The idealogical difference of the Trump Administration

I said it before, that the battle between the Trump Administration and the political establishment was simply a battle of oligarchs, like the House of York versus the House of Lancaster. It's a real battle, but it's largely meaningless to us peasants.
However, I've come to realize that there are two idealogical differences between the two political camps.

#1) The Democratic-led political establishment wants to keep around the dying embers of the New Deal and Great Society in order to keep the workers invested in a political system designed to exploit them. It's actually wise, long-term thinking.

The Trump Administration, and the Rand Paul-led Republicans, want to burn down the last of the social safety net and turn America into a Mad Max-style, anarcho-capitalist system where the only services the government provides are publically-funded security for the corporate warlords.

Both systems are designed for the benefit of the wealthy elite, but Trump has decided that the carrot is unnecessary when you have a big enough stick.

#2) Nationalism vs. Globalism
This is the only thing that the two groups of oligarchs really disagree about, and it is being played out right now at the G20 Summit.

The world's financial leaders rowed back on a pledge to keep an open and inclusive global trade system after being unable to find a suitable compromise with an increasingly protectionist United States.
Making only a token reference to trade in their communique, finance ministers and central bank chiefs from the world's top 20 economies broke with a decade-long tradition of endorsing open trade, a clear defeat for host nation Germany, which has fought to maintain the G20's past commitments...
"We are working to strengthen the contribution of trade to our economies," G20 finance chiefs said after a two-day meeting in the German resort town of Baden Baden, well short of a past commitment for rules-based, transparent, non-discriminatory, open and inclusive multilateral trade.
Seeking to put "America first", Trump has already pulled out of a key trade agreement and proposed a new tax on imports, arguing that certain trade relationships need to be reworked to make them fairer for U.S. workers.

Say what you will about Trump, but he appears to be truly patriotic, unlike every Administration before him for generations.
What is interesting is that if we go back just a decade, it was liberals that used the term "fair trade", not Republicans. Before it became a euphemism for international multiculturalism.
This, more than any other reason, is why Democrats lost the Rust Belt.

If Trump sees Germany -- which has a $68 billion trade surplus with the U.S. -- as having gotten the better of trading arrangements, China falls into the same category. Its newly found stance as the prime defender of the status quo reflects its economic gains under the rules-based system since it joined the WTO in 2001.
U.S. officials have criticized that setup, with the director of the National Trade Council, Peter Navarro, saying China’s accession was to blame for much of a 15-year American slowdown.
“China has been able to do well based on the multilateral system; it has been able to leverage the gray areas,” said Dominico Lombardi, director of global economy at the Centre for International Governance Innovation in Waterloo, Ontario. “The Trump administration is for a level trading field. In the case of China, there are complaints of subsidies so ‘fair’ trade is what Washington wants to push for.”
up
30 users have voted.

Comments

mimi's picture

up
11 users have voted.

@mimi
They often are

up
16 users have voted.
mimi's picture

@gjohnsit @gjohnsit
about the G20 meeting in Baden-Baden for a mainstream public TV station. Obviously they used nicer words and Schaeuble replaced scumbag with something more well behaved:

"Die Amerikaner haben keine Außenseiterrolle", betonte Schäuble, sie hätten eine zentrale Rolle. Der US-Finanzminister habe kein Mandat gehabt, "über neue oder irgendwelche kreativen Formulierungen" zum Thema Handel im engeren Sinne zu verhandeln, fügte Schäuble hinzu. "Das muss man irgendwann respektieren.
""The Americans do not have an outsider role." Schäuble emphasized that they played a central role. The US Finance Minister had no mandate to negotiate "new or any creative formulations" on the subject of trade in the narrow sense, added Schäuble. "You have to respect that at some point.

So, I guess that means that Mnuchin had no scumbag mandate...
At least I know now how he looks like. I wouldn't have recognized his face until now. Smile

up
8 users have voted.

@mimi
Schäuble's opinion doesn't carry a lot of weight here.

up
5 users have voted.
mimi's picture

@gjohnsit
my wording. I give up. If something is clear to anyone here, than it is exactly that.

up
2 users have voted.

Good one: "that the battle between the Trump Administration and the political establishment was simply a battle of oligarchs, like the House of York versus the House of Lancaster."

One example of the oligarchs fighting was the fight Walmart and large chain stores had with the banksters over swipe fees for credit cards. From what I can tell, the cabal of Walmart with large chain stores lost to the financial industry oligarchs. It has been a long battle, but looked like Walmart and friends were winning until the Fed and courts reversed their gains.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-scotus-card-swipe-fees-20150120-st...

One part that is upsetting those maintaining the power of the oligarchs is that Trump style's and methods are crass compared to how decisions are normally done. In terms of many policies was Arne Duncan that much different in terms of private charter schools compared to DeVos? Pundits have noted this--Trump is not different as an agent of oligarchs than what was done before, only now the facade and bullshit has been ripped away.

Where it matters to the peasants is how hard the impact comes home. As Nader once observed the difference between democrats and republicans is the difference between a car hitting a wall at 60mph vs 120mph. But hit the wall you will.

up
20 users have voted.
CB's picture

carrot-or-stick2.jpg

up
15 users have voted.
Arrow's picture

What's bad is neo-liberal exploitation.
There was this thing once called 'The International'.
Just sayin.

up
9 users have voted.

Both neoliberalism and neoconservatism are totalitarian ideologies of market fundamentalism. - Umair Haque

@Arrow @Arrow removing completely borders. Free movement without restriction. The whole concept of nation [like paternalistic religions] was founded in terms of the need for individual power, not for the people or any sense of justice.

up
9 users have voted.

@LaFeminista
The battle is over the free movement of capital and goods, not of people.

up
10 users have voted.

@gjohnsit Brexit was driven by the free marketeers and closed border nationalists, they want the free trade and the closed borders, i.e all the advantages and none of the costs.

In Europe I stand with the EU supporting left, closed borders and nationalism here has been historically horrific and the graves of those that died over that are scattered over the landscape where I live.

up
6 users have voted.
mimi's picture

@LaFeminista
many in the US either don't want to see and are in denial over it, or they simply don't understand it.
Very well expressed comment. Can only agree with you.

up
2 users have voted.
Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@Arrow

up
2 users have voted.

Voting for the party currently agitating for war with Russia seems adverse to the notion of promoting good government.
--on the cusp

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@Arrow Internationalism, when pursued by capitalists, is generally speaking worse than nationalism when pursued by same.

Internationalism, when pursued by Leninists or Stalinists, has also had some seriously bad effects, although I think Eddie Izzard has a point to make here in re: Russian history:

Internationalism, pursued by non-Leninist, non-Stalinist socialists hasn't been tried (or maybe never could get enough steam behind it to make any noise?). I'd be up for it.

up
2 users have voted.

Voting for the party currently agitating for war with Russia seems adverse to the notion of promoting good government.
--on the cusp

Global neoliberalism is a system which hides behind cynical "beneficial programs" to convince the people to support their exploitation. For examples: The ACA, which enriches and empowers the insurance companies while only appearing to benefit the public. (yes, it does provide some benefits, but only as part of the scam) Transforming the NLRB into a business enforcer rather than a labor protector. "Welfare" that is inadequate for helping any but the most ingenious, courageous and willing to buy into the exploitative status quo to rise out of poverty.
It's not that our institutions are by definition evil, it's that they have been twisted or undercut, sometimes from the beginning. And everyone who criticizes the inadequacy and fraudulence of neoliberalism are denounced as "racists" and "sexists". (of course many are)
Trump plans to grind away all of those frauds. Of course, he does so for his own, basically evil, purposes, but grind them he will (at least try) This is the job Bernie would have performed - should have performed, and he would have done it much better and without pain, but that is the choice Hillary forced us to make.

up
9 users have voted.

A PROUD Hillary hater since 1993

powerful American Empire ruling through military and corporate oppression. If that is Patriotism then I have misunderstood the whole of our history as a nation.

Nationalism and Patriotism can represent opposing poles of belief.

up
4 users have voted.

@LaFeminista
that being patriotic is a 'good thing'.
Patriotism is neither a good or bad thing. It's simply a matter of loyalty.

up
8 users have voted.

@gjohnsit their meaning is in the eye of the beholder/propagandist. I determine their meanings by what their user's background is:

Trump may be both as far as whites are concerned, his definition of what either word means would be directly opposite to my take on them.

up
5 users have voted.
mimi's picture

@gjohnsit
those, he is dependent on, only. That's not patriotism, it's mafia-style salesmanship in patriotic clothes (second hand clothes in that too).

up
2 users have voted.

@mimi
I think those of us on the left must be careful not to simply attribute EVERYTHING we find negative and evil to Trump.
Otherwise we are in danger of falling into the GOS trap.

There are plenty of reasons to hate Trump. He's awful on many levels.
But that doesn't mean he awful on every level. He doesn't have to be.

up
6 users have voted.
mimi's picture

@gjohnsit @gjohnsit
nobody sees anything in him that they find positive or something stable to build a relationship on. So I guess I am under the spell of bad-mouthing Germans. I am tired, everybody asks me here about Trump and I can't stand it anymore to answer those questions.

But then tell me what and to whom Trump is loyal to, based on what he has done and said in his life?

up
3 users have voted.
mimi's picture

@mimi @mimi
that at least the elderly generation of socialists in Germay and Europe will ever interact in supportive ways with someone, who has as his chief strategist, a fan of a nazi adoring philosopher:
Stephen Bannon Is a Fan of a French Philosopher...Who Was an Anti-Semite and a Nazi Supporter - Charles Maurras was sentenced to life in prison for complicity with the Nazis.

In an article on Bannon's interactions with European right-wing nationalists who want to break apart the European Union, Politico reported last week that Bannon has "expressed admiration for the reactionary French philosopher Charles Maurras, according to French media reports confirmed by Politico." Recent articles in French media claim Bannon favorably cited Maurras to a French diplomat. Politico describes Maurras as a Catholic nationalist—like Bannon—and notes that Bannon has parroted several of Maurras' ideas. A hero to members of Europe's far right, Maurras is a natural fit for Bannon, who has expressed support for Brexit and France's National Front movement and is known to hate the European Union.

You won't twist Social Democrats and Socialist's minds in Germany and France about Trump and Bannon. Not going to happen. I can imagine it will come to war about it. These right-wing interactions between US right-wing ideologues and white supremacists and European right-wing populist and neo-nazis are going on since a long time. Now they made the coup and sit in your government's administration.

The left in the US and Greece have launched criticism against the EU, but that means they disregard other reasons, for which many Germans and French will not support the US left in their hopes that the EU will dissolve itself. Economic reasons are not what motivates many Germans or French people to stick with the European Union, I believe. Look how Varoufakis is pretty weak when he somewhat weasels out of his former positions.

That doesn't mean that the left in Germany and Varoufakis can't work together in their demands to ECB. Varoufakis and De Masi demand publication of ECB legal opinion for the closure of Greece’s banks
If I would understand more about the economic reasons that cause so much tensions among the Germans and the southern EU member states, I am pretty sure, I support those critics. But I don't believe that they are more important than all the non economic reasons that are the ones many of us have to support the EU to stay united. May be it's a generational thing. The younger generations has less "memory" about what Europe has been, when it was not united. A mess. And it's not forgotten and being a right-wing ideologue is a no no in many of the older folks here. When it comes to right-winger you are either with them or against them. Even if you are a poor, white, formerly Eastern German disadvantaged working class guy without a job, it's not an excuse to join right-wing populists and xenophobes. They have the option to be Socialists and/or Social Democrats without the xenophobe and racial rhetoric. It's that simple, at least in my mind.

up
1 user has voted.
Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@gjohnsit Trump is bad. That's the fundamental and most important truth about American politics.

What the hell will we do when they successfully impeach him? We'll have nothing to talk about.

up
2 users have voted.

Voting for the party currently agitating for war with Russia seems adverse to the notion of promoting good government.
--on the cusp

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@gjohnsit It's not possible to say anything good about Trump, nor anything which could under some circumstances be construed as good, because evidently what that means now is that Trump is a Good Man or a Good Leader (tm).

We're no longer capable of thinking that someone is a bad person but has one or two positions we agree with.

The absolutism that has arisen around the figure of Trump is astonishing.

up
3 users have voted.

Voting for the party currently agitating for war with Russia seems adverse to the notion of promoting good government.
--on the cusp

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
Is that why everyone who wants to talk is Chamberlin at Nuremberg in 1938?

up
3 users have voted.
Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@gjohnsit Yes, although somehow Hitler, in this case, is a Russian puppet.

up
1 user has voted.

Voting for the party currently agitating for war with Russia seems adverse to the notion of promoting good government.
--on the cusp

up
2 users have voted.

Please donate to caucus99percent.com.