Trump Makes War on America


21 responses to “Trump Makes War on America

  1. We are all antifa.

    • In Weimar Germany, one of the reasons for the popularity of the Communists was that they were perceived as being most active against Hitler. The same was true for a lot of Jews in the US–the enemy of my enemy and all.

  2. Can you link to the original so we can spread it around?

  3. President Trump made clear that the United States condemns these senseless acts of violence that took the lives of nine American citizens in the call, and offered help to ensure the perpetrators face justice, the White House said in a statement.

    [Response: On Twitter Trump said he would apply the most vicious response, warning about “the shooting starts” when referring to Americans protesting against police violence. Trump’s only “plan” is to augment police violence with military violence — against Americans.]

    • Calling Trump “President” disgraces the office.

    • Bob Loblaw

      Just keep a close eye on who Trump calls “very good people” and who he calls “losers and low-lifes”. It tells you a lot about the man.

    • Oh, sure, a nice pro forma statement, written by some PR hack in the press secretary’s office. The Twitter feed is #therealDonaldTrump

  4. Twitter feed with videos here:

    It’s really, really disturbing.

    • Wow. I’m guessing they don’t shoot at white people on balconies with quite such alacrity? Or at all? There is something rotten in a culture where this sort of thing happens.

      • Yes, unless they’re press. (“Enemies of the people,” remember.) Although I think they’re shooting more at just about everybody a bit more nowadays, to be honest.

  5. Susan Anderson

    “Maybe it’s time to get uncomfortable” only one of probably millions of stories as she explains here:

  6. In the and his war on climate will kill more people. bleeding make as more emotional and this mass will end in weeks. Climate change will not end soon. And climate catastrophe may reduce the human population significantly. The toll can be higher in total and precentage of population then WWII. Much higher.

    • This is true, unfortunately. Luckily the proximate remedy is the same:

      Kick Trump to the curb. Vote climate!

    • Susan Anderson

      For me, the benchmark was a little noticed prime time special in 2009, “Earth 2100”. It had the population thinning to 2 or 3 billion by 2100. I think that’s about right. 2009 was a banner year for climate, but the delay in seating Al Franken and Ted Kennedy’s illness and death limited Obama’s ability to lead to 5 short months when he had a supermajority.

      • There is always a ‘gap’ in the ability, and desire, of the neoliberal establishment to address problems. Money and things are more important than communal values and sustainability (“best available science”). The liberalism of the Democratic Party (at most levels) is as thin as a Franklin ($100 bill).

      • Susan Anderson

        louploup2: I have always disliked the equation of neoliberalism with liberalism and the justifications for it. I absolutely do not agree with you. And there is no hope if you are right. But blaming victims for what perps do is self-defeating. We need allies, not enemies. I’m with Warren.

      • Let’s not forget that the lefties abandoned Obama before he even took the oath of office. He wasn’t pure enough for them. They are at best unreliable partners.

      • How am I equating liberal with neoliberal? The former has long meant social justice, equity, etc. The latter (as explained in detail by David Harvey in “A Brief History of Neoliberalism” 2005) means that money (capital) can do what it wishes with as little interference (“regulation”) by government as possible.

        Democratic politicians often promote both liberal and neoliberal policies. The national D party took a turn more toward the latter under Clinton (“New Democrats”). Republican politicians not so much; they tend toward the neoconservative side of policies, or outright fascistic (no safety net, unregulated capital, taxes designed to increase inequity—basically oligarchy with power of the state protecting interests of capital).

        You may “disagree with me” all you want, but you haven’t said anything that shows how or why.

      • Susan Anderson

        OK louploup, I may have misunderstood you. But this is what bothered me. You wrote: “The liberalism of the Democratic Party (at most levels) is as thin as a Franklin ($100 bill).”

        I am a lifetime proud liberal (= progressive); my parents supported Stevenson against Eisenhower when I was young, and Reagan made me physically ill.

        I will always speak out against people blaming Democrats for what Republicans did. It will sometimes not be a direct answer to the person who reminded me to speak up once more.

        You might not know about the Mont Pelerin Society meeting in 1947.
        I strong recommend Kate Raworth’s Doughnut Economy for an education in how things should be done. Oh well …


      • Thank you for the cogent response. My parents also supported Adlai Stevenson, and I’m well aware of the older definition (“classical”) of ‘liberal’ represented by Hayek, Uncle Miltie, et al. Those who follow their ideology are whom I call ‘neoliberal.’

        As for the Democrats, remember that the party was that of many reactionaries—the South!—and Jim Crow right through Woodrow Wilson (e.g., My grandfather was a Democratic congressman from Rochester NY in the early 1920s; he represents an early marker in the shift by the party toward being overall liberal in the modern sense.

        The Democratic Party is not monolithic and at the upper levels (DNC) has been taken over by the less reactionary wing of the neoliberal oligarchy, represented by Wall Street and New Democrats as I noted. I’m speaking as a life long Democrat—active PCO for decades, served on executive board of two legislative district party organizations, etc. I do not blame Ds for the actions of the American Fascist Party (Republicans).

        Where I sit, in Seattle, the second party is to our left (Socialist Alternative—the Rs are irrelevant here) and many of us Ds push in that direction. One push is against new urbanism (YIMBYs), representing “liberals” who get in bed with developers (capital) thinking that is the way to promote sustainable development (IMO, an oxymoron). The political fault lines are in flux as they always have been.

        As for the doughnut economy… I am familiar with Rockstrom’s work. I have been beating the anti-growth drum for so long I am known for it. The study and promotion of sustainability is my life’s work.