Donald Trump’s bruising return to the White House has sent many longtime foreign allies scrambling to get their distance, and according to a new piece from The Atlantic, that distance will last long after Trump is gone.

Trump’s second term as president has been marked by notable and widespread disrespect toward nations once seen as close U.S. allies. Between his attempts to level massive tariffs against nearly every nation in the world and his frequent breaches of diplomatic norms, Trump has created a hostile global environment in which allies no longer feel safe trusting in the stability of the U.S.

In a new piece for The Atlantic on Tuesday, staff writer Vivian Salama argued that this new dynamic, in which the nations of the world are working to establish a safe distance from the U.S., is bound to become the new normal for years to come, even after Trump leaves office and is potentially replaced by a more traditional, dependable administration.

  • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    No constitution can protect you from voting for an absolute buffoon.

    The constitution is a piece of paper. It’s the ones in power that enforce it, and you gave all the power to a clown.

    • slickgoat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      In our case, it’s not the constitution. It’s a result of long running electoral reform. in essence, political parties nor politicians can fuck with the electoral system nor boundaries. It’s run by an independent commission. Parties are welcome to make a submission suggesting change, evenake a case for change, but if it doesn’t match the set criteria, they get shut down. Unlike your states who can redraw boundaries to pick their voters.

      • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Do those independent commissions have their own military? If not, they can be ignored.

        Of course, institutions and constitutions can protect against some power. But at the end of the day, whoever has the police and military on their side has the last word.

        If democracies don’t often end up as military dictatorships is because people usually vote for parties that at least say they are pro-constitution and pro-independent institutions. Therefore the military ends up in the hands of someone that values those independent institutions.

        But if you give the power on purpose to a party that openly claims they don’t give a shit about the rule of law, you get the USA.

        As I said, constitutions and independent entities only have power if the ones in charge of the military (the ultimate power source) follow the constitution and the law voluntarily.