United States Politics Thread 47

[zompist]

I don't see any evidence that Trump dreams of war. Quite the opposite. He's not a general, never served in a war; he's a business guy, or thinks of himself as one. He gets excited by deals, which he imagines always go his way. And by money.

The best indication is what Trump 1.0 did in Afghanistan: leave. (Biden got the blame, but Trump negotiated the withdrawal.) It's hard to understand if Trump is gung ho for war, but easy to understand if you put yourself in the ugly but shiny shoes of a New York real estate tycoon. There was no money to be made there, no resorts to be built, no gifts or grifts coming in.

As hwhatting says, he's a bully, but a low-effort one. If it can't be done in ten days, he's not interested.

Finally, note how quickly he caved over tariffs, when the stock market and even more so the bond market collapsed. He's obviously afraid of presiding over a depression, and when enough rich people talk to him, he listens.

(Again, none of this is a guarantee of actual peace. Putin thought Ukraine was going to be a one-day coup.)

[hwhatting]

The danger with Trump is not, I think, that he wants a major war, or even an ongoing medium war like Afghanistan. It's that he's an idiot who could mistake a high-cost operation for a low-cost one.

If the past is an indicator, he actually shrunk back from escalating military action against Iran during his first term, and like the bully he is, he backs down when he encounters effective resistance. That doesn't mean that his typical cycle of rushing ahead with outrageous demands and destructive initatives only to back down and trumpet minor achievements as huge triumphs couldn't go wrong; but what I'm more worried about than one thing going catastrophically wrong is that this approach destabilizes the international order in a way that the cracks widen and lead to chaos to a degree that would make the current situation look like paradise in comparison.
Edit: for whatever reason I saw zomp's last post only after I posted this. It looks like we're in agreement.

[Raphael]

And he's turning around on tariffs again - this time 50 percent on EU stuff. He can't help himself.

[keenir]

And he's turning around on tariffs again - this time 50 percent on EU stuff. He can't help himself.

what was the point of sending letters to the countries? Trump won't hold the course long enough for postal time.

[MacAnDàil]

That was precisely my point. Democracy in the US is collapsing because too many people couldn't be bothered to pay attention to politics and failed to notice the rising tide of dictatorship. It takes active effort to prevent the rise of dictatorship whereas allowing it to persist requires nothing apart from mindless obedience.

i feel this is naive. i'm not sure i disagree, but the following arguments emerge right away in my mind. i'm not sure they're compatible yet:


line 1: no, it's not apathy: it's not some fascist small minority that the vast antifascist majority would stop if only they were engaged in politics. ask a non-voter about his political ideas and you sometimes hear some fucked up stuff.

That does exist but the people who totally would vote left-wing but are too demanding also exist.

line 2: isn't it rather obvious that the last two global rises of fascism coincide with a big technological shift in IT in the broad sense of the word? by IT here i mean computers but also the printing press. maybe it's not apathy, but simply the fact that new media just makes it easier to convince people to support führers, at least until society develops antibodies for their propa?

That is plausible.

On second thoughts, it is relevant that "the medium is the message". The printing press actually came without widening religious freedoms, religious minorities finding it a way to propagate their ideas and not be just massacred as was the case with Hussites and Cathars.

[Raphael]

OK, will Trump blow up the world now that he had a mood swing about Putin?

[keenir]

OK, will Trump blow up the world now that he had a mood swing about Putin?

well that'd be one way of ensuring Israel listens to him about stopping their fight with his new pal Syria.

[/ˌnɐ.ˈɾɛn.dɚ.ˌduːd/]

despite having been an american for all my few sixteen years and being born into a heavily republican-dominant family, I'm still whatever color you might classify as not just neutral, but as intentionally not supporting any existing political ideology at all. if only it were a much simpler thing for the world to have some global event (possibly catastrophic, if only to push the point across) that causes people to realize that political policy isn't just some constant power struggle amongst people who have lots of money and sway, but instead actually effects we commonfolk who consider ourselves under them. trump nuking russia might be a good start.

[jcb]

And he's turning around on tariffs again - this time 50 percent on EU stuff. He can't help himself.

Aaaaand they're off again.
- https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/27/investin ... rade-trump

[Raphael]

despite having been an american for all my few sixteen years and being born into a heavily republican-dominant family, I'm still whatever color you might classify as not just neutral, but as intentionally not supporting any existing political ideology at all. if only it were a much simpler thing for the world to have some global event (possibly catastrophic, if only to push the point across) that causes people to realize that political policy isn't just some constant power struggle amongst people who have lots of money and sway, but instead actually effects we commonfolk who consider ourselves under them. trump nuking russia might be a good start.

I had some pretty weird ideas when I was 16, but I'm pretty sure I wasn't in favor of seeing many millions of people, probably including myself, get killed to make a political point.

[/ˌnɐ.ˈɾɛn.dɚ.ˌduːd/]

despite having been an american for all my few sixteen years and being born into a heavily republican-dominant family, I'm still whatever color you might classify as not just neutral, but as intentionally not supporting any existing political ideology at all. if only it were a much simpler thing for the world to have some global event (possibly catastrophic, if only to push the point across) that causes people to realize that political policy isn't just some constant power struggle amongst people who have lots of money and sway, but instead actually effects we commonfolk who consider ourselves under them. trump nuking russia might be a good start.

I had some pretty weird ideas when I was 16, but I'm pretty sure I wasn't in favor of seeing many millions of people, probably including myself, get killed to make a political point.

you're probably right, that might actually be a bit over the top. but hey, if it happens, then there's our outcome. people realize, "oh crap, we just killed, like, half the earth's population. maybe that's not the whole idea behind this?" but then again, trump might not even get that notion, considering what all he's done already seemingly without so much as a first doubt.

[Torco]

despite having been an american for all my few sixteen years and being born into a heavily republican-dominant family, I'm still whatever color you might classify as not just neutral, but as intentionally not supporting any existing political ideology at all. if only it were a much simpler thing for the world to have some global event (possibly catastrophic, if only to push the point across) that causes people to realize that political policy isn't just some constant power struggle amongst people who have lots of money and sway, but instead actually effects we commonfolk who consider ourselves under them. trump nuking russia might be a good start.

i think this kind of nihilism is at the heart of what used to be called the new right (these days, I tend to think of it as just the right, they're all in love with trump milei etcetera). they're annoyed at some minor thing (substitute "people don't realize politics affects them" with "trans people in sports" or whatever) and so they suddenly become pro almost everyone dying in nuclear fire.

you're probably right, that might actually be a bit over the top. but hey, if it happens, then there's our outcome. people realize, "oh crap, we just killed, like, half the earth's population. maybe that's not the whole idea behind this?" but then again, trump might not even get that notion, considering what all he's done already seemingly without so much as a first doubt.

probably not. instead, they would say things like "oh crap, *they* [the postmodern neomarxists, the woke, whatever] just killed half the earth's population, now we really need to stop them. luckily, trump is here to do exactly that, all hail the emperor"

[/ˌnɐ.ˈɾɛn.dɚ.ˌduːd/]

despite having been an american for all my few sixteen years and being born into a heavily republican-dominant family, I'm still whatever color you might classify as not just neutral, but as intentionally not supporting any existing political ideology at all. if only it were a much simpler thing for the world to have some global event (possibly catastrophic, if only to push the point across) that causes people to realize that political policy isn't just some constant power struggle amongst people who have lots of money and sway, but instead actually effects we commonfolk who consider ourselves under them. trump nuking russia might be a good start.

i think this kind of nihilism is at the heart of what used to be called the new right (these days, I tend to think of it as just the right, they're all in love with trump milei etcetera). they're annoyed at some minor thing (substitute "people don't realize politics affects them" with "trans people in sports" or whatever) and so they suddenly become pro almost everyone dying in nuclear fire.

you're probably right, that might actually be a bit over the top. but hey, if it happens, then there's our outcome. people realize, "oh crap, we just killed, like, half the earth's population. maybe that's not the whole idea behind this?" but then again, trump might not even get that notion, considering what all he's done already seemingly without so much as a first doubt.

probably not. instead, they would say things like "oh crap, *they* [the postmodern neomarxists, the woke, whatever] just killed half the earth's population, now we really need to stop them. luckily, trump is here to do exactly that, all hail the emperor"

hey, woah, I never claimed being pro watch the world burn. and I never claimed being "people don't realize politics affect them". I only ever said that the world leaders ought to realize that their own actions affect real people. if it takes, for example, nuclear warfare, then that's what it takes.

[Torco]

i mean... "if that's what it takes that's what it takes" still sounds kind of pro-nuclear-hellfire-adjacent, but fair enough, if it's not your take it's not your take.

[malloc]

if only it were a much simpler thing for the world to have some global event (possibly catastrophic, if only to push the point across) that causes people to realize that political policy isn't just some constant power struggle amongst people who have lots of money and sway, but instead actually effects we commonfolk who consider ourselves under them. trump nuking russia might be a good start.

Nuclear Armageddon as a solution to our political crisis? Sounds like we got our first Posadist.

[MacAnDàil]

Fascist gringos really don't make things themselves these days. Note how orange Hitler outsources his favourite concentration camp, CECOT, to an Arab Latino, El Salavador president Nayib Buekele. Also, J.D. Vance only wrote the blurb to Unhumans, a anti-left-wing dehumanising book by Jack Posobiec and Joshua Lisec so unhinged some commentators think it makes Mein Kampf look a little less awful by comparison.

[jcb]

Attention poors: You will be sacrificed on the altar of wealth, because that is a sacrifice that the rich are willing to make!
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeqJOJYMHg0
- https://www.npr.org/2025/05/31/nx-s1-54 ... wa-senator

[Raphael]

How long until they make up? A few hours? A few days? A few weeks? Saw a Bluesky post predicting that Musk will submit to Trump in the most humiliating way possible. Sounds about right to me.

[zompist]

How long until they make up? A few hours? A few days? A few weeks? Saw a Bluesky post predicting that Musk will submit to Trump in the most humiliating way possible. Sounds about right to me.

It's been predicted— how long can the world's top two narcissists work together? The question was when.

The root problem seems to be that Musk sees himself as a new coequal branch of government, able to veto Trump's budget. And he's just an unelected minion whose power was given to him (illegally) by Trump. So when he says things like “Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate. Such ingratitude"— he's showing himself to have more stupid hubris than Trump, which is hard to do.

They may well make up, and yeah, it'll involve Musk kissing Trump's ring or something worse. But not quickly. To the extent Trump needed musk to move fast and break things... well, they're all broken now. I suspect even Trump realizes that Musk is now not only a political liability, but a disloyal one.

[Raphael]

So when he says things like “Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate. Such ingratitude"— he's showing himself to have more stupid hubris than Trump, which is hard to do.

Well yes, Musk has said a lot of stupid things, but expecting Trump to show gratitude tops them all.