US President Trump's rhetoric and actions have drawn comparisons with that of Carl Schmitt, a Nazi theorist who envisioned the world divided into "great spaces" dominated by imperial powers. This concept, known as Großraum, involves the creation of spheres of influence where states are shaped by their central power and forbidden from intervening in neighboring regions.
Trump's emphasis on his own continent, particularly Latin America, has led some to see echoes of Schmitt's Monroe doctrine - a policy that sought to limit European interference in the Americas. However, the US has historically been more expansionist, asserting its influence across other continents through military power and economic might.
Critics argue that Trump is an advocate for aspects of Schmitt's concept, particularly his rejection of western universalism and the notion of great spaces free from outside interference. The president's willingness to impose territorial losses on Ukraine has led some to compare him with Putin, who also seeks to expand Russia's influence in its "near abroad".
But others are more skeptical, arguing that Trump is not a fascist but a narcissist who will not accept any other gods beside himself. His actions do not suggest strategic collusion or understanding based on spheres of influence, and he has clobbered Iran and Russian air-defence systems, among other targets.
Schmitt's vision ultimately failed due to the "Anglo-Saxon" powers refusing to stay out of Europe. Trump's actions may not be directly influenced by Schmitt, but they do reflect a similar anti-western sentiment and rejection of universal principles. As one historian notes, Trump is firmly within the expansive American tradition that has asserted US power across other continents.
While some may see parallels between Trump's vision and Schmitt's, others caution against drawing direct comparisons, pointing to significant differences in their ideologies and approaches. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that both leaders have a deep-seated distrust of Western universalism and an unwavering commitment to their respective national interests.
The future trajectory of the world under Trump's leadership remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: his actions will be shaped by a complex mix of nationalism, pragmatism, and self-interest - qualities that may or may not be aligned with Schmitt's vision of great spaces.
Trump's emphasis on his own continent, particularly Latin America, has led some to see echoes of Schmitt's Monroe doctrine - a policy that sought to limit European interference in the Americas. However, the US has historically been more expansionist, asserting its influence across other continents through military power and economic might.
Critics argue that Trump is an advocate for aspects of Schmitt's concept, particularly his rejection of western universalism and the notion of great spaces free from outside interference. The president's willingness to impose territorial losses on Ukraine has led some to compare him with Putin, who also seeks to expand Russia's influence in its "near abroad".
But others are more skeptical, arguing that Trump is not a fascist but a narcissist who will not accept any other gods beside himself. His actions do not suggest strategic collusion or understanding based on spheres of influence, and he has clobbered Iran and Russian air-defence systems, among other targets.
Schmitt's vision ultimately failed due to the "Anglo-Saxon" powers refusing to stay out of Europe. Trump's actions may not be directly influenced by Schmitt, but they do reflect a similar anti-western sentiment and rejection of universal principles. As one historian notes, Trump is firmly within the expansive American tradition that has asserted US power across other continents.
While some may see parallels between Trump's vision and Schmitt's, others caution against drawing direct comparisons, pointing to significant differences in their ideologies and approaches. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that both leaders have a deep-seated distrust of Western universalism and an unwavering commitment to their respective national interests.
The future trajectory of the world under Trump's leadership remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: his actions will be shaped by a complex mix of nationalism, pragmatism, and self-interest - qualities that may or may not be aligned with Schmitt's vision of great spaces.
. Like, don't get me wrong, I love how nostalgic it is to see these old concepts resurface - but at the same time, I'm like " wait a minute, this isn't some romanticized Disney fairy tale" 
. Trump's whole thing about Latin America and Monroe doctrine vibes just feels so... toxic 
. And can we talk about Ukraine? Like, what even is going on over there? 
. It's like we're living in a spy novel or something - all these secret alliances and spheres of influence... 
. And can we just talk about how messed up the whole Putin comparison is? Like, they're two peas in a pod or something 
.
. Anyone got some calming tea to spill? 
️
so like Trump's whole 'America First' thing feels super familiar, but it's not just about the Nazis 
, it's also about being a total egomaniac 
, you know? He's all about himself and his own power, not about some grand vision for the world like Schmitt had. And yeah, his actions are pretty aggressive, especially with Ukraine, but I think people need to separate that from the 'great spaces' thing, which is just a fancy way of saying he wants to be the boss of everyone else 
.
. I mean, sure, he's got that whole 'America First' thing going on, but it's not like he's trying to create some grand empire or anything 
. He's just as likely to stab his own allies in the back if it means getting ahead 
.
. I'm curious to see how this all plays out, but for now, I'm just gonna sit back and watch 
.
he thinks hes gonna get away w/ just ignoring everyone else & letting the us rule supreme? pls 
schmitts großraum concept might've worked in europe back in the day but now its just a fancy way of sayin imperialistic nonsense. Putin's got more game than trump any day 
and btw, trump's actions dont even make sense 4 a fascist lol thats just a weak excuse 4 his bad decisions 
. But let's be real, Trump doesn't have the strategic mind to pull off Schmitt's grand plan, he's more likely to trip over his own feet 
. I mean, Ukraine? Really? That's just a warm-up exercise for him, and Putin is probably laughing all the way back in Moscow 
. But at the end of the day, it's all about Trump's own ego and desire for validation, not about shaping any meaningful "great spaces" 
. I'm calling it now: his presidency is going to be a trainwreck, and we're all just along for the ride 
, and yeah, it kinda sounds like schmitt's whole "great spaces" thing... but, like, isn't that a bit simplistic? doesn't trump's whole presidency just be about him trying to stay on top of the game? 
he's not exactly been subtle about his feelings towards europe or other countries... and let's not forget all the times he's gone after iran and russia 
. it's like, sure, there are some similarities with schmitt's stuff, but trump's just trying to do his own thing, you know? 
I think it's kinda crazy how some people are comparing Trump to Schmitt, like they're old buddies or something 
. Maybe instead of comparing him to Schmitt, we should be trying to figure out how to stop him from messing up the world 
. One day he's all about America's greatness and Latin American strongmen 
, the next he's tweeting his head off at Putin 
, trying to show the world who's boss 
. But then again, isn't that just playing by the same rules as every other great power? 
...what if his whole 'America First' thing is just a way to mask a deeper desire for dominance? 