I recently read "Upheaval" by Jared Diamond (geography professor). Even though it was written before Trump’s second time as USA president, it helps understand that he isn’t the main problem in the USA. He’s more like clear signs of a bigger issues. If the main problem is like having the flu, then Trump is like the coughing and spitting that come with i, he is not the germ or virus that caused the flu. The book suggests that if a country don’t honestly identify that it is in crisis, reflect on that realistically, avoid victimhood and blaming others, they might keep seeing leaders like Trump, or even worse ones in the future. Do Americans think their country is in crisis?
But it has been a good day for trump. Putin is laughing at him and Canada sent for the King. How much longer before he becomes a gibbering wreck and they have to roll out the 25th Amendment?
Also, @Burgess, I wouldn't rely on that book by Jared Diamond to understand what's going on in the US right now. If you want an historical explanation, I'd recommend Illiberal America by NYU history professor Steven Hahn.
@Nick Tamen As I recall you recently chided me for stooping to Trump's games when I was doing a riff on his real name. Just to point out, I can never stoop as low as he is.
Over the past few days Trump has been expressing disappointment in Putin. The Kremlin's response? Trump must be suffering from emotional overload. I think I can agree with that assessment.
I still think Putin has something on Trump in reserve. Might go back to when Trump was trying to establish a Trump motel in Moscow. Then too, it is said much of the Trump enterprises had to rely on Russian financing when he could not get loans through the standard banking practices. Trump would hate it if all the Russian chips were called in or if Putin does a final reveal.
But, even if Trump were to finally and fully support Ukraine in their war effort, we might have exhausted what we could have given Ukraine already. We don't have many Patriots to give away anymore. For that matter, I don't think the European allies can supply them either.
I think he is preparing to pull out of any peace process and abandon Ukraine, now that he is insulting both sides at the same time.
@Nick Tamen As I recall you recently chided me for stooping to Trump's games when I was doing a riff on his real name.
Well, to be precise, and it wasn’t just for doing disparaging riffs on his real name. (Though I will say the Drumpf riff, given the context in which it was used, seems to come uncomfortably close to “his family is German, and so were the Nazis.”)
It was also for posting inaccurate or at least unverified claims—some of which can be shown to be inaccurate with just a little bit of research—and then ignoring requests to provide support for those claims. As just one example, you never provided anything to back up your accusation that Trump’s “family has a long fascist history.”
Just to point out, I can never stoop as low as he is.
Why stoop low at all? It certainly isn’t necessary. He provides plenty of all too valid and verifiable targets for criticism and disdain. Why choose rumor-mongering instead?
Why stoop low at all? It certainly isn’t necessary. He provides plenty of all too valid and verifiable targets for criticism and disdain. Why choose rumor-mongering instead?
Problem is, most of the legitimate criticism never seems to budge public opinion enough to ensure that a majority of voters will remain solidly anti-Republican from here on into the 2026 and 2018 elections.
BUT...
Unfortunately, the personal and family attacks(of whatever validity) don't seem to do much damage, either. Trump reads Mein Kampf/bankrupted six casinos/raped a woman in a changing room/sexualizes his own daughter/etc etc? None of that ever seems to be a permanent deal-breaker for swing voters.
Why stoop low at all? It certainly isn’t necessary. He provides plenty of all too valid and verifiable targets for criticism and disdain. Why choose rumor-mongering instead?
Problem is, most of the legitimate criticism never seems to budge public opinion enough to ensure that a majority of voters will remain solidly anti-Republican from here on into the 2026 and 2018 elections.
I strongly suspect that nothing said on the Ship of Fools is even remotely likely to budge public opinion even a hair.
To put my question another way, why continue to post in a way that makes shipmates assume they need to fact-check almost everything you say?
I recently read "Upheaval" by Jared Diamond (geography professor). Even though it was written before Trump’s second time as USA president, it helps understand that he isn’t the main problem in the USA. He’s more like clear signs of a bigger issues. If the main problem is like having the flu, then Trump is like the coughing and spitting that come with i, he is not the germ or virus that caused the flu. The book suggests that if a country don’t honestly identify that it is in crisis, reflect on that realistically, avoid victimhood and blaming others, they might keep seeing leaders like Trump, or even worse ones in the future. Do Americans think their country is in crisis?
Ah yes, the old "symptom or cause?" debate about Trump. I'd argue it's a little bit of both. As I observed elsewhere, Donald Trump is in many ways the culmination of five decades of trends in American conservatism (and the Republican party which is its primary vehicle). On the other hand, Donald Trump was able to build a successful campaign on open racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, personal grievance, and blatant corruption in a way that no national level Republican politician had been willing to attempt since the Gilded Age. If Trump hadn't come along I'm not sure how long it would have taken for another Republican to abandon dog whistling.
Yeah, the bad news is that Trump didn't come out of nowhere, the seeds of his rise to power are all the way back with Nixon via Reagan and Gingrich and Limbaugh. The good news is that Trump's ability to do what he does is not easily replicable, once he dies it's unlikely that any successor will be able to hold the same dark attraction. Even if Don Jr tries it's likely to be a case of Richard Cromwell to Trump's Oliver.
Yeah, the bad news is that Trump didn't come out of nowhere, the seeds of his rise to power are all the way back with Nixon via Reagan and Gingrich and Limbaugh. The good news is that Trump's ability to do what he does is not easily replicable, once he dies it's unlikely that any successor will be able to hold the same dark attraction.
I'm not sure that's true; American history is full of demagogues with a platform, none of whom tried or were able to cross over to politics, but given the debasement of the Republican Party I'm sure more will now try - I don't the supply is constrained (not in America, and not anywhere else either).
The good news is that Trump's ability to do what he does is not easily replicable, once he dies it's unlikely that any successor will be able to hold the same dark attraction.
I'm not sure that's the case. It's not as if there weren't racists or sexists in the Republican party before this. What Trump has changed is that he's pretty clearly disproved the conventional wisdom that openly embracing these things is automatic electoral poison at a national level. So the roadmap now exists.
And I would say that many elements of Trump's playbook are being implemented by others across the world with considerable electoral success. So I don't see why future American candidates wouldn't follow in his footsteps too.
Also, @Burgess, I wouldn't rely on that book by Jared Diamond to understand what's going on in the US right now. If you want an historical explanation, I'd recommend Illiberal America by NYU history professor Steven Hahn.
Thanks for answering. Sorry, is Jared Diamond an unreliable author? Did not think he was. I got the book in the discount section, having read other things by him. This book called "Upheaval" compares national crises in Japan, Indonesia, Chile, Australia, Finland, and looked to those countries similarities and differences in the challenges they have faced, to comment about the crisis the world as a whole faces, and then because he is an American, to what he sees as the crisis there.
Also, @Burgess, I wouldn't rely on that book by Jared Diamond to understand what's going on in the US right now. If you want an historical explanation, I'd recommend Illiberal America by NYU history professor Steven Hahn.
Thanks for answering. Sorry, is Jared Diamond an unreliable author? Did not think he was.
Searching for that leads to Malcolm Gladwell. Never heard of this person. Maybe the wrong thing.
They both tell just-so stories based on very little evidence. Diamonds first book was not bad in that context, but everything since then has got worse.
It's a form of insight porn that gives you just enough counterintuitive information to make it feel more real than it is.
Searching for that leads to Malcolm Gladwell. Never heard of this person. Maybe the wrong thing.
They both tell just-so stories based on very little evidence. Diamonds first book was not bad in that context, but everything since then has got worse.
It's a form of insight porn that gives you just enough counterintuitive information to make it feel more real than it is.
Remember Richard Florida, the urban theorist from about 15 years ago who said you can tell how succesful a city will be by how many gay people live there?
And, now, the US Intenational Trade Court has ruled Trump's Independance Day Tarniffs are unconstitutional, that he is exceeding his powers. It affirms Congress has the power to levy Tariffs.
It is late here. People will have to do their own research. Good night.
And, now, the US Intenational Trade Court has ruled Trump's Independance Day Tarniffs are unconstitutional, that he is exceeding his powers. It affirms Congress has the power to levy Tariffs.
It is late here. People will have to do their own research. Good night.
Saw this on the news. There will be appeals. Does he have to stop imposing the tariffs?
And, now, the US Intenational Trade Court has ruled Trump's Independance Day Tarniffs are unconstitutional, that he is exceeding his powers. It affirms Congress has the power to levy Tariffs.
It is late here. People will have to do their own research. Good night.
Saw this on the news. There will be appeals. Does he have to stop imposing the tariffs?
IANAL (especially NAUSL) but I would think that would depend on the appellate court issuing a stay while they hear the case. And of course the Trump regime's somewhat elastic attitude to judicial authority means "has to" and "will" are some distance apart.
For those who are interested the full opinion is located here [PDF]. It's "only" about fifty pages long. For those who want to cut to the chase, here's the conclusion (pp. 48-49).
The court holds for the foregoing reasons that IEEPA does not authorize any of the
Worldwide, Retaliatory, or Trafficking Tariff Orders. The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariff Orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs. The Trafficking Tariffs fail because they do not deal with the threats set forth in those orders. This conclusion entitles Plaintiffs to judgment as a matter of law; as the court further finds no genuine dispute as to any material fact, summary judgment will enter against the United States.See USCIT R. 56. The challenged Tariff Orders will be vacated and their operation permanently enjoined.
There is no question here of narrowly tailored relief; if the challenged Tariff Orders are unlawful as to Plaintiffs they are unlawful as to all. “[A]ll Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States,” U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 1, and “[t]he tax is uniform when it operates with the same force and effect in every place where the subject of it is found.” Head Money Cases, 112 U.S. 580, 594 (1884); see alsoSiemens Am., Inc. v. United States, 692 F.2d 1382, 1383 (Fed. Cir. 1982); Nat’l Corn Growers Ass’n v. Baker, 10 CIT 517, 521, 643 F. Supp. 626, 630–31 (1986) (noting “the statutory and constitutional mandate of uniformity in the interpretation of the international trade laws”).
Plaintiffs’ Motions for Summary Judgment are granted, and their Motions for Preliminary Injunction are denied as moot. Judgment will enter accordingly.
Bolding added by me. All other formatting from the original.
Since the Tariffs were not in place at the time of the court order, I do not believe the appellate court would issue a stay. The constitution is pretty clear Congress has the power to levy tariffs. It will likely go to the Supreme Court. I am interested in seeing what their final decision will be.
The panel consisted of on judge appointed by Reagan, one appointed by Obama, and one appointed by DJT. It had a conservative bent.
Trump is complaining an unelected three judge panel can have such power. Umm, Mr. Trump, that is why our federal judiciary system works as well as it does. It is not as beholden to the whims of the electorate.
Searching for that leads to Malcolm Gladwell. Never heard of this person. Maybe the wrong thing.
They both tell just-so stories based on very little evidence. Diamonds first book was not bad in that context, but everything since then has got worse.
It's a form of insight porn that gives you just enough counterintuitive information to make it feel more real than it is.
I don't get the part about "porn." I thought Jared Diamond pointed out the source of the problem. Which is realizing there is a crisis, and then starting to do something about it. I feel that people don't see it as a national crisis, but I may be wrong as I do not live there. But I think if people think that Donald Trump became the leader of a his country by accident, not just once but twice, then they are missing the real issue of the country being in crisis not just from him.
I feel that people don't see it as a national crisis, but I may be wrong as I do not live there. But I think if people think that Donald Trump became the leader of a his country by accident, not just once but twice, then they are missing the real issue of the country being in crisis not just from him.
There are quite a few apparent assumptions here, not least of which is that 340 million Americans are of one mind about whether the country is in a national crisis, and if so, what the nature of that crisis is and how Donald Trump fits into it.
If you take time to read comments from Americans in this thread, you’ll find many comments that do indeed reflect a recognition of a national crisis, and one that has been brewing for a long while, of which Trump is but a symptom. But this is a very large and polarized country, so not all Americans will see things the same way. We’re no different from just about any other country in that regard.
Searching for that leads to Malcolm Gladwell. Never heard of this person. Maybe the wrong thing.
They both tell just-so stories based on very little evidence. Diamonds first book was not bad in that context, but everything since then has got worse.
It's a form of insight porn that gives you just enough counterintuitive information to make it feel more real than it is.
I don't get the part about "porn." I thought Jared Diamond pointed out the source of the problem. Which is realizing there is a crisis, and then starting to do something about it. I feel that people don't see it as a national crisis, but I may be wrong as I do not live there. But I think if people think that Donald Trump became the leader of a his country by accident, not just once but twice, then they are missing the real issue of the country being in crisis not just from him.
Honestly I think you are better off reading Ruth's recommendation, or Joseph Tainter.
I feel that people don't see it as a national crisis, but I may be wrong as I do not live there. But I think if people think that Donald Trump became the leader of a his country by accident, not just once but twice, then they are missing the real issue of the country being in crisis not just from him.
There are quite a few apparent assumptions here, not least of which is that 340 million Americans are of one mind about whether the country is in a national crisis, and if so, what the nature of that crisis is and how Donald Trump fits into it.
Which points up the absurdity of a major premise in Diamond's book, as he compares how an individual responds to crises to how countries do, never mind that countries are composed of many different individuals.
The book I recommended is by a real historian at NY University, specializing in American history for 40-odd years, writing about the details of some the communities that have at various times fostered and promulgated American illiberalism. The author @chrisstiles mentioned studies civilizational collapse, is an anthropologist and historian, and has been looking at this topic for roughly 40 years. He didn't just start looking at this a few years ago. Jared Diamond is writing airport bookstore books at this point and cashing in.
So I'm not going to buy into the notion that Diamond has anything worthwhile to say about what's happening in the US right now.
Regards, the Tariff, the appellate court did issue a temporary stay. But it is requiring the petitioners to submit briefs by 5 June, with the government reply by 9 June. Something tells me they will rule quickly on the appeal.
Also, @Burgess, I wouldn't rely on that book by Jared Diamond to understand what's going on in the US right now. If you want an historical explanation, I'd recommend Illiberal America by NYU history professor Steven Hahn.
Thanks for answering. Sorry, is Jared Diamond an unreliable author? Did not think he was.
He tends to be a bit.. Gladwellic
As for that guy, never read him directly, but I believe he publicized the story about the Korean co-pilot who was afraid to challenge his older pilot after the pilot entered the wrong code into the flight plan(or some such) and the plane crashed into a mountain, with Gladwell claiming this illustrated the drawbacks of an age-based social hierarchy.
Having lived in Korea for many years, I can easily imagine something like that happening, at least up until the recent past(and I faintly remember hearing Koreans themselves talking about it). But it is the kinda thing that tends to become a factoid, used by armchair sociologists to sum up in the most simplistic terms complex social processes(*).
(*) And, of course, such amateur pontificating is why God invented "But not, I think, in the south."
Turns out the Trump lawyers, in their appeal of the USCIT, had to promise that if the court ruled against them Trump will refund all tariffs anyone had to pay. Has to do with the obligation of the courts to make whole anyone who has been harmed by any action.
Turns out the Trump lawyers, in their appeal of the USCIT, had to promise that if the court ruled against them Trump will refund all tariffs anyone had to pay. Has to do with the obligation of the courts to make whole anyone who has been harmed by any action.
Saw this. Yes any US company that has had to pay the tariffs will get the money, I believe either interest. A step forward certainly. Those who have gone out of business will at least get something. Apparently Trump has complained about the courts saying that tariffs have to come from congress. He said it was taking away power from the executive. It is putting things back to what they were. The executive never had that power. Have I understood correctly?
Is this some kind of admission from Trumps side of guilt? Even slight.
His interview with Jon Ronson makes interesting watching (it's on youtube), the line that stuck with me is 'he would take esoteric academic research and turn it into good stories', which summarises the approach of the authors operating in this space.
His interview with Jon Ronson makes interesting watching (it's on youtube), the line that stuck with me is 'he would take esoteric academic research and turn it into good stories', which summarises the approach of the authors operating in this space.
May I suggest we take pop social science pundits off to their own thread?
Turns out the Trump lawyers, in their appeal of the USCIT, had to promise that if the court ruled against them Trump will refund all tariffs anyone had to pay. Has to do with the obligation of the courts to make whole anyone who has been harmed by any action.
Surely the money would be refunded by the U.S. federal government, not Trump himself. One of the more toxic aspects of dictators and would-be dictators is the erasure of the line between the leader and the state.
Turns out the Trump lawyers, in their appeal of the USCIT, had to promise that if the court ruled against them Trump will refund all tariffs anyone had to pay. Has to do with the obligation of the courts to make whole anyone who has been harmed by any action.
Surely the money would be refunded by the U.S. federal government, not Trump himself. One of the more toxic aspects of dictators and would-be dictators is the erasure of the line between the leader and the state.
I interpreted @Gramps49 as meaning the courts want Trump to direct the government to refund the tariffs.
Even though the Federal government has promised to refund all collected tariffs should the government fail, that would not cover all the other associated costs of coping with the tariff threats like broken contracts, changes to supply systems, accounting costs, etc.
Comments
If it makes you feel any better, US power will wane considerably if we continue on our present course.
Depends who you ask. Me? Yes. The people down the street with the giant Trump flag in their front window? Probably would say no.
They probably would say it was in crisis under Biden, but Tchump has fixed it all.
Over the past few days Trump has been expressing disappointment in Putin. The Kremlin's response? Trump must be suffering from emotional overload. I think I can agree with that assessment.
I think he is preparing to pull out of any peace process and abandon Ukraine, now that he is insulting both sides at the same time.
It was also for posting inaccurate or at least unverified claims—some of which can be shown to be inaccurate with just a little bit of research—and then ignoring requests to provide support for those claims. As just one example, you never provided anything to back up your accusation that Trump’s “family has a long fascist history.”
Why stoop low at all? It certainly isn’t necessary. He provides plenty of all too valid and verifiable targets for criticism and disdain. Why choose rumor-mongering instead?
Problem is, most of the legitimate criticism never seems to budge public opinion enough to ensure that a majority of voters will remain solidly anti-Republican from here on into the 2026 and 2018 elections.
BUT...
Unfortunately, the personal and family attacks(of whatever validity) don't seem to do much damage, either. Trump reads Mein Kampf/bankrupted six casinos/raped a woman in a changing room/sexualizes his own daughter/etc etc? None of that ever seems to be a permanent deal-breaker for swing voters.
To put my question another way, why continue to post in a way that makes shipmates assume they need to fact-check almost everything you say?
Ah yes, the old "symptom or cause?" debate about Trump. I'd argue it's a little bit of both. As I observed elsewhere, Donald Trump is in many ways the culmination of five decades of trends in American conservatism (and the Republican party which is its primary vehicle). On the other hand, Donald Trump was able to build a successful campaign on open racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, personal grievance, and blatant corruption in a way that no national level Republican politician had been willing to attempt since the Gilded Age. If Trump hadn't come along I'm not sure how long it would have taken for another Republican to abandon dog whistling.
I'm not sure that's true; American history is full of demagogues with a platform, none of whom tried or were able to cross over to politics, but given the debasement of the Republican Party I'm sure more will now try - I don't the supply is constrained (not in America, and not anywhere else either).
I'm not sure that's the case. It's not as if there weren't racists or sexists in the Republican party before this. What Trump has changed is that he's pretty clearly disproved the conventional wisdom that openly embracing these things is automatic electoral poison at a national level. So the roadmap now exists.
Thanks for answering. Sorry, is Jared Diamond an unreliable author? Did not think he was. I got the book in the discount section, having read other things by him. This book called "Upheaval" compares national crises in Japan, Indonesia, Chile, Australia, Finland, and looked to those countries similarities and differences in the challenges they have faced, to comment about the crisis the world as a whole faces, and then because he is an American, to what he sees as the crisis there.
He tends to be a bit.. Gladwellic
They both tell just-so stories based on very little evidence. Diamonds first book was not bad in that context, but everything since then has got worse.
It's a form of insight porn that gives you just enough counterintuitive information to make it feel more real than it is.
Remember Richard Florida, the urban theorist from about 15 years ago who said you can tell how succesful a city will be by how many gay people live there?
It is late here. People will have to do their own research. Good night.
Saw this on the news. There will be appeals. Does he have to stop imposing the tariffs?
IANAL (especially NAUSL) but I would think that would depend on the appellate court issuing a stay while they hear the case. And of course the Trump regime's somewhat elastic attitude to judicial authority means "has to" and "will" are some distance apart.
Bolding added by me. All other formatting from the original.
The panel consisted of on judge appointed by Reagan, one appointed by Obama, and one appointed by DJT. It had a conservative bent.
Trump is complaining an unelected three judge panel can have such power. Umm, Mr. Trump, that is why our federal judiciary system works as well as it does. It is not as beholden to the whims of the electorate.
I don't get the part about "porn." I thought Jared Diamond pointed out the source of the problem. Which is realizing there is a crisis, and then starting to do something about it. I feel that people don't see it as a national crisis, but I may be wrong as I do not live there. But I think if people think that Donald Trump became the leader of a his country by accident, not just once but twice, then they are missing the real issue of the country being in crisis not just from him.
If you take time to read comments from Americans in this thread, you’ll find many comments that do indeed reflect a recognition of a national crisis, and one that has been brewing for a long while, of which Trump is but a symptom. But this is a very large and polarized country, so not all Americans will see things the same way. We’re no different from just about any other country in that regard.
Honestly I think you are better off reading Ruth's recommendation, or Joseph Tainter.
Which points up the absurdity of a major premise in Diamond's book, as he compares how an individual responds to crises to how countries do, never mind that countries are composed of many different individuals.
Jared Diamond is not a real historian. He writes very readable books, but he's gotten further and further away from his areas of expertise. There are multiple factual errors in this book as well. Here's a free link to NY Times review discussing these things:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/17/books/review/upheaval-jared-diamond.html?unlocked_article_code=1.K08.trOL.36y93Yjm5und&smid=url-share
The book I recommended is by a real historian at NY University, specializing in American history for 40-odd years, writing about the details of some the communities that have at various times fostered and promulgated American illiberalism. The author @chrisstiles mentioned studies civilizational collapse, is an anthropologist and historian, and has been looking at this topic for roughly 40 years. He didn't just start looking at this a few years ago. Jared Diamond is writing airport bookstore books at this point and cashing in.
So I'm not going to buy into the notion that Diamond has anything worthwhile to say about what's happening in the US right now.
As for that guy, never read him directly, but I believe he publicized the story about the Korean co-pilot who was afraid to challenge his older pilot after the pilot entered the wrong code into the flight plan(or some such) and the plane crashed into a mountain, with Gladwell claiming this illustrated the drawbacks of an age-based social hierarchy.
Having lived in Korea for many years, I can easily imagine something like that happening, at least up until the recent past(and I faintly remember hearing Koreans themselves talking about it). But it is the kinda thing that tends to become a factoid, used by armchair sociologists to sum up in the most simplistic terms complex social processes(*).
(*) And, of course, such amateur pontificating is why God invented "But not, I think, in the south."
Saw this. Yes any US company that has had to pay the tariffs will get the money, I believe either interest. A step forward certainly. Those who have gone out of business will at least get something. Apparently Trump has complained about the courts saying that tariffs have to come from congress. He said it was taking away power from the executive. It is putting things back to what they were. The executive never had that power. Have I understood correctly?
Is this some kind of admission from Trumps side of guilt? Even slight.
His interview with Jon Ronson makes interesting watching (it's on youtube), the line that stuck with me is 'he would take esoteric academic research and turn it into good stories', which summarises the approach of the authors operating in this space.
Dafyd, Hell Host
Surely the money would be refunded by the U.S. federal government, not Trump himself. One of the more toxic aspects of dictators and would-be dictators is the erasure of the line between the leader and the state.
I interpreted @Gramps49 as meaning the courts want Trump to direct the government to refund the tariffs.
This time next year, he'll still be guilty, and he'll (probably) still be the guiltiest and most felonious President EVER.
Will be grounds for impeachment once the 120th Congress will be in session