American politics are like a geriatric old man pretending amnesia to escape indictment. In this somewhat rough-hewn essay initially written simply as a response to a fellow Brit in a comments page, I discuss the initial fault line in American politics which caused so many of America’s current woes.
From Andrew W (comment) ‘The US is the noisiest country in the world, and they speak English, so for better or worse, the rest of the anglosphere gets America continuously in the news every day, most of us from many perspectives - from organizations based both in the US and outside, Americans on the other hand get very little news on America or the rest of the planet from anything other than their personally preferred US news and propoganda sources. So we see an America inhabited by people with very narrow and very different and slanted perspectives on each other and on their own country.’
All true. But the problem is that most of the rest of Anglosphere is institutionally misinformed about most of American culture and politics. The very nature of journalism is the attention economy and storytelling, which plays best upon fear, loathing and anger. American news sells in the rest of the Anglosphere because much of the rest of the Anglosphere’s politics consists of grey men in suits. Plus, the class prejudices of cosmopolitan liberals in the rest of the Anglosphere’s urban centres contains a affluent and well-heeled sneering condescension, which is all too familiar to many Americans.
Take Trump and Obama as an example. Don’t get me wrong, I didn’t like Trump and on a personal level I greatly admired Barrack Obama, but on a political level, Trump was often demonised, his modest accomplishments knowingly undersold, whilst Barrack Obama made some incredibly cynical political moves, which especially in the areas of policing and education have led to disaster. Their is no hope in sight for America on either issue, nor is there likely to be for another generation- barring the introduction of a man or woman able to transcend the current toxicity of the American political landscape. Whatever the flaws of Trump or the accomplishments of Obama, the one doesn’t deserve to be demonised, the other lionised. It’s a portrayal as facile as it is disingenuous.
Ironically, history will remember that both men diminished the incumbent greatness of their country- they simply did it in different ways. Although they each saw themselves as leaders, both were victims of media ecosystem which is able to manipulate its politicians like marionettes. Still, the rest of the Anglosphere isn’t faring much better.
Anyway, my main point is this- just as Americans are misinformed about the rest of the Anglosphere, the rest of the Anglosphere is chronically misinformed about America. The Biggest Lie is the supposed American White Nationalism of the Trump movement. What this completely overlooks is that a huge portion of the American population were desperately fed-up with their institutional politicians.
Once one sets aside the heavily entrenched 50% to 70% who care about emotionally important but politically inconsequential (apologies to any American readers I may offend with this observation) issues like gun rights or abortion the data shows that a huge chunk of the people who turned to Trump, were the self-same voters who voted for Barrack and wanted Bernie on the Democratic ticket. The irony is, whatever the political pundits who always get it wrong said at the time, Bernie probably would have whooped Trump’s ass in 2016.
Here’s the thing. Let’s take the Myth conjured about the Great Replacement. Don’t get me wrong- it’s great branding by the Dems. They took a theory only really talked about by a tiny fringe of American White Supremacists in the process of dying out, as well as a few anti-Government types (although the New World Order was more popular in this more numerous circle) and they made it mainstream. Many otherwise sensible conservatives occasionally bring it up. Of course, they are talking about it in cultural terms- but the fact that they use the terminology means they’ve been beaten yet again, by the types of linguistic shell game for which the Left is famous.
Let’s try a thought experiment. In terms of true and legitimate refugee status, the citizens of Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela have more cause to claim asylum than others. The origins of asylum in both Britain and America were specifically political before WWII. One had to be fleeing political tyranny in order to qualify. But if the demographics currently wanting to enter America were specifically from these three countries- do you think the Democrats would want to welcome them with open arms? Hell no- they deny a problem even exists in these countries- when the fact that former citizens are no longer allowed to contact their families should raise genuine humanitarian concerns. Cynically, the Democrats know that people fleeing failed Socialist states don’t vote Left for at least two generations.
It was about Political Displacement all along. Although there may be still at least some mutual respect and affinity for the politically savvy across the aisles at a representative level in America, at the grass roots both American parties see the other side as an existential threat.
But here’s the thing you probably don’t know that you probably should. The 2008 Global Financial Crash had American political origins- it wasn’t a market failure in any real sense. Clinton wanted to increase minority home ownership. The bankers admired his convictions but said it simply wasn’t possible- mortgages are contingent upon the ability to repay. Clinton didn’t care- he promised them an S & L style bailout- he took away their risk and introduced perhaps the greatest single systemic moral hazard in human history.
George W. didn’t do anything to fix it. For a start, he liked the booming unlimited growth economics which it introduced to the housing sector. Plus, he didn’t want to look racist, or upset the Latino demographic, with whom he had made significant inroads. Of course, the financial sector does deserve its own share of the blame. They were completely irresponsible with the license for structural failure American Government had given them.
They created the ability to spread to endemic bad risk which had previously been limited to the public-private hybrids of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They created CDO’s as a means of mixing perfectly good mortgages with crap ones. In reality, this seemingly useful financial instrument turned out to be the skeleton key which spread financial contagion across all of the world’s most advanced economies. The Credit Ratings Agencies didn’t fare much better, overseeing people who are also your best customers is a bad idea in general. But make no mistake- American Government caused the 2008 Financial Crash.
Why do you think only one guy ever went to jail? The fingerprints of American Government were all over the scene of the crime- and the evidence indicted both of America’s political parties. So instead, the bankers got a bailout at the American taxpayers expense, and evidence of the true culprits of the crime was buried under an avalanche of complexity and very real commercial interests desperate to evade their own very real collusive culpability.
And however much the rest of the world suffered for American government’s criminally negligent mistake, the American people suffered more. Homes were lost. Families split apart in the very real stresses which financial impossibilities introduce into a marriage. Businesses folded. Employees lost their jobs and their pensions after more than twenty years of service and paying their dues. Whole generations of men, young and old turned to suicide and drugs, leaving fatherless daughters and embittered sons. American Carnage, some have called it- and deservedly so.
Of course, most Americans didn’t realise just how deeply American politicians were implicated in this singular failure of limited imagination of risk. They thought that it was simply a matter of the American Political System failing to act appropriately as a Referee. They blamed the influence of lobbyists on politicians when America’s problems actually ran far deeper than that. But it was enough to make the American electorate consider everything from an inexperienced but apparently idealistic hopeful, to an aging socialist, to a bombastic and narcissistic reality TV star.
They were that desperate. They still are- and its getting worse, not better. Half the country seems to think the very thing that caused all their suffering and hardships is the solution and the other half feels so angry and betrayed by the Washington Political Establishment, they would probably vote for an Italian Porn Star if they thought she had any chance of fixing the endemic structural failures of America’s political and media institutions.
And rather than perform their well-deserved institutional mea maximi culpa, one side of the political aisle wants to blame it all on bad trade deals and immigrants, the other on the political of obstinacy of supposedly system-wide white supremacy. They should be on their knees begging for forgiveness for the damage they have wrought- both to the American people and to a system of American Government which had worked fairly well for over two centuries.
I lived through Clinton and W and Obama. My family progressed through the Financial Crisis, that had the chairman of the Fed puking in his trash can, with no direct harm. I don't recall even a tax increase to pay for the banks' bailout either. I assume my grandkids will be stuck with that bill.
Explaining what happened and who contributed what to create a crisis is difficult and complicated. This explanation may have been accomplished. My question is, how to explain this sort of game of elites early and in a way that makes such a game quickly recognizable in the future when it is just developing and before damage is locked in?
Geary, another magnificent piece, thank you - so important. The MSM could never publish it, and yet people need to know. A few thoughts stemming from working in a credit union with established immigrants: to a 1, the established immigrants worked hard and sacrificed to make a life from the one they uprooted. Many understood uprooting themselves might not benefit THEM but their children’s access to opportunity. These productive individuals formed credit unions to help finance homes for each other and newer immigrants - you dont default on your community/support network and you expect a premium rate because its that or nothing. Banks had hurdles too difficult to meet. They sweat blood and kids had paper routes, wives took in sewing or did housecleaning to make the payment. Those kids had work ethic returned in spades in terms of asset acquisition today.
Making credit union set up achievable was how governments helped new immigrants. Risk not on government. Those immigrants lament how difficult it was for them vis a vis the publicly funded support network available to todays immigrants. Tell you what, default rates are high in our new immigrant division. We have a forensic accountant and detective tasked to checking out “owned deposit” and job claims. A few try to buy property on their social benefits. Imagine if housing values stall, or correct?
I recall my own struggles with a new husband, coming from England. We did it all ourselves, and Canada wouldnt let my husband workfor 6months when we arrived. Of course he did so illegally. Another dumb policy. Hes been here since 1986 and has considerable assets, so maybe those headwinds and screenings worked to identify productive immigrants.
> Of course, the financial sector does deserve its own share of the blame.
One of the few things that can sum to over 100% is guilt. If one man commits murder he might hang for it, but if 10 men conspire in a murder, they might all hang for it -- there's no 'distribution' of the quilt they are all 100% guilty. Same with the above. The government might have been incompetent in not overseeing what Goldman (etc.) were up to, but that doesn't lessen Goldman's quilt. Both are 100% guilty, tho some might say the former was incompetence and the latter outright crime still I say that there is no distribution.
Everyone knows a free trade is a voluntary exchange in which both parties are better off than before it takes place, otherwise they'd not do it.
Everyone knows that peace and prosperity are best served in a voluntary society with people acting in their own interests as well voluntarily helping out others. The only required laws are against others being physically aggressive, threatening, stealing or defrauding.
Centrally planned force causes an opposing force among those who believe they can think for themselves; it creates animosity and hatred, destroying the very notions of tolerance and diversity. The use of force denies a moral people because you get neither credit nor blame when acting under coercive force.
People flock to the US for liberty and equality under the law, not our ghetto public schools run by the government rather than funding students, not our limited working hours, not our minimum wage, not our tariffs, not our mass incarceration, not our never-ending undeclared wars against poor people, not our drug wars, not our TSA, not our border agents searching people 100 miles from all borders, not our massive deficits, not handouts...
Everyone knows monopolies are bad. Yet they pretend to want government monopoly, a monopoly based on their ability to use force rather than good ideas that convince us to trade freely. They can see all the bad actions and crimes committed by the US and other governments, while pretending more government will fix that.
A vote is only a tiny bit of power. You get one vote, for one person who will then vote on untold numbers of issues, which makes it impossible that who you voted for will then vote on those issues as you'd have done. Furthermore, half the country or more voted for someone else and so they got nothing about what they voted for.
Compare that to the the dollar you earned and want to spend. No business can take your dollar without your consent. Every dollar you spend is a vote for that specific good you want. Smart people prefer to be free to spend their dollars as they see fit, and moral ones will certainly contribute some with like-minded people to solve problems.
“ Anyway, my main point is this- just as Americans are misinformed about the rest of the Anglosphere, the rest of the Anglosphere is chronically misinformed about America. The Biggest Lie is the supposed American White Nationalism of the Trump movement. What this completely overlooks is that a huge portion of the American population were desperately fed-up with their institutional politicians.”
There’s a good chunk of America institutionally misinformed on this subject too.
“ The irony is, whatever the political pundits who always get it wrong said at the time, Bernie probably would have whooped Trump’s ass in 2016.”
I actually doubt that. But it’s a counterfactual and therefore difficult to prove either way (if not impossible).
"But here’s the thing you probably don’t know that you probably should. The 2008 Global Financial Crash had American political origins . . . ."
Absolutely TRUE, yet most Americans don't realize it. Peter Wallison's book "Hidden in Plain Sight" sets forth the best explanation.
I lived through Clinton and W and Obama. My family progressed through the Financial Crisis, that had the chairman of the Fed puking in his trash can, with no direct harm. I don't recall even a tax increase to pay for the banks' bailout either. I assume my grandkids will be stuck with that bill.
Explaining what happened and who contributed what to create a crisis is difficult and complicated. This explanation may have been accomplished. My question is, how to explain this sort of game of elites early and in a way that makes such a game quickly recognizable in the future when it is just developing and before damage is locked in?
Geary, another magnificent piece, thank you - so important. The MSM could never publish it, and yet people need to know. A few thoughts stemming from working in a credit union with established immigrants: to a 1, the established immigrants worked hard and sacrificed to make a life from the one they uprooted. Many understood uprooting themselves might not benefit THEM but their children’s access to opportunity. These productive individuals formed credit unions to help finance homes for each other and newer immigrants - you dont default on your community/support network and you expect a premium rate because its that or nothing. Banks had hurdles too difficult to meet. They sweat blood and kids had paper routes, wives took in sewing or did housecleaning to make the payment. Those kids had work ethic returned in spades in terms of asset acquisition today.
Making credit union set up achievable was how governments helped new immigrants. Risk not on government. Those immigrants lament how difficult it was for them vis a vis the publicly funded support network available to todays immigrants. Tell you what, default rates are high in our new immigrant division. We have a forensic accountant and detective tasked to checking out “owned deposit” and job claims. A few try to buy property on their social benefits. Imagine if housing values stall, or correct?
I recall my own struggles with a new husband, coming from England. We did it all ourselves, and Canada wouldnt let my husband workfor 6months when we arrived. Of course he did so illegally. Another dumb policy. Hes been here since 1986 and has considerable assets, so maybe those headwinds and screenings worked to identify productive immigrants.
> Of course, the financial sector does deserve its own share of the blame.
One of the few things that can sum to over 100% is guilt. If one man commits murder he might hang for it, but if 10 men conspire in a murder, they might all hang for it -- there's no 'distribution' of the quilt they are all 100% guilty. Same with the above. The government might have been incompetent in not overseeing what Goldman (etc.) were up to, but that doesn't lessen Goldman's quilt. Both are 100% guilty, tho some might say the former was incompetence and the latter outright crime still I say that there is no distribution.
Everyone knows power corrupts.
Everyone knows a free trade is a voluntary exchange in which both parties are better off than before it takes place, otherwise they'd not do it.
Everyone knows that peace and prosperity are best served in a voluntary society with people acting in their own interests as well voluntarily helping out others. The only required laws are against others being physically aggressive, threatening, stealing or defrauding.
Centrally planned force causes an opposing force among those who believe they can think for themselves; it creates animosity and hatred, destroying the very notions of tolerance and diversity. The use of force denies a moral people because you get neither credit nor blame when acting under coercive force.
People flock to the US for liberty and equality under the law, not our ghetto public schools run by the government rather than funding students, not our limited working hours, not our minimum wage, not our tariffs, not our mass incarceration, not our never-ending undeclared wars against poor people, not our drug wars, not our TSA, not our border agents searching people 100 miles from all borders, not our massive deficits, not handouts...
Everyone knows monopolies are bad. Yet they pretend to want government monopoly, a monopoly based on their ability to use force rather than good ideas that convince us to trade freely. They can see all the bad actions and crimes committed by the US and other governments, while pretending more government will fix that.
A vote is only a tiny bit of power. You get one vote, for one person who will then vote on untold numbers of issues, which makes it impossible that who you voted for will then vote on those issues as you'd have done. Furthermore, half the country or more voted for someone else and so they got nothing about what they voted for.
Compare that to the the dollar you earned and want to spend. No business can take your dollar without your consent. Every dollar you spend is a vote for that specific good you want. Smart people prefer to be free to spend their dollars as they see fit, and moral ones will certainly contribute some with like-minded people to solve problems.
“ Anyway, my main point is this- just as Americans are misinformed about the rest of the Anglosphere, the rest of the Anglosphere is chronically misinformed about America. The Biggest Lie is the supposed American White Nationalism of the Trump movement. What this completely overlooks is that a huge portion of the American population were desperately fed-up with their institutional politicians.”
There’s a good chunk of America institutionally misinformed on this subject too.
“ The irony is, whatever the political pundits who always get it wrong said at the time, Bernie probably would have whooped Trump’s ass in 2016.”
I actually doubt that. But it’s a counterfactual and therefore difficult to prove either way (if not impossible).