"The trouble with defining Harris reflects the Trump campaign’s own identity crisis: is Trumpism still an uprising against elites and the American status quo in the opening decades of the 21st century? Or is the movement settling into familiar conservative patterns, battling “communist” phantoms, allying with powerful segments of American capital and abandoning a post-neoliberal trend first heralded by Trump himself in 2016? Evidence is mounting in favour of the second proposition: that Trumpism 2.0 is more conservative than radical or populist."
This passage is the journalistic equivalent of describing imaginary figures in clouds.
Back on Earth, Trump used the presidency to advance his interests and those of his immediate family members and as an outlet for his basest impulses, most notably xenophobia and racism. How could it be otherwise? Trump showed no interest in the office apart from the trappings and the ability to threaten opponents with punishment. If anyone thought Trump was going to shake up the nation's elite, it was the press looking for a coherent narrative where there was none or the rubes, who we now know Trump referred to as "basement dwellers."
That "Trumpism" was an assault against elites and the American status quo would come as a surprise to the ultra-rich who were the beneficiaries of Trump's only real legislative accomplishment, a massive tax cut that screwed the middle class and created the largest deficit in American history.
It is ludicrous to treat Trumpism as a political movement in the conventional sense. Trumpist politicians live in fear of having their careers ended by a wrathful Trump or his feral base, and they carefully tailor their words and deeds accordingly. At the federal and state level, Trumpists live to pursue Trump's personal vendettas, interfere with attempts to bring Trump to justice and lay the groundwork for another attempt to steal a presidential election. Their legislative agenda, such as it is, amounts to further assaults on reproductive freedom and the on separation of church and state in order to codify right-wing Christian beliefs.
As Never-Trump conservative exiles from the Republican Party have made clear time and again since 2015, there is absolutely nothing conservative about Trumpism. Here is how The Financial Times put it in 2023:
"It seems a fair bet that the philosophical revivalists of American conservatism in the 1950s and ’60s — political theorist and social critic Russell Kirk and William F Buckley Jr, the National Review editor whose watchwords were fiscal responsibility, limited government and a forward position in the world assuming American leadership — would not have recognised much in the Trump presidency embodying those principles." https://www.ft.com/content/3b9a4ec5-8b5c-4f62-9da9-121d12743c7b
There's no need to speculate as to the nature of a second Trump presidency. Trump always says ahead of time what he intends to do. Compulsive liar that he is, Trump has denied knowing anything about the radical Project 2025. Trump also denied knowing E. Jeanne Carroll, and look how that turned out. Trump has his fingerprints all over Project 2025, as do Trump henchmen such as the ghoulish Stephen Miller. The Washington Post calls Project 2025 "a blueprint for the second Trump administration. These are some of the highlights:
"The centerpiece is a 900-page plan that calls for extreme policies on nearly every aspect of Americans’ lives, from mass deportations, to politicizing the federal government in a way that would give Trump control over the Justice Department, to cutting entire federal agencies, to infusing Christian nationalism into every facet of government policy by calling for a ban on pornography and promoting policies that encourage 'marriage, work, motherhood, fatherhood, and nuclear families.' " https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/12/project-2025-summary-trump/
How is that agenda even remotely conservative? There's a reason that knowledgeable observers regularly refer to Trump's authoritarian tendencies.
Finally, Trump's weird penchant for calling Kamala Harris and other Democrats "communists" has nothing to do with American conservatism's Cold War phobias. Instead, it is straight out of Trump's playbook of repeatedly telling outrageous lies about his opponents. By now Trump has so thoroughly shattered his base's grip on reality that they will believe anything he tells them. Never mind that the Rosicrucians probably rival today's American communists in number and influence. Trump might as well be calling Harris a witch.
Cognitive dissonance: "Sohrab asks how Trump can reclaim his populist mantle." Despite some otherwise insightful observations, the writer either takes DT seriously or adheres to the tradition of horse-race journalism. Regardless, never buy a currency that is not backed up by a navy -> do NOT buy Trump's new crypto-currency.
Superannuated pop stars, revolting fascist politicians, and personal opinions of the late Queen? I suggest a better title would be "Bonfire of the inanities".
Whatever the outcome of this election, America will rise from the wreckage of the post-Cold War global order as a post-liberal great power?
America lost its great power status when it proved incapable of supplying the needs of its proxy war in Ukraine and its weapons and training proved inadequate.
Both Russia in 1918, and China in 1951, have defeated America in battle and would obviously have no difficulty repeating their performance.
"The trouble with defining Harris reflects the Trump campaign’s own identity crisis: is Trumpism still an uprising against elites and the American status quo in the opening decades of the 21st century? Or is the movement settling into familiar conservative patterns, battling “communist” phantoms, allying with powerful segments of American capital and abandoning a post-neoliberal trend first heralded by Trump himself in 2016? Evidence is mounting in favour of the second proposition: that Trumpism 2.0 is more conservative than radical or populist."
This passage is the journalistic equivalent of describing imaginary figures in clouds.
Back on Earth, Trump used the presidency to advance his interests and those of his immediate family members and as an outlet for his basest impulses, most notably xenophobia and racism. How could it be otherwise? Trump showed no interest in the office apart from the trappings and the ability to threaten opponents with punishment. If anyone thought Trump was going to shake up the nation's elite, it was the press looking for a coherent narrative where there was none or the rubes, who we now know Trump referred to as "basement dwellers."
That "Trumpism" was an assault against elites and the American status quo would come as a surprise to the ultra-rich who were the beneficiaries of Trump's only real legislative accomplishment, a massive tax cut that screwed the middle class and created the largest deficit in American history.
It is ludicrous to treat Trumpism as a political movement in the conventional sense. Trumpist politicians live in fear of having their careers ended by a wrathful Trump or his feral base, and they carefully tailor their words and deeds accordingly. At the federal and state level, Trumpists live to pursue Trump's personal vendettas, interfere with attempts to bring Trump to justice and lay the groundwork for another attempt to steal a presidential election. Their legislative agenda, such as it is, amounts to further assaults on reproductive freedom and the on separation of church and state in order to codify right-wing Christian beliefs.
As Never-Trump conservative exiles from the Republican Party have made clear time and again since 2015, there is absolutely nothing conservative about Trumpism. Here is how The Financial Times put it in 2023:
"It seems a fair bet that the philosophical revivalists of American conservatism in the 1950s and ’60s — political theorist and social critic Russell Kirk and William F Buckley Jr, the National Review editor whose watchwords were fiscal responsibility, limited government and a forward position in the world assuming American leadership — would not have recognised much in the Trump presidency embodying those principles." https://www.ft.com/content/3b9a4ec5-8b5c-4f62-9da9-121d12743c7b
There's no need to speculate as to the nature of a second Trump presidency. Trump always says ahead of time what he intends to do. Compulsive liar that he is, Trump has denied knowing anything about the radical Project 2025. Trump also denied knowing E. Jeanne Carroll, and look how that turned out. Trump has his fingerprints all over Project 2025, as do Trump henchmen such as the ghoulish Stephen Miller. The Washington Post calls Project 2025 "a blueprint for the second Trump administration. These are some of the highlights:
"The centerpiece is a 900-page plan that calls for extreme policies on nearly every aspect of Americans’ lives, from mass deportations, to politicizing the federal government in a way that would give Trump control over the Justice Department, to cutting entire federal agencies, to infusing Christian nationalism into every facet of government policy by calling for a ban on pornography and promoting policies that encourage 'marriage, work, motherhood, fatherhood, and nuclear families.' " https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/12/project-2025-summary-trump/
How is that agenda even remotely conservative? There's a reason that knowledgeable observers regularly refer to Trump's authoritarian tendencies.
Finally, Trump's weird penchant for calling Kamala Harris and other Democrats "communists" has nothing to do with American conservatism's Cold War phobias. Instead, it is straight out of Trump's playbook of repeatedly telling outrageous lies about his opponents. By now Trump has so thoroughly shattered his base's grip on reality that they will believe anything he tells them. Never mind that the Rosicrucians probably rival today's American communists in number and influence. Trump might as well be calling Harris a witch.
Bravo Ollie! Andy Borowitz cuts to the chase today with "Who Created Trump?" see, borowitzreport@substack.com
Cognitive dissonance: "Sohrab asks how Trump can reclaim his populist mantle." Despite some otherwise insightful observations, the writer either takes DT seriously or adheres to the tradition of horse-race journalism. Regardless, never buy a currency that is not backed up by a navy -> do NOT buy Trump's new crypto-currency.
Superannuated pop stars, revolting fascist politicians, and personal opinions of the late Queen? I suggest a better title would be "Bonfire of the inanities".
Whatever the outcome of this election, America will rise from the wreckage of the post-Cold War global order as a post-liberal great power?
America lost its great power status when it proved incapable of supplying the needs of its proxy war in Ukraine and its weapons and training proved inadequate.
Both Russia in 1918, and China in 1951, have defeated America in battle and would obviously have no difficulty repeating their performance.