What has Pres. Trump done wrong so far.

smr wrote:The poor pig and/or rich pig is getting the donkey to do all the work by allure of the carrot (treat). If the carrot is too close well the donkey gets the treat and no more free ride. If the carrot is too far the donkey will not work to get the carrot (treat). The whole trick is to keep the donkey working by offering the reward of a carrot. The pig has learned how to put the carrot just far enough that the donkey will keep working to get that carrot but the donkey will never actually get the carrot. Sorry, I thought that was self-explanatory.

You skipped the part where you explain how that constitutes a response to the current discussions occurring in this thread.

gcomeau wrote:
Also referred to them "infesting" the country. Called them "animals". Guess who else used that language about specific racial and ethnic groups?

I was under impression that Trump called "animals" the specific criminal gang, notoriously known for cruelty and brutality.

Dilandu wrote:

gcomeau wrote:
Also referred to them "infesting" the country. Called them "animals". Guess who else used that language about specific racial and ethnic groups?

I was under impression that Trump called "animals" the specific criminal gang, notoriously known for cruelty and brutality.

He regularly conflates them, speaking of immigrants, illegal immigrants, criminals and gang members all in the same breath.

Then if anyone calls him on his language it's "oh that was only referring to the evil murderous gang!" but it's bullshit. He's mashing all those things together deliberately, associating one with all the others...

In that particular comment MS13 was mentioned among other things by someone else in a general comment about "bad immigrants". But Trump's comment was this:

"We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in — and we're stopping a lot of them — but we're taking people out of the country. You wouldn't believe how bad these people are. These aren't people. These are animals. And we're taking them out of the country at a level and at a rate that's never happened before. And because of the weak laws, they come in fast, we get them, we release them, we get them again, we bring them out. It's crazy.

The dumbest laws, as I said before, the dumbest laws on immigration in the world. So we're going to take care of it, Margaret. We'll get it done."

He's trying to paint a general picture there, and it is not just about MS13.

Dilandu wrote:I was under impression that Trump called "animals" the specific criminal gang, notoriously known for cruelty and brutality.

Yes. Just like the Nazis were never really talking about ~normal~ jews, just the criminal ones.

Basically, this is how you get decent people on board with overly broad measures aimed at the disliked minority of the day. You drag out the very worst these minorities have to offer, the criminal outliers, present them and only them, and talk about how much of a problem they are and how they must be dealt with. You're never going to show the overwhelming majority of those people, who are likely to be just as honorable, decent and hardworking as the rest of your society, only its criminal elements, and soon enough the popular image of immigrants is all about how MS-13 is a big problem and so we definitely need bigger and better border controls and harsher deterrence methods against immigrants to make sure they won't make it into the country.

And during this entire process, you can count on a lot of people handwaving away rhetoric against immigrants because "surely they wouldn't" turn away or threaten legitimate asylum seekers or immigrants looking for a job. Just as, back in the day, lots of germans thought that "surely they wouldn't" deport good old Schlemil the goldsmith, he didn't do anything wrong, after all.
Except that one day they did, and by that point, you're so hardened against state violence that you figure that they must have had good reason to do this, after all, Schlemil was a jew, and everyone knows what they are like, yes?

The basic assumption of reasonableness that underlies a lot of our political decision making (i.e. the assumption that laws will be enforced fairly and objectively) falls apart under transitional conditions like the Trump regime. Let's not kid ourselves on this: The US today is under a transition from a Republic to an Oligarchy; This is a broad movement that has been going on for decades and now has culminated in Trump dismantling the state to the greater profit of the already powerful. Trump is just the first one willing to pursue these goals openly and without dressing it up for the greater populace; The beauty of Trump's plan is that he can rely on self-described defenders of freedom and the constitution to help him because they've been groomed to hate every single symbol of modern, liberal society.

(A note here, before the impression arises that Trump is somehow in control of this: He isn't. He's a figurehead, predictably stupid and predictable in his stupidity enough for the Bannons, Millers and Sessions of the world to get him to sign off on their pet issues.)

I look forwards to the dawn of the People's United Federated Republican States of Democratic America (as peopled by the God-fearing Gun-toting Citizens).

On a more serious note, America is becoming more isolationist. If it continues that way, it'll end up pulling its military out of Europe, South Korea and all the other places, indicating that it is dropping its self-appointed role as World's Policeman (which the other countries let it have because that role is just so expensive...)

So, if America turns in its badge, who will take over?
- Russia? As if. Russia is riddled with corruption and has an economy smaller than the UK. If not for its exports bringing in money, it would have imploded by now.
- China? Very unlikely. Sure, they'll try to expand, but China's cultural foundation means that it doesn't innovate well and reacts badly when things don't go as planned. China's got the manpower, but if they try to expand via conquest, the resultant internal tensions will cause a huge amount of trouble for them, especially since they find it hard to understand/predict the actions of other cultures.
- India? Yeeeeee-nope. Their caste system is still holding them back and as for their violence issues... sexual violence against women is still noticeably high in India. They can't even maintain their British-Empire-Bequeathed infrastructure properly, much less expand it outwards.
-The European Union? Hahahahaha! Yeah, right. The EU is in the middle of a slow-motion implosion. The whole thing was a screw-up from the start and right now, they're re-arranging the deckchairs on the Titanic and the internal pressures they thought they could simply legislate into unimportance froth up and start popping the corks. The Right Wing parties are gaining headway in Germany. That alone indicates things are effed up.
- Australia? Um... unlikely. Sure, they've got experience in dealing with deadly situations, but... my apologies to the Australians on the Board, but Australia doesn't really have the military muscle needed.
- Israel? Well, if America withdraws support, what'll be left of Israel and the surrounding countries will be a series of radioactive craters as part of Israel's You attacked first so I'm taking you down with me. And yes, it will the the countries around Israel that attack first.
- The UK? At the present time... very, very unlikely. We're still hamstrung by the Human Rights Laws and the lawyers seeking to profit from that by suing our Armed Forces on behalf of Terrorists who pretended to have been tortured by British Forces that in many cases, were provably at the other end of the country from them! Sure, the UK punches above its weight politically, but much of that is due to the Commonwealth and the links forged during the long-gone days of the British Empire.

If the USA goes fully isolationist, things will get... interesting.
Look to the history Japan to see how Isolationism can leave a country way behind everyone else.

Excellent post Michael. Fully agree with your analysis.
You have touched on something that is relevant to the Honorverse. High technology enabling military might can allow you to conquer, but the subsequent administration will be impossible. Humans are contrary creatures, the Gestapo couldn't control the French Resistance.
A friend I worked with years ago was a motor mechanic. He was Dutch originally, and I eventually found out his story from mutual friends. During WW2 he was declared a wanted man by the Dutch Resistance because he willingly maintained the German Officer's car fleet. One day the German High Command in the country went for a picnic drive. He was sick on that day, and after the explosions couldn't be found. Turned out that the senior Dutch Resistance had him inserted, but didn't dare tell their junior people so he was in constant risk of being killed by them.
One thing scarier than having a big brother cabal running the world, is discovering that we are on our own and have to muddle through ourselves.
I can guarantee that Australia (pop 24M) won't be putting their hand up. Our politicians are woefully inadequate in administering our country alone.

Michael Everett wrote:- The UK? At the present time... very, very unlikely. We're still hamstrung by the Human Rights Laws and the lawyers seeking to profit from that by suing our Armed Forces on behalf of Terrorists who pretended to have been tortured by British Forces that in many cases, were provably at the other end of the country from them! Sure, the UK punches above its weight politically, but much of that is due to the Commonwealth and the links forged during the long-gone days of the British Empire.

If you think human rights laws is what's holding the UK back (and not, say, your absolutely idiotic decision to leave the EU and fuck up the process of leaving the EU so badly that noone is able to take you or your decision making seriously), I don't know what to tell you except that you might want to catch up on the past 2 years of the history of your country.

The E wrote:If you think human rights laws is what's holding the UK back (and not, say, your absolutely idiotic decision to leave the EU and fuck up the process of leaving the EU so badly that noone is able to take you or your decision making seriously), I don't know what to tell you except that you might want to catch up on the past 2 years of the history of your country.

And you may wish to look at the last couple of years history of the EU.
Seriously, the whole project was doomed from the word GO. Clashing cultures, economies completely out of synch with each other, differing legal frameworks, historical animosities... yeah.
The One-size-fits-none Euro only made a very bad situation worse. While Germany is doing okay with it, Greece is still effectively bankrupt (although quite a lot of that may be the intrinsic corruption of its society) and Italy's employment rates are close to hitting levels lower than anything before.
The internal pressures of the EU have built up too far and there is no safety valve installed, as the politicians are discovering.
At least they are learning*
To put it in terms most here can understand, the European Union is going the way of the Solarian League and the UK is taking the Maya Option.

*Video link provided for metaphorical purposes. EU Politicians represented by Mrs Tweedy. UK represented by Mr Tweedy. EU represented by Pie Machine. Issues causing problems represented by chickens.

I'm not going to disagree with you on that.

(Except, of course, on your prognosis: The EU is salvageable, and the UK exiting is less like Maya exiting the SL and more like... I don't know, actually. There aren't that many fictional politicians that come to mind that are as inept and stupid as the current crowd of brexiteers are)

Michael Everett wrote:I look forwards to the dawn of the People's United Federated Republican States of Democratic America (as peopled by the God-fearing Gun-toting Citizens).

On a more serious note, America is becoming more isolationist. If it continues that way, it'll end up pulling its military out of Europe, South Korea and all the other places, indicating that it is dropping its self-appointed role as World's Policeman (which the other countries let it have because that role is just so expensive...)

So, if America turns in its badge, who will take over?
- Russia? As if. Russia is riddled with corruption and has an economy smaller than the UK. If not for its exports bringing in money, it would have imploded by now.
- China? Very unlikely. Sure, they'll try to expand, but China's cultural foundation means that it doesn't innovate well and reacts badly when things don't go as planned. China's got the manpower, but if they try to expand via conquest, the resultant internal tensions will cause a huge amount of trouble for them, especially since they find it hard to understand/predict the actions of other cultures.
- India? Yeeeeee-nope. Their caste system is still holding them back and as for their violence issues... sexual violence against women is still noticeably high in India. They can't even maintain their British-Empire-Bequeathed infrastructure properly, much less expand it outwards.
-The European Union? Hahahahaha! Yeah, right. The EU is in the middle of a slow-motion implosion. The whole thing was a screw-up from the start and right now, they're re-arranging the deckchairs on the Titanic and the internal pressures they thought they could simply legislate into unimportance froth up and start popping the corks. The Right Wing parties are gaining headway in Germany. That alone indicates things are effed up.
- Australia? Um... unlikely. Sure, they've got experience in dealing with deadly situations, but... my apologies to the Australians on the Board, but Australia doesn't really have the military muscle needed.
- Israel? Well, if America withdraws support, what'll be left of Israel and the surrounding countries will be a series of radioactive craters as part of Israel's You attacked first so I'm taking you down with me. And yes, it will the the countries around Israel that attack first.
- The UK? At the present time... very, very unlikely. We're still hamstrung by the Human Rights Laws and the lawyers seeking to profit from that by suing our Armed Forces on behalf of Terrorists who pretended to have been tortured by British Forces that in many cases, were provably at the other end of the country from them! Sure, the UK punches above its weight politically, but much of that is due to the Commonwealth and the links forged during the long-gone days of the British Empire.

If the USA goes fully isolationist, things will get... interesting.
Look to the history Japan to see how Isolationism can leave a country way behind everyone else.

The point about China is absolutely wrong. China is aiming exactly for that; to replace the USA as the world's dominant military, industrial and scientific power.

Other points are also highly disputable.

Seriously, you should NOT use Honorverse analogues to analyze real-world politics. Honorverse is a work of fiction; it is NOT accurate representation of real world processes & effects.