The 100,000 ft, theodicy of Trumpism, paradoxes of neo-imperialism view is that long-term unreliability of US world leadership was a given.
— CK MacLeod (@CK_MacLeod) May 28, 2017
The unsuitability of the US as hegemon is what made its hegemony tolerable, but also made a crisis inevitable. It's occurring right on time.
— CK MacLeod (@CK_MacLeod) May 28, 2017
…also predicted: that left-liberals who spent the last decade or generation or two deriding US-led global order would bewail its demise.
— CK MacLeod (@CK_MacLeod) May 28, 2017
If the generation since the fall of the USSR has been a tale of the unfitness of the USA for leadership, then Trump is pure continuity.
— CK MacLeod (@CK_MacLeod) May 28, 2017
Appendix:
Here's an example of someone who saw our predicament clearly during the 2013 Syria fiasco. TG Ash on "Withdrawalism" https://t.co/IQjUeQmwXW pic.twitter.com/YcUzwJN1DJ
— CK MacLeod (@CK_MacLeod) May 28, 2017
I also frequently return to Balakrishnan on "the stationary state," written in the wake of the Financial Crisis https://t.co/IQjUeQmwXW pic.twitter.com/CwIe7fyvsb
— CK MacLeod (@CK_MacLeod) May 28, 2017
Balakrishnan owes (as often) a debt to Schmitt. B's post-US world pseudo-order looks like Schmitt's – and Mao's: https://t.co/kR2z5FzB8j pic.twitter.com/d0HrjwYQAa
— CK MacLeod (@CK_MacLeod) May 28, 2017
Appendix to prior tweets: From a very good thread by @laseptiemewilay – more on the present moment with emphasis returning to Merkel. https://t.co/m0bSmp5wsI
— CK MacLeod (@CK_MacLeod) May 28, 2017
Photo: “Let not this Stein pass from my lips” – h/t @davidmackau
All this seems less clear to me than you present here. So far, I’ve heard left libs bewailing as you say, but others cheering that fellow on for undermining NATO (alas, I haven’t paid much attention to who said what).
At any rate, my first impulse is to say that the current situation is a poor example of what withdrawalism might look like – maybe if some one with a more reliable grasp on just everyday reality were doing it…
For instance, I think a withdrawalist could see a vital value in maintaining NATO to keep Russia in check.
Certainly I would be only barely marginally more optimistic if Bernie were doing his version. A continuation of the unevenness, fits and starts of the O years provides a more plausible map to withdrawalism. Enough of everything to make everyone unhappy.
Then if occurred to me that one could take a similar approach to strong interventionism – that GWB was a poor proponent of it, and it is unfair to judge that approach based on his execution.
In the end I see that fellow with no strong commitment to any ism other than that-fellow-ism, which may have tactical similarities to a wide range of isms, but is a poor fit for all of them.