Our Friday News Analysis | What the World Reads Now!

By Abraham A. van Kempen
31 January 2025

I Think, Therefore, I am
(Uniquely created in God’s image).

I Think NOT; therefore, I’m WHAT? A Robot
(Created in God’s image)?

Imagine how wonderful it is that skills like reading, speaking, writing, and basic math can brighten your journey! They connect with the brilliant—and not–so–exemplary—minds of the past and present, filling your heart and spirit with a treasure trove of information, knowledge, and wisdom—gifts from our shared human heritage.

Who wouldn’t feel uplifted in such an inspiring or perspiring company? Embracing this engagement will enrich your life and open new dimensions of depth, perspective, dignity, and accuracy.

So, why not dive into reading and connect with others?

Is that all? Just read?

Thinking critically – exploring and reflecting on ideas – matters more.

Many tend to rely on media that confirm their biases.

How can you start to explore and challenge your prejudices gently?

Think it through!

In this edition, you’ll explore contrasting viewpoints. It may feel uncomfortable or even frightening. Don’t worry! Take up the challenge. You’ll unlock new doors.

In short:

               Think! That’s who you are.

               Think not! That’s NOT who you are. You are not meant to be a mindless sheep following other mindless sheep.

OPINION | A PHILOSOPHER’S LETTER TO PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: ON THE MEANING OF TRUE GREATNESS

President Trump, in your promise to “make America great again," you might have found a unique set of global circumstances that could help you fulfill that vision! Thinking about achieving this in ways we might not have expected is exciting.

Photo by Robert Perry / Getty Images

Open letter From Australian Professor Freya Mathews to President Donald J. Trump (Condensed)

Posted on ABC.NET.AU (Australia)

22 January 2025

Dear President Trump,

On your re-inauguration, I, a philosopher, reach out from afar with a modest offering. Observing world affairs from this marginal viewpoint, I hope to gain the perspective ancient sages aspired to, which emperors sought in tumultuous times.

From the start of your presidency, you promised to “make America great again.” This goal seems sincerely held by you and is cherished by the millions who voted for you. However, your success will ultimately be judged against a clear idea of greatness. Perhaps reflecting on this question may illuminate the path ahead.

What truly defines the essence of "greatness" in a nation, empire, or civilization? It's not merely about having overwhelming power or forcing others into submission with economic or military threats. In today’s world—if it ever wasn’t—this viewpoint appears to be shifting, something China has recognized recently. Its efforts to exert economic influence against countries that disagreed with its policies often seemed counterproductive. This so-called “wolfish” tactic, which involved cutting off imports from nations like Australia, has surprisingly encouraged those countries to seek out new markets and discover other trading partners successfully.

While the posture may have evoked fear, it also generated aversion from other nations. China recognized that persisting with this coercive strategy would probably result in isolation. It could engender a Soviet-like “power bloc" established through military strength or subjugation instead of true allegiance. In this kind of bloc, every nation is poised to liberate itself whenever the oppressor's hold wanes.

President-Elect Donald Trump gestures to the crowd after his victory rally at the Capital One Arena on 19 January 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images)

A bloc is not a civilization, nor was the Soviet Union. Even if Germany had won World War II, the Third Reich would not have represented a civilization. Greatness in a nation is evidenced by the emergence of a new society and its spread beyond its immediate sphere of influence.

Generating a new civilization requires more than force or economic incentives. Powerful nations use grants, aid, loans, investment, and training programs as inducements, but these only work to a point. When a client nation feels its sovereignty threatened by debt, resentment and resistance emerge, leading to a loss of loyalty.

The influence of attractiveness

True greatness, marked by a unique civilizational flowering, is rooted in attractiveness. While military and economic strength is necessary, true greatness should attract other nations rather than coerce or bribe them.

In diplomatic circles, this ability to attract is called soft power, understood as interventions in foreign affairs intentionally designed to appeal to the international community. Examples include the BBC World Service, the British Council, China’s global media networks, Confucius Institutes, and the Belt and Road Initiative.

True greatness lies in how a nation influences others by its example. A great nation opens new avenues of self-actualization for its people that have been lacking globally. When others see these new possibilities, they desire them for themselves.

During the nineteenth century, Europe aggressively colonized extensive areas but simultaneously introduced novel ideas to its colonies—namely, science and liberalism, emphasizing human potential and experience. Despite oppression and exploitation, Europe provided unprecedented individual freedom and self-actualization ideals.

Many post-colonial nations embraced modernization and new possibilities despite ambivalence towards colonial histories.

An American flag is held in the snow outside the US Capitol Building on 19 January 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images)

Historically, America exemplified true greatness. After World War II, its superpower derived from military and economic strength, which the government did not always wield justly abroad.

Military and economic power weren’t the only keys to America’s status. Unmatched in its attractiveness, American culture allowed the nation to claim greatness in the post-war decades. Its influence wasn’t just a strategic tactic by US agencies; it was the magic of the culture Americans created, which defined their identity and captivated outsiders. Exhausted by the brutality of the Second World War, these outsiders embraced a mood of exuberance and a willingness to accept diverse cultural influences. This vibrant spirit resonated with youth worldwide through popular music, cinema, media, and technology, drawing them in.

…

President Trump, you can lead collaboration by reaching out to former allies President Xi Jinping and President Vladimir Putin for support. Despite past national self-interest, they remember your previous affection and admiration. The chance to join you on a high-stakes mission that could strengthen a three-way bond and restore your reputation is likely appealing.

…

President Trump, you’ve pledged to “make America great again." This mantra, embedded in our minds, has sparked something special. Perhaps deeper currents in our world align uniquely to help you fulfill your promise—potentially surprising us all.

Here’s to hoping that this unexpected and delightful journey toward true greatness becomes your enduring legacy!

Philosophically,

Freya Mathews

Freya Mathews is an Emeritus Professor of Environmental Philosophy at La Trobe University. She is the author of The Dao of Civilization: A Letter to China and The Ecological Self.

Please click here to review the full version of the Open Letter from Australian Professor Freya Mathews to President Donald J. Trump.

What is the Side of the Story that is Not Yet Decisive? Edited by Abraham A. van Kempen

VIEW | ACTIVISM, UNCENSORED: A CLASH OF INAUGURATION PROTESTS

Trump 2025 Inauguration reignites activism in Washington, DC.

Produced by Ford Fischer / News2Share with additional footage by TJ Jones and Will Allen-DuPraw for Activism Uncensored, a Collaboration with The Racket

Click Here to Watch the Video (25 minutes, 3 seconds)

By Ford Fischer and Matt Taibbi
News2Share and Substack.com
Jan 27, 2025

Pro- and anti-Trump protesters met on the streets of Washington, and caricatured lunacy primarily ensued. A 25-minute tour de force by Ford Fischer's News2Share crew

An accidental street collision in 1981 led to the phrase, "You got your chocolate in my peanut butter,” which ultimately launched Reese’s Peanut Butter Cup. In January 2025, “I love abortions!” clashed with "Fuck Antifa!” on the streets of Washington, creating who knows what, but the 25 minutes of subsequent News2Share coverage by Ford Fischer’s crew, including TJ Jones and Will Allen-DuPraw, were indeed interesting.

This reel contains numerous surprising moments, but one line from an utterly masked protester (no spoilers! I won’t reveal which movement) particularly caught my attention:

Q: Today, you’re standing in Malcolm X Park with a giant guillotine. Can you tell me about the intent behind that?

A: Um… I would say it’s art and open to interpretation. It’s subjective. I certainly have my reasons. Um, there are people I care about who are in jeopardy, who are likely to lose their rights to exist as they wish, love as they please, and be who they are meant to be. But this, this is a tangible symbol.

COME GET SUM: “It’s open to interpretation.”

Some scenes might be too sensitive for humor. Yet, this attempt to portray both sides of last week’s inauguration demonstrations adds another impressive piece to Ford’s expanding collection of historical video reels.

This time calls for an impartial perspective, and News2Share effectively allows powerful images of crucial moments to speak for themselves.

HOW HISTORIC IS TRUMP’S PRESIDENCY?

President Donald Trump delivers his inaugural address after being sworn in as the 47th president of the United States inside the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 20, 2025.

Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images

By Jeffrey A. Tucker
Epoch Times
29 January 2025

The peculiar situation of President Trump’s second term is significant. He is only the second person to serve non-consecutively after Grover Cleveland, who was in office in 1885 and 1893.

Then, the government was largely invisible to Americans, with an annual budget of $9.4 billion (inflation-adjusted). Today, it spends $6.82 trillion, or 72,000% more than before.

Let’s say the job has changed substantially.

In any job, key questions are what to do and what authority you have.

If managing millions of employees, overseeing the operations of 420 agencies, and controlling nearly $7 trillion in taxpayer spending is the answer to the first part, it’s too much for any single person.

If you can’t control your employees, you have a significant problem.

This has been the situation in American history for over a century. The job surpasses the office. Every new president notices this immediately. If they try to make an impact, they quickly encounter rules about independent agencies, civil service permanence, and conspiracies between established methods, the news media, and industrial backers.

The new CEO has a choice: take risky actions that might harm his popularity or maintain the status quo with minor adjustments.

It was never supposed to be this way.

The Constitution created a presidency to manage the executive branch, differing from most contemporary governments. Supporters of monarchy claimed that only someone skilled in statecraft could effectively fulfill the chief executive role.

The Founders countered this claim, stating that kings managed the realm, commanded armies, built cultures, and oversaw enterprises.

The president’s role is limited by a small central government, concentrating power in the states; thus, election occurs in a society valuing freedom.

The system functioned until it failed. As the government expanded, the federal civil service, created in 1883, accumulated knowledge, power, and essential functions. Over decades of conflict, economic downturn, and civic unrest, the presidency shifted from decisive to ceremonial.

The administrators managed all operations alongside media and industrial stakeholders.

Many realized this in the past four years, as the president appeared to lack influence. It echoed the last decades of the Soviet Union, where the head of state merely stood in for a vast, self-operating bureaucracy.

Nikita Khrushchev, the last Soviet premier who sought reforms, was removed from power and later spent years contentedly feeding pigeons, thankful for his survival.

When he became president in 2016, Trump lacked knowledge. As a businessman rather than a politician, he grasped government issues but thought he could run the country like a CEO, with millions implementing his policies.

The D.C. establishment was angry that he won without their support and tried to undermine his presidency. He faced false claims of winning via Russian influence, which were later disproven. However, conspiracies escalated into significant threats. Ultimately, the COVID-19 response, mail-in ballots, and a weak economy led to the collapse of Trump's first administration.

Trump refuses to accept defeat. He started employing legal tactics right after his loss. Supporters who protested against government corruption were labeled as “insurrectionists” and encouraged to breach the Capitol, which led to their imprisonment.

This was just the start. For four years, Trump endured lawfare, facing prison and property loss threats over minor technicalities from partisan enemies. Nevertheless, he secured the Republican nomination for a second term. The intense desire to prevent his ascent even culminated in assassination attempts, one of which occurred within a mere quarter inch of claiming his life.

Trump learned from his first term and collaborated with a skilled team to regain power. Now, the president is driven to change the system for the American people. This unprecedented situation explains the significant policy shift we are currently experiencing.

The irony is that if Trump regains presidential power over the executive and reduces Washington’s reach, restoring freedom in American life, he will fulfill the Founders’ vision of the presidency.

His mission includes executive orders reflecting common sense. Proclamations on free speech, immigration, diversity, gender, and regulations match mainstream Americans' desires. We lacked a bold, knowledgeable president to act.

The Trump team planned the first week years ago, expecting media and legal challenges to dominate the news cycle, shock the establishment, and impress voters. Witnessing this unprecedented event has been astounding.

FDR's first term moved quickly and comprehensively, showcasing executive power after a plot against the victor.

These momentous times signify a revival of the Founders’ perspectives on America and the Constitution. While it may seem challenging to accomplish this, Trump merits recognition for his attempts.

This alone deserves a prominent spot in the history of American government books.

Please click on this link to read the full version of Jeffrey Tucker’s ‘How Historic is Trump’s Presidency?’

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

JANUARY 28, 2025

Trump merchandise is sold outside the Capital One Arena for Donald Trump’s victory rally on 19 January 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Eric Thayer / Getty Images)

By Heather Cox Richardson
Substack.com
28 January 2025

In the 2024 presidential campaign, Trump distanced himself from Project 2025, a plan for his second term by right-wing groups led by the Heritage Foundation. The plan aimed to dismantle the nonpartisan civil service and replace it with loyal officers to a strong executive. This executive would control the Department of Justice and military, ultimately imposing Christian nationalism on the country.

The Heritage Foundation members behind Project 2025 align closely with Hungary's President Victor Orbán’s Danube Institute, mirroring his approach to eroding democracy for a white male Christian patriarchal dictatorship. On Monday, Jamelle Bouie of the New York Times noted, “It’s wild that their model for the U.S. is a country that would rival Mississippi as the poorest state if included.”

People opposed Project 2025. Trump denied knowledge despite many being involved in his first administration.

On January 24, Nik Popli noted in Time magazine that several authors of Project 2025 are likely to serve in Trump’s second administration. Nearly two-thirds of Trump's executive orders reflect the roughly 900-page document. Skye Perryman of Democracy Forward told Popli, “The real shame is Trump didn't level with Americans on his campaign. He didn't try to convince them this was his agenda, acting as if he had nothing to do with Project 2025 when he seeks to accelerate it.”

On January 27, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) guided agency heads on implementing “Schedule F,” a Trump-era plan to replace the nonpartisan civil service established in 1883 with loyalists. Although President Joe Biden revoked Schedule F, it has resurfaced in Trump’s second term as “Schedule Policy/Career.”

The plan removes civil service protections for thousands of federal workers. Don Kettl from the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy told Erich Wagner of Government Executive that the new rules assert, “executive branch officials must follow the president’s directives, with dismissal for noncompliance... It’s an unprecedented assertion of presidential authority under Article II of the Constitution."

Today, the Trump administration sent an email blast titled “Fork in the Road” to federal workers, offering to let them resign and keep their pay until September, a transparent attempt to clear places for loyalists. Judd Legum of Popular Information noted that this sure looked like Elon Musk was “spiking the ball,” as this was the same subject line he sent to Twitter employees when he bought the company. Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo looked at the buyout proposal and noted that “zero legal authority exists to do this.”

Last night, legal commentator Joyce White Vance highlighted the Trump administration’s attacks on the Department of Justice's independence. On Monday, Trump’s acting attorney general dismissed over a dozen lawyers who handled Trump's criminal prosecutions. An official stated that the acting attorney general “does not trust these officials to assist in implementing the President’s agenda.” In a clear act of gaslighting, the statement asserted: “This action aligns with the mission to end government weaponization.”

Vance asserts, "An administration cannot dismiss career federal prosecutors for political loyalties.” She warns that the ongoing witch hunt cautions federal employees about their loyalty to retain jobs. Trump cannot legally fire them but aims to deter others from diverging.

Trump seeks to control the military as a political tool. In his inaugural address, he claimed he'd allow the U.S. military to focus solely on “defeating America’s enemies.” However, the military's mission is “to deter war and ensure our nation's security," highlighting a fundamental difference.

Michael T. Klare states in The Nation that Trump’s Defense Secretary nominee, Pete Hegseth, focuses on fighting ‘Marxists’ in government and media instead of national security. Republican senators hesitated to confirm him, but Trump’s allies secured a 50–50 vote, with Vice President J.D. Vance casting the tie-breaking ballot due to shared right-wing beliefs.

Today, Dan Lamothe, Missy Ryan, and Alex Horton of the Washington Post reported that Hegseth stripped General Mark Milley of his security detail and clearance and launched an investigation into his behavior. Trump appointed Milley but despised him for opposing unconstitutional orders.

Amid attacks on the civil service, Justice Department, and military, the administration aims to bolster presidential power. Over the weekend, Trump defied a 2022 law limiting his ability to fire inspectors general, prompting the administration to pursue greater authority despite Republican indifference.

It ignores a 1974 law requiring the president to disburse funds appropriated by Congress, enacted after President Nixon tried to impound these funds to control Congress's power. Federal money belongs to the American people. The Project 2025 authors claim the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional, allowing the president to halt funding for Congressional priorities, reducing Congress from a lawmaking body to an advisory one.

In 2019, Trump tried to withhold Congress-approved funds for Ukraine to pressure President Zelensky to damage Joe Biden’s reputation. The House impeached him, but Republican senators acquitted him, fearing it would harm their party in the 2020 elections.

On Friday, the Trump administration froze all foreign aid. “We get tired of giving money to countries that hate us, don't we?" Trump said on Monday. However, American soft power has been vital in maintaining U.S. global influence since World War II. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) called the situation “dumb and murderous," emphasizing that many kids will die needlessly if U.S. food aid to famine-stricken Sudan is cut off. He noted that "the terrorists will gain" as funding for prisons housing ISIS offenders declines. Murphy stressed the goal is to weaken U.S. power globally, which supports China as it expands its assistance programs. China is where many of Trump’s billionaires manufacture products and pursue market opportunities. Is there a link?

U.S. aid groups are shocked. "The State Department's stop-work cable halts programs that support America's global leadership, creating vacuums for China and other adversaries," stated InterAction, the largest alliance of international aid organizations. "This stoppage disrupts critical life-saving efforts like clean water for infants, education, combating girls' trafficking, and providing vital medication. It halts assistance to key U.S. interest countries, including Taiwan, Syria, and Pakistan, and undermines decades of work through PEPFAR to ensure babies are born HIV-free.”

International aid organizations hoped for a reversal, but on Monday night, the Trump administration accused USAID leadership of circumventing its foreign aid freeze and placed many officials on leave. After an outcry, newly confirmed Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced a temporary waiver for certain “lifesaving humanitarian assistance,” though details remain unclear.

On Monday, Trump’s budget office strengthened its position by pausing all federal grants and loans, mandating a ban on diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, and cutting clean energy funding. According to the Washington Post’s Jeff Stein, Jacob Bogage, and Emily Davies, the memo warned that affected programs include financial aid for foreign aid, NGOs, DEI, gender ideology, and the Green New Deal.

Georgetown Law professor Josh Chafetz stated: "No plausible argument exists that the president can refuse to spend appropriated funds due to personal preferences. A claim that a president can spend unappropriated funds or refuse appropriated ones is extremely destructive to our constitutional order."

Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) stated: “President Trump has plunged the country into chaos. The administration halted nearly all federal funds, cutting billions for states, cities, schools, hospitals, businesses, and families. This threatens the average American in all regions. Disaster assistance, local law enforcement, rural hospitals, elderly aid, and food support are at risk.” Schumer added, “Congress approved these investments; they are law.”

Catherine Rampell of the Washington Post notes that the freeze likely includes discretionary spending, such as the Head Start program and WIC for mothers and infants. Representative Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ) stated that Trump’s order is “illegal, dictatorial, and will result in American deaths.”

Senator Angus King (I-ME) called Trump’s freeze on federal grants and loans “blatantly unconstitutional," labeling it a serious constitutional issue. He stated, “What happened last night is the most direct assault on Congress's authority in U.S. history."

A federal judge stayed the Trump administration’s freeze on federal funds. U.S. District Judge Loren L. AliKahn paused the measure until Monday evening while hearing arguments.

CNN host Jim Acosta, a Trump critic, announced he is leaving after management attempted to move him to a late-night slot. He cited covering Obama’s 2016 trip to Cuba, where he questioned Raul Castro about political prisoners, as a career highlight. As the son of a Cuban refugee, he learned never to bow to a tyrant. He stressed that the press must hold power accountable and intends to continue that mission. His final message: Don’t succumb to lies or fear. Hold onto truth and hope. If necessary, repeat this: I will not give in to lies or fear. Please share it on social media.

Please click on this link to read the full version of Heather Cox Wilkerson’s Letter Dated 28 January 2025.

—

Notes:

https://time.com/7209901/donald-trump-executive-actions-project-2025/

https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2025/01/new-schedule-f-guidance-shows-trump-white-house-rearing-fight/402532/

https://apnews.com/article/cdc-who-trump-548cf18b1c409c7d22e17311ccdfe1f6

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/01/27/white-house-pauses-federal-grants/

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trumps-strict-foreign-funding-freeze-sparks-panic-international/story?id=118159432

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/27/health/pepfar-trump-freeze.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/01/27/trump-presidency-news/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/24/us-health-agencies-funding-cuts-trump

https://apnews.com/article/justice-department-special-counsel-trump-046ce32dbad712e72e500c32ecc20f2f

VIEW | INTERVIEW WITH TUCKER CARLSON: LOOKING BACK ON EIGHT YEARS OF POLITICAL MYSTERIES

Good news was lost amid a controversial inauguration week: a slew of fascinating investigations had launched. Is a golden age of revelatory journalism coming?

Click here to check out the interview on X/Twitter, which helpfully contains time-stamped content. It was a fun, wide-ranging, and oddly optimistic discussion that covered topics from pardons to Nord Stream, political espionage, and the “very nervous” people in Washington.

By Matt Taibbi
Substack.com
27 January 2025

Last week was unusually quiet here as I traveled to meet Tucker Carlson for a positive discussion. Numerous investigations began last week addressing various issues, from the misdeeds of the intelligence community to the origins of COVID-19. Despite Tucker's skepticism, these developments suggest that we may see another wave of Church Committee-style revelations. These inquiries are expected to generate ample news, spurring reports and conversations across multiple platforms. This will help bolster a growing alternative media landscape, which is essential during the Trump years to fill the void created by the decline of the corporate press.

Thanks to Tucker for taking time between trips for a great discussion.

GLENN DIESEN | MACKINDER'S MARITIME HEGEMONY AND THE RETURN OF EURASIAN LAND POWERS

Russia, a land power, has been historically weakened by limited access to maritime corridors. However, its vast land could become a strength if it connects the Eurasian continent to challenge naval dominance.

By Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
23 January 2025

Halford Mackinder created a framework for the divide-and-rule strategy used by British and American maritime hegemonies. He proposed a world divided into sea powers and land powers. The Mongols, the last land power to dominate Eurasia, declined as European maritime powers rose in the early 16th century, connecting the world by sea.

The UK and US pursue hegemonic strategies to control Eurasia from the maritime periphery. Island states, like the US, don’t require large armies due to few powerful neighbors and invest in navies for security. They enhance security by preventing a hegemon or hostile alliance from emerging in Eurasia. This pragmatic balance of power was expressed by Harry Truman in 1941: “If we see Germany winning, we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany.” .[1] A maritime power is more likely to become a hegemon as key maritime corridors are under its control.

Railroads Revived the Rivalry Between Sea-Powers and Land-Powers

Russia, a land power, has been historically weakened by limited access to maritime corridors. However, its vast land could become a strength if it connects the Eurasian continent to challenge naval dominance.

The invention of railways allowed Russia to adopt the nomadic traits of the Mongols and diminish the maritime powers’ advantage. Railroads through Central Asia in the mid-19th century led to the Great Game, enabling Russia to access British India. By the 1890s, the trans-Siberian railroad emerged, challenging British interests in East Asia. In 1904, Mackinder warned:

               “A generation ago, steam and the Suez Canal seemed to enhance sea-power's mobility compared to land-power. Railways mainly fed ocean commerce. However, transcontinental railways are changing land-power conditions, especially in EuroAsia's remote areas where timber and stone for roads are lacking.” [2]

Mackinder warned that a German-Russian alliance could create a robust center controlling Eurasia, advocating for a divide-and-rule strategy.

               "A shift in power to the pivot state could lead to its expansion into marginal Euro-Asian lands, allowing for extensive continental resources for fleet-building, bringing world dominance closer. This may occur if Germany allies with Russia." [3]

US Hegemony from the Periphery of Eurasia

Mackinder’s ideas evolved into Nicolas Spykman’s 1942 Rimland Theory, which argued that the US needed to control Eurasia’s maritime periphery. This required a partnership with Britain for the western periphery and a protective policy toward Japan for the eastern periphery. [4] The US had to follow Britain’s strategy of restricting Russia’s access to maritime routes.

               “For 200 years, since Peter the Great, Russia has sought to break through surrounding border states to reach the ocean. Geography and naval power have consistently thwarted her.” [5]

Spykman's influence resulted in the term “Spykman-Kennan thesis of containment.” George Kennan, who shaped containment policies against the Soviet Union, advocated for an “Eurasian balance of power” to prevent any power left by Germany and Japan from filling the vacuum that could threaten Western maritime interests. ”.[6]

From 1948 onward, US National Security Council reports discussed Eurasian containment policies using Mackinder’s heartland theory. This is highlighted in the US National Security Strategy of 1988:

               The United States' core security interests would be at risk if a hostile nation or coalition dominated the Eurasian landmass, viewed as the world's heartland. We fought two world wars to prevent this.[7]

Kissinger outlined how the US should prevent Britain's divide-and-rule strategy from Eurasia's maritime periphery:

               For three centuries, British leaders assumed that a single European dominant power could challenge Great Britain’s command of the seas and threaten its independence. The United States, also an island off Eurasia, should have resisted the domination of Europe or Asia by one power and, even more, the control of both continents by the same power.[8]

Henry Kissinger adopted Mackinder's Eurasian ideas, advocating for decoupling China from the Soviet Union to mirror the division of Russia and Germany.

Continue reading...

ANALYSIS | HOW A CONSERVATIVE CULTURE SHIFT UNDER TRUMP COULD SAVE THE WORLD

Paradoxically, a turn away from ‘liberal’ and ‘progressive’ values has the potential to defuse some of America’s belligerence.

FILE PHOTO: US President Donald J. Trump gestures to a crowd of supporters at the Phoenix Convention Center during a 2020 Trump rally. © Joe Sohm / Visions of America / Universal Images Group via Getty Images

By Tarik Cyril Amar, a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory

@tarikcyrilamartarikcyrilamar.substack.comtarikcyrilamar.com

HomeWorld News
24 Jan, 2025 19:38

Recently, the conservative Wall Street Journal published two intriguing pieces. One noted that "MAGA is taking back the culture," while the other, by Walter Russell Mead, argued that "American exceptionalism is back." Together, they raise vital questions.

The phrase “MAGA is taking back the culture” suggests that Donald Trump's return to the presidency marks a shift in US culture. Trump maintained a high political ground during his first term despite chaotic challenges. This time, however, trends in public sentiment are aligning with Trumpism. Traditional values are gaining popularity; a June 2023 Gallup poll revealed that 38% of Americans identify as socially conservative and 44% as economically conservative, the highest since 2012.

Evidence now includes football players doing Trump’s shimmy, Disney removing a transgender storyline from an animated series, and MAGA caps appearing at elite campuses. As Antonio Gramsci might have sighed, it seems reactionaries have ideological hegemony again.

Mead’s “American Exceptionalism is Back” claims that only in the US can right-wing populism and high-tech capitalism form a lasting coalition. He suggests this combination reconciles inherent tensions, like those between Steve Bannon and Elon Musk, paving the way for an American resurgence. The conservative thinker warns that the US could “renew itself in unlikely and unseemly ways.”

Mead argues about class, though he avoids such terms. He suggests America has a unique magic—whether called the American Dream or Philipp Roth’s “American Berserk”—allowing the angry MAGA masses below and Bannon’s techno-feudalists around Trump to coexist and cooperate, serving the glory of the “indispensable nation.”

Read more
How Trump’s return reverberates in a war-torn African nation

It remains to be seen how much wishful thinking survives reality. Mead does not address the role this renewed America aims for in the international order: the same tired “primacy.” If so, things might become quite “unseemly,” not due to American opinions but because much of the world now rejects US domination with no way back.

What are the chances for America becoming a less rogue and asocial member of the international community? While Trumpist braggadocio about Canada, Greenland, and Panama may seem significant, these claims and threats aren’t the whole story. Much will depend on the relationship with rival powers like China and Russia and the rising Global South.

We must revisit the broader social-conservative shift in the US. This shift shows that America can be unexceptional and impacts domestic and international politics. Here’s how:

               Neat ideologies are often academic, emphasizing concepts and distinctions but lacking real-world impact. In contrast, impactful ideological movements are sprawling and messy, recognizable yet resistant to precise definition.

               Currently, we observe a global phenomenon unfolding in real time, referred to as "social conservatism," "family values," "traditionalism,” or, for critics, "cultural backlash." While these terms differ slightly—some are broader (family values) and others more specific (traditionalism)—they indicate a significant shift in attitudes and politics.

               A near-unanimous consensus indicates this shift is widespread, from India and Russia to the US, with varied effects. This has been state policy in Russia for over a decade and is also emerging in the US. Notable developments include a new German party that merges leftist economic justice with conservative cultural views and a significant conservative backlash against “liberalizing gender debates” in Sweden.

Read more
Trump roars back into office: Why US vassals are panicking.

The relationship between this large-scale change in the Zeitgeist and politics is akin to tectonic plates and earthquakes: plates move slowly but surely, while politics worldwide feel the impact, especially during clashes. And yes, for the theoretically minded, ideas can drive historical change; Marx, have mercy on me.

The two most active plates, which have clashed for decades, are easily identifiable. One side reflects the “silent revolution” of the 1970s, which began symbolically in 1968. It saw a shift from traditional to, for lack of better terms, “progressive” values and attitudes.

In neo-liberal capitalist practice, there’s an emphasis on individualism and gratification; a neglect of traditional moral and religious restraints and authoritative high-culture canons; a demand for equality in consumer and sexual lifestyles (but not in income, wealth, or power—socialism is off-limits); and a form of identity politics prioritizing equity among competing individuals over social justice, measured through tradeable personal qualities. The importance of the nation is diminished. Under these rules, one is 'free' to buy marijuana, may disregard classics, finds LGBTQ+ status advantageous for careers, and is prompted to mock extreme patriotism.

The contours of the opposing tectonic plate are precise: demands to adhere to traditional moral standards on family life, education, gender roles, and sex; a yearning for cultural canons; a rejection of secularism for religion or values with religious backing; and a refusal of liberal identity politics and their impacts.

The nation, often seen in civilizational terms, is profound. In such a world, you are "free" to be yourself but should not be too individual. You must know your classics, especially national ones. Being a straight family person can assist your career (even if you cheat, like some American presidents) and avoid criticizing patriotism.

Read more
Musk and Trump can bring a new era that blends technology and tradition.

In international politics, some progressives favor a secularized crusading ideology instead of pacifism. They view adversaries as fair game for pressure, demonization, civil-society subversion, color revolutions, economic warfare, and even direct warfare. Conversely, social conservatism emphasizes state sovereignty to protect national distinctiveness, rejecting progressive elites as globalists deemed disloyal to their countries.

Though this is uncertain, the U.S. might adopt a less aggressive stance toward global social conservatism. This change could stem from a decline in its secular crusading spirit, which would be an improvement and could ease significant ideological conflict.

Remember the distinction between defined academic ideologies and broad, influential ideological movements? A convergence, not an agreement, of Zeitgeist and attitudes extending beyond politics might offer stability. Not improvement or progress, but stability is crucial in our precarious world.

BUILDING THE BRIDGE! | A WAY TO GET TO KNOW THE OTHER AND ONE ANOTHER

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanism for Many to Move Mountains

Photo Credit: Abraham A. van Kempen, our home away from home on the Dead Sea

By Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor
Updated 19 January 2024

Those who commit to 'healing our broken humanity' build intercultural bridges to learn to know and understand one another and others. Readers who thumb through the Building the Bridge (BTB) pages are not mindless sheep following other mindless sheep. They THINK. They want to be at the forefront of making a difference. They're in search of the bigger picture to expand their horizons. They don't need BTB or anyone else to confirm their biases.

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanism for Many to Move Mountains

Accurate knowledge promotes understanding, dispels prejudice, and awakens the desire to learn more. Words have an extraordinary power to bring people together, divide them, forge bonds of friendship, or provoke hostility. Modern technology offers unprecedented possibilities for good, fostering harmony and reconciliation. Yet its misuse can do untold harm, leading to misunderstanding, prejudice, and conflict.

Continue reading

A Free Trial for Life – SUBSCRIBE NOW!

• It's quick and straightforward.

• We won’t ask for your credit card number.

• Just enter your e-mail address to receive your complimentary free-for-life subscription to our newsletter.

• Please include your First and Last Name.

• We won’t share or sell your e-mail address.

_________________________

Related Articles Recently Posted on www.buildingthebridgefoundation.com:

OUR FRIDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR WEDNESDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR MONDAY EDITION

________________________

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of the Building the Bridge Foundation