• Home
  • Technology
  • Gaming
  • Entertainment
  • World & Business
  • Science
  • Sports
  • AI
HomeTechnologyGamingEntertainmentWorld & BusinessScienceSportsAI
World & Business

Anne Applebaum critiques US policy as blending ideology and private business interests

Atlantic article "MAGA Is Making the World Safe for Corruption" argues US foreign policy intertwines state power with private interests, citing tariffs, informal envoys, energy deals involving Trump-linked figures, and support for far-right allies.

DS
1 Source, 5h ago, first seen 5h ago

TLDR

The piece frames US policy as an "international revolutionary project" rather than isolationism, eroding traditional alliances and soft power while enabling private enrichment. It resonated on X for critiquing how personal and political incentives intersect with global business, trade, and diplomacy—relevant amid ongoing tariff and geopolitical tensions.

Combined views

2.5K

1 Source, first seen 5h ago

96 likes3 comments9 saves23 reposts
Featured Source

Combined views

2.5K

1 Source, first seen 5h ago

96 likes3 comments9 saves23 reposts

Sentiment

Positive——Negative

Summary

Not enough discussion yet.

No sentiment analysis available yet.

Sentiment

Positive——Negative

Summary

Not enough discussion yet.

No sentiment analysis available yet.

1 Source

@DenShtiliermanThe Atlantic has published a major article by Anne Applebaum titled “MAGA Is Making the World Safe for Corruption.” It is a very important piece about what she believes U.S. foreign policy is becoming: a mix of an ideological far-right revolution, private business, personal connections, and U.S. state power. “Far-right ideologues have turned American foreign policy into a tool for private enrichment and anti-democratic reaction.” In 2025, the Trump administration imposed 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods, revoked the visas of eight Supreme Court justices, and imposed sanctions against Justice Alexandre de Moraes and his family. According to Applebaum, the reason was not economic. The court was hearing the case against Jair Bolsonaro, and de Moraes himself had clashed with Elon Musk. At the time, Trump publicly called the case against Bolsonaro a “witch hunt,” while Steve Bannon referred to Bolsonaro’s supporters — who stormed government buildings after the election — as “freedom fighters.” The article explicitly documents a new U.S. policy: American economic and diplomatic power is no longer being used to pressure a dictatorship, but to interfere in the domestic politics of a democratic state in favor of an ideologically aligned politician. At the same time, official channels are not functioning. A Brazilian official explains: “All the official channels that we have, they just suddenly went out of touch. And what happened is that myriad informal actors just started knocking at our doors.” Lobbyists, people with access to Mar-a-Lago, MAGA influencers, and businesspeople are emerging — all offering political services while simultaneously seeking to advance their own commercial interests. One investor, for example, offered to arrange a meeting for the Brazilians with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent in exchange for access to critical minerals. The America that allies once knew, according to Applebaum, is disappearing: “American power is no longer deployed solely by trained diplomats and reliable officials, working through state channels.” Instead, an increasingly prominent role is being played by “informal envoys, private companies, online grifters, and hardened ideologues.” Moreover, Applebaum categorically refuses to label MAGA an isolationist movement. On the contrary, her argument is that it is an international revolutionary project. She compares it not to classical American conservatism, but to previous revolutionary movements that sought to reshape not only their own country but also the world around it. “They believe they represent something much greater: the vanguard of a movement that will alter not just America, but the world.” The new American foreign policy no longer rests on the premise that the United States’ allies are democratic states. Allies now include ideologically aligned politicians and parties within those states, as well as those who pay handsomely for that friendship. Last year in Munich, Vance accused Europe of straying from its “fundamental values.” This year, Marco Rubio spoke of an “unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies” and called on Europe and the U.S. to unite around “a shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry.” There is not a single mention of democracy, the rule of law, or transparency in this list. The U.S. National Security Strategy already explicitly speaks of the need to “help Europe correct its current trajectory” and combat “civilizational erasure.” It is precisely this logic that underpins meetings between U.S. officials and the AfD, support for Viktor Orbán, contacts with the European far right, and the transformation of CPAC into an international touring platform for MAGA’s political allies. The U.S. is no longer working neutrally with the governments of allied countries. Part of the U.S. administration is effectively choosing who it would like to see in power in these countries. And money follows ideology. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller articulated the worldview of this system: “We live in a world, in the real world that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world.” If the rule of law, institutions, and self-restraint no longer matter, then state power becomes simply another resource that can be converted into political or financial gain. At a meeting with European leaders in Paris, Steve Witkoff said he is already discussing energy and mineral agreements with Russia for American companies that could be implemented after the war ends. There, he also spoke about BlackRock’s potential role in Ukraine’s reconstruction. And this fits very well with what we’ve already seen in The New Yorker’s in-depth feature on Jared Kushner: diplomacy, peace negotiations, investment funds, real estate, energy, and private capital are increasingly finding themselves at the same table. In the article, Applebaum poses a simple question regarding the Board of Peace created by Trump: “Is this organization designed to make peace, or make money?” She asks the exact same question regarding Gaza. Kushner is participating in the negotiations while simultaneously proposing “New Gaza” as a large-scale real estate development project. Applebaum mentions a deal for tungsten mining in Kazakhstan, which is backed by approximately $1.6 billion in U.S. federal funding and involves business entities linked to the Trump family and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. According to The New York Times, Trump earned about $2.2 billion during the first year of his second presidential term, a significant portion of which came from cryptocurrency projects. Former official at the U.S. National Security Council Fiona Hill described Trump’s inner circle during his first term as follows: “They seemed to believe they were representing American interests, but they were also representing their own.” Applebaum believes that this is no longer a side effect but a system. She illustrates this particularly well through the Trump administration’s war against the European Digital Services Act. Formally, Washington calls this a fight for free speech. But this very law creates regulatory challenges for American tech giants. The U.S. government is pressuring Europe over its digital legislation. American tech billionaires are pushing for deregulation. And those same billionaires and politicians support European parties that want to weaken the EU itself. In 2018, he wrote to Jeffrey Epstein about the success of far-right parties in Europe and predicted that after their representation in the European Parliament increased: “We’ll be able to shut down any crypto legislation or anything else we want.” Epstein replied: “Roger that.” Trump refers to Canada as the 51st state, imposes tariffs, and Mark Carney articulates his government’s position very directly: “He’s trying to break us, so that America can own us.” At the same time, separatism in Alberta is gaining momentum in the American media landscape. Representatives of the separatist movement are meeting with State Department officials. Finance Minister Bessent calls Alberta “a natural partner of the U.S.” and specifically mentions its vast natural resources. Applebaum describes the possible logic in the harshest terms: “Pressure the economy, break up the federation, pick up the pieces.” And she adds: “And no, it is not a joke.” In Greenland, it’s roughly the same mix: American political emissaries, oil companies, tech investors, people from Trump’s inner circle, talk of mineral resources, data centers, and the territory’s possible annexation by the U.S. A local politician describes the consequences of such pressure: “They are destroying the trust and the respect in society, in institutions, but also in people.” And even more bluntly: “They f*ck with people's brains.” Against this backdrop, Applebaum lists an entire infrastructure for exporting MAGA: direct funding for allies, political endorsements, MAGA podcasts, CPAC, restructured humanitarian programs, contacts through Congress, and the dismantling of traditional democracy-support programs. Argentina receives $20 billion in aid on the eve of the election, with Trump effectively tying the aid to a victory for Javier Milei’s party. In Germany, Vance meets with the AfD. In Hungary, he supports Orbán. In Poland, Trump meets with Karol Nawrocki during the presidential campaign and later boasts that he “won” the election for him. In Romania, George Simion visits Bannon and declares: “We totally bashed the globalists here in Romania.” Voice of America and Radio Free Europe have been nearly destroyed. USAID has been dismantled. The Fulbright programs have been subject to political interference. According to Applebaum, State Department Human Rights Reports may now describe Germany as a more repressive country than El Salvador. In other words, the very structure of American soft power is changing. Previously, it promoted — at least formally — democracy, freedom of speech, human rights, and the American model. Now, as State Department official Sarah Rogers says, grants should go to those who are capable of: “Advancing American priorities.” And Applebaum asks a perfectly logical question: “What are 'American priorities' if the American government is run by people who use its instruments not on behalf of citizens, but on their own behalf?” Meanwhile, the rest of the Western world is beginning to draw conclusions. Canada is signing defense agreements with the EU and negotiating with Australia. The EU is concluding new trade agreements with India and Australia. In the first half of 2026, 26 world leaders visited China. The French government is gradually removing Windows, Teams, and Zoom from government computers. Similar processes are beginning in Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, as well as in banks and universities. France’s Minister for European Affairs put it as precisely as possible: “We cannot leave the security of Europe in the hands of voters in Wisconsin every 4 years.” This, in my opinion, is the main takeaway of the article. Applebaum isn’t just writing about Trump, nor is she merely writing about MAGA. She describes the collapse of the system that has underpinned American influence for nearly 80 years. The U.S. was the world’s most powerful nation not only because it had the largest army, the dollar, and aircraft carriers. Its strength also lay in the fact that countries voluntarily chose to remain allies of the U.S. America had created the system and, within that system, had limited its own use of force. Now that system has been destroyed.5h
    • HomeTechnologyGamingEntertainmentWorld & BusinessScienceSportsAI
    • Home
    • Technology
    • Gaming
    • Entertainment
    • World & Business
    • Science
    • Sports
    • AI

    1 Source

    @DenShtiliermanThe Atlantic has published a major article by Anne Applebaum titled “MAGA Is Making the World Safe for Corruption.” It is a very important piece about what she believes U.S. foreign policy is becoming: a mix of an ideological far-right revolution, private business, personal connections, and U.S. state power. “Far-right ideologues have turned American foreign policy into a tool for private enrichment and anti-democratic reaction.” In 2025, the Trump administration imposed 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods, revoked the visas of eight Supreme Court justices, and imposed sanctions against Justice Alexandre de Moraes and his family. According to Applebaum, the reason was not economic. The court was hearing the case against Jair Bolsonaro, and de Moraes himself had clashed with Elon Musk. At the time, Trump publicly called the case against Bolsonaro a “witch hunt,” while Steve Bannon referred to Bolsonaro’s supporters — who stormed government buildings after the election — as “freedom fighters.” The article explicitly documents a new U.S. policy: American economic and diplomatic power is no longer being used to pressure a dictatorship, but to interfere in the domestic politics of a democratic state in favor of an ideologically aligned politician. At the same time, official channels are not functioning. A Brazilian official explains: “All the official channels that we have, they just suddenly went out of touch. And what happened is that myriad informal actors just started knocking at our doors.” Lobbyists, people with access to Mar-a-Lago, MAGA influencers, and businesspeople are emerging — all offering political services while simultaneously seeking to advance their own commercial interests. One investor, for example, offered to arrange a meeting for the Brazilians with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent in exchange for access to critical minerals. The America that allies once knew, according to Applebaum, is disappearing: “American power is no longer deployed solely by trained diplomats and reliable officials, working through state channels.” Instead, an increasingly prominent role is being played by “informal envoys, private companies, online grifters, and hardened ideologues.” Moreover, Applebaum categorically refuses to label MAGA an isolationist movement. On the contrary, her argument is that it is an international revolutionary project. She compares it not to classical American conservatism, but to previous revolutionary movements that sought to reshape not only their own country but also the world around it. “They believe they represent something much greater: the vanguard of a movement that will alter not just America, but the world.” The new American foreign policy no longer rests on the premise that the United States’ allies are democratic states. Allies now include ideologically aligned politicians and parties within those states, as well as those who pay handsomely for that friendship. Last year in Munich, Vance accused Europe of straying from its “fundamental values.” This year, Marco Rubio spoke of an “unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies” and called on Europe and the U.S. to unite around “a shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry.” There is not a single mention of democracy, the rule of law, or transparency in this list. The U.S. National Security Strategy already explicitly speaks of the need to “help Europe correct its current trajectory” and combat “civilizational erasure.” It is precisely this logic that underpins meetings between U.S. officials and the AfD, support for Viktor Orbán, contacts with the European far right, and the transformation of CPAC into an international touring platform for MAGA’s political allies. The U.S. is no longer working neutrally with the governments of allied countries. Part of the U.S. administration is effectively choosing who it would like to see in power in these countries. And money follows ideology. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller articulated the worldview of this system: “We live in a world, in the real world that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world.” If the rule of law, institutions, and self-restraint no longer matter, then state power becomes simply another resource that can be converted into political or financial gain. At a meeting with European leaders in Paris, Steve Witkoff said he is already discussing energy and mineral agreements with Russia for American companies that could be implemented after the war ends. There, he also spoke about BlackRock’s potential role in Ukraine’s reconstruction. And this fits very well with what we’ve already seen in The New Yorker’s in-depth feature on Jared Kushner: diplomacy, peace negotiations, investment funds, real estate, energy, and private capital are increasingly finding themselves at the same table. In the article, Applebaum poses a simple question regarding the Board of Peace created by Trump: “Is this organization designed to make peace, or make money?” She asks the exact same question regarding Gaza. Kushner is participating in the negotiations while simultaneously proposing “New Gaza” as a large-scale real estate development project. Applebaum mentions a deal for tungsten mining in Kazakhstan, which is backed by approximately $1.6 billion in U.S. federal funding and involves business entities linked to the Trump family and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. According to The New York Times, Trump earned about $2.2 billion during the first year of his second presidential term, a significant portion of which came from cryptocurrency projects. Former official at the U.S. National Security Council Fiona Hill described Trump’s inner circle during his first term as follows: “They seemed to believe they were representing American interests, but they were also representing their own.” Applebaum believes that this is no longer a side effect but a system. She illustrates this particularly well through the Trump administration’s war against the European Digital Services Act. Formally, Washington calls this a fight for free speech. But this very law creates regulatory challenges for American tech giants. The U.S. government is pressuring Europe over its digital legislation. American tech billionaires are pushing for deregulation. And those same billionaires and politicians support European parties that want to weaken the EU itself. In 2018, he wrote to Jeffrey Epstein about the success of far-right parties in Europe and predicted that after their representation in the European Parliament increased: “We’ll be able to shut down any crypto legislation or anything else we want.” Epstein replied: “Roger that.” Trump refers to Canada as the 51st state, imposes tariffs, and Mark Carney articulates his government’s position very directly: “He’s trying to break us, so that America can own us.” At the same time, separatism in Alberta is gaining momentum in the American media landscape. Representatives of the separatist movement are meeting with State Department officials. Finance Minister Bessent calls Alberta “a natural partner of the U.S.” and specifically mentions its vast natural resources. Applebaum describes the possible logic in the harshest terms: “Pressure the economy, break up the federation, pick up the pieces.” And she adds: “And no, it is not a joke.” In Greenland, it’s roughly the same mix: American political emissaries, oil companies, tech investors, people from Trump’s inner circle, talk of mineral resources, data centers, and the territory’s possible annexation by the U.S. A local politician describes the consequences of such pressure: “They are destroying the trust and the respect in society, in institutions, but also in people.” And even more bluntly: “They f*ck with people's brains.” Against this backdrop, Applebaum lists an entire infrastructure for exporting MAGA: direct funding for allies, political endorsements, MAGA podcasts, CPAC, restructured humanitarian programs, contacts through Congress, and the dismantling of traditional democracy-support programs. Argentina receives $20 billion in aid on the eve of the election, with Trump effectively tying the aid to a victory for Javier Milei’s party. In Germany, Vance meets with the AfD. In Hungary, he supports Orbán. In Poland, Trump meets with Karol Nawrocki during the presidential campaign and later boasts that he “won” the election for him. In Romania, George Simion visits Bannon and declares: “We totally bashed the globalists here in Romania.” Voice of America and Radio Free Europe have been nearly destroyed. USAID has been dismantled. The Fulbright programs have been subject to political interference. According to Applebaum, State Department Human Rights Reports may now describe Germany as a more repressive country than El Salvador. In other words, the very structure of American soft power is changing. Previously, it promoted — at least formally — democracy, freedom of speech, human rights, and the American model. Now, as State Department official Sarah Rogers says, grants should go to those who are capable of: “Advancing American priorities.” And Applebaum asks a perfectly logical question: “What are 'American priorities' if the American government is run by people who use its instruments not on behalf of citizens, but on their own behalf?” Meanwhile, the rest of the Western world is beginning to draw conclusions. Canada is signing defense agreements with the EU and negotiating with Australia. The EU is concluding new trade agreements with India and Australia. In the first half of 2026, 26 world leaders visited China. The French government is gradually removing Windows, Teams, and Zoom from government computers. Similar processes are beginning in Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, as well as in banks and universities. France’s Minister for European Affairs put it as precisely as possible: “We cannot leave the security of Europe in the hands of voters in Wisconsin every 4 years.” This, in my opinion, is the main takeaway of the article. Applebaum isn’t just writing about Trump, nor is she merely writing about MAGA. She describes the collapse of the system that has underpinned American influence for nearly 80 years. The U.S. was the world’s most powerful nation not only because it had the largest army, the dollar, and aircraft carriers. Its strength also lay in the fact that countries voluntarily chose to remain allies of the U.S. America had created the system and, within that system, had limited its own use of force. Now that system has been destroyed.5h
    Today's Rank

    —

    Not ranked yet

    Today's Rank

    —

    Not ranked yet