Trump is not offering peace in Ukraine

[Atla]

Binary Recursion guy is the best thinker on the forum, it's not even close.

[Alexis Jacobi]

It's not a side-splitter by any means, but that post is sort of funny and it does benefit from that being the case whether you meant it to be or not. It's a lot better than the running joke about your email series.

It’s actually true, Flash. In comparison you are a raging nutjob with the strangest, twisted ideas running around in that quasi-prepared “mind” you regard as philosophically trained.

A symptom of your time and your culture in severe decline.

[FlashDangerpants]

It's not a side-splitter by any means, but that post is sort of funny and it does benefit from that being the case whether you meant it to be or not. It's a lot better than the running joke about your email series.

It’s actually true, Flash. In comparison you are a raging nutjob with the strangest, twisted ideas running around in that quasi-prepared “mind” you regard as philosophically trained.

A symptom of your time and your culture in severe decline.

The "whether you meant it to be or not" was also true. The rant was boring though, stick to the jokes.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I admit I also think they are somewhat delightful.

[attofishpi]

It's not a side-splitter by any means, but that post is sort of funny and it does benefit from that being the case whether you meant it to be or not. It's a lot better than the running joke about your email series.

It’s actually true, Flash. In comparison you are a raging nutjob with the strangest, twisted ideas running around in that quasi-prepared “mind” you regard as philosophically trained.

A symptom of your time and your culture in severe decline.

That's amazing..psychoanalyse, mmm? IC, tho I slightly recall you've been doing that for a fair while.

The awful thing about:- "A symptom of your time and your culture in severe decline." -- is that he isn't aware of the reasons for the 'severe decline' hence is happy to keep sliding further to the left-wing of the plane, using his vote to cause the plane on its continued trajectory to the left, towards Mount Toolate.

[Alexis Jacobi]

MacGregor makes great sense to me. His general picture seems right.

[Alexiev]

Trump may or may not bring peace to the Ukraine. But it does seem he'll drive us into recession with his idiotic tariffs. I though the Republicans supported free trade.

[attofishpi]

Trump may or may not bring peace to the Ukraine. But it does seem he'll drive us into recession with his idiotic tariffs. I though the Republicans supported free trade.

You'd think he'd have some decent economic/financial advisors around him that could educate the oaf. I don't want to login again to see the graph on my retirement plan!

[Immanuel Can]

Well, Trump just did what they said he'd never do...he's got a ceasefire.

[Atla]

Oh? Have you spent any time on a website called Philosophy Now?

Yes I have.

And it's an excellent example of what philosophy isn't and how philosophizing isn't done.

I am — I say this sincerely, honestly and despite that you might think this is (just another) joke — the most rational, grounded, careful, and thorough thinker ON THIS ENTIRE FORUM.

You can't get outside the "American" perspective, how is that thorough? And your musings about ideology, metaphysics, narratives mean little when it's mainly the "might makes right" of the superpowers that moves the world.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Trump may or may not bring peace to the Ukraine. But it does seem he'll drive us into recession with his idiotic tariffs. I though the Republicans supported free trade.

Here, dear Alexiev, I think you reveal some misunderstanding and misperception. Like it or not Donald Trump, if understood through the Steve Bannon lens, is not a Republican but a populist. Trump “did a number” on the Republican Party and — insofar as they are “establishment” — they loath and resent him.

The concept behind Trump’s tariffs is (according to the argument which I am personally not qualified to assess) to bring businesses and industry back to the United States. It stands to reason and to intuition that this would necessitate the implementation of a radical policy that could not be else but painful (?) at the start.

I have watched some “experts” who have made the case that a policy of tariffs could, perhaps ultimately, create larger benefits in the long run than the short-term pain which will (?) certainly manifest.

The Republicans, if my researches into Reaganomics are correct (reduced taxes, and a free-market policy championed, for example, by the Wall Street Journal during that decade) is precisely what dismantled America’s industrial base and “shipped it to China”. The damage this class of “globalists” did was enormous.

From this perspective Reagan, though popular, and presented as a “gold standard” of the American presidency, did a great deal of harm to the American social body.

I have no way (that I can trust) to assess Trump’s radically bold policy moves in these specific areas. Will his policies, and this supposed populism be coopted by extraordinarily powerful interests? That seems likely given the history.

[Alexis Jacobi]

You can't get outside the "American" perspective, how is that thorough? And your musings about ideology, metaphysics, narratives mean little when it's mainly the "might makes right" of the superpowers that moves the world.

First, the policies being instituted by Trump are subsumed under the slogan America First. According to Trump “we have been treated very badly” (by everyone) and his policies, as stated, are the beginning of rectification.

If you accept MacGregor’s analysis, the US cannot afford (literally) to continue with those policies that defined it in the Cold War period. This is a sobering moment for the US mindset. The US neo-imperialism must retract. There is no other sane option but an array of insane ones.

The metaphysics that I expound have everything to do with how individuals orient themselves within themselves. Taken seriously, a man who lives in accord with metaphysical principles, eschews ‘the world of becoming’ for a conceptual ‘world of being’.

In my view a man must have that internal anchor, and that anchor in what is metaphysical, even if he is forced to participate, or at least to witness, the brutality of the obvious power-plays of our present.

A man must find metaphysical purpose, and then orient his life around that purpose. This, Atla, is such utterly basic stuff! And yet no part of your conception!

Poor, lost man! You are emblematic of the average man in our present.

Where is Harbal BTW? Did that lunatic nut-job chick really drive him away forever?!?

I managed to tranquilize Flash, a notorious perv and pederast, and a completely disordered (pseudo-) intellect, with a dart from my elephant tranquilizer gun.

Later, I am going to lecture him on Beginning Thought: Recovering From Derangement 101 and if you think you can also benefit I will send you the $999.00 PayPal invoice and you can listen, grumble, shuffle, prevaricate and carry on as usual. But at least I will benefit!

[Alexis Jacobi]

They shot this film recently when I was honored for my metaphysical contributions to humanity’s thought-processes.

See, some people appreciate what I do.

[FlashDangerpants]

Trump may or may not bring peace to the Ukraine. But it does seem he'll drive us into recession with his idiotic tariffs. I though the Republicans supported free trade.

Here, dear Alexiev, I think you reveal some misunderstanding and misperception. Like it or not Donald Trump, if understood through the Steve Bannon lens, is not a Republican but a populist. Trump “did a number” on the Republican Party and — insofar as they are “establishment” — they loath and resent him.

The concept behind Trump’s tariffs is (according to the argument which I am personally not qualified to assess) to bring businesses and industry back to the United States. It stands to reason and to intuition that this would necessitate the implementation of a radical policy that could not be else but painful (?) at the start.

I have watched some “experts” who have made the case that a policy of tariffs could, perhaps ultimately, create larger benefits in the long run than the short-term pain which will (?) certainly manifest.

The Republicans, if my researches into Reaganomics are correct (reduced taxes, and a free-market policy championed, for example, by the Wall Street Journal during that decade) is precisely what dismantled America’s industrial base and “shipped it to China”. The damage this class of “globalists” did was enormous.

From this perspective Reagan, though popular, and presented as a “gold standard” of the American presidency, did a great deal of harm to the American social body.

I have no way (that I can trust) to assess Trump’s radically bold policy moves in these specific areas. Will his policies, and this supposed populism be coopted by extraordinarily powerful interests? That seems likely given the history.

You have made a very large number of errors there, far too many to cover here, but we should make a start. Frist the good bit: I agree that Trump is not a conservative, and neither are any of his prominent advisers this go round, they comprise a collective of neo-trads and other radicals who just use old school conservatism as an occasional source of inspiration. There don't seem to be any actual conservatives left though and that trend started long before Trump and was previously embodied by Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.

The concept behind Trump's tariffs is clearly protectionist, but it goes further than that, his explanation of the reasoning constantly refers back to the notion that other nations who have a positive trade balance with the USA are ripping America off. This is an aggravating factor, it marks Trump out as a 21st Century Mercantilist. Mercantilism is one of those common sense sort of views that only the totally uneducated can possibly believe. Pursuing it in this day and age can only bring great harm.

Reagan did not create the decline in dirty manufacturing in America. To stay in the game in any area of economic activity requires investment, and to have investment requires returns on investment. America stopped investing in a lot of industrial activity in the years following the post war boom. The Stagflation years. You should learn to love that word btw, it's on a comeback tour thanks to Trump.

During the Stagflation period, and the decade prior, manufacturing growth in two the most bombed out economies of the second world war had completely overtaken that of the USA, France and Britain leading to underperformance on the British and American car and steel industries among others. Both countries attempted to protect their incumbent manufacturers with tariffs and non-tariff barriers such as quota systems, bailouts and so on. This response simply caused new problems, it did not bring about a situation where investment in a new car factory would boost productivity, gain market share and generate profits. Instead they maintained a shaky status-quo until it became unsustainable. Similar investments did generate such returns for German and Japanese (and Italian and South Korean) manufacturers.

That is why the USA ended up with Reagan and the UK with Thatcher. Nobody wanted Thatcher, her own party least of all, they just ran out of other ideas. It is worth noting however that other European nations in the 80s had the same underlying issues as their own manufacturing industries slowed down with lack of investment. They didn't go for Reaganite/Thatcherite low taxes zero social investment route, but they did all fix the main problem by ending the excessive subsidy and trade restrictions of the 60s/70s (they had to, they were in the EEC).

The subsequent move of manufacturing industry to China began much later when China joined the WTO. But the China stuff is just jingoism so we don't need to bother with that.

If you want to know how protectionism works out in the longer term, you can look into the Jones Act. Promulgated over a century ago, it enforces the protectionist rule that only American ships can carry cargoes between one American port and another. This means that American seaborn logistics companies do not need to invest rapidly in fleet that carries cargo to such places as Hawaii and Puerto Rico, making all sorts of every products ruinously expensive outside the contiguous states.

[Atla]

First, the policies being instituted by Trump are subsumed under the slogan America First. According to Trump “we have been treated very badly” (by everyone) and his policies, as stated, are the beginning of rectification.

The US has been the top political, military presence on the planet for many decades, possibly the richest country, it pretty much dictated to other countries how it wants to be treated. And no, it wasn't treated badly anyway. It's highly dishonest and pathetic for the US to suddenly say that it has been treated badly by everyone. ("everyone"??) Since you don't have much going on upstairs, you would adopt this Trumpian dishonesty. The US only makes itself look small with this behaviour.

If you accept MacGregor’s analysis, the US cannot afford (literally) to continue with those policies that defined it in the Cold War period. This is a sobering moment for the US mindset. The US neo-imperialism must retract. There is no other sane option but an array of insane ones.

Obviously. Which doesn't mean that Trumpism is the way.

The metaphysics that I expound have everything to do with how individuals orient themselves within themselves. Taken seriously, a man who lives in accord with metaphysical principles, eschews ‘the world of becoming’ for a conceptual ‘world of being’.

In my view a man must have that internal anchor, and that anchor in what is metaphysical, even if he is forced to participate, or at least to witness, the brutality of the obvious power-plays of our present.

A man must find metaphysical purpose, and then orient his life around that purpose. This, Atla, is such utterly basic stuff! And yet no part of your conception!

Poor, lost man! You are emblematic of the average man in our present.

You don't get it as usual, typical American mentality. The US and other superpowers can afford to be consumed by metaphysical self-fallation and act on it, because their "might makes right" has whatever they want to do covered. The vast majority of countries can't do that.