01-06-2017, 02:19 PM
(01-06-2017, 01:50 PM)TeacherinExile Wrote:(01-06-2017, 12:37 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: Ms Wonk,I would bet my money on Trump being the last gasp of the reactionary system put into motion by Reagan and Thatcher, some 36-years ago, that being neoliberalism. If Trump's policies amount to little more than a "booster shot" for neoliberalism, as I humbly foresee it, then that could hardly be called transformative. I believe that neoliberalism will eventually collapse of its own dead weight, perhaps as early as 2018-2020. Post-crash (2008), neoliberalism has fallen into disrepute, and (abortive) political challenges have been mounted against it--here and abroad. It's living on borrowed time, for no other reason than a core principle that I learned in my first economics course: the law of diminishing returns. It's taking higher and higher "doses" of neoliberalism to stimulate the global economy, which is now mired in what some have labeled "secular stagnation." Trump's administration looks all but certain to deliver further privatization, deregulation, tax cuts, austerity, ad nauseum...all part and parcel of the same old neoliberalism. It may deliver some GDP growth in the short term, as the stock market is currently discounting. But a sustained economic boom that generates a widely-shared prosperity and tamps down the class resentment that put him in office? I just don't see it.
Einzige intoduced the same political model to the board before I left. It actually fits most of the party systems quite well, other than two periods in the 19th century (1800 to 1828 and 1860 to 1901) when one of the two major parties (the Federalists and the Democrats) weren't competitive at the Presidential level.
It's pretty much what I am expecting. The party system that began with Reagan has been breaking down for a while, and I expect Trump to either transform the system (note that this statement is not the same as "Make Everything Wonderful and Give Us Everything We Want") or break it once and for all, paving the way for someone who can.
One can also point out that Trump could be a transformational two term president and not necessarily leave a wholly positive legacy. Again, "Change" and "Realignment" are not necessarily synonyms of "Progress" and "Improvement", as people generally use those words.
Has Trump already transformed politics? Without question. So did Silvio Berlusconi in Italy, who I think Trump more resembles than Caesar, Hitler, Mussolini, or any other dated historical analogue that people want to bandy about. Which is why I started this thread in the first place. Perhaps I suffer from "recency bias," but I think Silvio Berlusconi--not that many years removed from elected office--offers much better clues as to how Trump will behave and govern while in office. Maybe even predict Trump's measure of success.
Will Trump transform the political/economic system, not just politics? I rather doubt it. He has assumed the mantle of neoliberalism--with his own unique twist, perhaps--and the executive team that he is now assembling promises more of the same.
Teacher,
Yes, yes, neoliberalism, neoliberalism, neoliberalism. You can do what you like here (subject to WM discretion), but you've become a bit of a one-note-johnny on the subject of late. Try and remember that neoliberalism is not just privatization and tax cuts, but free trade, skepticism of government spending, support for immigration, etc. It's just 19th century classic liberal ideas in drag. Trump definitely seems to support certain aspects of it, but not others. Tariffs, for one, which are one of the few constants in Trump's ever-changing positions over the years, are definitely not neoliberalism.
Immigration restriction, a trade war with china, tax cuts combined with profligate spending on infrastructure and military buildup leading to inflation, would definitely transform the political/economic system, and don't require us to assume that Trump will magically become a different person as president. They're simply a likely consequence of his campaign promises, which presidents actually have a half-way decent record at keeping. Not all of them, mind you, but more than half.