What has Trump done now?

[red750]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14529609/Trump-demands-presidential-portrait-taken-down.html?ito=social-facebook

[facthunter]

The WHITNEY Boomerang was a very good Plane. The Millicer VICTA built by Merv Richardson had potential too. Eventually went to New Zealand. . Nev

[red750]

China remains a repressive dictatorship. And America is becoming more like China. At a remarkable rate.

 

Sino’ the times in Trump’s America:

PETER HARTCHER, INTERNATIONAL EDITOR, SMH, 25 March 35.

 

For three or four decades, the fashionable consensus in the West was that China was becoming more and more like the West.

 

Once the Chinese people enjoyed economic freedom, they’d demand political freedom and hey presto!, the communist autocracy would become a capitalist democracy. A lot like America’s. It was flat wrong. Instead, the exact opposite is happening. China remains a repressive dictatorship. And America is becoming more like China. At a remarkable rate.

 

The Australian sinologist Geremie Barme observes that there are ‘‘haunting parallels’’ between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping. They both possess autocratic personalities. Their signature chants echo each other: Trump’s ‘‘Fight, Fight, Fight’’ and Xi’s ‘‘Struggle, Struggle, Struggle’’ and they share values.

 

How to measure such a convergence? Helpfully, the Chinese Communist Party complied a checklist for us. Document No.9 was published in 2013, during Xi’s first months as president.

 

The document lists the regime’s ‘‘seven taboos’’. The encyclical demanded ‘‘intense struggle’’ against these seven ‘‘false trends’’. By outlining what is forbidden, it implicitly tells us what is desirable.

 

The first taboo is ‘‘Western constitutional democracy’’. Essential to this is the separation of powers. This is the doctrine that puts checks on power. A practical example is that, in a liberal democracy, a citizen can challenge a government decision in court.

 

But China’s dictators reject this in favour of ‘‘the monolithic leadership of the party’’. And Trump’s America, too, is rejecting the separation of powers under its rubric of ‘‘unified executive theory’’.

 

For instance. Have you been following the case of Trump’s decision to deport Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador despite a judge’s order that the plane not take off or, if it had already, that it be ordered to turn around?

 

The administration chose to ignore the ruling. White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, Stephen Miller, said: ‘‘It is without doubt the most unlawful order a judge has issued in our lifetimes.’’ So it’s now the president and his staff who decide which court orders are legal, apparently.

 

Second, the concept of ‘‘universal values’’ is forbidden. Xi regards human rights as a challenge to the rule of the Party. And Trump? ‘‘The concept that everyone is equal is undermined by the administration’s attack on DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion] policies,’’ says Barme, who has been writing on the growing convergence of US and Chinese values since 2017 on China Heritage.

 

‘‘They’re saying, ‘we don’t want diversity, we want a monoculture, we don’t want equity because we think some people are more valuable than others’. Trump is basically pursuing a massive re-segregation by race, class, wealth and values.’’

 

Xi’s third taboo is ‘‘civil society,’’ which Document No.9 describes as a ‘‘serious form of political opposition’’. The Party bans or strictly regulates any effort at citizens’ organising for a shared purpose, whether it’s a charity, trade union or environmental NGO, or spiritual group like Falun Dafa.

 

Trump seeks to delegitimise and halt civil society movements with which he disagrees. Trump’s defence secretary in 2020, Mark Esper, has written that Trump asked him to order troops to fire into crowds of Black Lives Matter protesters: ‘‘Can’t you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something?’’

 

Trump pardoned over 1000 people convicted of invading and vandalising the Capitol on January 6, but says people vandalising Tesla cars will be branded ‘‘domestic terrorists’’ by his administration, opening the prospect of severe punishments. ‘‘That’s incredibly familiar territory,’’ says Barme, citing China’s use of the term ‘‘subverting state power’’ to crush protest movements.

 

China’s fourth ‘‘unmentionable’’ is neoliberalism. Because it’s an idea that undermines state control of the economy by advocating full and free rein of market forces.

Similarly, Trump is leading a retreat from US neoliberalism by applying new tariffs. He is a mercantilist who believes that government should engineer positive trade balances through market intervention.

 

The fifth is independent journalism. China’s censorship and propaganda machinery is notorious for quashing independent reporting and debate. Xi has said that all media outlets in China share the same family name – ‘‘the Party’’.

 

In the US, Trump recently gave a speech at the Department of Justice where he said that CNN and MSNBC were ‘‘illegal, what they do is illegal’’ and ‘‘has to stop’’. Their crime? They ‘‘literally write 97.6 per cent bad about me’’. Separately, Trump sues media outlets whose coverage he dislikes. ABC News settled by paying him $US15 million. He’s demanding $US20 billion in damages from CBS for the way 60 Minutes edited a Kamala Harris interview. Trump has threatened to revoke broadcast licences and jail journalists. Under Trump, the Federal Communications Commission has launched multiple investigations into media outlets for ‘‘falsification’’ of information.

 

China’s sixth taboo is what Xi calls ‘‘historical nihilism’’. This is aimed at curbing honest accounting for the Party’s previous mistakes such as the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. Criticism of the Party’s past could undermine opinion of its present, he fears.

 

Barme says that a showcase of the Trumpian equivalent is his opposition to the New York Times’ 1619 Project, which reframed US history around the experience of slaves. Trump set up a committee in rebuttal, the 1776 Committee. He favours revisionist histories of slavery and the Civil War.

 

The final taboo is against any effort to challenge ‘‘reform and opening’’ as defined by Xi. Barme finds its analogue in Trump’s intolerance for criticism of his executive orders.

 

The US, of course, remains vastly freer and more contested a society than the People’s Republic. But after a mere two months into Trump’s current term, the trends are all China’s way, seven for seven.

 

It’s growing harder by the day for Australia and other US allies to claim ‘‘shared values’’ with America under Trump.

 

[facthunter]

That's Peter Hartcher and HE's always had a fulsome "opinion". I don't think todays China is really Communist  in the OLD sense and the Leader is not a Dictator.  It IS a ONE party system but his position is only  for as long as HE performs well. There's hundreds of delegates VERY ready to take his Job IF He falters. They PLAN ahead and are efficient and their success cannot just be ignored. The standard of living has Improved far Better than Most Countries. The truth is now "Can the USA be Trusted by it's former Allies? I would say DEFINATELY NO. HE could not care less HOW they FARE.  and the USA is Divided Unto Itself and Trump GOES AFTER his perceived Enemies within. It's becoming LAWLESS and scary.  Nev

[rgmwa]

It will be interesting to see if Trump fires anyone over the unofficial Signal communications group that resulted in the Pentagon's Houtis attack plans being shared with a journalist. Hegseth, Gabbard, Rubio and Waltz are all involved in the chat group. They will be OK unless Trump thinks it makes him look bad. He has denied all knowledge of course. 

[facthunter]

The way He looks. denying all Knowledge wouldn't be difficult. . Nev

[Jerry_Atrick]

Unless Chump was in the chat group, it sounds reasonable he had no knowledge of it, but who knows except Chump and anyone who may have told him?

 

The fallout from this will be in US terms, marginal. The Republican leaning press (remember Bezos now owns what used to be a more critical thinking paper, the Washington Post) will go easy on him and the right will dismiss any journalism from the other side as whining rabble rouses, especially if no damage has been done. As usual, it will be the rest of the world gasping in horror.

 

In terms of the Peter Hartcher's column, it is pretty spot on as far as I can tell. Chump's undermining of the three pillars of state and move towards them supporting his regime; and his discrimination and now pursuit of journalists and news organisations sort of calls out lurching towards autocracy, and heading the way of Xi.

 

China is not communist - no. And I doubt it ever really was; in the same way I doubt Russia and many others that claim to be communist or socialist ever really were. Autocracy does not equal either of the two and while democracy is not perfect, it is at least a guard against autocracy. The US is moving away from democracy and look what is filling its void.

 

China's standard of living has improved at a better rate than most countries - yes. It was starting at a very low base. But has it improved in proportion to the economic growth it has delivered?  That depends on how you measure it. By pure material lifestyle, it is OK, but there are massive imbalances between the cities and rural economies, with the latter still lagging the rest of the world by a way, although the gap is decreasing. And that is natural as the Chinese government move from a manufacturing to consumer led economy - and it's own internal market will provide the powerhouse to keep its economy growing. In other words, for the central government to cement power, it must ensure its domestic market is capable of driving the economy, which means putting more wealth in the domestic market.

 

However, if your standard of living includes basic human rights, freedoms of speech without fear of going missing in the night (it does still happen), freedom of choice, freedom of beliefs, and many other freedoms, well, I guess China hasn't really come that far.. has it?

 

I know @bexrbetter had many good things to say about China, but ex pats have a lot more intrinsic freedoms than the indigenous population (isn't there a $200k bounty on the head of a HK lawyer living in Melbourne as he is an activist against the government of China?). The US is lurching that way. In reality, for many US citizens it is of no consequence. In fact, for many, such an autocracy is a major advantage

 

 

 

[rgmwa]

8 minutes ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

Unless Chump was in the chat group, it sounds reasonable he had no knowledge of it, but who knows except Chump and anyone who may have told him?

Apparently it was reported on Fox News a couple of hours before he was asked about it and pretended to look blank. It's very unlikely he didn't know about it. He didn't look very convincing when he denied it. 

Edited 16 hours ago by rgmwa

[facthunter]

Jerry, Do you think the British Courts and Prity Patel Treated Julien Assange reasonably? Of Course Russia was Communist. Have you ever heard of Marx  Trotsky  Engels and Lenin? Nev

Edited 16 hours ago by facthunter
expand

[old man emu]

What is Communism in its purest form? It is not Capitalism. Is it Socialism? Exactly how communism differs from socialism has long been a matter of debate, but the distinction rests largely on the communists’ adherence to the revolutionary socialism of Karl Marx.

 

Marx identified two phases of communism that would follow the predicted overthrow of capitalism.

 

The first would be a transitional system in which the working class would control the government and economy yet still find it necessary to pay people according to how long, hard, or well they worked, 

The second would be fully realized communism—a society without class divisions or government, in which the production and distribution of goods would be based upon the principle “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.

 

Nowadays, Communism is a type of government as well as an economic system (a way of creating and sharing wealth). In a Communist system, individual people do not own land, factories, or machinery. Instead, the government or the whole community owns these things. Obviously, individuals must have ownership of the things needed for day-to-day living - clothes, food, vehicles, the key to the door of their dwelling.

 

Countries which claim to be "communist" actually exist within a system based on the ideas of Marx, but molded to suit the power plays of the leaders of the strongest political factions.

[red750]

In the memo sent to the journalist was this reference:-

 

"The discussions included a moment where Vance expressed opposition to a potential strike against Houthi rebels in Yemen to clear up shipping routes through the Suez Canal because, as Vance notes, Europe, whose trade is more reliant on the Suez Canal than the US, would benefit more than the US."

[rgmwa]

5 minutes ago, red750 said:

In the memo sent to the journalist was this reference:-

 

"The discussions included a moment where Vance expressed opposition to a potential strike against Houthi rebels in Yemen to clear up shipping routes through the Suez Canal because, as Vance notes, Europe, whose trade is more reliant on the Suez Canal than the US, would benefit more than the US."

Yes, it's extraordinary. "If the Houthis sink more of our allies' ships than ours then we win. If we stop them sinking both ours and our allies, then we lose unless we make them pay us for saving their shipping".  

[red750]

[rgmwa]

Well it will be interesting to see how Trump goes about announcing how much the Europeans owe him for attacking Yemen, now that the world knows about his plans in advance thanks to his incompetent hand-picked subordinates. He won’t be happy. 

[nomadpete]

I think the whole issue of using that chat platform stinks badly.

 

It was a sneaky attempt to circumvent the legally required record keeping. In other words, saying stuff that would be embarrassing if it ever got seen by others.

 

And due to their collective incompetance, it has now been seen.

 

Now we must ask, 'How many other decisions are made secretly, and with what motive?'

 

Further,  the world now sees how "transactional" the Trump administration really is. It appears to border on mobster style blackmail of Europe.

 

Absolutely disgusting!

[Jerry_Atrick]

12 hours ago, facthunter said:

Jerry, Do you think the British Courts and Prity Patel Treated Julien Assange reasonably? Of Course Russia was Communist. Have you ever heard of Marx  Trotsky  Engels and Lenin? Nev

On the first question  - to be honest, I don't know too much of the detail. I doubt Priti Patel ever treated anyone fairly, however, she is a politician and in the UK, they still do not control the courts. Did the courts treat Assange fairly? I have no idea. Did they treat him in accordance with the law, which sometimes is not fair (remembering, fair is a subjective concept)? Yes. Aboslutely. Otherwise his case would have been dispensed with very quickly. In fact, theere were reports that if it was not such a high profile case, the final leave to appeal, which I think was to the Supreme court - this highest court in the land -  would probably not have been granted. As I recall, the British courts temporarily refused the extradition order on the grounds that they were not convinced he would receive a fair trial.  Apparenlty Sweden also dropped their request for extradition based on an alleged sexual offence, too.

 

Re Russia being a communist country - yes - in name, and in some ways in structure - yes the factors of production were centrally owned and controlled.. sort of.. except that in today's terms, billions were funelled into Swiss bank accounts for the elite, but it was hardly governing these resources for the people.  Communist Russia/USSR has always been an autocracy claiming a vel of communism. The problem is power corrupts, and absolute power absolutely corrupts... However, if they maintained a democracy with a communist constituion, maybe it would have been proper communism and worked better.

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

10 hours ago, red750 said:

I get the disdain for including a journo, and then the disdain for yet another extortion raquet. But I can't help but think this was a planned PR stunt for the voters. I would guess it is getting harder to justify some of the crap they are doing even to their supporters, so come out and show them that they have to bail out Europe again, and sow further division. The MAGA manacs will be cheering how great America is that they have to come to the aid of baby Europe.. I am sure Eruope has the means to deal with the Houtis, but the US are probably not letting them.

 

Notice, there is no defence official? I would find it very hard to believe if it were really about making a decison, they wouldn't have a defence official in there, for someone to blame if it all goes wrong. 

 

I have changed my tune that it is reasonable that Chump didn't know about it.. this is PR gold to them. And the whiny left wing media complaining about a storm in a teacup to boot (how they will spin it).

Edited 3 hours ago by Jerry_Atrick

[nomadpete]

Occam's razor.

 

Simple uncompetance trumps conspiracies.

(Pun intended)

 

An aside question is 'Why did Waltz have the editor's phone numbers  in his private phone?' Accidental inclusion in the chat group is possible if he grabbed the numbers to invite, from his 'Recent Calls' list.

 

But according to reports:-

 

"He said he had never communicated with the journalist, Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg."

 

No, it's not a storm in a teacup. Europe should be outraged.

 

Curiouser and curiouser, said Alice.

 

 

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by nomadpete

[facthunter]

Where's the Whiny Left wing media in the USA . Jerry?   Nev

[Jerry_Atrick]

Wasn't worded well; they will characterise media raising the issue as the whiny left media