I'm thinking that if they're planning to drag the US into another war, then they need a united America seduced by the charm of a 'populist swamp-draining' leader. The threats he's made against Iran alone on multiple occasions, putting a preemptive blame on the country as the cause for his potential assassination is "interesting" at best for me. Should it all come down to another war, anyone who doesn't fall in line shall be ostracized and demonized with all the usual labels and tactics, especially if CBDCs become commonplace.
Other than that, the similarities between what we're witnessing now and what lead to Hitler's (and
his own connections to Zionism) rise to power are,
at least for me, hard to ignore.
Anyone who insists on comparing Trump to Hitler should at least keep in mind the significant differences between the two. That would make it a more
objective exercise IMO.
I'd give him a lot more credit and compare him to Napoleon. I think that's far more interesting. The way I see it is that any Great Man in History has to walk the dangerous line between Light and Darkness. The actions of the Great Man are based on a strategic balancing act between appeasing the earthly powers of many factions, and giving hope, employment, stability, and meaning to the masses.
Napoleon, as a revolutionary atheist, was known for his intelligence and ability to compromise - in particular with the power structure of his day, the Church and the royalists. Trump's version is the Art of the Deal. They're both bombastic pragmatists.
Napoleon stabilized and then rejuvenated a French society gone rotten and chaotic during the Revolution, and it seems Trump plans on doing the same for America after years of woke corruption. Though the stabilization in both cases can often look quite destabilizing.
Napoleon ushered in an Empire, while Trump stepped into one that's already in decline phase.
Napoleon vastly expanded France's borders and set up his family as rulers. Trump is also talking about territorial expansion, though not via artillery... and wouldn't it be something if Baron Trump became the first President of Mars?! Or Don Jr. as Secretary of the Moon?
Napoleon was a brilliant military/political/economic strategist, whereas Trump might just be an excellent political/economic strategist. I don't think he has any military acumen, though I could be wrong.
Napoleon was cornered by his geopolitical enemies, and exiled to Elba. He esccaped and returned to power without blood being shed. Trump endured his own form of exile at the hands of his enemies, and has returned to power without blood being shed... aside from the bullet to his ear. Napoleon then went on to rule for the famous '100 Days' - I'm hoping Trump gets more time than that.
Napoleon sought to contain the British Empire with his Continental System economic blockade. Geopolitics is downstream from geoeconomics. One big rival, Russia, felt the financial squeeze and was convinced by the Brits to break the blockade while the Brits went on the attack in Spain. Napoleon then sought to contain Russia, exactly as the Brits wanted, lost, and this eventually led to his downfall. Napoleonic France was over-extended. America is already over-extended, though Trump is working on that with the cuts to USAID. But the same danger is there - Trump's geoeconomic warfare could lead to geopolitical conflict in some form.
Napoleon destroyed the world order of his day, while simultaneously ushering in a new one. Though I don't think Trump is instituting anything brand new like Napoleon did, he's more into a return to American normalcy. I suppose we'll have to wait and see if Trump's destruction of the world order is as regenerative as Napoleon's, or if it will all go off the rails and MAGA will be hijacked into a new form of fascism, which is definitely a reasonable concern.
A white-headed dwarf gecko with tail lost due to autotomy
