top of page
Search

Big Empires and Bigger Personalities: Uncanny Parallels Between Trump and Mao

  • Writer: Olivia Qian
    Olivia Qian
  • 2 days ago
  • 4 min read

Radicalisation of the young, personality cults, populist policies- how two men found themselves at the opposite ends of a historical horseshoe. 


Chinese social medias’ adaptation of Trump’s rally shooting photograph. Text in background is an iconic communist slogan translates to “Workers of the world, unite!”
Chinese social medias’ adaptation of Trump’s rally shooting photograph. Text in background is an iconic communist slogan translates to “Workers of the world, unite!”

It is becoming increasingly difficult to define United States President Donald Trump through the labels of identity politics. It’s not your classic fascism or a straightforward conservatism, Trump as a political figure is much more complex. With a clear success campaign and loyal supporters, the American personality who used to be a celebrity businessman has taken turns in the White House as a leader of the free world. His populist and patriotic approach unified people in the US with a common enemy- that is, anyone or anything that is not ‘truly’ American. This resulted in a ‘cultural revolution’ in the US with Trump’s personality cult in support of extreme educational reforms, unforgiving tariff rates, and a plethora of interesting policy decisions. Sound familiar? It should- because in spirit if not substance, many of these moves echo those of modern China’s revolutionary: Mao Zedong. 


They Get It… Support from Those Unsupported 

Populism and nationalism lie at the heart of both Trump and Mao’s political power. It’s often their supporters who feel understood and heard by these charismatic men who promise a better life. Both men understood that they needed to target a large demographic that awaits political change. 


For Mao, that was the farmers and working class of China who needed dramatic systemic and cultural changes for wealth distribution. Similarly, Trump appealed to the ‘forgotten men and women of America’ specifically the blue collared workers who felt underappreciated by the liberal elite. In both cases, they posed as the ones who, if elected, were able to provide the changes that were so desperately needed to reform the state to one of prosperity and equality. Furthermore, the campaigns were solidified with common enemies provided for rage. Mao attacked the bourgeois of China while Trump condemned any ‘unamerican’ entity. This us-versus-them dynamic created a potent sense of nationalism- one that carried them to the peak of their political pyramids.


Distinct merch that identifies Mao and Trump supporters.
Distinct merch that identifies Mao and Trump supporters.

On the Pedestal They Go- Personality Cults and Radicalisation of the Young

For both Mao and Trump, the praising became religious. Mao and Trump both hold their personality cults strongly. The of their strongest supporters have turned these men into deities and embodiments of hope. 


In China, Mao was glorified as a living embodiment of the people’s will. Mao’s face was on the wall of every household, his words were recited, and his Little Red Book became the bible of the east. In the US, Trump’s with their iconic MAGA (Make America Great Again) merch, speaks the rhetoric of ‘Trumpism’ against liberal debaters and spreads its gospels regarding abortion and immigration. The common ground here is that there exists a blind trust in these men from the masses that is induced by ideological fervour. 


Furthermore, Mao and Trump had ensured a legacy that will live beyond their years through the radicalisation of the youth. Whether its Mao’s Red Guards that denounced those closest to them, or Trump’s Turning Point USA which preaches the ideals of conservatism in educational settings, both has a strong fan base in the youth. 


Cultural Revolutions: Time to Toughen Up and Out with the old 

Through the magnitude of both social and political power the men hold, their series of radical policies can invoke revolutions. These movements are marked by a common rejection of traditional intellectualism, a distrust of media, and a call or purge institutions of perceived corruption. 


Mao focused on ridding of the ‘Old Fours’ which included ideas, culture, customs, and habits. He then cancelled the college entrance exams, and censored massive amounts of media which halted educational progress for 11 years in China. Similarly, Trump targeted American education through promoting ‘patriotic education’ and dismantling the U.S. Department of Education. 


Furthermore, economic and institutional changes were similar. While Mao established a new order for a system of governance in China, Trump alongside dismantling entire governmental department, has further reformed the U.S. political arena by firing civil servants through the new Department of Government Efficiency. His economic nationalism, manifesting in aggressive tariff and trade wars, aimed to revive domestic manufacturing and punish foreign competition. Which is much like what Mao sought to do with his Great Leap Forward campaign where Chinese people were asked to boost domestic grain and steel production. 


These movements and policy decisions were arguably much fuelled by ideological persistence than long-term pragmatism.


Parallels, not Equivalents

While it is tempting to identify uncanny parallels between the two, the comparison has strong limits. Trump operates in the age of new media forms within the institutions of American liberal democracy; while Mao was a revolutionary who overthrew the entire old political system of a thousand-years old empire. Thus, it is key to note that there exists more difference than parallels between the two. The scale of violence, state control, and historical context are vastly different. 

Yet, the power structure and origin- the way each cultivated devotion, mobilised masses and inflicted systemic change is eerily similar. The horseshoe theory which suggests that the extreme left and extreme right often meet in method if not motive, finds a compelling case study in these two men.


 

References:


 
 
 

Comments

bottom of page