What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Valmy]

Yes I am deeply aware that Trump is currently trying to copy Orban and company. One of the reasons I want to see everybody in a position to do so speaking out.

It would totally check out though that this country went down in flames because of our pathological need to be involved in shit in the Middle East.

[viper37]

our pathological need to be involved in shit in the Middle East.

Hmm.

That pathological need has been derived from your pathological reliance on oil.

As Keynes pointed out in another thread (or was it here?), the US barely intervenes in Africa. Compared to Europe, that is.  Sure, it did a little during the Cold War.  An assassination here & there, a retaliation over there, but no more.

Clinton decided to help Somalia as part of the UN and pulled out so that Ridley Scott could make a great movie.

But the Middle East?  Not a single country is unaffected by the US, positively or negatively.  The oil must flow.  First, Israel after the USSR threatened to intervene, and then the other countries to stabilize oil prices and insure continued access to the resource.

And yet, at the same time, the US has resisted every effort at reducing its dependence on the resource so it could intervene less often in the ME.

[Valmy]

our pathological need to be involved in shit in the Middle East.

Hmm.

That pathological need has been derived from your pathological reliance on oil.

As Keynes pointed out in another thread (or was it here?), the US barely intervenes in Africa. Compared to Europe, that is.  Sure, it did a little during the Cold War.  An assassination here & there, a retaliation over there, but no more.

Clinton decided to help Somalia as part of the UN and pulled out so that Ridley Scott could make a great movie.

But the Middle East?  Not a single country is unaffected by the US, positively or negatively.  The oil must flow.  First, Israel after the USSR threatened to intervene, and then the other countries to stabilize oil prices and insure continued access to the resource.

And yet, at the same time, the US has resisted every effort at reducing its dependence on the resource so it could intervene less often in the ME.

We are currently energy independent thanks to fracking. In fact I think we might even export stuff now.

But that doesn't even matter. Even if we don't use a single drop of Middle Eastern oil, we still have to make sure the rest of the world can. For reasons that I am sure have to do with it being a fungible resource.

Oh and it was George HW Bush who decided to help Somalia, not Clinton. Just to be pedantic about something 

[grumbler]

The US exports oil.  It's involvement in the Middle east regarding oil has always been primarily a concern for oil's impact on allies, not the US.  Sure, oil instability in the ME causes prices to rise, and that impacts the US, but it's not an existential concern like it is for, say, Japan.

[crazy canuck]

Yes, the US exports oil, but it also imports oil.  The oil market is not so simplistic.

FYI, the reason why there is a trade imbalance between the US and Canada is because of all the oil the US imports from Canada.

[viper37]

We are currently energy independent thanks to fracking. In fact I think we might even export stuff now.

But that doesn't even matter. Even if we don't use a single drop of Middle Eastern oil, we still have to make sure the rest of the world can. For reasons that I am sure have to do with it being a fungible resource.

Oh and it was George HW Bush who decided to help Somalia, not Clinton. Just to be pedantic about something 

Ok, GHW Bush decided to help Somalia, Clinton decided to pull out.

But the US imports a lot of oil for domestic consumption.  I do not know about natural gaz, I suspect you are quite independent there.  But oil, no. For October 2024 (last available data), you imported 200 000 crude oil barrels per month, you exported 120 crude oil barrels per month.
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mcrimus1&f=m
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mcrexus1&f=m

No matter when you look, you always import more than your export.

And as you and Grumbler say, you are highly dependent on global oil prices.  If there's a crisis in Iran or anywhere in the Middle East, the oil price will rise and the US will feel the shock more than it will benefit from it.

[Barrister]

Btw, say hello to your new history programs:

"Patriotic education" means a presentation of the history of America grounded in:
(i)    an accurate, honest, unifying, inspiring, and ennobling characterization of America's founding and foundational principles;
(ii)  a clear examination of how the United States has admirably grown closer to its noble principles throughout its history;
(iii)  the concept that commitment to America's aspirations is beneficial and justified; and
(iv)  the concept that celebration of America's greatness and history is proper."

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-radical-indoctrination-in-k-12-schooling/

So I looked through the entirety of the EO - lots of stuff I could comment on here.  A lot about how exactly the Federal government can, or can not, enforce these kinds of principles on public school education which is supposed to be decided at the local level.

This is going to upset some people, but I'm still trying to call "balls and strikes" on Trump.  I don't like the man, think his Presidency the first time around was bad, think it could be historically awful the second time around - but this does not offend me.

It's the language of "foundational principles".  Those principles are admittedly noble and worth aspiring to.  But the language quoted above seemingly admits that the US has NOT always lived up to those principles.  That was a key rhetorical flourish to both Lincoln and MLK - that America should live up to its own principles.

As long as a history lesson remains committed to being "accurate" and "honest" - I also seem value in trying to ensure that a patriotic message is also passed on.


Now all of that being said - I think this EO will wind up being 100% meaningless and is just for messaging.

[Valmy]

The only thing I find upsetting about that BB is the idea that we are ending radical indoctrination. We are already teaching history based on those ideas. So the lie pisses me off, not the idea that those principles are some kind of upsetting thing he is introducing.

[DGuller]

What are actions you're taking towards that end?

Trying to get Democrats to shut up.

Definitely would've been a better strategy for them in the summer of 2020, or from October 2023 on.

[DGuller]

The only thing I find upsetting about that BB is the idea that we are ending radical indoctrination. We are already teaching history based on those ideas. So the lie pisses me off, not the idea that those principles are some kind of upsetting thing he is introducing.

To be devil's advocate, I don't know how history is taught these days anywhere, but I know how history was taught in NYC in 1990ies.  Let's just say that cynicism and self-hatred were the rule rather than the exception.  I get that US did a lot of immoral stuff, but frankly that's a rule rather than the exception, geopolitics is not for idealists.  I think US did a lot more good with the power it acquired than most countries in similar situations have done, or would've done.  Uncritical acceptance of one's country's actions is obviously not good, but so is unrestrained self-bashing.

[Barrister]

The only thing I find upsetting about that BB is the idea that we are ending radical indoctrination. We are already teaching history based on those ideas. So the lie pisses me off, not the idea that those principles are some kind of upsetting thing he is introducing.

So like I said - I think this is a messaging issue and nothing more.  I certainly can't speak for every classroom and every teacher - there may be a few who teach full-on 1619 Project that America's foundation was built on racism and slavery, but I doubt very much it's widespread.  And even if it was, I doubt a Presidential EO will do much to change it given the federal system.

But Oex seemed to take offence at the idea contained within - and I just couldn't.

[Valmy]

The only thing I find upsetting about that BB is the idea that we are ending radical indoctrination. We are already teaching history based on those ideas. So the lie pisses me off, not the idea that those principles are some kind of upsetting thing he is introducing.

To be devil's advocate, I don't know how history is taught these days anywhere, but I know how history was taught in NYC in 1990ies.  Let's just say that cynicism and self-hatred were the rule rather than the exception.  I get that US did a lot of immoral stuff, but frankly that's a rule rather than the exception, geopolitics is not for idealists.  I think US did a lot more good with the power it acquired than most countries in similar situations have done, or would've done.  Uncritical acceptance of one's country's actions is obviously not good, but so is unrestrained self-bashing.

Well the issue that feeds that is right there in the presentation. If you present, as was done, America's ideals and how are moving towards them then you end up covering all those times we failed to live up to them. Even when you put in the heroes and decent politicians who did the right thing, presenting the story being about ideals and how we are getting better at them is just going to lead to some cynicism. It is the paradox around centering things around principles and ideals.

If you instead were like "well the US was under tons of pressure to do evil things and managed to kind of be reasonably nice about it" you might get a different outcome.

I always try to point out that Manifest Destiny was being done in a context where European Powers might seize, or in fact already controlled, that territory and controlling it was seen as a way to protect American security. And you needed people out there to do it. The great game of international politics can be pretty ruthless.

[Razgovory]

Even as your country descends into fascism, you'd rather continue to cheer about dead Palestinians, and blame anyone but your corrupt institutions, inept political party, and authoritarian countrymen.

Some Republicans will gladly endure some pains as long as they own the Libs!!!
Anything to fuck with other people.
Raz may vote for the Dems, but he only does so he won't lose  his Medicaid.  For the rest, at heart, he is a very good Republican and rejoice in the suffering of others just as much as the average GOPtard.

Let's not get too on our high horse, this phrase was thrown around quite a bit on this forum.  Nobody had a problem with it, when it applied to the right.

[Valmy]

The only thing I find upsetting about that BB is the idea that we are ending radical indoctrination. We are already teaching history based on those ideas. So the lie pisses me off, not the idea that those principles are some kind of upsetting thing he is introducing.

To be devil's advocate, I don't know how history is taught these days anywhere, but I know how history was taught in NYC in 1990ies.  Let's just say that cynicism and self-hatred were the rule rather than the exception.  I get that US did a lot of immoral stuff, but frankly that's a rule rather than the exception, geopolitics is not for idealists.  I think US did a lot more good with the power it acquired than most countries in similar situations have done, or would've done.  Uncritical acceptance of one's country's actions is obviously not good, but so is unrestrained self-bashing.

Well the issue that feeds that is right there in the presentation. If you present, as was done, America's ideals and how are moving towards them then you end up covering all those times we failed to live up to them. Even when you put in the heroes and decent politicians who did the right thing, presenting the story being about ideals and how we are getting better at them is just going to lead to some cynicism. It is the paradox around centering things around principles and ideals.

If you instead were like "well the US was under tons of pressure to do evil things and managed to kind of be reasonably nice about it" you might get a different outcome.

I always try to point out that Manifest Destiny was being done in a context where European Powers might seize, or in fact already controlled, that territory and controlling it was seen as a way to protect American security. And you needed people out there to do it. The great game of international politics can be pretty ruthless.

Though ironically enough, the success of Donald Trump himself has done the job of making me cynical and radically indoctrinating me into thinking maybe it was all bullshit than any studying of history has.

[viper37]

As long as a history lesson remains committed to being "accurate" and "honest" - I also seem value in trying to ensure that a patriotic message is also passed on.

See Florida and Texas.