Trump Elected: The True MAGA Era Begins, Now What?

Here is a level-headed article on Trump's most recent forays into Greenland, Canada, and the Panama Canal. It overhypes the danger from China, but otherwise makes some good points IMO


Why is it that people are always calling for someone to think "outside the box," then when someone does, say, "Aaaak! He thought outside the box!"

In that view, President-elect Donald J. Trump has already committed (at least) three heresies: Buy Greenland, stop China from controlling the Panama Canal and deepen America's affiliation with Canada.

All three ideas are neither crazy nor even new.

President Harry S. Truman looked at acquiring Greenland in 1946. Thomas Jefferson, after the Louisiana Purchase, proposed buying Cuba – just think how the Cubans would be prospering now, politically and economically, if that deal had gone through. Those acquisitions didn't take place but in 1917, the US did acquire Denmark's Virgin Islands for $25 million. As historian Stephen Press writes,

"As secretary of state, John Quincy Adams arranged debt relief for Spain in exchange for Florida. Secretary of State William Seward acquired Alaska. What Mr. Trump proposes is consistent with this American tradition—and with our current borders. Sovereignty purchases are responsible for more than 40% of U.S. land...

"History suggests the benefits of being open-minded about this. Inhabitants of Alaska wouldn't be better off under Russian sovereignty. Bringing Greenlanders into closer affiliation with the U.S., and sweetening the deal with economic subsidies, could conceivably prove beneficial to all parties"
As for the Panama Canal, President Jimmy Carter handed it to Panama for $1, but on the condition that it permanently remain a neutral zone – not one controlled at both ends by China. "We gave the Panama Canal to Panama," Trump has pointed out. "We didn't give it to China. They've abused that gift."

The US built the Panama Canal in the first place to be able to avoid having commercial and military sea traffic avoid the long journey around South America's southernmost sea route, the Strait of Magellan – where the Chinese Communist Party also located a base.

If there were to be a conflict with Communist China, it would be easy enough for them to block the Canal to U.S. use. As China expert Gordon G. Chang has pointed out:

"China's port facilities are at both ends of the canal. And when Gen. Laura Richardson took a helicopter ride over the Canal Zone, this was the middle of 2022; she said she 'looked down and saw all of these dual-use facilities.' ... at a time of war, they could make the canal totally useless.... They say that we have a two-ocean Navy. Well, we would have two separate navies. It'd be very difficult to get ships from the Atlantic to the Pacific, or vice versa."
Closer ties with Canada, as Trump appears to see them, would make a united-in-some-way North America a formidable landmass to any would-be adversary. "You get rid of that artificially drawn line," Trump stated, "and you take a look at what that looks like, and it would also be much better for national security. Don't forget, we protect Canada."

Trump seems to have been merely responding to the opening provided him by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, days before the latter announced that he would be resigning. According to Trump:

"I said what would happen if we didn't do it. He said Canada would dissolve. Canada wouldn't be able to function, if we didn't take their 20% of our car market... So, I said to him, well, why are we doing it? He said, I don't really know. He was unable to answer the question, but I can answer it. We're doing it because of habit, and we're doing it because we like our neighbors ,and we've been good neighbors. But we can't do it forever and it's a tremendous amount of money. And why should we have a $200 billion deficit and add on to that many, many other things that we give them in terms of subsidy?"
Trump has also announced a "Made in America," tax break incentive for investment in the US, and a "Golden Age of America."

It seems to have begun already -- and he is not even president yet.
 
"History suggests the benefits of being open-minded about this. Inhabitants of Alaska wouldn't be better off under Russian sovereignty. Bringing Greenlanders into closer affiliation with the U.S., and sweetening the deal with economic subsidies, could conceivably prove beneficial to all parties"

I mean, the US is on the brink of financial collapse. If the US economy collapses, so will Canadas, Central America's, South America's, Europe's, Australia's, and probably most of the rest of the world. Sure, the effects on the BRICS countries will be somewhat mitigated, but it will still be a huge blow. If incorporating all neighboring countries from Greenland down to Panama staves off collapse for even a few years to buy time and try to restructure the US debt (and the bureaucracy that caused this situation), that is a win for most of the world. Sure, it is imperialistic, but it may be one of those "forced choices".

Session 26 December 1998:
Q: Is the 'buried treasure' of the Templars or Cathars, or whoever, manuscripts from the Alexandrian library telling about the true origin and nature of man?

A:
Well if so, maybe that would explain the structure you live under.

Q: Society? The Universe? The EM grid? Any or all of the above? What structure do I live under?

A:
Forced choices.

Per chat GTP, the combined National GDP for Canada, Greenland, Mexico, Belize, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Costa Rica, and Panama is about $5 Trillion. Combine that with the asset value of untapped resources, and you may get a situation where Trump can continue to borrow money aggressively to fund the major projects needed to pay off the debt. I'm not sure if Trump is actually planning to incorporate these countries into the United States or if he is just using this rhetoric to make some major deal which would have a similar effect, but there is no doubt in my mind that one or the other is in the cards. Now whether such a plan will be successful...

Session 27 February 2016:
(L) Well, Edgar Cayce said that World War III would start in the Middle East or thereabouts and that Syria and Turkey and all this was involved. I don't remember the exact details of what was said. But it really looks like they're gonna try to push it to that direction.

A: Or other "world" events may intervene.

Q: (L) Such as comets or weather or something?

A: Yes
 
If incorporating all neighboring countries from Greenland down to Panama staves off collapse for even a few years to buy time and try to restructure the US debt (and the bureaucracy that caused this situation), that is a win for most of the world

No doubt, it sounds very nice, but in reality, historically, Imperialism achieves its goals through military means. While the elites and citizens of the empire do not suffer, the indigenous people of the places where resources are to be exploited to make the empire great certainly pay with poverty, underdevelopment and death.

No doubt it's a win for the world from the materialistic perspective, let's prolong this unjust world as long as possible, it's like the Lizards' desire to perpetuate themselves in 4D

Screenshot_20250111-125819_X.jpg
Screenshot_20250111-125855_X.jpg
 
I came across this comment on the durans latest youtube video

I resonated with what the poster shared

''From a very high, "realist" perspective - say, from the perspective of the moon looking at earth - what I suspect is going to happen is Trump will white-wash the genocide in Gaza (not to mention all the other horrors of Neo-Con warmongering) in order to stabilize the Middle East as part of a profit-seeking plan to, a) exploit the big oil/gas deposits under Gaza and off Gaza; b) insure Israel's survival also using Syria's stolen oil, water and wheatfields; and c) secure the New Silk Road corridor from Asia to Europe via Israel-controlled countries. The Gaza genocide must be whitewashed and memory-holed for this larger economic plan to unfold smoothly - a plan designed not just to save Israel but to (try to) prevent a 1929-type Great Depression in the U.S. (i.e., to save our banksters and billionaire corporate monopolists, with maybe some "trickle-down.") I DO think that this plan would likely stabilize the Middle East (reduce the carnage) and may well extend the profit-taking years of the U.S. profiteers but it would be at the cost of our souls. Our souls - that is, the souls of all good people in the West - aside, the first step for the above plan would be to enlist Russia in stabilization of the Middle East. That seems to be under way. Spheres of influence will be clarified and avoiding clashes like Ukraine. Rivalry will be moved to the economic/trade sphere. How China and BRICS fare with this new U.S. policy, who knows? But I think it will be similar - avoidance of war. That is certainly a good thing, if humans are to survive at all.''


 
No doubt, it sounds very nice,
I did not say nor imply that. I argued it was the might be best case scenario given the current circumstances.

but in reality, historically, Imperialism achieves its goals through military means.
Usually yes but not always. Sometimes counties just buy other countries peacefully as Beau's post shows. Trump is not threatening Greenland, Canada, Panama ect. with military intervention. Nor is anyone here encouraging that.

While the elites and citizens of the empire do not suffer, the indigenous people of the places where resources are to be exploited to make the empire great certainly pay with poverty, underdevelopment and death.
Again, usually yes, but not always. No one here is arguing to rape and pillage Greenland or whoever. I was just adding some color to Beau's post that describes the potentially positive side of Imperialism. Russia, China, and BRICS engage in win-win diplomacy all the time.

Frankly, I think you're missing the point. Maybe I've misread your posts, and I'll admit I'm not 100% sure what you are trying to convey in all of them. But the point I'm trying to make is that Imperialism is not intrinsically bad. Global economic collapse is a lose-lose scenario for every country on the planet. If it is possible that incorporating other countries into the US prevents global economic collapse and allows time for, "the bureaucracy that caused this situation [to be restructured]", then how can I be against that?

I'd suggest reading the Hispanic Identity and the black legend thread for a nuanced look at the Spanish Empire. In short, there was quite a lot of good that came Spanish imperial expansion into South America.
 
Back
Top Bottom