Donald Trump

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Documents reveal Trump’s plan to gut funding for Nasa and climate science

      by

      Donald Trump shows no signs of easing his assault on climate science as plans of more sweeping cuts to key US research centers surfaced on Friday.The administration is planning to slash budgets at both the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency (Noaa) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Nasa), according to internal budget documents, taking aim specifically at programs used to study impacts from the climate crisis.Craig McLean, a longtime director of the office of oceanic and atmospheric research (OAR) who retired in 2022, told the Guardian that the cuts were draconian and would “compromise the safety, economic competitiveness, and security of the American people”.If the plan is approved by Congress, funding for OAR would be eviscerated – cut from $485m to $171m – dismantling an important part of the agency’s mission.All budgets for climate, weather and ocean laboratories would be drained, according to the document reviewed by the Guardian, which states: “At this funding level, OAR is eliminated as a line office.”“The elimination of Noaa’s research line office and all of its research capabilities is a crushing blow to the ability of our country to protect our citizens and also to lead the world,” said the former Noaa administrator Rick Spinrad, adding that the document included “an extraordinarily devastating set of recommendations”.The proposal would also cut more than $324m from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), instructing the agency to align its work with administration priorities to “unleash American energy”. Species-recovery grants, habitat conservation and restoration, and the interjurisdictional fisheries grant program, which supports coordinated management and research with the states, would all lose funding. The document also outlines a plan to move the NMFS under the US Fish and Wildlife Service.Noaa is facing a $1.3bn cut to overall operations and research, with various programs on the chopping block, and the National Ocean Service would be cut in half.Science done outside the agency would also be undermined with cuts to Noaa’s climate research grants program, which provides roughly $70m a year.“It’s a really disturbing and concerning development – but I would say it is not all that surprising,” Spinrad said of the plans outlined in the document, noting that there have been many indications the administration would take steps such as these. “But it also has an element of randomness associated with it,” he added. “There are specific programs called out, the reasons for which are absolutely not clear.”The fallout from cuts this deep, should Congress adopt the president’s plan, would be felt in communities around the world, and in far-ranging sectors, from agriculture to emergency management.“By making a complete divestiture in science and in our research enterprise, we are basically saying we are not interested in improving our quality of life or our economy,” Spinrad said.The administration also outlined plans to severely defund research at Nasa, the country’s space agency. The agency is slated for a 20% overall budget loss, but deeper cuts would be directed at programs overseeing planetary science, earth science and astrophysics research, according to Ars Technica, which first on Trump’s plans when agency officials were briefed last month.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionNow documents have been issued to back up those plans, halving funding for science at Nasa.The plan for Nasa would also scrap a series of missions, including some that the federal government has already poured billions of taxpayer dollars into. The Nancy Grace Roman space telescope, which could offer glimpses into distant galaxies after its scheduled launch next year, is among them, along with the Mars Sample Return and the Davinci mission to Venus. The Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, which employs roughly 10,000 people, would also be closed.“This is an extinction-level event for Nasa science,” Casey Dreier, chief of space policy for the Planetary Society, told the Washington Post. “It needlessly terminates functional, productive science missions and cancels new missions currently being built, wasting billions of taxpayer dollars in the process. This is neither efficient nor smart budgeting.”Still not set in stone, these “passback” documents are a part of how the government goes about budgeting. They are issued by the White House to federal agencies before the discretionary budget is released and are seen as a guidance on presidential priorities. The numbers aren’t final and could be changed, and Congress will also have to act on the plans to finalize them.Spinrad is confident that many legislators won’t support the cuts. “Many of the actions put forward by [the White House’s office of management and budget] are in direct contradiction to congressional intent,” he said. “Zeroing out programs that Congress has worked hard to authorize over the years – that’s a clarion call to specific members and sponsors.”There’s also likely to be strong pushback from the public and from industries that rely on the tools and services made possible by the country’s scientists.But the drastic degree of these cuts also shows the administration’s position on climate science and its determination to hamper US research, experts say. That alone is enough to cause concern.“This proposal will cost lives,” McLean said of the document if it is enacted. “When a room full of doctors tell you that it’s cancer, firing the doctors does not cure you.” More

    • 213 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      People in the US: tell us how you think Trump’s first 100 days have gone so far

      by

      On the eve of his inauguration in January, Donald Trump vowed to deliver the “most extraordinary first 100 days of any presidency in American history”.Since taking office, the president has issued a flurry of executive orders that amount to a shock-and-awe campaign, and made a series of policy moves to dramatically reshape the United States.They range from imposing sweeping tariffs; establishing the “department of government efficiency”; gutting programs including USAID; declaring a national emergency on the southern border; attempting to put an end to birthright citizenship; attempting to deport US students for engaging in protest; and ending diversity programs in the federal government, to name a few.As the 100-day mark approaches, we want to hear from people across the political spectrum in the US on the second Trump administration. Tell us, in 100 words or less, what you think of the beginning of Trump’s second term and how you think he has or has not succeeded on his promise of an “extraordinary first 100 days”.We will curate 100 responses from people across the country. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump insists tariff war is ‘doing really well’ as recession fears mount

      by

      Donald Trump insisted his trade war with much of the world was “doing really well” despite mounting fears of recession and as Beijing hit back and again hiked tariffs on US exports to China.As the US president said his aggressive tariffs strategy was “moving along quickly”, a closely watched economic survey revealed that US consumer expectations for price growth had soared to a four-decade high.The White House maintains that the US economy is on the verge of a “golden age”, however, and that dozens of countries – now facing a US tariff of 10% after Trump shelved plans to impose higher rates until July – are scrambling to make deals.“The phones have been ringing off the hook to make deals,” the press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, told reporters on Friday.Beijing raised Chinese tariffs on US products to 125% on Friday – the latest salvo of its escalating trade dispute with Washington – and accused Trump of “unilateral bullying and coercion”.“Even if the US continues to impose even higher tariffs, it would no longer have any economic significance, and would go down as a joke in the history of world economics,” the Chinese finance ministry said.Few investors were laughing. US government bonds – typically seen as one of the world’s safest financial assets – continued to be sold off, and were on course for their biggest weekly loss since 2019. The dollar also fell against a basket of currencies, and was down against the euro and the pound.Leading stock indices paused for breath on Friday after days of torrid trading. The FTSE 100 rose 0.6% in London. The S&P 500 increased 1.8% and the Dow Jones industrial average gained 1.6% in New York.The S&P 500 finished an extraordinarily volatile week for markets up 5.7%, its biggest weekly gain since November 2023.“We are doing really well on our TARIFF POLICY,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. “Very exciting for America, and the World!!! It is moving along quickly. DJT”Some of Wall Street’s most influential figures were unconvinced. “I think we’re very close, if not in, a recession now,” Larry Fink, CEO of the investment giant BlackRock, told CNBC. Far from providing certainty, the 90-day pause on higher US tariffs on much of the world “means longer, more elevated uncertainty”, he added.Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, the US’s largest bank, said the world’s largest economy was facing “considerable turbulence” as a key measure of consumer confidence tumbled to its lowest level since the Covid-19 pandemic – and the second-lowest level on record.US consumer sentiment has dropped 11% to 50.8 this month, ahead the pause announced by Trump earlier this week, according to a regularly survey compiled by the University of Michigan.Expectations for inflation meanwhile surged, with respondents indicating they are bracing for prices to rise by 6.7% over the coming year – the survey’s highest year-ahead inflation expectation reading since 1981.“There is great optimism in this economy,” Leavitt claimed at the White House briefing when asked about the survey. “Trust in President Trump. He knows what he’s doing. This is a proven economic formula.”Trump won back the White House last November by pledging to rapidly bring down prices – something he has claimed, in recent weeks, is already happening. US inflation climbed at an annual rate of 2.4% last month, according to official data.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Consumers have spiralled from anxious to petrified,” observed Samuel Tombs, chief US economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics. He added, however, that a bipartisan divide – with Democrats growing more pessimistic, while Republicans become more upbeat – suggests that people are allowing their political views to cloud their economic confidence.The US’s top markets watchdog is facing demands from senior Democrats to launch an investigation into alleged insider trading and market manipulation after Trump declared on social media that it was “A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!!” hours before announcing Wednesday’s climbdown on tariffs.Days of erratic policymaking constructed a rollercoaster week for markets, with the S&P 500 dropping 12% in just four sessions, before surging back almost 10% in a single day after the administration pulled back from imposing higher tariffs on most countries, except China, which is facing a 145% tariff on exports to the US.In a letter to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Senate Democrats including Elizabeth Warren and Chuck Schumer wrote: “It is unconscionable that as American families are concerned about their financial security during this economic crisis entirely manufactured by the President, insiders may have actively profited from the market volatility and potentially perpetrated financial fraud on the American public.”Tesla meanwhile stopped taking orders in China for two models it previously imported from the US, as companies scramble to adapt to prohibitive tariffs imposed in Trump’s trade war.The manufacturer, run by Trump’s close ally Elon Musk, removed “order now” buttons on its Chinese website for its Model S saloon and Model X sports utility vehicle.Tesla did not give any indication of why it had made the changes but it came after the rapid escalation of the trade war between the US and China.The border taxes make the goods trade between the two countries prohibitively expensive and mean cars imported from the US are now much less attractive in China than those produced locally.In the UK, economists warned that stronger than expected growth of 0.5% in February is likely to prove short lived as the impact of Trump’s trade war is felt throughout the global economy. More

    • 238 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Musk thinks Trump’s pal Navarro is a ‘moron’. Who are we supposed to root for here? | Dave Schilling

      by

      I would like to dispel some rumors right up front. One, I did not receive a PhD in business from Harvard Business School. Hopefully this doesn’t make you think less of me, but I felt it necessary to be honest. Second, I did not even attend Harvard. I thought about it once; hopefully, thinking about something isn’t illegal yet.My point is that I am no elitist snob begging for your subservience. I’m a simple man, just trying to salvage the last of my meager wealth during the great trade war of 2025. I know absolutely nothing about global economic policy. As such, I must be worth listening to.I say all of this because Elon Musk, the owner of various companies such as Tesla, SpaceX, Weyland-Yutani, OCP, the Tyrell Corporation, etc, has made it abundantly clear that he can’t stand Peter Navarro.Peter Navarro, with his fancy degree from Harvard, is too much of an intellectual for the current zeitgeist that favors a complete lack of knowledge for just about anyone in a position of authority. The secretary of education never taught a single school class, but she has (poorly) received a Stone Cold Stunner. The secretary of health and human services has a problem with pasteurized milk. The secretary of transportation was on Road Rules, so at least he has a basic understanding of motorway etiquette. But for the most part, if you have only a layman’s understanding of your role, you are unequivocally qualified to lead.I am ill-suited to any cabinet position, unless there’s a secretary of cocktails, in which case, I make a mean dry gin martini with a twist of lemon. So I am paradoxically the perfect person to run our economic policy, based on the rhetoric of Elon Musk, who deemed Peter Navarro to be a “moron” because of his advanced degree, and his support for Donald Trump’s ruinous tariffs against global trade. Navarro stated that Musk’s Tesla plants are a prime example of the world’s trade imbalance. “In many cases, if you go to [Musk’s] Texas plant, a good part of the engines that he gets, which in the EV case are the batteries, come from Japan and come from China. The electronics come from Taiwan,” Navarro alleged.This statement set Musk off, causing him to turn on Navarro – whom he considers “dumber than a sack of bricks” – and by proxy, Trump’s stated aims of bringing manufacturing back to the US through onerous taxation. Musk said on X: “By any definition whatsoever, Tesla is the most vertically integrated auto manufacturer in America with the highest percentage of US content. Navarro should ask the fake expert he invented, Ron Vara.” The “Ron Vara” comment is in reference to the allegedly made-up expert that Navarro cited in his 2011 book Death by China, which warns the reader of nefarious Chinese economic policy. When called out about his charming little fib, Navarro said that the use of a fictional figure that is clearly an anagram of his own last name was a fun “inside joke” between him and … I suppose the basic tenets of ethics.This is, by any cogent estimation, a battle of the titans: Navarro, the Ivy League-educated garbage man for the current American president, and Musk, who managed to wield his immense wealth to convince said president that having a functioning government was beta-ass behavior, bruh. Is there a winner here? Probably not. We all lose when no one seems to care about anything but their own interests. Navarro is terrified to upset his boss. Musk clearly doesn’t want to endanger his own profits by allowing tariffs to squelch the free exchange of goods between nations that like electric cars. The rest of us, the chaff caught between these two gibbering hobbits, can fend for ourselves until they figure it out.This fight is expensive for us. The stock market, which is too esoteric and costly for most average people to participate in directly, shed trillions of dollars thanks to fears of Trump’s tariffs. That value bounced back after the president backed off his threats for a period of 90 days, but the psychological effect of that brinkmanship will be hard to shake. Those fluctuations are video game-like blips for the mega-rich, but they can cause real harm to the retirement funds of the average citizen. A tariff on pharmaceuticals could inhibit people from accessing life-saving medication. To people like Navarro and Musk, these are theoretical concerns, so far removed from their everyday lives that they might as well be the problems of the Klingon empire on Star Trek. Why should they care, when their own petty squabbles are so near and dear to them?But this is the grand thesis of Trump’s America. Personal grievance and retribution are paramount. Proving you are superior to your enemy means more than the fate of a stranger, or a neighbor. Why do we get out of bed every morning if not to smite our opponent on the virtual battlefield of social media? It means more to be right than to do right.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn some twisted way, Musk is correct. We do need some manner of global trade to survive, because the global economy is so bloody complicated and ridiculous that we have to keep some semblance of the status quo for now. That his calculus is related to his own personal wealth is an unfortunate aspect of this position. Navarro, on the other hand, understands Musk shouldn’t be involved in the economic policy of the entire planet. The White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, referred to this spat as a benign “boys will be boys” dust-up, but I think it’s more than that. This is Godzilla v Kong, if Godzilla was a sycophantic bureaucrat and Kong appeared to have very expensive hair transplants.In the aforementioned film, Godzilla and Kong beat the shit out of each other and destroyed an entire city in the process. This real-life fight could actually be more devastating if we do nothing about it.

      Dave Schilling is a Los Angeles-based writer and humorist More

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump was playing chicken with tariffs. Then he chickened out | Steven Greenhouse

      by

      By imposing punitively high tariffs, Donald Trump was playing a high-stakes game of chicken with the US’s trading partners – but it was Trump who chickened out and suspended his tariffs just hours after they took effect. The president couldn’t ignore the worldwide economic havoc that he had caused singled-handedly – stock markets were plunging, business executives were panicking and consumers were seething.Eager to persuade manufacturers to build new plants in the US, Trump said on Monday that many of his tariffs would be permanent. But for Trump, permanent evidently meant two days.Once again, Trump showed that his second term is one of fiat, flub and flip-flop, of bluster and blunder, of shooting first and aiming later. It’s also a mix of cutting, gutting and cruelty.And foolery. Trump’s tariffs are worse than, as the Wall Street Journal put it, the “dumbest trade war in history”: they are the dumbest economic policy that any US president has ever adopted. His tariffs quickly caused vast and totally unnecessary damage to stock markets, industries and diplomatic relations across the globe. Before Trump unexpectedly suspended the tariffs, US stock markets had lost more than $10tn in value, and stock markets overseas plummeted, too. Millions of retirees had seen their 401(k)s plunge in value, consumers were facing substantially higher prices and many workers were already losing their jobs as Trump’s tariffs sent shockwaves through the global economy.Trump’s embarrassing climbdown on tariffs was one of the rare times he bowed to common sense. If only he would do the same when it comes to his dangerously myopic cuts to scientific research, environmental protection and foreign aid.Trump has not climbed down, however, in his showdown with China. In a fit of pique over China’s retaliatory tariffs, Trump has imposed stratospheric 145% tariffs on China. Attention Walmart shoppers: that is going to more than double the price of many things you buy.When it came to tariffs, Trump made some basic political fumbles. Not only did he go golfing and speak at a million-dollar-a-head fundraiser as this economic disaster unfolded, but he failed to give a coherent explanation for his screw-everyone-else tariffs. Trump and his team pointed to a potpourri of often-conflicting goals: to erase trade deficits, to collect trillions of dollars for the treasury, to bring back manufacturing jobs, to give Trump negotiating leverage to crack down on fentanyl and immigration and reduce other countries’ tariffs.Let’s not delude ourselves. There are two main reasons for Trump’s tariffs: first, to satisfy his never-ending thirst for vengeance against those he feels have wronged him (which seems to mean every country in the world except Russia) and second, to fulfill his desire to wield a club over everyone and everything. By using staggeringly high tariffs as a weapon, Trump has been acting like a mob enforcer, telling every business in town: I’m going to clobber you with my baseball bat unless you do what I want.There’s another reason for Trump’s tariffs: his ignorance about how the world’s economy works. Trump’s “liberation day” speech on tariffs gave the looney, but unmistakable, impression that he believes that Vietnam, for instance, is looting and pillaging the US by selling more sneakers and other goods to the US than the US sells to Vietnam. Trump thinks this even though millions of Americans are delighted to buy well-made sneakers from Vietnam (which would cost consumers far more if they were made in the US).With his grievance-driven, zero-sum worldview, Trump no doubt believes that other countries are unfairly taking advantage of the US whenever we trade with them – and he wants to get even.Trump thinks that trade deficits are evil. If Trump had taken a class with Robert Solow, a Nobel Prize-winning economist at MIT, he might have heard Solow’s wisdom about why there’s no big worry about bilateral trade deficits: “I have a chronic deficit with my barber, who doesn’t buy a darned thing from me.”That Trump got to impose his calamitous tariffs at 12.01am on Wednesday reflects the dismal quality of his cabinet and advisers. Too many are lackeys who automatically cheer whatever he does, while some others, like the treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, no doubt realized that his tariffs were dumb and disastrous, but they’re too cowardly to tell the Tariff King. The tariffs would inevitably increase inflation and probably push the US into recession. Even though Republicans have vowed never to raise taxes, Trump’s tariffs are unarguably a tax, a regressive tax and the largest tax increase in 60 years. Trump’s tariffs were bound to destroy smoothly running supply chains and hurt untold numbers of US companies. They were also a disaster for relations with our allies. They were already triggering massive retaliation.If Trump had some smart, principled advisers, they might explain to him that many obstacles might prevent his tariffs from achieving their goals. With the nation’s low 4% unemployment rate, it will be hard to find workers to do the manufacturing jobs that Trump wants to bring back, especially when he’s rounding up and expelling many immigrant workers. Moreover, US corporations have largely lost the technological knowhow to compete in various industries and that complicates hopes to bring back far more factories.Then there’s another big problem – the chaotic Trump is the worst possible president to persuade companies to build factories in the US to produce goods they now obtain from abroad. King Donald the Capricious does not exactly exude the air of stability that executives insist on before they decide to make big investment decisions, like building new factories.Trump trumpeted his tariffs in part to show strength, but he ended up in an embarrassing retreat (he did maintain a 10% tariff on many countries). Trump is eager to get China to heed his wishes, but China, the world’s leading manufacturing country, can now see that Trump will back down when the heat is too great.China doesn’t have clean hands on trade. It improperly subsidizes many industries to help them outcompete manufacturers in the US and elsewhere. China also has ambitions to vastly increase its manufacturing capacity – a strategy that could kill off important industries in the US, Canada, Europe, Japan and other countries. If Trump were smart and strategic, he – instead of alienating those countries with his tariffs – would have formed an alliance with those countries to pressure China. But now those countries are too angry at the Trump to do that.Trump, never one to admit defeat, insists that his climbdown was a victory, that the mess he made was marvelous strategy. He says many countries are eager to make deals with him. “I’m telling you, these countries are calling us up, kissing my ass,” he said on Wednesday. “They are dying to make a deal.”Our allies are no doubt furious with Trump. Not only were they already angry that he stabbed Ukraine in the back and sidled up to Putin, but they’re unhappy that his tariff foolishness violated numerous international agreements and sought to blow up a smoothly running trade system. And then Trump ridicules them by saying they were rushing to kiss his behind.I hardly ever agree with Elon Musk, but he was right that Trump’s tariffs were the work of morons who were “dumber than a sack of bricks”.

      Steven Greenhouse is a journalist and author focusing on labor and the workplace, as well as economic and legal issues. More

    • 238 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      The power and pitfalls of protest: how to speak out without falling victim to Trump’s playbook | Jonathan Smucker

      by

      On Saturday I was heartened to be one of millions of Americans who took to the streets in cities and towns across the United States to stand against “the most brazen power grab in modern history”. While no official total tally of “Hands Off!” participants is yet available, the anti-Donald Trump, anti-Elon Musk actions on Saturday were certainly among the largest single-day protests in US history, with rallies in all 50 states.As we seem to be entering a new stage of popular protest movements, it’s worth assessing the strategic value of protest, as well as the limits and potential liabilities. History is full of powerful examples of consequential bottom-up protest movements. The women’s suffrage movement secured voting rights after decades of struggle. The civil rights movement dismantled Jim Crow segregation. The labor movement won the eight-hour workday, the weekend and much more. Protest was an essential tool for each of these movements. It can take many different forms, including mass demonstrations, boycotts, strikes, unruly disruption and civil disobedience.Protest is often negatively framed as naive, utopian or merely self-expressive. But it can be profoundly pragmatic. When part of a larger power-building strategy, protest can play an essential role in forcing issues onto the public agenda, changing popular opinion, delegitimizing powerholders, shifting the balance of forces and even toppling regimes. Protest movements don’t always win, of course, but history is full of stories of “Davids” defeating “Goliaths”.Only weeks into Trump’s second term, as we seek to limit the damage and, ultimately, to defeat authoritarianism and oligarchy, protest is as necessary and important as ever. How can we make our voices as powerful as possible?How Trump frames protestersProtest is also rife with peril. When powerful people and institutions feel threatened, they tend to fight dirty, using every tool at their disposal, including police and legal repression. In addition to facing threats to safety and freedom, social movement participants are characteristically slandered and stereotyped by their opponents, with slanted news coverage often parroting the messages or sharing the assumptions of the ruling class.Before exploring some pitfalls of protest (and how to avoid them), let’s get a few things clear. First, it is brave and worthy to engage in protest for just causes, against powerful actors; not only that, it’s necessary if we want to have a democracy. Second, our opponents have a vested interest in disparaging and caricaturing our protests and they will attempt to slander us no matter what we do (but this doesn’t mean we have no ability to counter their attacks). Third, peril and pitfalls cannot be completely avoided: a protest where everything goes perfectly is rare, and the likelihood of errors and excesses is a poor excuse for inaction.That said, organizers of protests do have a responsibility to do everything in our power to ensure that collective action is as effective as possible. The sociologist Max Weber argued that those who seek to intervene in politics have a responsibility not only for our own intentions, but also for the counter-responses to our actions. In other words, we have a responsibility to think a few chess moves ahead and to craft a strategy that can win.A central constraint today is the dominant narrative about protest itself. In the US, this narrative casts protesters as a special type of person, with some combination of the following features: loud, shrill, naive, counter-cultural, speaking in jargon, Marxist, anti-American, violent and economically and/or educationally privileged (AKA “elitist”). The purpose of this dominant narrative is straightforward: inoculate millions of Americans against protest movements by otherizing “protesters”. In other words, there’s a well-worn caricature of a protester that holds many everyday working people back from aligning with protest movements.Ultimately it’s on us to get more people to see us differently. To be clear, I’m not talking about our hard opponents. The point of protest is never to be palatable to everyone. I’m talking here about the millions of Americans who have a high potential to join, support or at least sympathize with protest movements.Trump didn’t invent this disparaging story, but he grafts these negative tropes about protest and protesters on to his larger pseudo-populist “anti-elite” narrative. I put “anti-elite” in quotes because Trump strategically names cultural elites as culprits, intentionally diverting attention away from the concentrated economic power (eg Wall Street, huge corporations and billionaires like Elon Musk) that is actually to blame for the hardships of tens of millions of working-class Americans. Trump’s favorite “elite” targets include academia, the news media, Hollywood and Democratic politicians. “Woke protesters” take their place alongside the rest of this elite cast in Trump’s play. Opposed to these hoity-toity, overeducated, condescending elites, Trump presents himself as hero and champion of “ordinary Americans”.This framing is effective because it taps into a real and deepening class-based cultural divide in America – between a highly educated professional class occupying roughly the top 10-20% of the spectrum, and the bottom 80% below. In his book Dream Hoarders, Richard Reeves lays out how this upper stratum has pulled away from the majority of Americans – not just economically, but socially and culturally. The complex US tax code, legacy college admissions, and housing, zoning and other policies have benefited the already advantaged. As distinct from the ultra-rich “one per cent”, many in this larger upper strata see themselves as progressive, even as they benefit from invisible moats around their neighborhoods, schools and social networks. This deepening class-based insularity creates the cultural disconnect that Trump exploits. He directs populist anger toward these cultural elites, while diverting attention away from far more powerful and destructive economic culprits, offering working-class Americans cultural revenge rather than policies that could make a real positive difference in their lives.View image in fullscreenTrump’s exploitation of this cultural-economic backdrop – and Democrats’ failure to even comprehend it, let alone come up with a counter-strategy – was central to his electoral victories in both 2016 and 2024. This same backdrop should also be of great concern to protest movements. We who are attempting to organize people into collective action must recognize how easily our movements can be portrayed as extensions of this privileged class and work intentionally to break out of that framing (and, sometimes, that reality).At Trump rallies during his 2016 campaign, I observed how he would deliberately draw attention to protesters, utilizing them as characters in his story, encouraging the crowd to chant and jeer as security removed the disruptive “outside agitators”.So it was striking to watch how dramatically Trump changed his tack when military veterans spoke out at some of these same rallies. He completely ignored them, refusing to acknowledge their presence, strategically avoiding even looking in their direction. These veterans later learned from active-duty friends that Trump had gotten quite upset by their actions, because they didn’t fit into his narrative; military veterans could easily overcome Trump’s “woke protester” framing.Breaking out of Trump’s playbookIn the first several weeks of Trump’s second term, we again see powerful examples of veterans speaking out, for example, publicly confronting their representatives about Doge cuts to the benefits they earned. Grassroots organizations of veterans, like Common Defense, are helping to prepare, support and amplify the efforts of fellow veterans as they use their powerful voices to speak up in this critical moment. Protagonists in the story of America, veterans bring a unique authority and credibility that is very difficult for their powerful opponents to caricature or disparage.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSimilarly, the federal workers who are organizing and showing the real-life impacts of Musk’s reckless cuts are very effective spokespeople right now. From park rangers to USPS employees, these workers are protesting threats to their livelihoods and to the valued public services they provide, speaking up as workers about the devastation wrought by Musk’s “chainsaw” on their lives and the communities they serve. Importantly, they represent a cross-section of America: diverse in race, geography, education and political leanings. They are relaying their experiences and connecting with millions of Americans who see themselves in their stories. Using plainspoken language rather than jargon, they present themselves not as “protesters” but as parents, neighbors and workers who have a stake in their country’s future.The lesson isn’t that you have to be a military veteran or federal worker if you want to effectively protest against Trump and Musk. But if our opponents are determined to otherize us as unrelatable “protesters”, what are the familiar aspects of our identities that we can emphasize instead? The story of a worker who is so fed up that she decides to join with others in collective action is very different from the dominant story about generic protesters.It’s important to also grasp and grapple with other elements of Trump’s attack narrative; his use of “protester” tropes is not the only means he uses to otherize and dehumanize. He also attacks vulnerable people because of their immigration status, their advocacy for Palestine and their gender identity, among other pretenses. Each of these attacks warrants its own strategic counter-response and it’s vitally important that we show solidarity and narrate Trump’s targeting of any of us as an attack on all of us and on our shared values and rights – as has been on display in the popular outpouring of support for the detained Columbia graduate student Mahmoud Khalil.Another important way today’s protests are breaking out of Trump’s playbook is by consistently punching up, especially at Musk as an unelected billionaire who has taken oligarchy in America to new heights. When we name powerful economic culprits, it takes the wind out of Trump’s fake populist sails. Billionaires who rigged our economy and political system make for a more convincing culprit to millions of Americans than vulnerable scapegoats (eg immigrants, trans people, or “woke”). A central reason we got into this mess is that Democrats have been so tepid and inconsistent in picking visible fights with billionaires, Wall Street and corporate power.It’s important that we consistently punch up at billionaires and the politicians doing their bidding and refrain from punching down at people who voted for Trump. To break out of Trump’s story of the “smug and condescending affluent liberal protester”, we should avoid messages that are, indeed, smug and condescending (eg, “In this house, we believe science is real”) or that mock people for their economic struggles (eg, “How are you feeling about voting for cheaper eggs now?”). Such messages are self-indulgent and counterproductive, and we can do so much better.Organizing for powerFinally, if we are to make our protests as effective as possible, we should recognize protest for what it is: a tactic. Protest is not an end in itself. Tactics require larger long-term power-building strategies. Absent strategy, protest can sometimes still hold some short-term strategic value (eg, showing that dissent exists), but if we want to accomplish more than a flash in the pan – if we genuinely intend to shape history, as powerful movements before us have done – then we need to figure out what to do after the protest ends and everyone goes home.The key is organization. Organizations transform episodic moments of outrage into sustained campaigns that can win concrete victories. Without organization, we’re no match for the powerful forces we’re up against. It’s no accident that the five decades when labor unions and other participatory organizations have declined are the same decades when capital consolidated control of our political system and inequality grew worse and worse.To rebuild people power, we need to build organizations with structure, leadership development and capacity for sustained campaigns and struggle. There are all kinds of organizations: labor unions, place-based (local and statewide), issue-based, faith and congregation-based, and more (check out the list of partner organizations that helped plan the 5 April “Hands Off!” protests). If you’re showing up to the protest as a lone individual, let it be your on-ramp to longer-term collective action. Figure out where you fit in, what capacity you can add, what skills you can develop, how much time you can give. Even just a few hours a month, when multiplied by millions, can amount to a formidable force – the kind of people power we need to defeat authoritarianism and oligarchy.Because ultimately we’re not trying to build “protest movements”, we’re trying to build people’s movements; movements that use protest as one tool among many, whose ultimate aim is to win a real voice for working people in determining the policies that impact our lives and communities – and to make an America that works for all of us.

      Jonathan Smucker is a political organizer, campaigner and strategist who co-founded Popular Comms Institute, PA Stands Up, Lancaster Stands Up, Common Defense, Beyond the Choir and Mennonite Action. He is the author of Hegemony How-To: A Roadmap for Radicals. More

    • 200 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      China raises tariffs on US goods to 125% as Xi urges EU to resist Trump ‘bullying’

      by

      China has raised its tariffs on US products to 125% in the latest salvo of the trade dispute with Washington, just hours after Xi Jinping said there were “no winners in a tariff war”.Xi made the comments during a meeting with the Spanish prime minister in which he invited the EU to work with China to resist “bullying”, part of an apparent campaign to shore up other trading partners.The Chinese commerce ministry announced on Friday that it was raising the 84% tariffs on all US imports to 125%, again saying that China was ready to “fight to the end”. The statement also suggested it may be Beijing’s last move in the tit-for-tat tariff raises as “at the current tariff level, there is no market acceptance for US goods exported to China”.“If the US continues to impose tariffs on Chinese goods exported to the US, China will ignore it,” it said, flagging that there were other countermeasures to come.Some markets continued to tumble on Friday, as the French president, Emmanuel Macron, described the US president’s 90-day tariff pause – which sets most tariffs at 10% until July – as “fragile”.Asian indices followed Wall Street lower on Friday, with Japan’s Nikkei down nearly 5% and Hong Kong stocks heading towards the biggest weekly decline since 2008. Oil prices were also expected to drop for a second consecutive week.Chinese officials have been canvassing other trading partners about how to deal with the US tariffs, after the country was excluded from Trump’s 90-day pause of the steepest global tariffs. Instead the US president made consecutive increases to duties on Chinese imports, which are now 145%.On Friday, Xi welcomed Spain’s Pedro Sánchez, after also talking to counterparts in Saudi Arabia and South Africa. According to the official Chinese summary of the talks, Xi said “there will be no winners in a tariff war, and going against the world will isolate oneself”, in an apparent reference to the US.“China and the EU should fulfil their international responsibilities, jointly maintain the trend of economic globalisation and the international trade environment, and jointly resist unilateral bullying, not only to safeguard their own legitimate rights and interests, but also to safeguard international fairness and justice, and to safeguard international rules and order,” the summary said Xi told Sánchez.Spain said Sánchez told Xi his country favoured a more balanced relationship between the EU and China based on negotiations to resolve differences and cooperation in areas of common interest.Xi plans to travel to south-east Asia, including Vietnam and Cambodia, next week.Macron wrote on X early on Friday that Trump’s partial tariff suspension, pausing new rates on various countries that would have risen as high as 50%, “sends out a signal and leaves the door open for talks. But this pause is a fragile one.”He added: “This 90-day pause means 90 days of uncertainty for all our businesses, on both sides of the Atlantic and beyond.”Battered financial markets were given a brief reprieve on Wednesday when Trump decided to pause duties on dozens of countries. However, his escalating trade dispute with China, the world’s second-largest economy, has continued to fuel fears of recession and further retaliation.The US treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, tried to assuage the fears of sceptics by telling a cabinet meeting on Thursday that more than 75 countries wanted to start trade negotiations, and Trump had expressed hope of a deal with China.But the uncertainty in the meantime extended some of the most volatile trading since the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic.The US’s S&P 500 index ended 3.5% lower on Thursday and was now down about 15% from its all-time peak in February. Some analysts believe stocks have further to fall owing to the uncertainty surrounding the US tariff policy.Bessent shrugged off the renewed market sell-off on Thursday and predicted that striking deals with other countries would bring more certainty.The US and Vietnam agreed to begin formal trade talks after Bessent spoke to the Vietnamese deputy prime minister, Ho Duc Phoc, the White House said.The south-east Asian manufacturing hub is prepared to crack down on Chinese goods being shipped to the US via its territory in the hope of avoiding tariffs, Reuters reported on Friday.Taiwan’s president said his government would also be among the first batch of trading partners to enter negotiations. Taiwan, listed for a 32% tariff, has offered zero tariffs as a basis for talks.Japan’s prime minister, Shigeru Ishiba, meanwhile, has set up a taskforce led by his close aide that hopes to visit Washington next week, according to local media.View image in fullscreenWhile Trump suddenly paused his “reciprocal” tariffs on other countries hours after they came into effect this week, he did not include China, instead increasing duties on Chinese imports as punishment for Beijing’s initial move to retaliate.Trump had imposed tariffs on Chinese goods of 145% since taking office, a White House official said.Meanwhile, Trump told reporters at the White House he thought the US could make a deal with China, but he reiterated his argument that Beijing had “really taken advantage” of the US for a long time.“I’m sure that we’ll be able to get along very well,” the US president said, referring to Xi. “In a true sense, he’s been a friend of mine for a long period of time, and I think that we’ll end up working out something that’s very good for both countries.”Xi and Trump are not known to have spoken since before Trump’s inauguration. Beijing has said it has no intention of backing down to what it terms as Trump’s “bullying” with the tariffs.“We will never sit idly by and watch while the legitimate rights and interests of the Chinese people are infringed, nor will we sit idly by as international economic and trade rules and the multilateral trading system are undermined,” the Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson, Lin Jian, said on Thursday.As well as retaliatory tariffs, Beijing has also restricted imports of Hollywood films, and put 18 US companies on trade restriction lists.The commerce ministry said China’s door was open to dialogue but this must be based on mutual respect.The US tariff pause also does not apply to duties paid by Canada and Mexico, whose goods are still subject to 25% fentanyl-related tariffs unless they comply with the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement’s rules of origin.With trade hostilities persisting among the top three US trade partners, Goldman Sachs estimates the probability of a recession at 45%.Even with the rollback, the overall average import duty rate imposed by the US is the highest in more than a century, according to Yale University researchers.It also did little to soothe business leaders’ worries about the fallout from Trump’s trade dispute and its chaotic implementation: soaring costs, falling orders and snarled supply chains.One reprieve came, however, when the EU said it would pause its first counter-tariffs. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Will global climate action be a casualty of Trump’s tariffs?

      by

      Donald Trump’s upending of the global economy has raised fears that climate action could emerge as a casualty of the trade war.In the week that has followed “liberation day”, economic experts have warned that the swathe of tariffs could trigger a global economic recession, with far-reaching consequences for investors – including those behind the green energy projects needed to meet climate goals.Fears of a prolonged global recession have also tanked oil and gas prices, making it cheaper to pollute and more difficult to justify investment in clean alternatives such as electric vehicles and low-carbon heating to financially hard-hit households.But chief among the concerns is Trump’s decision to level his most aggressive trade tariffs against China – the world’s largest manufacturer of clean energy technologies – which threatens to throttle green investment in the US, the world’s second-largest carbon-emitter.‘A tragedy for the US’The US is expected to lag farther behind the rest of the world in developing clean power technologies by cutting off its access to cheap, clean energy tech developed in China. This is a fresh blow to green energy developers in the US, still reeling from the Trump administration’s vow to roll back the Biden era’s green incentives.Leslie Abrahams, a deputy director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington DC, said the tariffs would probably hinder the rollout of clean energy in the US and push the country to the margins of the global market.Specifically, they are expected to drive up the price of developing clean power, because to date the US has been heavily reliant on importing clean power technologies. “And not just imports of the final goods. Even the manufacturing that we do in the United States relies on imported components,” she said.The US government’s goal to develop its manufacturing base by opening new factories could make these components available domestically, but it is likely to take time. It will also come at considerable cost, because the materials typically imported to build these factories – cement, steel, aluminium – will be subject to tariffs too, Abrahams said.“At the same time there are broader, global economic implications that might make it difficult to access inexpensive capital to build,” she added. Investors who had previously shown an interest in the US under the green-friendly Biden administration are likely to balk at the aggressively anti-green messages from the White House.Abrahams said this would mean a weaker appetite for investment in rolling out green projects across the US, and in the research and development of early-stage clean technologies of the future. This is likely to have long-term implications for the US position in the global green energy market, meaning it will “cede some of our potential market share abroad”, Abrahams added.Instead, countries like China are likely to divert sales of their clean energy tech away from the US to other countries eager to develop green energy, Abrahams said. “So on the one hand, that should help to accelerate adoption of clean energy in those countries, which is good for emissions, but for the US, that is future market share that we’re ceding,” she said.‘Clean energy is unstoppable, with or without Trump’It’s important to distinguish between the US and the rest of the world, according to Kingsmill Bond, a strategist for the energy thinktank Ember.“The more the US cuts itself off from the rest of the world, the more the rest of the world will get on with things and the US will be left behind. This is a tragedy for the clean energy industry in the US, but for everyone else there are opportunities,” he said.Analysis by the climate campaign group 350.org has found that despite rising costs and falling green investment in the US, Trump’s trade war will not affect the energy transition and renewables trade globally.It said the US was already “merely a footnote, not a global player” in the race to end the use of fossil fuels. Only 4% of China’s clean tech exports go to the US, it said, in a trade sector where sales volume grew by about 30% last year.“Trump’s tariffs won’t slow the global energy transition – they’ll only hurt ordinary people, particularly Americans,” said Andreas Sieber, an associate director at 350.org. “The transition to renewables is unstoppable, with or without him. His latest move does little to impact the booming clean energy market but will isolate the US and drive up costs for American consumers.”View image in fullscreenOne senior executive at a big European renewable energy company said developers were likely to press on with existing US projects but in future would probablyinvest in other markets.“So we won’t be doing less, we’ll just be going somewhere else,” said the executive, who asked not to be named. “There is no shortage of demand for clean energy projects globally, so we’re not scaling back our ambitions. And excluding the US could make stretched supply chains easier to manage.”Countries likely to benefit from the fresh attention of renewable energy investors include burgeoning markets in south-east Asia, where fossil fuel reliance remains high and demand for energy is rocketing. Australia and Brazil have also emerged as countries that stand to gain.“In times like these, countries will be increasingly on the hunt for domestic solutions,” Bond said. “And that means clean energy and local supply chains. There are always climate reasons to go green, but there are national security reasons now too.”The challenge for governments hoping to seize the opportunity provided by the US green retreat will be to assure rattled investors that they offer a safe place to invest in the climate agenda.Dhara Vyas, the chief executive of Energy UK, the UK industry’s trade body, said: “Certainty has always been the thing that investors say they need. The UK is seen as a stable country with a stable government, but now more than ever we need to double down on giving certainty to investors.”“Investors do like certainty,” Bond agreed. “But they also like growth and opportunity, so that’s why there is some confidence that they will continue to deploy capital in the sector.”‘The US still matters’Although the green investment slowdown may be largely limited to the US, this still poses concerns for global climate progress, according to Marina Domingues, the head of new energies for the consultancy Rystad Energy.“The US is a huge emitter country. So everything the US does still really matters to the global energy transition and how we account for CO2,” she said. The US is the second most polluting country in the world, behind China, which produces almost three times its carbon emissions. But the US’s green retreat comes at a time when the country was planning to substantially increase its domestic energy demand.After years of relatively steady energy demand, Rystad predicts a 10% growth in US electricity consumption from a boom in AI datacentres alone. The economy is also likely to require more energy to power an increase in domestic manufacturing as imports from China dwindle.In the absence of a growing energy industry, this is likely to come from fossil fuels, meaning growing climate emissions. The US is expected to make use of its abundance of shale gas, but it is planning to use more coal in the future too.In the same week that Trump set out his tariffs, he signed four executive orders aimed at preventing the US from phasing out coal, in what climate campaigners at 350.org described as an “abuse of power”.Anne Jellema, the group’s executive director, said: “President Trump’s latest attempt to force-feed coal to the US is a dangerous fantasy that endangers our health, our economy and our future.” More