THE US election has increasingly evolved from traditional political contestation into a realm of post-politics, where issues are reframed not as ideological conflicts but as debates centred on efficiency, pragmatism and often sensationalism. The Republican manifesto, under the influence of President-elect Donald Trump, reflects a distinct populist tone that downplays complex policy in favour of blunt rhetoric and market-centred policies. This trend is complemented by opposition leaders such as Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, who attempt to counter Trump’s populism with a more inclusive but arguably still neoliberal approach, which suggests a broader trend toward post-political discourse. This shift is embedded in structural and ideological shifts that impact global power relations, particularly in South Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Europe, where the US election outcomes are not only closely watched but are also a source of regional reflection on governance, democracy and economic policy.
The implications of US elections resonate globally, with world leaders from China, Pakistan, India and Russia keenly observing shifts in American policy to recalibrate their foreign and domestic strategies. China, for instance, closely examines US policy on trade and security, wary of economic tensions that impact the global market. In South Asia, countries like Pakistan and India are directly affected by US foreign policy decisions on security and diplomacy, particularly in the light of the US’s stance on the Indo-Pacific strategy. Russia, on the other hand, remains focused on the implications for its geopolitical influence, as the US election affects global power dynamics. Consequently, the US election plays a significant role in these regions, where domestic politics often respond directly to shifts in American policy.
In the Middle East, US elections hold deep implications for countries embroiled in conflict and ongoing negotiations over nuclear programs, human rights issues and economic sanctions. Europe, often America’s closest ally, perceives US election trends as indicative of shifts in global order, adjusting its policies accordingly to either harmonize with or distance itself from US leadership, especially under unpredictable leadership styles like Trump’s populism. Africa, meanwhile, faces indirect consequences, as US policies on trade, aid and immigration directly impact its economic and social development.
Digital evidence and the rise of post-politics in US elections underline the ways in which political discourse has shifted from policy substance to online spectacle. Campaigns increasingly depend on digital platforms to amplify their messages, with algorithms selectively curating content that reinforces voter biases. Trump’s populism thrives in this environment, using digital tools to project his image as a leader who embodies anti-establishment values, even as these platforms also highlight the deeper issues of misinformation and echo chambers. For post-politics, this digital realm has become the primary battleground, where political agendas are replaced by the viral circulation of image and rhetoric over substance.
The framework of Trump’s populism aligns closely with post-politics, reflecting a style more oriented toward the aesthetics of populist appeal than structural political change. Post-politics aligns with neoliberalism, where political decisions are increasingly depoliticized and economic management is foregrounded as the primary criterion for governance. Trump’s manifesto speaks directly to this paradigm, embedding market-driven solutions to issues of health, education and foreign policy, rather than ideological commitments to substantive reform. Yet, it is this neoliberal depoliticization that renders his populism contradictory; while advocating for the “common man,” Trump’s policies remain anchored in a market-centric framework that reinforces the very structures of inequality it purports to dismantle.
Theorists such as Gramsci, Paulo Freire, and Louis Althusser provide useful frameworks to analyze the US elections from critical perspectives. Gramsci’s notion of cultural hegemony, for example, underscores how both parties operate within a pre-established economic order that maintains the status quo. Trump’s populist language of “draining the swamp” echoes a desire for structural upheaval but is undercut by neoliberal policies that primarily benefit established economic elites. Freire’s ideas on pedagogy and social change highlight the electoral pedagogy of the oppressed, where US elections serve as a platform that purports to give power to the masses but instead limits genuine agency by framing elections as periodic spectacles without fundamental impact on the lived experiences of marginalized populations.
From a feminist perspective, the US election presents a complex picture of symbolic representation versus substantive change. The candidacies of Kamala Harris and other women on the Democratic ticket mark a significant shift toward greater representation, yet feminist critics argue that post-political rhetoric limits the transformative potential of such representation. It reduces feminist gains to a symbolic gesture rather than addressing the systemic economic and social inequalities that disproportionately impact women, especially women of colour. A Marxist perspective on the US election, drawing on thinkers like Althusser and Habermas, would suggest that both Republican and Democratic platforms reflect the interests of capital over labor, focusing on policy changes that benefit corporate America while offering minimal improvement to the working class.
Using statistical evidence, such as Pew Research Centre and Gallup polls, we see that a significant portion of the US electorate feels disenfranchised and skeptical of both parties. Voter turnout data suggests that while Trump appeals to a vocal and mobilized base, many feel left out of a system that increasingly fails to address pressing socio-economic issues, leading to political apathy among certain demographics. This data supports the notion of post-politics, where citizens are often more engaged in cultural debates than structural political action, a shift exacerbated by neoliberalism, which reframes issues of inequality and power as issues of personal responsibility and market logic.
Post-politics in the US thus represents an era where elections have become less about ideological battle and more about managing public perception and spectacle through digital platforms and neoliberal rhetoric. This shift away from substantive policy toward digital branding has led to a unique post-political condition in American democracy, where spectacle and economic management have replaced grassroots political mobilization and ideology.
—The writer is a Chief Executive of Global Strategic Institute for Sustainable Development-A think Tank based in Islamabad.
