Why "Owning the Libs" Defines MAGA Culture
Exploring how denial, insecurity, and grievance shaped the MAGA obsession with "owning the libs" and what it reveals about modern America.
Understanding Before Judging
In an era of political division so sharp it feels almost insurmountable, one phenomenon continues to bewilder many observers: the almost gleeful desire among certain conservatives, particularly those aligned with Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) movement, to “own the libs.” To outsiders, the concept seems petty, even self-destructive. Why would citizens of a country work so hard to make half of their fellow citizens miserable when a healthy democracy depends on some level of national cohesion?
This is a window into deeper societal struggles about power, identity, denial, and belonging. Understanding the forces behind this cultural moment is not merely an academic exercise; it is a necessary step toward charting a path forward for individuals and nations alike.
The Rise of Denial as a Political Force
Donald Trump's ascension to the presidency in 2016 and 2024 was not merely a political event; it was the culmination of a decades-long cultural shift rooted in strategic denial. Trump himself displayed little personal religious conviction and often betrayed an ignorance of even basic tenets of the Christian faith. Yet, he secured the loyalty of conservative Christian voters with remarkable success.
For many religious conservatives, the flaws in Trump's character mattered less than his promise to defend their values against an increasingly progressive society. He was seen not as a moral paragon but as a tool of divine purpose, a flawed vessel through which God could enact His will. His appeal lay not in his piety but in his willingness to embody their grievances and fight their battles with unapologetic aggression.
Trump's most potent weapon was not policy expertise nor diplomatic prowess. It was the validation he offered to a substantial segment of Americans who felt increasingly alienated by a changing world. As racial demographics shifted, as climate science became irrefutable, as gender norms evolved, millions were left grappling with the erosion of an identity that had once seemed permanent. Rather than confronting these uncomfortable truths, Trumpism offered a seductive alternative: denial.
How Denial Became a Movement
Denial under Trump was not a passive retreat from reality; it was an active, almost militant rejection of facts that threatened deeply entrenched worldviews. Science, journalism, and democratic norms all became targets in a broader campaign to protect a crumbling sense of superiority.
This rejection was not rooted purely in ignorance. It was, for many, a conscious choice. It was easier to dismiss climate change than to accept personal responsibility for environmental damage. It was more comforting to deny systemic racism than to confront the uncomfortable legacy of privilege. It was less painful to mock the evolving language of gender identity than to admit that the rigid social hierarchies they had depended on were dissolving.
In this ecosystem of denial, “owning the libs” became a central form of emotional release. It was no longer enough to defend one’s beliefs quietly. The new cultural mandate was to mock, humiliate, and belittle anyone who stood in opposition to the fantasy of an unchanging, unchallenged America.
Grievance, Insecurity, and the Politics of Resentment
Much of the MAGA movement’s emotional energy draws from a profound sense of loss, not necessarily economic loss, as is often portrayed, but a loss of status, privilege, and unquestioned authority. In earlier eras, poor white men, even without wealth, could claim social dominance over women, racial minorities, and immigrants. Those implicit advantages have eroded over the past century through civil rights movements, feminist advancements, and cultural modernization.
For emotionally healthy individuals, these changes represent progress. For those steeped in insecurity and unable to adapt, they feel like existential threats. Media outlets that cater to grievance narratives exploited this vulnerability, framing every advance in social equality as a direct assault on the personal worth of the traditional conservative voter.
The result was a political culture fuelled not by a desire for constructive change, but by a seething resentment. "Owning the libs" is not just about political disagreement. It is about asserting dominance in a world where traditional power structures no longer guarantee superiority.
The Religious Right and the Illusion of Theocracy
For many religious conservatives, the appeal of Trump went even further than simple vengeance or cultural affirmation. There was an unspoken promise that his leadership could usher in a new American theocracy, restoring Christian dominion over political and cultural life.
Trump’s behaviour, marked by vanity, cruelty, and dishonesty, might have disqualified him from religious support in another era. However, among many voters, he was embraced as an “imperfect tool” of divine intervention. This belief allowed them to rationalize every contradiction, every hypocrisy, in service of a larger imagined mission: the restoration of a Christian America.
This alliance between grievance politics and religious nationalism only intensified the hatred directed at “the libs.” Liberals were not merely political opponents. They were framed as existential enemies of God’s will, to be defeated at any cost.
The Sportsification of Politics
In a healthy democracy, political disagreement is a normal, necessary mechanism for refining national policy and advancing public welfare. Under Trumpism, political disagreement mutated into something darker and more corrosive: politics as zero-sum warfare.
Instead of viewing elections and legislation as collective negotiations for the public good, many MAGA conservatives began to see every political development as a personal victory or loss. Political outcomes were no longer about guiding the nation’s future, but about humiliating the other side. Every liberal setback was a cause for celebration, while every conservative setback was a cause for rage.
This mentality treats political parties not as competing visions for national leadership but as sports teams locked in perpetual battle. Victory is sweet not because it advances the common good, but because it inflicts pain on opponents.
The Role of Money and Citizens United
This radicalization of American politics did not occur in a vacuum. The 2010 “Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission” Supreme Court ruling fundamentally altered the relationship between money and democracy in the United States. By equating corporate spending with free speech, it unleashed a tidal wave of dark money into political campaigns, transforming elections into high-stakes games where the loudest, most extreme voices often dominated.
Ordinary voters, overwhelmed by the sheer scale of messaging funded by billionaires and corporate interests, became increasingly alienated from the democratic process. Rather than focusing on nuanced policy debates, political discourse devolved into outrage-driven spectacle, perfectly suited to grievance-based movements like MAGA.
In this new political economy, the emotional highs of “owning the libs” became both product and purpose.
Where Do We Go From Here?
The instinct to humiliate rather than persuade, to destroy rather than build, has hollowed out much of the political conversation in America. Yet history shows that cultures of resentment eventually burn themselves out, often at great cost to the societies they infect.
The way forward is not to mirror the hatred of the MAGA movement with hatred of our own. It is to recommit ourselves to the ideals of democracy: open dialogue, mutual respect, and the constant, difficult work of building a society that leaves no one behind. We must reject comforting lies, even when the truth hurts. We must resist the temptation to dehumanize those we disagree with, even when they dehumanize us.
Change is slow. It demands patience, discipline, and hope. It demands that we continue to believe that reason, compassion, and justice are stronger than fear and hatred.
If you found this valuable, please consider sharing it with a friend, subscribing to more detailed explorations of political and cultural dynamics, or buying me a coffee to support my work. Every gesture helps keep independent writing alive.