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.
I do not see any ambitions to do so. For the DNC it was business as usual after Trump’s first term.
We may have differing opinions on how broken the system is, but we can agree that the reason the rest of the world is abandoning the US is more than just Trump.
Abandoning is a melodramatic way of putting it. Diversifying is a more accurate term. And it’s something that the rest of the world shouldn’t have waited until this point to do. Other countries will always have to rely on the U.S. to some degree, but the fact that they let America be the world police in the first place is their own doing.
America was never promised to be a perfect utopia that could never do wrong. On the contrary, the founding fathers were well aware of the potential for things to go wrong, and they built the country to be resistant to a complete fall into tyranny, and so far it has been. You’re free to speculate on the future, but as of right now we haven’t yet reached the low points some of our now allies did just in this past century.
It’s the accurate way to put it. For example, Canadians are not diversifying their shopping habits. They are consciously choosing to abandon American made goods.
The US will also have to rely on other countries to some degree.
Ah. This soundbite is a little to close to propaganda. Should other countries be paying the US to be the world police force?
Including clauses like emoluments, restrictions on terms, separation of church and state etc. Many of which are being or have been eroded (the main topic of our discussion).
True. As of now the US has only regressed to “1960 civil rights” levels of democracy
It’s the emotion driven, factually inaccurate way to put it.
Looks like imports and exports over this summer are up over last year
How about not handing over that power to the US at all?
None of them have been. Arguing about things you don’t really understand is only a sign that maybe you’re not so different from the average flyover state American. Every point you’ve tried to make so far is either a critical misunderstanding, or is outright verifiably false.
We see that Canadians have increased their spending on domestic travel and on grocery products from Canadian companies and have reduced their spending on similar US products and services
The US outspending the collective military budget of many of it’s closest allies is not something they have control over. No power is handed over to the US.
Many have been. Refer to our previous conversation for the example.
They haven’t been. Our previous conversation confirms that. It’s just you saying things, as if merely speaking them makes them true, like some kind of Harry Potter spell. Like I said, it’s just ignorance on your part, misunderstanding the basis of things.
Oh course it has. Americas defense spending isn’t really a factor. With every defense agreement, trade agreement, and willful choice to put all your eggs in Americas basket, you handed over that power.
You have admitted several Supreme Court judges are compromised. I.e. several checks have already failed. Reversal of roe v wade and loss of human rights is solid evidence against your protestations.
I think recent actions of Spain are good counter examples of this not being true.
Even in the recent Greenland deal “Non-NATO members are barred from having an ongoing military presence in Greenland” shows the declining relationship between US and it’s “allies”. The terms bind the US into Nato, giving power to Denmark and demonstrate distrust of the US long past the Trump era.
That does not logically follow. The Supreme Court is a panel for a reason, the check succeeded. Again you don’t seem to know what the checks and balances are.
Not in the slightest. Not sure how you came to this conclusion.
You’re just kind of babbling incoherently at this point. It’s getting harder and harder to keep track of the mental gymnastics you’re doing. You’re replying like an AI chat bot that’s filled it’s context window.
The checks that are supposed to prevent compromised judges from sitting in the Supreme Court have failed. This we have agreed.
The panel voted 6-3 to reverse a federal constitutional right. The panel check failed.
If my simple reasoning is getting to much for you then maybe you should take a break.