The musical “Hamilton” by singer-rapper Lin-Manuel Miranda tells the story of jumpstarting the U.S. economy. It glimpses Alexander Hamilton’s industrial policy: managing the national debt, building domestic manufacturing, reducing imported goods, and using tariffs to support key enterprises. In our times, the entertainment industry has turned Hamilton into a cultural icon.

Another entertainer, the co-producer and host of “The Apprentice,” and now U.S. president — Donald Trump — has championed Hamiltonian policies. Like Miranda’s rendition, Trump’s narratives target popular culture. But Trump is no Alexander Hamilton.

Skeptical of global trade, Trump insists that “America is being ripped off.” To protect the U.S. economy, he borrows a playbook from Hamilton, the first secretary of the treasury. Trump’s ostensible aim is to bring manufacturing jobs home by imposing tariffs. He would, effectively, recreate the 19th-century economy.

Hamilton was a savvy intellectual who collaborated with James Madison and John Jay on “The Federalist Papers,” essays that led to the adoption of the Constitution. In contrast, Trump is an anti-intellectual. With his sycophantic, illiberal advisers, he is engaged in a war on knowledge. Trump’s zigzagging, on-again, off-again policies are driven by his impulses, toughened by bluster, swagger and hypernationalism.

As one of Trump’s aides, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, said, “Geography matters.” Of course, but how? To this point, the renowned scholar-activist Edward Said maintained: “The struggle over geography … is not only about soldiers and cannons but also about ideas, about forms, about images and imaginings.”

Trump’s wacky ideas about geography suggest that he can redraw the map of the world. Maps are representations, powerful images of who owns or controls territory. In a throwback to the 19th century, Trump seems to be imagining a world configured into hemispheric spheres of influence dominated by great powers — the United States, Russia and China. In its sphere, an imperial presidency would enforce a modern-day Monroe Doctrine; Russia would occupy large parts of Ukraine; and China would hold sway over Taiwan.

But where to draw the boundaries? How would other major countries, such as India or Brazil, comport with this regional hegemony? In view of Trump’s political tropes and woolly thinking, it is not impertinent to ask, Who was his geography teacher? Why does Trump think that an imperial president can redesign the world map, the product of millennia?

Trump’s attempt to wind the clock back would reshore uncompetitive capacities. Rather, the challenge is to marshal new investments, technology and productive capabilities. Unlike in Hamilton’s day, when agriculture was a mainstay of the national economy, now rural and, more generally, depressed areas and global supply chains warrant special attention.

Employees want meaningful, not dead-end, precarious jobs. New jobs are created but necessitate training and knowledge. With high turnover rates, multitudes face increasing insecurity,

Over the last 20 years, the economic landscape has changed because finance outstripped manufacturing as a source of corporate profits. So, too, technological innovations, particularly algorithms and AI, have eliminated myriad blue-collar and white-collar jobs.

Now that Trump and his billionaire cabinet are demeaning science, vaporizing higher education institutions and enacting anti-immigration policies, who will fill niches in the labor market? Reductions in federal funding for R&D and encroachment on academic freedom are prompting brain drain. Some researchers are choosing not to work in the United States or are leaving the country. Cuts in grants and contracts are also hurting the private sector. Industries supported by government subsidies and tax credits report weak hiring.

The goal should be to climb the value-added ladder — that is, from predominantly labor-intensive to manufacturing-intensive and then to technology-intensive activities — rather than recover prior capacity, the path that the Trump administration is apparently pursuing. Today, Washington needs to stoke semiconductor, clean-energy technology, robotics and other key industries that would onshore innovation and talent.

Instead of moving the ideological needle to the right, policymakers should develop a coherent, forward-looking reindustrialization plan. They should prioritize spurring advanced manufacturing, creativity and university-industry ties. A broad political coalition must catalyze this effort.

Cultural supplements to state power, such as music and popular entertainment, are able to wake people up in a visceral way. Taking a cue from Lin-Manuel Miranda, individuals can deliver compelling messages about achieving a better future.

Jim Mittelman, a Boulder resident and Camera columnist, is an educator, activist, and author. His books include “The Globalization Syndrome,” “Hyperconflict,” and “Runaway Capitalism” (due out in late 2025).