The Republicans have been employing the word “communist”
or “Marxist” to describe their opponents for as long as I can remember. Since at least the time of Ronald Reagan, they have accused liberals of using the power of the state to infringe individual rights and liberties, and to violate the promise of capitalism and the principles of free enterprise.
However, what they actually imply isn’t related to Karl Marx at all. A government that represents, originates from, and works for the citizens must necessarily impose taxes on those who possess wealth and assets to ensure equal treatment and service for everybody. In Republicans’ perspective, this is precisely where the issue lies; governments should not be doing this. According to them, political equality equates to communism.
Due to the GOP’s dominance over public discourse, it’s perhaps not shocking, although still infuriating, that nobody has seemingly recognized that Donald Trump’s economic strategies are essentially communist.
Well, not quite nobody.
Justin Wolfers noticed
.
The famed economist was on MSNBC recently to comment on the destructive impact of the president’s tariff policies. Professor Wolfers read a passage from a recent interview Trump gave to
Time
magazine,
in which he said
“We operate as a department store, so we determine the pricing. During my meetings with these companies, I establish what I deem to be a reasonable price. They have the option to accept this price or not.”
“
Milton Friedman is rolling in his grave
Professor Wolfers responded, “This is centralized planning, but without any actual central planners. Even a typical central planning committee would possess some level of expertise. Instead, this seems like one person in an isolated setting believing they can manage the entire nation as though it were a retail outlet.”
Wolfers isn’t the only one who has noticed; others have as well.
Patrick W. Watson
a seasoned economic analyst for
Mauldin Economics
In this conversation with me, he discusses why the current policies resemble those found in “command economies,” and he also highlights how tariffs can lead to the government essentially seizing control over the means of production.
“True Marxist ideology,” Patrick stated.
JS: The president told
Time
The magazine suggests that he is the person who sets reasonable prices for items, acting like the manager of a large retail store. This appears contrary to the prevailing economic mindset over the past four decades, where markets solely determine pricing. So, what could be happening here?
PW: Consider his background; Trump comes from immense riches. If he has ever really had to shop in a typical store, he wouldn’t understand what it feels like to have budget limitations. Since he hasn’t lived through common experiences most people face when shopping due to cost constraints, it might not make sense to look for logical reasoning behind his statements.
However, this observation reveals an often overlooked ideological divide. Such a remark would previously have outraged Reagan-era conservatives. They believed that the government shouldn’t intervene at all in pricing matters—not even symbolically. MAGA represents quite the opposite; it advocates for forceful governmental involvement. In certain respects,
Trumpism resembles socialism
.
JS:
I’m quite pleased that you mentioned socialism. It’s something I’ve been
banging that drum
What are the main indications that Trump is introducing a hidden variant?
PW: First, the whole tariff-reindustrialization idea is more normally seen in command economies.
As I mentioned in 2020
It’s the government attempting to impose its desired outcomes rather than allowing market forces to determine them. They believe that “laissez-faire” has proven inadequate.
Secondly, the manner in which business leaders are desperately pleading with Trump for privileges, and his blatantly corrupt approach to bestowing these favors, essentially places governmental power over the mechanisms of production.
Pure Marxism there.
Thirdly, his immigration strategies are transforming the job market by removing individuals engaged in essential manual work, as they often perform tasks crucial for economic stability, whereas his critiques towards education appear aimed at fostering a workforce consisting predominantly of less skilled, white citizens to take their place.
JS: It keeps crossing my mind that if a Democrat were implementing these measures, we’d likely hear accusations of socialism echoing throughout the business media. I haven’t noticed many people drawing the same parallels as you have. What do you think accounts for this difference?
PW: This is indeed a very insightful point. Perhaps it’s due to the fact that for many years, “socialism!” was often used as a criticism hurled from the political right at those on the left. Swapping this dynamic around simply seems illogical to some people. Additionally, it might be challenging for them to acknowledge that Reagan-era conservativism is obsolete. The Republican Party which Trump currently co-opts is essentially defunct, yet continues to serve as a protective barrier for economic policies that even traditional conservatives of the past wouldn’t identify with.
JS: Building on your initial point about Trump, it appears he has an unusual perspective when it comes to finances; he might not grasp how far $20 could actually go since he hasn’t had to worry much about costs. This could possibly explain why he misjudges the impact and limitations of tariffs. It feels like this reflects some sort of “misperception” regarding their true capabilities.
PW: I believe this stems from a simplistic perspective on winning and losing, as though viewed through the eyes of a child. I doubt he fully grasps the concept of a trade deficit—perhaps seeing it merely as “their number being larger than mine,” which is bad. Though I am not a psychologist, I suspect that Trump’s personal traits significantly influence his policy choices. His actions seem driven by an extreme form of self-centeredness. For any issue, consider the option that makes him feel satisfied; more likely than not, that’ll be the decision he goes with. The well-being of the nation doesn’t factor into these considerations. This explains policies such as imposing tariffs.
JS:
The previous conversation we had
, you mentioned that Bidenomics is effective. Is it continuing to work? Could it serve as a stabilizing element during the upcoming recession?
PW: Biden inherited a solid economy with issues. Recall last September when the Fed lowered interest rates due to rising unemployment? They later suspended rate changes in December as inflation began to return.
I believe both Biden and Trump were largely aligned in their desire for reindustrialization and tackling China’s national security concerns. However, the key distinction lies in their approaches: Biden understood this as an extensive undertaking and undertook the challenging task of establishing frameworks through legislation to achieve these goals over time. In contrast, Trump seeks immediate recognition and success.
He once tweeted something like “trade wars are easy to win” and I think he really believes it. So he tossed aside everything Biden accomplished and is doing it his way. We’re seeing the results.
