.png)
The rise of Donald Trump to power in the United States and his initiation of a crusade against decades of liberal globalism raise profound questions, particularly when considering the role of the so-called "deep state." Trump and his supporters—Trumpists—have declared war on this entity, achieving significant victories, such as the closure of USAID. They define the deep state as a liberal-democratic elite, encompassing both left-wing and neoconservative factions, entrenched in the U.S. government and backed by financial, military, and tech oligarchies. This elite, with its networks in intelligence agencies ,has tied America and the West to globalism, unipolarity, and the spread of woke ideology—promoting mass migration, gender fluidity, and the erosion of sovereign nation-states.
In opposition, Trump’s MAGA ideology champions traditional values, a binary understanding of gender, resistance to illegal immigration, and the preservation of national sovereignty within a multipolar world, which he calls the “Great Power Order.” This shift represents not just an ideological break but a geopolitical revolution, reshaping alliances and enmities domestically and globally. Trump articulated this vision during his campaign—echoing “Project 2025,” despite his formal disavowal—and began implementing it post-inauguration by appointing loyalists like JD Vance, Elon Musk, Pete Hegseth, Tulsi Gabbard, Kash Patel, Robert Kennedy Jr., Pam Bondi, and Karoline Leavitt to key roles. In his March 3, 2025, address to Congress, he crystallized this agenda into a roadmap for what can be termed a Conservative Revolution, explicitly targeting the deep state for destruction.
Yet, this revolution’s success prompts a paradox. In my recent book, I argued that Trump’s radical changes—and his very survival to inauguration—required support from within the deep state itself. Decades of globalist dominance had granted them near-total control over politics, economics, media, and culture. Even with widespread public backlash against their policies, which turned America into what many see as a distorted ruin, Trump’s ambitious upheaval could not have succeeded without a deeper shift. How, then, could the deep state sanction its own demise?
One possibility is a split within its ranks, with one faction backing Trump while another clung to the old ideology. If true, Trumpists would likely have stopped targeting the deep state upon taking power, quietly purging it and repurposing it under new rules. Instead, they continue dismantling it outright. This suggests a different explanation: there are two deep states. The first, the “deep state,” is the liberal globalist network Trumpists decry—a “Liberal International” that fought him relentlessly. The second, an “even deeper state,” must exist to enable his victory, beyond mere populist support from America’s heartland.
Comparing Trump’s first term (Trump 1.0) as the 45thPresident to his current term (Trump 2.0) as the 47th sheds light on this. In2016, Trump rode a wave of conservative discontent, backed bypaleoconservatives, but his administration was staffed with deep statefigures—neocons and RINOs (Republicans In Name Only). His ideology then was apatchwork of conspiracy theories, epitomized by QAnon, lacking coherence. By2024, however, MAGA evolved into a structured ideology—populist, libertarian,and nationalist—codified in “Project 2025.” Still, this alone couldn’t accountfor the deeper force behind his triumph.
A clue lies in Silicon Valley’s unexpected support duringthe 2024 election. Tech oligarchs like Peter Thiel and Elon Musk, traditionallyDemocratic allies, backed Trump, reflecting a split within accelerationism—thephilosophy of hastening technological progress toward a post-human future. Leftaccelerationists tied this to liberal agendas, while right accelerationists,influenced by thinkers like Curtis Yarvin and Nick Land, argued thatliberalism’s woke dogma and open borders hinder progress. Their “DarkEnlightenment” calls for rejecting humanism and reviving hierarchical, closedsystems—like monarchies or castes—to turbocharge innovation.
Thiel and Musk, with their vast influence in surveillance,AI, and space tech, form the nucleus of this “tech right.” Thiel’s Palantirpowers intelligence agencies, while Musk’s X amplifies their reach. Theyinfiltrated the establishment, using populism as a mask for their radicalvision. My hypothesis is that this group constitutes the “even deeper state,”enabling Trump’s victory not for nostalgia but to dismantle liberal obstaclesto a technological leap—toward AGI, the singularity, and beyond. “Project 2025”reflects their input, with figures like Vance and Musk as visible leaders atopa broader network.
This explains Trump’s decisiveness: it’s not justtemperament but a strategic plan to accelerate time itself, backed by a techelite that overcame the liberal deep state by co-opting parts of it. The “evendeeper state” isn’t about returning to an American past—it’s about a futurewhere technology reigns, unencumbered by what they see as liberal folly. AsMusk recently posted on X, “We are at the event horizon of the singularity.”This is philosophy and metaphysics, not mere politics.
