"Trump is following a playbook written for him by Christian White Nationalists."

[Geronimo]

I'm not talking about punishment being literally inflicted but being the consequence of actions and a sudden, forced shift in geopolitics almost akin to an extinction level event on an ecosystem. Trump's moves have been repugnant to all around and no one wants to be involved in that. From governments to individuals deciding what products to buy, where to go on holiday next, who to go to for their next consignment of military equipment and systems. All turning away from the US. Those military bases in Europe previously thought to be those of an ally with everyone's best interests at heart? Now seen as a very real internal threat. Who knows when they could turn at the behest of Trump? Who can trust your equipment to not be compromised when you are actively collaborating with enemies of the free world?

But if Trump follows through on his words it proves he is consistent. And traitorous and untrustworthy. If he doesn't then he's still untrustworthy. Either way, no one can rely on the US, and that is going to hurt.

And good luck with the end of his term, if we have moved this far in a month, what does 4 years hold in store? Even if the man himself is gone (he is old, he is not going to be around for that long) this is a new order in the US which has irrevocably changed your political landscape. Political purges are going on, puppets being placed in prominent positions. So another step for the rest of the world is damage limitation and quickly due to the volatility of the situation - and the man. Getting the hell away from the US before anything worse happens. To be associated with this, what next sleight from an ally will incur the US's wrath? It results in one inevitable truth, the US cannot be trusted on any level. All of your checks and balances have failed (I mean when you have the political appointing the judiciary directly in this manner then this can happen). And no one wants to be at the mercy of your, let's not mince our words here, dictatorship. Only a dictator can make such direct orders and for them to go virtually unchallenged. And to have such an erratic dictator too. I don't think it is a stretch to describe your country as looking like a banana republic at the moment.

You seem to be operating from the assumption that this gigantic own-goal by the US will have relevance to the rest of the free world mainly for the nuisance of brushing off the distasteful reminders of the ruined alliance with a US which the rest of the free world can watch implode under the weight of its own incompetence while pivoting to other non-specified poles of power if needed or if the free world instead just closes ranks around a smaller but interally multipolar free-world pole.

This situation may in fact be even more dangerous for the rest of the free world than it is for the US as a state. China and a down but totally undefeated Russia both have strong reasons to consider striking in various ways to end the cohesion of the rest of the free world while the opportunity to do so remains. China almost certainly could so entirely absent any military means at all purely by wealth, economic footprint and divide and conquer. Russia simply by calling NATO's bluff as the non-US NATO starts acting to punish and exclude the US as a potential threat. Russia has drastically weakened itself in Ukraine but it also has maintained much higher mobilization. Russia's nuclear bluff was called because China made clear it would not stand for it and because MAD still applied to the US and Russia. Will Britain's nuclear deterrent based on their use of US SLBMs be considered credible? Will the French nuclear deterrent be enough?

At this stage I think it's terribly dangerous to be planning on how to counter the US. Acting against the US in a generally hostile way will probably only increase the danger. Even relatively informal rebuffs could be counterproductive such as turning to China for almost anything at all supplied by the US but especially defense material. Instead, the focus should be on demonstrating unity of the rest of the free world to oppose the betrayal directly but leave room for some kind of reproachment. It has to be clear that the existing betrayals and any further betrayals will not pay off but also clear that the US is not generally viewed as a new enemy and that there's a path to be some kind of friend again. Even Germany and Japan only had to wait outside the alliance for a relative few years.

[Elok]

Okay, doing some belated cursory digging and it turns out that the White Christian Nationalists of the Heritage Foundation were led by a black woman named Kay Coles James from 2017 to 2021. She resigned the presidency in 2021, but apparently continues to serve on its board of trustees as she has since 2005. I am not going to read all of Project 2025, but repeated skimming of various sections reveals a basically standard American conservative wish list, albeit bouncing between classical liberal and populist impulses as American conservatism has always done. One of the authors, Veronique de Rugy, I recognize as a regular contributor to libertarian mag Reason.

The phrase "white Christian nationalist" implies (to me) an overlap between the white nationalist and christian nationalist spheres--the latter nowadays being much smaller than the former, which in any case is now maybe a million mostly young and sexually frustrated men who spend too much time on Substack. Christian nationalists would I guess be the Rushdoony dominionist types. who have always been the fringe of the fringe. This is not to deny that the Trump administration is doing a lot of stupid crap and causing real damage, but unless "white Christian nationalist" is now being used like "fascist" to mean whatever you want it to mean, this claim appears false. Anybody have evidence to the contrary?

[Provost Harrison]

You seem to be operating from the assumption that this gigantic own-goal by the US will have relevance to the rest of the free world mainly for the nuisance of brushing off the distasteful reminders of the ruined alliance with a US which the rest of the free world can watch implode under the weight of its own incompetence while pivoting to other non-specified poles of power if needed or if the free world instead just closes ranks around a smaller but interally multipolar free-world pole.

This situation may in fact be even more dangerous for the rest of the free world than it is for the US as a state. China and a down but totally undefeated Russia both have strong reasons to consider striking in various ways to end the cohesion of the rest of the free world while the opportunity to do so remains. China almost certainly could so entirely absent any military means at all purely by wealth, economic footprint and divide and conquer. Russia simply by calling NATO's bluff as the non-US NATO starts acting to punish and exclude the US as a potential threat. Russia has drastically weakened itself in Ukraine but it also has maintained much higher mobilization. Russia's nuclear bluff was called because China made clear it would not stand for it and because MAD still applied to the US and Russia. Will Britain's nuclear deterrent based on their use of US SLBMs be considered credible? Will the French nuclear deterrent be enough?

At this stage I think it's terribly dangerous to be planning on how to counter the US. Acting against the US in a generally hostile way will probably only increase the danger. Even relatively informal rebuffs could be counterproductive such as turning to China for almost anything at all supplied by the US but especially defense material. Instead, the focus should be on demonstrating unity of the rest of the free world to oppose the betrayal directly but leave room for some kind of reproachment. It has to be clear that the existing betrayals and any further betrayals will not pay off but also clear that the US is not generally viewed as a new enemy and that there's a path to be some kind of friend again. Even Germany and Japan only had to wait outside the alliance for a relative few years.

Yet here we are, gathering more points regarding what the US administration now is and that correlation coefficient is not moving away from 1. Untrustworthy is starting to look like understatement. Treacherous and reckless I think are some different terms coming to mind.

I think today's display is further cementing that understanding. What distasteful behaviour for the self-proclaimed "leader of the free world". Not mine, I will tell you that now.

Boycott and isolation is our first recourse, the first of those can be exercised at a personal level, and exercising it we are.

[Provost Harrison]

Okay, doing some belated cursory digging and it turns out that the White Christian Nationalists of the Heritage Foundation were led by a black woman named Kay Coles James from 2017 to 2021. She resigned the presidency in 2021, but apparently continues to serve on its board of trustees as she has since 2005. I am not going to read all of Project 2025, but repeated skimming of various sections reveals a basically standard American conservative wish list, albeit bouncing between classical liberal and populist impulses as American conservatism has always done. One of the authors, Veronique de Rugy, I recognize as a regular contributor to libertarian mag Reason.

The phrase "white Christian nationalist" implies (to me) an overlap between the white nationalist and christian nationalist spheres--the latter nowadays being much smaller than the former, which in any case is now maybe a million mostly young and sexually frustrated men who spend too much time on Substack. Christian nationalists would I guess be the Rushdoony dominionist types. who have always been the fringe of the fringe. This is not to deny that the Trump administration is doing a lot of stupid crap and causing real damage, but unless "white Christian nationalist" is now being used like "fascist" to mean whatever you want it to mean, this claim appears false. Anybody have evidence to the contrary?

Still, regardless of it's origins, Project 2025 seems to be happening though. Either that or Mein Kampf. Make no mistake, the origins of it may be of some debate but what is happening is very close to it, after all it was just a US-centric Christian-cryptofascist (not very crypto any more though) plan of what has been well known by fascists since the 30s, get your tentacles on and put your stooges in prominent positions and slyly before anyone realises it's too late.

[Elok]

See, this is what I'm talking about: Trump ain't "fascist." He has strong isolationist impulses and no clear or consistent ideology. I believe his first term made him the first president of my lifetime to not start a new war (though he came awfully close, and expanded existing wars). His big accomplishments were an irresponsible tax cut and conservative judicial appointments, standard GOP goals for the past fifty years. People have been calling Republicans fascists since at least 2002, so that a decent fraction of today's voters literally can't remember a time when we weren't ringing that alarm bell. It's just a meaningless scare-word and deserves to be treated as such. And any US policy should be US-centric, we're not running a $4.5 trillion charity (on massive debt) here.

It seems probable that he is taking some advice from 2025, but again, what I skimmed of 2025 seems like pretty standard conservatism. His behavior doesn't make much sense as a fascist takeover ("first they came for the research grants, and I didn't speak up"), but does make sense as a clumsy and inept attempt to purge his ideological enemies, while also stealing crap and waving his dong around.

[-Jrabbit]

Pretty sure the main point is to relay the opinion that this guy is a POS, Elok. "Fascist" gets that job done, albeit at the expense of technical accuracy. Prattling on about the proper nomenclature for describing Donald Trump is literally exactly as stupid as the long-term GOP contention that anyone voting Dem is a woke commie liberal.

[Dauphin]

You also say Trump is isolationist. An isolationist would not be threatening Canada with annexation or seeking to make 'real estate' deals in Gaza. Something something Greenland and Panama.

[Dauphin]

Also, what is Fascism? I'm never clear what people mean. So throwing out some potential factors for discussion.

Establishment of a one party state
Contempt for democratic principles or liberalism
Autarky or self-sufficiency
Nationalism, typically militant and usually imperialistic
Belief in natural order (rule by elites and the masses who serve)
Country above individual
Acceptance or promotion of racism

[The Mad Monk]

Trump is not an isolationist, he is a monopolist who believes he can grab the world market by the balls because in his estimation they are tied to the dollar and have nowhere else to go.

[Aeson]

See, this is what I'm talking about: Trump ain't "fascist." He has strong isolationist impulses and no clear or consistent ideology. I believe his first term made him the first president of my lifetime to not start a new war (though he came awfully close, and expanded existing wars). His big accomplishments were an irresponsible tax cut and conservative judicial appointments, standard GOP goals for the past fifty years. People have been calling Republicans fascists since at least 2002, so that a decent fraction of today's voters literally can't remember a time when we weren't ringing that alarm bell. It's just a meaningless scare-word and deserves to be treated as such. And any US policy should be US-centric, we're not running a $4.5 trillion charity (on massive debt) here.

It seems probable that he is taking some advice from 2025, but again, what I skimmed of 2025 seems like pretty standard conservatism. His behavior doesn't make much sense as a fascist takeover ("first they came for the research grants, and I didn't speak up"), but does make sense as a clumsy and inept attempt to purge his ideological enemies, while also stealing crap and waving his dong around.

I'm not sure why you are so invested in minimizing what has already happened? It's not just some research grants that got cut.

They are working on funding mass deportations of millions of people. Demonizing government employees, the disabled, minorites, women, trans, and any attempt to stop discrimination against those groups. Attacking the founder's (and British Common Law before that) idea of what constitutes citizenship. Exploring sending US citizens to foreign prisons. Talking openly about ethnically cleansing millions from Gaza. Siding with Russia and North Korea to blame Ukraine for being invaded, bullying and shaking them down. Talking openly about expanding the empire to Greenland, Panama, and even Canada. Pissing off the rest of the free world, destroying our closest alliances and trade partnerships.

[Aeson]

As for project 2025 being something along the lines of a "standard Conservative wishlist", that has been becoming ... sadly, and scarily ... rather true.

Christian nationalists aren't necessarily white nationalists. White nationalists are almost if not entirely Christian nationalists. The scary part is the White nationalists are being welcomed into the fold by the Christian nationalists and more reasonable Christian right, being constantly dogwhistled to, and in cases driving policy.

The Republican party was just 20 years ago the party of free trade, fiscal responsibility. Reagan even gave amnesty to illegals. Bush II tried to. Now it's mercantilism, hatred of trading partners for giving us too much stuff, hatred of immigrants, hatred of diversity. Love for dictatorships. Licking the boots of the new American oligarchs.

[Elok]

If you want to see somebody who actually resembles a fascist, look at Putin (Russia is so crappy that their fascists are nostalgic for communism, even though the two diseases usually inoculate against each other). He crushes all opposition, controls speech, seizes his neighbors' territory by force and dirty tricks and huge gangs of paramilitary thugs. Trump is over here proposing to actually buy Greenland, and blithering about how he could turn Gaza into hotels instead of seizing both territories by surprise and daring anyone to object or stop him. His attacks on free expression so far amount to kicking the AP out of the White House for not calling it the Gulf of America--Biden, with his "misinformation" policies, was arguably worse on that front. His purge of disloyal elements consists of letting his billionaire buddy offer buyout packages to random Federal employees (albeit the buyouts will probably not be actually disbursed--oh, the humanity). Sometimes they realize they offered to fire people they might actually want and try to reverse the decision. Calling this fascism is a dumb joke by the same people who cheapened "white supremacy" until it meant "black kids get bad scores on standardized tests."

[Aeson]

If you want to see somebody who actually resembles a fascist, look at Putin (Russia is so crappy that their fascists are nostalgic for communism, even though the two diseases usually inoculate against each other). He crushes all opposition, controls speech, seizes his neighbors' territory by force and dirty tricks and huge gangs of paramilitary thugs. Trump is over here proposing to actually buy Greenland, and blithering about how he could turn Gaza into hotels instead of seizing both territories by surprise and daring anyone to object or stop him. His attacks on free expression so far amount to kicking the AP out of the White House for not calling it the Gulf of America--Biden, with his "misinformation" policies, was arguably worse on that front. His purge of disloyal elements consists of letting his billionaire buddy offer buyout packages to random Federal employees (albeit the buyouts will probably not be actually disbursed--oh, the humanity). Sometimes they realize they offered to fire people they might actually want and try to reverse the decision. Calling this fascism is a dumb joke by the same people who cheapened "white supremacy" until it meant "black kids get bad scores on standardized tests."

Trump wants to be like Putin. He admires him. As do the far right. We have more checks and balances than Russia did.

A lot of Project 2025 is how to subvert or destroy those checks and balances. It's a roadmap on how to get from where we are, to where Trump could do what Putin does. They are making lots of progress.

Don't wait until he starts doing the full-on Putin stuff. Because then it's too late.

[The Mad Monk]

I've said it before; Trump is not a Fascist, he lacks the core competencies.

But...he may open the door for one.

[Elok]

Uh-huh. Well, your claims about white nationalists are radically false--I move in conservative circles that get occasional annoying slopover from the racist right, and the overlap between white nationalists and practicing Christians is extremely small and has been for some time. White racists are mostly (excessively) online, constitute much less than 1% of the population, and appear to be divided between "Religion is for cucks, Christianity is gay, yay Nietzsche" and "Christianity is false, but an important traditional component of White western culture and should be buttressed and used as a tool to further our ends." Thankfully we shan't be furthering their ends because they're all mopey incel shmucks circle-jerking on YouTube. Like, seriously, Nick Fuentes is a white supremacist rock star and he had significantly fewer online followers than Peanut the Squirrel at the time of the latter's death. He is, to be fair, a self-defined "Christian Nationalist." Pretty sure the Heritage Foundation wants nothing whatever to do with him.

So no, I'm not scared that what appears to be a scattershot attempt to punish Trump's enemies is actually a fiendishly clever plan to slowly tighten the noose. This will make us poorer and weaker and isolate us internationally. It will not, barring extraordinary circumstances and a new leader figure, lead us to totalitarian government.

[giblets]

White racists . . . constitute much less than 1% of the population

Bruh....

[Elok]

Explicit, I-think-of-this-as-my-identity political racists, not your grumpy grandpa who thinks The Blacks want special treatment. I thought that was obvious from context. Guess I was wrong.