A recent analysis by Stephen Gardner and Susan Kokinda dives deep into what they term a revolutionary strategy reshaping American economic and foreign policy. Far from a collection of isolated tweets and rallies, they present a coherent, historically-rooted ideology aimed at reversing decades of perceived decline. This strategy, centered on a new “Donroe Doctrine” and a revival of Hamiltonian economics, directly confronts the forces of globalization and what is described as “deliberate de-industrialization.” This article unpacks the core arguments from their discussion, exploring the ideological battle, the tangible economic shifts, and the ultimate geopolitical endgame. 🗺️
The “Donroe Doctrine”: A New Framework for the Western Hemisphere
At the heart of this strategic shift is what Marco Rubio, in a Munich address, reportedly dubbed the “Donroe Doctrine.” This framework is presented as a modern evolution of the Monroe Doctrine, tailored for the 21st-century challenges of economic competition and ideological warfare. Its primary goal is not just American prosperity, but the preservation and strengthening of Western civilization as a whole.
🏛️ Key Pillars of the Donroe Doctrine
- Strengthening Western Civilization: A core focus on reinforcing the cultural and economic foundations of the West.
- Defending the Western Hemisphere: Prioritizing security and economic stability across North and South America.
- Countering China's Influence: Actively working to limit the economic and political encroachment of the Chinese Communist Party in the Americas.
- Reinforcing U.S. Leadership: Reasserting the United States as the primary economic and strategic partner for nations in its hemisphere.
According to Kokinda, this doctrine aligns perfectly with Trump's broader “America First” strategy. It’s not about isolationism, but about building powerful, reciprocal alliances within the hemisphere, creating a bulwark against external adversaries. The strategy involves appealing not just to foreign leaders, but directly to the citizens of other nations, inviting them to reject “failed policies” and embrace national sovereignty, strong borders, and a focus on their own working class.
An Ideological War: Hamiltonian Economics vs. Globalist “Parasitism”
The discussion argues that the economic decay seen in the West was not an accident of history but a calculated policy. This sets up a fundamental conflict between two opposing economic worldviews: the productive, protectionist model of Alexander Hamilton versus what is termed the “parasitism” of globalization.
📉 The Charge: “Deliberate De-Industrialization”
Kokinda and Rubio are cited as stating that the hollowing out of American and European manufacturing was a “conscious policy decision.” This policy is attributed to a “global imperial elite,” with its roots in the “British imperial system,” which uses free trade as its primary weapon.
🚨 The System of “Managed Decline”
The argument posits that a handful of powerful financiers and cartels rigged the global economy to loot countries through two primary methods:
- Free Trade: Lowering barriers to allow for the exploitation of cheap labor and the dismantling of domestic industrial bases.
- Green Policies: Convincing nations to de-industrialize under the guise of environmentalism.
This system, they claim, was laid out in documents like the Council on Foreign Relations’ “Project 1980s,” which allegedly called for the “controlled disintegration of the world economy” to overcome national desires for manufacturing independence. The ultimate result is the enrichment of a tiny elite and the impoverishment of the working and middle classes.
💡 The Antidote: A Return to Hamiltonian Economics
The counter-offensive to this globalist model is a revival of the “American system of political economy,” most famously articulated by Alexander Hamilton. Trade Ambassador Jameson Greer is highlighted for openly championing these principles at Davos, directly confronting the global elite on their home turf.
Hamiltonian economics is presented as the polar opposite of free trade. Its core tenets are:
- Protectionism: The government has a duty to protect its domestic economy, its people, and its crucial manufacturing sectors.
- National Interest: Policies should be designed to foster national production and penalize actions detrimental to the nation's economic health.
- Self-Sufficiency: A nation must possess the industrial capacity to produce what it needs for its security and prosperity.
By resurrecting this model, the speakers argue, the Trump administration provides the necessary ideological framework to not only fight back against de-industrialization but to “win this fight and make it permanent.”
📈 Reversing the Decline: A Surge in American Manufacturing
The video argues that this ideological shift is already producing stunning real-world results, representing a direct reversal of 50 years of “managed decline.” The key message Trump wants Republicans to push, according to the analysis, is simple: “The election has to be on the economy, because we are delivering.”
🏭 The American Industrial Comeback: By the Numbers
- Historic Investment: A massive $550 billion in investment commitments from Japan alone, aimed at building new factories in the U.S.
- Job Creation: A surge in manufacturing jobs, creating hundreds of thousands of well-paying positions for construction and factory workers.
- Factory Reopenings: The first new aluminum smelter in 50 years and the first new graphene facility in 70 years are cited as evidence of a manufacturing renaissance.
- Onshoring Critical Industries: A deliberate effort to bring back production of essential goods like minerals and pharmaceuticals to ensure national self-sufficiency.
These factory reopenings are deeply significant because they symbolize a rejection of the “post-industrial dark age.” They represent tangible proof that the country can rebuild its productive capacity, offering a future where prosperity is built on making things, not just financial speculation. This progress was initiated through every tool available, including executive orders, though the ultimate goal is to cement these changes through permanent legislation.
A Tale of Two Systems: New York City as a “Parasite” Case Study
To illustrate the endpoint of the globalist model, the discussion points to New York City’s fiscal policies. The city's struggles with budget promises and tax hikes are presented as a microcosm of the “parasitical” system at work. The argument is that when a system is based on financial extraction rather than production, it “sucks its host dry.”
In this view, the financial bubble enriches an elite while the real economy, which supports the average person, withers. The result is a city where working people, even with multiple jobs, “simply cannot make it.” This, Kokinda warns, is the final stage of parasitism: “not just weakening the host but finally killing the host.” This local example serves as a stark contrast to the national vision of a rebuilt, productive economy where hard work leads to advancement.
The Endgame: Changing Global Geometry and Securing the Future
The strategy extends beyond domestic economics into a full-scale reshaping of global politics. The goal is to “change the political geometry in the entire world” by fostering a global populist movement.
This is achieved by appealing directly to the “patriots in each one of these European nations,” inviting them to reject their current leadership and forge a new path based on national interest. It’s an attempt to build an international alliance of sovereign nations against the international alliance of globalists.
Domestically, the political future is also a key focus. The video speculates on a potential Trump-Rubio or Trump-JD Vance ticket, praising both for their commitment to serving the American people over global interests. However, the most critical element is the 2026 midterm elections. Kokinda emphasizes that maintaining a “MAGA” or Republican Congress is essential to pass the legislation needed to make the Hamiltonian revival permanent, ensuring it outlasts any single administration. 🗳️
In summary, the analysis presented by Gardner and Kokinda outlines a comprehensive and radical vision. It portrays the Trump movement not as a personality cult, but as the vehicle for a historic economic and ideological realignment—a deliberate effort to dismantle the architecture of globalization and rebuild the nation on the forgotten principles of American economic nationalism.