TEHRAN – Trump’s victory in the 2024 US presidential election on November 5th represents a conflict between two opposing groups.
The first group is deeply committed to human dignity and principles, but believes they are lying, following the law, maintaining discipline, staying loyal to their families, observing ethics, defending traditional values, and living in a world shaped by institutions. Their lives are influenced by these institutions, and they participate in the power structure as governors, senators and others. They believe that they are responsible for the standards set by these institutions and strive for civil virtues defined by the Constitution. They seek approval from federal and state entities and are supporters or servants of the norms of social institutions, such as the Constitution, Churches, Businesses, and the New York Times. Their goal is to fit within the framework defined by these institutions. This group believes in their lives they will inherit institutions, manage them, and pass them on to the next generation on better terms. They acknowledge that these institutions are flawed and require reform, but they fundamentally consider them legal.
On the other side, there are groups that overlook the ethical violations of people like Trump, such as lies, misconduct, immorality, and more, simply because they oppose the institutions they see as inherently corrupt. For this group, adherence to the norms and structures of these institutions is seen as an accomplice to corruption. Their view of Trump and others like him is that he is doing exactly what they want. They point to financial institutions that cause financial crisis, health institutions, are closing schools during the community pandemic, mainstream media and bureaucracy that drives the country towards ruin. For them, Trump’s moral shortcomings are forgiven. Because his main purpose – being an anti-institution outweighs everything else. The ideal person, in their view, is self-centered, combative, violating the law, and vengeful.
This person is not afraid to break rules to achieve their personal goals. They ignore the institution and welcome their destruction. They feel joy in the humiliating elite and intentionally create such a situation. In this perspective, if the system labels you as reckless or immoral, you are probably doing the right thing. If the legal system is blaming you, you are probably a virtue person. Some even argue that the scandal involving Trump represents the destruction of the destructive laws considered to be noble in this context.
This anti-institutional view was clearly manifested at the 2024 Republican National Convention. There he was not the former president, vice president or even Trump’s vice president for his first term. In this environment, the ethical failure of Trump and his peers is viewed as a virtue. Trump and his team are not hypocrites. They are simply their true selves and are changing philosophical standards.
This anti-institutional mentality is not exclusive to Republicans. Over the past 40 years, two opposing groups at the far end of the political spectrum share a common cause. It challenges the established order in America. The anti-establishment movement first gained momentum on the left side of the Democrats in the 1960s, but the Maga movement, which began to form with Reagan’s rise in power, reached its peak with Trump. This move has been proven to be more effective than the left in challenging the system.
US presidents have traditionally been seen as institutionalists who served in the military, the CIA, or other governmental institutions. They see the presidency as an important position in the broader government structure and manage it to pass it on to the next leader. In contrast, Trump did not consider himself an institutionalist and was not part of these systems. Trumpism promotes a value revolution in which traditional conservative morality and institutional liberalism are turned to the mind.
In this reversal, rules and norms that once emphasized moderation and respect for institutional authority are now considered vices, but breaking them is considered vices.
Over the next four years, it is predicted that there will be a continuing battle between institutional mentality and anti-institutional thinking among key institutional institutions, including the Department of Justice and Intelligence Reporting Agency. This ongoing conflict will likely bring anxiety and confusion, as his team’s approach to reform institutions contradicts the nature of these institutions.