Will Trump forever be a stain in American history?

[satimy]

Franklin didn't cause the Depression, he responded to it by creating jobs. Franklin made friends with Stalin out of necessity (there was this thing called "World War II".)

And no, no one can excuse the Japanese internment camps. So I guess I can give you one of those.

Frankln prolonged the depression with his pipe dream collectivist policies. There was no need to ally with the soviets. If anything it just bit us in the ass later

[Elegiac]

Considering an important aspect of your question is "on American History?" I am looking at it in the sum total of American history.

I suppose I interpret that to be an important qualifier. Considering even presidential history, we have had significantly more horrific presidents whose deeds were more chilling and terrible.

Trump's active badness is limited by his sheer inefficacy as an administrator; he's a spiteful and mean individual but is ultimately too lazy and has too short a span of attention to devote himself to actively pursuing bad policy.

His flaws as a President have much more to the disgrace he brings to the office through his behaviour.

[satimy]

Which says a lot about the United States since FDR was by and far one of if not the best administrator this country has seen in that office.

It's pretty easy to be a tyrant when half he country is starving to death. Look at how marvelous rocket man is in Best korea

[Edge-]

Frankln prolonged the depression with his pipe dream collectivist policies.

You mean the social programs that pumped a huge amount of money back into peoples hands and helped combat the effects of the Great Depression?

There was no need to ally with the soviets.

Except you know, World War II and all that.

[Elegiac]

Frankln prolonged the depression with his pipe dream collectivist policies.

Which is a neat little piece of Republican revisionism that isn't reflective of what actually happened. FDR ended the depression through his policies, that is a simple fact.

There was no need to ally with the soviets. If anything it just bit us in the ass later

"There was no need" is hindsight bias; at the time it made a high degree of sense since Russia pulled resources from the Axis powers that might otherwise have been spent combating the United States.

[Glorious Leader]

Frankln prolonged the depression with his pipe dream collectivist policies. There was no need to ally with the soviets. If anything it just bit us in the ass later

Let me guess. More laissez faire would have cured the depression? More deflation. More austerity. More suffering and missery. More hoover. Liquidate liquidate.

Even fucking hayek thought that position was stupid. Literally the only mistake fdr made was pulling back on spending when his advisors balked and cried.


As for brosif stalin, trump apparently had a quite pressing need to ally with putin. It may have won him the election.

[satimy]

Let me guess. More laissez faire would have cured the depression? More deflation. More austerity. More suffering and missery. More hoover. Liquidate liquidate.

Even fucking hayek thought that position was stupid. Literally the only mistake fdr made was pulling back on spending when his advisors balked and cried.


As for brosif stalin, trump apparently had a quite pressing need to ally with putin. It may have won him the election.

When put in kills 20 million get back to me

[Adam Jensen]

You mean the social programs that pumped a huge amount of money back into peoples hands and helped combat the effects of the Great Depression?



Except you know, World War II and all that.

Yeah, but ever since Obama and TARP (never mind that TARP was under Bush . . .), Conservatives have been playing this "revisionist history" game where they suddenly claim FDR "made the depression worse."

[Elegiac]

Yeah, but ever since Obama and TARP (never mind that TARP was under Bush . . .), Conservatives have been playing this "revisionist history" game where they suddenly claim FDR "made the depression worse."

The more impressive feat of mental gymnastics is saying 'government spending didn't get us out of the Depression, it was WWII'. You know, that even bigger government expenditure than the New Deal. Lol.

[Theodarzna]

Forever is a long time, so no.

I think it/he could be a catalyst for some introspection on the parts of the American Public though, which could be a good thing long term.

What do we want from our leaders? What is our role in the world? Are we going to be insular, and all about us, or a global partner, helping our friends, and other countries stand up their own stable governments, and communities, etc.

The issue has been that we tend to push our own ideology instead of actually helping.

When historically has that been the case?

[Theodarzna]

Globalization (though the current version I do not like), helping with aid (when natural disasters happen) helping in War (WW2), etc...

We just called it "spreading western ideals/democracy", etc... which... nothing wrong with that if the nation/people are ready... but blows up in your face when you force it on people.

Globalization in my mind sounds like the old "Civilizing" missionary initiatives of the last century. And we rarely give aid without string attached and are quick to punish any country that does anything we don't approve of.

I am just saying you seem to have a strangely angelic view of one and a demonic view of the other.

[Deleted]

Well google "worst us presidents ever" and figure if there is or not a place for him

[Sky High]

too early to make that call, at this point he'll end up being the lamest duck president in modern times. but at this point the less he and his party does the better.

[Theodarzna]

I am saying that the problem in what we have been doing is the "strings attached" part... Alter-Globalization is trying to be the "angelic" part, without the "demonic" part that I do not like.

But even the mixed version we are doing has been helping... world poverty is down. That is a good thing.

Yes, at the expense of western workers and almost exclusively to the profit of a very small select class of people.

[Draco-Onis]

Yes, at the expense of western workers and almost exclusively to the profit of a very small select class of people.

What do you suggest be done about it? I am sure you are aware that technology has made globalization pretty much guaranteed as the way forward. I understand the position of those against globalization but I have yet to hear good solutions. My point of view is that government in western countries need to facilitate better education to remain competitive not just against globalization but technology in general.

[PosPosPos]

I remember asking this after his immediate election and now curious almost a year on what thoughts are. I don't think anybody can argue he has negatively affected Americas reputation worldwide

Well, even before him the alt-right already existed and held a big chunk of power in the US, so Trump is simply one step up from that.

The US has been embarrassing itself ever since the Southern Strategy.

[Draco-Onis]

There are solutions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alter-globalization

"Alter-globalization (also known as alternative globalization, alter-mundialization—from the French "alter-mondialisation"—or the global justice movement) is the name of a social movement whose proponents support global cooperation and interaction, but oppose what they describe as the negative effects of economic globalization, considering that it often works to the detriment of, or does not adequately promote, human values such as environmental and climate protection, economic justice, labor protection, protection of indigenous cultures, peace, and civil liberties."

But I do not think we will get anything like this anytime soon...

I do not think that movements like these have enough political power to achieve what they set out to. We are talking about setting up a global network and movement across many countries and having enough political influence in each country to get a seat at the table that is a rather tall order.

[Fugus]

Forever, probably not. But for the next century. I think the last 17 years will.

We had Bush Jr who would have gone down as one of the worst presidents in History with all he had done if not for Trump outdoing him with his attempts.

Then you had Obama get into office with the Republican party doing everything they could to blame him for the failings of their own party even as he fixed them.

Then you had the election never before seen with a circus on the republican side with an entire sports team of candidates while on the Democrats you had it come down to 2 options, the independent who came in and came up fast and the Democrat who worked with the leadership in their own party to cheat and beat him as well as work with the media to push the worst and most extreme candidates to their front to give her the easiest patsy to win against and succeed in all of that.

Then in the general she lost to her own patsy because of her actions in the primary running off her voters.

Then the new guy came in being as mentally damaged as he let on while the republicans who worked so hard to blame Obama for Bush's mess now work to try and give him credit for all the successes of Obama. Then you have him and the republicans actively work to roll back everything Obama had did and try to pass laws to screw over America and it's people to sell them out to the wealthy and to corporations and try and blow a hole in the nations economy and it's debt like no president before and dismantle as much as they can on the way to make it harder to fix their mess.

The public actually starts paying attention more and blocks much of it (How much remains to be seen). The party that has been trying to take control for years and doing as much damage as they could to do so get their wish only to find they suck at it because they never actually made any plans worth anything in all that time grandstanding and sabotaging stuff. They are effectively the dogs that caught the car only not only do they have no clue what to do, they chewed off the wheels and damaged the car while they were chasing it and now have to deal with that as well.


I think the history books will have a field day with this for the next century at least unless some revisionists get to be the ones writing the books.

[Matchles]

With a little luck he will just be a footnote and will die in prison, broke and forgotten. Likely he will be remembered as the culmination of American Anti-intellectualism. Hopefully, we can then get past this idea that it is somehow a bad thing that we elect someone who actually knows what they are doing. The whole thing just reminds me of an Asimov quote.

"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'"

[Glorious Leader]

When put in kills 20 million get back to me

So presidents can associate with scum bags if their K/d ratio is under 1.0?