The Illusion of Sovereignty: Why “America First” Doesn’t Necessarily Mean Liberty First
The Sovereignty Gambit: A Shift Worth Noticing
The 2025 National Security Strategy under Trump 2.0 abandons the fantasy of spreading democracy at gunpoint and instead pledges allegiance to national sovereignty. That alone is a thunderclap across the neocon and neoliberal establishment. After decades of blood-soaked regime change, this shift in tone matters.
Instead of couching foreign policy in ideological crusades—liberty vs. tyranny, democracy vs. autocracy—this doctrine emphasizes economic self-interest, non-intervention, and bilateral realism. Trump’s policy openly pressures NATO allies to carry their own weight, pulls back from permanent entanglements, and elevates tariffs and decoupling from China over military escalation.
On paper, this sounds like a step toward libertarian realism. But don’t pop the champagne yet.
Agreement #1: Interventionism is Poison
Let’s not gloss over the good news. This NSS marks a rare moment of lucidity in the swamp’s foreign policy apparatus.
- It stops short of calling for regime change.
- It acknowledges that America’s entanglements have bled it dry.
- It pulls the plug on using military might to shape the world in our image.
These are huge. For years, libertarians and anti-war dissidents have been shouting that NATO expansion, endless military deployments, and CIA-backed coups serve no one but arms dealers and empire architects. This strategy, if implemented as stated, takes a wrecking ball to that status quo.
Agreement #2: Globalism Is a Death Cult
The article rightly torches the bipartisan obsession with “interdependence” and “global responsibility”—which in practice means surrendering sovereignty to multinational corporations, NGOs, and supranational alliances like the EU and WEF-controlled cabals.
It exposes how sanctions failed to cripple Russia because of global energy demand, and how China’s supply chain dominance makes decoupling a financial earthquake. In other words: globalism didn’t bring peace—it made us weak, fragile, and dependent on hostile powers.
And when Trump says “America First,” he’s at least speaking the right language: disengage from failed global systems and focus on internal resilience. Amen to that.
But Let’s Not Get Played: Sovereignty ≠ Liberty
Here’s where the whole thing veers off into statist fantasy: the article worships national sovereignty like it’s a stand-in for freedom.
News flash: the state isn’t your savior just because it pulls troops out of Syria or slaps tariffs on Beijing. It’s still a coercive monopoly that spies on you, taxes your labor, and censors dissent.
Nationalism isn’t liberty. It’s just empire turned inward.
Don’t mistake a less aggressive empire for a free society. If your government still controls your money (see: FedNow), tracks your movements, and criminalizes self-defense, then it doesn’t matter if it’s bombing Yemen or minding its own business—it’s still your master.
Disagreement #1: Tariffs Are Just Taxes in Camouflage
The strategy leans heavily on economic nationalism—tariffs, trade barriers, and “strategic decoupling.” That’s not freedom; that’s central planning with a red hat on.
Liberty doesn’t mean swapping out global technocrats for domestic bureaucrats. It means unleashing markets, tearing down artificial barriers, and letting individuals decide who to trade with—not some nationalist economist with a spreadsheet and a God complex.
Disagreement #2: Trusting the State to Protect Sovereignty
The article implies that a strong state is necessary to guard sovereignty and maintain order. That’s the oldest statist lie in the book.
You can’t protect liberty by empowering the very institution that violates it. A government that grows stronger to “protect sovereignty” will inevitably turn that strength inward.
We’ve seen it before:
- The PATRIOT Act after 9/11.
- Mass surveillance under Obama.
- Censorship via “misinformation” task forces under Biden.
Now imagine what a hyper-nationalist regime will do with those same tools, dressed in the language of freedom.
Disagreement #3: America First Still Centers the State
The core problem? “America First” is still a state-first ideology. It rejects globalism, sure, but only to double down on national centralization. It wants to preserve the republic, not dismantle the apparatus of coercion. It wants control over the borders and the economy—just without UN approval.
This is not the libertarian vision of decentralization, voluntary association, or market anarchy. This is still Leviathan—just wearing a stars-and-stripes uniform instead of a UN badge.
The Takeaway: Know the Game, Play Smarter
The empire is evolving, not dying. What we’re seeing is a tactical withdrawal from internationalism so it can regroup and consolidate power domestically.
This is not a victory. It’s a shift in terrain. And if we mistake this for liberation, we’re walking into the next trap blindfolded.
Don’t get suckered by the slogans. Demand true decentralization. Dismantle the surveillance state. Opt out of the digital dollar. Pull your wealth out of the system. Build parallel economies.
Because when the next crisis hits—and it will—they’ll try to centralize control again. Only this time, they’ll say it’s for your own sovereignty.
🛡️ Call to Action: Get Out of the System Before It’s Too Late
If you see the writing on the wall—FedNow, programmable currency, surveillance disguised as security—then you know what's coming next.
You need to act. Now.
Download the Digital Dollar Reset Guide by Bill Brocius. This isn’t optional reading—it’s survival intel for the collapse of fiat freedom and the rise of central bank control.
You don’t need a seat at the table. You need to flip the damn table.
Stay free,
– Derek Wolfe
