Trump creates biggest foreign policy &#$@-up possible with just word and no actions.

[Gori the Grey]

He tells them the jobs are "pouring" back in. Pouring is his verb. Mexican immigrants are pouring into our country and taking all our jobs. Now, due to his tax policy, jobs are pouring back into the US.

 

[Broken_Erika]

He tells them the jobs are "pouring" back in. Pouring is his verb. Mexican immigrants are pouring into our country and taking all our jobs. Now, due to his tax policy, jobs are pouring back into the US.

And the fermented ****is flowing out of the white house at record levels.......

 

[Hanaboshi]

The UN system is as close as we've gotten to the epitome of a system of multilateral relations in international politics.

It's never been universally liked for that.

The novelty is that the US now has a president who actively dislikes multilateralism, and might like to replace it with a system if bilateral deals between the US and various smaller nations.

It's one of these self-fulfilling situations. If enough of the major powers of the world ditch multilateralism in favour of bilateralism, everyone who has a stake and enough bulk, wealth and power to claim things is going to end up doing so.

I'm sorry but I don't get how American people think about Trump, please enlighten me about this matter. I mean, he is logically right about how American economy that was built from war plunders since the 20th century is now economically fudged and the government need to do something to revive it. In order to support the economy, the US population have to give up on the idea of Canadian social welfare and the long-held diplomatic powers, the privilege that only few countries have on earth. Yes he is rude and the way he handles things is wrong, however there is nothing that can help to support American economy other than this. So why Americans still can't accept him as a president when the only problem with him is his personality ?

 

[Gori the Grey]

and the government need to do something to revive it

Namely war plunder:

 

[Berzerker]

I'm sorry but I don't get how American people think about Trump, please enlighten me about this matter. I mean, he is logically right about how American economy that was built from war plunders since the 20th century is now economically ****ed and the government need to do something to revive it. In order to support the economy, the US population have to give up on the idea of Canadian social welfare and the long-held diplomatic powers, the privilege that only few countries have on earth. Yes he is rude and the way he handles things is wrong, however there is nothing that can help to support American economy other than this. So why Americans still can't accept him as a president when the only problem with him is his personality ?

We were on top following WWII but the Cold War 'required' us to bleed jobs to support our allies and future friends, especially in eastern Asia. There's a populist & protectionist movement in both parties and Trump appeals to both, so he'll need to deliver on trade if he wants to keep them.

 

[Hanaboshi]

Namely war plunder:

Yes, I get how his speeches really worries people, so why until this day there is no other alternative solutions to revive American economy ? I mean, the American life depends on a support system namely the 1%. Taxing them would only be bad. Is there even other solution from any people in the congress or the cabinet to deal with this ?

 

[Gori the Grey]

"Namely" means "to be specific." I was saying that Trump's solution to an economy built on war plunder is more war plunder.

I thought our economy in Trump's golden age was just a function of the fact that we'd fired up thousands of factories for the war effort, but not had any of those factories bombed out, so we could be the world's factory for a generation while the other economic powers rebuilt their infrastructure.

You and I are agreed, I think, that we can't simply reduplicate the golden era. Innovation was going to be our next card, our great university system, entrepreneureal spirit.

Under Trump it's who-knows-what. Clean coal, maybe.

 

[stinkubus]

I mean, the American life depends on a support system namely the 1%. Taxing them would only be bad.

[Citation needed.]

 

[Hanaboshi]

[Citation needed.]

I might be wrong about this because it's just my own individual perception from reading the news on how America operate in the eyes of the world. From tax haven for the riches in Panama, to moslem's style Jizya to the Arabs and giving a home to the Chinese, Russians and other moguls that had migrated from their own countries because of their political power. Without their support, America is essentially economically unstable.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/08/mossack-fonseca-law-firm-hide-money-panama-papers
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/15/world/middleeast/15prince.html

 

[Cutlass]

Wow, so now Clinton and Obama are conservatives? I dont even count Bush as a conservative, he's a big spending neo-con.

Clinton(s) and Obama were always conservative. GW Bush was neo-fascist.

 

[Cutlass]

Just read the US is claiming to have "negotiated" a $285 million cut in the UN's core budget. Anyone think this has anything to do with the US threat to pull funding for condemning it over moving the embassy to Jerusalem?

If so, is this an indication that Trump is now actively trying to destroy the UN by slowly chipping away at its funding, thus making it a completely ineffective and irrelevant organization?

And if that is the case, do you think the weakening and eventual "League of Nations-ing" of the UN is a good thing or a bad thing for global peace and stability?

There's a segment of the political class which fundamentally doesn't understand diplomacy, the US's place in the world, or the UN's place in the world. Most of those people would consider themselves to be neoconservatives. Although others are what I would term 'Jurassic conservatives'. That's the term I came up with for people like the Paultards who harken back to a version of conservatism that existed long before the invention of the paleoconservatives like Goldwater. Paultards would be an example of Jurassic conservatives, as would Trumptards.

Neoconservatives think that the US is the world's only superpower, so everyone else has to do what we want them to do! Jurassic conservatives think not only should the world do everything that we want them to do, but that we should tell them to screw off even if they do do what we want them to do.

None of this makes for rational foreign policy.

Okay, I was more asking if people think the UN is required for global peace and stability.

Basically, if Trump succeeds in destroying the UN, will it really change the current international political landscape all that much?

My kneejerk reaction says it would, but then when I think about it, nothing really stands out in my mind in terms of anything significant the UN has done that has truly made the world a better place to live. At the same time, they haven't done anything to make it worse either. So I guess in my mind, the UN is just this thing that kinda exists while serving no real purpose except to give yet another platform to politicians to talk about doing things and making it look like they've done things without really doing anything other than talk about doing things.

People misunderstand the purpose served by the UN. The UN exists as a forum for diplomacy. Nothing really more than that.

 

[Kyriakos]

Clinton(s) and Obama were always conservative. GW Bush was neo-fascist.

Moreover he did claim that god told him to invade Iraq.

 

[Verbose]

I'm sorry but I don't get how American people think about Trump, please enlighten me about this matter. I mean, he is logically right about how American economy that was built from war plunders

The US position as a dominant economic power was built on domestic US demand driving economic growth. Which is what China seems to be about to replicate. Sure, China as the new biggest economy in the world will have a lot of clout globally, and will soak up resources from all over (by more or less savory means), but what will really liberate China, and make it pretty much impervious to what goes on in the rest of the global economy at the same time, is IF it can replicate the US 20th c. trick, and essentially drive its own economic rise.

The pinnacle of US 20th c. relative power and wealth was the time it didn't really need to compete with the rest of the world, and could rely only on its own domestic economy to propel it upwards. The tricky bit now is that for some decades that hasn't been a possibility anymore and instead we've hade globalization and actual competition. The US hasn't done badly, in broad economic terms, the problem is that the US/UK style of neoliberalism is a failure at distributing what gains there might be. Iu even turns out it might in fact be toxic for society.

As far as the economic policies are concerned Trump seems mostly neoliberal, except more self-serving and venal then ever.

I've no real idea what Americans think about Trump. Funny thing is that the way Trump and the US are now going before long I might have the privilege of not actually having to bother with what goes on in the US. China, that would be another matter...

 

[Cutlass]

Trump isn't neoliberal on economic policy. He's crony capitalist. As are most Republicans, if not so blatant about it.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The UN does a lot of good for the world. Just because it isn't relevant to our lives in the US doesn't make it irrelevant to the world.

 

[Broken_Erika]

Pffffft! The UN was created by Hillary, Obama and the commies solely for the purpose of undermining Amercia and De-legitimizing Israel!
It must therefore be destroyed and replaced by a new order with Trump as Supremely Awesome Emperor of the Universe!

 

[hobbsyoyo]

This will probably turn into another 'look at this list and ignore common sense!' back and forth. Did you know that the FBI isn't part of the US intelligence committee? /s

The UN has a ton of social functions in addition to the political forum it serves.

 

[stinkubus]

Trump isn't neoliberal on economic policy. He's crony capitalist. As are most Republicans, if not so blatant about it.

One of the neoliberal agenda's goals is the privitization of public services. Neoliberalism and crony capitalism are one in the same.

 

[Verbose]

Trump isn't neoliberal on economic policy. He's crony capitalist. As are most Republicans, if not so blatant about it.

He's all over the place, making easy categorisation a bit elusive, but he apparently has picked up "trickle-down", and would seem to be setting it up for another spin. (With projected exploding US budget deficits.)

Crony capitalism is a reality but not really a discernible political project. Neoliberal economics is, one we would assume to by now be recognized as failed as economics, and potentially dangerous for society as politics. Yet here are Trump and the US republicans.