US Politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares28 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s Gaza plan suggests his pro-settler advisers are in the ascendant

      by

      When Benjamin Netanyahu arrived in Washington this week, his first stop was to meet evangelical Christian leaders, who have cheered on Israel in the war in Gaza in an alliance with the country’s pro-settler rightwing government. For both constituencies, Israel’s right to annex the occupied Palestinian territories of Gaza and the West Bank is a matter of faith and, they hope, a matter of time.Both constituencies cheered this week as Donald Trump announced his half-baked plan to “take over” Gaza, an idea he had only tinkered with before Tuesday evening, when it tumbled out to the obvious surprise of his closest aides.While most observers were shocked that the US president was in effect advocating for the ethnic cleansing of the Gaza Strip, the conservative alliance of Israel and the United States sees an opportunity to accelerate the expansion of settlements in the West Bank and its eventual annexation.“What has changed now is that Trump has said that it is US policy to support this as an end goal,” Matt Duss, the executive vice-president at the Center for International Policy, said of the Trump proposal. “And then of course it will just hop over to the West Bank, no question.”Israel’s pro-settler right wing immediately hailed Trump’s announcement. Bezalel Smotrich, the country’s ultranationalist finance minister, quoted a biblical passage about the return of Jewish pilgrims to Israel, writing: “Thank you President Trump. Together, we will make the world great again.”Itamar Ben-Gvir, who left Benjamin Netanyahu’s shaky coalition government because of the ceasefire with Hamas, said: “When I said this time and again during the war, that this was the solution to Gaza, they mocked me.”Under Joe Biden, saying that Gaza had been rendered unliveable would have been seen as a condemnation of Israel’s military campaign. But Trump, ignoring the Israeli assault that has been described as a “domicide” and led to the hollowing out of Gaza’s cities, simply went ahead and said it.The New York Times reported that the idea had been germinating among Trump and his close allies for weeks, and accelerated after his envoy Steve Witkoff travelled to the area and said: “There is almost nothing left of Gaza.” Yet Trump surprised his aides and even Netanyahu with the proposal, the paper reported, calling it “little beyond an idea inside the president’s head”.Trump’s plan may be a nonstarter and a distraction from more immediate questions of the second round of ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas. But it marks a serious shift towards some of the pro-settler advisers that he has elevated, including his nominee for ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, who said on Fox News in January: “There was a Palestinian state. It was called Gaza. Look how that turned out.”Huckabee, an evangelical Christian, has a record of hardline pro-Israel rhetoric and previously said Israel has a rightful claim to the West Bank, which he refers to by its Hebrew and biblical name of Judea and Samaria. Huckabee has refused to call the settlements by that name, insisting they be called “communities” or neighbourhoods. He has denied that the West Bank, seized by Israel from Jordan in the 1967 six-day war, is under military occupation.In a sign of growing ties between the US Christian right, the Israeli right and the pro-settler movement, Huckabee was in the audience when Netanyahu met leaders from America’s evangelical community during his trip to Washington this week.Also at the meeting with Netanyahu was John Hagee, the televangelist and founder of Christians United for Israel who has backed Israel’s expansion as a route toward Armageddon, after which “there will be 1,000 years of perfect peace, no presidential elections, no fake news, none of all of this nonsense”.In the US, Christian Zionists have tied their support for Israel’s claim to Palestinian lands to the book of Genesis, in which it says that God blesses those who bless Israel, and curses those who curse it.Hagee once claimed he had persuaded Trump to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem by telling him at a White House dinner that Jesus was coming back to Jerusalem to “set up His throne on the Temple Mount where He will sit and rule for 1,000 years of perfect peace”.Trump has offered other tokens to pro-settler groups, including the repeal of Biden administration sanctions against individuals and groups accused of expansion and violence against Palestinians in the West Bank.The situation may indicate that in the circles of those who surround him, pro-settler figures are ascendant. They include Huckabee and Elise Stefanik, the US ambassador-designate to the UN, who during a confirmation hearing said she supported statements by Ben-Gvir and Smotrich that Israel had a “biblical right to the entire West Bank”.Others, including Witkoff, represent a wing of Trump’s supporters who are less hawkish on Israel and more focused on cutting transactional deals across the world.Jeremy Ben-Ami, the head of J Street, a liberal pro-Israel organisation, said before the summit that Trump had two choices: the “dealmaker route” or the “screw-it path”. For Saudi Arabia to establish diplomatic relations with Israel, he said, Trump would have to at least seek to restrain Israel from expanding settlements in the West Bank.But, Ben-Ami said: “If he’s going down the screw-it path – ‘I don’t really care what anybody thinks, and I want Greenland and Panama and they can have the West Bank’ – then we’re in a different world.” More

    • 138 Shares28 Views

      in US Politics

      Here’s how Democrats should fight back against Trump | Margaret Sullivan

      by

      It’s easy to be disgusted with the Democratic party right now. Donald Trump is running roughshod over the rule of law, treating the US constitution like toilet paper. His trusty pal Elon Musk is the arsonist in chief, burning down worthy democratic institutions and installing his minions in the heart of government where they have gained access to citizens’ private information. Much of what’s happening is illegal and unconstitutional.And the Democrats, mostly, look less like an opposition party and more like stunned bystanders. As my Guardian colleague Moira Donegan put it, they are “out of touch, opportunistic and cowardly”.But not all. Some Democrats in a new generation are punching back hard, and in so doing, showing their colleagues how to overcome their reputation for spineless dithering.Take Jasmine Crockett, for example, a 43-year-old congresswoman from Texas, who is defiantly feisty. You’ll find her everywhere – on social media, on cable TV and leading citizen protests in front of government office buildings.“We have a thug in charge of the White House,” she thundered in a TV appearance this week. And she didn’t spare her fellow citizens who elected Trump or who stayed home instead of voting in November. “Americans thought that it was OK to take a full-fledged criminal and make him the president of the United States, and then they want to act aghast when he does criminal things.”I’ve been talking with Sawyer Hackett, a strategist who worked in the Obama administration, about how Democrats can meet this terrifying moment. He praised Crockett as “an authentic source of righteous indignation when Democrats desperately need it”.The millions of anti-Trump Americans, he told me, aren’t interested in curated talking points or polished press conferences.“They want to see us fight and speak clearly about the threats we face,” Hackett said, and she has been delivering. As a Black woman, Crockett is particularly incensed about TrumpWorld’s racist attacks on diversity and has no hesitation in blasting the “mediocre white men” who benefit.The Connecticut senator Chris Murphy is at least as impressive. He has been relentless in calling out exactly what’s happening and why, especially in the shocking weeks since Trump took office.“We have days to stop the destruction of our democracy,” Murphy raged at a protest Tuesday in front of the US treasury building in Washington. “It’s the people who rule, not the billionaires. We are taking this country back from Elon Musk.”Murphy calls what’s happening a constitutional crisis. It is one that the public must play a role in fixing by putting pressure not only on Democrats but on the cowardly Republicans who hold a majority in both houses of Congress. Talk about spineless!“There’s been no better messenger in the first two weeks of Trump 2.0 than Chris Murphy,” in Hackett’s view. “At a time when too many Democrats are afraid of their shadow, Murphy is showing how to fight back with a compelling populist message that should be a blueprint for the Democrats moving forward.”As outraged and frightened Americans urge Democrats to “do something”, it’s not clear whether voices like Crockett’s and Murphy’s can really make a difference. What can be done? Lawsuits are cropping up all over, and a federal judge on Wednesday barred the enforcement of Trump’s executive order that would restrict birthright citizenship.And some in Congress are refusing to vote for anything Trump wants until the illegality ends and Musk is sent home. Their notion is simple: gum up the works.“Democrats need to throw every possible wrench into the plans of Trump, Musk and their Republican cultists in Congress,” argued scholar Norm Ornstein in the Contrarian newsletter. “Doing so will also underscore how serious the threat is to our system, thereby forcing media to cover it.” As the Virginia congressman Don Beyer suggested on Greg Sargent’s Daily Blast podcast from the New Republic: “Put those things that used to be routine and make them not routine until Trump stops breaking the law.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn other words, attack on multiple fronts, including through leveraging the power of Democratic state governments. Most of all, prepare for the midterms elections next year by honing a strong, populist message.And lead with convincing voices that can motivate the public. Crockett and Murphy surely are two of those. Though far from alone – Congressman Jamie Raskin of Maryland, for example, is irreplaceable – they are notable because they are younger and savvy about how to communicate forcefully in today’s media environment. (Here’s Murphy’s clarity on the billionaire bonanza: “Why is Donald Trump engaged in this relentless campaign to try to silence journalists, media companies, and his political opposition? It’s because he’s trying to steal from you.”)They know how to put up their dukes.That’s important because one thing is certain: if the public believes there is no determination to fight back, Trump’s destruction will continue unabated.What’s giving me hope nowWhat’s giving me hope now is knowing so many talented young journalists, not only my students at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism, but others whose careers I have followed in recent years. Many of them are determined, honest, idealistic, energetic and unwilling to give up on their chosen craft despite all the headwinds and challenges that face them. Democracy demands journalism, so this is extremely important now and in the future.

      Margaret Sullivan is a Guardian US columnist writing on media, politics and culture More

    • 125 Shares25 Views

      in US Politics

      Seth Meyers on Elon Musk’s US takeover: ‘A billionaire coup’

      by

      Late-night hosts spoke about the damage being caused by Donald Trump’s new right-hand man as well as the president’s unconvincing attempts to show off his Christian side.Seth MeyersOn Late Night, Seth Meyers started by saying that despite the recent election, “the real president is Elon Musk”, who has shown he is in control despite being “very unpopular” with voters.He said the billionaire has been launching a “de facto takeover of the federal government” with his “team of unaccountable hatchet men”.Recent polls have shown that Americans are unhappy with Musk’s increased control but Trump has been defending him during typically hard-to-understand rambles, resembling “a real-time version of Mad Libs”.Musk has been frantically figuring out what to keep and what to cut within the government, with Meyers showing that he ultimately wants a “wholesale removal of regulations”.Meyers called it “a billionaire coup”.Musk has been busy dismantling USAid, with elected senators recently being blocked from entering the agency’s headquarters. “I’d be so embarrassed if I was a senator and I couldn’t enter the building based on something called Doge,” he said.Stephen ColbertOn The Late Show, Stephen Colbert also criticised Musk and his “crew of teenage mutant incels” who are busy trying to “tear apart 250 years of democracy like seagulls fighting over a bag of french fries”.They are trying to fire many people within the federal government and part of that has seen the White House ordering the CIA to send an unclassified email with the names of all employees hired over the last two years.Colbert calmed viewers by saying that according to an official, the people would be protected as the list only included the first names and first initial of the last name. “Well then we’re fine,” he said. “That is an uncrackable code.”He then joked that no one would be able to figure out who he was targeting if he said that it would be funny and good for the US if “obvious fascist Elon M got his junk stuck in a four slice toaster”.Colbert then said “Trump’s goons are also doing increasingly useless things just to scour the government clean of any trace of DEI” including taking down any reference to diversity or inclusion on walls or desks. “No federal agency is safe from the anti-compassion cyberdorks,” he said.They have also been ensuring that bathroom signs comply with Trump’s ruling. “What a waste of time,” he said. “The only bathroom signs that should be taken down are the confusing ones in theme restaurants.”He then continued by saying that “it’s not all bad news, some of it is also scary” as he spoke about a second bird flu strain that has now infected cattle. “This can mean only one thing: the birds are having sex with the cows,” he said. “Please no one tell the bees, they’re going to feel so betrayed.”Jimmy KimmelOn Jimmy Kimmel Live! the host spoke about this weekend’s Super Bowl, “also known as ‘get drunk at a friend of a friend’s weird living room’ evening”.Kendrick Lamar is the half-time performer, which means that it will lead to the “largest group of people ever to see anyone call Drake a bitch ever”.Trump will be in attendance and Kimmel joked that “he said he’s gonna let Elon pick the winner this year”.This week also saw the president attend the National Prayer Breakfast because he “doesn’t like it when people worship anyone but him”.He added that “of all the unbelievable things about Donald Trump, religious people believing he is also a religious person might be the toughest one to understand”.Kimmel said that if Trump met Jesus, “he’d call him a loser, he’d tell him to get a haircut and put a shirt on”.He also said the only reason he is going to the Super Bowl is because “he can’t stand to have even one day when he’s on TV less than Taylor Swift”. More

    • 275 Shares14 Views

      in US Politics

      US pressure has forced Panama to quit China’s Belt and Road Initiative – it could set the pattern for further superpower clashes

      by

      Following Donald Trump’s repeated claims that the US needs to “take back” the Panama canal from Chinese control, the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, visited Panama to demand the country reduce China’s influence. On the surface, it seems Rubio has succeeded.

      On February 3, the Panamanian authorities withdrew from the China’s international infrastructure programme, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). This makes Panama the first Latin American country both to endorse and to end cooperation with the BRI.

      On February 4, local lawyers urged the country’s supreme court to cancel the concession given to Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison Port Holdings which allows it to operate two ports at either end of the Panama canal. They say it violates the country’s constitution since it contains excessive tax breaks and cedes significant land areas to the port company. The Panamanian authorities are reportedly still considering this.

      But what is the reality of China’s presence in the canal, and what does increased US scrutiny mean for Xi Jinping’s signature project?

      The Panama canal is a key passage for US trade and military. The US accounts for 74% of canal cargo. However, while Trump’s fears of losing the canal may be understandable, his assertions about China’s influence are exaggerated.

      The Panamanian government administers the canal through the Panama Canal Authority. Since 1997, CK Hutchison Port Holdings Limited, a Hong Kong-listed conglomerate with interests in over 53 ports in 24 countries, has operated the Port of Balboa and Port of Cristobal on either end of the canal. These are two out of five ports in the vicinity.

      CK Hutchison Holdings Limited is one of the world’s leading port investors and is owned by billionaire Li Ka-shing. The company and projects have no direct ties with the BRI.

      Business as usual: billionaire Hong Kong tycoon Li Ka-shing with Chinese president, Xi Jinping, in 2017.
      EPA/Bobby Yip/pool

      The primary risks concerning China’s influence over the canal, as outlined by the US, are the potential for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to control the canal and “shut it down”.

      Washington has also expressed concerns that the CCP’s access to dual-use port technology allows it to gather intelligence about US ships, such as transshipment patterns and naval routes. It also fears that China can exert an “economic chokehold” on the US in terms of the imposition of rate hikes on transit fees.

      The first two points encompass the potential for China to use ports for naval purposes. But while the People’s Liberation Army navy has access to Chinese-owned ports under domestic laws and policies, they require host country permission to use Chinese-operated foreign ports. These ports are also often ill-suited for military support and operations.

      So the most probable risk concerns intelligence. If the CCP deems it necessary to national security, it may use the 2020 national security law to gather sensitive data from Hong Kong-based companies.

      As for rate hikes, there have been recent increases in response to droughts, maintenance investments and demand. Following Rubio’s visit, the US has claimed it is allowed to transit without paying fees.

      This has been denied by Panama’s President, José Raúl Mulino. The fees are equally imposed due to neutrality principles initiated in 1977. There is no evidence that China has played any role in these rate hikes.

      Panama’s ‘BRI-xit’ and Trump’s geopolitical gamble

      In the unlikely event that CK Hutchison’s concession is cancelled, what would that mean for China’s presence in Panama? China’s investments in Panama precede the BRI, even if they have increased since the initiative’s launch.

      The country holds geostrategic importance due to its location and role in international trade. So it’s a critical link for China’s establishment of a regional gateway for its economic and political influence.

      This includes securing raw material and energy resource imports and enhancing export capabilities. China’s engagements in Panama include foreign direct investments (FDI), which amounted to around 0.8% in 2023 (compared to 3.6% by Spain and 19.6% by the US), primarily in the logistics, infrastructure, energy and construction sectors.

      Most have been promoted as part of the BRI and faced renegotiation or cancellation for various – often geopolitical – reasons.

      Donald Trump’s intervention prompted angry demonstrations in Panama during the visit by US secretary of state, Marco Rubio.
      EPA-EFE/Bienvenido Velasco

      Since BRI projects in the canal are already quite limited, withdrawing from the initiative is unlikely to result in significant short-term changes. CK Hutchison will only be “slightly affected” in case of a contract cancellation.

      What’s more, as the case of Brazil shows, a country can remain unaffiliated with the BRI and still receive Chinese investments.

      Therefore, Chinese engagements will probably resume outside the BRI framework. Still, even though China has shown restrained disappointment and argued that Panama has made a “regrettable decision,” Sino-Panamanian relations may cool until Trump’s attention has turned elsewhere.

      Trump’s rhetoric over the Panama canal may be exaggerated to appease a domestic audience rooting for a “strongman president”. But it also reflects decades of US concerns about China’s growing clout.

      So the administration’s focus on containing China is hardly surprising. Instead, it demonstrates Trump’s broader “make America great again 2.0” strategy. Therefore, Panama’s “BRI-xit” may bolster US resolve on “reclaiming” the Americas.

      The Panamanian authorities seem caught between US pressure to limit China’s influence and the economic boost provided by Chinese “pragmatic” investments. So like other BRI countries, they face tough choices in the coming years.

      As the largest provider of FDI – US$3.8 billion (£3.05 billion) per annum – and the canal’s biggest customer, US influence and economic leverage over Panama is substantial. Conversely, China’s interests and engagements in the country have increased, and the CCP has made it clear that it is patient and wants to continue cooperation and “resist external interruption”.

      Protests have erupted in Panama over Trump’s “muscular approach”, and residents have expressed strong reluctance to return to US rule. Therefore, the question remains whether this is the “great step forward” for Panama’s ties with the US that Rubio suggests or whether Trump’s actions will ultimately push Panama closer to Beijing. More

    • 175 Shares28 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘In a real sense, US democracy has died’: how Trump is emulating Hungary’s Orbán

      by

      A pitiless crackdown on on illegal immigration. A hardline approach to law and order. A purge of “gender ideology” and “wokeness” from the nation’s schools. Erosions of academic freedom, judicial independence and the free press. An alliance with Christian nationalism. An assault on democratic institutions.The “electoral autocracy” that is Viktor Orbán’s Hungary has been long revered by Donald Trump and his “Make America Great Again” (Maga) movement. Now admiration is turning into emulation. In the early weeks of Trump’s second term as US president, analysts say, there are alarming signs that the Orbánisation of America has begun.With the tech billionaire Elon Musk at his side, Trump has moved with astonishing velocity to fire critics, punish media, reward allies, gut the federal government, exploit presidential immunity and test the limits of his authority. Many of their actions have been unconstitutional and illegal. With Congress impotent, only the federal courts have slowed them down.“They are copying the path taken by other would-be dictators like Viktor Orbán,” said Chris Murphy, a Democratic senator for Connecticut. “You have a move towards state-controlled media. You have a judiciary and law enforcement that seems poised to prioritise the prosecution of political opponents. You have the executive seizure of spending power so the leader and only the leader gets to dictate who gets money.”Orbán, who came to power in 2010, was once described as “Trump before Trump” by the US president’s former adviser Steve Bannon. His long-term dismantling of institutions and control of media in Hungary serves as a cautionary tale about how seemingly incremental changes can pave the way for authoritarianism.Orbán has described his country as “a petri dish for illiberalism”. His party used its two-thirds majority to rewrite the constitution, capture institutions and change electoral law. He reconfigured the judiciary and public universities to ensure long-term party loyalty.View image in fullscreenThe prime minister created a system of rewards and punishments, giving control of money and media to allies. An estimated 85% of media outlets are controlled by the Hungarian government, allowing Orbán to shape public opinion and marginalise dissent. Orbán has been also masterful at weaponising “family values” and anti-immigration rhetoric to mobilise his base.Orbán’s fans in the US include Vice-President JD Vance, the media personality Tucker Carlson and Kevin Roberts, the head of the Heritage Foundation thinktank, who once said: “Modern Hungary is not just a model for conservative statecraft but the model.” The Heritage Foundation produced Project 2025, a far-right blueprint for Trump’s second term.Orbán has addressed the Conservative Political Action Conference and two months ago travelled to the Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida for talks with both Trump and Musk. He has claimed that “we have entered the policy writing system of President Donald Trump’s team” and “have deep involvement there”.But even Orbán might be taken aback – and somewhat envious – of the alacrity that Trump has shown since returning to power, attacking the foundations of democracy not with a chisel but a sledgehammer.On day one he pardoned about 1,500 people who took part in the 6 January 2021 insurrection, including those who violently attacked US Capitol police in an effort to overturn his election defeat. Driven by vengeance, he dismissed federal prosecutors involved in Trump-related investigations and hinted at a further targeting of thousands of FBI agents who worked on January 6-related cases.Bill Kristol, director of the advocacy group Defending Democracy Together and a former official in the Ronald Reagan White House, said: “Flipping the narrative on January 6, becoming a pro-January 6 administration, then weaponising the justice department and talking at least of mass firings at the FBI – that’s further than the norm and very dangerous for obvious reasons.“If he could do that, he could do anything. Why can’t he order the justice department to investigate you and me and 50 other people? One assumes the lawyers at justice or the FBI agents wouldn’t do it, but if a couple of thousand have been cleared out and the rest are intimidated. I’m not hysterical but I do think the threat is much more real now than people anticipated it being a month ago.”Borrowing from Orbán’s playbook, Trump has mobilised the culture wars, issuing a series of executive orders and policy changes that target diversity, equity and inclusion programmes and education curricula. This week he signed an executive order aimed at banning transgender athletes from competing in women’s sports and directed the attorney general, Pam Bondi, to lead a taskforce on eradicating what he called anti-Christian bias within the federal government.View image in fullscreenHe is also seeking to marginalise the mainstream media and supplant it with a rightwing ecosystem that includes armies of influencers and podcasters. A “new media” seat has been added to the White House press briefing room while Silicon Valley billionaires were prominent at his inauguration. Musk’s X is a powerful mouthpiece, Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook has abandoned factchecking and the Chinese-owned TikTok could become part-owned by the US.Trump has sued news organisations over stories or even interview edits; some have settled the cases. The Pentagon said it would “rotate” four major news outlets from their workspace and replace them with more Trump-friendly media. Jim Acosta, a former White House correspondent who often sparred with Trump, quit CNN while Lara Trump, the president’s daughter-in-law, was hired to host a new weekend show on Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBut the most dramatic change has been the way in which Trump has brought disruption to the federal government on an unprecedented scale, firing at least 17 inspectors general, dismantling longstanding programmes, sparking widespread public outcry and challenging the very role of Congress to create the nation’s laws and pay its bills.Government workers are being pushed to resign, entire agencies are being shuttered and federal funding to states and non-profits was temporarily frozen. The most sensitive treasury department information of countless Americans was opened to Musk’s “department of government efficiency” (Doge) team in a breach of privacy and protocol, raising concerns about potential misuse of federal funds.Musk’s allies orchestrated a physical takeover of the United States Agency for International Development (USAid), locking out employees and vowing to shut it down, with the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, stepping in as acting administrator. “We spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper,” Musk posted on X.Musk’s team has also heavily influenced the office of personnel management (OPM), offering federal workers a “buyout” and installing loyalists into key positions. It is also pushing for a 50% budget cut and implementing “zero-based budgeting” at the General Services Administration (GSA), which controls federal properties and massive contracts.View image in fullscreenMusk, a private citizen who has tens of billions of dollars in government contracts, is slashing and burning his way through Washington with little accountability and has significant potential conflicts of interest. An array of lawsuits is demanding interventions to stop him unilaterally gutting government. Protests are erupting outside government agencies and jamming congressional phone lines.But critics aiming to sound the alarm that a shadow government is conducting a hostile takeover face intimidation or punishment. Edward Martin, the interim US attorney for the District of Columbia, threatened legal action against anyone who “impedes” Doge’s work or “threatens” its people. Martin posted on X: “We are in contact with FBI and other law-enforcement partners to proceed rapidly. We also have our prosecutors preparing.”Murphy, the Democratic senator, said: “What’s most worrying to me right now is there’s a whole campaign under way to try to punish and suppress Trump and Musk’s political enemies. It started with the pardoning of the January 6 rioters; now everybody knows that they are at risk of having the shit beat out of them if they oppose Donald Trump.“It extended to the seizure of government funding. It’s clear now that Musk and Trump are going to fund entities and states and congressional districts that support them and will withhold funds from entities and states and congressional districts that don’t support them.”He added: “Now you have this lawyer who represented January 6 defendants, the new acting DC US attorney, trolling activists online, threatening them with federal prosecution. It’s dizzying campaign of political repression that looks more like Russia than the United States.”View image in fullscreenDemocrats such as Murphy are determined to fight back but, being in the minority, have few tools at their disposal. Republicans have mostly appeared content to cede their own power. The party’s fealty to Trump was demonstrated again this week when senators in committee voted to move forward with the nominations of Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F Kennedy Jr as director of national intelligence and health secretary respectively – two mavericks whose selection would have been unthinkable just a year ago.Charlie Sykes, a conservative author and broadcaster, said: “There had been some lingering optimism that at least some Republican senators would draw the line at some of the more absurd Maga appointees but that hasn’t happened. That also demoralises any potential opposition.”He added: “What Elon Musk represents is basically a hostile takeover of the government and the complete indifference of the Republican Congress to the ways that it is being stripped of its core constitutional functions is demoralising. It is this mood that nothing can be done or will be done to stop them. You’re seeing that in the business community, in the political community, and it’s a fundamental loss of faith in the rule of law and in our system of checks and balances.”One guardrail is holding for now. Courts have temporarily blocked Trump’s efforts to end birthright citizenship, cull the government workforce and freeze federal funding. Even so, commentators warn that the blatant disregard for congressional authority, erosion of civil service protections and concentration of power in the executive branch pose a grave threat.Larry Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota, said: “You’d have to have your eyes fully closed not to be deeply concerned and outraged about the vacuum that Donald Trump is operating in now. In a real sense, US democracy has died this month. It doesn’t mean it’s dead for the long term but at this moment the idea of an accountable representative system, as the framers of the constitution wrote it, is no longer present.” More

    • 213 Shares28 Views

      in US Politics

      Why does Trump want to abolish the Education Department? An anthropologist who studies MAGA explains 4 reasons

      by

      “And one other thing I’ll be doing very early in the administration is closing up the Department of Education.”

      President Donald Trump made this promise in a Sept. 13, 2023, campaign statement. Since then, he has frequently repeated his pledge to close the U.S. Department of Education.

      Project 2025, the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for the Trump administration, also provides detailed recommendations for closing the Education Department, which was created by an act of Congress in 1979.

      On Feb. 4, 2025, Trump described his plans for Linda McMahon, his nominee for education secretary. “I want Linda to put herself out of a job,” Trump said, according to The Associated Press.

      I am an anthropologist and have been studying U.S. political culture for years. During Trump’s first presidency, I wrote a book about the extremist far-right called “It Can Happen Here”. Since then, I have continued to study the Make America Great Again, or MAGA, movement, seeking to understand it, as the anthropological expression goes, “from the native’s point of view.”

      Education policies in the U.S. are largely carried out at the state and local levels. The Education Department is a relatively small government agency, with just over 4,000 employees and a US$268 billion annual budget. A large part of its work is overseeing $1.6 trillion in federal student loans as well as grants for K-12 schools.

      And it ensures that public schools comply with federal laws that protect vulnerable students, like those with disabilities.

      Why, then, does Trump want to eliminate the department?

      A will to fight against so-called “wokeness” and a desire to shrink the government are among the four reasons I have found.

      President Donald Trump waves to supporters at a Jan. 25, 2025, rally in Las Vegas.
      Ian Maule/Getty Images

      1. Education Department’s alleged ‘woke’ mentality

      First and foremost, Trump and his supporters believe that liberals are ruining public education by instituting what they call a
      “radical woke agenda” that they say prioritizes identity politics and politically correct groupthink at the expense of the free speech of those, like many conservatives, who have different views.

      Diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives promoting social justice – and critical race theory, or the idea that racism is entrenched in social and legal institutions – are a particular focus of MAGA ire.

      So, too, is what Trump supporters call “radical gender ideology,” which they contend promotes policies like letting transgender students play on school sports teams or use bathrooms corresponding with their gender identity, not biological sex.

      Trump supporters say that such policies – which the Education Department indirectly supported by expanding Title IX gender protections in 2024 to include discrimination based on gender identity – are at odds with parental school choice rights or, for some religious conservatives, the Bible.

      Race and gender policies are highlighted in Project 2025 and in the 2024 GOP’s “Make America Great Again!” party platform.

      Trump has repeatedly promised, as he did on Aug. 14, 2024, in North Carolina, to “keep critical race theory and transgender insanity the hell out of our schools.”

      On Jan. 20, 2025, Trump signed executive orders targeting “gender ideology extremism” and “radical” DEI policies. Two weeks later, he signed another one on “Keeping Men Out Of Women’s Sports.

      2. American Marxist indoctrination

      For MAGA supporters, ”radical left“ wokeness is part of liberals’ long-standing attempt to ”brainwash“ others with their allegedly Marxist views that embrace communism.

      One version of this ”American Marxism“ conspiracy theory argues that the indoctrination dates to the origins of U.S. public education. MAGA stalwarts say this alleged leftist agenda is anti-democratic and anti-Christian.

      Saying he wants to combat the educational influence of such radicals, zealots and Marxists, Trump issued executive orders on Jan. 29 that pledge to fight ”campus anti-Semitism“ and to end ”Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schools.“

      3. School choice and parental rights

      Trump supporters also argue that “woke” federal public education policy infringes on people’s basic freedoms and rights.

      This idea extends to what Trump supporters call “restoring parental rights,” including the right to decide whether a child undergoes a gender transition or learns about nonbinary gender identity at public schools.

      The first paragraph of Project 2025’s chapter on education argues, “Families and students should be free to choose from a diverse set of school options and learning environments.”

      Diversity, according to this argument, should include faith-based institutions and homeschooling. Project 2025 proposes that the government could support parents who choose to homeschool or put their kids in a religious primary school by providing Educational Savings Accounts and school vouchers. Vouchers give public funding for students to attend private schools and have been expanding in use in recent years.

      Critics of school vouchers, like the National Education Association and American Federation of Teachers unions, argue that vouchers would diminish public education for vulnerable students by taking away scarce funding.

      Trump has already issued a Jan. 29 executive order called “Expanding Educational Freedom and Educational Opportunity for Families,” which opens the door to expanded use of vouchers. This directly echoes Project 2025 by directing the Education Department to prioritize educational choice to give families a range of options.

      4. Red tape

      For the MAGA faithful, the Education Department exemplifies government inefficiency and red tape.

      Project 2025, for example, contends that from the time it was established by the Carter administration in 1979, the Education Department has ballooned in size, come under the sway of special interest groups and now serves as an inefficient “one-stop shop for the woke education cartel.”

      To deal with the Education Department’s “bloat” and “suffocating bureaucratic red tape,” Project 2025 recommends shifting all of the department’s federal programs and money to other agencies and the states.

      These recommendations dovetail with Trump’s broader attempt to eliminate what he and his MAGA supporters consider wasteful spending and deregulate the government.

      Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 20 that establishes a “Department of Government Efficiency” headed by billionaire Elon Musk. Musk said on Feb. 4 that Trump “will succeed” in dismantling the Education Department.

      An electric school bus is parked outside a public high school in Miami in March 2024.
      Joe Raedle/Getty Images

      Can Trump abolish the Education Department?

      At first glance, the Education Department’s days might seem numbered given Trump’s repeated promises to eliminate it and his reported plans to soon sign an executive order that does so. Republican Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota also introduced a bill in November 2024 to close the department.

      And Trump has taken actions, such as seeking to shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development without the required congressional approval, which suggest he may try to act on his Education Department promises.

      Abolishing the department, however, would legally require congressional approval and 60 votes to move forward in the Senate, which is unlikely since Republicans only have 53 seats.

      Trump also made similar promises in 2016 that were unfulfilled. And Trump’s executive actions are likely to face legal challenges – like a DEI-focused higher education lawsuit filed on Feb. 3.

      Regardless of such legal challenges, Trump’s executive orders related to education demonstrate that he is already attempting to “drain the swamp” – starting with the Education Department. More

    • 125 Shares24 Views

      in US Politics

      Elon Musk’s journey from climate champion to backing EV-bashing Trump

      by

      Donald Trump’s attempts to slash incentives for electric cars would cause sales of the vehicles to plummet, with this effort cheered on by a seemingly confounding supporter – Elon Musk, the billionaire chief executive of Tesla and erstwhile champion for action on the climate crisis.Trump has said that he “will revoke the electric vehicle mandate, saving our auto industry and keeping my sacred pledge to our great American auto workers”.The US president, who previously suggested supporters of EVs “rot in hell” before somewhat tempering his rhetoric, has already ditched an aspirational goal for half of all car sales to be electric by the end of the decade, halted some funding for EV chargers and began reversing vehicle pollution standards that prod auto companies to shift away from gasoline models.A key tax credit for Americans buying an EV, worth up to $7,500, is also a major target for elimination, although to overturn this Trump will require Republicans in Congress. Should he succeed, though, the impact would be significant, with a recent study finding that electric car sales could fall by 27% without the incentive.“Turning off the credits would affect a meaningful share of the EV market,” said Joseph Shapiro, a University of California, Berkeley, economist and co-author of the study, who added that while a growing number of people would still go electric, the total number of cars sold would shrink by more than 300,000 a year than if the incentives stayed in place.“You could say that it would be a speed bump in the road but if the US goes all electric in 2090 rather than 2050, say, that matters a lot for the planet,” he said. “A lot of carbon would be emitted in that time.”Trump’s agenda has been enthusiastically backed by Musk, despite the world’s richest person heading Tesla, the market-leading EV company that also relies upon some parts made in China that may be targeted by tariffs imposed by Trump.Musk has said, though, that removal of EV subsidies will hurt rivals such as Ford and General Motors more than Tesla. “Take away the subsidies,” Musk wrote on X, another of his companies, in July. “It will only help Tesla.”There is some logic to this, Shapiro said. Tesla is comfortably the largest EV brand in the US, accounting for nearly half of all sales, and makes more profit per car than its rivals, meaning the removal of incentives would be disproportionately felt by other manufacturers.View image in fullscreen“If the tax credit is removed Tesla could survive and have less competition, they have more headroom to withstand a decrease in the market size,” Shapiro said. Stock in Tesla surged following Trump’s election win.However, Tesla will still be affected. Weakening federal pollution rules, for example, could see a reduction in the amount of carbon credits Tesla sells to other car companies – amounting to $2.7bn just last year – to offset their emissions and avoid fines. Tesla’s sales dipped slightly for the first time in 2024, amid concern among some of its traditionally liberal customer base about Musk’s rightward political turn.“Tesla isn’t immune to sales being impacted, they have some brand loyalty although we don’t know what the impact Elon Musk has had on polarizing consumers yet, that’s still a bit of an unknown,” said Stephanie Valdez Streaty, director of industry insights at Cox Automotive, which estimates EVs will have a 10% share of US car sales this year, up from 8% in 2024.Regardless, Musk’s focus has now seemingly shifted away from EVs to other areas such as robotics, artificial intelligence and his SpaceX venture, Valdez Streaty said. He has also embraced rightwing fixations shared by Trump. In a speech after the president was inaugurated, Musk made no mention of cars but said that the “future of civilization is assured” with “safe cities, secure borders, sensible spending, basic stuff”.He added: “We’re going to take Doge to Mars,” in reference to the “department of government efficiency” he heads in an effort to curb spending. “Can you imagine how awesome it will be to have American astronauts plant the flag on another planet for the first time? Bam. Bam. Yeah. How inspiring would that be?”Concern over the climate crisis is seemingly no longer one of Musk’s priorities, despite previously saying he is “super pro-climate” and in 2016 calling for a “popular uprising” against the fossil fuel industry because the world was “unavoidably headed toward some level of harm and the sooner we can take action, the less harm will result”.When Trump removed the US from the Paris climate agreement in 2017, Musk said he was quitting a presidential advisory body in protest. “Climate change is real,” he tweeted at the time. “Leaving Paris is not good for America or the world.”But Musk has had little to say after Trump, who memorably called climate change “a giant hoax”, once again pulled the US from the Paris deal and issued a flurry of orders to ramp up oil and gas drilling and stymie renewable energy production. In January, Musk said: “Climate change risk is real, just much slower than alarmists claim.”Critics say it is unlikely Musk will reflect the growing alarm voiced by scientists, and the American public, over the impacts of dangerous global heating within the Trump administration.“It just shows he’s an opportunist, really,” said Paul Bledsoe, who was a climate adviser to Bill Clinton’s White House. “He now downplays the dangers of climate change, but I think in the back of his mind he’s thinking about using government contracts for geoengineering as the costs of climate change become so undeniably expensive.”Those who know Musk say that he soured on Democrats in part after not being invited to a major summit on electric cars held by the White House in 2021, after Joe Biden became president.“That was an unforced error by Biden,” said Robert Zubrin, a leading advocate for human exploration of Mars who said he helped introduce Musk to the idea of Martian expansion. “And in the past two years, Elon Musk has redefined himself from the white knight of environmentalists to a Bond villain.”Zubrin said that Musk’s “central motivation is the desire for eternal glory for doing great deeds. He wants to save civilization because he wants to be famous for saving civilization.“This desire for eternal glory for doing great deeds has motivated his primary accomplishments, Tesla and SpaceX,” he added. “But it also has a dark side to it, and this has been exploited.”Tesla was contacted about its stance towards the EV tax credits but did not respond. More

    • 238 Shares20 Views

      in US Politics

      If Trump really cared about his ‘favourite’ US president, he would leave Gaza and Greenland alone | Simon Jenkins

      by

      Donald Trump’s favourite US president was William McKinley. Who he? In his inaugural address, Trump pledged to restore the name Mount McKinley to North America’s highest peak. It was an anti-woke dig at Barack Obama, who had given it the Alaskan native name of Denali. But why this idolatry?The answer has since become clear. McKinley was the president (1897-1901) who introduced super-tariffs in his first year in office to protect the US’s post-recessionary manufacturers. Some were as high as 57%, and were seen as an alternative fundraiser to income tax. McKinley was also appealing to Trump for presiding over the founding of a hesitant US empire beyond the North American continent, one from which it has since retreated. Apart from that, the man was unostentatious, intelligent and impeccably polite, faults that Trump is clearly ready to forgive. His only carelessness was to be assassinated six months into his second term.Trump has blatantly sought to mimic McKinley’s policies over the past fortnight. It is therefore worth studying what his hero actually did. Unlike Trump, McKinley made sure that his tariffs were approved by Congress. Indeed, the constitution then required it – and technically still does. He was emphatic that they should be based on treaties embracing reciprocity. They should be treaties.In the event, the tariffs were not seen as critical to economic recovery. They were also blamed for a 25% rise in the cost of living. McKinley lost enthusiasm for them and became instead a champion of global free trade. He formed a group of nations to pursue an open-door policy, aimed at strengthening trade with China. He never saw tariffs as tactical weapons of foreign policy, nor used Trump’s description of his trading partners as “atrocious”.As for seeking new colonies, historians regard McKinley as at best an accidental imperialist. A year after his 1897 tariffs were introduced, the US was faced with the effective collapse of the Spanish empire, with armed insurrections in Cuba and the Philippines. Like many Americans, McKinley welcomed the arrival of new and free states. But he was adamantly against aiding them in wars against Spain. His much-cited quote was that “war should never be entered upon until every agency of peace has failed”. He had seen the civil war, and never wanted to see another one.View image in fullscreenYet he was under pressure. This was a time when European nations were reaching their imperial limits. It was an opportunity for the US to spread its wings, and many of McKinley’s colleagues were eager for the challenge. Over the course of 1898, war fever against Spain became hysterical. The Hearst and Pulitzer newspapers daily demanded intervention in the Caribbean and the Pacific. Showered with petitions, Congress demanded, in effect, that McKinley declare war on Spain.He did so under protest. His belligerent assistant navy secretary, the young Teddy Roosevelt, had already mobilised the navy, aiming it at Cuba and the Philippines. Roosevelt then formally resigned his position and led a volunteer regiment to fight in Cuba amid a blaze of publicity. He had accused McKinley of having “no more backbone than a chocolate eclair”. He was nonetheless chosen as McKinley’s vice-president in 1900.These interventions did not result from any threat to US territory or sovereignty. They were naked acts of aggression. They were spectacularly egged on by Rudyard Kipling’s poem, The White Man’s Burden, directed at the Philippines and published in the New York Sun. It challenged America to take over from the British empire, to fight “the savage wars of peace” against “sloth and heathen folly”.McKinley throughout was on the side of negotiation and peace. The Spanish war ended in a treaty signed in Paris in December 1898, which ceded America varying measures of control over Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippines. McKinley agreed with an anti-imperial majority in Congress that, once pacified, the US should deny any “intention to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control”. The government of the islands must be left to their people. The only “imperial” acquisition that McKinley did undertake was that of Hawaii, to prevent it falling into the hands of Japan.View image in fullscreenOn McKinley’s assassination in 1901, it was Roosevelt who assumed control of these territories, did not leave and retained them into the 20th century. It was also Roosevelt who backed rebels in seizing Panama from Colombia and giving the US control of the canal’s building and fortification. This was highly controversial. Roosevelt was challenged in Congress and by the New York Times for “an act of sordid conquest”. If Trump is seeking to emulate an earlier president, it is surely Roosevelt – described as the “bucking bronco” of American imperialism – he should be worshipping.Almost every president comes to office asserting if not isolationism, then a refusal to commit money or resources to setting the world to rights. Yet all are seduced by the power of office and the language of the founding fathers. They come to see the US’s “manifest destiny” as being to champion freedom and democracy wherever it is threatened. From Woodrow Wilson to Franklin Roosevelt, from JFK to Johnson and the Bushes father and son, all came to see themselves as global crusaders for that cause.In 2016, Trump refreshingly described the interventionism of his predecessors as a “total disaster”. He stuck to his guns and almost entirely avoided troop deployments during his first term of office. The world at least knew where it stood.His emphasis on putting America’s interests first was repeated in 2024. But this time the prospect is uncertain. In his inaugural speech, he described his task as one that “expands our territory … and carries our flag into new and beautiful horizons”. He even used the fell phrase, manifest destiny, as being one he would “pursue … into the stars … to plant the Stars and Stripes on the planet Mars”. Not content with Mars, he has set his sights on Panama, Greenland and Gaza.These territories might not match the ambitions of a Kipling or a Roosevelt, but Trump’s current intentions are hardly pacific. If he is to deify McKinley, he might first seek to find out a bit more about him.

      Simon Jenkins is a Guardian columnist

      Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More