A Tale of Two Movements

By Matt Singleton

This last spring, an unusual exchange of words happened between Donald Trump and two Kentucky politicians: Rand Paul and Thomas Massie. The topic was over the Big Beautiful Bill. Trump even threatened to primary them.

Rand Paul and Donald Trump (AI Image via Grok)

Trump wanted to create a massive change, as the last administration had left a massive change in the other direction.

However, the Kentucky Congressmen were at odds with this strategy because it violated their philosophy on limited government. Spending too much money causes inflation, and wielding too much power can erode the rights of the people.

The rift was quick and sharp but is not a personal beef. It’s a sign that the Republican Party is not one ideological unit. In reality, it includes several philosophies which can sometimes clash.

The most popular two movements currently are the Tea Party movement and the MAGA movement. Meanwhile, the neo-conservative movement has waned in popularity. Being part of the Grand Old Party, these movements mostly wrestle for the same voter base. Yet their differences still exist.

Neo-cons were moderate limited government, strong military, socially Christian, and globalist in economics.

The Tea Party was libertarian economically, slightly globalist, mildly Christian, strongly limited government, and pro-border security.

MAGA is strongly pro-border security, strongly nationalistic, pro-big spending, strongly fair trade, and pro-low taxation.

The switch from free trade to fair trade is a historic difference. Trump secured the votes to make this happen, as many moderate Democrats have converted to Republican after this ideological shift.

The spending distinction between the Tea Party and MAGA is the most obvious infraction which leaves political bruises, since tea party was in extreme opposition to this. Trump broke with Tea Party philosophy.

Trump for his part used D.O.G.E. to pacify the fears of the fiscal conservatives. However, this was short lived, because the Big Beautiful Bill is spending more than those cut backs.

These intellectual struggles actually go back decades. I am reminded of Nietzsche’s “will to power” versus the “will to truth.”

As a Christian, I am a “will to truth” advocate. We can anchor morality in a desire for truth over power. Yet at the same time, I believe that the tower[1] of Rand Paul fell hard against Trump.

Trump as a master of money obviously represents the “will to power” motif, while Rand is a strong proponent of the “will to truth.” Trump’s power over economics could be more influential than debate. The fatal flaw here is that politics is a “will to power over a will to truth” playing field.

Rand had platitudes, but he did not have money. (When the Left used its money and wouldn’t give anything back to the people, the libertarians couldn’t react because they had no control.)

However, Rand is not just a martyr here.

The flaws in the libertarian system are psychological. Libertarians psychologically demonize the government, so that government is not useful for any form of good.

So, then they may stop bad government, but they also stop good government. Rand Paul was apparently weak on the issue of the border. Ironically, his father Ron Paul was very strongly for border security.

But I believe the emotional pessimism brought Rand to weakness on the issue and sank his 2016 hopes of Presidency.

Trump makes good decisions, and he stays in his lane, but then he bluffs with tyrannical proposals like taking over Canada or U.S. cities.

He’s done well so far, but this is honestly dangerous considering whoever comes next in office.

People must understand the subjective element of politics. The landscape is always changing. The principles we have must adapt to different environments.

The good news is there are different positions for different people that can make things work. But we must make the effort or suffer the consequences.

-------------------------

[1] “Tower” here is a figure of speech referring to the momentum or power of an individual or organization or idea.