PSL: ‘War monger Trump: Let it be an arms race’

Estevan Hernandez at the PSL’s Liberation News:

On December 22 president-elect Donald Trump tweeted: “The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability.”

The next day, he reportedly told MSNBC host Mika Brzezinski “Let it be an arms race,” when she asked him about his earlier tweet. This comes after an election campaign peppered with flippant and belligerent talk about the U.S. nuclear arsenal on Trump’s part.

The United States is the only country in the world ever to have used an atomic weapon on people when in 1945 it attacked the civilian cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. In one of the most terrible crimes against humanity in history, some 210,000 Japanese and enslaved Koreans immediately died from those bombings.

Even more troubling is the fact that the number of people who could be potentially killed today has greatly increased with modern nuclear weapons, which can be 1000 times stronger than those used in 1945.

Some political pundits are debating what Trump’s use of the word “expand” specifically means and suggest that his comments are unclear. Following the comments, Trump spokesperson Jason Miller, backpeddled and claimed that the comments were somehow actually about preventing terrorists from acquiring nuclear weapons.

To most people across the country, Trump’s comment is clear as day. He will happily use military force and attack whoever the U.S. empire happens to consider a threat and that his hubris won’t allow anything to be held back – including nuclear weapons.

Although the Trump administration aims to unleash an attack with renewed intensity on both the people of the United States and our sisters and brothers around the world, it is not entirely new. The Obama administration has already committed to a massive one-trillion dollar project to upgrade the current U.S. nuclear arsenal.

Trump’s nuclear weapon comment came only a few days after meeting with top military officials at his holiday home at Mar-A-Lago, suggesting that the Pentagon may be the source of some of his more aggressive proclamations.

Russian president Vladimir Putin has recently also called for the ‘’strengthening” of the Russian nuclear arsenal. Trump’s recent comments could mean the beginning of a new cold war-style arms race.

We cannot allow the incoming president to imperil all life on Earth with a 140 character Twitter threat. The people have the power to fight back against this and the rest of the Trump Agenda. We call on anti-nuclear progressives, socialists and all people to come into the streets and protest the Inauguration in Washington D.C., on January 20 to build this fight back movement.

12 thoughts on “PSL: ‘War monger Trump: Let it be an arms race’

  1. john

    I notice how Paulie deftly reverses the order of events, implying falsely that Trump made his comment before Putin, rather than after.

  2. paulie Post author

    LOL. What’s Paulie have to do with it, Jim? I don’t necessarily agree with articles just because I repost them here. It’s only posted for discussion. If you don’t waste my time with such nonsense I’ll have more time to post a larger array of articles from a wide variety of different authors, sources and viewpoints, just like I always do.

  3. Luke

    Ah yes, he’s a completely blank book. There’s no track record anywhere for how he conducts himself and no similarities to what has happened in any other countries.

  4. Starchild

    Yes, Donald Trump is a bit of a cypher. But I did just come across a very interesting and insightful analysis of his role in politics…

    http://www.versobooks.com/blogs/2479-trump-candidate-of-truth

    How can someone who lies as much as Trump does be a “candidate of truth”? And yet paradoxically, that seems in the sense explained by Jodi Dean to be the case. This much, at least, is true for me:

    “Others like the way Trump’s brutality, his directness, unsettles and disrupts the branded lies that are the mainstream parties. He’s going to screw the same folks who screwed them.”

    Perhaps the central thesis of Dean’s piece is this:

    “As Trump makes explicit the power of money in the contemporary US, he facilitates, stimulates, and circulates enjoyment (jouissance). Trump openly expresses the racism, sexism, contempt, and superiority that codes of civility and political correctness insist be repressed. This expression demonstrates the truth of economic inequality: civility is for the middle class, a normative container for the rage of the dispossessed and the contempt of the dispossessors. The .1 % need not pretend to care.” [emphasis added]

    Among the interesting aspects of this thesis is that it may be empirically testable. And the testing will be fascinating, because perhaps the #1 thing that Americans have been demanding from the political class in the current era is that they pretend to care. Very few U.S. politicians dare to flout this demand. The president of the United States, perhaps least of all.

    Think about many of the things on which White House occupants routinely spend their time: Trips to disaster areas, spent touring the wreckage and comforting victims; Meetings with troops injured in war, and with the grieving families of those killed; Speeches at the funerals of dead law enforcement officers; Meetings with aggrieved special interest groups; Legislation that is sold as a prescription for relieving suffering, with its accompanying need for emotional speeches and bill-signing ceremonies. Many of these functions are widely perceived as obligatory.

    Has Trump shown an ability to really pull of this kind of “caring act” during the campaign, or has he so far managed to largely flout the normal demand that someone in his position care? I confess I don’t really know, because I haven’t been paying close enough attention. I personally find watching politicians perform the kind of ritualistic activities described above to be mildly nauseating and a total bore.

    Trump has shown that he can handle telling people stuff like, “Everything’s going to be great, I promise you that,” which some presumably find comforting. But will such a B-rate performance of the “caring act” be enough to satisfy the masses once he sits in the Oval Office? I don’t know, but it will no doubt be entertaining to watch the drama play out.

    I’ve heard numerous predictions along the lines of saying that Trump will not have the patience for the presidency, and will quit, turn most of the reins of power over to Mike Pence, or something of the sort. Perhaps they sense, without articulating it as well as Jodi Dean has, that Trump doesn’t have the patience to pretend to care, and believe this will sooner or later cause him to voluntarily abandon much or all of the power of the office.

    I don’t believe that will happen. One aspect of the psychological trainwreck that is Donald Trump, is being addicted to power. Anyone with a case of power addiction as severe as his would be highly unlikely to walk away from the most powerful office in the world. Betting on such an outcome seems to me about like the odds of putting an open $500 bottle of liquor next to a wino sitting in the street and begging for money, and expecting him not to drink it.

    Besides the empirical testability of Dean’s thesis, another interesting angle is that, if true, it suggests a problematic aspect of a highly unequal society – that only rampant inequality could have produced the simultaneously entertaining, disgusting, and highly dangerous spectacle of Donald Trump’s political rise.

    Thinking about that spectacle, another thought: Was the recent “scary clown” or “creepy clown” epidemic (see e.g. http://globalnews.ca/news/2990008/creepy-clown-sightings-why-the-epidemic-is-spreading-across-canada-and-the-u-s/) coincidental? I suspect not.

    While I don’t expect the real-life scary clown soon likely to occupy 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to go away on his own, I do think his behavior could easily get him involuntarily removed from office, whether via failing to win reelection or via one of the more drastic means of impeachment or assassination. The latter of which raises disturbing parallels to the fall of the Roman Republic. What if Donald Trump’s career becomes that of a latter-day Julius Caeser? The analogy is obviously comical* (Trump as the victorious conquerer of a barbarian horde armed with cameras rather than spears!), but frightening due to its aftermath: Caeser took the practice of entertaining the masses with bread and circuses to a new level, preserving the trappings of popular rule while openly seeking to amass power and glory to himself. He was of course eventually killed for his arrogance, but in death the power elité came to exalt his memory and after a period of warfare, the vestiges of the Republic were swept away and his anointed heir became the first full-on emperor. Already there is ominous talk of the end of democracy (along with the equally troubling talk that we live in a “post-truth era”).

    What makes George Orwell’s “1984” so terrifying is that it depicts a future in which both freedom and truth have died. Fortunately, in that aspect I believe the novel is not realistic – Truth will ultimately survive, because no matter what happens it is always bound to reality, from which it cannot be separated. The future will not be (in Orwell’s words) “a boot stamping on a human face forever”.

    Love & Liberty,
    ((( starchild )))

    *If one postulates Trump as Caeser, then Ron Paul – the admired, principled and politically shrewd elder who has long warned of the impending police state while attempting to fight it off – is clearly our Cicero. And that comparison too has its comical side: Ron Paul, with his rambling and sometimes inarticulate speeches, playing the role of the master orator! Who was it who made that famous remark about history repeating itself, the first time as tragedy and the second time as farce? What would a farcical police state look like?

    P.S. – While writing this, the secret Bohemian Grove gatherings of the elité, which many U.S. presidents have attended, flashed into mind. As you may know, they infamously hold a ritual called the “Cremation of Care” in which a mock child sacrifice is enacted. (For those unfamiliar, a video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qBB_yOv_n8 describes the event – one need not take all the conspiratorial and occult stuff seriously in order to see how such a ritual serves a purpose.) Considered in the light of the political necessity of pretending to greatly care about children and other popular objects of sympathy/empathy, the spiritual need of Bohemian Grove participants to purge themselves of that largely false caring by symbolically burning a child, if only in relative secrecy, makes perfect sense.

  5. Luke

    Starchild makes many good points. Personally I don’t find Trump to be a cypher at all, but a lot of people seem to.

    “He’s going to screw the same folks who screwed them”

    Depends on who you mean by the same folks. He will pretty clearly make the ultra-rich even richer. Big corporations, especially ones that partner with the Trump regime, will rake in cash and become even less accountable. The military and police and the federal prisons will be greatly expanded, with the police being more militarized and the military deployed more both overseas and domestically. Those in the infotainment business who kiss up to Trump will be lavished with exclusive access. Or maybe he will manage his own media outlets, or people close to him will. He can go on TV and address the people directly as much as he wants. He can keep doing concert-style tours. He can tweet. And so on. There will be lots of opportunities for some people to cash in. Spy agencies will have more power too, but only the ones that are loyal to Trump; the rest will either adapt, have key personnel replaced, or have their power effectively shifted to other agencies that are loyal to him.

    ” One aspect of the psychological trainwreck that is Donald Trump, is being addicted to power. Anyone with a case of power addiction as severe as his would be highly unlikely to walk away from the most powerful office in the world. Betting on such an outcome seems to me about like the odds of putting an open $500 bottle of liquor next to a wino sitting in the street and begging for money, and expecting him not to drink it.”

    Agreed. He won’t just walk away. He will do everything he can to grab more power, and use any and every dirty trick imaginable to get it.

    “only rampant inequality could have produced the simultaneously entertaining, disgusting, and highly dangerous spectacle of Donald Trump’s political rise.”

    Excellent point.

    “Thinking about that spectacle, another thought: Was the recent “scary clown” or “creepy clown” epidemic (see e.g. http://globalnews.ca/news/2990008/creepy-clown-sightings-why-the-epidemic-is-spreading-across-canada-and-the-u-s/) coincidental? I suspect not.

    While I don’t expect the real-life scary clown soon likely to occupy 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to go away on his own”

    Another excellent point. Trump is indeed the penultimate scary, creepy clown epitomized and embodied.

    ” I do think his behavior could easily get him involuntarily removed from office, whether via failing to win reelection or via one of the more drastic means of impeachment or assassination”

    As you pointed out, it’s hard to predict what the fallout will be if he gets assassinated, other than that it probably won’t be good. As for removal from office, he will fight back…and not fairly or cleanly. All sorts of national emergencies may happen whether real or false flag. He might simply refuse to leave office, if he has enough support from the military. He could start wars to give himself a short term popularity boost, and maybe add more and more wars to keep the high going. He could use his ability to go on TV, on twitter and on the road to appeal directly to the people. The same sort of things may apply whether it’s a case of him being behind in a re-election attempt or during an impeachment. What if the physicians say he has become (hah!) dangerously mentally unstable and he disagrees… what then?

    “Caeser took the practice of entertaining the masses with bread and circuses to a new level, preserving the trappings of popular rule while openly seeking to amass power and glory to himself. ”

    Indeed, popular rule without freedom is becoming more widespread once again. Poland, Hungary, Turkey, the Phillipines, and so on. Trump is likely to be another example of this.

    “What makes George Orwell’s “1984” so terrifying is that it depicts a future in which both freedom and truth have died. Fortunately, in that aspect I believe the novel is not realistic – Truth will ultimately survive, because no matter what happens it is always bound to reality, from which it cannot be separated. The future will not be (in Orwell’s words) “a boot stamping on a human face forever”.”

    I’m not sure I can be as optimistic. Truth can certainly die a la 1984. Fake news along the lines of the National Inquirer and the increasingly popular deliberately fake news such as those often seen linked on facebook with (for example) Macedonian teenagers competing who can put out the most viral clickbait bullshit will spread, and the establishment media will have to answer the entirely accurate rejoinder that they themselves have been guilty of manipulating, distorting, and even making up stories. With no trustworthy information sources anywhere, truth may already be dead, at least as far as any independent ability to establish what’s true and what isn’t and to get that information out there without being effectively counteracted. So, yes, freedom and truth may both be doing and we may indeed be faced with a boot stamping on the face of humanity. Forever? Maybe.

  6. Just Some Random Guy

    I’m not sure I can be as optimistic. Truth can certainly die a la 1984. Fake news along the lines of the National Inquirer and the increasingly popular deliberately fake news such as those often seen linked on facebook with (for example) Macedonian teenagers competing who can put out the most viral clickbait bullshit will spread, and the establishment media will have to answer the entirely accurate rejoinder that they themselves have been guilty of manipulating, distorting, and even making up stories.

    But this is very different from 1984. In 1984, the Ministry of Truth controlled all of that. In our world, it’s a hodgepodge of a ton of different groups all offering their version of the “truth” and it being harder to determine what is true and what is false.

    In 1984, when the Ministry of Truth said they had always been at war with Eurasia, people didn’t challenge it. That’s basically unthinkable in our civilization; if the government were to claim anything, true or false, someone will immediately start writing about how what they claimed was a lie.

    If we’re talking popular dystopian works, I’d be more worried of Fahrenheit 451 or Brave New World than I would 1984.

  7. Oliver Steinberg

    Never lose sight that all these generalizations overlook the truth that American voters rejected Trump by a margin of over 3 million votes. The politics of resentment, the neo-Confederate crypto-fascism so well personified by the orange maggot and his zombified followers, did not manage to secure even a plurality of the citizens who actually voted. Where they did succeed was in so befouling the political arena that too many people recoiled and just didn’t vote; and that, combined with successful voter suppression schemes in states like Florida, North Carolina, Michigan, and Wisconsin, tipped the scales in that archaic Constitutional booby-trap, the Electoral College. Thus the American republic self-destructed, when the consent of the governed was nullified by the Rape of 2016. I encourage everyone to never speak of Trump as “president.” This sociopath is not entitled to that dignity, and he was NOT the peoples’ choice. True, as with most fascist regimes, within a year or two a nice little war combined with selective but efficient removal of critics and opponents, assisted by servile and fawning mass media, will succeed at bolstering the usurper’s popularity, and future elections will be a farcical formality. Putin’s punk will prove a quick study at the helm of our Mafia state.

  8. ATBAFT

    “Big corporations, especially ones that partner with the Trump regime, will rake in cash and become even less accountable…. Big corporations, especially ones that partner with the Trump regime, will rake in cash and become even less accountable. ”

    Good advice for Mr. Steinberg and others who are scared out of their mind. Take this apparent opportunity to make some Big Bucks and then flee the country before the Trumpists come for them. This “crisis” will not be solved with papier mache giant heads or petitions. If you feel as pessimistic as Mr. Steinberg and some others do, then get out of the U.S. as soon as financially able.

  9. Luke

    “But this is very different from 1984. In 1984, the Ministry of Truth controlled all of that. In our world, it’s a hodgepodge of a ton of different groups all offering their version of the “truth” and it being harder to determine what is true and what is false.”

    Since no one can know what is true and what is false and everything is fake news, or plausibly accused of being fake news, the regime can beat, arrest and disappear people and go to war as it pleases. Any investigation into anything the regime does, any corruption it engages in, or anything else that anyone may dig into to build support for change can be effectively countered with “pope meets with president Trump, blesses him and absolves him of all sins” (no meeting having actually taken place), “troublemaking reporter found to be secret jihadi,” “protest organizers busted as a front for dope pushing ring” “opposition politician caught with dead teenage hooker” and so on. None of it has to be true. And there’s no compass to distinguish what more likely to be true, either.

    “In 1984, when the Ministry of Truth said they had always been at war with Eurasia, people didn’t challenge it. That’s basically unthinkable in our civilization; if the government were to claim anything, true or false, someone will immediately start writing about how what they claimed was a lie.”

    And it won’t matter, because “news” outlets like the National Inquirer (a long time Trump favorite) and many equivalents will be what most people will rely on for their news. The ones that get government access (ie are favorable to the regime) and covert funding, and the advertising money of large corporations that rely on regime favoritism and regime contracts, will have a big leg up on others, and if those others get too pesky they can be taken care of with libel suits (in regime kangaroo courts), intimidation, harassment, psyops, disappearing and intimidation of journalists – basically, the Putin model that Trump expresses open admiration for.

    “If we’re talking popular dystopian works, I’d be more worried of Fahrenheit 451 or Brave New World than I would 1984.”

    It won’t be exactly like any of them, but they are all good guideposts for trying to imagine what our near term future is likely to be like within months or a small handful of years.

  10. Luke

    Excuse me, Steinberg. And ATBAFT, what makes you think that other countries will provide a refuge? The whole world is moving towards wars and authoritarian regimes and hostility to migrants and refugees. Even if it weren’t, with very few exceptions it takes time to make large amounts of money, and I doubt there’s much time left to do the sort of thing you suggest. I’d love to get out of the US, but it probably won’t happen, and probably won’t keep “them” from coming for me that much longer even if it did.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *