Leftists cry as Trump obliterates their patronage network

After securing a decisive electoral mandate and launching his second presidential term with a flurry of executive orders, Donald Trump has overwhelmed his liberal opposition. Progressives have struggled to find a compelling narrative against the real estate billionaire but have now focused their attacks on foreign aid spending cuts.

One of Trump’s executive orders placed a 90-day hold on foreign aid. In response, Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency identified the U.S. Agency for International Development as a prime candidate for elimination. Democrats and their media allies attempted to frame the cuts as an act of cruelty by wealthy elites indifferent to poor Africans being denied AIDS medication. But that strategy has backfired. As more Americans learn about USAID, they are discovering how much of their tax money has been siphoned into questionable projects abroad.

USAID’s funding is not merely wasted on political favors — it is actively used to support some of the most heinous projects imaginable.

Most Americans value generosity but recognize the importance of attending to domestic needs first. Foreign aid is easier to justify in times of prosperity, but when infrastructure is crumbling, housing is unaffordable for young people, and food prices are soaring, spending tax dollars overseas becomes a lower priority.

Democrats have warned that millions of lives could be lost if USAID is cut, but their alarmist rhetoric has triggered the Streisand effect. As scrutiny of USAID increases, Americans are beginning to see the agency not as a lifeline for the poor but as a massive slush fund for progressive ideological projects.

While progressives are committed to their ideology, they understand that politics ultimately revolves around rewarding friends and punishing enemies. Patronage is the lifeblood of politics, and progressives integrate it into every institution they build and every action they take. One can either accept or reject this reality, but it remains a fundamental aspect of American politics. The fact that progressives embrace patronage while conservatives often recoil from it helps explain the left’s political dominance in the United States. USAID is no exception.

Progressives have transformed the agency into a vehicle for rewarding their domestic allies and cultivating a network of ideologically aligned organizations abroad. While the U.S. foreign aid budget may assist some in need, its primary function is to fund a global progressive agenda while treating American taxpayers as little more than a revenue source.

Diverting tax dollars from American families to fund political allies would be troubling enough, but the reality is even worse. Democrats, the media, and the foreign policy establishment portray USAID as a critical tool of diplomacy. In practice, however, the agency’s funding is not merely wasted on political favors — it is actively used to support some of the most heinous projects imaginable.

Politico, which presents itself as an independent media outlet in the United States, has received more than $8 million from USAID and other federal agencies. BBC Media Action, the charitable arm of British state media, lists USAID as its second-largest contributor. The American government’s funding of both domestic and foreign media presents an obvious conflict of interest, yet this is only the beginning.

USAID has integrated LGBTQI+ ideology into all its development programs, particularly in children's education. The agency has allocated $45 million in scholarships to influence the governing elite in Burma. It has also spent $500,000 to promote atheism in Nepal, $32,000 to distribute transgender children's books in Peru, $70,000 to fund a DEI musical in Ireland, and another $70,000 to support a transgender opera in Colombia. In 2016, USAID directed $300,000 toward LGBTQ+ education initiatives in Macedonia, a predominantly Christian nation. Additionally, U.S. tax dollars have funded DEI seminars in Serbia, leftist publications in Poland, and transgender advocacy groups in Bangladesh — part of a broader effort costing tens of billions of dollars.

Progressives are not merely subsidizing allies abroad; they are using American tax dollars to pressure foreign governments and organizations into adopting their ideological agenda. The American public is gradually realizing that a well-funded global influence campaign has been carried out in their name. The worldwide spread of progressive politics was neither organic nor inevitable — it was a deliberate, taxpayer-funded initiative orchestrated by the U.S. foreign policy establishment.

Democrats have framed Elon Musk’s proposal to eliminate USAID as the cruel overreach of an unelected billionaire and his technocratic allies. That argument rings hollow, given that the Democratic Party relies heavily on funding from billionaires like George Soros and elevates figures like Anthony Fauci to near-reverential status. Trump’s 2024 re-election campaign gained significant support from Musk, in part due to the SpaceX founder’s commitment to identifying and cutting wasteful or politically motivated government programs like USAID.

As Trump takes decisive executive action, some conservatives urge caution. They warn against moving too quickly, dismantling too many institutions, and disrupting the established order. This is misguided advice. Progressives are struggling to counter Trump’s ability to control the narrative, and their attempts to push back have only drawn attention to the corruption within the Washington bureaucracy. The president has the electoral mandate, moral justification, and executive authority to enact lasting change. He should continue to press on while momentum is on his side.

Niccolò Machiavelli advised that when harming an enemy, one must do so decisively to prevent reprisals. If the goal is to restore governance that serves the American people, the transformation must be complete. Trump is not just dismantling the global leftist patronage network because of its abuses — he is eliminating its ability to target conservatives. The agencies of the U.S. government must either be restructured to serve the nation or dismantled entirely. Leaving them weakened but capable of retaliating would be the greatest strategic blunder imaginable.