"But as a businessman, Gov. Braun knows something very important: risk and uncertainty are kryptonite to investment. If he pulled the plug on a bunch of deals his predecessor had been working on, what would that do to Indiana’s reputation as a place to invest."
Minor point, but I don't like this example at all. These deals (i.e., ripping off taxpayers to transfer resources to favored business interests) do not encourage investment on net, so I would expect pulling the plug on these deals to have only a positive effect, if any, on the investment decisions of people not receiving the graft. It would be better for a state to commit (if it could) to creating a level playing field for businesses, rather than a place where cronyist promises are kept (which is in the reputational interest of individual politicians, but not the well-being of Indianans).
Trump has done some stupid things that did not even have anything to do with his campaign promises (e.g. treating Canada as an enemy). But I think that some of the changes in foreign policy make the USA more dependable than we were before. One clear example is defunding left wing propaganda from USAID
Going around the world and trying to push the LGBTQWERTY+ agenda down everyone's throats hardly made us a good ally.
As a Canadian conservative who is generally sympathetic to a lot of Trump’s agenda, I agree that foreign nations and people have lost trust in the US. This is likely hard to see from within the US as it is a semi-consistent articulation of America First that clearly has popular support but it has consequences for the rest of the world that will far outlive Trump’s presidency.
Trump’s musing about making Canada his 51st state and continued trade aggression against us has fundamentally and I would argue at least in the short term entirely changed Canadians views of the US. It even upended our most recent election where we saw a 25 point change in support for our Liberal party in a matter of a few weeks. I’m not saying Canadians are being rational or wise in taking this view but the general consensus among the vast majority of Canadians is that we can no longer trust America. You can argue there was legitimate reasons for why Trump has treated Canada the way he has and I’m not going to debate those but the reality is that for a majority of Canadians they no longer trust America and that is something that will last beyond Trump’s term.
Nutty indeed, but however the free trade issue is a different matter: Canada has long had some fairly large tariffs against a range of American products.
The conservative tree house already laid out that our rival nation to the north has no functional economy outside of assembly of parts for China. They'll get what they deserve when the usmca is renegotiate next year. Maybe burning down our white house isn't so goddamn funny after all? Maybe that bullshit of fighting the commonwealth wars of the 20th century was a blip in history?
You clearly don’t understand the value of allies and friends in international relations or the economic value Canadian natural resources provide to American manufacturers, so instead of trying to engage with a hateful and scornful person I chose to bless you.
Interests...no such things as allies especially with a nation we've fought two hot wars against and still serves a dumb king and before that queen. We have enough here to exploit without groveling to Tories or dying for their idiotic cousins across the pond. If our interests align temporarily whatever. But there are no more of your German enemies to fight and we will renegotiate our trade agreements like the one coming up in 2026 to our maximum interests. Too bad so sad we won't snowbirds sucking up space on our highways anymore.
Our national anthem is what it is and for good reason. We know who are original enemies were and who likes to say they burned down our white house. They can be treated as the separate entity that they are and we will do business according to our highest interests. Not the interests of fucking Ontario snowbirds and tourists.
Knowing that we aren't "allies" and we will do business only in the highest benefits of our people, not to keep some stupid post ww2 or cold war world together at the expense of the American heartland. Done being a doormat for anglo tories, eu socialists and the Asian outposts. We will do the best deals for ourselves and through our history know that "friends" and "enemies" mean nothing. Our original enemies were the tories and we are not duty bound to forever be their stooges in perpetuity.
Well that was a stupid and pointless answer that addressed nothing. Love for my heritage american neighbors and pray for the end of this idiotic American experiment in empire and the governments obsession with siding with our traditional adversaries at the expense of real Americans. If that means no more Americans being fleeced by Canucks snowbirds or dying for commonwealth and euros, all the better for trumps policies.
Why should we trust or care about what Canadians think? Because of some stupid Toronto snowbirds in Sarasota? Canadians sided with German monarchs both in the 1770s and 1810s and still brag about burning down the white house. We are rival nations like every other nation around the globe. F Canada and the king and queen we fought to get rid of all those years ago.
Watching trump discredit the horrible post ww2 order that gutted the heartland for thw benefit of assholes in nyc, la and dc is beautiful.
Getting out of our entanglement with the stupid euros is an added bonus. And for the record, the commonwealth isn't our friend either as we've gone to direct war against them more than Russia. Those Canucks still have monuments to Benedict Arnold and brag about burning down our white house. We have national interests and being the chump for other nations who laugh at us is not our real national interest anymore, if it ever was.
I also think that Aaron is missing the big picture. Trump is restructuring the basis on which the United States deals with other countries by basing it on mutual self-interest, which is the most and maybe the only durable foundation for international relations.
As an example, our natural allies in the Middle East are those nations that oppose radical Islam, want a stable equilibrium in the region, and are interested in economic development. Trump has clearly identified those as America’s priority interests as well, as evidenced by his speech in Saudi Arabia earlier this year. Trump's diplomacy based on mutual interest produced the Abraham Accords in his first term, and there is a good chance those accords will expand to include, most prominently, Saudi Arabia – assuming either negotiations or Israeli military action can restore stability in Gaza.
If the Abraham Accords are expanded, no new post-Trump Administration will abandon them, any more than Biden abandoned the original arrangement. It’s true that Biden attempted to reverse Trump’s Iranian policy, and resurrect Obama’s, but that went nowhere; and now that the Israelis and the United States have decimated Iran’s proxy network and destroyed its nuclear program, it is not likely to happen again.
In Europe, the NATO alliance is growing in strength because of the admission of the Finns and Swedes, because Europe is relying on American rather than Russian energy, and because the other NATO allies, and especially Germany, are increasing their defense spending. Trump has been arguing for the latter two since his first term, and the Europeans have now accepted them. They also recognize that it is in their interests to stabilize Eastern Europe by finding an end to the Ukraine war. There is tension about the terms of any cease fire, but the recent Oval Office meeting between Trump and the other NATO leaders was a striking example of the renewed strength of American leadership.
In Trump's first term, he discontinued the policy of engagement with China and recognizing that the U.S. is in an essentially adversarial position with Beijing. That was welcomed by our formal allies and other countries like Vietnam. The Administration is continuing to strengthen those partnerships, as for example by welcoming South Korean investment in America’s shipbuilding industry and encouraging Japan as it becomes more assertive in its own defense and in defense of the region.
Again, Biden didn’t reverse the fundamental redirection of our China policy which Trump established. Neither will any succeeding Administration, because it is based on a recognition of vital national interests that our allies share.
I’m not saying that Trump’s tactics are always the right ones. What I am saying is that Trump is the first post-Cold War President to clearly identify those interests which constitute American national security, and he is pursuing them with purpose. He is a tactically unpredictable but strategically consistent foreign policy realist. That has allowed the U.S. to regain the initiative globally, and it means that if Trump’s policies are successful they will be very difficult to reverse, regardless of what the career people in the State Department think.
I also think that Aaron is missing the big picture. Trump is restructuring the basis on which the United States deals with other countries by basing it on mutual self-interest, which is the most and maybe the only durable foundation for international relations.
As an example, our natural allies in the Middle East are those nations that oppose radical Islam, want a stable equilibrium in the region, and are interested in economic development. Trump has clearly identified those as America’s priority interests as well, as evidenced by his speech in Saudi Arabia earlier this year. Trump's diplomacy based on mutual interest produced the Abraham Accords in his first term, and there is a good chance those accords will expand to include, most prominently, Saudi Arabia – assuming either negotiations or Israeli military action can restore stability in Gaza.
If the Abraham Accords are expanded, no new post-Trump Administration will abandon them, any more than Biden abandoned the original arrangement. It’s true that Biden attempted to reverse Trump’s Iranian policy, and resurrect Obama’s, but that went nowhere; and now that the Israelis and the United States have decimated Iran’s proxy network and destroyed its nuclear program, it is not likely to happen again.
In Europe, the NATO alliance is growing in strength because of the admission of the Finns and Swedes, because Europe is relying on American rather than Russian energy, and because the other NATO allies, and especially Germany, are increasing their defense spending. Trump has been arguing for the latter two since his first term, and the Europeans have now agreed. They also have recognized that it's in their interest to find an end to the war in Ukraine that stabilizes Eastern Europe. There is tension about the terms of any cease fire, but the recent Oval Office meeting between Trump and the other NATO leaders was a striking example of the renewed strength of American leadership.
In Trump's first term, he laid a new basis for our East Asian alliances by clearly discontinuing the policy of engagement with China and recognizing that the U.S. is in an essentially adversarial position with Beijing. That was welcomed by our formal allies and other countries like Vietnam. The Administration is continuing to strengthen those partnerships, as for example by welcoming South Korean investment in America’s shipbuilding industry and encouraging Japan as it becomes more assertive in its own defense and in defense of the region.
Again, Biden didn’t reverse the fundamental redirection of our China policy which Trump established. Neither will any succeeding Administration, because it is based on a recognition of vital national interests that our allies share.
I’m not saying that Trump’s tactics are always the right ones. What I am saying is that Trump is the first post-Cold War President to clearly identify those interests which constitute American national security, and then to pursue them with purpose. He is a tactically unpredictable but strategically consistent foreign policy realist. That has allowed the U.S. to regain the initiative globally, and it means that Trump’s policies will be difficult to reverse, regardless of what the career people in the State Department think.
The intimation that Trump makes waves for self-aggrandizement seems off the mark, considering that his actions support a coherent vision and strategy, for which he was elected.
Not that he doesn't self-aggrandize, but one is left to wonder whether that is also not mostly tactical.
Aaron, my comment was directed at your claim that Trump was discrediting the United States as a trusted partner for foreign countries. I believe the opposite is true, at least on a strategic level.
I think countries can trust that Trump will consistently pursue American interests, as he has defined them, and that therefore, when their interests and ours overlap, Trump will be a willing and faithful partner in joint efforts. For example, the Saudis know that Trump wants stability in the Middle East and economic connections with the Kingdom that benefit the United States, and, conversely, that promoting democracy is much less important to him. Therefore the Saudis can trust that they can work with Trump on issues like the Abraham Accords, or stabilizing Syria, or suppressing the Houthis in Yemen, without Trump pulling the rug out from under them by condemning their authoritarian practices.
Ukraine is another example. Trump made clear from the beginning that ending the war was in America's interest, and that the peace formula he is aiming at is that Ukraine trades territory but gets sovereignty and security in return. After an initial squabble, Trump lined up Zelensky and Europe behind that formula, and the group is now working together to get Putin to the negotiating table.
You can agree or disagree with how Trump has defined our interests, or with how he is pursuing them. My point is that Trump is clearly pursuing a realist foreign policy based on national interest, and that such a foreign policy creates strategic predictability that fosters stable partnerships were there are mutual interests to support them. Other countries know where they stand in the big picture -- though Trump, being Trump, is and will remain tactically unpredictable so that he can wrong foot our adversaries and get as much as possible out of our friends.
Whether it will all work or not I don't know. But if it does, we're going to see a different and better world four years from now, and as I wrote before, the next Administration, whoever runs it, will accept the benefits regardless of what the career people think.
I think this whole take misses the mark. The 'Great Man" theory of history is something that historians like to talk about, but it is not reality. Great men arise because they get in front of a movement or trend that has been building, and they ride it or lead it or help shape it. Their greatness is in sensing the movement and then getting in front of it.
Trump has gotten in front of movement that has been building since the early 1990s when the Soviet Union went extinct. The US is returning to its pre-WWII history of not going after monsters abroad. Worldwide communism was an existential threat to the US which caused us to take the lead in global affairs by rebuilding Europe and Japan as well as developing alliances to fight communism which was using the ravages left by WWII to spread itself. We allowed protective tariffs for other nations to help them recover and to build alliances against communism (USSR and China). That period of history is over. Europe and Japan have been long rebuilt, and Russia is a third world nation that cannot even defeat its next-door neighbor - Ukraine. China is still troublesome, and we are working to contain them.
People tend to forget that this movement of America first - which has its roots in the1930s - began to resurface in the 1992 election where Ross Perot captured 20% of the popular vote by bringing attention to the "big sucking sound" that was hollowing out America. Trump flirted with the Reform Party back in the early 2000s and then led the remaking of the Republican Party.
JD Vance who lived the experience as he articulated in his book - Hillbilly Elegy - is the heir apparent to this movement and will most likely win a landslide victory in 2028 to solidify what Trump is instituting. America will not be the indispensable nation in the world, and we will not be propping up the rest of the world's economies. This is not 3D chess or a great man - it is the flow of history - which Trump got in front of.
Undoubtedly, Trump sensed that there was a moment for him to glom onto social trends. But I don't see how anyone other than Trump could have pulled off what he did in getting elected. It will be very interesting to see if any of his would be successors has what it takes to even win the presidency, much less accomplish anything.
Well I have to disagree. While Trump is a unique individual someone else would have had to break the course America was on because it was unsustainable. We could not go on policing and propping up the rest of the world. Both parties alluded to changing the course but were stuck with problems inherent to their political party. An outsider was needed. That’s what Perot attempted but he was too early.
As I said Trump flirted with the Perot’s Reform Party but realized it couldn’t accomplish what was needed. It was impossible for the Democrat Party to make the correction because they are wedded to the status quo of a large federal government, the current university system and international relations. I would agree with you that Trump is making these changes in a more rapid manner than one might expect and in that respect so he appears to be the “great man.”
But then again since God is sovereign Trump was selected by Him for this job, so ultimately you are correct.
I tend to agree that the attempts to suppress America First populism are failing, especially with younger generations as this Substack has mentioned previously.
My question in response to the fact (it seems like a factual statement to me) that Trump is undermining our reliability as an international partner would be this-
Do the negative benefits of that decline in reliability (less friendly trade, more complicated diplomacy, etc) in the long run outweigh the perceived positive outcomes of that decline (less reliance by our allies on US military hegemony, less foreign aid leaving the country, etc)?
"But as a businessman, Gov. Braun knows something very important: risk and uncertainty are kryptonite to investment. If he pulled the plug on a bunch of deals his predecessor had been working on, what would that do to Indiana’s reputation as a place to invest."
Minor point, but I don't like this example at all. These deals (i.e., ripping off taxpayers to transfer resources to favored business interests) do not encourage investment on net, so I would expect pulling the plug on these deals to have only a positive effect, if any, on the investment decisions of people not receiving the graft. It would be better for a state to commit (if it could) to creating a level playing field for businesses, rather than a place where cronyist promises are kept (which is in the reputational interest of individual politicians, but not the well-being of Indianans).
Trump has done some stupid things that did not even have anything to do with his campaign promises (e.g. treating Canada as an enemy). But I think that some of the changes in foreign policy make the USA more dependable than we were before. One clear example is defunding left wing propaganda from USAID
Going around the world and trying to push the LGBTQWERTY+ agenda down everyone's throats hardly made us a good ally.
As a Canadian conservative who is generally sympathetic to a lot of Trump’s agenda, I agree that foreign nations and people have lost trust in the US. This is likely hard to see from within the US as it is a semi-consistent articulation of America First that clearly has popular support but it has consequences for the rest of the world that will far outlive Trump’s presidency.
Trump’s musing about making Canada his 51st state and continued trade aggression against us has fundamentally and I would argue at least in the short term entirely changed Canadians views of the US. It even upended our most recent election where we saw a 25 point change in support for our Liberal party in a matter of a few weeks. I’m not saying Canadians are being rational or wise in taking this view but the general consensus among the vast majority of Canadians is that we can no longer trust America. You can argue there was legitimate reasons for why Trump has treated Canada the way he has and I’m not going to debate those but the reality is that for a majority of Canadians they no longer trust America and that is something that will last beyond Trump’s term.
The attacks on Canada were pretty nutty in my view. It's one could we should have free trade with!
Nutty indeed, but however the free trade issue is a different matter: Canada has long had some fairly large tariffs against a range of American products.
The conservative tree house already laid out that our rival nation to the north has no functional economy outside of assembly of parts for China. They'll get what they deserve when the usmca is renegotiate next year. Maybe burning down our white house isn't so goddamn funny after all? Maybe that bullshit of fighting the commonwealth wars of the 20th century was a blip in history?
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2025/08/29/mexico-is-doing-what-canada-is-ignoring-preparing-for-2026-usmca-renegotiation/
You clearly don’t understand the value of allies and friends in international relations or the economic value Canadian natural resources provide to American manufacturers, so instead of trying to engage with a hateful and scornful person I chose to bless you.
Do Canucks still have monuments standing to Benedict Arnold? Some "allies".
And now france, Germany and uk are bankrupt and going to the imf. Some allies if they ever were ones besides sucking the American taxpayer dry.
Interests...no such things as allies especially with a nation we've fought two hot wars against and still serves a dumb king and before that queen. We have enough here to exploit without groveling to Tories or dying for their idiotic cousins across the pond. If our interests align temporarily whatever. But there are no more of your German enemies to fight and we will renegotiate our trade agreements like the one coming up in 2026 to our maximum interests. Too bad so sad we won't snowbirds sucking up space on our highways anymore.
Because, as we all know, it is in our interests to deliberately antagonize our neighbors. Grow up.
Our national anthem is what it is and for good reason. We know who are original enemies were and who likes to say they burned down our white house. They can be treated as the separate entity that they are and we will do business according to our highest interests. Not the interests of fucking Ontario snowbirds and tourists.
Are you done with your temper tantrum? If so, please provide evidence for how being deliberately provocative is acting in "our highest interests."
Knowing that we aren't "allies" and we will do business only in the highest benefits of our people, not to keep some stupid post ww2 or cold war world together at the expense of the American heartland. Done being a doormat for anglo tories, eu socialists and the Asian outposts. We will do the best deals for ourselves and through our history know that "friends" and "enemies" mean nothing. Our original enemies were the tories and we are not duty bound to forever be their stooges in perpetuity.
Have a blessed sabbath. May the Lord give your soul some grace to love your neighbor as yourself. God Bless you.
Well that was a stupid and pointless answer that addressed nothing. Love for my heritage american neighbors and pray for the end of this idiotic American experiment in empire and the governments obsession with siding with our traditional adversaries at the expense of real Americans. If that means no more Americans being fleeced by Canucks snowbirds or dying for commonwealth and euros, all the better for trumps policies.
Why should we trust or care about what Canadians think? Because of some stupid Toronto snowbirds in Sarasota? Canadians sided with German monarchs both in the 1770s and 1810s and still brag about burning down the white house. We are rival nations like every other nation around the globe. F Canada and the king and queen we fought to get rid of all those years ago.
Watching trump discredit the horrible post ww2 order that gutted the heartland for thw benefit of assholes in nyc, la and dc is beautiful.
Getting out of our entanglement with the stupid euros is an added bonus. And for the record, the commonwealth isn't our friend either as we've gone to direct war against them more than Russia. Those Canucks still have monuments to Benedict Arnold and brag about burning down our white house. We have national interests and being the chump for other nations who laugh at us is not our real national interest anymore, if it ever was.
I also think that Aaron is missing the big picture. Trump is restructuring the basis on which the United States deals with other countries by basing it on mutual self-interest, which is the most and maybe the only durable foundation for international relations.
As an example, our natural allies in the Middle East are those nations that oppose radical Islam, want a stable equilibrium in the region, and are interested in economic development. Trump has clearly identified those as America’s priority interests as well, as evidenced by his speech in Saudi Arabia earlier this year. Trump's diplomacy based on mutual interest produced the Abraham Accords in his first term, and there is a good chance those accords will expand to include, most prominently, Saudi Arabia – assuming either negotiations or Israeli military action can restore stability in Gaza.
If the Abraham Accords are expanded, no new post-Trump Administration will abandon them, any more than Biden abandoned the original arrangement. It’s true that Biden attempted to reverse Trump’s Iranian policy, and resurrect Obama’s, but that went nowhere; and now that the Israelis and the United States have decimated Iran’s proxy network and destroyed its nuclear program, it is not likely to happen again.
In Europe, the NATO alliance is growing in strength because of the admission of the Finns and Swedes, because Europe is relying on American rather than Russian energy, and because the other NATO allies, and especially Germany, are increasing their defense spending. Trump has been arguing for the latter two since his first term, and the Europeans have now accepted them. They also recognize that it is in their interests to stabilize Eastern Europe by finding an end to the Ukraine war. There is tension about the terms of any cease fire, but the recent Oval Office meeting between Trump and the other NATO leaders was a striking example of the renewed strength of American leadership.
In Trump's first term, he discontinued the policy of engagement with China and recognizing that the U.S. is in an essentially adversarial position with Beijing. That was welcomed by our formal allies and other countries like Vietnam. The Administration is continuing to strengthen those partnerships, as for example by welcoming South Korean investment in America’s shipbuilding industry and encouraging Japan as it becomes more assertive in its own defense and in defense of the region.
Again, Biden didn’t reverse the fundamental redirection of our China policy which Trump established. Neither will any succeeding Administration, because it is based on a recognition of vital national interests that our allies share.
I’m not saying that Trump’s tactics are always the right ones. What I am saying is that Trump is the first post-Cold War President to clearly identify those interests which constitute American national security, and he is pursuing them with purpose. He is a tactically unpredictable but strategically consistent foreign policy realist. That has allowed the U.S. to regain the initiative globally, and it means that if Trump’s policies are successful they will be very difficult to reverse, regardless of what the career people in the State Department think.
I also think that Aaron is missing the big picture. Trump is restructuring the basis on which the United States deals with other countries by basing it on mutual self-interest, which is the most and maybe the only durable foundation for international relations.
As an example, our natural allies in the Middle East are those nations that oppose radical Islam, want a stable equilibrium in the region, and are interested in economic development. Trump has clearly identified those as America’s priority interests as well, as evidenced by his speech in Saudi Arabia earlier this year. Trump's diplomacy based on mutual interest produced the Abraham Accords in his first term, and there is a good chance those accords will expand to include, most prominently, Saudi Arabia – assuming either negotiations or Israeli military action can restore stability in Gaza.
If the Abraham Accords are expanded, no new post-Trump Administration will abandon them, any more than Biden abandoned the original arrangement. It’s true that Biden attempted to reverse Trump’s Iranian policy, and resurrect Obama’s, but that went nowhere; and now that the Israelis and the United States have decimated Iran’s proxy network and destroyed its nuclear program, it is not likely to happen again.
In Europe, the NATO alliance is growing in strength because of the admission of the Finns and Swedes, because Europe is relying on American rather than Russian energy, and because the other NATO allies, and especially Germany, are increasing their defense spending. Trump has been arguing for the latter two since his first term, and the Europeans have now agreed. They also have recognized that it's in their interest to find an end to the war in Ukraine that stabilizes Eastern Europe. There is tension about the terms of any cease fire, but the recent Oval Office meeting between Trump and the other NATO leaders was a striking example of the renewed strength of American leadership.
In Trump's first term, he laid a new basis for our East Asian alliances by clearly discontinuing the policy of engagement with China and recognizing that the U.S. is in an essentially adversarial position with Beijing. That was welcomed by our formal allies and other countries like Vietnam. The Administration is continuing to strengthen those partnerships, as for example by welcoming South Korean investment in America’s shipbuilding industry and encouraging Japan as it becomes more assertive in its own defense and in defense of the region.
Again, Biden didn’t reverse the fundamental redirection of our China policy which Trump established. Neither will any succeeding Administration, because it is based on a recognition of vital national interests that our allies share.
I’m not saying that Trump’s tactics are always the right ones. What I am saying is that Trump is the first post-Cold War President to clearly identify those interests which constitute American national security, and then to pursue them with purpose. He is a tactically unpredictable but strategically consistent foreign policy realist. That has allowed the U.S. to regain the initiative globally, and it means that Trump’s policies will be difficult to reverse, regardless of what the career people in the State Department think.
Changing the basis of relationships is actually the exact sort of thing I'm talking about.
The intimation that Trump makes waves for self-aggrandizement seems off the mark, considering that his actions support a coherent vision and strategy, for which he was elected.
Not that he doesn't self-aggrandize, but one is left to wonder whether that is also not mostly tactical.
Aaron, my comment was directed at your claim that Trump was discrediting the United States as a trusted partner for foreign countries. I believe the opposite is true, at least on a strategic level.
I think countries can trust that Trump will consistently pursue American interests, as he has defined them, and that therefore, when their interests and ours overlap, Trump will be a willing and faithful partner in joint efforts. For example, the Saudis know that Trump wants stability in the Middle East and economic connections with the Kingdom that benefit the United States, and, conversely, that promoting democracy is much less important to him. Therefore the Saudis can trust that they can work with Trump on issues like the Abraham Accords, or stabilizing Syria, or suppressing the Houthis in Yemen, without Trump pulling the rug out from under them by condemning their authoritarian practices.
Ukraine is another example. Trump made clear from the beginning that ending the war was in America's interest, and that the peace formula he is aiming at is that Ukraine trades territory but gets sovereignty and security in return. After an initial squabble, Trump lined up Zelensky and Europe behind that formula, and the group is now working together to get Putin to the negotiating table.
You can agree or disagree with how Trump has defined our interests, or with how he is pursuing them. My point is that Trump is clearly pursuing a realist foreign policy based on national interest, and that such a foreign policy creates strategic predictability that fosters stable partnerships were there are mutual interests to support them. Other countries know where they stand in the big picture -- though Trump, being Trump, is and will remain tactically unpredictable so that he can wrong foot our adversaries and get as much as possible out of our friends.
Whether it will all work or not I don't know. But if it does, we're going to see a different and better world four years from now, and as I wrote before, the next Administration, whoever runs it, will accept the benefits regardless of what the career people think.
Sure, but unless I badly misread you, it was presented as almost entirely negative.
I think this whole take misses the mark. The 'Great Man" theory of history is something that historians like to talk about, but it is not reality. Great men arise because they get in front of a movement or trend that has been building, and they ride it or lead it or help shape it. Their greatness is in sensing the movement and then getting in front of it.
Trump has gotten in front of movement that has been building since the early 1990s when the Soviet Union went extinct. The US is returning to its pre-WWII history of not going after monsters abroad. Worldwide communism was an existential threat to the US which caused us to take the lead in global affairs by rebuilding Europe and Japan as well as developing alliances to fight communism which was using the ravages left by WWII to spread itself. We allowed protective tariffs for other nations to help them recover and to build alliances against communism (USSR and China). That period of history is over. Europe and Japan have been long rebuilt, and Russia is a third world nation that cannot even defeat its next-door neighbor - Ukraine. China is still troublesome, and we are working to contain them.
People tend to forget that this movement of America first - which has its roots in the1930s - began to resurface in the 1992 election where Ross Perot captured 20% of the popular vote by bringing attention to the "big sucking sound" that was hollowing out America. Trump flirted with the Reform Party back in the early 2000s and then led the remaking of the Republican Party.
JD Vance who lived the experience as he articulated in his book - Hillbilly Elegy - is the heir apparent to this movement and will most likely win a landslide victory in 2028 to solidify what Trump is instituting. America will not be the indispensable nation in the world, and we will not be propping up the rest of the world's economies. This is not 3D chess or a great man - it is the flow of history - which Trump got in front of.
Undoubtedly, Trump sensed that there was a moment for him to glom onto social trends. But I don't see how anyone other than Trump could have pulled off what he did in getting elected. It will be very interesting to see if any of his would be successors has what it takes to even win the presidency, much less accomplish anything.
Well I have to disagree. While Trump is a unique individual someone else would have had to break the course America was on because it was unsustainable. We could not go on policing and propping up the rest of the world. Both parties alluded to changing the course but were stuck with problems inherent to their political party. An outsider was needed. That’s what Perot attempted but he was too early.
As I said Trump flirted with the Perot’s Reform Party but realized it couldn’t accomplish what was needed. It was impossible for the Democrat Party to make the correction because they are wedded to the status quo of a large federal government, the current university system and international relations. I would agree with you that Trump is making these changes in a more rapid manner than one might expect and in that respect so he appears to be the “great man.”
But then again since God is sovereign Trump was selected by Him for this job, so ultimately you are correct.
Trump's accelerating it, but American reliability on the international stage has been in steep decline since at least 9/11.
I tend to agree that the attempts to suppress America First populism are failing, especially with younger generations as this Substack has mentioned previously.
My question in response to the fact (it seems like a factual statement to me) that Trump is undermining our reliability as an international partner would be this-
Do the negative benefits of that decline in reliability (less friendly trade, more complicated diplomacy, etc) in the long run outweigh the perceived positive outcomes of that decline (less reliance by our allies on US military hegemony, less foreign aid leaving the country, etc)?
Since Vietnam. Not just reputation for reliability, but also for sanity and competence in foreign affairs.