Parallels between US President Donald Musk and pre-revolutionary French Monarchs
Donald Trump exhibits several characteristics that resemble pre-revolutionary French monarchs, particularly in terms of governance, style and public perception.
Gérard Araud who has been France’s ambassador to the U.S. for almost 40 years compares Donald Trump’s administration to the court of King Louis XIV: “You have an old king, a bit whimsical, unpredictable, uninformed but he wants to be the only one to decide”
On foreign policy, he also pointed to Trump's unpredictability, insisting that he has become isolated from traditional allies.
“When they say “America first”, it’s “America alone”, Araud said. “Basically, this president and this administration have no allies, have no friends. It’s really about bilateral relationships based on the balance of power and the defense of narrow American interests.” [refer to my post "In Today’s Multipolar World, what are the Geopolitical and Economic Implications of a US Transactional Foreign Policy?"]
The French fascination with power is deeply rooted in history. Will America one day look back on Trump, the “monarchical” president, with the same nostalgic reverence that the French devote to their monarchs?
Parallels between Donald Trump and French monarchs
Drawing parallels between Donald Trump and French monarchs involves examining their leadership styles, personalities and approaches to governance.
1. Centralization of power
French monarchs, especially Louis XIV, centralized authority and often ruled without significant checks on their power. Trump, too, has demonstrated a tendency to centralize decision-making within his administration, relying heavily on a close circle of advisors and often bypassing traditional political processes.
2. Populist Appeal
Just as Napoleon attempted to maintain his power by appealing to the masses, Trump used populist rhetoric, to build a solid base of supporters - often by portraying himself as the champion of the "common man" against an established elite (bypassing traditional political processes) - resonating most strongly with those who felt marginalized.
3. Communication style
Louis XIV and Trump share a penchant for whimsical style and extravagant choices. King Louis XIV relied on lavish display and pageantry to convey his power and influence. Similarly, Trump uses social media, rallies or public appearances to nurture his image and connect with his base, preferring spontaneous communication conveying personal feelings more than established protocols.
4. Court influence and loyalty
French monarchs surrounded themselves with a court of loyal nobles to retain power, often engaging in political intrigue. Trump, too, relies on a close circle of advisors and loyalists, fostering a culture of loyalty and flattery that overshadowes traditional checks and balances.
5. Polarization and division
The reign of the French monarchs was marked by growing divisions within society, leading to significant unrest. Parallels exist with Trump's often polarizing policies and actions, particularly on immigration reform and tariffs, which have sparked national and global debate, leading to protests and divisions.
6. Unpredictability
Louis XIV could be unpredictable in his governance, often changing policies or court alliances based on personal relationships or momentary desires, leading to a court that was constantly adapting to his whims. Trump has a tendency to make unexpected moves, from abrupt policy shifts to controversial statements that keep supporters and detractors on their toes. Our world of certainties is collapsing, we are entering a new era. We just don’t know what this era will be?
7. Conflict with institutions
Monarchs often faced conflicts with emerging institutions such as the parliament or the burgeoning bourgeoisie. Trump has had contentious relationships with various institutions, including the judiciary and the media, challenging their authority and legitimacy.
What lessons can we draw from the legacy of the French monarchs?
During 1787 and 1789, France faced major financial difficulties, driven by rising national debt resulting from wars and lavish spending by the royal court. Attempts at tax reform and fiscal austerity to remedy these problems triggered widespread unrest and resistance from the privileged classes and the population at large.
The nobility and other elites opposed the monarchy's attempts to centralize power and implement tax reforms. They saw these measures as a threat to their traditional privileges under the feudal system, and sought ways to reassert their influence through the reintroduction of mechanisms such as the Estates-General. The Estates-General was a representative body of the French people that in the past enjoyed the right to consent to royal decrees. Initially, the king resisted. However, the impending bankruptcy forced Louis XVI to convene the Estates-General in the autumn of 1788.
In May 1789, the Estates-General finally met, and social divisions deepened. The financial burden fell disproportionately on commoners, while the nobility and clergy largely avoided taxation. This inequality, coupled with widespread famine and rising food prices, fueled anger and calls for systemic reform.
Within a month, the leading commoner deputies decided that to get a share of power, they would have to seize it. In June 1789, the commoner deputies declared that they alone represented the “nation”. The rest is history.
How do Trump's current political dynamics relate to those of French monarchs?
The US national debt has also seen a colossal increase under the Trump administration, exacerbated by the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which significantly reduced corporate tax rates but contributed to deepening deficits. The COVID-19 pandemic added further pressure to the economy, calling for stimulus spending to support struggling businesses and individuals.
The new Trump administration has already implemented a series of executive orders (without Congressional oversight) aimed at addressing the US deficit and advancing the “America First” agenda. While these initiatives seek above all to stimulate economic growth and protect domestic industries, they are likely to worsen the deficit and fuel popular discontent, thereby undermining the promises of restoring America's mythical economy.
Trump's fiscal policy, which favors corporations and the wealthy, is leading to economic polarization between wealthy elites and working-class Americans, reminiscent of the tensions between social classes during the French Revolution.
Rising prescription drug prices and cuts to the Medicaid program will make healthcare less accessible to low-income families. Federal job cuts and the elimination of protections for federal employees also directly affects middle-class workers.
The aggressive stance on immigration, including the deportation of undocumented immigrants, will disrupt many critical industries, such as agriculture and hospitality, driving up food prices for consumers.
Rising tariffs on imported goods from key trading partners will also lead to higher prices for everyday consumer goods, putting a strain on household budgets, particularly those of low- and middle-income families.
Overall, the adoption of these collective initiatives may lead to unintended consequences, such as rising costs of living and economic contraction. In the event of an economic slowdown, the borrowing capacity of the US government, businesses and individuals could be reduced, further restricting spending and investments and deepening the downturn.
In an increasingly chaotic world, where global warming is having devastating effects on the economy, any new financial crisis could set the world alight, as it did in 1789. Revolutions are often triggered by the unexpected coincidence of unrelated events, driving a fraction of the population into poverty.
Final thoughts
These insights highlight the extent to which financial mismanagement, social fractures, resistance among the elite and declining institutional trust are likely to create conditions ripe for upheaval. In the US, these factors have contributed to the emergence of an increasingly divided and conflictual political climate.
These parallels remind us of the importance of addressing economic disparities, preserving institutional credibility and promoting unity to prevent systemic crises.
