Trump Says “Jump,” Canada Asks “How High?”

Published at 17:17 on 29 November 2024

Really Now, You Didn’t See This Coming?

I don’t think Trudeau did. Pathetic, utterly pathetic. I mean, come on now: the polls showed this to be a close election for like months until Biden’s campaign self-immolated in the wake of the debate. At that point, the odds clearly favoured Trump. Biden dropping out and Harris jumping in evened those odds back up, but still: for months it was either a draw or distinctly in Trump’s favour.

As such, it was obvious that Trump could well win. And if he won, it was likely that he would do, well, basically what he is doing right now. Trudeau should have met months ago (in a low key fashion, possibly online) with the provincial premiers to start sketching out a response for this very easily foreseeable scenario.

Instead, the whole rushed, hair-on-fire nature of this response points out to it being a complete surprise to Canada’s ruling elite. These people should not be taken seriously when they profess to be experts at leadership.

Go ahead Punk, Make My Day

OK, it would be highly irresponsible for the PM to say that, but if he has even half a brain (dubious, see above), he should at least be thinking it. A famous economist (I forget who) once quipped that the essence of a trade war was both parties competing to do themselves damage. Which is not to say 25% tariffs on just about everything wouldn’t hurt Canada. Of course they would. The rub is, they would also hurt the USA. A lot.

So, for making this threat, Trump is either bluffing, an idiot, or both. It has to be seen as more of a negotiating ploy than a serious proposal. If it is a serious proposal, the economic harm it does to the USA is likely to be part of the backlash that erupts against Trump.

The logical way to use this fact is, again, not via public statement. Rather, use it implicitly at the negotiating table. “Such tariffs might hurt President Trump domestically by causing economic problems inside the USA. Surely his administration wants to come to an amicable resolution with Canada and avoid that risk?”

Both the Liberals and the Conservatives Suck

None of them saw this coming. The Liberals, because (like in most countries) the left in Canada has ceded thinking about threats from abroad to the right. The Conservatives, because Trump is a threat from the right and it is ideologically inconvenient for them to think their own side of the spectrum could represent a threat.

Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew is one of the few who seem to have been thinking about the implications of a second Trump term well in advance. Unfortunately, his office is at the provincial level, not the national one. Now, a given Canadian province has a louder voice than a given US state (for the simple reason that there are fewer provinces), but still, it is a disadvantage that Kinew is not a federal politician.

Hopefully, his foresight (in the midst of a crowd that lacked same) will by default give him greater influence. We shall see.

It Wasn’t the Economy, Stupid

Published at 09:17 on 19 November 2024

One reason conspicuously absent from my postmortem is the economy. This is not an oversight. I do not believe the economy to be a significant root cause.

Oh, it’s a proximate cause, all right. Many voters cited the economy as a reason for voting for fascism.

However, if you look at the economic statistics, it becomes clear that the economy really isn’t all that bad by US historical or world comparative standards. Sure, it could be better for the working class. It always could be. But abnormally bad? Let’s-give-fascism-a-whirl bad? No, not by global historical standards.

The USA is actually doing better economically post-COVID than pretty much all of the rest of the developed world, yet it stands alone as undergoing a transition to fascism in that time.

Compare the USA with other countries that have historically gone fascist, and the comparison is even more stark. There is none of the extreme economic distress that preceded fascism in Germany, Italy, Spain, or Chile. An inflation rate that peaks at 8% per year? Try inflation in the thousands or millions or billions percent per month. Unemployment of 4%? That’s nothing. Try an unemployment rate of 25% or worse.

To reiterate, things could certainly be better in the USA. It’s a terribly inegalitarian society. Yet Trump was saying basically nothing about economic inequality. It was all about fear-mongering and grievance-stoking.

The USA stands alone, in a tiny circle of exceptional shame containing but a single nation, in going fascist after experiencing such minor economic issues.

The USA also stands in a slightly larger but still very small circle of shame in having gone fascist via popular vote: Hitler never got more than about ⅓ the vote in Germany and was appointed to the post of chancellor by the president, Mussolini likewise was appointed and not elected, Franco staged a coup and the Spaniards then fought a civil war to try and prevent their transition, Pinochet also got in via a coup, etc. Russia and Hungary have, in more recent times, gone fascist via popular vote, but again, their economies were significantly worse off.

The economy simply can’t explain it. What can help explain it is a morally compromised political culture, one compromised enough to be so accepting of fascist values that fascism seemed like a reasonable answer to what are, by any reasonable comparative standards, some relatively minor issues.

Which is why my postmortem mentions moral decline and not the economy.

Election Portmortem

Published at 17:43 on 18 November 2024

Everyone has one. Most everyone has already offered one. The vast majority of the postmortems very conveniently excuse the postmortem author’s pet views and place the blame elsewhere. Also very conveniently, the blame tends to be placed on some camp the author has never liked very much in the first place. Mind you, this doesn’t automatically invalidate the blame being laid, but it does put it into context.

It is clear to me that there is more than one underlying cause. Following are what I see as the causes, in rough order from most to least significant.

A Morally Compromised Political Culture

This is the elephant in the room that not many people are writing about. Of those who have mentioned it, most are on the right of the anti-Trump movement, and those inevitably don’t get very far into it. It tends to be limited to short harrumphs such as “we are an unserious people,” or “we have met the enemy and he is us.”

Ideological convenience explains it all. Moral decline (and the foolishness of the many) have long been pet issues for conservatives. So they look for it, and they find it.

They find it because, of course, it exists. Despite all the criticisms that can be levelled at the Democrats and other actors in this historical episode, the fact remains that many people, across the political spectrum, were saying exactly what kind of person Trump was and what the likely consequences of a second Trump term would be. Some of these warnings were coming from those who had served in the first Trump administration and were based on personal experiences of interacting with Trump. The warnings grew to be very explicit, correctly identifying Trump as a fascist.

In response to all these warnings, many voters decided that fascism was just fine, or that all of this talk about of fascism stuff was simply overblown. The latter belief was generally driven by American exceptionalism (“don’t be silly, that can’t happen here”), which just goes to show how exceptionalist rhetoric itself plays a key role in the moral decline.

With the exception of the far left, American exceptionalism is a popular belief across the political spectrum in the USA. It is particularly popular amongst conservatives. And here we have the reason why, while there have been conservative voices pointing out this cause, they tend to touch on it only briefly. More detailed examination is likely to reach conclusions ideologically inconvenient for conservatives.

Not only is American exceptionalism largely a myth, a good part of the moral decline comes from neoconservatives, and it turns out that never-Trump conservatives are invariably neocons. Because of course they are: of all the flavours of conservative, it is the neocon for whom opposing Trump is the most ideologically convenient, since Trump’s isolationism directly conflicts with their belief in the necessity of an American empire. Yet it is their own advocacy of empire that led them to draw up the Project for the New American Century, to advocate that the George W. Bush administration lie its way into wars of choice, and to defend the use of war crimes such as torture and extrajudicial executions in that war.

Those who most tend to point out moral decline are, in other words, themselves the chief architects of that decline. Worse yet, it is the fallout from the wars of choice they advocated which helped make the isolationist aspects of Trump’s platform appealing to so many. (I know, I have talked to Trumpers, and they very commonly bring up isolationism and opposition to neoconservatism as some of the things they most like about their candidate.)

Social Media

Social media balkanizes people into echo chambers where information can circulate without any regard to its factual accuracy. It thus corrodes the political fabric by helping to destroy respect for (and even awareness of) facts. Facts allow at least some sort of shared social project to emerge. If, for example, budget deficits are increasing, you are going to get people talking about deficits, talking about whether or not they are too high, and talking about strategies for paying them down.

Absent fact-driven debate, there is nothing but warring camps, who will not tend to even agree on what needs to be talked about, much less what needs to be done. Debate becomes meaningless, democracy becomes meaningless, all that matters is for one camp to get enough power that it can force its will on everyone else.

Social media therefore aids and abets the growth of right-wing extremism. And it turns out that this is a testable proposition. One country, France, got social media well before (as in, decades before) the rest of the world did. And in France, right-wing extremism became a major political force well before it did in any other first-world democracy.

It gets all the worse when one of the largest social media networks is owned by a fascist who uses it to promote fascist beliefs.

Democratic Party Incompetence

Just look at the basics of the current situation. We had a clown car of at best minimally-suitable candidates in 2020. Eventually an elderly man with delusions of a past era of consensus and unity still existing came to the top of the heap, and by some miracle managed to prevail in the general election. The administration of the resulting presidency operated in large part under that delusion, refusing to acknowledge the reality of ascendent fascism and its historical mission in dealing a death blow to that fascism. As such, the crimes of the fascists were insufficiently prosecuted, and the fascists politically survived.

All the while this was going on, the elderly man grew increasingly elderly and began to exhibit signs of senility. The response of the Democratic Party was to gaslight the nation about the senility, close a circle around the president, and run him for reelection, as if nothing untoward was going on. It all collapsed spectacularly with the worst performance in the history of televised debates, and the party was forced to patch together a last-minute alternate strategy. Which, not entirely surprisingly, proved inadequate to the task.

I have said it before and I will say it again: the Democratic Party is one of the world’s most incompetent major political parties.

Sometimes the incompetence gets bad enough that I doubt it is purely coincidence. And indeed, it is probably not a coincidence. Having the more left of two major parties be incompetent is valuable to the bourgeoisie, as it means advocates of left policies will lose fights that they really ought to have won. And given that egalitarianism is the prime motivating force of left-wing politics, this helps preserve the wealth and power of the bourgeoisie. The USA has a largely privatized political funding system, and an ineffectual left party is likely to be better at selling itself to well-heeled potential donors than an effectual one.

Activist Left Incompetence

Of course, this is the camp I identify with the most, and it is politically convenient for me to rank it as the least significant factor. But I honestly believe it is, for the simple reason that the activist left is not very large in the USA. Heck, the left in general is not very significant in the USA, which stands alone as the only major democracy in the world without an electorally viable social-democratic party.

But still, the activist left has a problem. Its rhetoric has degenerated to the rhetoric of the academic left, mostly geared to pursuit of in-group status, and increasingly irrelevant to those not already existing within its inward-looking circles. I have written about this before.

It is possible to evaluate this economically, in much the way as I did for Democrats above. As with an incompetent Democratic Party, an incompetent activist left is valuable to the bourgeoisie. Left activists exist in capitalism and as such are also motivated by economic self-interest. Perhaps the most lucrative career available to a leftist who wants to make a career out of their leftism is to become a tenured professor at a major university. Salaries and benefits are generous, and the principle of academic freedom valued by liberal society means that one’s unconventional views will be tolerated, even respected.

The academic left has been a thing since approximately the Seventies (it was a natural destination for a subset of the student left of the Sixties). It has been producing volumes of literary output of dubious value, largely inscrutable to outsiders, ever since. It is only relatively recently, however, that its values have become so dominant in the activist left generally. I suspect social media to have played a role in this.

What It Was Not

Right now, the debate largely seems to be within the Democratic Party itself, as to whether the centrists or the progressives were at fault. A pox on both their houses. It is my contention that a competent candidate from either camp could have prevailed if backed by a competent party, and in a political culture that was not seriously morally compromised. Either a centrist or a progressive would have had pet items in their platforms to tiptoe around (they would be different pet items, of course), but a competent candidate would be able to do that, particularly if backed by a competent party apparatus.

One thing in particular it was not, and that is a refusal to go full Trumper against identity politics. The latter has long been part of the Left (it goes back at least as far as Engels writing about the importance of ethnic self-determination for the Poles in his 1892 preface for the Communist Manifesto). Suppose the Democrats successfully managed to become as anti-trans as the Republicans, then what? Well, the Republicans were the genuine article, and could campaign against the Democrats as a cheap knockoff of it. Plus they would pick some other identity politics thing and go big against it. There would always be something to drag out.

Again, a competent campaign could have retaliated in kind. But it should at this stage be abundantly clear that we don’t have a competent Democratic Party.

What we need to do is to address the real causes, and given how these lie at the very roots of our political society, this is not going to be either easy or simple. It is certainly not going to be accomplished by having the weaker of the two parties of a dying political order settle a soon-to-be-irrelevant intraparty spat about which of their two major factions is most at fault.

Israel More Likely to Have Interfered than Russia

Published at 22:59 on 14 November 2024

On the matter of foreign interference to elect Trump, I would suspect Israel more than Russia.

It is known that the Trump campaign communicated with the Netanyahu regime multiple times this year, including twice in October alone. By contrast, I am not aware of the Trump campaign having any meetings with Russian officials this campaign cycle.

Netanyahu is not a popular leader, war serves Netanyahu’s self-interest by helping to distract from his domestic problems, and Trump wasn’t quiet about giving Netanyahu free rein to brutalize his enemies. Moreover, both Trump and Netanyahu have a track record as one of their respective nations most corrupt public figures.

Mind you, I am not saying that Israel did interfere, only that Israel might have interfered, and that it is more likely that Israel interfered than it is that Russia did.

George W. Bush, Cryptofascist

Published at 06:02 on 12 November 2024

One of the little-known footnotes of America’s transition to fascism is that former president George W. Bush promptly congratulated Trump on his recent victory. He did so after remaining absolutely dead-silent on the Trump 2024 campaign, all the while many other former Republicans (most of who had already quit the party in disgust over Trumpism) denounced Trump and begged Americans not to vote for him.

This is, I believe, highly significant, as it was the actions of the George W. Bush presidency that convinced me of the fundamentally fascist nature of the Republicans at the time. The George W. Bush Administration was when I started routinely using the f-word to refer to Republicans and Republican administrations. It had by then become obvious: the bald-faced lying to get into the Iraq war, the attitude that truth is irrelevant and what matters is myth construction, the glorification of militarism (witness Bush’s flight suit “mission accomplished” stunt), the willingness to break laws (they literally went so far as to make torture an official policy).

The fundamentally fascist nature of the whole enterprise was clearly evident. When it was all over, after the dust settled and a new administration was in power, what happened? What was done to hold the architects of the fascism accountable? Nothing. Nobody served so much as a single night in jail. Of course not. The Democrats are, and long have been, a party of institutionalized weakness. In this, there was a lesson: fascism works, and it is a viable political tactic in the USA.

I knew then that the USA was in serious trouble, and that it was only a matter of time, unless some sort of revolutionary movement could prompt change from below (most likely as a result of giving the ruling class a good scare and frightening them into reforming). But the revolution never came, so here were are.

They’re Doing It Again

Published at 07:33 on 11 November 2024

Establishment liberals are doing it again.

Remember Ruth Bader Ginsberg, how she selfishly clung to her Supreme Court seat as she aged, despite not only a cancer diagnosis but a pancreatic cancer diagnosis, only to die on Trump’s watch and get replaced by a Trump fascist?

Well, it’s happening again. The Democrats control the Senate, Justice Sonia Sotomayor is aging, and she’s clinging to her seat despite the Democrats having a Senate majority and thus the ability to replace her, should she resign.

This is but one data point that explains why I am personally just so completely over Establishment liberalism and the Democratic Party. They are the present-day exemplars of what Churchill observed when he wrote “The malice of the wicked was reinforced by the weakness of the virtuous.”

Maybe Not a Pogrom?

Published at 17:20 on 8 November 2024

This is getting circulated amongst pro-Israel social media circles as a modern-day pogrom, an example of why Jews need a state of their own (and by implication why any criticism of anything Israel does is unacceptable).

But read the whole article, and you find this passage:

It was unclear what set off Thursday’s violence or how long after the game it began. Some Amsterdam locals said the Israeli fans had spent the previous two days instigating.

Two videos shot Wednesday showed Israeli fans climbing walls to pull Palestinian flags down from second-story windows; in one of the clips, scores of Israelis gathered below cheered as the flag was burned on the street. Maccabi hooligans also sang an anti-Arab chant Thursday as they entered the stadium.

Other footage seemed to show Israelis engaging in violence themselves. One dashboard camera clip posted Wednesday night by a Dutch taxi driver appeared to show a Maccabi fan smashing a taxi with an iron chain. Another video — it was unclear whether it was shot Wednesday or Thursday — appeared to show about 50 Israeli fans doing the chasing.

There was also disagreement online about what was happening in some of the videos. One was widely shared on Jewish social media accounts as evidence of a mob attack against Israelis, but the woman who recorded the video said it showed Maccabi supporters ganging up on a Dutch man.

And if anyone tries to accuse me of antisemitism or justifying violence against Jews by inventing some fictitious context here, I will just note that the article I have cited is in the Forward, a Jewish newspaper.

It may well just be that “brawl between rival gangs of soccer hooligans” is a far more accurate summary of what happened here than “pogrom.”

Two Bad Takes

Published at 08:06 on 8 November 2024

The Centrist Bad Take

If only those transgender weirdos had stayed in the closet and not opened their stupid yaps about their preferred gender pronouns, Harris would have won. Yes, I am really seeing basically this sort of stuff circulate in the Democratic Party policy wonk space.

It’s crap, of course. Harris did not focus much at all on trans issues in her campaign. It was much more about preserving democracy (as, given the context, it should have been). It wasn’t even a particularly liberal message she sent; she literally had Liz Cheney stump for her. The existence of openly trans people did not stop Biden from winning last time (or stop Michigan and Wisconsin from reelecting their Democratic senators this time).

The Leftist Bad Take

If only Harris had gone full Bernie Sanders and promised democratic socialism, she would have won. Again, yes, I am really seeing this.

Again, also crap. Biden actually, within parameters of being electable, did quite a bit for the working class, policy-wise. Yes, as a liberal capitalist, not a socialist. This is because most Americans, including most working-class Americans, don’t want socialism.

Don’t like how unwilling so many Americans are to see capitalism as the ugly thing it really is? Fine, neither do I. Do the grassroots work to turn that around first. Just running for president based on your personal pet ideology is not the way to do it. People will just vote for someone else. If Harris had gone full Bernie Sanders, she would have lost even worse.

One More Thing

Keep an eye on the Democrats. If they try to, for example, shove transpeople under the bus, challenge them, disassociate with them, or flat-out oppose them as you see fit. This is the party that sent a boatload of Jewish refugees back to Europe (where some of its passengers got the Final Solution) we are talking about. This is the party that locked American citizens up in concentration camps we are talking about. Oh yes they could get that ugly again.

When I recently wrote about establishing moral principles and guidelines, this is one of the things I was thinking about. Make reasonable compromises with reasonable people, yes, but do not sell your soul in the name of gaining the world.

I Was Mostly Wrong, but It Does Not Matter

Published at 08:36 on 7 November 2024

My predictions on the likely fate of the Biden presidency four years ago were mostly wrong.

Biden did in fact get his Senate majority, so he was able to enact policy for the most part the proper way, via passing bills through Congress. He actually did pass a fair amount of reforms to increase the power of the working class, which logically is exactly what he should have done to try and chip away at Trump’s base of support in the White working class.

But it doesn’t matter. Biden still failed.

His biggest failure was not directly his failure, but the failure of the Attorney General he appointed: Merrick Garland turned out to be a staunch traditionalist, but the tradition he was particularly staunch about preserving was the American führerprinzip that a president must be above all written law. So Garland dragged his feet about indicting Trump Federally until it was too late.

It was the historic mission of the Biden administration to deal a mortal blow to Trumpist fascism, and the Administration failed in that mission.

Maybe some in the Administration knew the brewing failure, maybe none did. Again, it doesn’t matter. Suppose some did, and Biden was sympathetic to their point of view. He had at that point painted himself in a corner: he campaigned against Trump’s politicization of the Department of Justice, and had promised a hands-off policy. So it was ideologically very difficult for Biden to twist Garland’s arm or threaten him with dismissal and replacement.

Which brings us to a darker and more ominous corner: the Democrats have painted themselves, since 2020, as the enemies of insurrection against a leader with an electoral mandate. Well, Trump now has a clear electoral mandate, and he is about to embark on policies for which a measure of insurrection is the morally justified response.

Even as Trump pardons the January 6th insurrectionists, he will willingly crack down hard on any unrest that arises in response to anything he does. A transition to authoritarian rule is then
by far the most likely result.

And all because the Biden Administration failed in its historic mission of crushing fascism.

Postscript: Jonathan V. Last has an analysis that comes to basically the same conclusions I just did above.

Two Assignments

Published at 21:12 on 6 November 2024

  1. Come up with strategies for protecting the vulnerable, the ones American fascism is most likely to harm, e.g. transpeople, immigrants, and non-human living things (this is not a comprehensive list, and is not in any particular order).
  2. Come up with a set of moral principles and guidelines for whatever action(s) you will take. I am not going to tell you what those princples must be, that is for you to determine for yourself. Then write those principles down for future reference.