President Donald Trump’s latest step to obtain partial U.S. government control in Intel demonstrates just how far the Republican Party has strayed from its free-market roots.
What was once the party of capitalism and limited government now leads the way in cheering Trump’s increasingly brazen willingness to ensnare government in private enterprise, something Republicans of earlier eras would have abhorred.
Trump recently revealed that the federal government will buy a 10% holding in Intel, in the name of national security. This brazen move is just the latest illustration of his administration’s interventionist economic agenda. With scant opposition from within the party and, in many instances, overt admiration for his negotiating skills, the GOP is increasingly adopting policies that bear a close resemblance to the very “socialism” they purport to decry.
Trump blurs the boundaries between government and business
Trump has had a long interest in putting the government into industries he sees as essential to security and economic power. Aside from Intel, the Department of Defense bought a 15% share in the sole rare earth mining and processing firm in the U.S., paying $400 million for it. In like fashion, the U.S. acquired a “golden share” in U.S. Steel in its contentious sale to Japanese concern Nippon Steel, a transaction Trump approved personally earlier this year.
Although Trump has stated that the U.S. will not use its stake in Intel to interfere in business conduct, his actions call this into question. He has already gone on public record demanding that the CEO of Intel step down, which is inconsistent with a hands-off policy. The truth is that government ownership, even a partial one, provides Washington with influence over corporations and their choices.
This strategy follows left-wing perceptions of government as an active force in structuring markets. Trump’s economic philosophy is based on tariffs, ownership stakes, and political pressure, arbitrage tools that prescribe how the private sector must conduct its business. It therefore shouldn’t be surprising that his Intel deal even received some semblance of endorsement from Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Vermont democratic socialist who generally finds himself at odds with Republicans. Sanders has previously supported Trump’s protectionist policies, and their agreement on government intervention indicates they have more in common than most would anticipate.
Republicans give up on free market ideals
The most surprising aspect of this transformation is the quietness, or active endorsement, of Republican legislators. For decades, the GOP advocated that free markets, not the government, more efficiently allocated resources. They cautioned that central planning was wasteful, damaging, and fundamentally un-American. But now that Trump is in charge, Republicans seem to be fine with policies that go against those very ideals.
This transformation did not occur suddenly. Throughout Trump’s first term, tariffs became a hallmark policy, upending old trade coalitions and compelling companies to acclimate to Washington’s whims. Nevertheless, the party remained ideologically attached to free-market capitalism, at least on the verbal level. Now, though, the dynamic is different. Republicans no longer quarrel with Trump’s economic interventions, instead choosing to “trust Trump” on faith.
This deference to Trump is a disturbing deviation from sound economic policy. Rather than analyzing the virtues of government ownership or tariffs, Republicans appear happy to adopt them as long as they are labeled with Trump’s name. The end result is a party that complains of “socialism” from Democrats while embracing their own brand at the national level.
A pernicious precedent
Trump’s willingness to put government into private business decisions has larger implications. These policies instill uncertainty in businesses and investors, retard economic growth, and establish a precedent for future presidents to use comparable power. What initially will be justified by national security could readily grow into larger government regulation of industries whenever it is convenient to the political agenda.
While, however, Republican leadership aims its anger at local politicians such as New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, condemning his self-described socialist policies, the outrage is subdued when Trump advocates government intervention on orders of magnitude larger. The double standard establishes that the problem is not socialism per se, but who applies it.
In the end, the Intel agreement symbolizes more than one policy choice. It reflects a deeper shift inside the Republican Party, a desire to exchange free-market principles for political allegiance. As Trump proceeds to confuse capitalism and government authority, the silence of the GOP rings loud.
Leo Cruz brings sharp insights into the world of politics, offering balanced reporting and analysis on the latest policies, elections, and global political events. With years of experience covering campaigns and interviewing world leaders, Leo ensures readers are always informed and engaged.
