Alex Hinton, Rutgers University – Newark

At the start of his inaugural address on Jan. 20, 2025, President Donald Trump declared, “The golden age of America begins right now!”

A month later, Trump’s supporters gathered at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC, in Oxon Hill, Maryland, from Feb. 19-22 to celebrate the advent of this golden age.

Gold glitter jackets, emblazoned with phrases like “Trump the Golden Era,” are for sale in the CPAC exhibition hall. There, attendees decked out in other MAGA-themed clothing and accessories network and mingle. They visit booths with politically charged signs that say “Defund Planned Parenthood” and collect brochures on topics like “The Gender Industrial Complex.”

Another booth with a yellow and black striped backdrop resembling a prison cell’s bars was called a “Deportation Center.” Attendees photographed themselves at this booth, posing beside full-size cutouts of Trump and his border czar, Tom Homan.

Former Jan. 6 prisoners, including Proud Boys’ former leader Enrique Tarrio, have also been a visible – and controversial – presence at CPAC.

The conference’s proceedings kicked off on Feb. 20 with an Arizona pastor, Joshua Navarrete, saying, to loud applause, “We are living in the greatest time of our era – the golden age!”

Many subsequent speakers repeated this phrase, celebrating the country’s “golden age.”

For many outside observers, claims of a golden age might seem odd.

Just months ago during the 2024 presidential campaign, Trump said that an American apocalypse was underway, driven by a U.S. economy in shambles and major cities overrun by an “invasion” of “illegal alien” “terrorists,” “rapists” and “murderers.”

Now, Trump’s critics argue, the U.S. is led by a convicted felon who is implementing policies that are reckless, stupid and harmful.

Further, these critics contend, Trump’s illegal power grabs are leading to a constitutional crisis that could cause democracy to crumble in the U.S.

How, they wonder, could anyone believe the country is in a golden age?

As an anthropologist of U.S. political culture, I have been studying the Make America Great Again, or MAGA, movement for years. I wrote a related 2021 book, “It Can Happen Here.” And I continue to do MAGA research at places like this year’s CPAC, where the mood has been giddy.

Here are three reasons why the MAGA faithful believe a golden age has begun. The list begins, and ends, with Trump.

1. The warrior hero

Trump supporters contend that after the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attacks, which they consider a “peaceful protest,” Trump became a political pariah and victim.

Like many a mythic hero, Trump’s response was “never surrender.” In 2023, he repeatedly told his MAGA faithful, “I am your warrior, I am your justice.”

Trump’s heroism, his supporters believe, was illustrated after a bullet grazed his ear during an assassination attempt in Pennsylvania in July 2024. Trump quickly rose to his feet, pumped his fist in the air and yelled, “Fight, fight, fight.”

The phrase became a MAGA rally cry and, in February 2025, it has been stamped on CPAC attendees’ shirts and jackets.

After Trump’s 2024 election victory, many Trump supporters dubbed it
“the greatest comeback in political history.” MAGA populist Steven Bannon invoked this phrase at a pre-CPAC event on Feb. 19.

When Bannon spoke on the CPAC main stage on Feb. 20, he led the crowd in a raucous “fight, fight, fight” chant. He compared Trump with Abraham Lincoln and George Washington and called for him to run again for president in 2028.

This is despite the fact that Trump running for a third term would violate the Constitution.

2. A wrecking ball

The MAGA faithful believe that Trump is like a human “wrecking ball,” as evangelical leader Lance Wallnau said in 2015. This metaphor speaks to how Trump supporters believe the president is tearing down an entrenched, corrupt system.

The day Trump took office, MAGA stalwarts underscore, he began to “drain the swamp” with a slew of executive orders.

One established the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, which is devoted to eliminating government waste. DOGE, led by billionaire Elon Musk, has dismantled USAID and fired thousands of government workers whom MAGA views as part of an anti-Trump “deep state.”

Musk stole the show at CPAC on Feb. 20. Speaking to a cheering crowd, Musk held up a large red chain saw and yelled, “This is the chain saw for bureaucracy.”

Speaker after speaker at this year’s CPAC have celebrated this and other wrecking-ball achievements on panels with titles like “Red Tape Reckoning,” “Crushing Woke Board Rooms” and “The Takedown of Left Tech.”

3. The Midas touch

A golden age requires a builder. Who better, the MAGA faithful believe, than a billionaire businessman with a self-proclaimed “Midas touch.” This refers to King Midas, a figure in Greek mythology who turns everything he touches into pure gold.

“Trump Will Fix It” signs filled his 2024 campaign rallies. And MAGA supporters note that Trump began fixing the country on Day 1 by “flooding the zone” with executive orders aimed at implementing his four-pronged “America First” promise. In addition to draining the swamp, this plan pledges to “make America safe again,” “make America affordable and energy dominant again” and “bring back American values.”

These themes run through the remarks of almost every CPAC speaker, who offer nonstop praise about how Trump is securing the country’s borders, increasing energy independence, repatriating who they call illegal aliens, restoring free speech and reducing government regulation and waste.

CPAC speakers said that Trump has already racked up a slew of successes just a month into his presidency.

This includes Trump using the threat of tariffs to bring other countries to the negotiating table.

Meanwhile, Trump supporters are pleased that he has been working to cut deals to end the conflict in Gaza and the war between Russia and Ukraine, while reorienting U.S. foreign policy to focus on China.

House Speaker Mike Johnson expressed the prevailing MAGA sentiment when he stated at CPAC that Trump “wrote the art of the deal. He knows what he’s doing.”

American exceptionalism restored

The golden-age celebration at CPAC centered on Trump and his mission to “make America great again.”

Speaker after speaker, including foreign conservative leaders from around the world, paid homage to Trump and this message.

During her CPAC speech, Liz Truss, the former prime minister of the U.K., stated, “This is truly the golden age of America.” Truss, who does not have a current political position, told the CPAC audience that she wanted to copy the MAGA playbook in order to “make Britain great again.”

The MAGA faithful believe that Trump is restoring an era of American exceptionalism in which the U.S. is an economic powerhouse, common sense is the rule, and traditional values centered on God, family and freedom are celebrated.

And they believe in a future where the U.S. is, as Trump said in his inaugural address, “the envy of every nation.”

Alex Hinton, Distinguished Professor of Anthropology; Director, Center for the Study of Genocide and Human Rights, Rutgers University – Newark

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Elizabeth Aranda, University of South Florida; Deborah Omontese, University of South Florida; Elizabeth Vaquera, George Washington University; Emely Matos Pichardo, University of South Florida, and Liz Ventura, University of South Florida

Since arriving in the United States four years ago, Alex has worked at a primary care office. He has witnessed firsthand how difficult it was for immigrants to access preventive care.

When he heard of the implementation of Florida’s Senate Bill 1718, Alex feared it would have dire consequences for the patients he served.

Alex is a pseudonym for one of our research subjects.

SB 1718, signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis in May 2023, imposed sweeping restrictions aimed at discouraging unauthorized immigration. Among its provisions, it requires hospitals that accept Medicaid funds to question patients about their immigration status and share data about how many immigrants they are serving within the state.

The law had several more provisions. It mandated E-Verify, a system to check employment eligibility, be used for new hires in businesses employing more than 25 employees. It also criminalized driving into Florida with an unauthorized immigrant, and restricted community organizations from issuing IDs.

After the law passed, Alex told his patients that they could refuse to divulge their legal status when asked on hospital forms. But he says his reassurances didn’t work. He watched as many immigrant patients hesitated to access necessary medical care for themselves and their children – or even left the state.

Alex had legal documentation to be in the country, but as his immigrant community shrank, he wondered if he, too, should leave Florida.

We are a group of social science professors and graduate students studying immigrant communities in Florida. We believe SB 1718 has important implications for immigrants, for Floridians and all Americans – particularly as the country faces surges in outbreaks of communicable diseases like measles and the flu.

An environment of fear

These concerns are based on our survey of 466 immigrants to Florida and adult U.S.-born children of immigrants between May and July of 2024.

Nearly two-thirds of non-U.S. citizens and one-third of U.S. citizens who responded to our survey said they hesitated to seek medical care in the year after SB 1718 passed.

“I was very sick recently and needed medical care, but I was scared,” one survey participant told us.

While hospitals cannot deny care based on a patient’s immigration status, our data shows that anticipating they would be asked deterred not only immigrants lacking permanent legal status but also those with legal status, including U.S. citizens, from seeking care.

We believe U.S. citizens are affected by spillover effects because they are members of mixed-status families.

Our survey took place during the intense 2024 presidential election season when anti-immigrant rhetoric was prevalent. The immigrants we surveyed also reported experiencing discrimination in their everyday lives, and these experiences were also associated with a reluctance to access health care.

Laws like SB 1718 amplify preexisting racial and structural inequities. Structural inequities are systemic barriers within institutions — such as health care and employment — that restrict access to essential resources based on one’s race, legal or economic status.

These kinds of laws discourage immigrants from utilizing health resources. They foster an exclusionary policy environment that heightens fears of enforcement, restricts access to essential services and exacerbates economic and social vulnerabilities. Moreover, restrictive immigration policies exclude people from accessing services based on their race. Immigrants who have been discriminated against in everyday settings may internalize the expectation that seeking care will result in further hostility – or even danger.

Consequences for public health

U.S. history holds numerous examples of racial and ethnic barriers to health care. Examples include segregation-era hospitals turning away Black patients . It also involves systemic restrictions on health care access for non-English speakers, including inadequate language assistance services, reliance on untrained interpreters and lack of culturally competent care.

President Donald Trump’s new executive orders signed in January 2025 threaten to further ostracize certain communities. For example, the order terminating federal diversity, equity and inclusion programs dismantles efforts to address racial disparities in public institutions. New restrictions on federally funded research on race and equity could hinder efforts to study and address these disparities.

Civil rights advocates believe these measures represent a systemic rollback of rights and diversity practices that generations fought to secure and could accelerate a national shift toward exclusion based on race under the guise of immigration enforcement.

The results of our survey in Florida may be a warning sign for the rest of the country. Health care hesitancy like we documented could increase the likelihood of delayed treatment, undiagnosed conditions and worsening health disparities among entire communities.

These legal restrictions are likely to increase the spread of communicable diseases and strain health care systems, increasing costs and placing a greater burden on emergency services and public health infrastructure.

Elizabeth Aranda, Professor of Sociology, University of South Florida; Deborah Omontese, Ph.D. Student, Department of Sociology, University of South Florida; Elizabeth Vaquera, Associate Professor of Sociology and Public Policy & Public Administration, George Washington University; Emely Matos Pichardo, Ph.D. Student, Department of Sociology, University of South Florida, and Liz Ventura, Research Associate, Department of Sociology, University of South Florida

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Bill Sullivan, Indiana University

Insects do a lot more harm than ruining picnics. Some insects spread devastating diseases, while others cause staggering economic losses in agriculture. To control some of these pests, scientists are developing males that make sex a deadly event.

The stakes are high. Mosquitoes carry viruses such as dengue, West Nile and Zika, as well as parasites that cause malaria. Researchers estimate that mosquitoes have caused the deaths of 52 billion people overall – nearly half of all the humans that have ever lived.

Other insects cause major crop damage, jeopardizing the food supply and driving up prices. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 20% to 40% of global crop production is lost to pests annually at a cost of US$70 billion.

Pesticides have been the front-line defense against insects, but many bugs have evolved resistance to these chemicals. Some pesticides can indiscriminately kill beneficial insects, harm the environment and endanger human and animal health. Some researchers worry that certain pesticides can cause cancer or have damaging effects on human nervous and endocrine systems.

I’m a microbiology researcher studying infectious disease. New solutions that do not harm humans and the environment to control disease-carrying insects and agricultural pests could lead to fewer people contracting dangerous diseases. In the past few years, a variety of genetic engineering approaches have emerged as promising tactics to combat problematic insects.

Genetically modified insects

To avoid the problems associated with pesticides, scientists have devised new approaches that genetically alter the insects themselves in ways that cause their population to crash or render them incapable of transmitting disease – a strategy called genetic biocontrol.

The idea to suppress an insect population by flooding it with sterile males has been around for decades. Since the 1950s, scientists have been using radiation to create infertile male mosquitoes. These sterile males mate with females but produce no offspring. Since females are engaged in a lot of unproductive mating, the overall population tends to decline.

In the past two decades, genetic engineering has been used to introduce dominant lethal genes into insect populations. In this approach, the offspring of genetically modified males inherit a gene that kills them before they reach reproductive age. A field trial in Brazil found that this strategy reduced the target mosquito population up to 95%. Another approach on the horizon involves releasing insects genetically modified to be poor carriers of pathogens that cause disease.

Despite these advances, a key shortcoming to current genetic biocontrol methods is that they take time. At least one generation needs to be born before the population suppression begins. This means the female insects continue to be a disease vector or agricultural pest until they die a natural death. An ideal technique would neutralize the females immediately, especially during outbreaks.

A faster approach

Biologists Samuel Beach and Maciej Maselko at Macquarie University in Australia sought to solve this dilemma by genetically engineering male insects to make poisonous semen. The poisonous semen would kill the female quickly, reducing the population faster than previous biocontrol methods.

To test this idea, the team used fruit flies called Drosophila melanogaster, which are easy to genetically modify and study in the lab.

The researchers transferred venom genes from the Brazilian wandering spider (Phoneutria nigriventer) and the Mediterranean snakelocks sea anemone (Anemonia sulcata) into the genomes of fruit flies.

The genetically modified fly produces and stores venom proteins in its male accessory gland – a fly’s prostate – along with other seminal fluid proteins. Upon mating, the fly deposits the venomous semen into the female’s reproductive tract. The researchers named this approach the toxic male technique.

After mating, the seminal toxins seep into the female’s body and attack her central nervous system. The toxins bind to proteins called ion channels on cellular membranes, which nerve cells use to communicate with one another. This quickly leads to paralysis and respiratory arrest. You could say these genetically engineered Romeos literally take her breath away.

The lifespan of female flies that mated with toxic males decreased – up to 64%. A computer simulation of the toxic male technique for Aedes aegypti, a mosquito that transmits several viruses, predicted that this approach could work better than current methods.

Safety and effectiveness

While promising and innovative, there are some important challenges that researchers developing the toxic male technique will need to overcome. For example, the technique has been shown to work only in fruit flies. Whether it will work in mosquitoes or other insect pests remains an open question.

In addition, the technique reduced the female lifespan by only 37% to 64%. To improve the rate of killing, the researchers suggested that other venom formulations might work better. Researchers could try thousands of venom genes from spiders, snakes, scorpions and centipedes. Each new venom they try will require tests to ensure the modified males tolerate them – if they become weak, unmodified males may outcompete them for mating opportunities.

As with all genetic biocontrol methods, this technique may be too expensive to implement for low-income countries. Nations would need to finance the costs of breeding and deploying the mosquitoes safely.

Insects also pollinate plants and serve as food sources for other animals, such as bats. If these insects vanish, the ecosystem could face unforeseen adverse effects. Monitoring these potential effects on the environment will also be expensive.

Other researchers are experimenting with using venom toxins to control parasites that female insects spread through biting. Called paratransgenesis, this technique alters an insect’s gut bacteria to produce a toxin that kills the parasite, leaving the insect unharmed. Since the insect population remains unaltered, paratransgenesis may pose less risk to ecosystems.

Insects tend to adapt quickly to the methods humans use to control them, so it is advantageous to have multiple strategies at our disposal. The toxic male technique may one day become a valuable new weapon in the arsenal to combat insect pests.

Bill Sullivan, Professor of Microbiology and Immunology, Indiana University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.