We won't get anything like beautiful boulevards because Trump and his circle have a personal hatred of any well designed public goods. Cutting-edge science, the performing arts, libraries and research institutions––I think Trump, Musk, et all view these kinds of collective achievements as an implicit rebuke of their greatness, and thus targets of their vengeance.
The oligarchs of the Gilded Age were savvy enough to co-opt the most advanced art and knowledge by donating capital in return for having their name associated with great achievements they themselves could never have produced. But these guys will feel more triumphant when everything is reduced to the sort of enshittification they have brought to the internet.
Very good. I was thinking last night in the shower about the idea that somehow Trump is a sage macroeconomist, a gold plated Krugman or something. It’s ludicrous. He has no idea what he’s doing. I’m more interested now in the psychology of his lackeys who are going along with it.
These connections to the 18th Brumaire are illuminating. Another passage that has been coming to mind in light of recent events is Walter Benjamin on the "indecisiveness of the tyrant" in Origins of German Tragic Drama (1928), one of the passages in this book that seeks to subvert Schmitt's theory of sovereignty: "The prince, who is responsible for making the decision to proclaim the state of emergency, reveals, at the first opportunity, that he is almost incapable of making a decision. Just as compositions with restful lighting are virtually unknown in mannerist painting, so it is that the theatrical figures of this epoch always appear in the harsh light of their changing resolve. What is conspicuous about them is not so much the sovereignty evident in the stoic turns of phrase, as the sheer arbitrariness of a constantly shifting emotional storm in which the figures of Lohenstein especially sway about like torn and flapping banners. And they also bear a certain resemblance to the figures of El Greco in the smallness of their heads, if we understand this in a metaphorical sense. For their actions are not determined by thought, but by changing physical impulses" (p. 71)
I actually think that the endgame for the Trump 2.0 has been recast by his Heritage Foundation brain trust from simple ‘America First’ bullying into something far more ambitious: a world divvied-up between Putin/Russia, Trump/US, and Xi/China as three autocratic ruling syndicates, on the La Cosa Nostra model.
The tariffs are a ploy to pull Canada and Mexico into a new type of economic order/entanglement, where economic policy is ‘dictated’ and shaped by Boss Trump and increasingly facilitated and enforced by what will surely become more of Trump’s consiglieres, a la Musk, Bezos, and so many other corporate and financial titans who are falling in line.
That’s why Trump is trying to undercut Europe on behalf of Russia, for that would be part of Putin’s domain. It’s also why Trump is laying claim to Greenland, Canada, Mexico and the Gulf, as well as the Panama Canal, etc. That would all fall under the Trump/U.S. domain. I present more evidence for this in my own latest post: https://open.substack.com/pub/jonthinks/p/trump-20-la-cosa-nostra-writ-large?r=mrvx1&utm_medium=ios
As Canada and others are beginning to realize, doing a “deal” with Trump not only rides on personal sucking up, it also presupposes accepting his version of the underlying facts, which of course he invents (fentanyl, crime, immigrants, “unfair” subsidies, Ukraine started the war, etc.). You don’t accept the factoids, no deal.
As we saw in the Zelensky fiasco, he loses his shit when told to his face he’s lying. I thought he was going to bust a vein. Apparently, the same thing happened yesterday on the phone when Trudeau cited the US gov’t’s own figures on fentanyl from Canada.
Trump and Vance: Well, we don’t use that metric.
Trudeau: What metric do you use then?
According to reporters, this precipitated the ‘fuck you’ meltdown.
On the public works thing, fascists have to de-valorize anything that either is not a mirror image of themselves or anything over which they have no control. Public works? What’s in it for me? It’s completely beyond imagining that Musk would ever use any of his wealth for, let’s say, something like saving pollinators from extinction. Inconceivable.
Your quotes reminded me of Marx's articles written for the American newspaper. I had picked up a copy of the recent biography of Napoleon III. I can see from it that Marx was on to something. I also see that the Brumaire is a lot shorter than the new translation of Capital, and no doubt a more entertaining read. It should help with any undue optimism issues to be regularly reminded of how Trump instinctively finds a way to under perform even Napoleon III. Sigh. I don't care how big the challenge to unify the Standard Model and General Relativity is, it pales next to finding a rational explanation of how a sentient group of humans can conclude that what they really needed was 4 more years (if he makes it) of Trump. Let alone Trump and Elon the Black Swan, of course.
This analysis seems astute, except it doesn't take into account the fact that Trump appears to see tariffs as a way to weaken Canada as a first step toward annexing it. Serious question(s) for Americans: Are you willing to die in an invasion of Canada? Are you willing to watch family, friends, neighbours, colleagues die in an invasion of Canada? If not, what are you going to do about it, starting today?
My question to folks who like to leave comments in this sort of sanctimonious hectoring style is what do you hope to get out of it? Has it ever "worked"? And what would working look like?
The 18th Brumaire is also where Marx comes up with the term lumpenbourgois for Napoleon III and his cronies. That label fits Trump like a mobsters glove
I think you got it right. The mistrust of institutions is not due to them failing; they're operating about as well, or as badly, as they ever have. Rather, it's their rejection by minds that abhor complexity. We're witnessing a reversion to a premodern mode of thought, sensible in an age of face-to-face societies but idiotic in a huge society of strangers. This regression is a reaction against complexity and the lack of simple answers that such minds crave.
To the extent you can see anything in Trump 2.0, I think we are looking at trying to sell chunks of the goverrnment off to cronies and pals or for the broligarchs, create a third-rate Shadowrun campaign with them as the corporate overlords under their "philosopher" Yarvin as a guiding principal. There could end up being some self-owns in here.
We will also see the federal government used to target anyone who is in their ire. The Executive Order against Perkins Coie is a bill of attainder in all but name and mainly because they represented Democratic politicians and Marc Elias used to work for them.
He’s just enough of a hyper-greedy capitalist but also a political nihilist to provide enough canvas for opportunists and believers alike to project an avatar on which promises can be sustained.
It will end in a frightfully inglorious shitshow. If the protagonists are permitted to waltz off to the BVI or continue to take it in on the has been circuit we will be looking for something stronger than Farce for this particular third act.
Interesting similarities. Yeah, one can understand a lot of the moves by looking for the people he wants to make 1) afraid 2) grateful 3) manipulable 4) rich, etc. So it’s chaotic but there are a lot of different methods going on to turn power to himself. But he’s not doing the usual thing of openly benefitting the specific voters he needs the most, and yet they still love his moves. That could mean he doesn’t worry about elections going forward or that he considers them fully captive to his narrative.
We won't get anything like beautiful boulevards because Trump and his circle have a personal hatred of any well designed public goods. Cutting-edge science, the performing arts, libraries and research institutions––I think Trump, Musk, et all view these kinds of collective achievements as an implicit rebuke of their greatness, and thus targets of their vengeance.
The oligarchs of the Gilded Age were savvy enough to co-opt the most advanced art and knowledge by donating capital in return for having their name associated with great achievements they themselves could never have produced. But these guys will feel more triumphant when everything is reduced to the sort of enshittification they have brought to the internet.
Good points!
Very good. I was thinking last night in the shower about the idea that somehow Trump is a sage macroeconomist, a gold plated Krugman or something. It’s ludicrous. He has no idea what he’s doing. I’m more interested now in the psychology of his lackeys who are going along with it.
These connections to the 18th Brumaire are illuminating. Another passage that has been coming to mind in light of recent events is Walter Benjamin on the "indecisiveness of the tyrant" in Origins of German Tragic Drama (1928), one of the passages in this book that seeks to subvert Schmitt's theory of sovereignty: "The prince, who is responsible for making the decision to proclaim the state of emergency, reveals, at the first opportunity, that he is almost incapable of making a decision. Just as compositions with restful lighting are virtually unknown in mannerist painting, so it is that the theatrical figures of this epoch always appear in the harsh light of their changing resolve. What is conspicuous about them is not so much the sovereignty evident in the stoic turns of phrase, as the sheer arbitrariness of a constantly shifting emotional storm in which the figures of Lohenstein especially sway about like torn and flapping banners. And they also bear a certain resemblance to the figures of El Greco in the smallness of their heads, if we understand this in a metaphorical sense. For their actions are not determined by thought, but by changing physical impulses" (p. 71)
I actually think that the endgame for the Trump 2.0 has been recast by his Heritage Foundation brain trust from simple ‘America First’ bullying into something far more ambitious: a world divvied-up between Putin/Russia, Trump/US, and Xi/China as three autocratic ruling syndicates, on the La Cosa Nostra model.
The tariffs are a ploy to pull Canada and Mexico into a new type of economic order/entanglement, where economic policy is ‘dictated’ and shaped by Boss Trump and increasingly facilitated and enforced by what will surely become more of Trump’s consiglieres, a la Musk, Bezos, and so many other corporate and financial titans who are falling in line.
That’s why Trump is trying to undercut Europe on behalf of Russia, for that would be part of Putin’s domain. It’s also why Trump is laying claim to Greenland, Canada, Mexico and the Gulf, as well as the Panama Canal, etc. That would all fall under the Trump/U.S. domain. I present more evidence for this in my own latest post: https://open.substack.com/pub/jonthinks/p/trump-20-la-cosa-nostra-writ-large?r=mrvx1&utm_medium=ios
As Canada and others are beginning to realize, doing a “deal” with Trump not only rides on personal sucking up, it also presupposes accepting his version of the underlying facts, which of course he invents (fentanyl, crime, immigrants, “unfair” subsidies, Ukraine started the war, etc.). You don’t accept the factoids, no deal.
As we saw in the Zelensky fiasco, he loses his shit when told to his face he’s lying. I thought he was going to bust a vein. Apparently, the same thing happened yesterday on the phone when Trudeau cited the US gov’t’s own figures on fentanyl from Canada.
Trump and Vance: Well, we don’t use that metric.
Trudeau: What metric do you use then?
According to reporters, this precipitated the ‘fuck you’ meltdown.
On the public works thing, fascists have to de-valorize anything that either is not a mirror image of themselves or anything over which they have no control. Public works? What’s in it for me? It’s completely beyond imagining that Musk would ever use any of his wealth for, let’s say, something like saving pollinators from extinction. Inconceivable.
Your quotes reminded me of Marx's articles written for the American newspaper. I had picked up a copy of the recent biography of Napoleon III. I can see from it that Marx was on to something. I also see that the Brumaire is a lot shorter than the new translation of Capital, and no doubt a more entertaining read. It should help with any undue optimism issues to be regularly reminded of how Trump instinctively finds a way to under perform even Napoleon III. Sigh. I don't care how big the challenge to unify the Standard Model and General Relativity is, it pales next to finding a rational explanation of how a sentient group of humans can conclude that what they really needed was 4 more years (if he makes it) of Trump. Let alone Trump and Elon the Black Swan, of course.
This analysis seems astute, except it doesn't take into account the fact that Trump appears to see tariffs as a way to weaken Canada as a first step toward annexing it. Serious question(s) for Americans: Are you willing to die in an invasion of Canada? Are you willing to watch family, friends, neighbours, colleagues die in an invasion of Canada? If not, what are you going to do about it, starting today?
My question to folks who like to leave comments in this sort of sanctimonious hectoring style is what do you hope to get out of it? Has it ever "worked"? And what would working look like?
I genuinely can’t get a read on whether he actually wants to do this.
https://youtu.be/X1QUAr6qHKA?si=XQiSYLZsJG0Vp8-p&t=9
The 18th Brumaire is also where Marx comes up with the term lumpenbourgois for Napoleon III and his cronies. That label fits Trump like a mobsters glove
I think you got it right. The mistrust of institutions is not due to them failing; they're operating about as well, or as badly, as they ever have. Rather, it's their rejection by minds that abhor complexity. We're witnessing a reversion to a premodern mode of thought, sensible in an age of face-to-face societies but idiotic in a huge society of strangers. This regression is a reaction against complexity and the lack of simple answers that such minds crave.
Regarding the administration's economic-financial goals, many people are saying this is a sort of playbook from which they're working:
https://www.hudsonbaycapital.com/documents/FG/hudsonbay/research/638199_A_Users_Guide_to_Restructuring_the_Global_Trading_System.pdf
To the extent you can see anything in Trump 2.0, I think we are looking at trying to sell chunks of the goverrnment off to cronies and pals or for the broligarchs, create a third-rate Shadowrun campaign with them as the corporate overlords under their "philosopher" Yarvin as a guiding principal. There could end up being some self-owns in here.
We will also see the federal government used to target anyone who is in their ire. The Executive Order against Perkins Coie is a bill of attainder in all but name and mainly because they represented Democratic politicians and Marc Elias used to work for them.
He’s just enough of a hyper-greedy capitalist but also a political nihilist to provide enough canvas for opportunists and believers alike to project an avatar on which promises can be sustained.
It will end in a frightfully inglorious shitshow. If the protagonists are permitted to waltz off to the BVI or continue to take it in on the has been circuit we will be looking for something stronger than Farce for this particular third act.
Trump thinks of everything has a zero-sum game. He has no understanding of concepts like the law of comparative advantage.
Interesting similarities. Yeah, one can understand a lot of the moves by looking for the people he wants to make 1) afraid 2) grateful 3) manipulable 4) rich, etc. So it’s chaotic but there are a lot of different methods going on to turn power to himself. But he’s not doing the usual thing of openly benefitting the specific voters he needs the most, and yet they still love his moves. That could mean he doesn’t worry about elections going forward or that he considers them fully captive to his narrative.
Beautifully written
So query: does this shit ever end well, without some awful disaster triggering the collapse?
Only thing coming to mind is FDR and the New Deal ending the Gilded Age but that clearly didn’t work well, and nothing like will or can happen again.