What has Trump done now?

[Jerry_Atrick]

Haven't read it yet as I have to go out, but here is what Chat GPT has to say on the same question:

Title: Historical Parallels in the Rise of Adolf Hitler and Donald Trump

Throughout history, leaders have emerged under similar sociopolitical circumstances, often capitalizing on economic distress, nationalistic sentiment, and public disillusionment. The rise of Adolf Hitler in 1930s Germany and Donald Trump in the United States during the 2010s share striking parallels. While their ideologies and historical contexts differ significantly, the manner in which they ascended to power bears noteworthy similarities. This treatise explores these parallels in terms of populism, media manipulation, scapegoating, erosion of democratic norms, and the mobilization of mass movements.

1. Exploitation of Economic and Social Grievances

Both Hitler and Trump rose to prominence during periods of national crisis. Hitler exploited Germany’s post-World War I economic depression and the public's discontent with the Treaty of Versailles, positioning himself as the savior of the German people. Similarly, Trump capitalized on the economic anxieties of the American middle class, particularly in the wake of the Great Recession, and the perceived decline of American manufacturing jobs. Both leaders promised a return to national greatness, using slogans like "Make America Great Again" and "Deutschland über alles" to appeal to nationalist sentiment.

2. Populist Rhetoric and Anti-Establishment Messaging

Hitler and Trump both employed populist rhetoric, casting themselves as outsiders who would dismantle a corrupt and ineffective political establishment. Hitler vilified the Weimar Republic, blaming its leaders for Germany’s struggles. Trump, in turn, attacked the Washington political elite, branding them as part of the "swamp" that needed to be drained. Both men cultivated an image of being the voice of the "common people," rallying mass support against perceived enemies within their own governments.

3. Media Manipulation and Use of Propaganda

Both leaders demonstrated a keen understanding of the power of media. Hitler’s propaganda machine, spearheaded by Joseph Goebbels, mastered the use of radio, print, and mass rallies to spread Nazi ideology and control public opinion. Similarly, Trump utilized social media, particularly Twitter, to bypass traditional media channels and communicate directly with his base. Both men attacked the press, branding critical media outlets as purveyors of "Lügenpresse" ("lying press") in Hitler’s case and "fake news" in Trump’s.

4. Scapegoating and the Creation of Internal Enemies

A hallmark of both leaders’ rise to power was their reliance on scapegoating. Hitler blamed Germany’s woes on Jews, communists, and other marginalized groups, fueling anti-Semitic and nationalist fervor. Trump similarly targeted immigrants, particularly those from Latin America and Muslim-majority countries, portraying them as criminals and threats to national security. Both leaders used fear and division to solidify their base and justify controversial policies.

5. Undermining Democratic Institutions

As their influence grew, both Hitler and Trump sought to erode democratic norms and institutions. Hitler’s ascent to power culminated in the Reichstag Fire Decree and the Enabling Act, which effectively dismantled the Weimar Republic’s democracy and established a dictatorship. While Trump did not achieve a comparable level of authoritarian control, his repeated challenges to election results, refusal to commit to peaceful transitions of power, and attempts to delegitimize the judiciary and law enforcement mirrored early warning signs of democratic erosion.

6. Cult of Personality and Mass Mobilization

Both leaders built devoted followings, transforming their political movements into quasi-religious phenomena. Hitler’s Nazi Party rallies were grand spectacles that reinforced his leadership through mass displays of loyalty. Trump’s rallies similarly became ritualistic events where supporters chanted slogans like "Lock her up!" and "Build the wall!" The use of spectacle, repetition, and emotional appeal cemented their followers’ allegiance, often at the expense of rational political discourse.

7. Attempts to Overturn Electoral Processes

The most alarming parallel emerged in Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 U.S. presidential election. Hitler, after failing to seize power in the Beer Hall Putsch of 1923, eventually used legal means to dismantle democracy. Trump’s refusal to accept electoral defeat, culminating in the January 6th Capitol riot, showcased an unprecedented effort to subvert democratic processes in the United States. While unsuccessful, it demonstrated the fragility of democratic institutions when faced with authoritarian ambitions.

Conclusion

While historical comparisons must be made with caution, the parallels between Hitler and Trump’s rise to power are significant. Both men leveraged economic distress, nationalism, and mass media to galvanize support, while undermining democratic norms through populist rhetoric and scapegoating. The key difference lies in the resilience of democratic institutions: Hitler successfully dismantled German democracy, while Trump’s efforts were resisted by the judiciary, media, and civil society. Nevertheless, the warning signs remain. Understanding these historical patterns is crucial in preventing future authoritarian threats, reinforcing democratic values, and ensuring that history does not repeat itself.

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

King Charles seems to be the only winner in the UK. He's like a pensioner, gets an allowance, and can sit back and watch the circus perform everyday. Pity he couldn't do a lone-wolf "Trump", sack all the progressive politicians, and slash all the wasteful spending.

[onetrack]

Go ask David Cameron how his little taxpayers money lending spree from the British Business Bank, to his best mate Lex Greensill, worked out.

 

Greensill Capital wasn't eligible for any COVID-era business loans, but Cameron wangled through $400M in loans to Greensill by getting the loans divided up into 8 smaller $50M loans, to 8 newly formed Greensill subsidiaries. The 8 Greensill subsidiary companies were only sham companies set up to receive the loans monies.

 

Greensill lent the money to Sanjeev Gupta, went bankrupt, thanks to his "innovative" business practices - and none of the loan money has ever been repaid - and nor is it likely to ever be repaid. Meantimes, Cameron collected $1M a year in salary from Greensill for 25 days of work a year.

 

The saga still hasn't played out, Sanjeev Gupta the steel "tycoon" is going to go broke next, and take a huge amount of taxpayers money with him. When you have people like Cameron in charge of Britain, he makes Trump look like an amateur at ripping off taxpayers, and sending the country down the drain.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greensill_Capital#:~:text=Greensill in turn lent all,a potential £335m loss.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greensill_scandal#:~:text=Reports emerged that Cameron had,the pandemic-related economic recession.

[Jerry_Atrick]

Yes... Strange how the UKgovernment couldn't find the money to bail out British Steel until a donor (Gupta) took it over for a penny.. and then the money was found.. Nice little earner for 1p for the fella.

[Jerry_Atrick]

5 hours ago, Grumpy Old Nasho said:

King Charles seems to be the only winner in the UK. He's like a pensioner, gets an allowance, and can sit back and watch the circus perform everyday. Pity he couldn't do a lone-wolf "Trump", sack all the progressive politicians, and slash all the wasteful spending.

13 years of conservatives, and they are progressives? I'm with @Litespeed - you need help.. and lots of it.

 

The simple fact is, under the previous Labour admin in the UK, they took a basket case economy handed to them by the cumulative effects of Thatcher and Major, made structural changes to make it a solid economy (and yeah, they made mistakes) and handed a strong economy that survived the global financial crisis far better than most of its peers to the conservatives, who's non-progressive agenda wrecked it to almost beyond repair. Somehow, though, it was the "progressives" fault? In the great worlds of Pauline Hanson, please explain.. because all you do is fluff a lot of hot air, with no basis and can't refer to anything to even mildly support your assertions.

 

The Aussie economy is in pretty good shape given its challenges under the stewardship of Labor, especially when you consider what was handed to them. The LNP are also hardly progressive, but somehow their economic record is never quite as good as Labor's. Again, they aren't perfect and make mistakes, but when the chips are down, I know who I would prefer to be in.

 

 

 

 

[nomadpete]

7 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

Haven't read it yet as I have to go out, but here is what Chat GPT has to say on the same question:

Title: Historical Parallels in the Rise of Adolf Hitler and Donald Trump

Throughout history, leaders have emerged under similar sociopolitical circumstances, often capitalizing on economic distress, nationalistic sentiment, and public disillusionment. The rise of Adolf Hitler in 1930s Germany and Donald Trump in the United States during the 2010s share striking parallels. While their ideologies and historical contexts differ significantly, the manner in which they ascended to power bears noteworthy similarities. This treatise explores these parallels in terms of populism, media manipulation, scapegoating, erosion of democratic norms, and the mobilization of mass movements.

1. Exploitation of Economic and Social Grievances

Both Hitler and Trump rose to prominence during periods of national crisis. Hitler exploited Germany’s post-World War I economic depression and the public's discontent with the Treaty of Versailles, positioning himself as the savior of the German people. Similarly, Trump capitalized on the economic anxieties of the American middle class, particularly in the wake of the Great Recession, and the perceived decline of American manufacturing jobs. Both leaders promised a return to national greatness, using slogans like "Make America Great Again" and "Deutschland über alles" to appeal to nationalist sentiment.

2. Populist Rhetoric and Anti-Establishment Messaging

Hitler and Trump both employed populist rhetoric, casting themselves as outsiders who would dismantle a corrupt and ineffective political establishment. Hitler vilified the Weimar Republic, blaming its leaders for Germany’s struggles. Trump, in turn, attacked the Washington political elite, branding them as part of the "swamp" that needed to be drained. Both men cultivated an image of being the voice of the "common people," rallying mass support against perceived enemies within their own governments.

3. Media Manipulation and Use of Propaganda

Both leaders demonstrated a keen understanding of the power of media. Hitler’s propaganda machine, spearheaded by Joseph Goebbels, mastered the use of radio, print, and mass rallies to spread Nazi ideology and control public opinion. Similarly, Trump utilized social media, particularly Twitter, to bypass traditional media channels and communicate directly with his base. Both men attacked the press, branding critical media outlets as purveyors of "Lügenpresse" ("lying press") in Hitler’s case and "fake news" in Trump’s.

4. Scapegoating and the Creation of Internal Enemies

A hallmark of both leaders’ rise to power was their reliance on scapegoating. Hitler blamed Germany’s woes on Jews, communists, and other marginalized groups, fueling anti-Semitic and nationalist fervor. Trump similarly targeted immigrants, particularly those from Latin America and Muslim-majority countries, portraying them as criminals and threats to national security. Both leaders used fear and division to solidify their base and justify controversial policies.

5. Undermining Democratic Institutions

As their influence grew, both Hitler and Trump sought to erode democratic norms and institutions. Hitler’s ascent to power culminated in the Reichstag Fire Decree and the Enabling Act, which effectively dismantled the Weimar Republic’s democracy and established a dictatorship. While Trump did not achieve a comparable level of authoritarian control, his repeated challenges to election results, refusal to commit to peaceful transitions of power, and attempts to delegitimize the judiciary and law enforcement mirrored early warning signs of democratic erosion.

6. Cult of Personality and Mass Mobilization

Both leaders built devoted followings, transforming their political movements into quasi-religious phenomena. Hitler’s Nazi Party rallies were grand spectacles that reinforced his leadership through mass displays of loyalty. Trump’s rallies similarly became ritualistic events where supporters chanted slogans like "Lock her up!" and "Build the wall!" The use of spectacle, repetition, and emotional appeal cemented their followers’ allegiance, often at the expense of rational political discourse.

7. Attempts to Overturn Electoral Processes

The most alarming parallel emerged in Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 U.S. presidential election. Hitler, after failing to seize power in the Beer Hall Putsch of 1923, eventually used legal means to dismantle democracy. Trump’s refusal to accept electoral defeat, culminating in the January 6th Capitol riot, showcased an unprecedented effort to subvert democratic processes in the United States. While unsuccessful, it demonstrated the fragility of democratic institutions when faced with authoritarian ambitions.

Conclusion

While historical comparisons must be made with caution, the parallels between Hitler and Trump’s rise to power are significant. Both men leveraged economic distress, nationalism, and mass media to galvanize support, while undermining democratic norms through populist rhetoric and scapegoating. The key difference lies in the resilience of democratic institutions: Hitler successfully dismantled German democracy, while Trump’s efforts were resisted by the judiciary, media, and civil society. Nevertheless, the warning signs remain. Understanding these historical patterns is crucial in preventing future authoritarian threats, reinforcing democratic values, and ensuring that history does not repeat itself.

Have you asked ChatGPT to write a treatise on

'What are the differences' between them?

Edited February 9 by nomadpete

[Jerry_Atrick]

I think you fellas can ask questions of Chap-GPT without me.

[octave]

So Musk and rumps latest "kill" is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.  

 

From its creation until 2017, the CFPB "has curtailed abusive debt collection practices, reformed mortgage lending, publicized and investigated hundreds of thousands of complaints from aggrieved customers of financial institutions, and extracted nearly $12 billion for 29 million consumers in refunds and canceled debts."^[41] That figure had risen to $19 billion by 2024.^[42]

 

^{Consumer Financial Protection Bureau}

 

 

  ^{I am not saying that it should not be immune from cost-cutting however it seems to me that a billionaire, who can, afford to sue a bank if they are wronged, probably does not appreciate the importance of this organisation to ordinary people who might find themselves wronged by a bank. The running cost of this department seems to be about 500 million a year,(2021) but it has returned 19 billion dollars to consumers in 7 years.   Musk is taking a chainsaw to something that he perhaps cannot see the purpose of but this is because of his extreme wealth.}

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Marty_d]

In 4 years time, hopefully the American people will get a clue after living in the wreckage of Trump's ego, and elect the Democrats.

They will then have the unenviable task of rebuilding all these institutions which Musk has destroyed.

The trouble is, all the knowledge, experience and expertise that the staff brought to them is now gone.

I know idiots like Musk probably think of employees as replaceable pegs which are slotted into holes and can be moved around at will. But there is a world of difference between that office manager who knows everything about keeping the place running smoothly because she's done it for 30 years, and some 19yo fresh out of uni.

[Jerry_Atrick]

Y'all seem to fergeet that the msm is right wing bias and will use propaganda techniques like many of them do today to shift the blame... it is in their advertisers interests... and we have seen how the social media barons have shifted their policies and dismantled their fact checking to support someone they couldn't last time as they have been boarding the gravy train express this time. Who knows what algorithm changes will have been made that they don't have to inform us of?

 

By the time the average person wakes up, it will be too late.. game over.

[red750]

Pressure is on the Albanese Government to secure a tariff exemption after President Donald Trump announced a 25 per cent tax on all steel and aluminium imports to the US.

 

Trump  announced the tariffs on imported metal would broadly apply without exemptions, during a media conference aboard Air Force One as he was flying to the Super Bowl in New Orleans.

[rgmwa]

4 hours ago, Marty_d said:

In 4 years time, hopefully the American people will get a clue after living in the wreckage of Trump's ego, and elect the Democrats.

It may not take that long. The mid-terms might see the Democrats back in charge of the House of Representatives and the Senate which would help, although by then most of the damage will have been done and Trump will probably still be the ruling monarch with Musk as his lead inquisitor.

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

Bluescope shares on the ASX just went up 4%. Bluescope makes more than half it's profits in the US.

Edited February 10 by Grumpy Old Nasho

[Jerry_Atrick]

Yes, because it has 5 businesses in the US which would not be affected by tarrifs.. in fact it could be helped by them. But this is small fry compared to the rest of the market.. Some others in a similar position were up on the ASX further (note, Bluscope's gains fell to 1.6%) while most were unchanged or down: https://www.listcorp.com/asx/sectors/materials/materials/metals-mining/steel

[red750]

Looks like Trump also put the moz on the Kansas City Chiefs, His tip for the Super Bowl.

[facthunter]

Geez I'm GLAD we are an ally of the USA.   Nev

[octave]

1 hour ago, Grumpy Old Nasho said:

Bluescope shares on the ASX just went up 4%. Bluescope makes more than half it's profits in the US.

It went up because of it's US operations as in the portion of it's business situated in the US.   Its US operation may benefit from tariffs but is Australian operation won't

 

While BlueScope is best known in Australia for its Port Kembla steelworks, south of Sydney, the company generates more revenue from its North American operations than in Australia, according to its most recent financials.

It has a large presence in Ohio, and could therefore end up a beneficiary of a tariff regime that hinders rivals.

Its shares were up 4% earlier on Monday, in response to Trump’s announcement. A BlueScope spokesperson said the company would “continue to work with the Trump administration and the Australian government, as we await further details”.

Steel fabricator Bisalloy did not fare so well on Monday morning, with its shares falling 4% in early trading.

The benchmark S&P/ASX 200 was down 0.25% by late morning, tracking a sell-off on Wall Street on Friday. The tariff announcement likely created further uncertainty for traders, weighing on overall market sentiment.

[old man emu]

If Trump puts a 25% tariff on our aluminium and steel, we should up the rent on the properties the US has here for its military uses. 

 

I was going to say that we should bung a 25% tariff on US goods and service, but then I remembered the lesson learned from this discussion - tariffs hurt the consumer living in the country which imposed them. So we don't want to put them on. About the only bargaining chip we have is to tell the Yanks to move out. That would be in line with Trump's policy of evicting people from countries. We could also cancel AUKUS and get our subs from Europe.

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

We're lucky it's not 50% given all the cheek, criticism, and disparaging by Rudd, Albanese, and all their lefty mates and associates.

[octave]

3 minutes ago, Grumpy Old Nasho said:

We're lucky it's not 50% given all the cheek, criticism, and disparaging by Rudd, Albanese, and all their lefty mates and associates.

 

Yes because of course Trump doesn't use disparaging language about anyone else.  For a man who happily insults others he sure does have a thin skin but this is the hallmark of a malignant narcissist. 

[Jerry_Atrick]

2 hours ago, Grumpy Old Nasho said:

We're lucky it's not 50% given all the cheek, criticism, and disparaging by Rudd, Albanese, and all their lefty mates and associates.

What? Oh, is Trump the imperial leader we all need to bow down to and can't criticise lest his sensitive feelings are offended like a snowflake... and he will have a tantrum and slap on more tarrifs.. There, there, Trumpy... mummy will tuck you into bed and get you a family bucket of KFC.. all will be better.. the boys in the playground really do like you...

How is planet Zork? Because you obviously don't live on planet earth, that is for sure.. Most of is ex-administration, harrdly woke, all openly criticise him and have campaigned against him.. In Aus, Malcolm Turnbull, David Sharma, and Simon Birmingham, again hardly woke, openly criticise him still. even Nigel Farage - you know the bastion of wokeness has openly criticsed him. Have they all suddenly turned tree huggiung, tie-dye wearing lefties? Noticed the silence about Trump from most of the LNP, except for the nuttier ones...hardly a ringing endorsement of Trump or their leader for Trumpian politics. Yeah, it helped with the voice, but when people have to vote about matters that directly affect them, I am not sure Australians have the same mentality as their Ameican cousins. It's not like th bye-elections in Vic handed the LNP a resounding message of support, is it?

 

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

Rudd and Albanese will be on their hands and knees crawling for an exemption in a few days. Why don't they have some pride, let it be, and say nothing?, if they reckon they are better than Trump.

 

The tariffs won't affect Australia so much as they will affect the foreign multinationals producing aluminium and steel here. We don't buy much of those, so the extra cost will hardly be felt. If imports from China are increased, then we need to worry. The other worry is if the foreign multinationals pack up and leave, something the Greens will be happy about obviously. But our exports of aluminium and steel to the US are not that significant in terms of the global market, or even to the US. Ours are exported to other destinations besides the US. 

[Marty_d]

I think you're missing the point.  Regardless of who owns the factories, they're employing Australians.  If Trump puts tariffs on Australian goods then the price goes up in the US, which means it either gets passed to the consumer or they stop importing as much.

In either case demand for Australian products goes down and that could lead to a loss of Australian jobs.

That's why Albo will talk to him.  Hopefully he understands that when dealing with vindictive bullies of limited intellect, crawling will not work, so he will be respectful but firm and clearly put Australia's case forward.

[red750]

[red750]