[quetzalcoatl]

Which came first, globalist treason or Trump treason?

Is there really a distinction between the two, Donald? If one faction of the globalist oligarchy succeeds another, this hardly portends the end of the globalist elite. Interestingly, Trump has concluded a deal whereby his name brand will be protected in China, furthering the advance of the Trump Organization into fresh markets. Co-incidentally, Trump now recognizes the one China policy and will change the definition of currency manipulation such that China is no longer guilty. It is not for nothing that Goldman Sachs man Steve Mnuchin is head of Treasury.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose, no?

[Donna]

Is there really a distinction between the two, Donald? If one faction of the globalist oligarchy succeeds another, this hardly portends the end of the globalist elite. Interestingly, Trump has concluded a deal whereby his name brand will be protected in China, furthering the advance of the Trump Organization into fresh markets. Co-incidentally, Trump now recognizes the one China policy and will change the definition of currency manipulation such that China is no longer guilty. It is not for nothing that Goldman Sachs man Steve Mnuchin is head of Treasury.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose, no?

Did you even read skinster's article? It describes how Trump represents a nationalist faction within the US deep state, not the globalist political class. Obviously these two entities aren't the same thing if the former is peppered with bureaucrats with nationalist sympathies.

À raconter ses maux, souvent on les soulage.

[quetzalcoatl]

Did you even read skinster's article?

Quite thoroughly.

It describes how Trump represents a nationalist faction within the US deep state, not the globalist political class. Obviously these two entities aren't the same thing if the former is peppered with bureaucrats with nationalist sympathies.

The Deep State is a creation of liberalism, and as such, is necessarily globalist in reach. It is incapable of not being so.

For humans at the periphery, the distinction between a nominally nationalist and a globalist Deep State won't be apparent. It is the Deep State network itself that is dying, and must come to an end. The answer is not who controls it. It doesn't serve you, it serves only itself. Every action it takes screams this truth.

[Donna]

The Deep State is a creation of liberalism, and as such, is necessarily globalist in reach. It is incapable of not being so.

You are conflating or confusing liberalism with globalism (perhaps you are thinking about the more cerebral 'globalization', but that would also be inaccurate). Globalism is a post-war political phenomenon rooted in the Truman Doctrine and the mobilization of liberal democracies against Communism after 1945. There is a difference between Manchesterian liberalism and globalism as an authoritarian political philosophy.

For humans at the periphery, the distinction between a nominally nationalist and a globalist Deep State won't be apparent.

Not at all, nationalism and globalism are two very different uses of the state apparatus that can produce very different results.

It is the Deep State network itself that is dying, and must come to an end. The answer is not who controls it. It doesn't serve you, it serves only itself. Every action it takes screams this truth.

It absolutely matters who controls the 'deep state' (or simply, the state itself). It's starting to sound like I'm the one who is a Leninist here.

The deep state is a natural consequence of the nation-state that is rooted in its martial institutions. We know that it has a genealogy that precedes globalism, so your attempt to conflate it with the global power structure is disingenuous and appears to be a deliberate attempt to manipulate the language that you're using.

[quetzalcoatl]

All I'm saying, Donald, is that the Deep State (which is actually much more than the state itself) evolved to administer the needs of global capitalism. Some people are claiming that Trump has placed himself in opposition to the Deep State - I'm claiming it's a factional struggle within liberalism. It's no good at all to be a Leninist if you're simply going to continue the policy directions implicit in neoliberalism, as the past 6 Presidents have done.

IMO, we are long past the point where marginal changes (like Trumpism) can help workers. If I'm wrong, I will acknowledge it, but so far the evidence is not encouraging. It's possible of course I'm not seeing everything, but I'm not deliberately cooking the books.

On the Flynn thing, I don't attach any special significance. It's okay to lie downward, but to lie upward (to your boss) is usually not tolerated.

[Donna]

...is that the Deep State (which is actually much more than the state itself) evolved to administer the needs of global capitalism.

This isn't what you said, though. You conflated the deep state with globalism itself. Now you're trying to backpedal the faux pas.

Some people are claiming that Trump has placed himself in opposition to the Deep State - I'm claiming it's a factional struggle within liberalism. It's no good at all to be a Leninist if you're simply going to continue the policy directions implicit in neoliberalism, as the past 6 Presidents have done.

'Neoliberal' becomes a completely useless and over-intellectualized label if the president spending a trillion dollars on infrastructure falls under it. Why stop at the last 6 presidents? You're using language broad enough to cover the entire history of the republic.

It goes without saying that Trump isn't a revolutionary socialist, which is obviously the only criteria of challenging powerful social classes that is acceptable to you.

IMO, we are long past the point where marginal changes (like Trumpism) can help workers. If I'm wrong, I will acknowledge it, but so far the evidence is not encouraging. It's possible of course I'm not seeing everything, but I'm not deliberately cooking the books.

Perhaps, my priority though is the preservation of the Anglo-Saxon birthright rather than a purely class-based interest. The left is in denial that - and Zizek appeared to agree with this in a recent interview - that the far-right has a reputable track record for delivering relief to workers in times of crisis. Understandably leftists do not want to confront this possibility in Trump; the failure of identity politics would then be compounded with their failure to overthrow capitalism during the last century.

[Tewodros III]

@Donald My priority is red terror in the south, create our own holodomor there.

[Donna]

>implying the holodomor was intentional

[Tewodros III]

[Zag Edit: Rule 3]

[Beren]

Citing a Yahoo News interview with retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn last July, a House committee has opened an investigation into whether President Trump’s recently resigned national security adviser received an improper payment from the Russian government for a trip to Moscow in December 2015.

It's only treason (conspiring with the enemy) Trump could be impeached for successfully. I can't remember how the whole thing started, but the guy lied to VP Pence, didn't he?