When Team Biden Met with Team China in Alaska in 2021, it was confronted and told it had no leverage, no position of strength, with which to lecture China on anything.
I am in the camp that the Trump tariffs is less about re-industrialization of America but more about the destruction of China as the clear superior economic power. Trump's rhetoric appealing to the auto industry is empty rhetoric when one considers that the current decline of the US auto industry is terminal unless they enter into deep alliances with Chinese auto-makers. Ex: Apples I-phone has retained its dominant market share because of its alliance with its Chinese manufacturer with its 5th generation technology and access to a workforce of numerous, highly-qualified engineers. It is a win-win relationship but Trump and his band of China hawks have no interest in mutually beneficial relationships. They are unabashed American "exceptionalists" who think America has a divine right to be the #1 economic power in the world. As someone from the Caribbean it is quite evident Trump is willing to destroy our economies, which have always been subservient to the Uncle Sam, just to destroy China.
or their is a contrarian viewpoint that isn't being considered here - one - it is all kabuki and the actions are another way to fleece the little guy, more then it being about china...
I gather Trump has been informed that by shoving tariffs up everyone's nose he can restore usa to some position of strength. The equation that led him to this ridiculous act ignores the fundamental component of success - building the replacement industries and all the precursor training elements that can operate within these future industries PLUS finding wealthy oligarchs in the usa that are confident about spending huge dollars to establish those industrial production facilities in the usa rather than say Vietnam etc. It is important to recall that these potential oligarch investors are mostly globally minded people, not Henry Ford clones or Hewlett and Packard types of the mid last century.
The oligarchy thinks globally and acts selfishly and f##k the locals.
Methinks the rogues pissing in Trumps ears drape themselves in stars and stripes just for theatre and effect but they are fully owned weasel worders for the elite. And that is painfully obvious! Once the fallout settles in the coming weeks and months the cashed up gang will scoop the cherries off the top and move on.
The consciousness of the oligarchy is founded on the principle that if you are a billionaire and lose half, then you are a billionaire and still on top of the surviving pile and own the Presidents advisers and the FED even more.
As one of my source articles showed, there were many studies done analyzing Trump 1.0’s tariffs that should have been consulted but clearly weren’t. He had it in his mind during the campaign that he’d do this. I recalled Hudson’s 2019 paper halfway through that I linked in a comment elsewhere, https://michael-hudson.com/2019/02/trumps-brilliant-strategy-to-dismember-u-s-dollar-hegemony/
It makes sense for Trump to use America's economic leverage on his country's behalf. Isn't that what you'd want a leader to do?
The reason why tariffs are big leverage is because the USA is the biggest market in the world for foreign goods, $3.17 trillion in 2023. That's a tsunami of imports. Big money is involved. Trump's rationale is purely transactional. If you want to import goods into America, prepare to make less by doing so. It may still be profitable though. But if under tariffs you don't feel it's worth your trouble, then find another market to play in. Just don't be surprised if some enterprising startup in a developing country fills your place.
By putting heavy tariffs on imported goods, Trump reduces America's brutal trade deficit, adds a lot of revenue to the federal government which can be spent without adding to inflation, and sets the stage for a rejuvenated American industrial sector by protecting them from foreign competition.
I don't know if those factors will be enough to turn things around, but they are all logical things to do if you have that goal.
Leaders may chose to do tariffs as a means of balancing local market prices in favour of locally made product. But where locally made product is at relatively high cost then that may not be the sole strategy. People on small incomes will spend all their income on a variety of essentials like food, shelter, kids, transport, health and so on. China and India and Vietnam make stuff that will be purchased after those essentials are satisfied. Over the past decades the usa has pegged wages to minimise production costs but those costs were then raised by the FIRE sector NOT the wages sector. Then the profitability of many productive industries were plundered by venture capitalism seeking only short term gain and having little to no regard for long term production viability.
So I suggest the leader needs to establish a clear set of priorities and a hierarchy of strategic actions well before grabbing the tariff bludgeon. Those strategies and actions might include reforming the national taxation system to benefit production sector and attenuate the plunder sector. Make industry a viable sector for long term savings investment so today's jobs foster tomorrows jobs.
On the point of who is the biggest market in the world for foreign goods, I understand that Asia is huge as is Europe. China sees only 5% of exports TO THE USA. It is not the only nation that has a diversified trade and financial settlement strategy. It is important to consider which nations are topmost performers in national self sufficiency as well and the USA is not. Sure it exports stuff, but it is far from broadly self sufficient afaik.
North America is accelerating its segue to irrelevance in world trade and that is an excellent thing. The current burst of bullying make yield some billions of $us for the home team but don't bet your nuts on it being productive in the long run. Time will outpace the usa faster than you can imagine.
The usa may have been the biggest market for a while (in $value or equivalent currency terms) but its behavior has driven innovation and money settlement platforms have been given a priority imperative to move out of its orbit asap. And that is the consequence of Trump tariffs and his repulsive circle of capitalist vultures and Rapture freaks.
Much of what you say is true, nevertheless the fact remains that if done right, the US could create a manufacturing revival. It has the necessary ingredients. Whether it has the political will to do it is another matter.
I think Trump has the intention as do some who support him but he appears to have been hijacked by the Rapture gang that want to incite an armageddon of purely imaginary proportion regardless of the needs of the people and the nations future. I say 'imaginary' as there is no armageddon - there is human induced genocide and endless war masquerading as yet another Crusade into the Holy Land under the pretext of relieving the encircled Hill Station (of their making) one more time.
I recall Bannon walking out of the T1 presidency declaring it failed and dead early in the piece. It is mighty close to a recurrence of that episode today in T2.
The tragedy of shattered humanity that pours down the steps of the White House year after year since 1945 threatens to drown the homeland people who stand powerless to change it. THIS is the failure of political capacity NOT will. It is the political capacity of the masses that has been confiscated by the shocking penetration of capitalism into the soul of the political class. The usa needs to pick another enlightened and compassionate capitalism before it drowns in despair. It will take a revolution - an occupation - almost an exorcism of oligarchy to manifest the will.
I honestly don't know what will happen to the Trump administration or what it will do, other than the moves we've seen so far. That's because he is a genuinely enigmatic person. It's also due to Trump's habit of saying one thing and doing something else. I never judge the likelihood of something happening just because Trump has announced it. I wait to see what he does instead.
Take Iran for instance. Trump threatened Iran directly, no doubt to satisfy his Jewish backers. But instead of attacking Iran, he has entered direct negotiations with them to work out a deal on their nuclear program. Trump threatens war, but may deliver peace instead. Enigmatic, no?
Don't count on what he says, watch what he does.
Trump is unlikely to do all the things Steve Bannon would like, but that's probably a good thing. It doesn't mean that the Trump administration is failing.
If you truly wish for a new kind of capitalism in America, as do so many of us, it will not come from the traditional Democrats or Republicans. They are too entrenched in their old ways. Real change can only come through the hands of an outsider. And Trump is an outsider, 100%. He owes neither the Republicans nor Democrats anything. Plus it's (probably) his last term. He can do anything he wants, and as unpredictable as he is that may bring surprises. Good or bad, we will have to wait and see.
If you hope for a new kind of America, radical changes must take place. Of that there can be no doubt. And no one but Trump is offering change. Every other political force in America is entrenched in the rapidly deteriorating status quo.
I'm definitely not saying Trump is the new Messiah. He and his policies may turn out to be a disaster. His enigmatic nature again. In any case, altering America's path won't be easy and it will likely be accompanied by some chaos. Nevertheless, if you're praying for a new kind of USA to emerge, Trump is your best bet for it.
There is no reason why Trump couldn't be trying to do both things: re-industrialize America and contain China. In fact, he's almost certainly trying to do both, or at least elements in his administration are.
Mr. Trump should stick to America's business. Focus on its strengths and correct its weaknesses. Leverage the USA's huge R&D with a rejuvenated industry. Make it easy for businesses to start up. But if the US tries to stay in the race by tying an anchor to China, they are just going to fall farther and farther behind.
It's not as if the USA is starting from scratch or has fallen far. It's the number 2 exporting nation in the world. It's balance of payments though is hideous, because they import so much into their hyper-commoditized market. Cut back on imports however, through tariffs or just through patriotism, and America's balance of payments would come more in line.
On the other hand, your dream of America and China simply working together looks even better.
Karl, a highly informative post with its substantial extracts from the Chinese analyses.
There is an issue, under the radar generally, which I believe will be the dagger in the heart of the current vampire occupying the WH. Those of us in the field have been watching closely the controls that China has been putting on exports of critical materials ranging from the well-known (tungsten) to the obscure (yttrium compounds). The carefully graded controls have now, I believe, crossed the threshold to the point of neutering the US military for perhaps several years. This link to the most definitive discussion I’ve encountered yet on the lethality of these curbs — well worth your time:
“What China did wasn’t a ban, at least not in name. They called it export licensing. Sounds like something a trade lawyer might actually be excited about. But make no mistake: this was a surgical strike. They didn’t need to say no. They just needed to say “maybe later” to the right set of paperwork. These licenses give Beijing control over not just where these materials go, but how fast they go, in what quantity, and to which politically convenient customers.”
[to be read while listening to Chopin’s Funeral March]
"China calmly walked over to the supply chain and yanked out a handful of critical bolts. The bolts are made of dysprosium, terbium, tungsten, indium and yttrium—the elements that don’t make headlines but without which your electric car doesn’t run, your fighter jet doesn’t fly, and your solar panels go from clean energy marvels to overpriced roofing tiles."
The Chinese approach shows the curiosity, drive, and search for answers that characterized engineering in America until financialization took over the country under Clinton.
I wonder through all of this if the EU will grow a pair and step away from Amerika and go back to Russia for its energy needs or do they die a death because they don't wish upset Amerika?
Then at the same time we on Main Street Amerika are thrown under the wheels of the bus just before it goes off the cliff.
Thanks, and if I was much younger, I would be learning Chinese or Russian.
Most current Euroelites are very Russophobic, but many of their citizens disagree, although that’s dependent on their degree of propagandization. The main point is Russia doesn’t need Western Europe at all and certainly has no need to go to war with it except to defend itself. IMO, “Main Street Amerika” has an opportunity thanks to the chaos being provoked, but taking advantage will require some smart visionary and very energetic people nationally.
I fought in the Crimean War with the Pioneer Corps in 1854 and again in 1893 under Commander Major Patrick Forbes of The British Army against the indigenous peoples of Matabeleland crossing over both the Zambezi & Limpopo Rivers, nae picnic son.
Only last week I was recruited by the 3rd Brigade AZOV on their Social Network Site after hearing that they had suffered horrendous losses in Nadiia (Nadiya), Lugansk, near Novosvitlivka.
Well comrade, I recall we were on opposite sides in every one of those battles. Your last choice of ally might be your last choice ;) I will play a svirel for you at your next resting place.
To what lengths will the duopoly of fake party politics and their oligarchic sponsors go to stymie the change to win/win outcomes? Britain and the eurocrats provide the template of banning and cancelling any challengers. The rise of people's parties within this paradigm is made impossible, so where will this lead? I'd suggest breakdown and splits within elite circles as the lifeboats become fewer. Wealth confiscation is on the table so asset stripping won't be limited to some "foreign" agents.
Australia has an election shortly, and there are several "independent" parties that look to have been setup to divert votes, the most hilarious being "Trumpet of Patriots" backed by the odious Clive Palmer. He had to get Trump in somewhere, and include the word patriot but it looks like marketing central has been busy.
The Citizen's Party has done the most legwork over decades of being smeared as far right and worse, e.g. conspiracy nuts. There's an established track record of working with independents in getting banking reform (a major focus over the past seven years), opposition to the defence complex and it's smearing of China, creating a national bank (like what the Commonwealth Bank used to be) to mobilise national development projects and industry. Of course the financial oligarchy is totally opposed.
So here we are with two parties whose pathetic leaders are Chip Miller clones, "Thank you sir, may I have another"
The People's party yes and is this a vision or is there leadership out there working to gain support from the disaffected and disillusioned. This leadership must be resolute and expect bribery blackmail death threats at every turn but it is the only way ahead. Your role in education is commendable keep up the good work.
Organizing a People’s Party has been on my mind since 2000. The idea comes from the first People’s Party in the late 1800s that almost won the big prize.
Ultimately Trump's tariffs will reduce US imports (and not by domestic substitution) which in turn will reduce dollars overseas that today get returned to US financial services firms for investment in stocks, bonds, real estate, and other financial services. That will hurt Trump's buddies including the 13 oligarchs he appointed who are largely from financial services. The long knives will come out.
Mitt Romney, Bain Capital, was the first US industrialist/financier/politician I heard of who removed his US factory to China bolt by bolt, even having the American workers train the new Chinese crew on operating the machinery.
And America is almost clinically deranged about China.
The USA suffers from a "Yellow Peril" pathology evidenced in the US political class, corporate oligarchy, media, military, and large swaths of American society itself.
For all its America First chest-beating, the USA is pathetically obsessed and deeply insecure about China surpassing the self-styled Leader of the Free World economically or otherwise.
Hence, you routinely see comments from American regime, corporate, and military officials that the USA must "Win the 21st Century" and that it is in a existential struggle against China.
Meanwhile, China just goes about its way and takes care of its own business.
This situation would almost be amusing--if there weren't the danger of major conventional or nuclear war.
Remember the old truism: Trade Wars lead to Shooting Wars.
This all goes back to 1832 when Jardine & Matheson, post East India Company, formed a company to run opium (imports into China rising from 50 tonnes in 17th Century to a peak 6500 tonnes in the 19th Century). See, the Brits can be quite entrepreneurial!! Off of the proceeds they purchased & reclaimed half of the Hong Kong coast.
Well maybe the British didn't acquire HK legally but claimed temporary sovereignty over it with the help of cannon, gunboat diplomacy USA today.
I can't see today's financial class rolling up their sleeves and doing an honest days work, no siree Bob, we'll settle this on the Battlefield, eh what!
The Chinese academic Zhang Weiwei has written many books and essays on the topic, and held video discussions, many in English, over the last 15 years. This essay is similar to others he's written and was published in 2023, so it's rather new. There're other sources, but Zhang is very good, https://www.noemamag.com/china-rises-as-the-ideal-civilizational-state/
You have to have something to compare the government to, in order to know how well it's managing the people's business. The measure of the success of a government is fundamentally in the Constitution it creates, and how diligently it respects those principles.
China has created a very interesting system of governance and it's clearly laid out in their constitution. It's a democracy with unique Chinese characteristics.
You lost me when you characterized Musk as a globalist. Maybe I will go back after I calm down. I agree with you on China and have ranted about it since Nixon and Kissinger swung the damn door wide open and Clinton removed the door's hinges. Maybe you should describe the attributes of your "globalist." Perhaps you have already. If so, please provide me a URL and I will read it. Without belaboring the point, being a globalist in and of itself is in the nature of the modern word and has been when the "globe" consisted variously as this land mass or another and even space. Today, many youngsters know our "globe" that is planet Earth and recognize it if presented by a photo from outer space. Likewise, economies of scale, business, technology, religion and so on can be global (or local, intermediate and so on). So, what is your political definition of of a globalist and why is being one a "bad" thing? And can a globalist be a good thing?
I’ve never liked the term “globalist“. Megalomaniac or one afflicted with pleonexia or both combined are certainly attributes. Sociopathic/controlling, needing all arrangements to have Zero-sum outcomes where that person always wins—no win-winism whatsoever, which also means no humanism. Many an Ian Fleming villan fits the description. The official #1 policy goal of the Outlaw US Empire—Full Spectrum Dominance—is a “globalist” goal that was based on the Wolfowitz Doctrine. Brezenski fits the mold. Fukuyama is another. W Bush and Cheney most certainly. Obama, yes. Sullivan and Blinken, too. And many more. Netanyahu fits the mold, but his lust doesn’t appear to be global, although that might be a mistake. There’ve been many people who’ve said they’re against global government meaning the UN, but it’s okay if it’s the Outlaw US Empire running the show. Hitler was a Globalist. Soros. And what I call the ancien regime (borrowed from Arno Mayer) whose members are present within the Deep States of several key Western nations would also qualify. Several organizations have served as their public face over the decades, currently the Davos-based WEF, although not all who speak at their forums are “Globalists.”
Trump’s declared idol, William McKinley, was an American Imperialist who had a global vision based on Manifest Destiny, so he’d qualify as a “Globalist” in today’s terms. All “Globalists” share one trait—their lack of humanism. And most of them are serial prevaricators—it’s very hard to be a sociopath without lying.
G'day Karl, manifest destiny is a pentecostalist trope to allow the leaders ill gotten wealth to appear heavenly alongside the political power grab being deemed by God.
The term Globalist could also be China's aim but for the benefit of the globes population. Trotsky and Lenin both were internationalist though not globalists and railed against socialism in one country which was Stalin's downfall.
Nationalism leads to hubris of one over another followed by war that we know only benefits the few.
Earlier in the 20th Century prior to the wars the term Internationalist was formulated. Later after WW2 the term Isolationist was invented to attack those against the Outlaw US Empire’s aim of Primacy. Globalist was formed to go with Globalism as far as I can tell, and the definitions are not universal. China has offered many global initiatives aimed at serving humanity, not corporations or an ideology other than Humanism. It offers, not demands. IMO, the seeking of Harmony is a very attractive goal for human relations.
Centuries ago it was referred to as universalism but they all have one thing in common: centralized control by a small elite. Ever since the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia which solidified the concept of nation-state and which later became foundational to the UN Charter, the globalists have been trying to regain control. It's what Kissinger and Blair meant when they said we have to move beyond Westphalian principles.
I asked a simple question about Musk and you cut and pasted me a screed that I actually recall from another of your posts. Musk is doing just fine. I think at core you're an anarchist. It's a fine theory, but won't work in practice, Nitzche and Chomsky notwithstanding. I won't throw that baby out with the bathwater though.
Musk is a fake as well as an opportunist front man for the oligarch class in the USA. Maybe he is a globalist, maybe not, but he uses his global satellite system to provide support for the nazi army in Ukraine and perhaps elsewhere.
Therefor he is a murderous scoundrel and I trust that depiction is more in line with your thinking.
I don't think Trump's sponsors actually want to zero out the trade balance. I think they want continue to get things for free* from the rest of the world. [* technically in exchange for freshly printed future claims on dollar assets]. The problem they recognize is the trade deficit has led to declining US power, and made Asia the economic center of the world. Thus eroding US and G7 dominance of global financial services. When US is out of the loop in the financial services, the rest of the world has no reason to continue giving it free stuff.
So in that light, the move to put in gonzo trade barriers is a transparent bluff and hostage taking attempt. They want to get concessions from other countries, but those concessions are NOT to have, e.g. Taiwan or Vietnam offer "0% for 0%" which is simply free trade. Trump admin already refused this, belying their initial statements of the policy goal. They want, in reality, to put in "deals" which block as many countries as they can from using non-US or at least non-G7 financial services. This is such an important thing, they're willing to gamble the US economy on it. Trump admin apparently expects that intervention by the FED and G7 central banks are sufficient to win the standoff and extract the concessions.
China called their bluff. Game on.
Citibank estimated that the latest 100% tariffs on China will result in a 0.5% reduction of Chinese GDP growth: from +4.7% to +4.2%. US will get hurt more than that. Trump will have to either escalate again, or really focus on harming other Asian countries.
That was a good report on China's tactical response to USA financial blackmail. Come out leading and setting the pace for others that might think begging is a strategy. All the more important coming from a China hating propaganda rag like the asia times. I guess the editor will be eaten by shark or fall out of a tenth story window soon.
I am in the camp that the Trump tariffs is less about re-industrialization of America but more about the destruction of China as the clear superior economic power. Trump's rhetoric appealing to the auto industry is empty rhetoric when one considers that the current decline of the US auto industry is terminal unless they enter into deep alliances with Chinese auto-makers. Ex: Apples I-phone has retained its dominant market share because of its alliance with its Chinese manufacturer with its 5th generation technology and access to a workforce of numerous, highly-qualified engineers. It is a win-win relationship but Trump and his band of China hawks have no interest in mutually beneficial relationships. They are unabashed American "exceptionalists" who think America has a divine right to be the #1 economic power in the world. As someone from the Caribbean it is quite evident Trump is willing to destroy our economies, which have always been subservient to the Uncle Sam, just to destroy China.
Your camp is rather large.
Good to know that not everyone is fooled.
or their is a contrarian viewpoint that isn't being considered here - one - it is all kabuki and the actions are another way to fleece the little guy, more then it being about china...
Well, it’s always about fleecing the little guy. Class War is incorporated into all Duopoly policy.
true too.. when will be ever learn??
I gather Trump has been informed that by shoving tariffs up everyone's nose he can restore usa to some position of strength. The equation that led him to this ridiculous act ignores the fundamental component of success - building the replacement industries and all the precursor training elements that can operate within these future industries PLUS finding wealthy oligarchs in the usa that are confident about spending huge dollars to establish those industrial production facilities in the usa rather than say Vietnam etc. It is important to recall that these potential oligarch investors are mostly globally minded people, not Henry Ford clones or Hewlett and Packard types of the mid last century.
The oligarchy thinks globally and acts selfishly and f##k the locals.
Methinks the rogues pissing in Trumps ears drape themselves in stars and stripes just for theatre and effect but they are fully owned weasel worders for the elite. And that is painfully obvious! Once the fallout settles in the coming weeks and months the cashed up gang will scoop the cherries off the top and move on.
The consciousness of the oligarchy is founded on the principle that if you are a billionaire and lose half, then you are a billionaire and still on top of the surviving pile and own the Presidents advisers and the FED even more.
As one of my source articles showed, there were many studies done analyzing Trump 1.0’s tariffs that should have been consulted but clearly weren’t. He had it in his mind during the campaign that he’d do this. I recalled Hudson’s 2019 paper halfway through that I linked in a comment elsewhere, https://michael-hudson.com/2019/02/trumps-brilliant-strategy-to-dismember-u-s-dollar-hegemony/
It makes sense for Trump to use America's economic leverage on his country's behalf. Isn't that what you'd want a leader to do?
The reason why tariffs are big leverage is because the USA is the biggest market in the world for foreign goods, $3.17 trillion in 2023. That's a tsunami of imports. Big money is involved. Trump's rationale is purely transactional. If you want to import goods into America, prepare to make less by doing so. It may still be profitable though. But if under tariffs you don't feel it's worth your trouble, then find another market to play in. Just don't be surprised if some enterprising startup in a developing country fills your place.
By putting heavy tariffs on imported goods, Trump reduces America's brutal trade deficit, adds a lot of revenue to the federal government which can be spent without adding to inflation, and sets the stage for a rejuvenated American industrial sector by protecting them from foreign competition.
I don't know if those factors will be enough to turn things around, but they are all logical things to do if you have that goal.
Leaders may chose to do tariffs as a means of balancing local market prices in favour of locally made product. But where locally made product is at relatively high cost then that may not be the sole strategy. People on small incomes will spend all their income on a variety of essentials like food, shelter, kids, transport, health and so on. China and India and Vietnam make stuff that will be purchased after those essentials are satisfied. Over the past decades the usa has pegged wages to minimise production costs but those costs were then raised by the FIRE sector NOT the wages sector. Then the profitability of many productive industries were plundered by venture capitalism seeking only short term gain and having little to no regard for long term production viability.
So I suggest the leader needs to establish a clear set of priorities and a hierarchy of strategic actions well before grabbing the tariff bludgeon. Those strategies and actions might include reforming the national taxation system to benefit production sector and attenuate the plunder sector. Make industry a viable sector for long term savings investment so today's jobs foster tomorrows jobs.
On the point of who is the biggest market in the world for foreign goods, I understand that Asia is huge as is Europe. China sees only 5% of exports TO THE USA. It is not the only nation that has a diversified trade and financial settlement strategy. It is important to consider which nations are topmost performers in national self sufficiency as well and the USA is not. Sure it exports stuff, but it is far from broadly self sufficient afaik.
North America is accelerating its segue to irrelevance in world trade and that is an excellent thing. The current burst of bullying make yield some billions of $us for the home team but don't bet your nuts on it being productive in the long run. Time will outpace the usa faster than you can imagine.
Today China announced the digital yuan:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX_Id7J2Ee0
The usa may have been the biggest market for a while (in $value or equivalent currency terms) but its behavior has driven innovation and money settlement platforms have been given a priority imperative to move out of its orbit asap. And that is the consequence of Trump tariffs and his repulsive circle of capitalist vultures and Rapture freaks.
Much of what you say is true, nevertheless the fact remains that if done right, the US could create a manufacturing revival. It has the necessary ingredients. Whether it has the political will to do it is another matter.
I think Trump has the intention as do some who support him but he appears to have been hijacked by the Rapture gang that want to incite an armageddon of purely imaginary proportion regardless of the needs of the people and the nations future. I say 'imaginary' as there is no armageddon - there is human induced genocide and endless war masquerading as yet another Crusade into the Holy Land under the pretext of relieving the encircled Hill Station (of their making) one more time.
I recall Bannon walking out of the T1 presidency declaring it failed and dead early in the piece. It is mighty close to a recurrence of that episode today in T2.
The tragedy of shattered humanity that pours down the steps of the White House year after year since 1945 threatens to drown the homeland people who stand powerless to change it. THIS is the failure of political capacity NOT will. It is the political capacity of the masses that has been confiscated by the shocking penetration of capitalism into the soul of the political class. The usa needs to pick another enlightened and compassionate capitalism before it drowns in despair. It will take a revolution - an occupation - almost an exorcism of oligarchy to manifest the will.
I honestly don't know what will happen to the Trump administration or what it will do, other than the moves we've seen so far. That's because he is a genuinely enigmatic person. It's also due to Trump's habit of saying one thing and doing something else. I never judge the likelihood of something happening just because Trump has announced it. I wait to see what he does instead.
Take Iran for instance. Trump threatened Iran directly, no doubt to satisfy his Jewish backers. But instead of attacking Iran, he has entered direct negotiations with them to work out a deal on their nuclear program. Trump threatens war, but may deliver peace instead. Enigmatic, no?
Don't count on what he says, watch what he does.
Trump is unlikely to do all the things Steve Bannon would like, but that's probably a good thing. It doesn't mean that the Trump administration is failing.
If you truly wish for a new kind of capitalism in America, as do so many of us, it will not come from the traditional Democrats or Republicans. They are too entrenched in their old ways. Real change can only come through the hands of an outsider. And Trump is an outsider, 100%. He owes neither the Republicans nor Democrats anything. Plus it's (probably) his last term. He can do anything he wants, and as unpredictable as he is that may bring surprises. Good or bad, we will have to wait and see.
If you hope for a new kind of America, radical changes must take place. Of that there can be no doubt. And no one but Trump is offering change. Every other political force in America is entrenched in the rapidly deteriorating status quo.
I'm definitely not saying Trump is the new Messiah. He and his policies may turn out to be a disaster. His enigmatic nature again. In any case, altering America's path won't be easy and it will likely be accompanied by some chaos. Nevertheless, if you're praying for a new kind of USA to emerge, Trump is your best bet for it.
There is no reason why Trump couldn't be trying to do both things: re-industrialize America and contain China. In fact, he's almost certainly trying to do both, or at least elements in his administration are.
Mr. Trump should stick to America's business. Focus on its strengths and correct its weaknesses. Leverage the USA's huge R&D with a rejuvenated industry. Make it easy for businesses to start up. But if the US tries to stay in the race by tying an anchor to China, they are just going to fall farther and farther behind.
It's not as if the USA is starting from scratch or has fallen far. It's the number 2 exporting nation in the world. It's balance of payments though is hideous, because they import so much into their hyper-commoditized market. Cut back on imports however, through tariffs or just through patriotism, and America's balance of payments would come more in line.
On the other hand, your dream of America and China simply working together looks even better.
Karl, a highly informative post with its substantial extracts from the Chinese analyses.
There is an issue, under the radar generally, which I believe will be the dagger in the heart of the current vampire occupying the WH. Those of us in the field have been watching closely the controls that China has been putting on exports of critical materials ranging from the well-known (tungsten) to the obscure (yttrium compounds). The carefully graded controls have now, I believe, crossed the threshold to the point of neutering the US military for perhaps several years. This link to the most definitive discussion I’ve encountered yet on the lethality of these curbs — well worth your time:
https://cleantechnica.com/2025/04/05/china-just-turned-off-u-s-supplies-of-minerals-critical-for-defense-cleantech/
Thanks! I’ve known about the rare earth/metals embargo that was put in place. Larry Johnson wrote an article on it last month that was very good.
“What China did wasn’t a ban, at least not in name. They called it export licensing. Sounds like something a trade lawyer might actually be excited about. But make no mistake: this was a surgical strike. They didn’t need to say no. They just needed to say “maybe later” to the right set of paperwork. These licenses give Beijing control over not just where these materials go, but how fast they go, in what quantity, and to which politically convenient customers.”
[to be read while listening to Chopin’s Funeral March]
Thanks for the link. 👍🏽
"China calmly walked over to the supply chain and yanked out a handful of critical bolts. The bolts are made of dysprosium, terbium, tungsten, indium and yttrium—the elements that don’t make headlines but without which your electric car doesn’t run, your fighter jet doesn’t fly, and your solar panels go from clean energy marvels to overpriced roofing tiles."
The Chinese approach shows the curiosity, drive, and search for answers that characterized engineering in America until financialization took over the country under Clinton.
I wonder through all of this if the EU will grow a pair and step away from Amerika and go back to Russia for its energy needs or do they die a death because they don't wish upset Amerika?
Then at the same time we on Main Street Amerika are thrown under the wheels of the bus just before it goes off the cliff.
Thanks, and if I was much younger, I would be learning Chinese or Russian.
Most current Euroelites are very Russophobic, but many of their citizens disagree, although that’s dependent on their degree of propagandization. The main point is Russia doesn’t need Western Europe at all and certainly has no need to go to war with it except to defend itself. IMO, “Main Street Amerika” has an opportunity thanks to the chaos being provoked, but taking advantage will require some smart visionary and very energetic people nationally.
It's never too late comrade.
I fought in the Crimean War with the Pioneer Corps in 1854 and again in 1893 under Commander Major Patrick Forbes of The British Army against the indigenous peoples of Matabeleland crossing over both the Zambezi & Limpopo Rivers, nae picnic son.
Only last week I was recruited by the 3rd Brigade AZOV on their Social Network Site after hearing that they had suffered horrendous losses in Nadiia (Nadiya), Lugansk, near Novosvitlivka.
Well comrade, I recall we were on opposite sides in every one of those battles. Your last choice of ally might be your last choice ;) I will play a svirel for you at your next resting place.
To what lengths will the duopoly of fake party politics and their oligarchic sponsors go to stymie the change to win/win outcomes? Britain and the eurocrats provide the template of banning and cancelling any challengers. The rise of people's parties within this paradigm is made impossible, so where will this lead? I'd suggest breakdown and splits within elite circles as the lifeboats become fewer. Wealth confiscation is on the table so asset stripping won't be limited to some "foreign" agents.
Australia has an election shortly, and there are several "independent" parties that look to have been setup to divert votes, the most hilarious being "Trumpet of Patriots" backed by the odious Clive Palmer. He had to get Trump in somewhere, and include the word patriot but it looks like marketing central has been busy.
The Citizen's Party has done the most legwork over decades of being smeared as far right and worse, e.g. conspiracy nuts. There's an established track record of working with independents in getting banking reform (a major focus over the past seven years), opposition to the defence complex and it's smearing of China, creating a national bank (like what the Commonwealth Bank used to be) to mobilise national development projects and industry. Of course the financial oligarchy is totally opposed.
So here we are with two parties whose pathetic leaders are Chip Miller clones, "Thank you sir, may I have another"
For Clive it should be Strumpet of Patriots. The S can be substituted with a swastika in bold.
The People's party yes and is this a vision or is there leadership out there working to gain support from the disaffected and disillusioned. This leadership must be resolute and expect bribery blackmail death threats at every turn but it is the only way ahead. Your role in education is commendable keep up the good work.
Organizing a People’s Party has been on my mind since 2000. The idea comes from the first People’s Party in the late 1800s that almost won the big prize.
Trump acting like a Mob boss engaged in a shakedown of neighborhood store owners seeking protection from criminal gangs which he controls.
Ultimately Trump's tariffs will reduce US imports (and not by domestic substitution) which in turn will reduce dollars overseas that today get returned to US financial services firms for investment in stocks, bonds, real estate, and other financial services. That will hurt Trump's buddies including the 13 oligarchs he appointed who are largely from financial services. The long knives will come out.
"Pride never comes down from where it rises, but it always falls from where it rose."
Francisco de Quevedo (Spanish writer, 1580-1645)
Mitt Romney, Bain Capital, was the first US industrialist/financier/politician I heard of who removed his US factory to China bolt by bolt, even having the American workers train the new Chinese crew on operating the machinery.
Shouldn't Trumplethinskin call in Mitt the Shit?
Trump and Biden are just a symptom of America.
And America is almost clinically deranged about China.
The USA suffers from a "Yellow Peril" pathology evidenced in the US political class, corporate oligarchy, media, military, and large swaths of American society itself.
For all its America First chest-beating, the USA is pathetically obsessed and deeply insecure about China surpassing the self-styled Leader of the Free World economically or otherwise.
Hence, you routinely see comments from American regime, corporate, and military officials that the USA must "Win the 21st Century" and that it is in a existential struggle against China.
Meanwhile, China just goes about its way and takes care of its own business.
This situation would almost be amusing--if there weren't the danger of major conventional or nuclear war.
Remember the old truism: Trade Wars lead to Shooting Wars.
This all goes back to 1832 when Jardine & Matheson, post East India Company, formed a company to run opium (imports into China rising from 50 tonnes in 17th Century to a peak 6500 tonnes in the 19th Century). See, the Brits can be quite entrepreneurial!! Off of the proceeds they purchased & reclaimed half of the Hong Kong coast.
Well maybe the British didn't acquire HK legally but claimed temporary sovereignty over it with the help of cannon, gunboat diplomacy USA today.
I can't see today's financial class rolling up their sleeves and doing an honest days work, no siree Bob, we'll settle this on the Battlefield, eh what!
thank you!
Thanks. Could you please describe, or point to a reference for, China's governance? I'm sure Wikipedia will not provide and honest account.
The Chinese academic Zhang Weiwei has written many books and essays on the topic, and held video discussions, many in English, over the last 15 years. This essay is similar to others he's written and was published in 2023, so it's rather new. There're other sources, but Zhang is very good, https://www.noemamag.com/china-rises-as-the-ideal-civilizational-state/
I strongly recommend going to the source. China’s constitution is available online.
Thanks, one good idea. And, I would gain little sense for American governance from oyr Constitution
You have to have something to compare the government to, in order to know how well it's managing the people's business. The measure of the success of a government is fundamentally in the Constitution it creates, and how diligently it respects those principles.
China has created a very interesting system of governance and it's clearly laid out in their constitution. It's a democracy with unique Chinese characteristics.
The final clause in your opening sentence is exactly my point. I need both, in order to understand.
Do you have a link to the Constitution? Thanks.
Very Nice Headline ! Off to read.
You lost me when you characterized Musk as a globalist. Maybe I will go back after I calm down. I agree with you on China and have ranted about it since Nixon and Kissinger swung the damn door wide open and Clinton removed the door's hinges. Maybe you should describe the attributes of your "globalist." Perhaps you have already. If so, please provide me a URL and I will read it. Without belaboring the point, being a globalist in and of itself is in the nature of the modern word and has been when the "globe" consisted variously as this land mass or another and even space. Today, many youngsters know our "globe" that is planet Earth and recognize it if presented by a photo from outer space. Likewise, economies of scale, business, technology, religion and so on can be global (or local, intermediate and so on). So, what is your political definition of of a globalist and why is being one a "bad" thing? And can a globalist be a good thing?
I’ve never liked the term “globalist“. Megalomaniac or one afflicted with pleonexia or both combined are certainly attributes. Sociopathic/controlling, needing all arrangements to have Zero-sum outcomes where that person always wins—no win-winism whatsoever, which also means no humanism. Many an Ian Fleming villan fits the description. The official #1 policy goal of the Outlaw US Empire—Full Spectrum Dominance—is a “globalist” goal that was based on the Wolfowitz Doctrine. Brezenski fits the mold. Fukuyama is another. W Bush and Cheney most certainly. Obama, yes. Sullivan and Blinken, too. And many more. Netanyahu fits the mold, but his lust doesn’t appear to be global, although that might be a mistake. There’ve been many people who’ve said they’re against global government meaning the UN, but it’s okay if it’s the Outlaw US Empire running the show. Hitler was a Globalist. Soros. And what I call the ancien regime (borrowed from Arno Mayer) whose members are present within the Deep States of several key Western nations would also qualify. Several organizations have served as their public face over the decades, currently the Davos-based WEF, although not all who speak at their forums are “Globalists.”
Trump’s declared idol, William McKinley, was an American Imperialist who had a global vision based on Manifest Destiny, so he’d qualify as a “Globalist” in today’s terms. All “Globalists” share one trait—their lack of humanism. And most of them are serial prevaricators—it’s very hard to be a sociopath without lying.
G'day Karl, manifest destiny is a pentecostalist trope to allow the leaders ill gotten wealth to appear heavenly alongside the political power grab being deemed by God.
The term Globalist could also be China's aim but for the benefit of the globes population. Trotsky and Lenin both were internationalist though not globalists and railed against socialism in one country which was Stalin's downfall.
Nationalism leads to hubris of one over another followed by war that we know only benefits the few.
Earlier in the 20th Century prior to the wars the term Internationalist was formulated. Later after WW2 the term Isolationist was invented to attack those against the Outlaw US Empire’s aim of Primacy. Globalist was formed to go with Globalism as far as I can tell, and the definitions are not universal. China has offered many global initiatives aimed at serving humanity, not corporations or an ideology other than Humanism. It offers, not demands. IMO, the seeking of Harmony is a very attractive goal for human relations.
Centuries ago it was referred to as universalism but they all have one thing in common: centralized control by a small elite. Ever since the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia which solidified the concept of nation-state and which later became foundational to the UN Charter, the globalists have been trying to regain control. It's what Kissinger and Blair meant when they said we have to move beyond Westphalian principles.
I asked a simple question about Musk and you cut and pasted me a screed that I actually recall from another of your posts. Musk is doing just fine. I think at core you're an anarchist. It's a fine theory, but won't work in practice, Nitzche and Chomsky notwithstanding. I won't throw that baby out with the bathwater though.
I did not cut/paste from another article. I wrote that originally directly to you. I’m certainly no anarchist. That would be Richard Steven Hack.
Musk is a fake as well as an opportunist front man for the oligarch class in the USA. Maybe he is a globalist, maybe not, but he uses his global satellite system to provide support for the nazi army in Ukraine and perhaps elsewhere.
Therefor he is a murderous scoundrel and I trust that depiction is more in line with your thinking.
Smoke Musk not hopium.
I don't think Trump's sponsors actually want to zero out the trade balance. I think they want continue to get things for free* from the rest of the world. [* technically in exchange for freshly printed future claims on dollar assets]. The problem they recognize is the trade deficit has led to declining US power, and made Asia the economic center of the world. Thus eroding US and G7 dominance of global financial services. When US is out of the loop in the financial services, the rest of the world has no reason to continue giving it free stuff.
So in that light, the move to put in gonzo trade barriers is a transparent bluff and hostage taking attempt. They want to get concessions from other countries, but those concessions are NOT to have, e.g. Taiwan or Vietnam offer "0% for 0%" which is simply free trade. Trump admin already refused this, belying their initial statements of the policy goal. They want, in reality, to put in "deals" which block as many countries as they can from using non-US or at least non-G7 financial services. This is such an important thing, they're willing to gamble the US economy on it. Trump admin apparently expects that intervention by the FED and G7 central banks are sufficient to win the standoff and extract the concessions.
China called their bluff. Game on.
Citibank estimated that the latest 100% tariffs on China will result in a 0.5% reduction of Chinese GDP growth: from +4.7% to +4.2%. US will get hurt more than that. Trump will have to either escalate again, or really focus on harming other Asian countries.
This was provided by Gym rat, https://asiatimes.com/2025/04/chinas-tariffs-as-a-mike-tyson-knockout-punch-for-america/#
That was a good report on China's tactical response to USA financial blackmail. Come out leading and setting the pace for others that might think begging is a strategy. All the more important coming from a China hating propaganda rag like the asia times. I guess the editor will be eaten by shark or fall out of a tenth story window soon.
Trump creates yet another tar baby to get his fingers stuck. Too good.
C'mon usa the precipice aint far away.