6 ms·

I think about this line a lot when I read about what Trump and Musk are doing

by PLenz 1y ago

palmotea 1y ago
>> “Some of you may die, but that’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make” - Shrek (2001) > I think about this line a lot when I read about what Trump and Musk are doing It's not just them though, but also their predecessors who created the conditions that led to Trump (e.g. pushing free trade even after the initial fairy tale that it would increase US manufacturing proved to be untrue). They were willing to sacrifice others' blue collar employment. It's would be kind interesting to see every politician's list of who should be prioritized and who they're willing to sacrifice, but they'll never be explicit about such things.
- twixfel 1y ago
  It's mostly Trump though. Trump is responsible for his actions.
  - goodtakes 1y ago
    That's a very surface level analysis. You have to consider root causes... how did we get here? Not just "what symptom am I experiencing right now?"
    - SpicyLemonZest 1y ago
      I actually do not have to. I care about developing opposition to the tariffs so that they’ll be removed, not sociological theories about why some particular politician came to support them. If the tariffs were popular among the general public, it might make sense to do a root cause analysis, but they aren’t.
  - palmotea 1y ago
    > It's mostly Trump though. Trump is responsible for his actions. Eh, kinda sorta. Trump is responsible for his actions, but the people who created the conditions for him are responsible too. There are a lot of leaders are very interested in having the buck to stop with him because it lets them off the hook. IMHO, Trump's tariff policies were poorly thought through, and that's something that's all on him. But reshoring manufacturing is going to be costly, and those costs will land on people who aren't yet used to bearing them, and that's also on his predecessors who allowed the offshoring in the first place. If they'd never done that, there'd be no Trump and no pain of reshoring.
    - twixfel 1y ago
      > the people who created the conditions for him are responsible It's just a truism though isn't it? Everything in the past is responsible for what is the current state of things. You can say it but it has next to no meaning and is not interesting. But using plain English and the plain meanings of words: Trump is responsible. You can blame Biden for not dropping out soon enough or whatever, but ultimately: what is happening now is on Trump. What would perhaps be interesting is to discuss this objective failure of the American system. Far from the "greatest democracy in the world", the constitution is clearly quite, quite a shit one if it allows this to happen.
      - 9rx 1y ago
        It is not just about the past. A king is only as powerful as his subjects are loyal. Trump continues to hold sway because people have remained trusting of him and are willing to go along with him. They don't have to, but they choose to.
        twixfel 1y ago
        Right, and a constitution that allows that to even happen has also failed. The American system was supposed to be somewhat elitist and prevent wild populism. So it didn't do that. It failed. Perhaps related to the overly permissive definition of speech in the US and subsequent extreme partisanship. Or perhaps presidential systems actually are quite shit in comparison to parliamentary ones. Anyway, obviously the country is very, very sick at the moment.
        actionfromafar 1y ago
        First past the post voting is one critical root cause. It prevents coalition building and compromise. I think that's a much bigger smoking gun than presidential vs parliamentary.
        anonymars 1y ago
  - Tadpole9181 1y ago
    Trump did not write Project 2025. He's just the one signing the EOs.
    - ujkhsjkdhf234 1y ago
      Do not take responsibility from Trump. He does not need to sign the EOs or do any of this. He was campaigning on tariffs before Project 2025 was ever a concept.
- goodtakes 1y ago
  This is a good assessment. Fundamentally a Trump doesn't rise to power unless the road has been paved in weak, neoliberal policies. Clinton, Bush, Obama, Biden... all had roles in expanding class divides, weakening manufacturing, increasing executive branch power, failing to capture the hearts of the working class. Yes, Trump is doing awful, aimless, cruel things, but he would be laughed out of power had the parties been serving any interest other than those of the wealthy.
  - jmull 1y ago
    Wow, it is truly amazing the levels of rationalization people are able to achieve. Trump is your fault, not Clinton's.
- Dumblydorr 1y ago
  Don’t reassign blame off Drumpf. He threw a hand grenade into the system. Everyone before him was poking it with toothpicks.
- fullshark 1y ago
  You of course are correct, but the posters on this board are likely some of the winners of globalization/neoliberalism so they are downvoting you. I remember Obama and Clinton railing against NAFTA when they were competing for rust belt votes in the primary and it was insincere nonsense. Of course Obama's policies after getting elected revealed he thought as much and that was why so many democrats (now a globalist/neoliberal party) like him. https://www.npr.org/2008/02/26/38185288/clinton-obama-and-nafta-a-non-issue https://www.npr.org/2008/02/26/38185288/clinton-obama-and-na... Trump is the reckoning that comes when you tell the exurbs / blue collar work force you ultimately don't care about them and they should all just learn to code.
  - senordevnyc 1y ago
    No, Trump is the reckoning that comes for the blue collar voters who listened to right wing propaganda and decided they just want to burn it all down. Unfortunately, they'll be hurt more than anyone with what's to come.
    - fullshark 1y ago
      They are going to learn a tough lesson about the modern economy and how things can get worse them for sure. The desire to burn it all down came from despair over a loss of status and economic anxiety, which was/is justified because the R/D party before Trump legitimately did not care about them at all and had fantastical notions about globalization turning everyone into winners, and ignored all evidence to the contrary. They felt ignored and powerless and latched onto Trump and here we are. A populist movement in America was overdue, democrats could have taken control of it with Bernie but they put their thumb on the scale to get Hillary the presidency. Republican establishment looked on with despair and saw several of their favored candidates get their career ended but adapted.
      - nobody9999 1y ago
        >They are going to learn a tough lesson about the modern economy and how things can get worse them for sure. The desire to burn it all down came from despair over a loss of status and economic anxiety, which was/is justified because the R/D party before Trump legitimately did not care about them at all and had fantastical notions about globalization turning everyone into winners, and ignored all evidence to the contrary. To be fair, much of the hollowing out of the rust belt/rural areas is/was as you mention (although, I'd say that Trump doesn't give a rat's ass about those folks either, they were just a means to an end), but what's unsaid is the lack of infrastructure investment by the states themselves. Had the state governments paid attention to the lack of decent educational opportunities, broadband, transportation and opportunities for the "new economy" (as compared with the withering/now withered manufacturing economy), there would be significant investment/start ups in/of tech companies in those areas, as the cost of living and capital/real estate costs are much lower in the "rust belt" and similar areas. But no such investment was made by those state governments, so those areas left damaged by the loss of manufacturing jobs were left to rot. Not just by the Federal government, but even more so by the state and local governments in those areas. There were/are other factors in play too, but you rarely (if ever) hear anyone calling state/local governments to task over this stuff -- it's always the "Feds" who, in point of fact, can certainly help, but remaking areas with sagging economies is much more a state/local thing, IMNSHO.

I think about this line a lot when I read about what Trump and Musk are doing

by PLenz 1y ago

I think about this line a lot when I read about what Trump and Musk are doing

>> “Some of you may die, but that’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make” - Shrek (2001) > I think about this line a lot when I read about what Trump and Musk are doing It's not just them though, but also their predecessors who created the conditions that led to Trump (e.g. pushing free trade even after the initial fairy tale that it would increase US manufacturing proved to be untrue). They were willing to sacrifice others' blue collar employment. It's would be kind interesting to see every politician's list of who should be prioritized and who they're willing to sacrifice, but they'll never be explicit about such things.

twixfel 1y ago
It's mostly Trump though. Trump is responsible for his actions.
- goodtakes 1y ago
  That's a very surface level analysis. You have to consider root causes... how did we get here? Not just "what symptom am I experiencing right now?"
  - SpicyLemonZest 1y ago
    I actually do not have to. I care about developing opposition to the tariffs so that they’ll be removed, not sociological theories about why some particular politician came to support them. If the tariffs were popular among the general public, it might make sense to do a root cause analysis, but they aren’t.
- palmotea 1y ago
  > It's mostly Trump though. Trump is responsible for his actions. Eh, kinda sorta. Trump is responsible for his actions, but the people who created the conditions for him are responsible too. There are a lot of leaders are very interested in having the buck to stop with him because it lets them off the hook. IMHO, Trump's tariff policies were poorly thought through, and that's something that's all on him. But reshoring manufacturing is going to be costly, and those costs will land on people who aren't yet used to bearing them, and that's also on his predecessors who allowed the offshoring in the first place. If they'd never done that, there'd be no Trump and no pain of reshoring.
  - twixfel 1y ago
    > the people who created the conditions for him are responsible It's just a truism though isn't it? Everything in the past is responsible for what is the current state of things. You can say it but it has next to no meaning and is not interesting. But using plain English and the plain meanings of words: Trump is responsible. You can blame Biden for not dropping out soon enough or whatever, but ultimately: what is happening now is on Trump. What would perhaps be interesting is to discuss this objective failure of the American system. Far from the "greatest democracy in the world", the constitution is clearly quite, quite a shit one if it allows this to happen.
    - 9rx 1y ago
      It is not just about the past. A king is only as powerful as his subjects are loyal. Trump continues to hold sway because people have remained trusting of him and are willing to go along with him. They don't have to, but they choose to.
      - twixfel 1y ago
        Right, and a constitution that allows that to even happen has also failed. The American system was supposed to be somewhat elitist and prevent wild populism. So it didn't do that. It failed. Perhaps related to the overly permissive definition of speech in the US and subsequent extreme partisanship. Or perhaps presidential systems actually are quite shit in comparison to parliamentary ones. Anyway, obviously the country is very, very sick at the moment.
        actionfromafar 1y ago
        First past the post voting is one critical root cause. It prevents coalition building and compromise. I think that's a much bigger smoking gun than presidential vs parliamentary.
        anonymars 1y ago
- Tadpole9181 1y ago
  Trump did not write Project 2025. He's just the one signing the EOs.
  - ujkhsjkdhf234 1y ago
    Do not take responsibility from Trump. He does not need to sign the EOs or do any of this. He was campaigning on tariffs before Project 2025 was ever a concept.
goodtakes 1y ago
This is a good assessment. Fundamentally a Trump doesn't rise to power unless the road has been paved in weak, neoliberal policies. Clinton, Bush, Obama, Biden... all had roles in expanding class divides, weakening manufacturing, increasing executive branch power, failing to capture the hearts of the working class. Yes, Trump is doing awful, aimless, cruel things, but he would be laughed out of power had the parties been serving any interest other than those of the wealthy.
- jmull 1y ago
  Wow, it is truly amazing the levels of rationalization people are able to achieve. Trump is your fault, not Clinton's.
Dumblydorr 1y ago
Don’t reassign blame off Drumpf. He threw a hand grenade into the system. Everyone before him was poking it with toothpicks.
fullshark 1y ago
You of course are correct, but the posters on this board are likely some of the winners of globalization/neoliberalism so they are downvoting you. I remember Obama and Clinton railing against NAFTA when they were competing for rust belt votes in the primary and it was insincere nonsense. Of course Obama's policies after getting elected revealed he thought as much and that was why so many democrats (now a globalist/neoliberal party) like him. https://www.npr.org/2008/02/26/38185288/clinton-obama-and-nafta-a-non-issue https://www.npr.org/2008/02/26/38185288/clinton-obama-and-na... Trump is the reckoning that comes when you tell the exurbs / blue collar work force you ultimately don't care about them and they should all just learn to code.
- senordevnyc 1y ago
  No, Trump is the reckoning that comes for the blue collar voters who listened to right wing propaganda and decided they just want to burn it all down. Unfortunately, they'll be hurt more than anyone with what's to come.
  - fullshark 1y ago
    They are going to learn a tough lesson about the modern economy and how things can get worse them for sure. The desire to burn it all down came from despair over a loss of status and economic anxiety, which was/is justified because the R/D party before Trump legitimately did not care about them at all and had fantastical notions about globalization turning everyone into winners, and ignored all evidence to the contrary. They felt ignored and powerless and latched onto Trump and here we are. A populist movement in America was overdue, democrats could have taken control of it with Bernie but they put their thumb on the scale to get Hillary the presidency. Republican establishment looked on with despair and saw several of their favored candidates get their career ended but adapted.
    - nobody9999 1y ago
      >They are going to learn a tough lesson about the modern economy and how things can get worse them for sure. The desire to burn it all down came from despair over a loss of status and economic anxiety, which was/is justified because the R/D party before Trump legitimately did not care about them at all and had fantastical notions about globalization turning everyone into winners, and ignored all evidence to the contrary. To be fair, much of the hollowing out of the rust belt/rural areas is/was as you mention (although, I'd say that Trump doesn't give a rat's ass about those folks either, they were just a means to an end), but what's unsaid is the lack of infrastructure investment by the states themselves. Had the state governments paid attention to the lack of decent educational opportunities, broadband, transportation and opportunities for the "new economy" (as compared with the withering/now withered manufacturing economy), there would be significant investment/start ups in/of tech companies in those areas, as the cost of living and capital/real estate costs are much lower in the "rust belt" and similar areas. But no such investment was made by those state governments, so those areas left damaged by the loss of manufacturing jobs were left to rot. Not just by the Federal government, but even more so by the state and local governments in those areas. There were/are other factors in play too, but you rarely (if ever) hear anyone calling state/local governments to task over this stuff -- it's always the "Feds" who, in point of fact, can certainly help, but remaking areas with sagging economies is much more a state/local thing, IMNSHO.