The US National Security Strategy: A manifesto for the far right – Explaining History
Read more favorable to US capital.From the demonization of migration to the cynical normalization of Russia, we unpack how the Trump administration is attempting to reshape Europe in its own image—and why the economic weakness of the continent leaves it vulnerable to this new, aggressive Monroe Doctrine.Key Topics:The 2025 Strategy: A blueprint for far-right interventionism.Civilizational Rhetoric: How "Great Replacement" theory has entered US policy.Economic Imperialism: The drive to deregulate Europe for American corporations.The Future of NATO: Why the US is pivoting towards "patriotic" (i.e., far-right) allies.References:Cas Mudde's analysis in The GuardianOswald Spengler's The Decline of the WestRenaud Camus' The Great ReplacementExplaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
If future historians were to curate an archive of the global far-right, the 2025 US National Security Strategy would undoubtedly be a centerpiece. It is to the modern nativist movement what Churchill’s “Iron Curtain” speech was to the Cold Warriors of the 20th century: a defining statement of intent.
In this week’s podcast, we dissected this alarming document. Far from a standard diplomatic strategy, it reads like a manifesto for interference in European democracy. Its stated goal is to promote “European greatness”—a phrase that, when decoded, signals a desire to replace liberal, pluralistic governments with far-right regimes modelled on Hungary or Italy.
The Language of “Civilizational Erasure”
As political scientist Cas Mudde noted in The Guardian, the document’s language is lifted almost verbatim from the speeches of Viktor Orban. It speaks of “civilizational self-confidence” and warns that Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to migration.
This is the rhetoric of the “Great Replacement” theory, sanitized for state policy. Originating with French writer Renaud Camus, this conspiracy theory claims that liberal elites are deliberately replacing native populations with immigrants to create a docile electorate. Once the preserve of fringe internet forums, this idea now sits at the heart of American foreign policy.
The strategy paints a dystopian picture of a Europe overrun by migrants, stifled by censorship, and losing its identity. It mirrors the false narratives pushed by online bot farms about “no-go zones” in London or Paris—narratives that serve to justify extreme political responses.
Follow the Money: The Economic Logic
However, as is always the case with the Trump administration, ideology is often a smokescreen for avarice. While Trump himself may hold racist views, his primary motivations are self-aggrandizement and wealth accumulation.
The push to install far-right governments in Europe is not just about culture wars; it is about economics. For decades, the European Union has acted as a regulatory superpower, curbing the excesses of American tech giants and enforcing standards on everything from food safety to data privacy. American corporate elites, who currently find Trump useful, view these regulations as intolerable barriers to profit.
A Europe governed by “patriotic” (read: far-right) parties would likely be hostile to the EU’s regulatory framework. By undermining Brussels and empowering national populists, the US hopes to fracture the single market and open the continent to American capital on American terms. It is a hostile takeover disguised as a civilizational rescue mission.
The New Monroe Doctrine
The strategy explicitly references the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which declared the Western Hemisphere the US’s sphere of influence. The 2025 document seeks to enforce a global corollary to this: listing countries that will “safeguard US national interests.”
This effectively divides Europe into “friends” (like Hungary and Italy) and potential adversaries (liberal democracies). It also signals a pivot regarding Russia. The document calls for “strategic stability” with Moscow, refusing to label Russia an adversary. This aligns perfectly with the worldview of the modern far-right, which sees Putin not as a geopolitical threat, but as an ideological ally in the war against liberalism.
A Century of Humiliation?
Europe finds itself in a precarious position. Having outsourced its security to the US for decades and ceded ground on energy and technology, it is weak. As Yanis Varoufakis has warned, Europe may be entering a “century of humiliation.”
The tragedy is the lack of resistance. European capitals seem paralyzed by the audacity of an ally that openly plans to undermine them. If the EU cannot find the political will to stand up to this new form of American imperialism, it risks becoming a mere vassal in a multipolar world—a playground for American corporations and a museum of its former self.
Part 3: Tidied Transcript
Nick: Hi there and welcome again to the Explaining History podcast.
If there were, in the future, an online archive or a museum dedicated to the foundational documents of the global far-right, the 2025 US National Security Strategy would have to be up there. It is to the global far-right what Churchill’s “Iron Curtain” speech was to the liberal and conservative Cold Warriors.
It contains the talking points that were eccentric fringe views just a decade ago, and it targets Europe in particular. It is an extreme and alarming document—a manifesto for American interference in European elections and a threat to social democratic and centrist governments.
Cas Mudde wrote in The Guardian:
“The document espouses an aggressive form of foreign policy interference in which the US explicitly sets itself the goal of promoting ‘European greatness’… Its language could have been directly lifted from Viktor Orban’s speeches during the so-called refugee crisis of 2015-16. Orban said, ‘We want Europe to remain European, to regain its civilizational self-confidence.’ Even more ominously, the document claims that Europe’s economic decline is eclipsed by the real and more stark prospect of ‘civilizational erasure’.”
This is an explicitly racist document. It puts into print the kind of rhetoric Trump uses about cities like London and Paris being “overrun.” There is this nonsense promulgated in the right-wing Twittersphere that there are “no-go areas” in London—claims often pushed by bot accounts and paid for by platforms like X (formerly Twitter). It is a coordinated initiative to create a narrative that justifies an extreme far-right response to pluralistic European life.
Why is Trump doing this? With Trump, it is always about the money. He doesn’t believe in anything sufficiently enough to base policy around it, other than acquiring wealth, self-aggrandizement, and a thuggish “America First” standpoint.
The strategy holds the EU and migration policies responsible for transforming the continent, creating strife, and causing a loss of national identity. It claims that if present trends continue, the continent will be unrecognizable in 20 years. It suggests that within a few decades, certain NATO members will be “majority non-European”—again, openly racist language.
These arguments echo two foundational far-right theories. First, Oswald Spengler’s The Decline of the West, which argues for the cyclical decline of civilizations—a theory used by the German far-right to criticize the Weimar Republic. Second, “The Great Replacement” theory, popularized by French writer Renaud Camus in 2011. This conspiracy theory accuses elites of using immigration to replace native populations with a docile electorate. It is also inherently antisemitic, often implying that Jewish elites are behind migration flows.
Mass immigration into Europe after WWII was based on the needs of capital. In Britain, the welfare state and post-war rebuilding relied on migrant workers from the Commonwealth. These were people who often felt fiercely loyal to Britain and were treated appallingly upon arrival. Britain’s identity is multi-ethnic and has been throughout the 20th and 21st centuries.
The economic rationale behind this US pressure on Europe is deregulation. American corporate elites dislike European regulations on tech platforms and food standards. They see these as barriers to American capital dominating Europe. Perhaps they fear Chinese capital doing the same—look at the explosion of Chinese EV sales, threatening the German car industry.
The Trump government is effectively saying, “We are going to put time, energy, and money into undermining your governments.” The lack of response from Europe is only going to encourage them. Trump operates on the principle that if someone shows weakness, you push them harder.
The document states:
“American diplomacy should continue to stand up for genuine democracy… and unapologetic celebrations of European nations’ individual character… The growing influence of patriotic European parties indeed gives us cause for great optimism.”
By “patriotic,” they mean nativist, racist, and fascist parties. When they talk about “freedom of speech,” they mean the ability of far-right parties to lie openly and challenge regulations on misinformation. This relates to Karl Popper’s “paradox of tolerance”—if you platform fascists who do not debate in good faith, they will use that freedom to seize power and end freedom.
We are at an alarming inflection point. The rhetoric of the street right filters into parties like Reform UK, which then pulls the Conservative Party further right, and Labour often follows to appear “patriotic.” This domino effect mainstreams fringe ideas. We see this with Keir Starmer arguing that the European Convention on Human Rights must be watered down—a key objective of the extreme right to strip refugees of rights.
Cas Mudde notes that the US believes making Europe “great again” is key to its own security, and only the far-right can achieve this. The policy prioritizes cultivating resistance within European nations (read: the far-right) and building up “aligned” countries like Hungary and Italy. It also seeks to pressure Europe to adopt US-style free speech laws, essentially allowing a European-wide Fox News.
Another priority is normalizing Russia. The document calls for “strategic stability” with Russia and refuses to treat it as an adversary.
Broadly, the strategy takes inspiration from the Monroe Doctrine of 1823. Trump’s team promises to enforce a “corollary” to this doctrine, listing countries that help safeguard US interests.
Ultimately, follow the money. This is about American capital seeing Europe as a place to be conquered. Europe has outsourced its security to the US and ceded ground on tech and energy, making it weak. Post-Brexit Britain tries to throw itself on America’s mercy, but once Trump is gone, whoever replaces him—Republican or Democrat—will be focused on power players like Putin, Xi Jinping, and Modi, not the British PM.
It will be difficult for a future Democrat president to row back on much of this if European regulations have already been downgraded. A Democrat president might enjoy the fact that when the US speaks, the EU listens.
On that bleak note, I will finish today. I may be back later with Part 2 of the series on Russian Jewish politics. Take care, everybody. Bye.
Leave a Reply