Only domestically. In terms of foreign policy it’s much worse, and it’s foreign policy that matters to other countries.
My fear is that you will shortly have your tenses mixed up;
The US scored higher on democracy and human rights than China.
Indeed. I admit that my own older brother emigrated to the US because of the proverbial “offer that you cannot refuse” – they were literally throwing money at him and offering millions to set up a dedicated research center that he would direct, something no Canadian institution at the time could match. But that was then – decades ago – and this is now, when US research has been defunded, degraded, vilified and threatened. It may hopefully recover, but in the meantime numerous academic researchers along with many ordinary citizens have found Canada to be a safe haven, and we welcome them all.
No, I did not miss that. Can you explain why you think I missed that? I am aware the USA is a ROGUE state.
Because your attitude seems to be naive. The allies held their nose and allied with the USSR to defeat Germany and they’ll have to do it again with China to defeat the US. It’s a nation run by messianic lunatics and cannot be contained.
The US has a massive nuclear arsenal and the world’s most powerful military by far; it can’t realistically be conquered. They’ll likely ally with China, but the goal will be to contain the US and hope it collapses.
It’s not really the same though. The USSR and Germany shared the same continent, and both had aspirations to conquer a lot of the land in between them, and some of the other’s land. Conflict between them was incredibly likely, and actually happened, which is why we started helping the USSR.
China and the US can’t easily come into direct conflict along a common geographical front like that. Both would have to choose to move troops into an area to fight each other, and I can’t see why China would do that right now. The only possible spot would be Taiwan, and I don’t think that’s enough to cause a full-scale war. China doesn’t want any US territory, and won’t be in a position to change that in our lifetimes, and the US is the same with respect to China. Does anyone think even Trump would be stupid enough to try to invade mainland China?
The Cold War with the US won’t be about guns and bullets, as others have said, it will be about isolating the US, limiting its options for global adventurism. We’re already seeing the beginnings of that:
Those are all stories that we likely wouldn’t have seen, if Trump had lost the election. We’ll be seeing more of them.
I agree. In the event that Trump is eventually replaced by a rational president of either party (and I sure as hell don’t mean JD Vance) that president will be faced with an almost insurmountable task of reversing the incredible damage that’s been done to international relations. Restoring trust in the US will likely take generations, if it ever happens, given the rise and persistence of the authoritarianism and populism that elevated Trump to power in the first place, and the collapse of the checks and balances that was supposed to protect US democracy.
That’s no exaggeration. JD Vance will shortly be flying to Hungary to express his support for Viktor Orban in the upcoming fake elections, where the far-right Hungarian dictator has secured a stranglehold on the country and which Vance and the other Trumpists see as a model for the US.
Trump and his team are doing more to bring about collapse than any enemy could ever hope to do.
When the chaos stops and we can take a clear look at the damage, I think it will be so awful that the country will choose denial over repair.
And like happened in the past, for the sake of “working compromise” and “unity” the unrepentant MAGAs and broligarchs will be allowed to “honorably” go on doing their thing in their home turf in exchange for everyone pretending we got over it, while they build up their own Lost Cause myth.
It’s like the Trump administration saw this post from 2007 and said, “Hold my beer.”
China scores a 9/100 on global freedom and 9/100 on internet freedom.
The United states scores an 81/100 on global freedom and 73/100 on internet freedom.
The US is not good by western standards, but luckily we still have a lot of checks and balances to keep things from getting to that level one would hope.
Things are bad. We just have to keep fighting back in whatever ways we can to keep the numbers from slipping more and more.
No we don’t; and by all the evidence we never did, we were just pretending until Trump came along and casually walked all over those supposed “checks and balances”.
And internationally, which is again the relevant aspect for the rest of the world the US has been a relentless force for tyranny for decades. Installing dictators, promoting bigotry and authoritarianism, and just engaging in random acts of terror.
China hasn’t been nearly as bad as us internationally; short of just launching their nuclear missiles at everyone they haven’t had the power to be as bad as us even if they wanted to be.
We have some checks and balances. The judiciary is spineless and gets ignored by the executive. the federal legislature chooses not to resist Trump.
But states and cities are resisting Trump. People are protesting ICE. We have mostly free media.
People do not do mass protests in China because they’ll be arrested or shot. In Venezuela, when the opposition won the legislature the executive just took away all their power. China doesn’t have nearly as much media freedom as we do.
These checks and balances will hopefully slow our decline into authoritarianism. The dictatorship parties in Hungary and Poland want to create a Putin-esqe dictatorship, but they have checks and balances that limit the power of dictatorship parties.
A big part of why Venezuela transitioned to dictatorship is because they had an election to rewrite the constitution, and the people didn’t bother to vote. So Chavez rewrote the constitution giving himself and his party total power.
Again - tenses matter. You HAD a lot of checks and balances.
Did Nazi Germany have nuclear weapons?
I am probably repeating what others have said, but how can you put any credence in any treaty, alliance or agreement with the US, when you know that in four years a new president can tear it all up?
Or less, if it’s a treaty, alliance, or agreement with the current administration.
Not once a treaty has been ratified by the Senate, and for example the President can not unilaterally leave NATO.
Nonsense, the courts have ruled against trump and MAGA many times.
Trump could certainly stop cooperating with NATO, and pull troops, etc. The US has obligations under the treaty, but they’re not self-executing.