foreign policy – R&R – Reachout and Rebuild

Why Start a War with Iran? Trump in his own Words…

David Posnett — Thu, 09 Jan 2020 01:09:25 +0000

No comment.

Bombing Hospitals in Syria: a Crime against Humanity

David Posnett — Sun, 13 Oct 2019 19:06:58 +0000

I just saw a documentary on a Syrian underground hospital: The Cave. It should be compulsory viewing for everyone. INCLUDING Rep. Lee Zeldin. He too lived thru a period where his premature born twin girls where in the NICU. Might he identify with the story of a 30 year old pediatrician running an underground hospital in northern Syria under horrendous conditions and constant bombardment? I have spoken with Lee Zeldin, and he is aware of how lucky his family was.

Here is a review of The CAVE: https://www.thewrap.com/the-cave-film-review-syrian-documentary-goes-underground-to-find-a-new-face-of-tragedy/

And here is the trailer: https://www.firstshowing.net/2019/official-trailer-for-the-cave-doc-film-about-a-hidden-syrian-hospital/

If you have any doubt about the culprits, read more in the NY Times (Oct. 13). There is an 8 min video attached to the article and it contains ample proof of Russian planes specifically targeting hospitals. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/13/world/middleeast/russia-bombing-syrian-hospitals.html

In my book this is a crime against humanity. It should be prosecuted at The Hague. And the prime suspects/culprits are Syrian President Assad and Russian President Putin.

This all is relevant to our most recent national disaster in foreign policy: inviting Turkey to invade parts of northern Syria, where our previous allies, the Kurds, live. The bombs have started falling as reported today. The players are likely to have blood on their hands. Erdogan? Donald Trump? And Lee Zeldin ? He habitually supports Trump, irrespective of common sense.

Zeldin on Yemen

David Posnett — Mon, 05 Nov 2018 02:14:02 +0000

By Ken Dorph

Amal Hussein, the seven-year-old in the two photos below, died of starvation last week in Yemen. I am working with a Yemeni team here in Cairo and I can’t help but despair over the never-ending war there. Our American leadership has created a human catastrophe in Yemen, taking sides in a tribal conflict driven by our greed to sell weapons. I asked our Congressman, Lee Zeldin, who has consistently supported the sale of weapons used to kill civilians to the Saudis, if we could somehow stop these sales. His response, verbatim:

“Not unless there’s, not unless … I’m not completely … No one’s read members of Congress like myself completely what strategically the big picture is with that deal. So I’m left to speculate. I don’t believe that that is a solely Yemen play, what the President agreed to in Saudi Arabia. That there is more of a regional play there that’s going on right now. Yemen is a piece of it. If everything got narrowed down to that we’re giving weapons in order to fight in Yemen, it would be a different analysis of what I am speculating to be part of the picture, not all of it.”

Our leadership will only change if we change them.
Vote for Perry Gershon on November 6th.

Treason

David Posnett — Wed, 18 Jul 2018 02:25:38 +0000

“President Trump proved not only unable, but unwilling to stand up to Putin, He and Putin seemed to be speaking from the same script as the president made a conscious choice to defend a tyrant against the fair questions of a free press, and to grant Putin an uncontested platform to spew propaganda and lies to the world.”

Senator John McCain

LEE ZELDIN IS AN EXTENSION OF DONALD TRUMP! He has remained pretty much silent on this latest presidential debacle.

Follow these hashtags on Twitter

#treasonsummit

#OccupyLafayettePark

There are Confront Corruption/Demand Democracy rallies around the country this Wednesday, July 18th, including in front of the WH:

https://www.confrontcorruption.org/

Addendum (7/18):

More here on the response by NYS Republicans to Trump: https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/politics/news-politics/republicans-responding-trump-offer-range-responses.html

Hedging their bets? Trying to minimize potential fall out? But:

Where is the primal outrage?

Addendum 7/22: a related blog post: https://opinion8ed2.wordpress.com/2018/07/22/its-up-to-us/

A Mom Speaks Out: Wake up America, we are at War!

David Posnett — Wed, 21 Feb 2018 22:50:15 +0000

Speaking at Tuesday’s Feb 20 Rally on gun violence and international security: Mara Gerstein

Thank you for being here. I’m Mara. I’m a mom, a lifelong New Yorker, and a constituent of Lee Zeldin. And I’m here to tell my representative, and everyone who will listen, that as of this week, I am a single issue voter.

I only vote for people who will take basic steps to protect me and my family from preventable threats – both foreign and domestic. I am here to tell Rep Zeldin that if he cannot fight for the most basic measures to keep our children safe from gun violence. If he cannot fight for our country to defend itself from information and cyber warfare, then he is worse than useless to any of us.

Trump and Rep Zeldin and so many men like them run on “law and order”, borders, “security”, building up our military, “keeping us safe”. And here we are: 100 of us dying daily from gun violence, another day, another school shooting. Another 15, 20, 50 young lives lost. There is not a parent in this country who wasn’t afraid to send their children to school this week. There wasn’t a kid over the age of 5 in America who didn’t sit in their
classrooms this week afraid that maybe they were next. What is this? Why do we have to live like this? When the majority of Americans are desperate for sensible gun safety laws, why is Lee Zeldin actively working hard to make gun laws more lax?

At what point does this failure to address gun violence become a dereliction of his basic duty to protect us? At what point? A long time ago!

We have a couple of brilliant people who will talk more about our so-called “moderate” congressman’s voting record on gun safety so we can all understand why the NRA loves Zeldin so much. But I want to talk about one specific bill, voted on and passed by the House of Representatives in December. H.R. 38/ Senate Bill 446, the so called “concealed carry reciprocity” bill. It means that states with the weakest requirements for allowing people to carry concealed, loaded guns in their communities will set the national standard. So whereas now states are free to decide what gun laws will keep their communities safe, and can then enter into agreements with other states to honor out of state gun laws. Concealed Carry would mean that all states would be forced to accept the lowest gun safety standards in the country. And no one is talking about it.

It is time that we understand – and make sure everyone we know understands – what HR 38 / Senate Bill 446 – Concealed Carry will mean for New York.

NY awards concealed carry permission only to citizens with justifiable need who are not a danger to themselves or others, and can demonstrate a high level of knowledge of firearm use and safety. Our laws recognize and protect us from the potential threat of dangerous and violent people carrying concealed guns. This is one reason why NY has such a low incidence of gun deaths and injuries per capita. If the NRA – with the tens of millions of dollars they have spent to do so — succeeds in getting the Senate to pass Zeldin’s Concealed Carry Bill it would put domestic abusers and people convicted of violent crimes with hidden weapons on the streets of our towns — Patchogue, Bellport, Montauk, Smithtown, etc. I want Zeldin to tell me how this will make it more safe for me and my child to walk those streets, to go to school, to go to work. Tell me how!

And when you tell me, I will tell you this. You are lying to our faces. More guns, more concealed weapons, and looser gun laws will not make us safer. Until you stop serving the NRA over your constituents, until you stop selling our children’s lives to gun manufacturers, we are all single issue voters. And I ask all of you to tell everyone you know, about what HR 38 / Senate Bill 446 – Concealed Carry will do to NY and why it is
keeping you up at night. Here’s what else is keeping me up at night! We learned this week that there is incontrovertible evidence that the US is under attack from a foreign adversary. What most defense experts are calling the worst attack on our country since 9/11.

We know that Russia penetrated the systems of our major political parties, tampered with our voting machines, discouraged voting with fake information and media campaigns built on lies, that they rounded up support for Trump and are sowing disinformation and confusion about the harm he is inflicting upon us every day. We know that Russia helped sway public opinion to push Al Franken out of office. That they are acting to control social discourse after the Parkland shooting last week. America
needs to wake up. We are at war.

And the president said nothing. He attacks the FBI and goes golfing. He spends NO TIME thinking about how to protect us from the very real threat that Russia will decide in 2018, who runs our government. Russia, is clearly exercising control over the people they have handpicked for the job. Why are Trump and Zeldin doing nothing? Why won’t Trump institute sanctions (H.R. 3364) that were passed by a huge margin 419-3 in the House?

Why is that ok with Zeldin? Is it because the GOP & Zeldin know that they can only stay in power with Russia’s help? Well I’m sorry. That’s too bad. If you can only keep your jobs with Russian help, you’re out. This is OUR country. Not Russia’s.

The people in Washington running the Republican party are dirty. They give tax cuts to the rich and spend millions of dollars to fly first class, and in the same breath take away veterans healthcare, children’s healthcare, food for the poor. They are dirty and corrupt from the inside out. Lying to the FBI, money laundering, tax evasion, defrauding consumers, bank fraud, exploiting their office for personal gain.

Before we even get to collusion with a foreign adversary, if even half of the things these people are accused of are true, Republican leadership in Washington should be in jail. And if they were black they would be.

Every day in this country feels more and more like a national version of the godfather. Here’s what we know. 130 white house staff didn’t have security clearance as of Nov of 2017. The people with the highest levels of security access in the country, have been deemed by our FBI to be unfit for that access. Unfit means that – for whatever reason – be it domestic abuse or foreign debts or lying repeatedly on disclosure forms – our top law enforcement has said that giving these people access puts our lives in danger.

This is not hyberbole. Our government is burning. It is being run by people who are beholden, literally, financially and probably more, to a foreign adversary, and special interests, like the NRA, that is controlled by companies who sell guns and, it turns out, has its own ties to Russia.

What has happened, and is happening, in our government is so insane that we can’t admit it. Because no one knows what to do in the face of this all being true.

What does Donald Trump do? He goes golfing. And what does Lee Zeldin do? He defends him. And worse. Zeldin is actively working to derail the Russia investigation and to attack people who have devoted their lives to protecting our country. A proud member of Devin Nunes #CoverUpCaucus, Zeldin is doing far worse than nothing. Just this morning on Twitter, Zeldin continues his constant and desperate scramble to undermine the efforts of those who are trying to understand what happened and protect us from attack.

And all of these people – Trump, Zeldin, Devin Nunes – every person who holds elected office – has taken an oath to “protect and defend our constitution.” And they won’t even try. A basic dereliction of duty to perform their basic oath of office.

So we are all single issue voters! If Zeldin cannot take basic steps to protect us from threats – both foreign and domestic – he is worse than useless, he is doing us great harm. He is endangering our children, our rule of law, our constitution, and our basic rights as Americans. Zeldin, we are all single issue voters. If you cannot put basic gun safety measures in place, you need to step aside. If you fail to recognize and respond to Russia’s attacks, you need to step aside. You need to step aside and make room for someone who will do their job to protect us and to protect our constitution.

“They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen”

David Posnett — Thu, 10 Aug 2017 07:08:03 +0000

In regard to the N Korea story…

Submitted to this blog by my friend Rajeev Pillay:

For want of any better options, one has to assume that even Kim Jong Un is rational.

That being the case, one can assume that he has a feeling of isolation and victimisation. Nuclear weaponry levels the field in any eventual negotiation. One has to therefore assume that there is no stopping him. He will accelerate his nuclear program – not slow it down or terminate it. He knows that to do so would be suicidal.

What should the US do? Would security guarantees for Kim’s regime (quite the opposite of Trump’s approach) persuade him to back off? Perhaps.

Next alternative is to allow him to develop his missile program and put in place a series of checks and balances and protocols to control their actual use – ideally with independent verification.

The final option is to take out his missile bases. One has to assume that his nuclear weapons are stored separately from his missiles (because of course he is rational, remember). As a consequence, taking out the missile batteries may not result in an apocalypse.

The problem is that the US has very little intelligence capacity on the ground to take this risky approach, so it is entirely likely that Kim would be able to get a couple of missiles off too. That is probably sufficient to eliminate Guam if not parts of Alaska.

No easy solutions, I’m afraid. Can we live with a nuclear N. Korea? We might have to at this point!

Noam Chomsky: On Trump and the State of the Union – SCARY!

David Posnett — Thu, 06 Jul 2017 16:14:28 +0000

GREAT INTERVIEW!

THE STONE JULY 5, 2017

Continue reading the main story Share This Page

Over the past few months, as the disturbing prospect of a Trump administration became a disturbing reality, I decided to reach out to Noam Chomsky, the philosopher whose writing, speaking and activism has for more than 50 years provided unparalleled insight and challenges to the American and global political systems. Our conversation, as it appears here, took place as a series of email exchanges over the past two months. Although Professor Chomsky was extremely busy, because of our past intellectual exchange, he graciously provided time for this interview. Professor Chomsky is the author of numerous best-selling political works, translated into scores of languages. Among his most recent books are “Hegemony or Survival,” “Failed States,” “Hopes and Prospects,” “Masters of Mankind” and “Who Rules the World?” He has been institute professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology since 1976.— George Yancy

George Yancy: Given our “post-truth” political moment and the growing authoritarianism we are witnessing under President Trump, what public role do you think professional philosophy might play in critically addressing this situation?

Noam Chomsky: We have to be a little cautious about not trying to kill a gnat with an atom bomb. The performances are so utterly absurd regarding the “post-truth” moment that the proper response might best be ridicule. For example, Stephen Colbert’s recent comment is apropos: When the Republican legislature of North Carolina responded to a scientific study predicting a threatening rise in sea level by barring state and local agencies from developing regulations or planning documents to address the problem, Colbert responded: “This is a brilliant solution. If your science gives you a result that you don’t like, pass a law saying the result is illegal. Problem solved.”

Quite generally, that’s how the Trump administration deals with a truly existential threat to survival of organized human life: ban regulations and even research and discussion of environmental threats and race to the precipice as quickly as possible (in the interests of short-term profit and power).

G.Y.: In this regard, I find Trumpism to be a bit suicidal.

N.C.: Of course, ridicule is not enough. It’s necessary to address the concerns and beliefs of those who are taken in by the fraud, or who don’t recognize the nature and significance of the issues for other reasons. If by philosophy we mean reasoned and thoughtful analysis, then it can address the moment, though not by confronting the “alternative facts” but by analyzing and clarifying what is at stake, whatever the issue is. Beyond that, what is needed is action: urgent and dedicated, in the many ways that are open to us.

G.Y.: When I was an undergraduate philosophy student at the University of Pittsburgh, where I was trained in the analytic tradition, it wasn’t clear to me what philosophy meant beyond the clarification of concepts. Yet I have held onto the Marxian position that philosophy can change the world. Any thoughts on the capacity of philosophy to change the world?

N.C.: I am not sure just what Marx had in mind when he wrote that “philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.” Did he mean that philosophy could change the world, or that philosophers should turn to the higher priority of changing the world? If the former, then he presumably meant philosophy in a broad sense of the term, including analysis of the social order and ideas about why it should be changed, and how. In that broad sense, philosophy can play a role, indeed an essential role, in changing the world, and philosophers, including in the analytic tradition, have undertaken that effort, in their philosophical work as well as in their activist lives — Bertrand Russell, to mention a prominent example.

G.Y.: Yes. Russell was a philosopher and a public intellectual. In those terms, how do you describe yourself?

N.C.: I don’t really think about it, frankly. I engage in the kinds of work and activities that seem important and challenging to me. Some of it falls within these categories, as usually understood.

G.Y.: There are times when the sheer magnitude of human suffering feels unbearable. As someone who speaks to so much suffering in the world, how do you bear witness to this and yet maintain the strength to go on?

N.C.: Witnessing it is enough to provide the motivation to go on. And nothing is more inspiring to see how poor and suffering people, living under conditions incomparably worse than we endure, continue quietly and unpretentiously with courageous and committed struggle for justice and dignity.

G.Y.: If you had to list two or three forms of political action that are necessary under the Trump regime, what would they be? I ask because our moment feels so incredibly hopeless and repressive.

N.C.: I don’t think things are quite that bleak. Take the success of the Bernie Sanders campaign, the most remarkable feature of the 2016 election. It is, after all, not all that surprising that a billionaire showman with extensive media backing (including the liberal media, entranced by his antics and the advertising revenue it afforded) should win the nomination of the ultra-reactionary Republican Party.The Sanders campaign, however, broke dramatically with over a century of U.S. political history. Extensive political science research, notably the work of Thomas Ferguson, has shown convincingly that elections are pretty much bought. For example, campaign spending alone is a remarkably good predictor of electoral success, and support of corporate power and private wealth is a virtual prerequisite even for participation in the political arena.The Sanders campaign showed that a candidate with mildly progressive (basically New Deal) programs could win the nomination, maybe the election, even without the backing of the major funders or any media support. There’s good reason to suppose that Sanders would have won the nomination had it not been for shenanigans of the Obama-Clinton party managers. He is now the most popular political figure in the country by a large margin.Activism spawned by the campaign is beginning to make inroads into electoral politics. Under Barack Obama, the Democratic Party pretty much collapsed at the crucial local and state levels, but it can be rebuilt and turned into a progressive force. That would mean reviving the New Deal legacy and moving well beyond, instead of abandoning, the working class and turning into Clintonite New Democrats, which more or less resemble what used to be called moderate Republicans, a category that has largely disappeared with the shift of both parties to the right during the neoliberal period.Such prospects may not be out of reach, and efforts to attain them can be combined with direct activism right now, urgently needed, to counter the legislative and executive actions of the Republican administration, often concealed behind the bluster of the figure nominally in charge.There are in fact many ways to combat the Trump project of creating a tiny America, isolated from the world, cowering in fear behind walls while pursuing the Paul Ryan-style domestic policies that represent the most savage wing of the Republican establishment.

G.Y.: What are the weightiest issues facing us?

N.C.: The most important issues to address are the truly existential threats we face: climate change and nuclear war. On the former, the Republican leadership, in splendid isolation from the world, is almost unanimously dedicated to destroying the chances for decent survival; strong words, but no exaggeration. There is a great deal that can be done at the local and state level to counter their malign project.On nuclear war, actions in Syria and at the Russian border raise very serious threats of confrontation that might trigger war, an unthinkable prospect. Furthermore, Trump’s pursuit of Obama’s programs of modernization of the nuclear forces poses extraordinary dangers. As we have recently learned, the modernized U.S. nuclear force is seriously fraying the slender thread on which survival is suspended. The matter is discussed in detail in a critically important article in Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists in March, which should have been, and remained, front-page news. The authors, highly respected analysts, observe that the nuclear weapons modernization program has increased “the overall killing power of existing U.S. ballistic missile forces by a factor of roughly three — and it creates exactly what one would expect to see, if a nuclear-armed state were planning to have the capacity to fight and win a nuclear war by disarming enemies with a surprise first strike.”The significance is clear. It means that in a moment of crisis, of which there are all too many, Russian military planners may conclude that lacking a deterrent, the only hope of survival is a first strike — which means the end for all of us.

G.Y.: Frightening to the born.

N.C.: In these cases, citizen action can reverse highly dangerous programs. It can also press Washington to explore diplomatic options — which are available — instead of the near reflexive resort to force and coercion in other areas, including North Korea and Iran.

G.Y.: But what is it, Noam, as you continue to engage critically a broad range of injustices, that motivates this sense of social justice for you? Are there any religious motivations that frame your social justice work? If not, why not?

N.C.: No religious motivations, and for sound reasons. One can contrive a religious motivation for virtually any choice of action, from commitment to the highest ideals to support for the most horrendous atrocities. In the sacred texts, we can find uplifting calls for peace, justice and mercy, along with the most genocidal passages in the literary canon. Conscience is our guide, whatever trappings we might choose to clothe it in.

G.Y.: Returning to the point about bearing witness to so much suffering, what do you recommend I share with many of my undergraduate students such that they develop the capacity to bear witness to forms of suffering that are worse than we endure? Many of my students are just concerned with graduating and often seem oblivious to world suffering.

N.C.: My suspicion is that those who seem oblivious to suffering, whether it is nearby or in remote corners, are for the most part unaware, perhaps blinded by doctrine and ideology. For them, the answer is to develop a critical attitude toward articles of faith, secular or religious; to encourage their capacity to question, to explore, to view the world from the standpoint of others. And direct exposure is never very far away, wherever we live — perhaps the homeless person huddling in the cold or asking for a few pennies for food, or all too many more.

G.Y.: I appreciate and second your point about exposure to the suffering of others not being far away. Returning to Trump, I take it that you view him as fundamentally unpredictable. I certainly do. Should we fear a nuclear exchange of any sort in our contemporary moment?

N.C.: I do, and I’m hardly the only person to have such fears. Perhaps the most prominent figure to express such concerns is William Perry, one of the leading contemporary nuclear strategists, with many years of experience at the highest level of war planning. He is reserved and cautious, not given to overstatement. He has come out of semiretirement to declare forcefully and repeatedly that he is terrified both at the extreme and mounting threats and by the failure to be concerned about them. In his words, “Today, the danger of some sort of a nuclear catastrophe is greater than it was during the Cold War, and most people are blissfully unaware of this danger.”

In 1947, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists established its famous Doomsday Clock, estimating how far we are from midnight: termination. In 1947, the analysts set the clock at seven minutes to midnight. In 1953, they moved the hand to two minutes to midnight after the U.S. and U.S.S.R. exploded hydrogen bombs. Since then it has oscillated, never again reaching this danger point. In January, shortly after Trump’s inauguration, the hand was moved to two and a half minutes to midnight, the closest to terminal disaster since 1953. By this time analysts were considering not only the rising threat of nuclear war but also the firm dedication of the Republican organization to accelerate the race to environmental catastrophe.

Perry is right to be terrified. And so should we all be, not least because of the person with his finger on the button and his surreal associates.

G.Y.: Yet despite his unpredictability, Trump has a strong base. What makes for this kind of servile deference?

N.C.: I’m not sure that “servile deference” is the right phrase, for a number of reasons. For example, who is the base? Most are relatively affluent. Three-quarters had incomes above the median. About one-third had incomes of over $100,000 a year, and thus were in the top 15 percent of personal income, in the top 6 percent of those with only a high school education. They are overwhelmingly white, mostly older, hence from historically more privileged sectors.

As Anthony DiMaggio reports in a careful study of the wealth of information now available, Trump voters tend to be typical Republicans, with “elitist, pro-corporate and reactionary social agendas,” and “an affluent, privileged segment of the country in terms of their income, but one that is relatively less privileged than it was in the past, before the 2008 economic collapse,” hence feeling some economic distress. Median income has dropped almost 10 percent since 2007. That’s apart from the large evangelical segment and putting aside the factors of white supremacy — deeply rooted in the United States — racism and sexism.

For the majority of the base, Trump and the more savage wing of the Republican establishment are not far from their standard attitudes, though when we turn to specific policy preferences, more complex questions arise.

A segment of the Trump base comes from the industrial sector that has been cast aside for decades by both parties, often from rural areas where industry and stable jobs have collapsed. Many voted for Obama, believing his message of hope and change, but were quickly disillusioned and have turned in desperation to their bitter class enemy, clinging to the hope that somehow its formal leader will come to their rescue.

Another consideration is the current information system, if one can even use the phrase. For much of the base, the sources of information are Fox News, talk radio and other practitioners of alternative facts. Exposures of Trump’s misdeeds and absurdities that arouse liberal opinion are easily interpreted as attacks by the corrupt elite on the defender of the little man, in fact his cynical enemy.

G.Y.: How does the lack of critical intelligence operate here, that is, the sort that philosopher John Dewey saw as essential for a democratic citizenry?

N.C.: We might ask other questions about critical intelligence. For liberal opinion, the political crime of the century, as it is sometimes called, is Russian interference in American elections. The effects of the crime are undetectable, unlike the massive effects of interference by corporate power and private wealth, not considered a crime but the normal workings of democracy. That’s even putting aside the record of U.S. “interference” in foreign elections, Russia included; the word “interference” in quotes because it is so laughably inadequate, as anyone with the slightest familiarity with recent history must be aware.

G.Y.: That certainly speaks to our nation’s contradictions.

N.C.: Is Russian hacking really more significant than what we have discussed — for example, the Republican campaign to destroy the conditions for organized social existence, in defiance of the entire world? Or to enhance the already dire threat of terminal nuclear war? Or even such real but lesser crimes such as the Republican initiative to deprive tens of millions of health care and to drive helpless people out of nursing homes in order to enrich their actual constituency of corporate power and wealth even further? Or to dismantle the limited regulatory system set up to mitigate the impact of the financial crisis that their favorites are likely to bring about once again? And on, and on. It’s easy to condemn those we place on the other side of some divide, but more important, commonly, to explore what we take to be nearby.

George Yancy, a professor of philosophy at Emory University, is the author of “Black Bodies, White Gazes” and “On Race: 34 Conversations in a Time of Crisis,” and a co-editor of “Pursuing Trayvon Martin” and “Our Black Sons Matter.”

Now in print: “The Stone Reader: Modern Philosophy in 133 Arguments,” an anthology of essays from The Times’s philosophy series, edited by Peter Catapano and Simon Critchley, published by Liveright Books.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter, and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

I Would Short Tourism to the USA

David Posnett — Tue, 27 Jun 2017 17:28:57 +0000

I can personally confirm the unpopularity of DT and the USA in Switzerland where I am currently!

Apparently the sentiment is wide spread: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-image-survey-idUSKBN19I00F?utm_source=applenews

http://tpc.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-9/html/container.html

World News | Tue Jun 27, 2017 | 7:28am EDT

Image of the United States has plunged under Trump, survey shows

By Noah Barkin | BERLIN

The image of the United States has deteriorated sharply across the globe under President Donald Trump and an overwhelming majority of people in other countries have no confidence in his ability to lead, a survey from the Pew Research Center showed.

Five months into Trump’s presidency, the survey spanning 37 nations showed U.S. favorability ratings in the rest of the world slumping to 49 percent from 64 percent at the end of Barack Obama’s eight years in the White House.

But the falls were far steeper in some of America’s closest allies, including U.S. neighbors Mexico and Canada, and European partners like Germany and Spain.

Trump took office in January pledging to put “America First”. Since then he has pressed ahead with plans to build a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico, announced he will pull out of the Paris climate accord, and accused countries including Canada, Germany and China of unfair trade practices.

On his first foreign trip as president in early June, Trump received warm welcomes in Saudi Arabia and Israel, but a cool reception from European partners, with whom he clashed over NATO spending, climate and trade.

Just 30 percent of Mexicans now say they have a favorable view of the United States, down from 66 percent at the end of the Obama era. In Canada and Germany, favorability ratings slid by 22 points, to 43 percent and 35 percent, respectively

In many European countries, the ratings were comparable to those seen at the end of the presidency of George W. Bush, whose 2003 invasion of Iraq was deeply unpopular.

“The drop in favorability ratings for the United States is widespread,” the Pew report said. “The share of the public with a positive view of the U.S. has plummeted in a diverse set of countries from Latin America, North America, Europe, Asia and Africa”.

BELOW PUTIN AND XI

The survey, based on the responses of 40,447 people and conducted between Feb. 16 and May 8 this year, showed even deeper mistrust of Trump himself, with only 22 percent of those surveyed saying they had confidence he would do the right thing in world affairs, compared to 64 percent who trusted Obama.

Image of the United States plummets under Trump

The image of the United States in the world has been seriously damaged by President Donald Trump and an overwhelming majority of people in other countries have no confidence in his ability to manage world affairs, a Pew Research Center survey showed.

The countries with the lowest confidence in Trump were Mexico, at 5 percent and Spain at 7 percent. The only two countries where ratings improved compared to Obama were Russia, where confidence in the U.S. president surged to 53 percent from 11 percent, and Israel, where it rose 7 points to 56 percent.

Globally, 75 percent of respondents described Trump as “arrogant”, 65 percent as “intolerant” and 62 percent as “dangerous”. A majority of 55 percent also described him as a “strong leader”.

The survey showed widespread disapproval of Trump’s signature policy proposals, with 76 percent unhappy with his plan to build the wall on the border with Mexico, 72 percent against his withdrawal from major trade agreements and 62 percent opposed to his plans to restrict travel to the U.S. from some majority-Muslim countries.

On the positive side, the survey showed that 58 percent of respondents had a positive view of Americans in general. And in many regions of the world, a majority or plurality of respondents said they expected relations with the United States to stay roughly the same in spite of Trump.

Macron invites Americans upset over Trump exit from climate pact to find a ‘second homeland’

David Posnett — Wed, 07 Jun 2017 22:45:30 +0000

by Margaret Menge | Updated 06 Jun 2017 at 6:06 AM

French President Emmanuel Macron is offering refuge to American liberals upset at President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement.

In a video posted to Twitter, speaking in English, Macron said:

“I wish to tell the United States: France believes in you. The world believes in you. I know that you are a great nation. I know your history, our common history.”

“If you’re wondering how to get into France, you can either be a Syrian [jihadi] or an American climate scientist.”

“To all scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs, responsible citizens who were disappointed by the decision of the president of the United States, I want to say that they will find in France a second homeland. I call them: Come and work here, with us, to work together on concrete solutions for our climate, our environment. I can assure you, France will not give up the fight.”

Macron also posted a picture to Twitter, with the words “Make Our Planet Great Again” on a green and blue background.

Macron is a 39-year-old liberal who worked in mergers and acquisitions for the Rothschild investment bank in Paris and as the economy minister to French Socialist Party President François Hollande before rebranding himself as an “outsider” last year and launching a campaign for president.

He defeated populist National Front leader Marine Le Pen in May to become the youngest-ever president of France.

It may be because of his youth that Macron is not aware that the specter of a young Frenchman calling out the president of the United States, speaking English with a French accent, may invite more ridicule from Americans than gratitude.

“If you’re wondering how to get into France, you can either be a Syrian [jihadi] or an American climate scientist,” newspaper columnist and talk radio guest host Mark Steyn said on “The Rush Limbaugh Show” on Friday afternoon, before noting that France would likely require more paperwork from the American climate scientist than from the jihadi.

And as for President Trump himself, The Washington Post reported Friday that Trump’s irritation with Macron’s disrespecting him at their first meeting may have, in fact, helped seal his decision on withdrawal from the Paris accord.

Trump: 6.5 Million Jobs Saved by Leaving Paris Accord President says pact allowed other nations to gain ‘financial advantage over the United States’

It occurred in Brussels, Belgium, on May 26, when the new French president approached the line of world leaders, with Trump in the middle, but veered off to his right. He ignored Trump to shake German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s hand first, and then the hand of NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenburg. Only then did he finally face Trump, who clasped Macron’s hand tightly and pulled the slender Macron toward him forcefully while shaking his hand vigorously, breaking out into a huge smile — not at Macron, but toward the cameras that he saw were pointed toward him.

At an earlier private meeting between Macron and Trump, the two had shaken hands, with both gripping tightly and grimacing for the cameras, in what some media organizations interpreted as an alpha male showdown.

In what was likely the best, or probably the most memorable, line from the president’s energetic address from the Rose Garden on Thursday, in which he laid out a strong case for exiting the Paris agreement, he said: “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris.”

Trump has damaged America, not the environment

David Posnett — Sat, 03 Jun 2017 13:08:01 +0000

Tobias Stone

Posted on The Medium

Jun 2

Trump has spent his life being powerful just because he is rich. And in America, wealth is everything. If you’re rich you are powerful and revered. The American Dream was never about becoming a professor or scientist, it is about becoming rich. That was the crux of his campaign message — I am rich, therefore I am successful and clever.

We are now in no doubt that rich is all he is. Any idea that after election a hidden clever Trump would emerge from behind the bombastic facade is long gone.

Trump knows that at the level of his personal experience (and his knowledge seems to be almost entirely limited to his personal experience) his wealth has given him clout and made him powerful. As he said himself (about grabbing women), in his world when you’re rich you can get away with anything. He has taken this idea into his Presidency, assuming that because America is the largest economy in the world, it will also by default be the most powerful and influential.

With his withdrawal from the Paris accord he has discovered that wealth alone does not equate to power or influence on the global stage. America under Trump has given up its position of moral leadership, and has shown the world it no longer wants to occupy that position. Overnight, Trump created a power vacuum at a global level. It looks like China and Europe are stepping in to fill it. This could, in the future, be seen as a turning point in the decline of America; the point at which America went it alone, and stepped out of the most important global movement of our times, and of future times.

Despite the rage burning in the stomach of any thinking person, anyone who believes the earth is round and the future is bleak, this could be a good thing in the long term.

America produces 14% of global emissions, so the remainder is still being addressed by other nations. Meanwhile, America’s abdication from the throne of Global Leader seems to have inspired China to make a grab for the crown, possibly triggering something of a competition to out-Green America, and become a global clean-energy leader. This is a good thing.

America will take 4 years to drop out of the Accord, and will finish the process the day after the next American Election, so in fact this may just be an even shorter term vision than we realised, one intended to appeal to Trump’s coal-digging, truck-driving, oil-drilling constituency as a great soundbite, but which will actually not affect anything. One can hope.

Otherwise, If Trump actually manages to make any of this happen, it is clear that any revival of the Coal industry that he somehow brings around will be undermined by the fact that clean energy will become cheaper than coal, and that clean energy race will now more likely be won by China, further undermining Trump’s goals of a stronger economy and more balance of trade. There will come a time when his broke coal miners will have to buy Chinese solar panels.

In fact, provided the global coalition around the Paris Accord holds together, which it shows surprising signs of doing, then America dropping out will not be a trigger for its collapse. And if American States and companies continue to honour the Accord, then Trump’s move may have very little negative impact. However, it has totally undermined American supremacy globally.

His recent foreign trip made America less relevant in Europe and with NATO, not only because of the message he delivered, but because of the way he delivered it. He has left Europe and NATO in no doubt that he is an incompetent fool, so for now at least they will not bother with him. America is therefore less relevant globally. Trump has failed to realise that just turning up as the richest guy in the room doesn’t win you power or influence on the global stage. Being wise and mixing might with genuine leadership has made America significant up until now. Trump has blown that in a very short time.

Trump has left the world wide open for new countries and leaders to step into the role America has enjoyed since the war. That global leadership not only cost America money, it also won it influence and made it matter in a way that made it money — American goods, American films, America as a destination, all of these things were the pay-back.

One imagines that global leaders, apart from a few of the worst dictators, are now just putting America on hold until it removes Trump. China has stepped in to show leadership in climate change, alongside Merkel, who is now seen by most as the Leader of the Free World.

Trump is doing incredible damage to his own country, and most of all to his own voters. The extent of his narcissism and egotism is shown in this latest move, as it will bring him benefit in the short term, by shoring up his core vote, but will damage America and his voter base in the long term — but by then he’ll be dead, so he clearly doesn’t care.

As for those around him, the real blame falls at the feet of Fox News and the Republicans who are still supporting him. Surely they can’t all be as stupid and egocentric as Trump. Some of them must know what they are doing. Or are they all in fact ignorant, uneducated, and uncaring about anyone other than themselves?

Either way, they have blown it. The Paris accord will carry on, and the rest of the world will continue to fight global warming. They will be led by China, Germany, and France. China does incredibly well being able to stand on the same stage as respected, mature, leaders like Merkel, and be so associated with Europe as a partner in an honourable cause. America meanwhile will continue to decline under Trump. The democracy continues to be weakened, and with it America’s ability to be a relevant and significant country globally. The impact of climate change, and the leadership now shown by China and Europe will damage American businesses, in a country built on oil and petrol cars. They may still have a lot of bombs, and lots of money, but America is no longer taken seriously globally. Trump’s voters wanted isolationism, and now they have it. But it’s not protectionism, it’s just self-harm.