The Trump presidency

[newbie]

It's not really that, and it's not really silly. I said much the same on the 'war with China' thread. If you can't imagine what form it would take and what it would look like in practice, how meaningful is the possibility?

You're challenging 'my' imagination, and that's limited at best. When I woke that long-ago morning to the news that the Thatcher government was taking off exchange controls I couldn't possibly have imagined what that meant in practice nor where it would lead. I've no doubt there were people clever and engaged enough to have had a fair idea. Possibly there are people now who understand the modern issues in detail and know why such changes are/are not in their interests, but now as then, I'm not one of them. < I don't even know if globalisation is a necessary component of neoliberalism, which is all I was asking about >.

What I can imagine is a reversal, if you will, of what's been happening over recent decades. Instead of political encouragement for the more globalised elements of capital at the expense, if politically necessary or expedient, of locally focussed capital, the political will shifts, so that there's a transition towards a political economy in which it matters where goods (& services) are produced and the nationality of both the workforce and the ownership of the means of production. (hypothetical) German capital using Polish labour based in the UK to make biscuits for sale in Ireland, Spain etc will become a thing of the past.

Now it's dead easy to shoot that to ribbons, of course it is. Not only because I can't construct such an idea properly, but also because it's too farfetched. Import tariffs and immigration controls yes, but the reimposition of exchange controls is completely impossible to imagine. Isn't it?

I'm more inclined to ask, 'do they even want or intend to deliver'. Is anyone but the guy at the bottom even really interested?

It's beyond that, surely. We're coming out, TPP and TTIP are dead, Trump is passing labour mobility EOs and threatening tariffs, plus there's a distinct possibility that both the Euro and the EU may not last the year out. Competing capital forces will push politicians this way or that, but they'll have to deliver something, which might be more of the same, might be exactly what was promised, might be world war, might be some other future I don't have the imagination to sketch out.

That waffle is an easy target to tear to shreds. The fact that I'm not able to usefully imagine a post-globalised economic landscape doesn't mean that neoliberalism will accelerate or continue.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

So they are going to make money out of it?

Everything they do is about money. They've spent years monetizing the environment. Now they're monetizing the average citizen.

 

[belboid]

Globalisation is absolutely at the heart of neoliberalism, and if Trumps actions meet his pre-election rhetoric, it will be a major shift away from the economic policies of the last forty years. But that is the big question, whether he'll do what he said. His low taxes pledge is perfectly compatible with neolib, but the massive state investment and potential tariff's are very much not. the 'crackdown' on 'illegals' will depend very much on how it is done, the reality will be that actually they wont stop the circulation of human capital too much, because it would be shit for the economy. But that still leaves room for him to come up with something headline grabbing, that wont affect numbers too much, but will be absolutely horrible to one group (while quietly ignoring the majority)

 

[CrabbedOne]

he's hardly been a wallflower

Turd Blossom II!

 

[bimble]

Maybe Trump's Wall, which is definitely happening any day now, will be a bit like Hoover's dam, proper jobs for proper americans etc.
"with employment peaking at 5,251 in July 1934.[33] "Mongolian" (Chinese) labor was prevented by the construction contract,[33] while the number of blacks employed by Six Companies never exceeded thirty, mostly lowest-pay-scale laborers in a segregated crew, who were issued separate water buckets.[34]"

 

[krtek a houby]

Maybe Trump's Wall, which is definitely happening any day now, will be a bit like Hoover's dam, proper jobs for proper americans etc.
"with employment peaking at 5,251 in July 1934.[33] "Mongolian" (Chinese) labor was prevented by the construction contract,[33] while the number of blacks employed by Six Companies never exceeded thirty, mostly lowest-pay-scale laborers in a segregated crew, who were issued separate water buckets.[34]"

Ah, so this is the sort of thing they mean, harking back to the days when America was great

 

[killer b]

Bercow has banned Trump from addressing the mother of all parliaments, fwiw. (not much).

 

[bluescreen]

Bercow has banned Trump from addressing the mother of all parliaments, fwiw. (not much).

Speaker Bercow: Trump should not speak in Parliament - BBC News

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Tomgram: Nomi Prins, Goldmanizing Donald Trump | TomDispatch

Trump is a banker puppet.

 

[krtek a houby]

Speaker Bercow: Trump should not speak in Parliament - BBC News

Hmm. "Strongly opposed"; is that an actual ban, then?

 

[bimble]

Tomgram: Nomi Prins, Goldmanizing Donald Trump | TomDispatch

Trump is a banker puppet.

we've had that article already. It doesn't mention what's different about this regime and i think looking at what's different is important, this is not business as usual.

 

[Pickman's model]

Tomgram: Nomi Prins, Goldmanizing Donald Trump | TomDispatch

Trump is a banker puppet.

yeh and none of the other presidents or indeed prime ministers of the uk have been great pals to the banksters.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

The Republicans have been after the EPA for decades. The only reason this is popping up now is because they think they can get it done this time.

People sometimes point to the founding of the EPA as proof that Nixon wasn't all bad. Yes, he did create the agency, but the truth, as always, is more complex. Rachel Carson deserves most of the credit. She wrote a book called 'Silent Spring', that arguably spawned the environmental movement, or at least gave it a large shot of adrenaline. President Kennedy was the first to begin implementing changes based on her ideas; and Nixon was simply giving in to a cultural backlash that he could ignore only at his peril.

How ‘Silent Spring’ Ignited the Environmental Movement

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

we've had that article already. It doesn't mention what's different about this regime and i think looking at what's different is important, this is not business as usual.

Fair enough.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

yeh and none of the other presidents or indeed prime ministers of the uk have been great pals to the banksters.

The establishment press have made a great play about how "anti establishment" he is. It's utter bollocks. This model of hoax alternative is standard fayre for making far-rightists acceptable. So in that sense, what other "leaders" have done or haven't done is less relevant. He is posed as "different" and lots of dupes have fallen right for it, dupes (including "truthers", "libertarians" etc. though not all) who spent decades spouting at us to see through this and that. So that (speaking to bimble's point too) is what is substantially different this time around - the extent to which we are told it is different when it so plainly isn't.

Chanelled dissent. Hollow rage. Fake rebellion. He must be anti establishment, the establishment said so.

 

[agricola]

Bercow has banned Trump from addressing the mother of all parliaments, fwiw. (not much).

Speaker Bercow: Trump should not speak in Parliament - BBC News

... and yet there was not a peep out of him when Modi spoke there.

 

[killer b]

... and yet there was not a peep out of him when Modi spoke there.

Or Xi Jinping

 

[Pickman's model]

The establishment press have made a great play about how "anti establishment" he is. It's utter bollocks. This model of hoax alternative is standard fayre for making far-rightists acceptable. So in that sense, what other "leaders" have done or haven't done is less relevant. He is posed as "different" and lots of dupes have fallen right for it, dupes (including "truthers", "libertarians" etc. though not all) who spent decades spouting at us to see through this and that. So that (speaking to bimble's point too) is what is substantially different this time around - the extent to which we are told it is different when it so plainly isn't.

Chanelled dissent. Hollow rage. Fake rebellion. He must be anti establishment, the establishment said so.

the more things change the more they stay the same.

 

[Wilf]

Or Xi Jinping

Yep. Only thing it adds up to is the embarrassment it causes for May as she dithers and vacillates about the post-Brexit Trumpy future.

 

[bimble]

Or Xi Jinping

or Netanyahu, who came round for tea today.
But isn't that the same as castigating the anti-Trump protestors for why didn't you protest whatever other thing? I'm glad the speaker spoke.

 

[CRI]

Handy website for keeping track of things:

What The Fuck Just Happened Today?

 

[redsquirrel]

Do those protestors get a whopping great salary for doing fuck all and have access to media whenever they want it.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Trump's Populist Deceit

Another piece about the laughable fraud of an idea (generally agreed on by the mainstream and "alternative") that Trump is "anti establishment", "populist" etc. He is an authoritarian elitist through and through.

"Rather than a populist, Trump is the voice of aggrieved privilege—of those who already are doing well but feel threatened by social change from below, whether in the form of Hispanic immigrants or uppity women. … Far from being a defender of the little people against the elites, Trump plays to the anxiety of those who fear that their status is being challenged by people they regard as their social inferiors.”

 

[killer b]

No, it isn't the same.

It's fine to use pronouncements like this to draw attention to the other occasions they've happily let tyrants into the house.

It's a pretty meaningless gesture anyway, although at the same time I'm glad he's done it - even a minor discomfort is still a discomfort.

 

[bimble]

Do those protestors get a whopping great salary for doing fuck all and have access to media whenever they want it.

Yes! We are all paid by Soros, and as liberal elite snowflakes also have the keys to the lying failing MSM
But seriously, do you think it would've been better for the speaker to have shut up?
I think it's brave. Looks like he's getting a lot of flack.
"Government sources described the intervention as “hugely political and out of line”.

 

[killer b]

No-one is saying he should have shut up.

 

[Wilf]

Yes! We are all paid by Soros, and as liberal elite snowflakes also have the keys to the lying failing MSM
But seriously, do you think it would've been better for the speaker to have shut up?
I think it's brave. Looks like he's getting a lot of flack.
"Government sources described the intervention as “hugely political and out of line”.

Well, I'm glad he said it, but along the same lines as killer b. He might momentarily be Trump's enemy, but that doesn't make the likes of Bercow my friend.

 

[CRI]

Even the lawyer who helped draw up the memorandum justifying the use of torture for the GW Bush administration is worried about Trump going too far.

As an official in the Justice Department, I followed in Hamilton’s footsteps, advising that President George W. Bush could take vigorous, perhaps extreme, measures to protect the nation after the Sept. 11 attacks, including invading Afghanistan, opening the Guantánamo detention center and conducting military trials and enhanced interrogation of terrorist leaders. Likewise, I supported President Barack Obama when he drew on this source of constitutional power for drone attacks and foreign electronic surveillance.

But even I have grave concerns about Mr. Trump’s uses of presidential power.

 

[redsquirrel]

Yes! We are all paid by Soros, and as liberal elite snowflakes also have the keys to the lying failing MSM
But seriously, do you think it would've been better for the speaker to have shut up?
I think it's brave. Looks like he's getting a lot of flack.
"Government sources described the intervention as “hugely political and out of line”.

I think the prick can fucking do one. Brave? Like it was brave the time he thought Mandela should be hung. He knows that they'll be plenty that support him and that his job for isn't under any real threat.

EDIT: It'll increase his dislike within the right of the Tories but they already hate him and it'll cement his support from everywhere else (well except maybe the DUP loons)

 

[belboid]

No, it isn't the same.

It's fine to use pronouncements like this to draw attention to the other occasions they've happily let tyrants into the house.

It's a pretty meaningless gesture anyway, although at the same time I'm glad he's done it - even a minor discomfort is still a discomfort.

hmm, there is also the fact that none of Modi, Xi Jinping or Netanyahu addressed parliament, in the Palace of Westminster. It's that that Bercow is objecting to, not a state visit per se