Un manifestant anti-immigration masqué est arrêté à une barrière de police près du Parlement irlandais après qu'environ 500 personnes ont défilé à Dublin pour coïncider avec la réouverture du parlement le 19 septembre 2024. (Photo de Paul Faith / AFP) (Photo de PAUL FAITH/AFP via Getty Images)

L’Irlande exerce un effet étrange sur les Anglais. Un pays de fantaisie, si proche et pourtant si lointain ; à la fois étranger et, dans un sens intangible, jamais tout à fait ainsi. « Seul en Irlande, puisque ce n’était pas chez moi », écrivait Philip Larkin à Belfast, sans parler de Dublin. Et pourtant, « l’étrangeté avait du sens… nous étions en contact ».
Aujourd’hui, contrairement à l’époque de Larkin et à l’imaginaire collectif, il n’existe presque plus de sentiment anti-irlandais discernable en Grande-Bretagne. Fini le temps où une figure respectée comme J.B. Priestley pouvait fantasmer ouvertement sur l’exil des masses venues d’Irlande, entassées depuis les ports occidentaux de l’Angleterre. « Quelle grande épuration il y aura », écrivait-il. « Quelle belle sortie de l’ignorance, de la saleté, de l’ivresse et de la maladie. » Les héritiers respectables de Priestley aujourd’hui, s’il en existe encore, voient les Anglais sous un tel jour et l’Irlande comme un modèle de gouvernement sobre et solide.
Il est difficile de considérer l’Irlande sous un autre jour alors qu’elle se rend aux urnes pour élire un nouveau gouvernement. Quels que soient les problèmes qu’elle rencontre, et ils sont nombreux, la grande question structurelle qui divise la politique irlandaise aujourd’hui est, en essence, combien de son énorme excédent fiscal mettre de côté pour faire face à un éventuel choc lié à une présidence Trump. De tous les problèmes qu’elle pourrait avoir, il est juste de dire que celui-ci n’est pas le pire.
Peu importe combien de fois les observateurs britanniques tentent de balayer la richesse de l’Irlande comme une simple stratégie d’évasion fiscale, la réalité est que la plupart de l’Irlande est en réalité plus riche que la plupart de l’Angleterre — comme quiconque y passe même le plus bref moment peut en témoigner. Ce seul fait constitue un douloureux reproche envers l’État britannique, reproche qui ne suscite pas autant d’introspection qu’il le devrait. L’Irlande a mené une guerre pour quitter le Royaume-Uni lorsqu’elle était la partie la plus pauvre de ces îles. Elle est désormais plus riche que le pays qu’elle a quitté. Ce ne sont pas seulement les Écossais qui devraient être en colère à ce sujet.
Cependant, il y a quelque chose de frauduleux dans le succès actuel de l’Irlande, qui, comme le pays lui-même, semble étrangement familier pour l’observateur anglais. En 1997, tout juste sorti de sa victoire électorale écrasante, Tony Blair émerveillait la conférence du Parti travailliste à Brighton avec sa vision d’un avenir que la Grande-Bretagne dirigerait. Dans la grande économie mondialisée qui avait émergé des cendres de la guerre froide, Blair affirmait que la Grande-Bretagne deviendrait un « phare » pour le reste du monde à suivre, combinant le meilleur du dynamisme économique américain avec la conscience sociale européenne. Avec la City de Londres comme cœur battant, la Grande-Bretagne, selon lui, avait tous les ingrédients pour réussir au XXIe siècle : une économie ouverte et flexible soutenue par un peuple bien éduqué, libéral et tolérant, heureux dans sa propre identité multiculturelle. Bien que cette vision se soit depuis longtemps effondrée en Grande-Bretagne, elle reste le mythe réconfortant de l’Irlande moderne.
En observant l’Irlande de loin, la tentation est de la voir comme la dernière citadelle d’un monde perdu, celui de Fukuyama : la Constantinople byzantine juste avant sa chute, s’occupant naïvement de sa vie derrière des murs qui seront bientôt franchis. Peut-être est-ce pourquoi la classe politique irlandaise est si admirée par les centristes solitaires des podcasts britanniques, qui passent leur temps à déplorer la perte du monde civilisé d’avant la crise, dans lequel ils se sentaient à l’aise. L’Irlande, pour ces personnages, reste reconnaissable : une preuve vivante que leur vision du monde n’est pas dépassée, alors qu’ils errent seuls dans une Angleterre qui n’est plus la leur.
Cependant, la fragilité du modèle irlandais est évidente pour tous ceux qui y prêtent attention. En tant que tête de pont de la Silicon Valley échappant à l’impôt au sein de l’Union européenne, l’Irlande est particulièrement exposée à l’évolution du contexte géopolitique mondial. Il est d’ailleurs notable de constater à quel point cela a été compris et exprimé clairement pendant la campagne cette année.
En matière d’immigration, il existe également des parallèles évidents avec la Grande-Bretagne. Le revers de la position de l’Irlande en tant que grande plaine inondable pour le capital mondial est qu’elle doit aussi être un lieu d’arrivée pour les personnes. Un pays de seulement 5 millions d’habitants, l’Irlande connaît une migration nette d’environ 80 000 personnes — bien inférieure aux 600 000 à 1 million qui ont afflué en Grande-Bretagne ces dernières années, mais proportionnellement plus élevée. Avec une crise du logement qui, si tant est qu’elle existe, est encore plus aiguë qu’en Grande-Bretagne, les conditions d’une révolte populaire sont clairement visibles, même si l’on fait abstraction des émeutes qui ont secoué Dublin après qu’un immigrant naturalisé a attaqué des enfants d’école primaire à l’arme blanche.
Cela ne signifie aucunement que l’Irlande va s’effondrer, ni même nécessairement faiblir. Il est fort possible que le deuxième mandat de Trump soit aussi insignifiant que le premier, se contentant de bricoleurs dans les marges du commerce mondial sans en changer les fondements. Peut-être que l’Irlande ne dévoilera pas le vide de la prophétie de Blair, mais deviendra au contraire sa réalisation ultime, l’héritage de la Grande-Bretagne transféré à l’Irlande dans un grand affichage cosmique de karma impérial.
Au-delà de la simple économie, la politique irlandaise offre de nombreuses notes de prudence pour ceux du gouvernement Starmer qui scrutent les développements d’aujourd’hui. La première est que, peu importe combien la performance économique de l’Irlande a été impressionnante ces dernières années, il existe un profond malaise dans le pays, parfaitement reconnaissable. Sur des questions de logement, d’immigration et de services publics, la colère du public irlandais est aussi tangible et aiguë qu’au Royaume-Uni, nourrie du même sentiment intuitif que sa classe politique est devenue tellement distante qu’elle ne semble plus capable d’apprécier les préoccupations de ses propres citoyens.
Peut-être est-ce là aussi le prix de la richesse. J’ai été frappé, par le passé, par la façon dont sa classe politique semblait alors accessible. Lors du Derby irlandais à la fin des années 2000, j’ai eu l’occasion d’approcher le Taoiseach de l’époque, Brian Cowen, pour lui poser une question — un geste largement impensable en Grande-Bretagne. Cowen était, bien sûr, profondément impopulaire en raison de son rôle dans le crash financier, la figure malchanceuse qui est restée debout lorsque la musique s’est arrêtée. Pourtant, rétrospectivement, il incarnait un Fianna Fáiler authentique. Simon Harris, l’actuel Taoiseach de Fine Gael, représente la nouvelle génération de dirigeants irlandais : irrités, impopulaires, apparemment incapables de supporter un contact direct avec le peuple.
Le moment décisif de la campagne électorale a été une rencontre gênante dans un supermarché de Cork, lorsqu’une travailleuse sociale en larmes a accusé Harris d’ignorer ceux, comme elle, qui travaillaient pour de faibles salaires en s’occupant des personnes handicapées. « Non, vous ne l’étiez pas », a répondu Harris, seulement pour que la dame persiste : « Vous n’avez rien fait pour nous, notre peuple souffre », a-t-elle continué, la voix tremblante. « Ce n’est pas vrai de dire cela », a répliqué Harris, commençant à se frustrer. À ce moment-là, alors que la dame continuait à se plaindre, Harris a simplement tendu la main et s’est éloigné d’elle, avant de revenir sur ses pas comme s’il réalisait qu’il avait commis une terrible erreur. « Vous n’êtes pas un homme bien », a alors murmuré la dame, en larmes. « D’accord, eh bien si vous pensez que je ne suis pas un homme bien », a répondu Harris, avant de s’éloigner pour de bon, laissant les spectateurs murmurer, honteux. Cet échange, capturé en vidéo, a torpillé la campagne de Harris, son parti chutant dans les sondages en conséquence.
Pour un observateur anglais, tout cela semble remarquablement familier. En 2010, la campagne électorale de Gordon Brown a explosé après qu’il ait été enregistré en train de traiter une électrice de « femme bigote », tandis qu’au début de cette année, Rishi Sunak a fait échouer sa tentative de rester Premier ministre en abandonnant les célébrations du Jour J. À chaque occasion — Brown, Sunak et maintenant Harris — ont présenté des excuses serviles pour endiguer la perte de soutien. Et à chaque fois, du moins en Grande-Bretagne, ils ont échoué.
Le pouvoir de chacun de ces moments résidait non seulement dans leur embarras personnel, mais aussi dans le fait qu’ils semblaient capturer quelque chose d’essentiel sur le pays lui-même : le mépris des hypothèses et des préjugés de l’électeur ordinaire, que ce soit sur l’immigration, les soins de santé ou le patriotisme lui-même. Plonger dans les réseaux sociaux irlandais ces derniers mois donne certainement l’impression que la vision d’une élite déconnectée tenant les électeurs ordinaires en mépris est désormais aussi courante en Irlande qu’en Angleterre. Même Sinn Féin est maintenant accusé de trahison parmi certains nationalistes plus marginaux pour son attitude envers l’immigration. Ce n’est vraiment pas un bon chemin à suivre.
Pour moi, l’Irlande a toujours semblé offrir encore plus de preuves de l’observation caustique de George Orwell selon laquelle « l’Angleterre est peut-être le seul grand pays dont les intellectuels ont honte de leur propre nationalité ». Là-bas, il semblait y avoir une révérence plus profonde, entièrement non ironique, pour les mythes et symboles de la nationalité, une révérence qui a depuis longtemps disparu en Angleterre. L’énergie qui animait les historiens irlandais révisionnistes pendant les Troubles semble s’être éteinte. Tel est le poids de la révérence envers le récit officiel irlandais que, pour les unionistes du Nord, la terre de la République demeure aussi étrangère que jamais — ses coutumes ne sont pas les leurs.
J’ai toujours trouvé ironique que, tandis que l’Irlande est présentée par ceux qui ne connaissent pas bien son histoire comme un phare de l’internationalisme civilisé, elle puisse tout aussi facilement être définie comme un lieu de nationalisme conservateur réussi, du type rejeté en Grande-Bretagne. En effet, on pourrait soutenir que, pour que l’internationalisme soit durable, un pays doit d’abord avoir un nationalisme solide. Un ami diplomate irlandais m’a un jour dit en plaisantant que l’Anglais le plus choquant de tous n’était pas celui du noble de la classe dirigeante, vantard dans la légende, mais le libéral qui se déteste, admirant le nationalisme pittoresque des autres tout en rejetant le sien. Peut-être que l’inverse est également vrai : l’Irlandais moderne le plus surprenant est celui qui croit que son propre nationalisme n’est qu’une forme d’internationalisme moderne et éclairé.
L’Irlande, donc, reste une terre étrangère qui demeure familière par son accueil, même si elle évolue pour s’adapter au monde moderne. Aujourd’hui, en se rendant aux urnes, le Fine Gael de Harris, le Fine Gael de l’ancien Taoiseach Micheál Martin et le Sinn Féin de Mary Lou McDonald se partagent à égalité les voix, chacun autour de 20 %, ce qui semble mener vers une autre grande coalition centrée traditionnellement.
Pour l’Anglais moyen, habitué au scrutin uninominal majoritaire, un tel scénario pourrait sembler étrange, mais en même temps remarquablement familier. Il existe désormais une prise de conscience croissante au sein de la classe politique de Westminster que Reform UK pourrait faire à la politique britannique ce que Sinn Féin a fait en Irlande, non pas simplement disparaître, mais s’établir comme un nouveau parti viable, stabilisé autour de 20-25 % dans les sondages. Si cela se produisait, il y aurait un scénario plausible dans lequel le Parti travailliste, les Conservateurs et Reform UK entreraient dans la prochaine élection à égalité dans les sondages, avec la position de Premier ministre disponible pour le leader du parti capable de tirer le plus mince des avantages. Il y a même des analystes politiques de haut niveau qui spéculent sur un réalignement de la politique britannique dans lequel Reform UK, sous la direction de Farage, fusionnerait avec le Parti conservateur après la prochaine élection pour sécuriser la primature.
L’Irlande était autrefois destinée à suivre la Grande-Bretagne, son grand frère de l’autre côté de la mer. Peut-être qu’elle nous montre maintenant notre avenir de bien des façons. Londres, Belfast et Dublin restent connectées, chacune à sa manière.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThese are lefties prtending to be Republicans at these ersatz town halls.
I am a registered Democrat, and I support Doge 98%. I have been screwed by the unaccountable bureaucracy for my entire life – just like the Trump voters have. You knew the haters were gonna hate, right? A third of you knew it and were twitching to echo the poorly informed “backlash” BS.
It’s been a MONTH, b*tches! Wait until something real happens before you crap your guts out.
Mr. Bauer, do you really believe what you just wrote? In every poll, and I don’t care for polls, there is over 60 % support for auditing and restructuring the Feds. I can only assume that you are aware of this support so I have determined that you are nothing but a hack shill. No real discussion, just the “talking points” of the folks who have been eating at the trough for far too long.
Discussions of economic politics still make the assumption that the voters are like isolated self-interest robots, only concerned with their own finances.
But other issues pertain. Just in the first month so many people have been fired or threatened with firing, in NGO jobs as well as Federal jobs, that many voters see their friends and neighbors suffering. And now the talk in the news has turned to programs that hundreds of thousands of people depend on.
If the richest man in the world told me I didn’t need food stamps or public schools for my kids I would certainly be angry. Mr. Trump would do well to brush back DOGE before he makes too many new enemies. He still needs those voters to get him through the all-important mid-term elections.
The indiscriminate firings touch everyone in the US. It’s particularly annoying that the firings have concentrated on probationary workers, who are young persons mostly. Many parents are very concerned about their fledglings and independence. So, now that they have a decent job, that f*****g asshole Musk comes along and fires them WITHOUT CAUSE. Many of them already have had good or excellent reviews. It’s just a bitter pill, and is destroying Trump’s support.
Most of this jobs in NGOs are bullshit jobs for useless woke parasites.
Now they can go and find jobs in real economy.
But no one want wasters with degrees in gender studies.
Idea that this people would ever vote for Trump in for the birds.
It is the same in uk. Previous “Conservative”, ha, ha, government should had fired hundreds of thousands of uncivil service and NHS parasites but it never did.
The town halls are more than political theater- they’re pure astroturf.
See recent polls- from a left-leaning pollster.
It was quite a feat to write this article but not mention the Harvard Harris poll from Monday that showed a 76% approval for DOGE among the public. In fact almost all of Trump’s flagship policies (deportations and wall, men in wome’s sport, ending race-based hiring practices, ending drilling bans, cutting foreign aid, tariffs) had majority support.
Indeed.
Modern Washington DC has almost never been forced to weather an economic downturn (such as a recession) and in the rare cases that it has, it bounces back faster than other areas. Because the government always finds a way to not only fund itself but also to grow – even if this means accruing $36 trillion in debt and an additional $2 trillion in accumulating yearly loans that our children’s children will have to pay back.
Individual stories of government layoffs may be sad, but this doesn’t mean that the layoffs aren’t necessary. The alternative is so much worse.
The American people understand this, and they overwhelmingly support this once-in-many-lifetimes chance to start getting America’s financial books in order.
In many regards it is far too early to conclude Trump already in serious trouble, but the chainsaw was always going to hit some of his constituency. And he won no landslide. Doesn’t take much to peel away sufficient to lose the House entirely in 20mths. Having a Billionaire in the White House and the World’s richest man cutting programmes whilst his companies acquire further Federal contracts (see Starlink and the FAA) an increasing gift to opponents. Yes absolutely an elite controls power – a real Estate & Tech Bro Billionaire elite. A great Betrayal. You can it in lights already.
And this is before the real fight in the House for his Reconciliation Bill. Here his prioritisation of tax cuts for the v rich will receive further spotlight juxtaposed with an increase in national debt and cuts to programmes that just may support many in need.
The WWF smack-down distraction twaddle will only get you so far.
I actually got a tax cut in 2017 too. Helped a ton. You may want to modify your “tax cuts for the rich theory” when many working class people significantly benefit.
He promised alot of tax cuts in his 2024 campaign. Remember the one on tips? Now watch carefully which one’s he prioritises in his Reconciliation Bill. You can be sure that relating to the top 0.1% will be prioritised. As the US treasury published itself a continuation of that gives the top percent £360k a year benefit. The ‘little guy’ gonna get screwed and you know it.
I care about my family. Is my disposable income going to increase or decrease?
Depends where you are on the strata TB, how secure your employment, type of industry you work in, your age, your asset owning situ, and your health status. Things could already be loaded in your favour. But for many things are not loaded in their favour.
And as you know if inflation ahead of wage growth…
Inflation always hits the poorest more. Who’s paying the cost of tariffs?
I sense though you may put much stock in your personal position in coming to judgment. Of course many will do that. But society relies on us also appreciating better what it like for many others less fortunate.
The problem with what DOGE is doing is that increasing efficiency seems to be a benefit but it usually is not. Taking out the slack in a complex system usually doesn’t make it work better, it makes it work worse.
Take the food distribution system. People can see that there’s a lot of wasted food and they think that’s a problem that’s easy to solve. But it’s not. It’s really, really hard not to waste food. Try too hard, and some people will starve.
My sense is that about 20% slack in a complex system is about right. So that’s about 80% efficiency. Beyond that, you probably make the system more brittle and fragile and that offsets any sayings from efficiency.
Take Elon Musk’s Twitter as an example. Elon Musk went in and cut 75% of his staff yet the company still operates about the same as it did. A success, right? Sure, unless you look at the value of the company now compared to when he bought it. On that metric it’s about as big a failure as it could be.
But company was never worth what Musk paid for it.
He knew it and tried to back out of a deal but sale deal was so tight that he could not.
So congrats to lawyers on the sale side.
His decision to fire woke parasites from Twitter was a right one.
Obviously you are in denial about censorship on Twitter under old management.
Just follow Twitter Files to find out.
Nope. You need to a better job of following the money Fred. The noise at the townhalls is from Soros backed, USAID funded (previously) progressive activists. Plenty of real journalist sources for that.
No doubt you can supply some of these real journalist sources for this insane claim?
(This is where he says he isn’t going to do my homework for me and then scuttles away with his tail between his legs – just watch!)
Let me help. Check out this and the references in it…
https://freebeacon.com/media/mainstream-media-outlets-cited-red-district-doge-protests-as-proof-of-broad-musk-backlash-soros-funded-liberal-groups-organized-them/
…well at least its my own tail down there and not some woke ideolog’s tongue as with your carcass Chamsoc. Check out the Washington Beacon for relevant video content,
And guess who were the major financial supports of the right-wing tea party protest during the Obama era: the billionaire Koch Brothers and their org “Americans for Prosperity” So it seems both sides have their billionaire supporters. And each side tries to use that fact to invalidate the actions / arguments of their opponents, claiming that the protesters were bought and paid for. Is it really hard that hard to believe that people have genuine anger that wasn’t paid for by a billionaire. One of my brothers hated Obama but he ever received any $ from Koch while my sister despises Trump and Musk. She hasn’t received a dime from Soros. But go ahead hate on people who are probably more like you than you imagine.
There’s no hate at this end Nick. But as others are pointing out, the only mode Progessives are actually capable of operating in is political Kabuki theatre. In their safe spaces within the bureaucracy/academy/media complex they have been incompetent self dealing, failures. And now Trump is stripping off their masks, and ripping up their fantasy scripts. Everybody will be better off as a result, including the newly maskless, who must now embrace the actual human condition that life is not a movie read-through.
Another headline question were the answer is no.
Sometimes its not even worth mocking you people…
I know how you feel
I was on about CS
Haha yes, they do that a lot, especially with the DOGE topic.
Dont believe the fear porn, Europe. Nice try, trying to convince the average citizen there’s a downside to cutting the bloat. That we should feel sympathetic and that there will be some horrible backlash to cutting the corruption and the thousands of empty desks and money going to NGOs. What a joke. It’s all the same playbook, attack Trump, attack Musk, leverage the lefties, as they cling to the lies and TDS. And don’t forget how much was exposed, which shows the global/leftist/democrat funded media and all the baddies, have a big stake and billions of dollars in manipulating you to believe you want this big, fat, corrupt leftist self destruction. I have been loving unherd, but interesting not one article with specifics about what’s actually exposed. They think you are so stupid.
Here’s the website, if you care to look and not put your faith in the media at all. Sadly, that seems to include unherd. I think we all know how the baddies behave when we are over the target. Fear, smears and gaslighting.
https://www.doge.gov/
Is this the website that claimed an $8BN savings when it was actually $8M?
Yeah, these guys are right on top of things! Honestly, even I am sometimes surprised at how gullible you hicks are!
You’d be one of the lefties they leverage. Well played.
“town halls are political theatre, and progressive activists have recognised in them an opportunity to hold Republicans’ feet to the fire.”
This one sentence sums up the entire story. Nobody knows how to work the public meeting space like progressive activists.
The DOGE fanatics remind me of the climate fanatics. Both have reasonable goals — to eliminate the federal deficit in one case and to eliminate carbon emissions in the other.
In both cases those goals are aspirational but unachievable, at least in the near term. There’s no way to cut trillions of dollars from the federal budget. There’s no way to get to net zero.
When people pursue fanatical and fantastical goals they tend to do their cause more harm than good. They often generate a backlash that stops all progress when if they had been less doctrinaire and ideological they could have achieved much of what they sought. So they get 20% of what they want instead of 80%.
What’s the answer? Give up a little to the other side. Recognize they are not evil and let them save face instead of forcing them to eat dirt. Be reasonable instead of forceful. Push but don’t shove.
Replied to your deleted post first…
Have you ever looked at political contributions from different agencies, say USAID?
Does a 97% donation rate imply neutrality to you? I’m not sure how any organization could get that partisan let alone a supposedly neutral agency.
Should I as a Republican voter just assume Correlation is not Causation. Would Democrat voters assume there was no partisan bias if donations were 97% Republican?
Every honest person knows the answer. Standard operating procedure for the Left is to push as far as they can when in power then urge the Right to be cautious when we’ve got the reins.
Right on, Mr. Bone.
97% donation rate? What are you babbling about now?!?!?
Its hard to make any sense of your “thoughts” here but are you suggesting that 97% of USAID donations went to democrats? Because that is stupid even for you!
According to Open Secrets it was 96.74% to Democrats and 3.26% to Republicans. Go ahead and check yourself. I’ll be eagerly awaiting your apology.
Do you know what USDAID is? Had you ever heard of it before Trump decided that he didn’t like it? Have you done even the most basic research about it since then?
Obviously the answer to all of these questions is a resounding NO!
Your comments make me thankful ..that at least the U.S. taxpayer dollars used to deceive the useful idiots, hasn’t gone to waste. Money well spent.
I sure do CS. Let me know if you want to have a substantive discussion.
OK. Point me to a reliable source that says that 96.74% of USAID donations went to Democrats. A link to the actual story because I looked at Open Secrets and it said nothing of the kind.
If you go to the USAID page on Open Secrets and click on Totals it has a chart of the Democrat to Republican contributions and percentages by election year dating back to 1990.
In 2006 contributions were 52% Republican. In 2008 it went to 69% Democrat. 2010 was 89% Democrat and from 2012-2024 its all over 90% Democrat.
You can’t handle the truth: They ARE evil.
That is the recipe more for the same old same old.
.
Have you ever looked at political contributions from different agencies, say USAID?
Does a 97% donation rate imply neutrality to you? I’m not sure how any organization could get that partisan let alone a supposedly neutral agency.
Should I as a Republican voter just assume Correlation is not Causation. Would Democrat voters assume there was no partisan bias if donations were 97% Republican?
It would be interesting to know where you’re coming from, Carlos. It’s not that nothing you say has any value. It’s just that you don’t seem to have come to terms with the mood of our side of the spectrum.
Nobody voted for Trump expecting nuance. Our exasperation over decades of the political class not stewarding the country well reached a head. We tried the diplomatic approach to no avail, so we sent a bouncer.
In other words, read the room. There’s no strategy other than full sunlight.
You’re conflating a lot, Fred. Do some more research.
Red-District DOGE Protests, Cited As Proof of Broad Musk ‘Backlash,’ Were Organized By Left-Wing Groups
Yes, exactly. It’s all orchestrated and Doge is showing the receipts
Free Beacon? LOL!
Again, you people are beyond mockery! But that won’t stop me doing it anyway!
You may be the person held in lowest esteem here, but you seem too obtuse to realize it.
Given all the time evidently on your hands, no one will be surprised.
What did they expect? Trump inherited a booming economy from Obama, drove it into the ground through his lavish tax cuts for the richest Americans and his grotesque incompetence during the first year of Covid.
Biden may have received little credit for it but his administration did the hard work of turning the economy around and the pain that involved.
I suspect that many US voters are starting to realize that they may have elected an imbecile and the person actually running the government is a racist megalomaniac.
Kamala Harris must be looking pretty good to them right about now – shame that its too late for that…
Polls show the Trumpster is off to a phenomenal start. Still, he hasn’t moved to reduce income taxes yet.
Once he slashes income taxes and replaces it with the hearty 90% trust fund tax, we will be swimming in revenue.
I’m not sure that you know what the word phenomenal means.
Anyway, the true MAGA lunatics like you don’t care about facts and will blindly follow your dumbo cult leader regardless of what nonsense he spouts. Its the few in the middle that matter and when they see inflation going up, chaos in the government, services being cut willy nilly and maniacs like Dan Bongino being appointed to senior roles we’ll soon see Trump’s already squishy approval numbers tank.
Reality will eventually strike the Trump fantasy world, the shitshow is only starting, a huge market crash is coming with a slowing economy and fiscal crisis. Income tax cuts with a 2 trillion annual deficit? Good luck with that. And don’t tell me they will slash government spending and social security and Medicare amd defense spending to give more to the rich, which will cause a depression. Trump will sink like a rock. The great swindle will be exposed soon.
In the next 4 years we will have learned what NPD abuse and the shared fantasy is on a global scale.
Let’s remove the schoolground politic of Dem/Rep
This is about psychopathology and the shared fantasy – In this instance we have two unchecked, phenomenally rich/powerful guys who fit the bill of malignant NPD running the country with the safety off.
Unlike other leaders falling into the NPD bracket (Blair, Clintons, Obama, Reagan) but these two are genuinely sadistic. They don’t care about anyone, or anything, they dont even care about MAGA. The whole world is an object to play with and reality is something to be played with.
Right now they are trying to find a way to solve the crisis in the debt system where the US stopped QE and collapsed the bond market. Which is why we are seeing the state being torn up, which is why we are seeing deals in Ukraine, which is why we are seeing a pullback in global military committment.
Basel regs meant all banks had to hold a certain amount of long duration debt and They have been running false pricing on overnight swaps for 2 years now, and that only leads for every other broke bank to increase risk because like SVB, they know the gov (or Jamie Dimon as a proxy for the gov) will bail them out. (Wait? Who’s freeloading on gov time now?)
All of this is another fantasy. The US cannot keep expanding if it tariffs the rest of the world without forcing new alliances amongst nations which redeuce their dependency on the US. It cannot cut all wealfare support without creating a revolutionary reaction internally. The USA cannot project power if it pulls troops away – which then takes away the ability for the US to use it’s most powerful weapon – The Dollar. GDP Q/Q comes out tomorrow and I have bet that it spells stagflation.
Meanwhile, it cannot rebuild the gap in the demographics required to restructure taxation (especially at the lower rates they aim for) without immigration. You can’t have kids in the past.. We missed that boat 15 years ago.
Oh and back to psychopathology – not only do narcs self destruct blaming the country/family/relationship for not living up to their impossible fantasy. But they turn on each other. Elon and Trump wont be able to be in the same room at the same time after a while… MAGA will tear itself apart.
None of this feels good. Apart from feeling gobally unsafe, it actually ends up with the end of the USA as we know it. Some of you may be indifferent, but we are going to see a lot of people dying. On a global scale. Trump just opened up a multipolar world when all his voters were voting for a Unipolar one.
Some of this is true. The mistake is not recognizing that the world already broke away from Unipolarity with BRICS. Thats 55% of the world’s population.