The Coming Realignment: MAGA, BRICS, and the Battle to Redefine the World Order
In a world increasingly defined by fragmentation and ideological rifts, a quiet but seismic shift is taking place. At the heart of it are two forces that, at first glance, seem fundamentally opposed. These forces are Donald Trump’s MAGA movement and the growing coalition of nations known as BRICS. This coalition includes Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, and has recently expanded to include countries like Iran and Egypt. But look deeper and a more complex picture emerges. It suggests these players, though adversaries on the surface, are responding to the same fundamental pressures. They are potentially shaping the next chapter of global history.
To understand the stakes, we need to go back to the basics. MAGA, the “Make America Great Again” project, sees American decline as the result of globalism, multiculturalism, and bureaucratic stagnation. Trump and his allies have made it clear. The world works better when the United States calls the shots. It functions well when manufacturing comes home. Borders—economic and political—are tightly controlled for optimal results.
BRICS, meanwhile, was born out of frustration with that very world. Its founding members were tired of playing second fiddle to the U.S.-dominated financial and political institutions that emerged after World War II. The International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the U.N. Security Council never fully reflected their growing economic power or regional influence. Over time, BRICS morphed from an economic acronym into a genuine political project. Now, its members are pushing for a multipolar world—one not ruled from Washington or Wall Street.
This year, the tension has reached new heights. Trump has promised sweeping 10 to 100 percent tariffs on BRICS countries, especially those experimenting with trading outside the U.S. dollar. China and Russia have been building alternative financial systems. These include BRICS Pay, local currency swaps, and a new development bank. All these are designed to chip away at U.S. economic dominance. Trump sees this as an existential threat. He’s not wrong.
Behind the headlines, there’s a deeper ideological conflict at play. MAGA and BRICS are two answers to the same question: What comes after the global liberal order? For MAGA, the answer is nationalist restoration—bringing power back to the American worker, the American company, the American identity. For BRICS, the answer is regional power-sharing. It means an end to Western monopoly. It involves the recognition that different civilizations can govern in different ways.
But here’s the twist: both MAGA and BRICS are united by what they reject. They despise the slow, indecisive churn of liberal democracy. They distrust elites who speak the language of human rights while enforcing economic dependencies. And they both believe in sovereignty—not the abstract kind used in U.N. resolutions, but hard, pragmatic control: over borders, industries, media, and minds.
Carl Schmitt was a controversial German legal theorist who supported the Nazis. He once wrote that the essence of politics is the distinction between friend and enemy. In today’s fractured world, his influence echoes through both MAGA’s rhetoric and BRICS’s strategy. Trump identifies “the deep state” and “fake news” as enemies. China and Russia label the West as hypocritical imperialists. The new global realignment is being framed as an existential battle.
There’s also an economic layer to this. Within BRICS, a split is emerging. Countries like China and Brazil are investing heavily in clean tech. On the other hand, countries like India, Russia, and South Africa remain reliant on fossil fuels. It’s a tension between “electrostates” and “carbon states.” It mirrors debates within the West about climate. It also raises questions about development and who gets left behind. MAGA, for its part, aligns naturally with the carbon side. Its disdain for environmental regulation and its nostalgia for coal and steel reflect a worldview where energy is national power.
Despite internal contradictions, BRICS is growing. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Iran have either joined or expressed interest. India remains the wild card—simultaneously a partner in the Western “Quad” alliance and a committed member of BRICS. But if the group holds together, it could reshape trade. It could influence finance and change diplomacy in ways the West is not prepared for.
MAGA and BRICS ultimately represent two competing bets on how to save the world. At least, they are competing on how to control its future. MAGA believes salvation comes through strength, tariffs, and withdrawal from entangling alliances. BRICS believes it comes through collaboration, new institutions, and the erosion of U.S. influence.
Whether they collide or coexist may define the next 50 years. One wants to smash the old system to rebuild it stronger. The other wants to leave it behind and start a new one. Both, in their own way, are trying to bury the liberal order of the 20th century.
And the rest of the world? It’s stuck in the middle, waiting to see who writes the rules of the next age.