New Book Dissects Trumpism's Intellectual Origins, Concluding in an Ideological 'Void'

A new book by Laura K. Field, titled "Furious Minds: The Making of the MAGA New Right," delves into the intellectual underpinnings of Trumpism, according to a recent review by The New Yorker. The publication noted that the book traces these origins "straight into the void," suggesting a critical examination of the movement's ideological depth. Field, an academic and former conservative, explores how a cohort of intellectuals and academics contributed to shaping the ideas associated with the MAGA movement.

Field's research highlights a significant intellectual effort by "PhDs and intellectuals," predominantly men, who sought to either revert pluralistic liberal democracy or propel new visions for the future through Trump's nascent movement. These thinkers, despite Trump's own ideological malleability, saw an opportunity to advance their agendas. The book distinguishes between the broad, often chaotic online discourse surrounding MAGA and the more structured intellectual contributions.

The book examines specific intellectual concepts that gained traction within Trumpism, such as the embrace of "nationalism" influenced by figures like Yoram Hazony, and the intellectual roots behind seemingly casual slurs, including the "childless cat ladies" remark, which Field traces to theological and social theories. It also touches upon more radical ideas, such as the notion of a "Red Caesar" or the concept of a "state of exception" to justify extraordinary political actions. Field argues that the New Right often lets "abstractions smother straightforward real-world truths."

Field, who experienced a disillusionment with conservative intellectual circles, observes a "newly supercharged misogyny" and a push for a more assertive, "postliberal" form of governance. Her analysis questions the internal coherence of the New Right's ideas, suggesting they are frequently "untethered from the history of the real world" and lack practical applicability. The book ultimately poses whether these intellectual frameworks can sustain the MAGA movement beyond the influence of its namesake.