Is Trump Proving The Communist Manifesto To Be Right?

Well, perhaps, not the whole manifesto. But consider the quote below:

'The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn asunder the motley feudal ties that bound man to his “natural superiors”, and has left remaining no other nexus between man and man than naked self-interest, than callous “cash payment”. It has drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervour, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation.'

 Now think of tariff policies towards allies or his plan to provide weapons for Ukraine or his stated plans for Gaza. Or think about how Trump's Administration has attacked foreign aid and domestic social safety nets, and regulations that protect workers, customers, and the environment. What characteristics has Trump, who is certainly an example of today's bourgeoisie, exhibited? Don't we see the best descriptions of the connections between the U.S. and other nations as being 'naked self-interest,' 'callous cash payment,' and  'egotistical calculation.' We also see that latter characteristic in his self-worship statements.

Or think about Trump's remaking of the EPA, his attacks on scientific and medical research or his takeover of the Kennedy Center. Isn't that where he exhibits 'philistine sentimentalism.'

Noam Chomsky's Profits Over People talks about some of those characteristics as being a part of today's Neoliberal Capitalism. Note to those of us Baby Boomers, today's form. of Capitalism is not the form that we grew up under. But when his book came out, which was 1999, many of these traits were hidden in the shadows. Now despite that in the foreign front Trump is not neoliberal, on the domestic one he is. And the difference that exists between 1999 and now  is that these traits are not just being exhibited in the open, they are being promoted as prized traits that benefits the common good.

It isn't that The Communist Manifesto is right about everything; it isn't. But its interpretation of the form of Capitalism of when and where it was written seems most appropriate to today's form of Capitalism as employed by the Trump Administration.

We should note that Trump is not the only problem here. In a commercial local to where I live, a congressperson is publicly thanked by certain taxpayers because they had their taxes cut. And the concluding statement is that this congressperson cares about these people because they cut their taxes. The logic employed by the commercial is overly simplistic and uses a form of all-or-nothing thinking which is part and parcel to accepting authoritarianism. For no matter what else that congressperson voted on, that they only had to cut taxes for particular groups of people to prove that that congress- person cared for them. Who cares if that congressperson also voted for legislation that allows businesses to pollute the environment or increase the emissions of greenhouse gases? Who cares if that congressperson also voted for legislation that allows businesses to exploit workers and/or cheat customers? Who cares if that congressperson also voted for legislation that will stop research on diseases and the environment? And who cares if that congressperson also voted for legislation that will cause the national debt to increase and perhaps reach a tipping point? All that congressperson had to do was to vote for tax cuts to show that they care.

Of course DOGE paved the way for those tax cuts. And I imitated DOGE's approach in my approach to life, it might look like the following. For example, if I wanted to lose weight, I could ask myself which limb I use the least and then have it amputated. I could refuse to pay my car insurance because I haven't had an accident in a while. What could go wrong with that philosophy?

Trump's 'America First' motto is calling on America to be a selfish nation. And this should be considered to be more than ironic because of Trump's support from the Evangelical community. But perhaps it should be expected since many in the Evangelical community uncritically embrace Capitalism, even today's Neoliberal form. That such an embrace of Capitalism exhibits traits such as 'naked self-interest' and 'egotistical calculation.' From their devotion to their information bubble, we know that many from the Evangelical community also show a 'philistine sentimentalism.' Perhaps we should ask ourselves if Capitalism has more of an influence on the Evangelical Community than our preaching of the Gospel has on Capitalism.

Capitalism revolves around making personal prosperity one's first pursuit. It derives its motivational energy from its promotion on maximizing profits. Perhaps, just as war corrupts all of its participants, something I have heard from both a war correspondent and people in the military, so too does Capitalism. For what drives a Capitalist nation is not just the desire to make profit seeking its number one priority, it is the consumer mentality. Consumerism makes Capitalist economies tick.

In a consumeristic economy, the strong tendency of its participants is for those people to measure their personal significance by what and how much they consume. Martin Luther King Jr. expressed this fear about America because of its Capitalist economic system when he wrote, in Stride Toward Freedom, that people would exclusively judge themselves by their income and possessions rather than by what they contributed to others and their relationships with people.

In his speech on the Vietnam War, he wrote the following, which has been cited on this blog a few times:

'I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin...we must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered'

Note what King associates a thing-oriented society, which a consumer oriented society is: 'racism, extreme materialism, and militarism.' Do we see how the more consumer oriented we become, the fewer people can remain unscathed from how it corrupts. And that consumerism is driven by economic systems that lean heavily toward Capitalism--especially today's Neoliberal Capitalism.

It would be easy to point fingers at others at this point, but one can do so only when they are suffering from significant self-delusions. These points being brought up here for there for us to acknowledge where we have been corrupted first.

And so, no, we can't just point our fingers at Trump and others like him and be done with looking at how our nation should change. We also need to look at ourselves, and perhaps at ourselves first. If we have passionately embraced Capitalism because of how it has allowed us to become more prosperous consumers, how are we also confirming what was previously cited from The Communist Manifesto about Capitalism, especially Capitalism here and now. Just perhaps we can't change who our leaders are without first changing who we are.

 

 

Pedro Martinez On Trump's Aid For Ukraine?

The title of this article is a bit deceiving because I have no evidence for even hinting that MLB Baseball great Pedro Martinez has voiced an opinion on Trump's aid for Ukraine. But there is something that Martinez said about the dark side of MLB Baseball in the Netflix documentary, The Comeback. That dark side, according to Martinez, is the business side because it knows no loyalty or friendship.

And so when we come to Trump's aid package for Ukraine, note that Trump described it like a business transaction. The US will provide weapons for Ukraine's defense only those weapons are being sold. And they are; they are being bought by European nations that are committed to Ukraine's defense. Here, it seems, that Trump appears to be more focused on the US is making a profit than on helping a nation under siege. Would Trump have offered an aid package for Ukraine if there were no European nations willing to foot the bill? We cannot say for sure, but as things stand, Trump is showing no loyalty to Ukraine with his aid package.

And with Russia's war against Ukraine where it seems civilians are major targets, we need to ask this question: What does Trump owe Putin? For he has always expressed admiration for Putin and there is no doubt that he was elected with Putin's help. And he has been very slow to put new sanctions on Putin while quick to put tariffs on our, perhaps now former, allies. It could be that either Trump owes him a lot or, surprise, Trump will be reneging on a debt. If Ukraine meant more to Trump than just an avenue for revenue, he would show a certain degree of loyalty to Ukraine despite the costs. But if Trump's actions regarding the Russian-Ukraine war also show that he owes Putin a significant debt, then whatever sanctions he employs or actions he takes on Russia will be for PR reasons only. That makes Trump's positions and actions very interesting at this time.

Though this blog is adamantly opposed to almost all of Trump's actions as President, he should be given credit for the following. He said that Ukraine cannot be a part of NATO. Why? The first answer should be history. Russia's history with its western neighbors is horrific. And so we must respect Russia's sensitivity here. The second answer is that any move that the West made/makes westward after George W. Bush's agreement with Gorbachev violates at least the spirit of the agreement that they made regarding the reunification of Germany. So to be fair, if a peace agreement can be made prior to Russia conquering it, then Ukraine must not become another member of NATO.

I think that we would do well to interpret Trump's Presidency as being similar to how  a heavy-handed CEO runs a large corporation. This might explain Trump's criticisms of Biden. Trump compared how Biden was running the nation with how he, Trump, wants to run his businesses. First, many parts of the business that were  not contributing making a profit, such as many foreign aid and domestic social safety nets, were axed. Also axed were dissidents in government  and scientists whose findings he could neither refute nor control. We should note that corporations tend to foster authoritarian environments with some being more authoritarian than others. The more authoritarian the environment, the less tolerance is shown to those in leadership positions who disagree.

And if we continue along this line, then realize that Trump expects certain kinds of relationships with other nations (a.k.a., 'the competition') in Trump's eyes, that he wants his own businesses to have with other businesses. It isn't enough for the US to be coexisting with other nations in the world. He wants his business to be on top, which means that he wants America to dominate and even control other nations. When, under Biden, America was not dominating others and was giving away too many freebees, Trump saw America as failing. And let's be honest about Biden, he did fail in a lot of areas other than the ways that Trump views failure. 

So, in other words, Trump has taken a reductionistic approach to our nation. He runs it like a business with his own authoritarian way.

Now if we return to what Martinez said about the dark side of baseball, don't we see that playing out in Trump's Presidency? That for Trump, there is little room for loyalty to those subordinates who now disagree with at least some of what he says and does.  In contrast, loyalty is a trait that is best measured by how one reacts despite the negative consequences that come with remaining steadfast. His berating and even silencing of those people show his lack of loyalty and friendship while displaying his authoritarianism.

And so now, both our nation and Putin should be a bit leery of Trump. For if the business side of Trump's personality infringes on being loyal, then our nation must ask what would Trump's asking price be for betraying our nation. Some would say that he has already been doing that by how he has used his Presidency to increase his personal wealth. 

But Trump's lack of loyalty should also put Putin on notice. Suppose Trump turns on Putin for personal gain? Suppose Trump betrays Putin and reneges on paying his debt to him? That betrayal is not one that I expect to happen nor is it one to be taken lightly. But should that happen, the conflict that could arise from that betrayal would be ominous for the whole world.

Again, what Martinez said about the business side of baseball should very much concern us because of how Trump seems to rule as our President. For right now, we have a President who is behaving like a CEO. But what would happen if we have a CEO would be King?

Why Isnˋt The Church Saying This To Trump, Supporters Of His BBB, and the Rich?

Who said the following, Marx or the Bible?

'Come now, you rich, weep and howl for the miseries that are coming upon you. Your riches have rotted and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver have corroded, and their corrosion will be evidence against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have laid up treasure in the last days. Behold, the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, are crying out against you'

The writing style of the quote should give away the answer. And so if we changed the writing style, perhaps the question would be more challenging. We should note here that, according to Marx, the redistribution of wealth first depends on the redistribution of power which would give power to the proletariat.

Before going on, we should finish the rest of the passage that was speaking to the rich:

'and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts. You have lived on the earth in luxury and in self-indulgence. You have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter. You have condemned and murdered the righteous person. He does not resist you'

The above passage comes from James 5. It is fresh in my mind because of the local Bible study I attend. And the question that is in the title of this article is the question which every one of us religiously conservative Christian (a.k.a., Flaming Fundamentalist) should be asking both our leaders as well as ourselves. Which Bible believing Christian is quoting this passage from James 5 to Trump and his supporters of his Big Beautiful Bible?

What we see in the above Bible passage is one of  kinds of prophetic messages preached in New Testament times to those whose sins were so grievous that they warranted a public reprimand. The first kind of warning can be seen in the previous chapter of James. In that passage not only is sin identified and reprimanded, a way of repenting from the sin is laid out before the believer. But the message of repentance was not provided in this 2nd kind of prophetic message. Rather, certain doom as punishment for sin(s) was pronounced. This second kind of New Testament prophetic messages to sinners is an even more serious message than the first kind. And yet, none of Trumpˋs hand-picked religious advisors nor any popular minister Iˋve listened to have been eager to share such a message with Trump.

And it isnˋt just Trump supporters of his Big, Beautiful Bill, wealthy hedge fund managers, and even many of the elite from the Democratic Party also need to read what James wrote. Even upper middle class people need to read what James wrote. That is because Trumpˋs bill reduces the number of social responsibilities that the wealthy have to society including to workers. And that includes reducing the social safety nets that tax-payer funds provide for the vulnerable. It does increase the budget that supports the punishment and expulsion of poor and some working and middle class immigrants even though wealthy immigrants are always welcomed with open arms. One has to wonder, with the money being invested in prisons that hold immigrants who are criminals, whether certain groups of natural born citizens will eventually join them.

While Trump has reduced national greatness to wealth and prestige from power (a.k.a., 'fear'), we religiously conservative Christians might want to consider some other biblical passages such as Ezekiel 16:48-51 when judgment was pronounced against Israel:

'As I live, declares the Lord God, your sister Sodom and her daughters have not done as you and your daughters have done. Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. They were haughty and did an abomination before me. So I removed them, when I saw it'

And while many of my fine fellow flaming fundamentalist friends and families fiercely focus on Sodomˋs sexual sins, what laid the foundation for their immorality was the combination of their wealth and their neglect of the vulnerable. We should note that such treatment of the poor is not a prerequisite for sexual immorality. But we should stare in the mirror when many of those who are blatantly sexually immoral have more compassion and practical concern  for the poor than we religiously conservative Christians have as expressed in our political positions and politicians whom we support. Here we should remember that with their ease, those residents from Jerusalem who were receiving Ezekielˋs message were also arrogant.

Or wasnˋt the following passage from I Timothy 6:9-10 ever quoted to Trump and his supportersÉ

'But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs'

That passage speaks to more than the religious. The kind of ruin Paul is talking about is more than just falling away from the faith when he says that the love of money can be dangerous. ˋRuin and destructionˋ can be the destiny of anyone who has loves money.

The desire for more wealth can also lead to wars according to James 4. And history tells us that that claim applies to more than just believers in Christ. And war corrupts everyone involved. So says active military service members and veterans with whom Iˋve spoken. Those who are on the attacking side of aggressive wars risk military defeat and/or moral suicide, the latter of which is eventually visited on those from one's own nation.

Or consider the following from Ecclesiastes 5:10:

'He who loves money will not be satisfied with money, nor he who loves wealth with his income; this also is vanity'

Consider how many who support Trumpˋs bill are those who are super wealthy when reading that passage.

Or consider the following from II Timothy 3:1-5: 

'But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away'

Doesnˋt the beginning of that passage remind us of today and our world leaders? And so which religiously conservative minister among Trump's advisors is warning Trump about arrogance or being a lover of himself?

Since Trump has entered the political scene, he has seen America as an extension of himself. What he considers to be greatness for him is greatness for America. And perhaps that is why he saw Biden and America under Biden the way he did. BTW, certainly Biden merited much criticism, but Trump expressed America in black/white terms so that if America, despite it having the worldˋs leading economy, didnˋt have the wealth that Trump defined as being wealthy, then America was a failure. The same applies to America's prestige through power. But look at what we have already and will be sacrificing to meet Trumpˋs definition of success.

Certainly the President and our government must be concerned with our nation becoming prosperous enough. But when we consider the Biblical passages cited above, the question becomes which religious leader from Trump's advisors and/or which popular preacher is warning Trump and his supporters about what Godˋs Word says about the love of money?

 

Only Time Will Tell

We just finished a 12-Day War in which all sides claimed victory and a President claimed to have masterminded the most complex military strike in history which also ended the war. All three leaders of the nations involved claimed victory. Will the real truth teller(s) please stand up?

The 12-Day War was started because the Israeli Prime Minister claimed that Iran was on the verge of creating nuclear weapons that would be used to utterly destroy his own nation. BTW, he has been making that claim for decades but now he has found a willing partner in the White House to act on his claims. And now he claims that what his nation and the US did will change history in the Middle East. Besides the fact that we are talking about changing one prediction for the future, we need to ask the Rocket J. Squirrel question regarding that change: Is it friendly change?

We have heard other claims too but let's just consider the ones above. Which claims are true and which ones are false. We should note that all key national leaders have political reasons for claiming victory. While the approval ratings of the Israeli Prime Minister and President Trump have been sliding down, the Iranian leader could possibly face possible removal if the war went too far south. And so each of these leaders have reasons to interpret the war opportunistically.

As adults, we have a sound reasons for ignoring the claims made by all opportunists whether they are made by national leaders, their supporters, or their critics. Instead, we should let time determine what we should believe. And indeed, time has already spoken on some of those claims. For example, intelligence garnered and interpreted by our military says that the damage done by our 'Bunker-Busting Bombs' was not as great as the President claimed it was. This caused the President to lash out at that intelligence information and double-down on his claims. Again, who is right? Time will tell.

In the meantime, one lesson from the 12-Day War is clear: the powerful need friends, not enablers. The difference between the two is that friends tell us the truth in order to help us; enablers tell us what we want to hear for their own sake. The problem that exists here is that the powerful are often all too eager to see enablers as friends and friends as mortal enemies. What we see with each of the key leaders in the 12-Day War is that their lust for power and, for 2 of those leaders, their desire to outrun the laws of their own nation have blinded them so that they are unable to distinguish between friends and enablers. And so we should further define our terms here.

We could define an enabler as a person who contributes to another person's efforts to perform malevolent or unhealthy actions. In contrast to that, a friend will not only help make another person do what is good or healthy, a friend will speak out against those actions that are immoral or unhealthy.

Unfortunately, national and other leaders who are focussed on garnering as much power as they can tend to surround themselves with enablers. Here we could compare and contrast the current set of enablers who currently serve in Trump's Cabinet from most of those who served in his Cabinet during his first term. Many of Trump's Cabinet members who served during his first Presidential term insisted on telling Trump the truth. In so doing, they acted as his friends and faithful advisors. Most of Trump's current Cabinet advisors are acting as his enablers in order to enjoy riding in on his coattails. Tulsi Gabbard, Trump's Director of National Intelligence has, regarding the effectiveness of American airstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, decided to speak truth to power and report what her intelligence resources shared with her. Of course a question becomes what will her future job status be.

Both enablers and many opponents act as opportunists. While enablers are more than eager to provide either positive spins on or deny potentially damaging news and stories, opponents provide either negative spins on or deny favorable news and stories. Both are way too eager to accept the first news report or story that serves their purposes.

At this point, those of us who are Christians have choices to make. As has been made apparent by the facts, most of my fellow religiously conservative Christians voted for Trump and many of them still support his Presidency. They need to choose being a friend to the President rather than an enabler.

Those of us religiously conservative Christians who oppose some of policies or his whole Presidency have choices to make too. We must choose to be Trump's opponents who are also his friends. That means that we oppose his policies and even his Presidency while caring about him as a person. But we must also choose to resist the temptation to be the opportunists with the news like his opportunists are. 

We religiously conservative Christians need to take such an approach to President Trump for a few reasons. The first reason is that our regard for and treatment of Trump must reflect how God has treated us in Christ. If God has not treated us as our sins deserve, then how dare we not do the same for those in our lives including our public officials. Because of that, we religiously conservative Christians cannot respond to our government with the animosity and rancor that many unbelieving fellow opponents to Trump often respond with. Here, though forgiven, it is important for us Christians to remember the sins we have committed in the past so that we understand what we are capable of doing in the future. Such understanding can help us to properly respond to our leaders when they do what is wrong.

The second reason is that the Scriptures tell us to respect those in authority over us. Many times, that respect includes obedience. But when our government practices or promotes social injustices, either domestic or foreign, then we need to speak out and sometimes engage in civil disobedience.

The third reason for us religiously conservative Christians must avoid being opportunists with the news is the prohibition against bearing false witness that one of the Ten Commandments warns against. Being too quick to comment on the news can lead us to, because of carelessness and overeagerness, to bear false witness against those in power. 

Certainly, it should be clear by now that our President and the Prime Minister of Israel are pursuing pathological policies. The attacks on Iran are an example of those pathological policies. Iran posed no immediate threat to the existence of Israel. That is despite the atrocities that it enables through its proxies. We need to ask whether Israel's Occupation and treatment of the Palestinians is the driving cause for Iran's opposition to the current form of Zionism that Israel passionately embraces. After all, the Occupation serves as camouflage for Israel's often brutal ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the land. And Trump joined in Netanyahu's pathological practices by being Israel's tag-team bombing partner in the 12-Day War along with his support for Netanyahu's unconscionable war against Gaza where civilians are daily slaughtered with no remorse. As Rita Corriel wrote in an article on Israel, and this was written a while ago, Israel is showing that they have learned more from their oppressors than from the experience of being oppressed (click here for the article). 

What about Trump? His immigration policies alone show an extreme favoritism toward those who already have more than enough as well as a cruel disposition toward many who emigrated here to escape life-threatening poverty and/or violence in their own countries that are south of the border. His immigration policies not only look to deport people, but to deport many without due process to nations that practice cruelty on its own prisoners. And Trump's deportation of immigrants has not taken sufficient care to distinguish between law-biding immigrants from those with criminal records.

His big beautiful bill shows the same kind and similar level of favoritism as he wants tax cuts for the wealthy at the expense of social safety net programs that serve those in need. Trump's tariffs shows his approach to foreign policy to being that of shoot or threaten first hoping that his targets will grovel to make a deal second.

And what Netanyahu and Trump also share is their attempts to use their positions in government to outrun the law with the former having been investigated for corruption and the latter being a convicted felon. Is either one morally superior to Putin who brutally suppresses political support at home and has his military slaughtering civilians in Ukraine?

What leaders like Trump, Putin, and Netanyahu teach us is that the powerful are, on a practical level, above international law while the rest are not. That the powerful only need to make claims about threats and injustices made by the weak in order to move against them without having to rely on international due process to attack. And so here we can conclude that power hungry leaders like Trump, Putin, and Netanyahu need help, not power. But they are getting the latter thanks, in large part, to their enablers.

Thus, we need to avoid being enablers for leaders like Trump and Netanyahu. We could also include Putin and Iran's leader, Ali Khamenei, and a host of others And one way to avoid being such an enablers is to refuse to be opportunistic with the news.

And how can we avoid being opportunistic with the news? One of the first ways by which we can avoid doing so is to be patient. We need to let time tell which claims are true and which ones are false. And that means not being eager to selectively report the first tidbit of news that favors our own agendas and perceptions. The more we let time speak, the more complete will be our knowledge and understanding of the world around us.

Welcome To Atlas Shrugged The Mulligan

For those who are not familiar with the game of golf, a mulligan is a free do-over for a shot that a player does not like. And so the golf shot that went awry is not counted in the golfers score.  

Atlas Shrugged is a book written by Ayn Rand who escaped from Russia during the Russian Revolution. Her book, which she saw as being the best of her novels, tells how business leaders who felt too controlled by government escaped the country and eventually started their own city..

What we are seeing today under Trump's second presidency is not the fleeing in horror by today's wealthiest corporate leaders to start a 2nd America. It is quite the opposite. What we are seeing is the wealthiest corporate leaders standing behind and supporting Trump as he replaces American Democracy with a kind of Russian oligarchy. That is the rule of a limited number of rich people under a wannabe dictator who employs a religious façade in order to secure the political loyalty of the predominant branch the Church in America. In other words, instead of fleeing, this small group of wealthy corporate rules get to impose their agenda on America. And that agenda includes cutting more and more social responsibility ties that they have with  the nation that enabled them to become so wealthy.

Thus, what we are seeing today is a remake of Rand's book, Atlas Shrugged, where a group of the super wealthy come to rule over rather than flee from the nation. And when I say that they are here to rule over the nation, I am not just referring to the gutting of regulations governing business and manufacturing processes; via  Trump's Presidency, they are looking to rule over many areas of American life. They are looking to control education including from grades K-12 to all levels of college and university educations. They are looking to cut social safety nets in order to help "fund" their tax breaks. Of course the projected increase to our National Debt shows that such cuts do not fund those tax breaks. They are trying to suppress the press and relegate the Judiciary Branch to a lesser branch of government than the Executive Branch.

And with the rejection of science and rationalism, as evidenced by most, if not all, of Trump's policies and Cabinet picks, Trump's attempted authoritarianism is becoming an American version of 1933 Germany when Hitler started to rule over Germany. Even the chaos that has a come with Trump 2.0 echos the chaos of Hitler's governance. And should anyone protest the comparing of Trump with Hitler, Trump was the first to suggest that comparison when he stated that he wanted the same kind of generals that Hitler had.

While Hitler had the Gestapo, many of the practices of I.C.E are starting to remind us of that secret police force.  Conservative Evangelicalism, which is the predominant branch of the Church in America, is acting like it has its own Konkordat with Trump. Its support for Trump are primarily because of how his Executive Orders address enough culture war issues.

In the place of burning books, we have the banning of books and Trump's war against DEI.

In addition, while Hitler used the burning of the Reichstag to seize absolute power in Germany, Trump is looking to relegate the position of the Judicial Branch to that of an advisory board so that collection of his Executive Orders and bills he has signed replace The Constitution.

And so while Trump is no Hitler of the latter 1930s, the similarities  are growing between Trump and the 1933 Hitler. Those comparisons tempt many to see Trump as instituting Fascism. Personally, I believe that Trump wants his government to be very similar to the model of government employed by Putin. In either case, what we are dealing with is a wannabe totalitarian leader who can tolerate neither opposition nor even mere disagreement.

With the above focus on Trump, it would be fair to ask why bring in Ayn Rand's book here and mention the super wealthy. It is because they play a vital role in Trump's takeover as Elon Musk demonstrates. In addition, when Apple got a dispensation from Trump's tariffs on China, we should note how muc money that the CEO donated to Trumps inauguration. 

Or perhaps the best example can be found when Microsoft blocked the email account of ICC prosecutor who is looking to prosecute Israel's Prime Minister, Ben Netanyahu for war crimes. In addition, Trump had his bank account blocked. It isn't just Trump and his Republican minions that is the problem here. It also includes those who financially enable Trump and sat where real dignitaries  were suppose to sit during Trump's inauguration. They are not just using their wealth to support Trump, they are also using their businesses to support Trump.

If we are to resist, we need to PEACEFULLY protest certain individuals from both the public and private sectors. In other words, we need another Occupy Movement. Not that we need encampments, it is that Occupy protested against both Wall Street and the Federal government. In other words, it's like a Lite-Beer commercial that says that 'it tastes great' and that 'it's less filling,' it is both.  But we need an Occupy that learns from the mistakes that the first Occupy committed.

From what I saw, the first mistake that Occupy committed is that it sought to use police interventions as an object for publicity. For the most part that I know of, Occupy used peaceful means to provoke police reaction, but we were hoping that the police response would get us the publicity that we wanted. If we are going to successfully oppose the Trump and the current oligarchy, it is necessary that we protest in ways that merit respect from the police as well as the military should they be called in. But we also need to protest in such ways because, despite all of their faults and bad apples, the job of a police person merits our respect. And so we should not use them as an object. Instead, beside earning their respect for how we protest, we need to show that we are defending their freedom and rights as well as our own. Here we need to study why one of the reasons why Otpor was successful in overthrowing Slobodan Milošević.

The second mistake that Occupy made is that we attempted to scapegoat the wealthy. And by doing so, we put the burden of proof for our claims on ourselves. Had we invited the wealthy to join the rest of society, to stop their societal apartheid that is enforced by laws, social values, and financial disparities, people would lean more toward looking at the wealthy to prove that they are not building a financial Berlin Wall that separates the economic classes with their wealth. And here, we must point people to the direction well described by Martin Luther King Jr in his speech against the Vietnam War (click here for the source):

'Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken, the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investments. I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin...we must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.'

In short, we need to passionately embrace a people-first ethic as a primary social value of society if we are going to successfully oppose the current oligarchy. For the oligarchy's current thing-oriented approach to life has been put on steroids. And so we need to push the oligarchy to also adopt a people-first ethic.

The reason why we should take at least some of the Occupy approach that was taken around 14 years ago is because we are dealing with the same kind of problem only one that is currently far more intense than what Occupy challenged. The past oligarchy was content to hide in the shadows so that claims of oligarchy had to be made by researchers (click here for an example). But now, run-of-the-mill news reporters can point out the power that wealth has over our government because this mulligan taken by Atlas Shrugged.

A good example of protesting oligarchy can be found in today's boycotting of Tesla vehicles. That boycott is one of the reasons why Musk appears to be paying more attention to his businesses and less attention to our government. Note here that we need peaceful ways of protesting. The deliberate burning of Tesla vehicles both is immoral and does not serve our protests against oligarchy. Such violence against Tesla vehicles actually fits the military definition of terrorism. And so such violent reactions serve the oligarchy and its leader.

And so the above describes much of the problems that we face now. We have an oligarchy that has come out of the closet via a President who knows little to no self-restraint and wishes to lead a government that provides little to no legal restraint on his Presidency. It's not just Trump and his new Republicans whom we need to protest, it is the whole oligarchy.

Will Harvard Be Democracy's Last Stand or its Alamo; or will Harvard Be Trump's Waterloo?

Dear Harvard,

Although I am confident that no one from Harvard will read this letter seeing that I could never qualify to attend there, I wanted to share my thoughts about the situation in which you find yourselves.

First, don't feel special because the Trump government is picking on yous guys. Just look at the other people he is picking on. Take the conditions that that the Trump government is putting on England to end U.S. tariffs against its products. One of those conditions stipulates that England must do away with its hate speech laws. Perhaps a reason for why that condition is because the Trump government either doesn't understand the purpose for those laws or rejects why those laws exist. Here we should note that Europe has learned from its history that hate speech is what fascists use to establish a beachhead in a society. 

Second, my experiences within some of the intramural doctrinal battles within conservative Christianity tells me that while Trump's government claims that it is looking to end discrimination and DEI, it is really looking to replace one them with a different discrimination and protection for another group. This is true regarding the government's stated concern about anti-Semitism and when it comes to DEI. 

The Trump government is obviously oblivious to other forms of anti-Semitism than the form that targets Jews. Certainly, anti-Semitism against Jews must never be tolerated. But since there are other ethnic groups that also qualify as Semites, the Palestinians for example, then discrimination and attacks against those groups should be counted as anti-Semitism as well. In particular, regarding the Trump government's demands that those who promote Palestinian concerns be prohibited from attending Harvard, such a demand is simply is not just letting another form of anti-Semitism fly in under the radar, it is promoting it. 

Likewise, the Trump government's concerns for the elimination of DEI on campus along with the elimination of non merit-based hiring and admission of students shows that it is merely replacing DEI and non merit-based hiring and admission of students with another somewhat similar program. What the Trump government is actually promoting is what I call Privilege, Exclusion, and Inquisition, or PEI for short.

Notice that the Trump government is not concerned about a balanced ideological makeup of faculty at conservative Christian universities in America. His government is not pushing to make sure that universities like Bob Jones, Liberty, Oral Roberts, or Grand Canyon ensure that their faculty demographics are balanced between all political ideologies. Why is that? It is because the Trump government wants those Christians who are both religiously and politically conservative to have dominant roles at every institution because Trump's base consists of Christians who are both politically and religiously conservative.

And so Trump wants Harvard to employ merit-based hiring of faculty with the exception of employing religiously and politically Christians. So ensuring that qualified professors and students from formerly marginalized groups, like racial minorities, can be at Harvard is out while guaranteeing that Christians who are religiously and politically conservative can be at Harvard is in.

Now those who attend or teach at Harvard have no need to read what I just wrote because all that I have just mentioned is obvious to them. What I want those at Harvard to realize is that your battle against the Trump government is very critical to the survival of America in terms of restoring whatever levels of democracy we once had. You, Harvard are our canary in the mine. You, Harvard, will serve as either our democracy's last stand or its Alamo, or your victory will serve as the Trump government's Waterloo. 

It is impossible to know what the future will bring. But do you, Harvard, see how important you are to America at this time in its history? See, you, Harvard, are not just fighting for the survival of a single University including its faculty, students, and others in its community; you are fighting to help restore what limited measure of democracy we once had in this nation. And though the our loss of our democracy occurred just a few months ago, it seems more like our loss occurred a century ago. 

Inaction Can Also Speak Louder Than Words Too

 After Trump expressed anger at Putin's attitudes toward Ukraine in his war against it, something went missing. For after Trump threatened additional tariffs against Russia, no additional tariffs came even after Trump declared a trade war with the world and Putin's persistence in attacking civilian targets and slaughtering children. Tariffs against America's now former allies were put into place; but, again, no new tariffs for Russia could note even be seen on the horizon (click here).

What does the above mean? It should be quite clear by now. We have been witnessing a geopolitical shift. America is no longer a reliable ally of the NATO nations. It is even no longer an ally of its dearest and closest friend, Canada. Canada and the rest of NATO are all now America's exes. Perhaps now is the time for those exes to write a tell all book about what it is like to have America as a partner.

But where is America heading? The way Trump is acting as President, it should be abundantly clear. Trump is acting like America's CEO and Americans are his employees. He is reserving the right to fire any of his employees (a.k.a., even deporting those who have legal green card status) which is a right he will most probably assume when he deports American natural-born citizens whose parents were American citizens.

Another way to look at where America is going is to look at Russia. Why? One reason is because we just don't know how much Trump owes Putin for his election; but we have seen signs of how much Trump admires him. We know that Russia was using disinformation during Trump's previous two Presidential campaigns to help Trump. My own experiences on the internet says to me that I ran into Russian interference during this most recent election. I saw Russian meddling on those  who were on the Left and the Right. The goal of the Russian internet ventures during the last Presidential race was to make Trump look preferable to Biden first and then Harris second regardless of Trump's faults. Evidence for this claim is in the efforts of a self-allegedly conservative Christian website writing at least one article justifying Putin's invasion of Ukraine.

In addition, because of both Russia's help in electing Trump and the words of some fellow believers in Christ, I had predicted that if Trump was elected, that Russia would be our future. I predicted that Russia would be our future because it is an oligarchy while granting the Russian Orthodox Church just enough privileges and considerations  to keep it in the fold. And indeed we are on the way there.

Trump's lack of additional tariffs on Russia despite their conduct in their War against Ukraine should at least indicate, if not imply, that Trump is moving the U.S. closer and closer to Russia both in terms of being its ally and in terms of becoming more and more like it. 

In other instances, the Trump Administration has failed to act on Federal judicial rulings. The most infamous one concerns a man who was mistakenly sent to a maximum security complex in El Salvador. Though the Trump Administration admitted that sending the man there was an error, with the bigger error being that they sent even one person to a prison in another nation without due process of any level, it argued that it has no right to demand that El Salvador has to return the prisoner. In fact, though admitting the error, the Trump Administration has made no voluntary effort to have the man returned. Instead, it argued that the man had ties to MS-13. The man's lawyer denied the claims as well as claimed that the man in question had no criminal record.

Think about the implications here. The Trump Administration can can send anyone to an El Salvador maximum security prison or a prison in any other nation and then wash their hands of the mistake regardless that it was a mistake. That isn't just an ominous position for legal migrants, it applies to American citizens as well. That means any of us could be arrested and sent away with no legal recourse to have the mistake corrected.

And so is the Trump Administration putting America first here? Perhaps the question should be this: Is the Trump Administration putting Americans first? Regardless of the claims made by the Trump Administration, it isn't just actions that speak louder than words, it is inaction as well.

Now that we have pointed out the sins of others, what does our own inaction say about what we really believe? As we reflect on how we have sometimes been inactive in the presence of injustice, especially when we were unjust to others, in addition to urging people to become active in ways that speak out against injustice, we need to have empathy with those who don't. That is because we've done what they are doing now.

What's Most Important To Americans

 During the 2024 Presidential campaign, the #1 issue for American voters was money. It was inflation, grocery prices, and money spent on immigrants. The second issue for many conservatives was the culture wars. And the culture wars revolved around the equal rights for the LGBT community.

Now what is the #1 issue of conservative Americans? The polls tell us that. We could say that the #1 issue is the same for Americans in general; it is money. But that is not entirely accurate. The #1 issue for conservative Americans is oneself. How are conservative Americans concerned about themselves? They are concerned about themselves in terms of money issues including jobs, taxes, and prices. They are concerned about themselves in terms of whom they will share society with. They want the LGBT community to be put back into the margins of society. They are concerned about non-Christian influences on the lives of their families. They see themselves as being victims of  illegal immigration. In general they see themselves as being victims because their leader, Donald Trump, tells them so. And because they are victims by so many people and even countries, remember the Trade Wars, they could care less if Trump does not follow the rules to save them. And in thinking that way, they not only ignore history.

How America got to be this way must be told so that others might avoid our plight. It starts by thinking that one's own group is above all others. Because of America's great wealth, it starts by leaning toward finding more significance in what one consumes more than in what one contributes to others and society.

And though I am no longer a conservative American, I am not innocent of these charges. As I was talking with my best friend, she was talking about how her husband has always been a very hard worker. I had to tell her that I wasn't raised that way. I was raised to be a consumer and so hard work and how it contributed to others was, to me, the price of admission for consuming rather than a reward in and of itself. And so I didn't always work as hard and with the right attitudes as I should. I still struggle with having a good work ethic for the right reasons.

We Americans, especially conservative Americans, want two things in life. The first thing we want is to believe that we are special in a way that makes us and our nation superior to all others. Listen to conservative talk radio if you doubt that part of my analysis here.

And because we are special, or perhaps when we doubt ourselves, we want to consume as much as possible. So we make consumption the center of our lives. That is because, for us, consuming  is both a reward for being so special and an assurance that we are.

In an article (click here and use Google Translate if necessary) written by Richard Martineau for Le Journal de Montréal, Trump is described as the leader whom we all deserve because of our obsession with entertainment--something which we consume in great quantities. And so our consumption of entertainment results in our entertainment replacing culture. Our consumption of entertainment means that we eventually  become attracted to the spectacle and no one makes more of a spectacle of himself than Trump.

Read the comments on capitalism made by Martin Luther King Jr in his book, Stride Toward Freedom (click here and read pg 94-95). When describing what Marx saw as the danger when the profit motive becomes the 'sole basis for an economic system,' King said that Capitalism 'inspires' people to focus more on 'making a living' than on 'making a life.' That capitalism causes us to 'judge ourselves' more by our income and possessions than by what we contribute to others.

If we want to get Biblical about it, note what the prophet wrote in Ezekiel 16:48-50):

48 As I live,” declares the Lord God, “Sodom, your sister and her daughters have not done as you and your daughters have done! 49 Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had arrogance, plenty of food, and carefree ease, but she did not help the poor and needy. 50 So they were haughty and committed abominations before Me. Therefore I removed them when I saw it.

Paul wrote, in his letter to the Galatians, that the desires of the flesh oppose the desires of the Spirit . I believe that a secular parallel to that conflict can be found in the conflict between consumerism and Democracy with equality. Certainly not all consuming is bad; a certain amount of consuming  is necessary for both individuals and society. But when consuming becomes a main way of defining oneself, then we start caring less and less about Democracy with equality. When our own possessions and consumption of material and immaterial goods becomes too important to us, we start to care less and less about the injustices and inequities that those outside of our own tribes suffer. And the more we love to consume, the more we will see those outside of our own tribes as threats to our way of life. And so the more we care about consuming, the more we are likely to fall prey to authoritarian leaders who promise us pie in the sky while warning us, or using fear mongering, that those outside of our tribe are threatening to steal our slice of the pie from us. And the thing about authoritarian leaders who tell us what we want to hear is that they don't have to be rational, they just have to stroke our fears and egos to be persuasive.

America has already been caught in consumerism's vortex because of what we believe about ourselves. How we can escape alive I do not know. But perhaps our example can serve as a warning to our dearest neighbor to the North and our former allies to the East and to the rest of the free world.

Evangelicals Need A Bonhoeffer Movement To Redeem The Church For Voting For Trump

I have two ways to look at Donald Trump. I can look at him as a person and thus as a peer. And I can look at him as the President of the nation in which I live.

What I can't afford to do in looking at him as a peer is to judge and look down on him. I can't do that as a Christian because the Scriptures tell me when I judge a person, Donald Trump for example, I am calling on God to apply His standards and laws on me in the same way as I want Him to apply it on a given person, like Donald Trump. And that would be like being out in the middle of the ocean and sinking the boat I am in. That is because Trump and I are in the same boat. I have my own sins and faults with which I struggle and without the forgiveness that is provided for those who believe in Christ, I'm lost. It matters not that Trump and I do not share the same set of sins. We both deserve the same fate. And so when I look at Trump as a person, I pray that he repents.

But what I can't afford to do when looking at him in the latter way is to be silent about the injustices he's visiting on others and the extraordinary government authority he is seeking. And so I have to speak out against and protest what he is doing. But according to the Golden Rule, Christ requires that when I speak out against and protest him, I need to do so in ways in which I would want people to protest me if I was acting like Trump is. Spoiler alert, I very much struggle with applying the Golden Rule here.

And so I believe that my fellow Evangelicals need to oppose what Trump is doing. But we need to oppose Trump's actions in ways in which we would want people to oppose us if we were in Trump's position and they were protesting us. But let me restate part of what I just wrote. We Evangelicals MUST oppose what Trump is doing. And one reason why we must oppose him is because of our past.

What past am I talking about? The past of the last 3 Presidential elections. At least 80% of us Evangelicals voted for him in each of those elections. At least 80% did so. And many of us still support him despite the present suffering he has caused, the future suffering that will be caused by his policies, and the power grab he is making.

The Apostles wrote and told us to submit to the governing authorities. They told us to lead quiet lives and to not stir the pot because God has ordained our leaders and to protect the reputation of the Gospel. But times have changed since the days of the Apostles and so how we submit to the governing authorities becomes somewhat different and more complicated. One issue here is that we have to factor in how we submit to the governing authorities is that the Gospel is now well known and has been preached in almost all of the earth. In fact, because the Gospel has been strongly associated with different governments, the Gospel now has a track record when it comes to government. And that track record includes when the Church was silently complicit in the sins committed by governments as well as when the Church was actively promoting or involved in committing atrocities. When the Apostles started sharing the Gospel, the Gospel had no track record to either point to  or be ashamed of. 

In addition, unlike today, the citizens of a given nation conquered by Rome had no say in how their government acted and thus they bore far less responsibility than we do now. But when Trump was last campaigning to be President, our nation was a democracy to a significant enough extent in that we employed democratic procedures for determining who runs our government. And in such a system, the people bear much responsibility for what their government does. That is another difference between our situation and the times of the Apostles. But even when that is not the case, like the  Old Testament prophets did before us, we have an obligation to call out social injustices and to appeal to oppressors to repent. James does that in his epistle, especially in chapter 5 where he starts to sound somewhat like Marx.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer felt the burden to speak out  against Hitler. Though he personally was not responsible for Hitler's rise to power, he knew that he must speak out for the oppressed. 

And so we Evangelicals need to create a Bonhoeffer Movement. It is a movement that opposes the autocratic desires and actions of President Trump. The goal is to stop his power grab in its tracks and to restore to our government's implementation of the 3 coequal branches of government as well as to restore those gutted agencies and former employees which was part of our government's programs of social uplift. 

We need to create a Bonhoeffer movement but with one difference. While Bonhoeffer eventually worked to remove Hitler from power, we only need to stop Trump from doing what he is doing. 

And so we need to limit the damage Trump does to our government. We need to do this to limit the number of victims of Trump's desired policies. And, we need to do this for the reputation of the Gospel. The last reason is because the percentage of us Evangelicals who voted for Trump has indisputably tied his Presidency with the reputation of the Gospel.

Because we have supported Trump with such overwhelming numbers, people will link our faith with his policies. In the past few centuries,  there were too many times when we saw the dominant branch of the Church in a given country support those with wealth and oppressive power. That was true during the pre-revolutionary times of France, Russia, and Spain. And after those oppressive regimes were overthrown, the Church unnecessarily suffered various levels of significant persecution. And not only that, the reputation of the Gospel was harmed. And in addition to that, we might consider how Post Modernism, with its view of Christianity, was a reaction to all of the atrocities that occurred under Christendom. 

One more point should be made here. We have sound examples of how we Christians can oppose Trump policies while honoring the position of those in government. Two prominent examples of how to oppose policies and laws while honoring the position of those in government are provided by Martin Luther King Jr. and the SCLC in the 1960s and by Otpor in Serbia from 1998 to 2000 (click here for a brief description of the latter).

The main lesson that we can learn from both groups is the nonviolent approach by which they accomplished their goals. We should stress the nonviolent approaches not just because they are morally right, but also there are groups in our nation that desire that we fall prey to a Civil War. And so if our resistance to Trump's policies involves violence, we could very well be playing into their hands as well as committing atrocities of our own. And though we might have to employ some different tactics than what both previously mentioned peace groups used, maintaining a strict nonviolent approach is an absolute necessity. 

Why do we need a Bonhoeffer Movement? It is because, like Bonhoeffer, we are facing a very similar leader who is driven by hate,  love of money, and the lust for power. And he is wantonly sacrificing programs of social uplift to accomplish his goals. How can we Christians support his actions?

But, again, there must be a difference between the goal of our Bonhoeffer Movement and what Bonhoeffer attempted to. While Bonhoeffer tried to remove Hitler, we must work to merely stop Trump from what he is doing. 

And so it is up to us Evangelicals to do our part in stopping the direction that our nation is on which we have helped enable. We have legitimate reasons for opposing Trump's power grabs and we have a history of nonviolent approaches in opposing a government that visits injustices on people. It is now time to pray, study, speak, and act out. What would be optimal is if we could get Trump to repent and change. But if that doesn't happen, then we must move the other 2 branches of our government to stop the steal. 

Trump's Gaza Plan Indicates What Has Become of Israel And The United States

It wasn't bad enough that Trump suggested that Gaza be emptied of its Palestinian residents and have them moved to Egypt and Jordan. But since both of those nations refused to receive those Gazans, he now  wants to move them to places in Africa where there is poverty and, in some locations, violence (click here). Netanyahu agrees with Trump's plans. All of that is despite the fact that Arab states have offered to foot the bill to rebuild Gaza.

This forced removal of a people from their land has precedents in American history. And so what we are seeing is that Trump is leading Israel to repeat some of the worst parts of American history. In particular, Trump wants Israel to repeat how Americans treated Indians. Those of us Americans who are living now and who are not immediately repulsed by Trump's suggestions show that we neither have personally come to grips with all of American history nor that we have any commitment to principles outside of holding to self-interest. The same could be said of those conservatives who complain that they have heard enough, if not too much, of America's past treatment of Blacks. Those conservatives say that it is now time to move on. But shouldn't the  bare minimum.of us moving on include admitting, rather than repeating, past atrocities?

On the other hand, there is some continuity between Trump's plan and Israel's Occupation practices in the West Bank. That is because the goal of both is the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people from the lands that Israel covets. The difference between Trump's proposal and Israel's occupation is in speed. Whereas the Occupation is facilitating a slow ethnic cleansing, Trump's plan would result in a relatively quick one. An additional absence of humanity in the removal of Gazans from Gaza is that it would all but cut off any contact that Gazans would have with friends and family from the West Bank.

Trump's plan refuses to fully recognize the humanity of the Gazan people. The same could be said of Israel's Occupation of those living in the Palestinian Territories. Both are imitations of how America, for almost its full history, has refused to fully recognize the humanity of non-whites, especially Native Americans and Blacks, within its borders. And Israel's imitation should not surprise us considering all of the ties that have bound America and Israel together. That includes the fact that Netanyahu was educated in America for a significant amount of  of his life. And another factor includes the authoritarian leadership styles that both Trump and Netanyahu exhibit.

So if there are ties between the current leaders of the U.S. and Israel in how they lead lead their nations in their treatment of the Palestinians , we have to face the fact that there are possible ties between the oppressed people in America and the Palestinians. Those ties are more comparable with Native Americans from the past, but they also exist  with many Blacks as well. In either case, what we see in both Israel and the U.S. is that there are a certain groups of people who claim to have rights that they deny to others from having. That changes their rights into privileges because the claiming of rights for one group but not others implies that one is at least partially denying the citizenship and humanity of another group. 

At the same time, fairness demands that the accusations made against the Occupation and Trump's plan must also be made against all Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians. That each Palestinian attack on Israeli civilians must be counted as a denial of the full humanity of all Israelis. There is no justification for those attacks. And we cannot afford to minimize in any way the atrocities committed by groups like Hamas. Those attacks, the Occupation, and Trump's plan must all be vehemently condemned. And though Israel had a right to respond to Hamas's October 7th atrocities, not every possible response is a moral one. And so condemnation of Palestinian terrorism, the Occupation, and Trump's plan must also include an acknowledgement and understanding of the context for both the Occupation and Palestinian terrorism. And that leaves us with one complicated mess where, all too many times, it seems like there are no adults in the room who would restore some resemblance of order.

Recently, a French politician demanded that the U.S. return the Statue of Liberty because Trump's current policies show that America now despises that statue and what it stands for. Though it doesn't appear that that politician had Trump's plans for Gaza in mind, those plans fit neatly into that politician's complaint. And one has to admit that that politician has a point unless, of course, one has fallen prey to the tractor beam of needing to be flattered to feel significant.

Views From The Outside For March 7, 2025

Views From The Outside For March 7, 2025

The purpose of this page is to list news stories and reports from Western sources outside of the U.S. You can use Google Translate to translate articles that are printed in another language.

For March 7

1. Uncertainty For Thousands Forced From West Bank Camps By Israeli Raids -- BBC
2. AfD In The Bundestag: Hitler, Hate, And Hooligans -- DW
3. Can The U.S. Auto Industry Survive Without Canada? -- CBC
4. Former MI6 Boss On Trump, Putin And A 'New Era' For International Relations -- BBC
5. La Proximité Entre Trump Et La Russie ébranlera-t-Elle La Chine? -- Le Journal de Montréal
6. François Hollande: 'Donald Trump Is No Longer Our Ally' -- Le Monde
7. 'How Did It Come To War? To This US Pivot Toward Russia?' -- Le Monde
8. Confused By Trump's Many Tariff Threats? Here's What's Going On -- CBC
9. European Leaders Rally Behind Zelensky After Explosive Exchange With Trump -- Le Monde
10. Trump, Merz And The Future Of The US-German Friendship -- DW
11. Hundreds In US Climate Agency Fired In Latest Cuts -- BBC
12. Altercation Trump-Zelensky: «Une Nouvelle Ère D’Infamie A Commencé», Dit Berlin -- Le Journal de Montréal
13. Social Security Administration To Cut 7,000 Workers -- Reuters
14. Millions Of Children Affected By US Aid Freeze, UNICEF Says -- France24
15. Is Trump Undermining The US Justice System? -- DW
16. Germany's AfD In The Bundestag: 'We Have A Reason To Worry' -- DW
17. Donald Trump And The Putinization Of American Politics -- Le Monde
18. UN Rights Chief Voices Concern At New US Political Direction -- DW
19. How Trumpism Is Permeating French Politics -- Le Monde
20. 'Trump And Musk Are Plunging American Science Into Indescribable Chaos' -- Le Monde
21. Trump Brutally Freezes US Military Aid To Ukraine To Force Zelensky Into Ceasefire -- Le Monde
22. Trudeau Outlines Response To U.S. Tariffs, Says Canada Will 'Relentlessly' Fight To Protect Economy -- CBC
23. Fact-checking Trump's Address To Congress -- BBC
24. Judges Face Rise In Threats As Musk Blasts Them Over Rulings -- Reuters
25. Fact check: Where Was Trump Wrong In His Congress Speech? -- DW

                                                                                        Next Views >>

Is It A New Axis Of Evil Or Just A Love Triangle?

I've always been curious about movies that featured time travel. In two such movies featuring the military, troops who were unknowingly  transported through time were surprised to learn who their new allies and enemies were. For example, in the original The Philadelphia Experiment, two sailors were transported from 1943 to 1984. They were shocked to find out that the U.S. was friends with Japan. In the movie, The Final Countdown the commanders of the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Nimitz are shocked to hear that Germany was attacking Russia

The Trump White House, which can now be called Kremlin West, has apparently caused our enemies and friends to trade places. From Trump's proposed economic policies and statements, Canada and the EU, including NATO, are our new enemies while the U.S. and Russia are in the process of becoming bosom buddies. But unlike the movie The Philadelphia Experiment, neither time nor the nations involved have changed. It is the U.S. that has changed abruptly and surprisingly because promises of these changes were not even hidden in the fine print of Trump's campaign. On the other hand, the U.S. has now joined North Korea, Belarus, and Iran in voting against U.N. resolutions that would condemn Russia for its invasion.

However, not all of the nations we have been involved with have traded places. For example, Trump's planned tariffs indicates that China is still viewed as an adversary.

So our new world consists of both the US and Russia growing closer while China and Russia are doing the same and the US and China have somewhat of an economic adversarial relationship. 

In a BBC NewsNight episode that included a former MI6 leader, Sir Alex Younger, see the video linked to below, stated that we have entered a new time period when instead of reliance on the law and treaties, our world will now be ruled by 3 strongman leaders and deals. Those leaders of course are, Vlad Putin, Donald J, and Xi Jinping where, because of their military strength of their respective countries, these strongmen will do what they can while the rest of the world will have to suffer with their decisions.

We should note that some have for a long time thought that the U.S. has ruled vulnerable parts of the world like a strongman seeing that the U.S. has been involved in coups and invasions in an attempt to facilitate regime change.s But one difference now would be that the U.S. would now have at least a somewhat cooperative relationship with at least one giant of authoritarianism, Russia, while acting like a strongman regime. In addition, Trump is beginning to act like a strongman leader to American citizens too.

Before dismissing Younger's analysis, we need to remember the words and planned actions of Donald Trump. He said that he is willing to use force to achieve his goals in Greenland where he wants access to certain essential natural resources. He also wants to control the Panama Canal and he said that he is willing to use force to do so. As for Canada, it seems that Trump will be waging an economic blitzkrieg in order to make Canada the 51st state. A major reason for Trump wanting to do so is that Canada too is rich in natural resources such as rare mineral deposits and oil. We should also note that Trump's planned tariffs on EU nations will make it tougher for those nations to build up their militaries.

And so what kind of relationship do these strongmen leaders have with each other? Are we looking at a new axis of authoritarianism (a.k.a., evil) or are we witnessing the emergence of a love triangle where Jinping and Trump are competing to be Putin's main squeeze? If the latter is true, what will Putin do? Will he favor one strongman leader over the other or will he try to become a political Mormon who is experimenting with political polygamy which, of course, also produces an axis of authoritarianism. We should note that the Surgeon General should warn everyone that having more than one wife can be hazardous to one's health while the Attorney General should issue a warning that that having more than one wife can be hazardous to one's finances. 

We should note that other nations are supporting Russia's invasion of Ukraine, notably North Korea and Belarus. But neither of those nations are in the same league with  the U.S. and China and so the best label we can give them is that of Putin's concubines.

So do we have a new Axis of Authoritarianism or Evil (Russia, the U.S., and China)\ or is there a love triangle with the U.S. and China competing for most of Putin's affections. I cannot speak to Jinping's  relationship with Putin, but there is an aspect to Trump's relationship with Putin that Sir Alex Younger didn't mention in the video. How much Trump lovingly caters to Putin or independently he acts depends on how much he owes  Putin for his election victory. BTW, Russian disinformation was definitely present in Trump's 2016 and 2020 elections. And though I have no information from intelligence agencies to confirm this, my discussions and reading on the web and scanning the news certainly gave strong indicators that Russian disinformation played a vital role in the 2024 Presidential election. 

Yes, as Younger pointed out, Trump wants Putin's blessings on his lusts for Canada and Greenland. But that would include Trump giving the green light to Putin for obtaining the Ukraine and other parts of Europasia. And perhaps one way of doing that would be for Trump to help contribute to making a fatally flawed peace treaty between Russia and the Ukraine. As Younger pointed out, while Trump sees the issue behind Russia's invasion of Ukraine as being the acquisition of land--he also sees it as an opportunity to sell himself as problem solver and chief to the American public--Putin sees it as an issue of sovereignty because, according to Putin, Ukraine naturally belongs to Russia. But then again, Ukraine's wealth in natural resources might be another reason why Putin wants Ukraine and so Ukraine could become a battle ground if Trump is unable to acquire either Canada and Greenland.

And so how much does Trump owe Putin? The answer to that question will be revealed during Trump's presidency and will help us determine whether we have a new Axis of Authoritarianism/Evil. If there is no new axis, perhaps the other alternative, a love triangle with Putin starring as the center of attention, will provide for some comic relief when watching or reading today's news.

Did Putin Win Our Election?

There is a conspiracy theory that I want everyone to consider. Now the only evidence I have for my theory is the news itself and so don't automatically believe my theory. Instead, let time tell if my theory is true? My theory says that Trump made a deal with Putin. The deal stipulated that if Russia used enough disinformation to get Trump elected, the latter would be a Vassal President who would be subservient to the former. Vassal can mean a person or nation that is subservient to another. And so in exchange being subservient to Putin, Trump avoids at least one prison sentence. In addition, Trump gets to forge domestic policies that are economically beneficial to himself, his fellow oligarchs, and his wealthy peers. If my theory is true, then Trump made deal for himself in a very timely fashion.

If my theory is true, then it was Putin who won the 2024 Presidential Election. That is because he is the one who gets to holds Trump's reigns while Trump is in control of the nation. And that would make Putin and his oligarchy the new deep-state for America.

The evidence that supports my view is circumstantial in that Trump's foreign policy decisions are the drastic reversal of America's usual policies toward Putin.

The circumstantial evidence includes Trump's economic threats and attacks are mostly on NATO nations first. His threats are not just economic, they are physical in that he is threatening to annex one NATO member and the land that is loosely supervised by another. Such threats threaten to divide and seriously weaken Russia's strongest rival: NATO. And now, the Trump Administration is joining far right groups, like the AfD in Germany, in siding with Russia in the Ukraine War. Part of that includes Trump's blaming Ukraine's President Zelensky for Russia's invasion.

 I would be remiss not to mention what America's new conservatives get out of this deal. By riding in on Trump's coattails, they get to implement Project 2025 which concentrates Washington's power, rather than weakens it, on the President who can then enact policies that will make it impossible for conservatives to lose control over the government. There is no need to point out how Project 2025 is working out.

Again, don't believe my theory at first. Let the news tell us how correct that theory is.

With Members Like US, Who Needs Russia?

The article below was originally scheduled to be posted two weeks ago in response to the implementation of Trump's tariffs. Because the tariffs were put on pause, I wrote another article. This article has not been updated since the pause in the tariffs except to put in this preface.

 Trump seems to be publicly announcing his enemies list by his actions and words. From his responses to the horrific airline accident and some of his EOs, one such enemy is DEI. But we might want to add another one to that short list.

That next entry is indicated by Trump's plans. His unwarranted 25% tariff on Canada provides a hint regarding one of his enemies. His 10% tariff on the EU is rationalized without providing any context, and his plan to take Greenland from Denmark's control is another. After all what do Canada, Denmark, and most of the EU have in common? It's NATO. 

Here we need to go back to our government's belief that Russia was working to promote Trump's chances at being elected in the past 3 elections. We need to go back to Trump's publicly stated admiration for Vlad Putin and other dictators over the past several years. And we should note that Trump criticized Zelensky for fighting back against Russia's invasion.

Plus, Trump is telling NATO members how much of their own GDP they should contribute to defense and if they fail to meet that mark, he would not defend them against Russian attacks. Here we should note that while the treaty requiring NATO members to defend each other is a binding, how much of a given nation's GDP contributes to defense is not. And while he initially said that the minimum percentage of a member's GDP dedicate to defense should be 2%, he has upped that to 5%.

As for his tariffs, yes, Trump is imposing tariffs on Canada, EU nations, Mexico, and, reluctantly because of his warm feeling for its leader, China. But the proposed tariffs on our neighbors are 25% while the tariffs on the EU and China will be 10%. That means that China is being treated as an equal or better than our allies.

One of Trump's stated reasons for the tariffs on Canada has to do with the border and fentanyl trafficking. But, according to a CBC broadcast, only around 1% of the fentanyl trafficked into the US comes from Canada. The USCBP's own data supports that estimate. Similar comparative statistics show how illegal crossings from Canada are minuscule compared to those coming from Mexico. And yet, they both are receiving the same penalties in tariffs. 

Along with that are Trump's arrogant statements that Canada should become our 51st state. Such a prospect might horrify Texans if Texas was a province in Canada, it would be around the 2nd or 3rd smallest province. Trump's claim is that Canadians would have lower taxes. It is at this point that we see who one of Trump's gods is and why he doesn't understand people. Trump can be bought and so he believes everyone else can be too.

And then there are Trump's threats against the EU nations because of their restrictions on importing our food products. Here we should note that Trump's protests against the EU's restrictions on our food product are without context. Trump doesn't mention why the EU doesn't allow many US food products to be imported. Issues such as preserving small farms, keeping environmental regulations in the production of agricultural products, and additives that are in our foods are prohibited in European foods provide reasons why the EU doesn't import many, if not all, of our food exports. One could look at Trump's tariff threats here as his way to impose his views on environmentalism, climate change, and food safety on Europe. It isn't that the EU treats us badly; it is that the EU answers to a higher authority in terms of standards for both the environment and health in the production and consumption of food.

There is more than one motive behind Trump's tariffs. One of those motives is that they are used to reduce tax rates for Americans--especially the wealthier ones. Such is basically an attempt to get other nations to pay for the government services that Americans access. And reducing those tax rates is a campaign carrot Trump offers during elections.

Yes, we have large trade deficits. And, yes, Trump is right in pointing out the problems that nations like China and Mexico significantly contribute to. But neither Canada nor the EU nations significantly contribute to any problems. And yet Canada is singled out like Mexico and China are and the trade problems regarding food was pointed out without providing the context.

Certainly Canadians rightfully see Trump's tariffs as a threat to their sovereignty. Trump's tariffs on Canada is an economic blitzkrieg because of their immediacy amount. And so we see in Trump's EOs an attempted shifting of power in the Western Hemisphere. But perhaps what Trump aims for is larger than that. Perhaps, with his attacks on the EU, Perhaps Trump is aiming to create a geo-political shift of power where Trump is taking the US out of NATO and into an accord with Russia and China. Or perhaps Trump sees the US being able to stand by itself for as long as he is President because, in his mind, he is that great of a leader. In either case, we would be out of NATO.

And so when we put together the threats against the holdings of a NATO member along with economic threats against the economies of other NATO nations along with claims that he would not defend certain NATO nations from attack, all of that indicates that NATO, and Canada, might have to prepare for a future where the US is not just missing in action, it is an adversary.