The slogan “Make America Great Again”, popularized by President Donald Trump, encapsulates a desire to return to a perceived idealized version of the United States. For many, this phrase harkens back to a time when America’s economy was strong, its social systems more equitable, and its international standing revered. Yet, the concept of “greatness” remains ambiguous — what exactly is meant by making America great again? This question becomes more complicated when we consider the policies implemented by Trump’s administration, which primarily relied on market-driven solutions over government intervention. The administration’s embrace of neoliberal economic policies, such as tax cuts for the wealthy, deregulation, and the empowerment of corporate interests, has arguably contributed to the erosion of the middle class, increasing social fragmentation, and rising inequality.
The idea of “greatness” was previously linked to a time when the government played an active role in regulating the economy and distributing resources, particularly through the New Deal programs initiated under President Franklin D. Roosevelt. These initiatives expanded the role of government, raised taxes on the wealthy, and promoted social mobility through union power and social welfare programs. The idea of a strong government working on behalf of the people was central to the post-Depression prosperity. By contrast, the policies championed by Trump’s administration — market deregulation, tax cuts, and the reduction of social safety nets — have left the corporate sector to dictate terms and weakened the bargaining power of the middle class. This shift in governance from politics to market-driven solutions lies at the core of the growing social and economic divides in America.
This essay critically examines how the market-driven approach to solving societal problems, epitomized by the Trump administration’s focus on corporate interests, has ultimately exacerbated the very issues it seeks to address. Using philosophical frameworks rooted in Adam Smith’s invisible hand, Isaiah Berlin’s negative freedom, and Noam Chomsky’s critique of corporate power, we will explore how the move from politics to markets has led to growing inequality, the collapse of social capital, and a decline in the meaning of life within American society. Furthermore, we will delve into the role of education, drawing on the work of Samuel Bowles and Robert Putnam, and discuss how the neoliberal approach to education and governance has shaped the social preferences of Americans and undermined collective bargaining and social welfare.
The Ambiguity of “Making America Great Again”
To begin, we must understand what is meant by the phrase “Making America Great Again”. The idea of America’s greatness has been perpetuated in popular culture and political rhetoric as a time when the country was at the forefront of global economic and political power, with a robust middle class and strong social safety nets. The prosperity of the post-World War II era, fueled by government intervention and strong labor unions, is often considered a high point in America’s history. During this period, the government played a central role in regulating markets, funding public services, and creating an environment in which the middle class could thrive.
The New Deal, introduced by Franklin D. Roosevelt in response to the Great Depression, is often cited as a pivotal moment in America’s post-war prosperity. Through a combination of financial reforms, social programs, and the creation of regulatory bodies such as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the New Deal expanded government involvement in the economy. This model stood in stark contrast to the laissez-faire capitalism of the previous century, which was based on minimal government intervention and the belief that markets would regulate themselves. The New Deal era saw the rise of labor unions, which improved the bargaining power of workers, and an expansion of social welfare programs aimed at alleviating poverty, providing unemployment insurance, and ensuring broader access to healthcare and education.
However, the idea of “greatness” promoted by Trump’s administration is centered around deregulation, tax cuts for the wealthy, and the reduction of government intervention in the economy. This shift towards neoliberalism has shifted the burden of addressing societal problems onto the private sector, where corporations and market forces are seen as the primary drivers of prosperity. Under Trump, tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy were designed to stimulate economic growth, yet they have instead contributed to growing income inequality and the erosion of the social safety net. The Republican tax cuts, which disproportionately benefited the wealthiest Americans, have increased the national deficit while doing little to address the systemic problems facing the working and middle classes. The reality is that the market-driven policies associated with “making America great again” have largely benefited corporate elites, while doing little for the broader public.
Philosophical Foundations of Neoliberalism: Adam Smith, Isaiah Berlin, and the Erosion of Social Capital
The economic model championed by neoliberal ideologues draws on the work of Adam Smith, whose theory of the invisible hand posited that individuals acting in their own self-interest would unintentionally contribute to the public good. Smith argued that by pursuing their own goals within a competitive market, individuals would create wealth, benefit society, and promote prosperity. This vision of self-regulating markets has been the cornerstone of the economic policies that have shaped the modern capitalist world, particularly in the United States.
However, Smith’s invisible hand rests on the assumption that markets are free and competitive, and that individuals have the power to shape their destinies. This vision has largely failed in the modern era, as corporate consolidation, monopolies, and increasing wealth concentration have distorted market competition. Economic inequality has skyrocketed, with the top 1% now holding more wealth than the bottom 90% combined. In a system dominated by large corporations, the self-interest promoted by neoliberalism often leads to the enrichment of the few at the expense of the many, rather than benefiting society as a whole.
Isaiah Berlin’s concept of negative freedom provides another important framework for understanding the philosophical underpinnings of neoliberalism. Negative freedom, according to Berlin, refers to the absence of external interference in an individual’s life. In the neoliberal context, negative freedom manifests in the belief that individuals should be free from government regulation, allowing them to make their own choices in a competitive market. While this might seem empowering on the surface, negative freedom can be deeply isolating. The absence of government intervention leaves individuals to fend for themselves in a market where power is concentrated in the hands of corporations and the wealthy. This can lead to social isolation, as people focus on their own individual survival rather than working together for the common good. The erosion of social capital — the trust, shared values, and networks of cooperation that bind societies together — is one of the major consequences of neoliberal economic policies.
The collapse of social capital is perhaps best illustrated by Robert Putnam’s work on the decline of community engagement and trust. Putnam’s “Bowling Alone” highlights how Americans have become increasingly disconnected from each other, as social bonds weaken and civic engagement declines. The neoliberal emphasis on individual success and the privatization of public goods has led to a culture of self-interest and competition, undermining the sense of community that once characterized American society. As trust in government and institutions has declined, individuals are less likely to participate in democratic processes or work together for the common good.
The Aftermath of Neoliberalism: Inequality, Education, and Social Preferences
One of the most devastating consequences of the neoliberal agenda has been the widening inequality between the rich and the poor. Thomas Piketty, in his seminal work Capital in the Twenty-First Century, highlights the ways in which the return on capital (wealth) has consistently outpaced the rate of economic growth, leading to the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few. Piketty’s analysis of income inequality demonstrates that the fundamental dynamics of capitalism have resulted in the growing wealth gap, a phenomenon that has been exacerbated by the neoliberal policies of deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy. The top 1% now controls a staggering portion of America’s wealth, while the middle and working classes have seen their wages stagnate.
Neoliberal policies have also had a devastating impact on education. In the wake of reduced government spending and privatization efforts, the cost of education in the U.S. has skyrocketed. Student loan debt has reached astronomical levels, with the average borrower owing more than $30,000 upon graduation. This growing burden of debt is a direct result of the privatization of higher education and the lack of investment in public education. Samuel Bowles’ critique of the educational system in Schooling in Capitalist America argues that education is not merely about providing knowledge, but rather about reproducing social hierarchies. In this system, education becomes a tool for the elite to maintain their dominance, while the working class is left to shoulder the burden of debt and limited opportunity.
Bowles’ work highlights the importance of considering social preferences and the heterogeneity of society when designing economic policies. The neoliberal focus on individual success and market incentives ignores the broader social and cultural factors that influence people’s lives. As a result, individuals become increasingly isolated and disconnected from the collective values that once underpinned the American social contract.
Samuel Bowles’ Suggestions: A New Vision for Governance
Bowles argues that the economic incentives designed to foster individual success often undermine social preferences and lead to the breakdown of community values. His suggestions for reforming education and governance emphasize the importance of social cooperation, equity, and the need for government intervention to address inequality. Bowles advocates for a model of governance that prioritizes the common good over individual gain, and that takes into account the diverse needs and preferences of society.
One key element of Bowles’ argument is the need to rethink the role of the state in regulating markets. He suggests that the state should play a more active role in shaping the economy, ensuring that wealth is more evenly distributed, and that the needs of the vulnerable are prioritized. This would involve reforms to the tax system, the creation of universal health care, and greater investment in public education.
Bowles’ work offers an alternative vision of governance — one that acknowledges the role of social preferences in shaping economic behavior, and the need for government intervention to ensure that markets serve the public good rather than corporate interests. This approach offers a potential solution to the current crisis of inequality and social fragmentation, and can help restore the social capital that has been lost under neoliberal policies.
Conclusion
The rise of neoliberalism and the shift from politics to markets have led to growing inequality, the erosion of social capital, and a breakdown of social trust in the United States. The embrace of negative freedom and the invisible hand has resulted in a society driven by self-interest, where the needs of the many are subjugated to the desires of the few. The widening wealth gap, the burden of student debt, and the decline of social cohesion are all direct consequences of this shift in governance.
As Samuel Bowles and others have argued, we must reconsider the role of government in regulating markets and fostering social cooperation. A new vision of freedom, one that balances the needs of individuals with the collective good, is essential for rebuilding America’s social fabric and ensuring that the country lives up to its promise of equality and opportunity for all.
In the end, the call to “Make America Great Again” should not be about returning to an idealized past, but about creating a future where markets are regulated to serve the public good, education is accessible to all, and social cooperation is valued above individual gain. Only by addressing the deep structural inequalities that have emerged in recent decades can we hope to rebuild the social capital and democratic participation that once made America great.
