Why MAGA Will Collapse: The Authoritarian Playbook Ends In Fracture

The Civil War Brewing Within MAGA: Part 7

In our previous installment, we examined the uneasy alliance between The Christian Nationalists and The Extraction Class, highlighting their shared goals and inevitable clashes. Their alliance was built on a shared enemy, not a shared vision—and as history has repeatedly shown, once the enemy is weakened, the factions turn on each other.

MAGA is no different. Every authoritarian coalition eventually fractures, consumed by the same internal power struggles that once united them. Now, we turn to historical precedents that foreshadow the collapse of the MAGA movement, as ideological divides and power struggles mirror those that have shattered authoritarian regimes in the past.

Authoritarian factions always turn on their own once they outlive their usefulness. The Nazi SA, once indispensable to Hitler’s rise, became a liability once he consolidated power. Their radicalism and continued push for a 'second revolution' conflicted with Hitler’s need to secure support from the military and conservative elites. To maintain control, Hitler ordered the Night of the Long Knives, eliminating SA leadership and subordinating the group to the SS. Similarly, Lenin purged rival socialist factions, and Iran’s Islamists eliminated their secular allies after the 1979 revolution.

MAGA’s Militant Extremists will meet the same fate—discarded once their chaotic violence becomes a threat to the ruling factions.

The Purge Begins: Authoritarians Always Target the Military First

Trump’s recent moves aren’t coming from a position of strength—they’re coming from a need to consolidate control. His team is actively implementing loyalty tests for key positions, ensuring that those who serve in his administration are fully aligned with his agenda. Reports indicate that Trump and his allies are focused on rooting out officials they view as disloyal, a common tactic in authoritarian movements to eliminate internal dissent before a full power grab. At the same time, his poll numbers have shown signs of decline, particularly on economic issues like inflation, raising concerns among his campaign and prompting a more aggressive posture.

When authoritarian leaders feel their grip on power could be at risk, they don’t pivot to broaden their appeal—they double down on control, tighten their inner circle, and accelerate purges. Which brings us to his latest target: the military.

Every authoritarian leader, once they consolidate power, turns to purging institutions that could threaten them. Historically, the military is often one of the first targets. Trump is no exception.

His recent purging of military leadership follows a familiar trajectory seen in authoritarian regimes throughout history. Stalin’s Great Purge eliminated Soviet military officers who could challenge his rule. Erdogan’s post-coup purges in Turkey stripped the military of anyone who wasn’t loyal. Hitler’s Night of the Long Knives not only targeted the SA but also ensured that the German military fell in line with his new order.

Trump understands what every dictator before him knew: the military, if left unchecked, could become an obstacle to total control. By removing leaders who might resist his agenda, he is clearing the path for full-scale authoritarian consolidation. But these purges aren’t just about eliminating dissent—they’re about preemptively reshaping institutions to ensure no internal resistance when escalation begins. Trump’s allies have already laid out plans to expand executive power and dismantle institutional checks, and loyalty tests are the first step in securing absolute control before those plans are put into motion.

But this isn’t just about purging “disloyal” figures—it’s about reshaping the military into a tool of MAGA rule. Trump has long complained that the Pentagon is too independent, too unwilling to follow his directives. His loyalists have openly discussed using the military for domestic crackdowns, from deploying troops against protesters to executing mass deportations. A military led by Trump-aligned officers isn’t just about defense—it’s about ensuring there’s no institutional resistance when authoritarian orders are given.

For MAGA’s factions, this should be a warning. The Militant Extremists may believe they are allies in this fight, but history proves that when the moment is right, Trump will turn on them just as he is now turning on the military. The Extraction Class may assume they can control him, but once Trump sees them as disloyal, they too will be discarded.

This is the moment where the authoritarian shift becomes undeniable.

History’s Warning: Factions Are Temporary, Power Struggles Are Permanent

This pattern is as old as power itself. During the Bolshevik Revolution, Lenin aligned with socialist factions to overthrow the Russian monarchy, but once the Bolsheviks secured power, they systematically eliminated their former allies. Iran’s Islamist clerics partnered with secular nationalists to oust the Shah—only to purge them once religious rule was secured.

MAGA’s factions are following this same trajectory—allies in the fight for power, but destined for conflict once control is within reach.

This isn’t just a relic of the early 20th century. During the Spanish Civil War, Francisco Franco’s fascist forces united religious conservatives, military elites, and Falangist paramilitaries under a common goal—defeating the leftist Republican government. But once Franco secured power, the movement’s internal divisions surfaced. The military sought an expansionist empire, the Catholic Church pushed for moral governance, and the radical Falangists demanded a totalitarian revolution. Franco’s solution? Neutralizing his former allies to ensure only his authority remained.

Even more recently, China’s Cultural Revolution under Mao Zedong showed how authoritarian leaders exploit radicalized factions for power, then turn on them. Mao initially relied on youth paramilitaries and local factions to purge his opponents, but when their chaos threatened his control, he dismantled the very movement that had helped him consolidate power.

The same fate awaits MAGA’s factions. History tells us that fractures alone don’t guarantee collapse—only pressure forces them to break. Without resistance, regimes adapt, rebrand, or consolidate under new leadership. MAGA is no exception. If we assume its internal divisions will naturally bring it down, we ignore the lessons of history—power only falls when it is forced to.

The Billionaire Betrayal: Trump vs. Musk and the Limits of Economic Nationalism

Authoritarian movements rely on economic elites to fund their rise, but those alliances are always temporary. The Extraction Class supports authoritarians when it serves their interests—lower taxes, deregulation, labor suppression—but they are never loyal to a single leader or nation.

Trump’s recent criticism of Elon Musk’s decision to expand Tesla manufacturing in India is a textbook example of this inevitable split. Trump, who has built his movement on economic nationalism and “America First” rhetoric, expected billionaires like Musk to remain aligned with his vision. Instead, Musk—like every billionaire before him—chose global expansion over loyalty.

This moment mirrors countless historical examples of the rift between authoritarians and the wealthy elites who initially empower them. In Nazi Germany, corporations like IG Farben and Krupp profited heavily from Hitler’s rise but later chafed under state interference. Similarly, China’s tech oligarchs, such as Jack Ma, were celebrated by the CCP until their unchecked power became a liability, leading to crackdowns. In Russia, Putin tolerated oligarchs until they crossed him, resulting in asset seizures, exile, or worse.

Trump’s reaction to Musk follows a familiar pattern—an authoritarian leader turning on an economic elite once they become inconvenient. The key question now is how far Trump will escalate in public. If it isn’t resolved behind closed doors and Trump looks poised to win, Musk may try to repair the relationship by making performative gestures to regain favor. However, if Trump needs a new enemy, he could completely turn on Musk, casting him as a “globalist traitor” to rally his base. If Musk weathers the break, it could embolden others in The Extraction Class to distance themselves from Trump, setting a precedent for a broader shift.

This fracture is another example of why authoritarian movements ultimately collapse under the weight of their own contradictions. Economic elites fuel their rise, but their self-interest ensures that they will never remain fully under their control.

Emerging Fault Lines: A Two-Front Battle Against The Extraction Class

MAGA’s internal fractures aren’t just historical inevitabilities—they are already happening. The Christian Nationalists and The Militant Extremists are increasingly hostile toward The Extraction Class, despite their own differences.

The most visible conflict erupted over immigration, with Elon Musk and other corporate leaders advocating for foreign talent, igniting backlash from Nationalists and Militants who see immigration as an existential threat to their vision of a white, Christian America.

Steve Bannon and Nick Fuentes have openly attacked Musk, calling him an enemy of the movement. Musk’s actions, particularly his initial bans on far-right figures from Twitter—many of whom he has since reinstated—indicate an attempt to distance himself from the more extreme factions of MAGA, even as he continues to flirt with right-wing politics. Like many billionaires, he attempts to play both sides—catering to reactionaries while maintaining enough distance to avoid full accountability. This suggests a strategic realignment that could further alienate hardline nationalist elements. This highlights the fundamental incompatibility between The Extraction Class’s globalist economic agenda and the nationalist, populist fervor driving MAGA’s base.

Musk’s strategic positioning is part of a larger trend among MAGA power players who recognize the importance of keeping the militant base engaged—but they are not allies in this fight. Just this week at CPAC, Steve Bannon performed a Sieg Heil gesture on stage—an echo of Musk’s own when he spoke at Trump’s Inauguration Day Party. These moments aren’t incidental; they reflect a shared recognition that to consolidate power, they must keep the foot soldiers engaged. Yet, as MAGA fractures, figures like Musk and Bannon are vying for dominance, each seeking to position their faction as the movement’s true vanguard. Whether they intend to fully embrace the movement’s most extreme elements or simply manipulate them for their own benefit, both understand that maintaining their influence requires gestures of allegiance to the base.

At some point, The Extraction Class will make its choice.

Just as Franco discarded the Falangists and Iran’s Islamists eliminated secular nationalists, The Extraction Class will abandon MAGA the moment the costs outweigh the benefits. When MAGA’s instability threatens their profits or legal standing, they will cut their losses and walk away—leaving MAGA fractured, leaderless, and weakened.

They never intended to build a long-term movement—they intended to extract wealth and influence. And without The Extraction Class, MAGA loses the financial backing and logistical power needed to sustain itself. Without billionaires and media moguls shaping its narratives, MAGA’s facade of dominance begins to crack.

The MAGA militant faction is unraveling in real time. Recently, Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio was arrested by U.S. Capitol Police for assaulting a counter-protester—a clear sign that the violent enforcers of the movement are facing increased legal consequences. While some January 6th defendants continue to organize and seek public support, the broader trajectory follows a historical pattern: paramilitary foot soldiers, once useful, often become political liabilities.

Many in the militant wing believed they were untouchable—that their loyalty to Trump would protect them. But as the legal system continues to prosecute key figures, and as the MAGA movement shifts its focus toward consolidating institutional power, the question remains: how long before these groups become entirely expendable? Historically, authoritarian movements turn on their own when their presence becomes a burden. The militants, who once saw themselves as part of the inner circle, may soon find out that in a collapsing regime, loyalty is a one-way street.

MAGA’s factions are already fighting among themselves. The question is whether we let them reassemble into something stronger—or whether we take advantage of their fractures to break their grip on power before they can adapt.

The Militants’ Deep-Rooted Resentment

Of all the factions, The Militant Extremists harbor the most visceral hatred for The Extraction Class. Viewing them as elitist profiteers who abandoned the movement when faced with legal scrutiny, the Militants feel betrayed.

This mirrors historical instances where paramilitary forces, once instrumental in authoritarian takeovers, turned against their benefactors when denied power.

MAGA’s Militant Extremists have always been useful but expendable. Throughout history, paramilitary forces used to consolidate power have often turned on their former patrons when abandoned. The Nazi SA’s disillusionment led to internal purges, while jihadist factions once armed by states later became enemies of those same governments. MAGA’s Militants, similarly, may not fade quietly; their resentment toward The Extraction Class could manifest in violent splintering or rogue actions that destabilize the movement from within. Every authoritarian movement relies on radicalized enforcers to seize power, only to turn on them once they threaten the new order.

The Nazi SA believed they would become the vanguard of the regime, only to be discarded. MAGA’s Militants will follow a similar trajectory—but their willingness to retaliate violently makes them a unique and dangerous wildcard. If they feel abandoned, they could splinter into rogue factions, escalate violence, or turn against other MAGA factions in unpredictable ways. Their unpredictability poses a significant risk—not just to their former allies, but to the entire movement’s ability to sustain cohesion as infighting escalates.

MAGA’s Inevitable Fractures—But Not a Guaranteed Collapse

Historical precedent shows that alliances rooted in conflicting ambitions are inherently unstable and doomed to fracture. As MAGA’s factions clash through moral absolutism, economic greed, and violent zeal, their unraveling is not a matter of if, but when. The Christian Nationalists and The Extraction Class may believe their uneasy partnership will endure, but their ideological chasm is too wide. Once their shared enemy of democracy is weakened, they will turn on each other in the same way every authoritarian movement in history has.

However, fractures alone do not bring regimes down—people do. And history tells us something else: authoritarian movements don’t just collapse under their own weight. They evolve, adapt, and rebrand. The Nazi Party didn’t disappear after World War II—it splintered into underground movements and re-emerged as new nationalist factions. The Soviet Union fell, but its authoritarian structures lived on in Putin’s Russia. The Iranian revolutionaries who overthrew the Shah did not dismantle authoritarianism—they replaced one version with another.

MAGA’s collapse is not the end of authoritarianism in America—it’s the beginning of its next form. The factions may splinter, but the ideology and the drive for power will remain. The question is not whether MAGA will fracture—it will. The real question is: Will we act before they reassemble into something stronger?

This is why resistance cannot be passive. If we assume collapse alone is enough, we will be right back here in a few years, facing a more disciplined, rebranded version of the same threat. MAGA fracturing isn’t the end—it’s the opening. What happens next depends entirely on whether people take action before the next power structure solidifies. That means resistance can’t be reactionary—it has to be proactive. If we wait until the next form of authoritarianism is fully realized, we’ve already lost. The time to act is before they adapt.

In the final installment, we’ll explore how mass resistance has historically forced authoritarian movements into collapse and how that applies to MAGA today. The question is not whether their movement will break—it’s whether we make sure they never recover from it.

Subscriber Fee Transparency: Currently, 100% of subscription fees are going into journalism and publications that make my research possible.

Prefer a one-time support option?

Further Reading

Analyses - In-depth breakdowns examining the systems driving democratic collapse—exposing threats, tactics, and timelines to empower informed resistance.

Playbooks - Actionable strategic guides that directly respond to each analysis, providing step-by-step resistance plans designed for immediate implementation.

Insights - Timely, targeted pieces highlighting critical events, emerging threats, and essential context—keeping you ahead of developments as they unfold.

---