Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
How to Understand the Folk Marxism of Trump Supporters
How to Understand the Folk Marxism of Trump Supporters
Jan 21, 2026 11:08 AM

The phenomenon that is Donald Trump and his presidential campaign can only truly be understood when you recognize his basic appeal: he’s bringing a brand of folk Marxism to an entirely new audience.

Before we unpack what this means, we must first understand what it does not mean. Folk Marxism is not Classical Marxism, much munism. Marxism has so many varieties that even Karl Marx once said, “what is certain is that I myself am not a Marxist.” Folk Marxism is no different, and in America it manifest in different forms among divergent political groups.

Folk Marxism differs from academic forms of Marxism in the same way most folk beliefs differ from scholarly beliefs. As economist Arnold Kling explains, “Ordinary people and scholars may treat the same ideas differently. In terms of influence, it is the folk beliefs of ordinary people that matter, not the beliefs of scholars.”

A decade ago, when it was still a belief system found mostly on the political left, Kling outlined the basics of folk Marxism:

Folk Marxism looks at political economy as a struggle pitting the oppressors against the oppressed. Of course, for Marx, the oppressors were the owners of capital and the oppressed were the workers. But folk Marxism is not limited by this economic classification scheme. All sorts of other issues are viewed through the lens of oppressors and oppressed. Folk Marxists see Israelis as oppressors and Palestinians as oppressed. They see white males as oppressors and minorities and females as oppressed. They see corporations as oppressors and individuals as oppressed. They see America as on oppressor and other countries as oppressed.

I believe that folk Marxism helps to explain the pride and joy that many people felt when Maryland passed its anti-Walmart law. They think of Walmart as an oppressor, and they think of other businesses and Walmart workers as the oppressed. The mainstream media share this folk Marxism, as they reported the Maryland law as a “victory for labor.”

This brand of folk Marxism has been popular on the left for more than a century and continues to grow in influence (see: Bernie Sanders). But Donald Trump has tapped into a strain of folk Marxism that has cross-ideological appeal and extends across the political spectrum.

Here are some of the defining characteristics of Trump-style folk Marxism:

Class consciousness matters more than political identity –Class consciousness refers to the beliefs that a person holds regarding their social class or economic rank in society, the structure of their class, and their class interests. Almost all Trump supporters associate themselves with a particular (though largely undefined) oppressed class. They also consider Trump as the best candidate to champion their class interests. For them, these class interest are more important than almost any other affiliation.

This is why criticism that they are RINOs (Republicans in name only) or that they are not “true conservatives” falls on deaf ears. They identify more as a class of the oppressed than they do with any political party or historical ideological movement.

Defeating the oppressor class is the primary goal of the revolution —Talk to any Trump supporter for more than five minutes and you’ll inevitably hear them use the catch-all term they use for their perceived enemy: the Establishment.

Trump supporters don’t use the term merely to mean the Republican Party establishment. If they did they’d prefer Ted Cruz, who is more despised by that “establishment” than almost any other candidate — including Trump. Indeed, Trump is more closely aligned with the political establishment than any other candidate (with the exception of Hillary Clinton).

The Establishment, for Trump supporters, is not a specific entity but rather a term loosely used for any person or group who opposes, disagrees with, or is otherwise on the wrong side of their particular oppressor-oppressed line.

However, even this criterion is malleable. For example, Trump is a wealthy crony capitalist who has previously exploited the lower economic social classes for his own advancement. But because he uses rhetoric (i.e., “he isn’t politically correct”, “he tells it like it is”) that appears to trash the Establishment and their interest, he’s given a pass and considered one of their own. They assume that despite his lifelong connection to the Establishment that Trump is, at least in his heart, a traitor to his own class.

There are few if any true economic laws, only policies controlled by an oppressor class — As the Wikipedia entry on class consciousness explains:

Through dialectical materialism, the proletariat understands that what the individual bourgeois conceived as “laws” akin to the laws of nature, which may be only manipulated, as in Descartes’s dream, but not changed, is in fact the result of a social and historical process, which can be controlled. Furthermore, only dialectical materialism links together all specialized domains, which modern rationalism can only think as separate instead of as forming a totality. Only the proletariat can understand that the so-called “eternal laws of economics” are in fact nothing more than the historical form taken by the social and economical process in a capitalist society. Since these “laws” are the result of the collective actions of individuals, and are thus created by society, Marx and Lukács reasoned that this necessarily meant that they could be changed.

This is a wonky way of saying that the proletariat (working class) believe there are no true laws of economics. When the people in power claim they are simply following the “laws” what they are really doing is just protecting their interest and exploiting the oppressed class.

Trump supporters tend to believe this about issues like free trade. An almost universal belief shared by economists is that free trade tends to benefit all countries involved by making them more efficient and wealthy. But Trump and his supporters think in categories of “winners” and “losers” and assume that for every macroeconomic policy there must be an oppressor —and that they are likely to be the oppressed. What is needed to e this “law of economics”, they believe, is to put a strongman in power that will fight for them against the oppressor classes (e.g., China).

The desire for social revolution is more important than the e of the revolution—Like almost all other types of Marxists, the Trumpian folk-Marxists crave revolution less for what it will bring and more for what it will tear down. The desire to “burn down” their oppressor class (the Establishment) is much stronger than any eagerness to replace it with something better.

The oppressed that are attracted to Trump falsely believe that they are already as despised, ignored, and oppressed as it is possible to be (at least by American standards). The reality, of course, is that if they got their way they might succeed in bringing down the Establishment a peg while immiserating and impoverishing themselves considerably. Still, the emotion appeal of the Trumpian revolution trumps their reasoned self-interest.

Trumpian folk-Marxists despise other types of folk Marxists —Let me state without equivocation: I do not believe that the average Trump supporter is racist. But it is indisputable that Trump is the favorite candidate of avowed racists. Why is that? Because most white supremacists are folk Marxists engaged in a long-term struggle against other folk Marxists.

One of the favorite terms of white supremacist groups is the term “cultural Marxism.” They believe that there is a concerted effort to overthrow “white culture” through the promotion of such Marxists ideologies as feminism, multiculturalism, etc. They don’t merely oppose these groups as harmful to the flourishing of mankind, though. They view “cultural Marxism” as the work of an oppressor class (the Establishment?) that is intentionally trying to oppress them personally by diluting and destroying their cultural “white identity.”

When he talks about “Mexican rapists” and preventing Muslims from immigrating to the U.S., Trump is speaking their language. They recognize he is a folk Marxist who is on their side and who opposes the wrong kinds of “cultural Marxist.”

****Like all brands of Marxism — including that of Bernie Sanders — Trumpism is a perfidious and dangerous political virus that can infect and destroy a body politic. But we can learn to better fight against it when we recognize it for what it is, and stop confusing it for right-wing populism, malformed conservatism, or a particularly vehement strain of anti-establishmentarianism.

Trumpism is real, unique, and not a belief system that is going to fade away on its own. We must therefore act quickly to quell what could be one of the most dangerous form of Marxism every to pose an internal and existential threat to America.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
The future of work: How a ‘design narrative’ changes our perspective
Given the breakneck pace of improvements in automation and artificial intelligence, fears about job loss and human obsolescence are taking increasing space in the cultural imagination. The question looms: What is the future of human work in a technological age? In A World Without Work: Technology, Automation, and the Future of Work, a new collection of essays from AEI’s Values and Capitalism project, four academics explore those concerns from a Christian perspective.“Will job e in new sectors that we cannot...
Herman Bavinck on love, economics, and the reformation of society
When we think about markets, we often think only in terms of mathematics or money. But at a deeper level, markets are simply networks of human relationships. When we participate in economic activity, we aren’t just creating wealth; we are munities, cultures, and civilization, partnering with God and neighbor in a divine exchange of gifts, blessings, and love. Yes, love! Yet the mere existence of markets doesn’t mean that such love will manifest itself accordingly. For that, we’ll need to...
What economists mean by ‘signaling’
Note: This is post #68 in a weekly video series on basic microeconomics. Economists often make such claims as “a college diploma is an example of signaling.” What exactly do they mean by ‘signaling’? A signal is an action that reveals information, explains Tyler Cowen. In this video by Marginal Revolution University, Cowen looks at higher education, and shows how a a large fraction of the value you receive from your es on the day you earn your diploma. (If...
Entrepreneurship by example
Of all the schools founded by Robert Luddy, author of the new book Entrepreneurial Life: The Path from Startup to Market Leader, not one of them has a cafeteria. The schools have gyms and Apple TVs, but none of the facilities needed to provide lunches each day. Yet, when I show visitors around the campus of Thales Academy, a chain of private schools Luddy founded in 2007 where I teach, the absence of a cafeteria is actually a bonus I...
Around the Old World-Sea
Later today we’re having a book launch discussion about the latest volume in the Abraham Kuyper Collected Works in Public Theology, On Islam. This book is a selection from a travel narrative Kuyper published after he voyaged around the Mediterranean Sea in 1905-1906. For those who are unable to join us in Grand Rapids, the event will be available via a live stream and will also be archived for viewing later. For those interested in learning more about Kuyper’s trip,...
NPR: If you have to beg, do it in a capitalist country
Christian life relies on faith, not on sight. But it is a serendipity when social science bears out its teachings about spiritual and religious freedom – and it is particularly delicious when those findings are featured on NPR. “The world’s wealthiest and most individualistic countries also happen to be some of the most altruistic,” wrote Georgetown University’s Abigail March on the news service’s website. A 2017 study (which relies, in part, on the work of Angus Deaton) has found “dramatic...
Can capitalism be saved from conservatives?
“The diversity of American conservatism would astound those pundits, politicians, and critics who believe conservatism is a rigid ideology aimed at privileging the wealthy (and the white),” says Gregory L. Schneider in this week’s Acton Commentary. Peter Kolozi’s new bookConservatives Against Capitalism: From the Industrial Revolution to Globalizationshowcases a conservatism fortable with free-market capitalism — which adherents see as revolutionary and disruptive of tradition — and traces its origins from the antebellum South, to the election of Donald Trump, profiling...
Rev. Sirico: What I learned from Michael Novak
Today is the first anniversary of the death of Michael Novak. The theologian, scholar, and writer was one of the most influential Catholic thinkers of his generation, and an indefatigable champion of free enterprise, democracy, and liberty. During his life Novak was a prolific writer. In addition to being the author or editor of more than 50 books, he wrote a syndicated column that was nominated for a Pulitzer. He was also a teacher (he taught at Harvard, Stanford, SUNY...
Radio Free Acton: Greg Forster on the legacy of Whittaker Chambers, Econ Quiz on income inequality, Upstream on Ursula K. Le Guin
On this episode of Radio Free Acton, Paul Bonicelli, director of programs and education at Acton, and Trey Dimsdale, director of program outreach at Acton, speak with Greg Forster, director of the Oikonomia Network and visiting assistant professor of faith and culture at Trinity International University, on the legacy and modern relevance of Whittaker Chambers and his landmark book,Witness. Then, Dave Hebert, professor of economics at Aquinas college, joins us on the Econ Quiz segment to talkabout e inequality. Finally,...
Riding the net neutrality see-saw
This week, I was one of menters consulted in Nicholas Wolfram Smith’s article “FCC Repeal of Net Neutrality Leads to Lively Fight” for the National Catholic Register. I think Smith did a fine job conveying my primary concern: But according to Dylan Pahman, a researcher and managing editor of Acton Institute’s Journal of Markets & Morality, one of the problems with the 2015 net neutrality regulations was that it gave the government far too much regulatory power over ISPs. At...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved