by Oui
Sun Jul 28th, 2024 at 11:24:09 AM EST
.
Following the aftermath of the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol, "American Reckoning - A PBS NewsHour Special Report" looks at the economic and racial history that led to a political divide between Americans, the impact of President Donald Trump's rhetoric throughout his presidency and the next steps for the nation to heal from the recent attack on American democracy.
Developing story was no surprise to me ...
Below the fold a summary of the little adjustment in new era policy of AmericaFirst! between Obama - Trump - Biden ... a NWO.
The Age of America First
Washington's Flawed New Foreign Policy Consensus | Foreign Affairs |
By Richard Haass - 29 Sept 2021
Donald Trump was supposed to be an aberration--a U.S. president whose foreign policy marked a sharp but temporary break from an internationalism that had defined seven decades of U.S. interactions with the world. He saw little value in alliances and spurned multilateral institutions. He eagerly withdrew from existing international agreements, such as the Paris climate accord and the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, and backed away from new ones, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). He coddled autocrats and trained his ire on the United States' democratic partners.
At first glance, the foreign policy of U.S. President Joe Biden could hardly be
more different. He professes to value the United States' traditional allies in Europe and Asia, celebrates multilateralism, and hails his administration's
commitment to a "rules-based international order." He treats climate
change as a serious threat and arms control as an essential tool. He sees the
fight of our time as one between democracy and autocracy, pledging to
convene what he is calling the Summit for Democracy to reestablish U.S.
leadership in the democratic cause. "America is back," he proclaimed shortly
after taking office.
But the differences, meaningful as they are, obscure a deeper truth: there is
far more continuity between the foreign policy of the current president and
that of the former president than is typically recognized. Critical elements of
this continuity arose even before Trump's presidency, during the
administration of Barack Obama, suggesting a longer-term development--a
paradigm shift in the United States' approach to the world. Beneath the
apparent volatility, the outlines of a post-post-Cold War U.S. foreign policy
are emerging.
[...]
U.S. presidents have always allowed professed commitments to
human rights and democracy to be set aside when other interests or
priorities have come to the fore. The "free world" of the Cold War was often
anything but free. But the broader shift in U.S. foreign policy today, with its
stress on both great-power competition and short-term domestic priorities,
has made those tradeoffs more frequent and acute.
[...]
Whatever the failings of this new paradigm, there is no going back; history
does not offer do-overs. Nor should Washington return to a foreign policy that, for much of three decades, largely failed both in what it did and in what
it did not do.
1. The starting point for a new internationalism should be a clear
recognition that although foreign policy begins at home, it cannot end
there. The United States, regardless of its diminished influence and
deep domestic divisions, faces a world with both traditional
geopolitical threats and new challenges tied to globalization. An
American president must seek to fix what ails the United States without
neglecting what happens abroad. Greater disarray in the world will
make the task to "build back better"--or whatever slogan is chosen for
domestic renewal--much more difficult, if not impossible. Biden has
acknowledged the "fundamental truth of the 21st century . . . that our
own success is bound up with others succeeding as well"; the question
is whether he can craft and carry out a foreign policy that reflects it.
The United States also cannot succeed alone. It must work with others,
through both formal and informal means, to set international norms and
standards and marshal collective action. Such an approach will require the
involvement of traditional allies in Europe and Asia, new partners, countries
that may need U.S. or international help at home, and nondemocracies. It
will require the use of all the instruments of power available to the United
States--diplomacy, but also trade, aid, intelligence, and the military. Nor can
the United States risk letting unpredictability give it a reputation as
unreliable; other states will determine their own actions, especially when it In the absence of a new American internationalism, the likely outcome will
be a world that is less free, more violent, and less willing or able to tackle
common challenges. It is equal parts ironic and dangerous that at a time
when the United States is more affected by global developments than ever
before, it is less willing to carry out a foreign policy that attempts to shape
them.
Early analysis by Frank Schnittger
Europe warns Obama: this relationship is not working | 15 July 2010 |
The irony is that much of the European unhappiness comes from what would be seen (in the US) as the left, whereas the US Right rather gleefully assumes that Europeans are coming to agree with them. This is obviously not the case on issues such as Climate Change. However the article presents most of European unhappiness with Obama as confirming the US Right's opposition to Obama.
A moment in history sandwiched in between the financial crisis 2008-09, austerity measures and the Euro crisis, shortly before the ill advised intervention in Libya and Syria causing immense chaos and a war refugee flight that will push populists and right-wing parties into power across "Old Europe:" Damnation to exceptionalism and white-supremacy .. preparing the ground for Tea Party fanatics and a red carpet for entry of Trumpism in an empire in decline.
The Line Between the Tea Party and Stop the Steal | The Atlantic - 12 Aug 2022 |
The scholar Theda Skocpol--renowned for her research on the Tea Party movement a decade ago--explains how American politics has evolved since then.
The Koch Network and Republican Party Extremism | Cambridge - 31 Aug 2016 |
Earthquakes and erosions have remade the U.S. political terrain, reconfiguring the ground on which politicians and social groups must maneuver, and it is important to make sure that narrow and short-term analyses do not blind us to this shifting terrain. We draw from research on changes since 2000 in the organizational universes surrounding the Republican and Democratic parties to highlight a major emergent force in U.S. politics: the recently expanded "Koch network" that coordinates big money funders, idea producers, issue advocates, and innovative constituency-building efforts in an ongoing effort to pull the Republican Party and agendas of U.S. politics sharply to the right. We review the major components and evolution of the Koch network and explore how it has reshaped American politics and policy agendas, focusing especially on implications for right-tilted partisan polarization and rising economic inequality.
The future of democracy remains in doubt as wars abroad doesn't hide division and violence at home. Quite similar to Israel and its policy confronting Palestinians and its neighbours forgetting about the true intent of the UN Charter.
Small Shifts to Hold Israel to Account
More violent rhetoric to stir up crowds and fanatics at rally
'Lunatic, incompetent': Trump launches all-out attack on Harris at North Carolina rally | ANC |
Donald Trump, campaigning in North Carolina, turns his attacks toward Kamala Harris
