Understanding Trump’s Role Through Levin’s Lens

The American Enterprise Institute might not be the first place to reflect on the necessity of Donald Trump a decade ago. Yet, comments from Yuval Levin during a recent AEI panel really brought that difference into focus. Levin pointed out that today’s Republican Party, under Trump’s influence, leans towards a more populist, simplistic approach. He described it rather starkly, saying it resembles “a burning trash pile.” It’s a curious way to engage with younger audiences, and honestly, it feels a bit off.

While Trump himself hasn’t used the phrase “burning trash pile,” he does express strong sentiments about America’s state under other administrations. His “Make America Great Again” slogan suggests that he believes America hasn’t been at its best for some time—but he and his supporters can bring about change. When he refers to the “burning garbage pile,” he’s often pointing fingers at past leadership and the consequences of their actions.

Levin seems to overlook that Trump’s mission is to empower everyday people against the elite, implying that this accountability could force reform within those elite circles.

Revising the Narrative

It might be a stretch to claim that Levin thinks the elite and their institutions are all that matters in governance, but historical precedents support such viewpoints. Traditional monarchies often viewed rulers as the embodiment of a territory. Contrarily, the Declaration of Independence radicalized that notion, advocating for a government that answers to the populace. Levin and other like-minded thinkers know well the failures of the Republican Party pre-Trump; however, understanding and feeling are worlds apart.

Many within the pre-Trump conservative movement emphasize virtue over the failures of past elites, and understandably so. It’s human to fear demagoguery and the masses, while criticizing Ivy League leadership lightly to maintain its mystique is all too common.

Since he famously descended that escalator ten years ago, Trump has disrupted the political norm. In a way, he dismisses the traditions that historically distinguished American leaders from everyday people, breaking down the barriers of noble lineage.

Public Awakening

Trump’s popularity arises from his ability to highlight the weaknesses and failings of American elites. They’ve often evaded consequences for violating norms they helped establish. In past elections, Trump has presented voters not just with candidates but also with distinct governance options—think of the various frameworks within our Republican constitution.

Unfortunately, many Americans, even those well-educated, have scarcely engaged with the idea of informal governance. Figures in the elite sphere—like typical writers in esteemed publications—often panic at Trump’s rhetoric.

For them, violating the established “norms” equates to breaching the Constitution itself.

Typically, voters choose among candidates who represent the same underlying administrative norms—think Bush, Clinton, Obama, etc. Trump, though, sets himself apart in policy and in the relationship he cultivates between the electorate, elected officials, and the elite, both in and out of government.

Rejected Institutions

Trump has granted Americans the chance to choose between two governance models. One reflects a renewed sense of aristocracy, represented by traditional election processes and Republican Party dynamics. The other promotes greater autonomy, even at times feeling chaotic.

He and those in his inner circle belong to the same wealthy elite as those they oppose, yet they often struggle to interpret his actions. However, as tradition holds, the less fortunate are always present in society. Power dynamics are not defined solely by wealth—authority is about relationships, and that’s where Trump has made his mark.

This evolution was crucial because the previous administration had already eroded its legitimacy, becoming increasingly disconnected from ordinary Americans.

The new governance model has its challenges, but its ability to adapt is what defines it. The former elite seemed content to neglect their duty, despite still having some power left.

Trump, far from being a revolutionary who upended a healthy system, more so acted as a catalyst for re-establishing a healthier dynamic, akin to what took place 250 years ago in America.

Challenging the Old Order

Thomas Jefferson envisioned voters selecting a natural nobility—leaders of true wisdom and virtue. Unfortunately, the past few decades have seen a drift toward a self-perpetuating elite. This group, composed of those in universities, nonprofits, media, and bureaucracy, avoid real competition.

Even Trump falls into this dynamic.

Yet, he offered a radical alternative, and people embraced it, ultimately rejecting the established elite.

If the current ruling class resembled the natural nobility Jefferson had in mind, many might not have found a need for Trump at all. Still, they see the elite as self-righteous mediocrity rather than true leaders. Swapping one insider for another yielded little change. Trump’s emergence presented an invaluable option.

Even those conservatives who appreciate well-formed elite roles, like Levin, should recognize this juncture. By leaning more democratic and populist, America may be on its way back to the type of noble leadership the founders envisioned—one that earns the people’s trust and exhibits true competence without arrogance.

Ultimately, Trump’s aim is clear: to invigorate the populace against the elite. That, in turn, could drive the elite towards necessary reform.

This course of action won’t dismantle American institutions but might save them.