What do you think?
Rate this book
The MAGA Doctrine: An Insightful Analysis of how Trump reshaped Conservatism, from the Late Turning Point USA Founder
NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER. The movement that brought Donald Trump to the White House has better ideas than the old right or the new left. It’s time that the rest of America started listening. The Tea Party began as a protest for patriots who feared Big Government. President Trump has become a hero for patriots who are against Big Everything. Fed up with Silicon Valley, the media, liberal higher education, the military-industrial complex, Twitter mobs, swamp monsters, Big Pharma, out-of-control prosecutors, and gun-grabbing fascists, ordinary Americans miss the days when America cared about rule of the people, by the people, and for the people. Remember when you didn’t feel bombarded on all sides by coastal billionaires and their government stooges? The MAGA Doctrine urges an overdue restoration of self-rule by a populace long taken for granted by its rulers. Turning Point USA founder and social media superstar Charlie Kirk explains once and for all why a New York real estate magnate found an audience among young conservatives all over the country. Trump and his allies are working to protect all the small things that both parties dismissed: local businesses, families, churches, and the rights of the individual. Kirk explains why it took a reality TV superstar to see past the sclerotic and power-hungry institutions, from the United Nations and Google to Harvard and Viacom, working to crush real America. The Trump Doctrine is all about giving you a say in the future of America and a hand in making it happen. As the mainstream media keep churning out lies about the “real reasons” behind the new conservative agenda, Charlie Kirk’s The MAGA Doctrine is a powerful reminder of the true narrative of freedom and greatness that swept Donald Trump to the presidency.
256 pages, Hardcover
First published March 3, 2020
5826 people are currently reading
4292 people want to read
About the author
Charlie Kirk
14 books789 followersCharlie Kirk was the Founder and President of Turning Point USA, a national student movement dedicated to identifying, organizing, and empowering young people to promote the principles of free markets and limited government.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 249 reviews
November 25, 2020
he's a racist, rapist, ableist, misogynist, zionist, white supremacist (please tell me if I forgot some) cheeto.
and a SnOwFlAkE.
and a loser.
he can't speak
can't dance
actually looks like a shriveled up orange left in water for too long
and a SnOwFlAkE.
and a loser.
he can't speak
can't dance
actually looks like a shriveled up orange left in water for too long
March 19, 2020
The actual substance of this book can be summed up in the single line: "I would like to think maybe Donald Jr. sees in me and in Turning Point USA something just a little like his dad."
December 3, 2019
This book was very well written and I think the reason I gave it five stars was because there was a lot of historic principles that were written about and I think that as conservatives, we need to go back to those basic principles. I think Charlie did a great job of articulating those basic principles in a way that is easy to understand.
March 8, 2020
I LOVE THIS BOOK!
The problem is that most people right of the center point on the political spectrum line WILL love this book, a few might not. The people right of center who do not like this book would best be classified as the Deep State people we hear about. They prefer the old political status quo but that all changed in 2016. Most people left of the center point will not even consider reading the book and that will no doubt be their loss. They too have been satisfied with the status quo prior to 2016.
The book is a history book on politics prior to 2016. It is a review of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It is a book about America in the past and what it could be in the future. It is very well written and easy to follow and understand.
It IS a book about President Donald Trump. One might even suggest it is a book about what makes Donald Trump “tick.” What he believes in. How he approaches problems. How he ignores non-constructive criticism as compared to constructive criticism; they are not the same.
It IS a book about the Political Left as much as it is about the Political Right. It is also about the “public appearance” of the Political Left as compared their contrary actions; not the same thing. It IS also about the “public appearance” of the Political Right prior to 2016 as compared to their actions as well; not the same thing. It is about perception as practiced by both political parties prior to 2016 and then after the 2016 election.
As a disclaimer – based upon the content, I could have written this book if I were as talented as Charlie Kirk which I’m not. It espouses my personal beliefs about America and where we should be going as compared to where a lot of people with completely opposite views apparently believe. I can think of no other country on Earth where I would prefer to live and I don’t want to see our principles and values flushed down the drain. In that regard the book confirms that President Trump, Charlie Kirk and I are all on the same page. Read it and see where you stand on the future of America.
I LOVE THIS BOOK!
Who should read the book? EVERY AMERICAN! Every person who wants to be an American!
Would I read it again? Probably not. Why not? I understood it the first time through and it is in line with my thinking and beliefs. A subsequent read would serve little purpose.
Would I give it as a gift? ABSOLUTELY! Whether the recipient reads it or not, giving it as a gift sends a strong message of where you stand! Where do you stand?
The problem is that most people right of the center point on the political spectrum line WILL love this book, a few might not. The people right of center who do not like this book would best be classified as the Deep State people we hear about. They prefer the old political status quo but that all changed in 2016. Most people left of the center point will not even consider reading the book and that will no doubt be their loss. They too have been satisfied with the status quo prior to 2016.
The book is a history book on politics prior to 2016. It is a review of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It is a book about America in the past and what it could be in the future. It is very well written and easy to follow and understand.
It IS a book about President Donald Trump. One might even suggest it is a book about what makes Donald Trump “tick.” What he believes in. How he approaches problems. How he ignores non-constructive criticism as compared to constructive criticism; they are not the same.
It IS a book about the Political Left as much as it is about the Political Right. It is also about the “public appearance” of the Political Left as compared their contrary actions; not the same thing. It IS also about the “public appearance” of the Political Right prior to 2016 as compared to their actions as well; not the same thing. It is about perception as practiced by both political parties prior to 2016 and then after the 2016 election.
As a disclaimer – based upon the content, I could have written this book if I were as talented as Charlie Kirk which I’m not. It espouses my personal beliefs about America and where we should be going as compared to where a lot of people with completely opposite views apparently believe. I can think of no other country on Earth where I would prefer to live and I don’t want to see our principles and values flushed down the drain. In that regard the book confirms that President Trump, Charlie Kirk and I are all on the same page. Read it and see where you stand on the future of America.
I LOVE THIS BOOK!
Who should read the book? EVERY AMERICAN! Every person who wants to be an American!
Would I read it again? Probably not. Why not? I understood it the first time through and it is in line with my thinking and beliefs. A subsequent read would serve little purpose.
Would I give it as a gift? ABSOLUTELY! Whether the recipient reads it or not, giving it as a gift sends a strong message of where you stand! Where do you stand?
January 20, 2021
I can’t stop laughing 😆
Charlie Kirk who helped fund 80 buses to attack the nation’s capital and then claimed he didn’t after bragging about it, decided to write a book and it’s just as bad as you think it is. MAGA? Please!
Forget reading this book
Unless you want to waste a few hours of your life
Carry directly to the garbage bin
Kicker being others have done the same
Try figuring out what Charlie stands for
Ridiculous that he even wrote a book
Unless you have the same mental capacity
Maybe you do or maybe you don’t
Perhaps you don’t care either way? Better off not reading.
Charlie Kirk who helped fund 80 buses to attack the nation’s capital and then claimed he didn’t after bragging about it, decided to write a book and it’s just as bad as you think it is. MAGA? Please!
Forget reading this book
Unless you want to waste a few hours of your life
Carry directly to the garbage bin
Kicker being others have done the same
Try figuring out what Charlie stands for
Ridiculous that he even wrote a book
Unless you have the same mental capacity
Maybe you do or maybe you don’t
Perhaps you don’t care either way? Better off not reading.
March 6, 2020
An extremists perspective which seeks to placate and normalize the crimes and corruption of the right and completely dismissing the divisive nature of Trump is else trying to twist the cult association of trump by calling it a doctrine.
March 24, 2020
I am really trying to understand why people love Donald Trump so much. Reading this book helped me to understand it a bit. Kirk really only listens to what Trump says but fails to look at his actions, especially in the section talking about social media. Trump does not want to protect the Freedom of the Press. When asked a question on why he fired the Pandemic Team in 2018 he said, "that is a nasty question." Can we count on this guy to protect the Freedom of the Press? Yes, according to Kirk. In the chapter where it was discussed that it was good to remove regulations from business and let healthy competition take over - Kirk really hasn't look at what happened with most cases of deregulation. Cable companies are a great example - there are many three major cable companies nation wide and they do not go into other's "territory." We need to look the amount of pollution companies create and most will not spend extra money on their own free to will to reduce it. Just look at how much more CEOs now earn than the average worker of a company - it has sharply increased since the sweet days of the 1950s where daddy worked and mommy stayed home. Kirk doesn't think regulation is needed in these matters. He will take a bit of truth and exaggerate it as well.
October 2, 2025
3.5
A few thoughts:
I hadn’t heard of Charlie Kirk until he was shot dead on 10th September 2025. In view of the understandable furore following his death, I needed to plug the gap in my knowledge. I’d start with reading one of his books. I figured that if I read his own words I might start to make up my own mind up about him rather than have it made up for me.
He was kind of inspired, initially, by one of his school/college teachers who opposed the Bush invasion of Iraq. So far, so good: on that they saw eye to eye. However, the teacher’s extreme leftist politics were another matter, causing the young Charlie to have a discussion with his parents. It seems that politics were rarely discussed in the Kirk household and it was only now that Kirk junior learned that his parents were moderate Republicans.
From this point he became increasingly more politically aware and soon very active, co - founding Turning Point USA (TPUSA), attracting young people in particular to his cause - smaller government, libertarianism, MAGA nationalism, Pro Life and the rest. Inevitably, a keen ally of Donald Trump and pally with the younger Trumps, he was magnetised by D.T. senior and his ability to get things “done”. In many ways this reads as an apology/apologia for Trumpism.
Obviously, this is politically one-sided but there are instances where he shows even handedness towards his “enemies”, as long as they aren’t called Clinton!
I am not sure that I learnt a huge amount from this but it was a worthwhile read. I did not agree with all he had to say but I admired his courage in arguing his cause on university campuses where he was prepared to listen and challenge where necessary. Sadly, he paid a heavy price. Ironic that the bullet got him when he was taking a question on gun control.
He is now a martyr and as such perhaps more powerful than before. Would he have come to my attention otherwise?
A few thoughts:
I hadn’t heard of Charlie Kirk until he was shot dead on 10th September 2025. In view of the understandable furore following his death, I needed to plug the gap in my knowledge. I’d start with reading one of his books. I figured that if I read his own words I might start to make up my own mind up about him rather than have it made up for me.
He was kind of inspired, initially, by one of his school/college teachers who opposed the Bush invasion of Iraq. So far, so good: on that they saw eye to eye. However, the teacher’s extreme leftist politics were another matter, causing the young Charlie to have a discussion with his parents. It seems that politics were rarely discussed in the Kirk household and it was only now that Kirk junior learned that his parents were moderate Republicans.
From this point he became increasingly more politically aware and soon very active, co - founding Turning Point USA (TPUSA), attracting young people in particular to his cause - smaller government, libertarianism, MAGA nationalism, Pro Life and the rest. Inevitably, a keen ally of Donald Trump and pally with the younger Trumps, he was magnetised by D.T. senior and his ability to get things “done”. In many ways this reads as an apology/apologia for Trumpism.
Obviously, this is politically one-sided but there are instances where he shows even handedness towards his “enemies”, as long as they aren’t called Clinton!
I am not sure that I learnt a huge amount from this but it was a worthwhile read. I did not agree with all he had to say but I admired his courage in arguing his cause on university campuses where he was prepared to listen and challenge where necessary. Sadly, he paid a heavy price. Ironic that the bullet got him when he was taking a question on gun control.
He is now a martyr and as such perhaps more powerful than before. Would he have come to my attention otherwise?
March 3, 2020
Well written and speaks volumes
In this day and age of fake news and political correctness it’s great to find a quality read that’s based on facts and logic.
I’ll never be Trumps biggest fan, that’s for sure, but what he’s accomplished for the American people is astounding. Unheard of in any political arena. And this book spells it out.
In this day and age of fake news and political correctness it’s great to find a quality read that’s based on facts and logic.
I’ll never be Trumps biggest fan, that’s for sure, but what he’s accomplished for the American people is astounding. Unheard of in any political arena. And this book spells it out.
January 21, 2021
I'm crying laughing at this book.
Charlie constantly begins with small nuggets of truth surrounding things like healthcare, military spending and censorship. He then quickly takes a sharp right turn to vapid, ahistorical quick takes that after 30 seconds of research can be not only proved wrong but even if you were kicked in the head by a horse, you'd be unlikely to believe to be true.
So much projection, dishonesty and grifting is going on here it's fun to imagine how much money it would take to write out a such a dry hand job of a book that paints Trump in a positive light.
Charlie constantly begins with small nuggets of truth surrounding things like healthcare, military spending and censorship. He then quickly takes a sharp right turn to vapid, ahistorical quick takes that after 30 seconds of research can be not only proved wrong but even if you were kicked in the head by a horse, you'd be unlikely to believe to be true.
So much projection, dishonesty and grifting is going on here it's fun to imagine how much money it would take to write out a such a dry hand job of a book that paints Trump in a positive light.
February 5, 2024
This book shows you what the mind of a true Trump believer is like. They don’t understand facts from fiction they believe what Donald Trump says even when proven wrong and they don’t care if he breaks the law lies cheats rapes or steals from people. They believe Donald Trump was sent to the United States by God, and not as a joke.
This book will open your eyes to who and why they believe. It may help you and trying to persuade people but it does give you an opportunity to understand what a delusional mind is really like.
This book will open your eyes to who and why they believe. It may help you and trying to persuade people but it does give you an opportunity to understand what a delusional mind is really like.
September 28, 2020
While I did not understand everything that was being discussed in this book, I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. Charlie Kirk did a great job explaining what the MAGA doctrine is and discussing the promises made that turned into promises kept. I would absolutely recommend this book for every American!
November 30, 2025
This book is chock-full of wisdom. The truth. The statistics. The common-sense. The open discussion. This is what they murdered this man for.
He backs up everything he says with solid research. I think everyone should read this with an open-mind.
He backs up everything he says with solid research. I think everyone should read this with an open-mind.
March 8, 2025
I would be embarrassed to have my name attached to this “book”. Kirk has shown a lack of knowledge in almost every subject he has talked about, a demonstration of strawmanning to anyone who is not team trump all the while whining that people straw man his side. He has bashed the contradictions of the “left” without recognizing any of his own. And that's all without bringing up the fact that This book contains no cited sources and lacks credible evidence to defend Trump against his shortcomings and failures. On Top of that this book is so scatterbrained and makes random jumps in topics just cause he cannot argue for them. I’ve written more concise papers at 10:27pm four shots deep cause I forgot it was due at midnight.
IF YOU ARE GOING TO WRITE A POLITICAL BOOK WITH STATISTICS YOU NEED TO CITE IT. There is not one single cited source or reference in this book. The closest thing to one is him saying “vox.com said…” and no that is not a proper source. I would say I have no clue how you completed a single English class but Charlie only has a highschool degree. I only bring this up and only bash him for it simply because he cannot stop himself from complaining about academia on issues that do not exist. But this is not how you write a book. Three pages of bullet-pointed statistics felt meaningless to me since they lacked references, leaving me uncertain about their reliability. The simple fact that in this book he literally said “look it up” no you summarize it and cite it. I am not saying that all these facts are illegitimate or misleading, however when I don't know where they came from I can treat them as such. Like most arguments in this book, Charlie does not understand the burden of proof.
Charlie repeatedly uses uncited facts as a foundation of truth, only to take an unsupported sharp turn to the right for which the facts can no longer support and most of the time they dont support. Only for a quick google search to find his argument completely and utterly wrong. The spinning of these facts and stories makes it nearly impossible to give him any credentials about any topic his confused brain feels like talking about. Often we get so lost from the plot with his speculations of “it suggests” and “it seems” that sometimes he argues about a speculation from a former speculation. And that is assuming the fact is true. There are many statements and facts in this book that are not always completely true but not always untrue. One example of him being dishonest is his paragraph about regulations. He dishonestly grouped personal and corporation regulations and proceeded to spend most of the argument attacking personal regulations only to at the end stick corporate regulations saying are bad too. These are two completely different things. Later when he actually talked about corporate regulations instead of showing any facts he took the extremely basic argument of “well companies don’t want their customers dead” and “they would regulate themselves cause they don’t want to pay the higher insurance”. There are plenty of facts, papers, and books disproving and dismantling this approach so I won’t argue for it here but I will say history has no upheld this approach and they don’t want you dead but sick money is just just as good as healthy money.
Another example of dishonesty is how he uses quotes. Not to list all of them but the argument typically goes as: “trumps not racist, he loves _____ just look at this quote ‘I knew a lot of ____ in New York. They’re nice people’ see!” As if he hasn’t said racist comments. Take for instance The New York Times reported that Trump read off a sheet stating that 15,000 persons had visited from Haiti, he commented, "They all have AIDS," and when reading that 40,000 persons had visited from Nigeria, he said that after seeing America the Nigerians would never "go back to their huts."[1] by the way that’s how you site a source Charlie.
A Lot of this book is also Charlie showing his lack of understanding of who the “left” is while attempting to bash them. Whenever he says the “left” i am forced to do mental gymnastics to figure out of he is talking about:
(A). The democrats
(B). The liberals
(C). The socialist
(D). The communists
Does he think that they are the same?!?!? I'm assuming not entirely. But these are four different political ideologies with different beliefs. He continues to blame socialism for something that socialists do not believe and or isn’t socialism (or even economics entirely!). And when he bashes Marxism he clearly shows an ignorance in the subject. Charlie it is not exploitive when people trade things no one says that. Marxist do say it is exploitative when capitalist buys the labor of the proletariat and sells the product for more than what they pay the workers so the capitalist capital grows from the ownership of the means of production. The capitalist capital grows validates the capital. If you argued against that instead of making a fake stance then bashing the fake stance you made I would not have an issue with that. Learn your party’s they are completely different.
Now these are more of nitpicks. Charlie when talking about the 1st amendment complains about social media censoring and how it shouldn’t be allowed. The first amendment is free speech that is protected from the government not from facebook. Also I don’t think they take down posts unless it’s hate speech. If it’s misinformation or even a controversial subject there is usually a fact check at the bottom of it. Before anyone says “well the left calls so many things hate speech” no. You can talk about troubling issues without being racist. You can be critical about immigration in a respectful manner. Secondly Charlie compares taking posts down as banning book and says if “they banned books even the left would see a problem”. However there is censorship in books. For an extremely long time the only way to get your book out there was by a publishing company (like social media) and the company has to approve your book. The censorship happens with both. People just see the posts before they get taken down. Another constriction, Kirk at the beginning talk about how you should be skeptical of your government. However suddenly when we are talking about academia we have a different stance about how students are skeptical of “tradition, religion, capitalism, individualism, right to self arm, conventional gender roles”. Interesting when it doesn’t suit you. I believe you should be skeptical of even things you agree with and so do the schools you bash. They teach you to question and when you question things you look further into them and gain a deeper understanding. This can strengthen your viewpoint or make you form new ones either way you will gain a better stance and be able to argue your stance.
I can keep going on but I’ll finish with some shorter uncategorized thoughts. It was wild that Kirk saw no problem in talking about how trump had “schmoozed politicians when he was in private business” (pg 41). said Russia is a really good friend now that their no longer communist (they’re still authoritarian). This quote about mass shooting was disgraceful “more exaggerated mass shooting stats, louder overreactions” really people died. And calling Brett Kavanaugh actions “alleged youthful behavior” now what was the youthful behavior???
So with that I rate this book 1/5. Of course there were bits I did agree with Kirk on. I appreciate his stance on demilitarization in foreign countries. I agree with the privacy laws. I agree with some of his stance on internet regulations. But that was about 8% of this book. I do believe he is intellectually dishonest and manipulative at times. This book had very little substance it had no well formed and thought out arguments and no theory to it. It was a middle age man fangirling over trump. Placing him an a pedestal in which he could never do any wrong. I wanted much more from this book. I like being skeptical and unlike what Kirk said in the preface about how this is a conservative manifesto to be studied by republicans, I feel that hefty goal has not been met. I would not recommend this book even to conservatives because it will give them surface level arguments that have been heard a thousand times but in a less throughout more rambling way. A 2000’s sham-wow ad has a better plot and depth than this book.
REFERENCES:
[1] Shear, Michael (December 23, 2017). "Stoking Fears, Trump Defied Bureaucracy to Advance Immigration Agenda". The New York Times. Archived from the original on December 26, 2017.
IF YOU ARE GOING TO WRITE A POLITICAL BOOK WITH STATISTICS YOU NEED TO CITE IT. There is not one single cited source or reference in this book. The closest thing to one is him saying “vox.com said…” and no that is not a proper source. I would say I have no clue how you completed a single English class but Charlie only has a highschool degree. I only bring this up and only bash him for it simply because he cannot stop himself from complaining about academia on issues that do not exist. But this is not how you write a book. Three pages of bullet-pointed statistics felt meaningless to me since they lacked references, leaving me uncertain about their reliability. The simple fact that in this book he literally said “look it up” no you summarize it and cite it. I am not saying that all these facts are illegitimate or misleading, however when I don't know where they came from I can treat them as such. Like most arguments in this book, Charlie does not understand the burden of proof.
Charlie repeatedly uses uncited facts as a foundation of truth, only to take an unsupported sharp turn to the right for which the facts can no longer support and most of the time they dont support. Only for a quick google search to find his argument completely and utterly wrong. The spinning of these facts and stories makes it nearly impossible to give him any credentials about any topic his confused brain feels like talking about. Often we get so lost from the plot with his speculations of “it suggests” and “it seems” that sometimes he argues about a speculation from a former speculation. And that is assuming the fact is true. There are many statements and facts in this book that are not always completely true but not always untrue. One example of him being dishonest is his paragraph about regulations. He dishonestly grouped personal and corporation regulations and proceeded to spend most of the argument attacking personal regulations only to at the end stick corporate regulations saying are bad too. These are two completely different things. Later when he actually talked about corporate regulations instead of showing any facts he took the extremely basic argument of “well companies don’t want their customers dead” and “they would regulate themselves cause they don’t want to pay the higher insurance”. There are plenty of facts, papers, and books disproving and dismantling this approach so I won’t argue for it here but I will say history has no upheld this approach and they don’t want you dead but sick money is just just as good as healthy money.
Another example of dishonesty is how he uses quotes. Not to list all of them but the argument typically goes as: “trumps not racist, he loves _____ just look at this quote ‘I knew a lot of ____ in New York. They’re nice people’ see!” As if he hasn’t said racist comments. Take for instance The New York Times reported that Trump read off a sheet stating that 15,000 persons had visited from Haiti, he commented, "They all have AIDS," and when reading that 40,000 persons had visited from Nigeria, he said that after seeing America the Nigerians would never "go back to their huts."[1] by the way that’s how you site a source Charlie.
A Lot of this book is also Charlie showing his lack of understanding of who the “left” is while attempting to bash them. Whenever he says the “left” i am forced to do mental gymnastics to figure out of he is talking about:
(A). The democrats
(B). The liberals
(C). The socialist
(D). The communists
Does he think that they are the same?!?!? I'm assuming not entirely. But these are four different political ideologies with different beliefs. He continues to blame socialism for something that socialists do not believe and or isn’t socialism (or even economics entirely!). And when he bashes Marxism he clearly shows an ignorance in the subject. Charlie it is not exploitive when people trade things no one says that. Marxist do say it is exploitative when capitalist buys the labor of the proletariat and sells the product for more than what they pay the workers so the capitalist capital grows from the ownership of the means of production. The capitalist capital grows validates the capital. If you argued against that instead of making a fake stance then bashing the fake stance you made I would not have an issue with that. Learn your party’s they are completely different.
Now these are more of nitpicks. Charlie when talking about the 1st amendment complains about social media censoring and how it shouldn’t be allowed. The first amendment is free speech that is protected from the government not from facebook. Also I don’t think they take down posts unless it’s hate speech. If it’s misinformation or even a controversial subject there is usually a fact check at the bottom of it. Before anyone says “well the left calls so many things hate speech” no. You can talk about troubling issues without being racist. You can be critical about immigration in a respectful manner. Secondly Charlie compares taking posts down as banning book and says if “they banned books even the left would see a problem”. However there is censorship in books. For an extremely long time the only way to get your book out there was by a publishing company (like social media) and the company has to approve your book. The censorship happens with both. People just see the posts before they get taken down. Another constriction, Kirk at the beginning talk about how you should be skeptical of your government. However suddenly when we are talking about academia we have a different stance about how students are skeptical of “tradition, religion, capitalism, individualism, right to self arm, conventional gender roles”. Interesting when it doesn’t suit you. I believe you should be skeptical of even things you agree with and so do the schools you bash. They teach you to question and when you question things you look further into them and gain a deeper understanding. This can strengthen your viewpoint or make you form new ones either way you will gain a better stance and be able to argue your stance.
I can keep going on but I’ll finish with some shorter uncategorized thoughts. It was wild that Kirk saw no problem in talking about how trump had “schmoozed politicians when he was in private business” (pg 41). said Russia is a really good friend now that their no longer communist (they’re still authoritarian). This quote about mass shooting was disgraceful “more exaggerated mass shooting stats, louder overreactions” really people died. And calling Brett Kavanaugh actions “alleged youthful behavior” now what was the youthful behavior???
So with that I rate this book 1/5. Of course there were bits I did agree with Kirk on. I appreciate his stance on demilitarization in foreign countries. I agree with the privacy laws. I agree with some of his stance on internet regulations. But that was about 8% of this book. I do believe he is intellectually dishonest and manipulative at times. This book had very little substance it had no well formed and thought out arguments and no theory to it. It was a middle age man fangirling over trump. Placing him an a pedestal in which he could never do any wrong. I wanted much more from this book. I like being skeptical and unlike what Kirk said in the preface about how this is a conservative manifesto to be studied by republicans, I feel that hefty goal has not been met. I would not recommend this book even to conservatives because it will give them surface level arguments that have been heard a thousand times but in a less throughout more rambling way. A 2000’s sham-wow ad has a better plot and depth than this book.
REFERENCES:
[1] Shear, Michael (December 23, 2017). "Stoking Fears, Trump Defied Bureaucracy to Advance Immigration Agenda". The New York Times. Archived from the original on December 26, 2017.
January 21, 2021
Well-written, enjoyable read. Though I’m not a fan of Trump’s personality and ego, I appreciate the good policies he promoted (protecting the unborn, standing up to Iran and communist China, bringing about multiple peace deals in the middle east, decreasing regulations, cutting taxes for working families, having the lowest unemployment rate in decades, not starting a new war). I hope our new president can also promote good policies, though it so far feels like “Obama’s 3rd term” with many of the same cabinet members brought back. (And what did Obama accomplish? Demonizing police officers, dividing the country into tribes and stirring them up to hate each other, trying to silence those who disagree with him (including sending the IRS against political opposition), bowing to terrorists like Iran, supporting the killing of fully viable babies for any reason up to the day they are born, attacking religious liberties (e.g. suing nuns), setting back women’s rights a few decades by putting biological men in women’s showers and women’s sports and women’s shelters.) I will miss Trump’s policies.
Quotes:
With Trump, “The new de facto party platform would be trade with a dash of strategic protectionism, free speech, and skepticism about the use of military power overseas-- combined with a desire to avoid socialism at home, avoid the erosion of our core culture, and avoid subsidizing other countries when our own has unmet needs.” -p. 8
“All individuals are created equal-- but not all cultures and ideas are equal, and we need to be able to compare and contrast intelligently. Yet the left, with its warped and doctrinaire version of equality, really wants to replace the Founding ideas of striving, competition, and individual excellence with mediocrity, enforced mediocrity if necessary-- and that’s not how American became great… The want people to be offended instead of being civil. What better way than to convince the populace that every advantage another citizen has over you, earned or unearned, real or imagined, is offensive and must be taken away? Who but the biggest of big governments will ever have the power to impose the entire anti-meritocratic leftist vision on society?” -p. 11
“Whether we conservatives like it or not, all government agencies, even the ones we admire, function a little like socialist countries. Resources get wasted, bureaucracy expands, innovation is rare.” -p. 79
“An uncritical unanimity in thought and collectivism in economics seem to go together quite naturally.” Trump said, “Socialism cannot survive when people are free to think for themselves, and America will never be a socialist country.” -p. 91
“Trump intuitively understands that you do not Make America Great Again by arguing over who gets the handouts, the perpetually poor or the well-connected-but-undeserving. There will never be enough government largesse, magically conjured from the wallets of other members of the population, to spark greatness and inspire creators, only enough to salve wounds and keep people dependent… (Trump worried that) unless we changed course, moving away from endless debt, endless wars, and spending without regard to consequences, our house of cards would come crashing down.” -p. 93
“If you live in a country where you can openly call the leader a fascist, you don’t live in a fascist country!” -p. 159
“Both tradition and individual rights are safer guarantors of our constitutional liberties than the leftist temptation to exercise whatever government power is deemed necessary to prevent the social crisis of the moment, real or perceived. That way lies socialism.” -p. 181
“Obama oversaw the administration with the most aggressive record of persecuting and prosecuting leakers, whistle-blowers, and journalists since the early days of the republic and the excesses of the Alien and Sedition Acts.” -p. 183
“Whether a human being’s goal is virtue, wealth, travel to the stars, a happy family, or amazing art, she must begin by accepting personal responsibility for the outcome. Survival can sometimes be eked out by following orders or letting the experts call the shots. Greatness, on the other hand, requires the liberty and the drive to make the most of yourself. I want to see my entire country free to try.” -p. 210
“Open borders are not compatible with an unrestrained welfare state that promises endless newcomers free goods extracted by force from the taxed populace. There had to be either an end to the welfare state or some limits on immigration. Perhaps one day when the entire apparatus of the modern welfare state has been turned into private and voluntary services, the United States can afford to let in everyone- everyone who abides by the rules of the marketplace and pays their own way- but until then, it’s good to have a wall.” -p. 231
“The best political idea is to stick to what made this country uniquely successful from the beginning, and it wasn’t socialism or fascism. On the contrary, it was limited government, freedom to engage in commerce, avoidance of entangling military alliances, respect for the individual’s rights, and an optimism born of boundless imaginative creativity. Those things made America great.” -pp. 233-4
Quotes:
With Trump, “The new de facto party platform would be trade with a dash of strategic protectionism, free speech, and skepticism about the use of military power overseas-- combined with a desire to avoid socialism at home, avoid the erosion of our core culture, and avoid subsidizing other countries when our own has unmet needs.” -p. 8
“All individuals are created equal-- but not all cultures and ideas are equal, and we need to be able to compare and contrast intelligently. Yet the left, with its warped and doctrinaire version of equality, really wants to replace the Founding ideas of striving, competition, and individual excellence with mediocrity, enforced mediocrity if necessary-- and that’s not how American became great… The want people to be offended instead of being civil. What better way than to convince the populace that every advantage another citizen has over you, earned or unearned, real or imagined, is offensive and must be taken away? Who but the biggest of big governments will ever have the power to impose the entire anti-meritocratic leftist vision on society?” -p. 11
“Whether we conservatives like it or not, all government agencies, even the ones we admire, function a little like socialist countries. Resources get wasted, bureaucracy expands, innovation is rare.” -p. 79
“An uncritical unanimity in thought and collectivism in economics seem to go together quite naturally.” Trump said, “Socialism cannot survive when people are free to think for themselves, and America will never be a socialist country.” -p. 91
“Trump intuitively understands that you do not Make America Great Again by arguing over who gets the handouts, the perpetually poor or the well-connected-but-undeserving. There will never be enough government largesse, magically conjured from the wallets of other members of the population, to spark greatness and inspire creators, only enough to salve wounds and keep people dependent… (Trump worried that) unless we changed course, moving away from endless debt, endless wars, and spending without regard to consequences, our house of cards would come crashing down.” -p. 93
“If you live in a country where you can openly call the leader a fascist, you don’t live in a fascist country!” -p. 159
“Both tradition and individual rights are safer guarantors of our constitutional liberties than the leftist temptation to exercise whatever government power is deemed necessary to prevent the social crisis of the moment, real or perceived. That way lies socialism.” -p. 181
“Obama oversaw the administration with the most aggressive record of persecuting and prosecuting leakers, whistle-blowers, and journalists since the early days of the republic and the excesses of the Alien and Sedition Acts.” -p. 183
“Whether a human being’s goal is virtue, wealth, travel to the stars, a happy family, or amazing art, she must begin by accepting personal responsibility for the outcome. Survival can sometimes be eked out by following orders or letting the experts call the shots. Greatness, on the other hand, requires the liberty and the drive to make the most of yourself. I want to see my entire country free to try.” -p. 210
“Open borders are not compatible with an unrestrained welfare state that promises endless newcomers free goods extracted by force from the taxed populace. There had to be either an end to the welfare state or some limits on immigration. Perhaps one day when the entire apparatus of the modern welfare state has been turned into private and voluntary services, the United States can afford to let in everyone- everyone who abides by the rules of the marketplace and pays their own way- but until then, it’s good to have a wall.” -p. 231
“The best political idea is to stick to what made this country uniquely successful from the beginning, and it wasn’t socialism or fascism. On the contrary, it was limited government, freedom to engage in commerce, avoidance of entangling military alliances, respect for the individual’s rights, and an optimism born of boundless imaginative creativity. Those things made America great.” -pp. 233-4
October 29, 2020
"The MAGA doctrine is no mere return to nineteenth century racism or narrow-mindedness." At first I tried to think it away, "oh, the editor probably just didn't catch this wording. I know what he really means to say." However, my mind cannot stomach this sentence that is probably NO MERE poor choice of words. Our collective national memory should be telling us that returning to the past, even in a MERELY legal or economic sense, would require racism. As many laws and business survived because of racist ideas.
This book is an exercise in doublethink. When I truly try to understand the perspective of this book, I find my mind bending, twisting and snapping. Trump was the first president to support gay marriage? Trump is the president hinting at an end to US involvement in Afghanistan? Trump calls out the frauds? There are many moments in this book that challenge our collective memories as a nation with statements that are not always completely untrue...but are also not completely true.
This book calls out contradictions in many political players and parties without recognizing any of their own. One example: The left guilt trips the country about political correctness. Meanwhile, on the back of this book we have Donald Trump Jr. using the term snowflake for people who don't agree. If that is not guilt-tripping then what is? Calling out discriminatory ideas is not guilt-tripping. If you feel guilty after someone points out one of your discriminatory ideas, try saying thank you. Second example, the left villify Trump for political points. Has Trump not villified Immigrants, Mexico, and socialism for political points? Also, if you think our leftist politicians are socialist...well, damn.
I do not bring these points up MERELY to disagree with the author but to point out the communication games that ALL politicians, and sometimes, historians play.
After reading, I do not feel like I understand Trump any better, but I do feel like I understand his followers a bit more.
This book is an exercise in doublethink. When I truly try to understand the perspective of this book, I find my mind bending, twisting and snapping. Trump was the first president to support gay marriage? Trump is the president hinting at an end to US involvement in Afghanistan? Trump calls out the frauds? There are many moments in this book that challenge our collective memories as a nation with statements that are not always completely untrue...but are also not completely true.
This book calls out contradictions in many political players and parties without recognizing any of their own. One example: The left guilt trips the country about political correctness. Meanwhile, on the back of this book we have Donald Trump Jr. using the term snowflake for people who don't agree. If that is not guilt-tripping then what is? Calling out discriminatory ideas is not guilt-tripping. If you feel guilty after someone points out one of your discriminatory ideas, try saying thank you. Second example, the left villify Trump for political points. Has Trump not villified Immigrants, Mexico, and socialism for political points? Also, if you think our leftist politicians are socialist...well, damn.
I do not bring these points up MERELY to disagree with the author but to point out the communication games that ALL politicians, and sometimes, historians play.
After reading, I do not feel like I understand Trump any better, but I do feel like I understand his followers a bit more.
September 16, 2025
Charlie Kirk’s, The MAGA Doctrine: The Only Ideas That Will Win the Future is well written and refreshingly optimistic. The future is always bright when you know where you’re going, where you are, and where you’ve come from.
According to Kirk, this is how Donald Trump is guiding the US as its President. The parameters in which the President operates, as he seeks to make America great again, is best summed up in the following quote from the book, “The Bill of Rights is still the law of the land. The Constitution is our guide, and it enshrines principles that remain true no matter how far modern lawmakers might like to stray from them. The Constitution was not written for its times but written to stand the test of time.”
The MAGA Doctrine and the Magna Carta have much in common, so much so, that without too much hyperbole, it could be called The MAGA Carta.
According to Kirk, this is how Donald Trump is guiding the US as its President. The parameters in which the President operates, as he seeks to make America great again, is best summed up in the following quote from the book, “The Bill of Rights is still the law of the land. The Constitution is our guide, and it enshrines principles that remain true no matter how far modern lawmakers might like to stray from them. The Constitution was not written for its times but written to stand the test of time.”
The MAGA Doctrine and the Magna Carta have much in common, so much so, that without too much hyperbole, it could be called The MAGA Carta.
July 13, 2020
I read this book to try and gain some insight into Donald Trump's decision making, why he chooses some policies over others and how he treats our military. I wanted credible information that justified Trump's actions and behavior leading up to the white house and during his presidency.
However, there are no sources in this book. No legitimate, credible evidence or information to support Mr. Trump in wake of his faults and failures.
I give everyone a voice (left, right or in between), but this is pointless, biased rubbish.
I would not recommend this even for Trump supporters because it will make future arguments they have with the left less credible, especially if referencing this book.
However, there are no sources in this book. No legitimate, credible evidence or information to support Mr. Trump in wake of his faults and failures.
I give everyone a voice (left, right or in between), but this is pointless, biased rubbish.
I would not recommend this even for Trump supporters because it will make future arguments they have with the left less credible, especially if referencing this book.
June 26, 2020
Charlie Kirk writes a well-researched, informative, Conservative book about the Presidency of Donald J. Trump, that millennials can understand. So much about this book is honest, direct and apparent. Military history, the Bill of Rights, healthcare, criminal justice reform, etc. are all discussed. Quick read with lots of “A-Ha! moments” that makes you want to reassess how you logically rebut your opponents antics.
March 15, 2020
The founder of Turning Point USA accomplishes the ambitious goal of defining the MAGA Doctrine of President Donald Trump. He explains how the populist movement, rooted in a belief in American Exceptionalism, led to the election of Trump and to his likely reelection. My only complaint is the many unnecessary references to Turning Point USA.
May 18, 2020
Honestly, this book in some ways seems like a suck up to Trump, but I could tell that’s not really what it is. It sounds that way because Trump is the catalyst to this new populist movement, and really all that movement is is a complete departure from the two-party establishment system.
I’ve followed Charlie Kirk for a few years and he is truly a guy that practices what he preaches: proponent for liberty, justice, and civility, standing against non-sensical wars, and truly desiring prosperity for all.
This book lays out what the philosophy of the MAGA mantra is, what it has contributed to the Trump administration, and how it goes against so much of what American politics had become. He discusses key policy decisions by the Trump administration that were supported by democrats pre-Trump like getting out of Iraq and promoting world-peace when possible. He delves into the democratic desire for lower carbon emissions and that it was after the US left the Paris Accords that the US had the lowest emissions than any nation in the accords. He addresses lots of examples like these that would resonate with anyone if anyone but Trump accomplished them.
More importantly, however, Kirk talks about what drives the policy decisions and even the mentality behind the rhetoric on the Right. The MAGA Doctrine is one that desires to see all people prosper, but rightfully cares most for its own, its one that desires to get back to American roots, not the sins of the past, but the past glories of having no regard for a political elitist class, of inspiring innovation and wealth, of supporting the freedom to discuss all ideas whether good or bad, and by understanding that learning from all of what history offers us, not just the so-called experts of today, is what keeps us grounded while propelling us toward progress and equality.
I’ve followed Charlie Kirk for a few years and he is truly a guy that practices what he preaches: proponent for liberty, justice, and civility, standing against non-sensical wars, and truly desiring prosperity for all.
This book lays out what the philosophy of the MAGA mantra is, what it has contributed to the Trump administration, and how it goes against so much of what American politics had become. He discusses key policy decisions by the Trump administration that were supported by democrats pre-Trump like getting out of Iraq and promoting world-peace when possible. He delves into the democratic desire for lower carbon emissions and that it was after the US left the Paris Accords that the US had the lowest emissions than any nation in the accords. He addresses lots of examples like these that would resonate with anyone if anyone but Trump accomplished them.
More importantly, however, Kirk talks about what drives the policy decisions and even the mentality behind the rhetoric on the Right. The MAGA Doctrine is one that desires to see all people prosper, but rightfully cares most for its own, its one that desires to get back to American roots, not the sins of the past, but the past glories of having no regard for a political elitist class, of inspiring innovation and wealth, of supporting the freedom to discuss all ideas whether good or bad, and by understanding that learning from all of what history offers us, not just the so-called experts of today, is what keeps us grounded while propelling us toward progress and equality.
August 9, 2025
Even though it is 5 years old, I picked this title off the library shelf because I know I should read from all sides of the political spectrum. In it, I found that Charlie Kirk makes several good points. Among them: we have wasted $85 million lending money for a hotel in Kabul, NATO allies should pay more for defense, our immigration policy needs reform, our government is bloated, and we lost too many lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Unfortunately, I have a much longer list of all the examples where he confuses correlation with causation, makes unsupported accusations, goes against prevailing scientific research, dismisses Trump's worst transgressions, and quotes out of context. Instead of listing them all, I'll just say that his 230+ page book of 'ideas' lacks even a single citation. That alone tells you all you need to know.
Unfortunately, I have a much longer list of all the examples where he confuses correlation with causation, makes unsupported accusations, goes against prevailing scientific research, dismisses Trump's worst transgressions, and quotes out of context. Instead of listing them all, I'll just say that his 230+ page book of 'ideas' lacks even a single citation. That alone tells you all you need to know.
October 25, 2020
I am surprised by how good the book is. After all, Kirk never finished college and he’s an activist not a pundit or a theorist. But apparently Kirk has read a lot, especially Dr Sowell’s books and digested them well. And it really shows. As a big fan of Dr Sowell, that’s enough for me to give him a 4 star rating.
September 23, 2025
Mr. Kirk has written the definitive account of the MAGA Movement in the United States.
Charlie Kirk's recent assassination has galvanized the 'Turning Point USA' across the country. '
'The MAGA Doctrine' explains in precise and accurate detail what MAGA and Turning Point USA is about: The reawakening of American pride and the teaching of our youth to not only be proud to be American, but pride in the United States as well.
Charlie Kirk's recent assassination has galvanized the 'Turning Point USA' across the country. '
'The MAGA Doctrine' explains in precise and accurate detail what MAGA and Turning Point USA is about: The reawakening of American pride and the teaching of our youth to not only be proud to be American, but pride in the United States as well.
July 11, 2021
I don't know what I was expecting with this book. It was fine; I think perhaps I'm a bit too involved in political news because nothing in here was overly-illuminating or provoking. If you want a very wide overview on Trump and his policies, this is a good, quick sampler. It struck me as more of a good reinforcement for things one may already believe about Trump instead of a powerful tool for convincing someone who is against him or even someone who's on the fence.
October 3, 2020
What about the MAGA doctrine captured the heart of so many Americans to vote for Trump in 2016? What’s interesting is that in these pages you will find that there is something very different and people focused about the doctrine. Laden with pages of pure facts about what Trump HAS already done for America as president, the best way to see how effective the MAGA doctrine has been is to let Trump’s actions according to the doctrine speak for itself.
August 8, 2024
Trumpism is totally antithetical to everything the U.S. was founded on - separation of church and state; country above self-interest, ethical and civil governance. Unfortunately he has brought back white nationalism, misogyny, and restrictive voter rights. He is a horrible narcissist that is incapable of coherent thought. Heil Trump!!!
September 11, 2022
Meh
Sums up his viewpoints very well but is overall intellec tally dishonest and is really just a book of miscellaneous things he thinks makes Trump look good. Not a particularly useful or informative read.
Sums up his viewpoints very well but is overall intellec tally dishonest and is really just a book of miscellaneous things he thinks makes Trump look good. Not a particularly useful or informative read.
August 12, 2020
The lack of facts and the spin on stories makes it impossible for me to take this book seriously. It “suggests” or “seems” is used way too often.
March 25, 2020
I am sympathetic to Kirk’s viewpoint, and have enjoyed some of his videos, but this book is just too superficial to be worthwhile. It seems to be written to reinforce rather than to persuade. I should probably swear off this kind of low-brow political stuff—easy to read but just not very enlightening.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 249 reviews