A few weeks ago we suggested that, while there are clear signs of their being some kind of doctrinaire, ideological approach(es) behind whatever might be called a 'Trump Programme', it was perhaps too soon to elaborate it methodically.
Work in progress, maybe: but here's an interesting stab at it: Trump as an auto-immune disorder. What's particularly good about this is that it offers a thoughtful angle on one critical aspect of the puzzle, namely, why aren't the legendary Checks & Balances working? I have a bit of a theory on this myself; but here's a much more fully-developed one. It also makes a neat point about the difference between business conducted in markets, and business conducted via barter-like deals, which I think we could profitably come back to another time.
Not too long, and well worth adding to the evolving body of intelligent ruminative literature. A couple of extracts:
Other tinpot dictators – like Modi, Erdoğan, Putin, Xi**, Orbán – and their countries are distinct from the US in an important way. These autocrats do not have comparable democratic institutions. They can capture, subvert or sabotage democratic traditions in their own countries, using their own means. In each of them, there are longstanding traditions of inequality (such as caste in India), vigorous and celebrated imperial histories (Turkey, Russia and China) and deep traditions of racial and religious nationalism (Hungary and India). But they do not have the special strengths of American democracy: a sturdy commitment to separation of church and state; the distribution of powers between legislature, judiciary and executive; and a deep antipathy towards tyrants, royal or otherwise... [Trump] has hit upon an original formula: to reverse-engineer the liberal institutions designed as guardrails against people like him.
Trump loves wealth, ostentation and deals, but he hates markets, not because of their imperfections but because they, in principle, rest on ... supply and demand, the rationality of prices, all of which are safeguards against political fiat, personal greed and efforts to cook up macro outcomes for micro reasons. This hatred of markets unites all of today’s autocrats, because markets make their oligarchies unstable and their nationalist fiscal policies responsive to global finance ... they fear the power of global financial markets to shake their national economic goals. [Trump] disdains the market – because it obeys no master other than its own rules of price, volume and scale. His weapon against it is tariffs, which he wields in the hopes of bringing it under his control. The market relies on the social contract, that agreement between individuals and government that is based in trust and predictability. Since Trump despises the market, he must dismantle the social contract, in all its forms and guises.
ND
__________________
** Not sure "tinpot" is exactly appropriate for Xi ...
9 comments:
"a deep antipathy towards tyrants, royal or otherwise...": oh balls. For years I've teased Americans that their Holy Constitution means that the President is an elected monarch. They've bridled but it's true. Indeed, on some topics he has pre-George III power.
As for evidence, apart from reading the bloody thing, I will instance much of the behaviour of Jackson, Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR. Or indeed Biden's boast that he simply ignored a SCOTUS order, or Obama's boasting that he'd use the phone and the pen (i.e. Executive Orders) to evade the wishes of Congress.
Hell's Bells, you only have to reflect for a moment on the use of the Regency when George III had his mad fits and the American null response to President Vegetable.
I can never understand the angst displayed by 'politicians' and their little teams of 'experts', when all one needs to do is watch what a normal developer does when an opportunity for profit is recognised. Look at the way London's - and other major cities' - buildings are put up. The firms behind these new developments aren't shrinking violets, they see a profit where lesser mortals don't! Councils are woefully inept at countering commercial opportunities, they have enough issues for their poll-tax-payers, with piddling issues and wokery!
President Trump certainly comes from that particular developer fold, and is the 'long deal' man, who is taking the US into a new anti-democrat-dead-hand of politics arena, and from what I've seen, the normal US citizen really does quite like the idea!
Not sure tinpot is appropriate for Vlad either. Given the US policy laid down by Wolfowitz and Brzezinski in the 1990s, of detaching Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Ukraine politically from Moscow; and the fact that post-Soviet Russia was being looted by oligarch gangsters, who appointed him as a front man - it's remarkable that he's still there and the oligarchs are tame, in prison or exiled.
I see that Merz is giving Ukraine the OK to fire German missiles into anywhere in Russia. Looks like Germany are going for third time being the charm ...
Lumping Orban, Trump and (arguably) Modi in with Erdogan, Putin and Xi suggests the author has a dislike of "populists" and therefore should be taken with a pinch of salt.
It is of course possible for pearls of wisdom to come forth from an otherwise useless price of writing, but the Left seldom manage that level of self awareness.
"This hatred of markets unites all of today’s autocrats, because markets make their oligarchies unstable and their nationalist fiscal policies responsive to global finance ... they fear the power of global financial markets to shake their national economic goals. "
Balls. People (ie voters) are increasingly sick of 'international markets' dictating what people may or may not have in their countries. Notably demanding mass immigration to provide cheap labour, but also many other things like DEI, Green nonsense and evisceration of Western industry so that global business can make more money.
The author of this piece sees Trump (and other 'populist' leaders) as being imposed on the voters, when in fact they are the creation of the voters. Trump and his ilk exist because of the views of a large proportion of Western voters who are sick and tired of the unelected globalist elite providing voters with the Uniparty version of democracy - you can vote for whatever colour rosette you like, as long is its a party who supports our aims.
Is capitalism stronger than Trump? Who owns capitalism and markets. Sure, Trump has notional control over some of the US economy but if he looks like screwing up he will be toast. Will his well coiffed mates save him or dump him. The real power base for capitalism probably sits somewhere between the East Coast bankers, the West Coast tech bros and the coastline of China. Not near Washington.
Trump is a cynical operator rebuilding his fortune through his media group. He is a media creation. The question is whether he will be allowed to overthrow the US constitutional apparatus. A third term? I suspect his thrashing around playing at tariffs and going nowhere will show him up for an empty vessel. I don't think upper/middle America will fall for that QAnon trick again.
"As democracy is perfected, the office of the president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron". HL Mencken.
"The real power base for capitalism probably sits somewhere between the East Coast bankers, the West Coast tech bros and the coastline of China. Not near Washington."
Isn't this the problem? When these people decide the rest of the world needs to conform to their way of thinking, that's what their puppet politicians deliver. Trump (and Orban) appear to be pushing back against that WEF inspired globalist cabal.
Progress is the exchange of one inconvenience for another. No Matt, you don't get to choose whether you are in or out of the world economy and yes politicians are puppets. In a way that is a good thing, effective governments are dangerous governments.
I quite like capitalism, it has given me decent medicines at reasonable cost, decent phones, electricity and gas delivered to my door etc etc. If one outfit jacks up the price I go and buy from another. But I want someone to have a firm grip on the capitalist's necks - looking at you Thames Water. I had some involvement in water privatisation and it was obvs that HMG had not spent any money and wanted shot of the whole thing to anyone who would take it off their hands - with no obligations of course.
Up till the '70s we had the fag end of a command economy, the Pelerin Society et al had told governments liberalism was the way to go. But gradually those who govern found capitalism was not self regulating except in a very boom/bust sort of way and apt to take its bat and ball away as well as take the p*ss. It needed a control system and that system needed to extend beyond national borders. National governments have proved inadequate to the task.
Mr Trump usefully cuts through the diplomatic and trade talk hokum but gets to the same end - nowhere. The beauty and curse of capital is it just does not care about governments.
In a rare display of consistency, I pretty much agree with the other comments here. The article way overstates Trump’s coordination and it tries to anchor policy with a particular pet peeve of the author when there are many other explanations for why Trump would adopt them. Not least because that’s what people want. Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar. We don’t need to keep on with all these strained interpretations of what it might all mean.
Worst of all, the article exhibits one of the old, old Soviet propaganda themes — diabolical motives. No-one can do something we don’t like or don’t approve of without some sinister, dastardly master plan being at work. It’s borderline Conspiracy Theory at best, just lazy Scooby Doo villain level characterisation at worst.
Post a Comment