By Richard Martin, President, Alcera Consulting Inc.
Throughout modern history, political ideologies have oscillated between models that elevate individual freedom and those that demand collective subordination. In recent years, Donald Trump’s “America First” doctrine has been widely debated. While many view it as a radical reassertion of national sovereignty, an alternative perspective sees it as a manifestation of authoritarian collectivism—a style not invented by Trump but symptomatic of a deeper societal shift in the United States and the Western world at large.
The Nature of Authoritarian Collectivism
At its core, collectivism asserts that the group’s interests—whether defined by class, race, or national destiny—override individual autonomy. This approach, by its very nature, demands centralized authority to ensure consistent collective action. In authoritarian collectivist regimes, loyalty is not optional; it is enforced through coercion, punitive measures, and an unwavering demand for obedience. Dictatorial tendencies, then, are not aberrations but inherent features, ensuring that the collective vision remains unchallenged.
Trump’s Manifestation of Authoritarian Collectivism
Several aspects of Trump’s behaviour and policymaking suggest that his “America First” agenda is less about liberating individual choice and more about enforcing a centralized, collectivist order:
- Demand for Submissiveness:
In the Oval Office on 28 February 2025, Trump and his aide Vance visibly dismissed Ukrainian President Zelensky for not being sufficiently submissive and appreciative of American support. This insistence on deference mirrors the authoritarian practice of demanding loyalty to a central authority—a hallmark of collectivist regimes.
- Dismissive Rhetoric Toward Allies:
Trump’s and Vance’s dismissive remarks towards European leaders and Canada, paired with their use of punitive tariffs, reveal a leadership style that values unilateral authority over collaborative engagement. This belligerence and economic coercion are reminiscent of authoritarian tactics, where power is maintained by sidelining dissent and enforcing conformity.
- Admiration for Authoritarian Leaders:
Trump’s frequent open admiration for figures like Putin—leaders known for their centralized control and suppression of dissent—further aligns his rhetoric with the tenets of authoritarian collectivism. Such admiration is not mere political theater; it signals an affinity for governance that prioritizes strength, order, and top–down decision-making over the pluralism and debate that characterize liberal democracies.
- Centralization of Power:
His overall behaviour, from the selection of cabinet nominees to his executive actions, emphasizes the consolidation of power. This approach undermines traditional checks and balances, drawing the governance model closer to one where a single leader—or a cohesive ruling group—dictates policy without the usual democratic constraints.
A Symptom of Deeper Societal Shifts
Crucially, the argument is not that Trump is the root cause of a turn toward authoritarianism. Rather, he is a manifestation of broader, deep-rooted structural shifts in American—and by extension, Western—society. This perspective finds support in the work of scholars like Peter Turchin, whose Structural Demographic Theory (SDT) in works such as Ages of Discord and End Times highlights long-term trends of elite overproduction, economic inequality, and social discord.
- Structural Pressures:
Turchin’s SDT posits that societies undergo cycles of discontent driven by economic stress, elite competition, and mass mobilization. In the current American context, rising inequality, a perceived disconnect between political elites and the common citizen, and cultural polarization have set the stage for a political environment in which authoritarian rhetoric can thrive.
- Symptomatic Leadership:
In this light, Trump’s authoritarian collectivist tendencies are not anomalies but reflections of a deeper societal shift. When traditional liberal institutions—built on decentralization, open debate, and individual rights—fail to address mounting structural issues, voters may gravitate toward a strongman who promises to restore order through decisive, even if coercive, action.
- Western World Implications:
This is not solely an American phenomenon. Similar trends are observable across much of the Western world, where dissatisfaction with liberal democratic governance, economic uncertainty, and cultural fragmentation create fertile ground for leaders who embody authoritarian collectivism. In this context, Trump is both a product and a promoter of a broader realignment away from liberal individualism toward a more centralized, authoritarian model.
The Grand Implication: Balancing Freedom and Order
The synthesis of these arguments presents a profound challenge for modern democracies. On one hand, liberal individualism has been the engine of unprecedented personal freedom, creativity, economic growth, and social progress. Its emphasis on decentralized decision-making and open debate has allowed societies to adapt and innovate over time. On the other hand, the allure of authoritarian collectivism—exemplified by Trump’s behaviour—signals a deep-seated shift driven by structural stresses and societal discontent.
If Trump’s “America First” doctrine is indeed a manifestation of authoritarian collectivism, it implies that the turn toward authoritarianism is not the fault of a single leader but the inevitable result of unresolved economic, cultural, and political tensions. Addressing this challenge will require more than electoral opposition; it demands a fundamental reengagement with the underlying structural issues that have eroded trust in liberal democratic institutions.
Conclusion: The Imperative to Defend Liberalism
Trump’s authoritarian collectivist tendencies, viewed through this lens, serve as a wake-up call for the West. They reveal that the fight for individual freedom is not merely a battle against one man’s policies but a struggle against a deeper, systemic shift toward centralized, coercive governance. Defending liberalism—its values of individual rights, decentralized power, and open debate—remains essential to preserving the progress and prosperity that have long defined the Western world.
Ultimately, the challenge is to reinvigorate liberal institutions so they can address modern structural pressures without sacrificing the very freedoms that have allowed human societies to flourish. Only by confronting these underlying issues head-on can democracies hope to stem the tide of authoritarian collectivism and secure a future built on true individual empowerment and collective well-being.
About the Author
Richard Martin is the founder and president of Alcera Consulting Inc., a strategic advisory firm specializing in exploiting change (www.exploitingchange.com). Richard’s mission is to empower top-level leaders to exercise strategic foresight, navigate uncertainty, drive transformative change, and build individual and organizational resilience, ensuring market dominance and excellence in public governance. He is the author of Brilliant Manoeuvres: How to Use Military Wisdom to Win Business Battles. He is also the developer of Worldview Warfare and Strategic Epistemology, a groundbreaking methodology that focuses on understanding beliefs, values, and strategy in a world of conflict, competition, and cooperation.
© 2025 Richard Martin
Discover more from Exploiting Change
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
