Thursday, June 7, 2018
The secret of how to defeat Trump lies in Europe
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/428812-donald-trump-sides-europe/
Slavoj Žižek is a cultural philosopher. He’s a senior researcher at the Institute for Sociology and Philosophy at the University of Ljubljana, Global Distinguished Professor of German at New York University, and international director of the Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities of the University of London
There may well be two sides to Donald Trump. The “peaceful” and the “belligerent,” depending on his moods. And we might just have seen both of them in quick succession.
Just after announcing the meeting with Kim Jong-un, Trump decided to withdraw from the Iran agreement, thereby bringing instability and the threat of war (not only) to the Middle East.
But, of course, there is only one Trump, who was doing exactly the same thing in both cases. In the case of North Korea, he began with exerting extreme pressure, including economic sanctions and military threats, and he is doing the same to Iran, in the hope that, if it worked the first time, it will work now also.
Will it though? What if the US government is well aware that the pressure on Iran will not work? What if, together with Israel and Saudi Arabia, they are preparing for war with Iran?
It is difficult to speculate about the consequences of such a military conflict. We should rather focus on the limitation of Trump’s entire approach: will Trump get his comeuppance? Because neither Russia nor China can do this – they are caught in the same game as Trump and they basically all speak the same language of “America (Russia, China…) first.”
Last hope
Only the European Union can deliver a hammer blow, and the new situation offers the bloc a unique chance to assert itself as a sovereign power block and to act as if the pact with Iran is still valid. Seizing this opportunity, the French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said that Trump’s proposals to corral the EU into joining US foreign policy on Iran should be counteracted by a stronger, independent European foreign policy. “We have to work among ourselves in Europe to defend our European economic sovereignty. Do we want to be a vassal that obeys and jumps to attention?”
Sounds nice – but does Europe have enough strength and unity to do it? Will the new East European, post-Communist axis (stretching from the Baltic States to Croatia) follow the EU resistance to the US, or will it bow to the US and thus provide yet more proof that the quick expansion of the EU to the east was a mistake?
What further complicates things is that Europe is caught in its own populist revolt, triggered by the fact that people trust less and less the Brussels technocracy, regarding it as a center of power with no democratic legitimacy.
The result of the last Italian elections is that, for the first time in a developed Western European country, Euroskeptic populists came to power. Plus, the withdrawal from the Iran agreement is just the middle one of the three anti-European acts of the US: the move of the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem vehemently opposed by the EU, plus the opening shot in the trade war with three of its biggest trading partners by deciding to begin levying tariffs on imports of steel and aluminum from the EU, Canada and Mexico.
Other view
Although most of us sympathize with the European reaction, we should not forget the (as a rule ignored) background of the US decision. To understand it, let’s turn to another topic which may appear to be totally different: the current uproar in the US over the abrupt cancellation of ABC’s hit TV show ‘Roseanne’ because of a racist tweet by the show’s star Roseanne Barr.
In her column “With Roseanne Barr gone, will the US working-class be erased from TV?” Joan Williams argues that the Left should finally start to listen to the white working class. She perspicuously notices how a key fact of this affair passed unnoticed: the cancellation “deprived American television of one of the only sympathetic depictions of white working-class life in the past half century – in other words, since television began.”
Williams unambiguously supports the exclusion of Barr on account of her racist tweets – but she adds: “All that said, race is not the only social hierarchy. Disrespectful images of the working-class whites are part and parcel of the cultural disrespect that paved the path for a demagogue like Trump.” The sad plight of the working-class whites is the clearest indication of the disappearance of the American dream.
“Virtually all Americans born in the 1940s earned more than their parents; today, it’s less than half. The rust belt revolt that brought both Brexit and Trump reflects rotting factories, dying towns, and a half century of empty promises. Those left behind are very, very angry; Trump is their middle finger. The more he outrages coastal elites, the more his followers gloat they got our goat. Finally, they are being noticed.”
And it is crucial to read Trump’s tariff war against the closest allies of the US against this background: in his populist version of class warfare, Trump’s goal is (also) to protect the American working class (and are metal workers not one of the emblematic figures of the traditional working class?) from “unfair” European competition, and thereby save American jobs. This is why all the protests of public officials and economists in EU, Canada and Mexico, as well as the countermeasures proposed by them, miss the target: they follow the WTO logic of free international trade, while only a new Left addressing the concerns of all those left behind can really counter Trump.
At some deep and often obfuscated level, the US neocons perceive the European Union as the enemy. This perception, kept under control in the public political discourse, explodes in its underground obscene double, the extreme Right Christian fundamentalist political vision with its obsessive fear of the new world order (with conspiracy theories such as how Obama is in secret collusion with the United Nations, international forces will intervene in the US and put all true American patriots in concentration camps etc.)
Conflicting ideas
One way to resolve this dilemma is the hardline Christian fundamentalist one, articulated in the works of Tim LaHaye et consortes: to unambiguously subordinate the second opposition to the first one. The title of one of LaHaye’s novels points in this direction: ‘The Europa Conspiracy.’
So, the true enemies of the US are not Muslim terrorists, they are merely puppets secretly manipulated by the European secularists, the true forces of the anti-Christ, who want to weaken the US and establish a new world order under the domination of the United Nations. And, in a way, they are right in this perception: Europe is not just another geopolitical power bloc, but a global vision which is ultimately incompatible with nation-states.
This brings us back to Trump and Putin: one openly supported Brexit, and the other is believed in the West to have desired it. Both figures belong to the conservative-nationalist line of “America/Russia first,” which should perceive a united Europe as its biggest enemy (even if Putin publicly says the opposite and many Russians resent their exclusion from the European project, rather than the notion itself) – and they are both right.
The problem for Europe is how to remain faithful to its emancipatory legacy, which is now threatened by the conservative-populist onslaught?
In his ‘Notes Towards a Definition of Culture,’ the great conservative T.S. Eliot remarked that there are moments when the only choice is the one between heresy and non-belief, when the only way to keep a religion alive is to perform a sectarian split from its main corpse. This is what has to be done today: the only way to really defeat Trump and to redeem what is worth saving in liberal democracy is to perform a sectarian split from liberal democracy’s main corpse.
Fed Up With Big Banks That Fund Climate Crisis and Oppression, Community Coalition Demands Public Bank for New York
"It's time New York City
puts its money where its mouth is, divests from Wall Street, and—through a
public bank—invests in us."
Chanting, "Wells, Chase,
B of A, public bank's a better way!" social justice groups rallied at the
New York Stock Exchange on Tuesday to demand that
New York City divest from Wall Street banks and establish a public bank that is
"expressly chartered to serve the public interest."
"New York deserves a
public bank that will invest in community needs, and be accountable to New York
City residents—one that will prioritize housing...and not prey on low-income
New Yorkers," said Scott Hutchins, a member of the grassroots social
justice group Picture the Homeless.
The more than two dozen groups
that gathered on Wall Street also included New York Working Families, the
Pan-African Community Development Initiative, and Food & Water Watch.
Investment in Wall Street
banks like Wells Fargo, Bank of Americas, and JPMorgan Chase is synonymous with
harming the environment, propping up private prisons, and putting working
families at risk for financial collapse as well as pushing them out of New York
neighborhoods, argued the groups.
The rally came days after the
Trump administration announced it
would roll back the Volcker Rule, which since 2014 has prohibited banks
from using their accounts to conduct risky, speculative trading, in an effort
to avoid another financial meltdown like the one that threw the country into a
recession in 2008.
"With the Trump
Administration and Congress handing out massive corporate tax breaks, rolling
back federal financial reform, and gutting the Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau, Wall Street is heading straight for another crisis," said Deyanira
Del Rio, Co-Director of New Economy Project. "A public bank will allow New
York City to deposit our public money with a bank that belongs to New
Yorkers."
The crowd also heard from a
Brooklyn resident whose rent has doubled in recent years and who spoke about
the exorbitant fees New Yorkers pay to big banks every year, a student who
spoke out against predatory loan practices and Wall Street's investment of
billions of dollars in fossil fuels that accelerate and worsen the climate
crisis, and a social justice activist who told the crowd of JPMorgan
Chase's support for
private prisons.
"As long as the city
continues to deposit its money in prison financiers like JPMorgan Chase, we
will remain complicit in systems of oppression that profit off of incarcerating
our communities," said Bamsa Eid of the racial and economic justice group
Enlace. "It's time New York City puts its money where its mouth is,
divests from Wall Street, and—through a public bank—invests in us."
A public bank would allow New York's public
money to go towards investing in small businesses run by locals, low-income
housing, and financial services to immigrant and low-income communities.
"Here's the deal: New
York City currently deposits billions of public dollars in the big Wall Street
banks," said Stephan Edel, director of New York Working Families.
"These bankers make millions off these deposits and high fees, while
providing little benefit to the City, small businesses, and residents of New
York. Our money should be put to use in our communities."
Despite Rightwing Fearmongering, Experts Say Now Is the Time to Expand Social Security
"Social Security is a solution to our looming retirement income crisis, the increasing economic squeeze on middle-class families, and the perilous and growing income and wealth inequality."
by
Jake Johnson, staff writer
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/06/05/despite-rightwing-fearmongering-experts-say-now-time-expand-social-security?utm
As corporate media outlets predictably trumpeted the right-wing narrative that Social Security is in dire financial straits after the Social Security Trustees' annual report was released on Tuesday, advocacy groups and experts were quick to denounce the fearmongering and correct the record, arguing that the new analysis shows the program is "stronger than ever."
"Each year, the release of the trustees report provides an occasion for Social Security scaremongering by those wanting to shrink our social insurance system," Monique Morrissey, an economist with the Economic Policy Institute, noted in a blog post on Tuesday. "But not only can we afford current benefits, we can afford to expand them."
In addition to demonstrating that "there is sufficient revenue to pay for all benefits until 2034" even if Congress does nothing, Social Security Works president Nancy Altman said the Trustees' report clearly demonstrates that an ambitious expansion of Social Security benefits is also both affordable and desirable.
"Poll after poll shows that the American people overwhelmingly support expanding the program's benefits," Altman noted in a statement. "Social Security is a solution to our looming retirement income crisis, the increasing economic squeeze on middle-class families, and the perilous and growing income and wealth inequality."
"In light of these challenges and Social Security's important role in addressing them, the right question is not how can we afford to expand Social Security, but, rather, how can we afford not to expand it," Altman concluded.
The Trustees' annual report comes amid a relentless push by the GOP-controlled Congress and the Trump administration to slash Social Security benefits—along with Medicare, Medicaid, and food stamps—after delivering $1.5 trillion in tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans.
In a petition demanding immediate congressional action to expand Social Security benefits, SSW communications director Linda Benesch noted that "all we need is for the wealthy to pay their fair share and we can afford to not only extend the lifespan of the trust fund, but expand benefits for millions of Americans."
"We can afford to protect and expand Social Security when millionaires and billionaires pay the same rate as the rest of us," the petition concludes.
Vowing to 'Padlock Revolving Door' in DC, Warren Teases New Anti-Corruption Legislation
"The Trump administration
and an army of lobbyists are determined to rig the game in their favor, to
boost their own profits—the cost to consumers be damned," the senator says
"Change is coming,"
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) declared Tuesday at a War on Regulations symposium hosted by
the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards and Georgetown University Law School. In
her live-streamed speech, Warren revealed plans to introduce anti-corruption
legislation to protect the American public from the Trump administration's
corporate-friendly deregulatory agenda.
"When we send a message
that corporate profits and powerful interests cannot overpower the health,
safety, and economic well-being of hardworking families, we fire a warning
shot," she said. "This is our time, our responsibility, our chance to
build a country where government works, not just for the rich and powerful, but
government that works for the people."
In her 30-minute address,
Warren highlighted the Trump administration's efforts to defang the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), an agency she helped establish.
"The agency is under attack now. The Trump administration and an army of
lobbyists are determined to rig the game in their favor, to boost their own
profits—the cost to consumers be damned," she warned.
"But it's not just the
CFPB that is under attack. In agency after agency across the federal
government, powerful corporations and their Republican allies are working
overtime to roll back basic rules that protect the rest of us," Warren
continued. "Giant corporations and wealthy individuals are working in the
shadows to make sure that government works for them, not for the people."
As an example, Warren pointed
to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt.
"Corruption oozes out of his office, from wasting hundreds of thousands of
taxpayer dollars to cutting deals to make himself rich to doing the bidding of
the highest-paid lobbyists," she said, noting his attacks on the Clean
Water Rule, pesticide
safety, the Clean
Power Plan, vehicle
emissions caps, and methane
emissions limits.
The senator rebuffed the GOP's
favored narrative that regulations hinder businesses and individual
freedom—calling that claim "a greasy baloney sandwich that has been left
out in the sun so long that it has started to stink." She also detailed
the importance of regulations throughout American history and argued that
"good rules empower people to live, work, and do business freely and
safely."
In response to the ongoing
deregulatory efforts of wealthy "corporate predators"—which Warren
noted have continued since the Reagan administration under presidents from both
parties—the senator said she will soon introduce "sweeping anti-corruption
legislation to clean up corporate money sloshing around Washington and make it
possible for our elected government to actually work for the American people
again."
"My plan will padlock the
revolving door between government and industry," she vowed. "It will
eliminate the ability of government decision-makers to enrich themselves
through their government service. It will empower federal agencies pass strong
regulations that benefit the public by ending corporate capture of the
regulatory process."
In addition to Warren's
address, the symposium featured two panels: one focused on the deregulatory
agenda the Trump administration has imposed at federal agencies, and one
focused on the communities that have suffered under that agenda. Participants
included former EPA scientist Betsy Southerland; Public Citizen president
Robert Weissman; and Heidi Shierholz, the senior economist and director of
policy at the Economic Policy Institute.
Jennifer Lawrence: Yes on Question 1 - Protect Rank Choice Voting in Maine
https://act.represent.us/sign/MaineRCV/?t=9&akid=20458%2E644152%2EnMJeIF
Fighting Back Against the Establishment
Politicians are trying to take away the people’s power in Maine - and voters are fighting back. In November of 2016, 388,273 Mainers voted yes to adopt Ranked Choice Voting (RCV), and three other measures – but within weeks, incumbent politicians tampered with or outright repealed all four of the citizen-backed initiatives. However, Maine’s constitution allows for a “People’s Veto” – a process that allows residents who are unhappy with an enacted state law to put that law up for a statewide vote. Now, two years later, residents are saying ‘no more’ with this people’s veto. Mainers gathered over 80,000 signatures in 88 days to put RCV back on the June 12th ballot.
Wednesday, June 6, 2018
'Liberal elites have lost contact with ordinary people' – Žižek on right-wing rise in Europe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3wwYxQUSL8
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)