The Trump Doctrine Against Neoliberal Globalism. A European Perspective [1 ed.]

Table of contents :
Introduction
Chapter One THE REBELLION AGAINST SUPERCLASS
§ 1. Deplorables
§ 2. Superclass
§ 3. The American Turnaround
Chapter Two THE NEOLIBERAL GLOBALISM
§ 1. Evolution of the Neoliberal Doctrine
§ 2. Liberalism and Neoliberalism
§ 3. Neoliberalism and Globalization
§ 4. The Global matrix
a. The Supremacy of the unelected
b. Unchurching of society
c. Identity politics
§ 5. The capture of the two parties in the United States
a. Features of American political parties
b. "The Orphans of Trotsky"
Chapter Three THE TRUMP DOCTRINE
§ 1. Glazes of three epochs
§ 2. The information tsunami
§ 3. The long road to the White House
§ 4. Framing the Doctrine (1988-2015)
§ 5. The Trump Doctrine in action (2016-2018)
a. America First or über alles?
b. Economic nationalism vs. free trade
c. Against the unchurching of society and identity politics
Conclusion: TIBA INSTEAD TINA
Addendum: Speeches and Remarks
Bibliography
About the Author

Citation preview

2

“We reject the ideology of globalism, and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism. We reject global governance and embrace international cooperation of sovereign nationstates.” - Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America

3

Introduction Chapter One THE REBELLION AGAINST SUPERCLASS § 1. Deplorables § 2. Superclass § 3. The American Turnaround Chapter Two THE NEOLIBERAL GLOBALISM § 1. Evolution of the Neoliberal Doctrine § 2. Liberalism and Neoliberalism § 3. Neoliberalism and Globalization § 4. The Global matrix a. The Supremacy of the unelected b. Unchurching of society c. Identity politics § 5. The capture of the two parties in the United States a. Features of American political parties b. "The Orphans of Trotsky" Chapter Three THE TRUMP DOCTRINE § 1. Glazes of three epochs § 2. The information tsunami § 3. The long road to the White House § 4. Framing the Doctrine (1988-2015) § 5. The Trump Doctrine in action (2016-2018) a. America First or über alles? b. Economic nationalism vs. free trade c. Against the unchurching of society and identity politics Conclusion: TIBA INSTEAD TINA Addendum: Speeches and Remarks Bibliography About the Author

5 10 10 17 21 30 30 38 43 46 47 54 58 63 63 67 75 75 80 89 96 112 113 125 130 132 136 184 189

4

Donald J. Trump launched his presidential campaign on June 16, 2015, at the Trump Tower in New York City. On November 8, 2016, he won the election, and on January 17, 2017, officially took office. Seventeen months later - on November 6, 2018, the midterm elections in the United States took place. Progressive and liberal mainstream media, Hollywood celebrities and talking heads of all caliber spilled Trump, his ideas, politics, and supporters, with indiscriminate denial, unmistakable hatred, satanic insults, calls for coups and violence. Anti-Trump activists and leftwing extremists of Antifa beat and harass women, men, and youth who wear the signature Trump campaign red MAGA hats. The American media Breitbart has documented six hundred thirty-nine violent incidents, many of which recorded on video. Trump opponents spread with a diabolical delight his "cut-off" head covered with butaforine "blood." They urinated on his star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. They mocked him, sware at him, cursed and ridiculed him. Everywhere. On social networks, shows, and public events. The US ruling elite did not stop for a moment. A total of 177 weeks. 1239 days. 29 736 hours. No interruption. Effect? Almost zero. The people elected Trump. His policy has the necessary public support and has already dismantled step-by-step the status quo of the neoliberal globalism found in the world over the last four decades. His enemies' expectation that a "blue wave" would come in the US midterms and Trump would be delegitimized would not be justified. There is a fierce and historical political battle in the United States of America. The Democrat opposition is hysterical against President Trump even at the expense of provocations, such as the defamatory campaign

5

against Judge Brett Kavanaugh. With all authorized and unauthorized techniques of partisan and propaganda struggle. Progressive and liberal media, which are most commonly read and reprinted in Europe, lead a real war against Trump. Conservative and independent press, which are rarely read in Europe and seldom reprinted, are conducting their "Stalingrad battle." Why is this fierceness, that hatred? Why is there no argument and clash of ideas, but shouting, intolerance, and malice? The short answer is the political battle is "life and death," because Donald Trump and his policy are the most severe threat to the dominant status quo of neoliberal globalism - a status quo that has brought the world into massive social inequalities, a financial and economic crisis, and a sharp international tension. Moreover, last but not least, to aggressive attempts to change the sociocultural code of modern civilization through identity politics and militant atheism. It put at stake the power and resources of a global ideological sect that has overwhelmed American institutions, politics, and the media in the last four decades and installed its loyal followers in the European political elite. The geopolitical architecture of the world is under radical transformation - from a unipolar world with the USA as an imperial center and a "world policeman" and the EU as its privileged periphery, into a multipolar world based on the keen competition and balance between Washington, Beijing, and Moscow. The economic model and the value priorities of the modern world are being restructured. Donald J. Trump personified and led the rebellion that shook the mainstay of neoliberal globalism in the United States. He started dismantling of the status quo and did not fit comfortably into it, as many expected. The status quo failed to tame him. It is the ideological change of the White House that is the main reason for the massive attacks on the 45th President of the United States. There was a long period in which the

6

two major parties in the United States differed as much as Coca-Cola and Pepsi - only in nuances because they were taken over by the symbiosis between neoliberal economic doctrine and neoconservative geopolitical vision. This status quo is rooted - it has its fed people in all political factions, at all levels in politics, media and culture. For all of them, a political change brought by Trump involves a revision of social status, power resources inevitably, and let us say the life comfort that they reside "on the right side of history." The anti-Trump resistance is logical but has long gone beyond the normal and necessary criticism of a politician and a government. It has become an adapted but not improved modern version of the Goebbels propaganda. Ultimately, one can criticize Donald Trump's policy by many ideological perspectives - this is a part of the democratic debate in society and the strong opposition of every government. However, the fanatical attempts to make this policy indiscriminately stigmatized as "authoritarian," "racist," "misogynist," "homophobic," and even "fascist," are not only factually unreliable and ideologically insubstantial. They are also deeply immoral and dishonorable because they devalue real words and concepts. The profanization and hysteria ad hominem to Trump is a manifestation of the existential horror that has plagued the transnational "superclass" of global capitalism and its beadles in

international

institutions,

the

press,

universities,

and

non-

governmental organizations. The horror that their global domination, which seemed to them so eternal and without an alternative that they proclaimed "the end of history," could be wiped out and the world takes it in another direction. Whether Trump will contribute decisively to the dismantling of neoliberal globalism or will suffer a humiliating defeat, now in early 2019, is still a matter of too many unknowns. However, in all cases, the political tendencies he expresses are legitimate, democratic and deeply connected with the values, attitudes, and interests of much of

7

American society and many people around the world. They are an ideological and political alternative to neoliberal globalism. The purpose of this monograph is not to praise Donald Trump, although it is written with a particular ideological sympathy for his policy. The following pages are an attempt to give answers from a European perspective, or at least to outline the direction in which answers can be sought to some questions that hang around in the public space about the 45th President of the United States. Among them, what is neoliberal globalism and why Donald Trump has unequivocally announced from the UN tribune that America rejects this ideology; is his election a historical accident or a result of profound processes, tensions, and contradictions in American society; does Trump have a political doctrine or a he is a mishmash populist who is recklessly surfing the public mood. The first chapter, "The Rebellion Against the Superclass," addresses some of the reasons for the deep gap between the dominant "superclass" of global capitalism and the vast majority of societies in Europe and America. It outlines some of the larger manifestations of resistance and rebellion against this status quo that come from the political left and right, as well as the US turnaround - the presidential election in 2016. The second chapter, "Neoliberal Globalism," focuses in more detail on the evolution and conceptual characteristics of the dominant ideology of neoliberal globalism, and its alternative - the Trump Doctrine. It studies the differences between neoliberalism and the classic laissez-faire liberalism and reveals the symbiosis of neoliberal economic principles with the neoconservative geopolitical vision and progressive identity politics. The third chapter, "The Trump Doctrine," traces the long road of Donald Trump to the White House from entering the catalog of potential presidential nominations with the Oprah Winfrey interview in 1988 until the election victory in 2016. It outlines the ideas that Trump has consistently and

8

publicly expressed over the years, including in his four books on sociopolitical issues. The chapter describes the main stances in the Trump Doctrine as a negation of neoliberal globalization - sovereignty, economic nationalism, and also principled realism, competition, and reciprocity in the international arena. It makes a comparative analysis of the National Security Strategy adopted by the Trump administration in December 2017 and the previous strategies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama. The chapter also presents - though without making a comprehensive catalog of what has happened - the Trump Doctrine in action during the first two years of the presidential term. It focuses on those changes aimed at dismantling neoliberal globalism and building a new geopolitical architecture in the world. Also, the full text of some of Donald Trump's program speeches is presented to enable everyone to make their judgments about his political ideas and actions.

9

§ 1. Deplorables

1

On 1 January 1994 NAFTA - the North American Free Trade Agreement came into force. Frontiers and administrative barriers to the movement of capital, goods, and services have fallen in the vast territories of North America. That same night in the most impoverished state of Mexico - Chiapas, the armed uprising of the Zapatist from EZLN2 broke out. The first rebellion against the neoliberal "open market," which for the indigenous Indian population of Chiapas means only a gradual deprivation of land and greater poverty. Rebellion in particular against the NAFTA agreement, which rebels call a "death sentence" for the Indians, and "a gift to the rich, which will increase the abyss between the unseen riches that are concentrated in the few and the mass misery of the majority." More than 3,000 rebels captured a dozen cities, firing police stations. A real war started "for work, land, home, food, health care, education," says the rebels' revolutionary manifesto. Subcomandante Marcos wrapped in mysterious romance was the rebels leader. He has become a global icon with his emotionally-philosophical essays and positions on social inequality and the rights of oppressed people, sending US Democratic Party candidate Hillary Clinton called “deplorable” the supporters of future President Donald Trump during the presidential campaign vote in 2016. 2 Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional (Spanish). 1

10

e-mails from the mountains of Southwestern Mexico to intellectuals and activists around the world. He announced that the reason to cover his face with a mask is that he is a representative of the "people without a faces" living in poverty and this immediately became a global symbol of the struggle for social justice. Thus his mask became a symbol of the left antiglobalization movements around the world. Gabriel Garcia Marquez interviewed him, and intellectuals of the scale of Noam Chomsky and Neyomi Klein debated his ideas. The rebellion attracted international attention, and the Mexican authorities were forced to enter into lengthy peace talks. In 2001, the Zapatists triumphantly ran hundreds of miles to Mexico City. At a rally of more than 300,000, Marcos asked for a revision of the neoliberal model. Zapatistas became the driving force of antiglobalization in the world - in Chiapas in 1996, and next year in Spain, on their initiative Intercontinental Congress on Humanity and against Neoliberalism was convened. Thousands of left activists from the five continents participated. The rebellion grew. The citadels of neoliberal globalization - the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the G-7, the Davos meeting - were under the siege of angry protests. Genoa and Seattle, where the global political and economic elite gathered, were turned into battle arenas. Moreover, the vision of a world beyond neoliberalism has become a topic of the forthcoming World Social Forum, which was held for the first time in the Brazilian city of Portu Allegri in 2001. Again in the first hours of 1994, but at 2356 miles from the outbreak of the Chiapas rebellion on the banks of Lake Michigan in the state of Indiana, the small town of Gery was declared the "crime capital of the US" with the highest percentage of murders per capita for the past year. The abandoned ruins of the great Methodist Church at the center of Gery - the largest of those times in the US Midwest - symbolized the decline of the once thriving town, founded around an important US steel factory in 1906. 11

Gery is the birthplace of the pop-icon Michael Jackson, and the future Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, who later rebelled against neoliberal globalization, but at that time he was still a principal economic adviser to the Bill Clinton’s administration. The first hours of 1994 saw Gery as an urban ghost. A sad testimony of the consequences of the painful process of deindustrialization. Three factors at least provoked deindustrialization in the United States. At the beginning was the crisis of the steel industry in the 70s of the twentieth century. Then comes the growing automation of production, and most importantly, the many free trade agreements that the United States concludes with the Third World countries in the next decade. As a result of these agreements, manufacturing is massively exported abroad, where labor costs, environmental, and other standards are lower, meaning more profit for capital. Deindustrialization pushes the US Midwest on the bottom. It is a territory comparable to Germany, France, and Spain combined, with a population of more than 66 million people - the states of Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Indiana, West Virginia, parts of the states of New York, Iowa, and Illinois. The decline is ubiquitous from important centers like Detroit and Cleveland to small but vibrant towns like Youngstown and Mansfield in Ohio, Gary and Hammond in Indiana, Flint, and Pontiac in Michigan. Dozens of cities. The population is halved, entire streets and neighborhoods are in desolation, and drug trafficking, violence, and hopelessness are wandering among the rushing streets of "dead zones." Not only is the economy broken, but also the social ties, dozens of libraries, schools, and local social and cultural institutions are closed. The former "Factory Belt," a symbol of US economic power, turned into a "Rust Belt," whose landscapes are strewn with the scarred skeletons of industrialized businesses passed into nothingness. It was like my country - Bulgaria in the first half of the 90s when state-owned

12

factories were scrapped and despoiled but multiplied by at least a thousand. The final chord of this economic requiem set NAFTA. Neoliberal free trade policy has a single priority - maximizing capital gains. The fate of people, their prospects of life, their social status, and the future of their communities do not have a specific meaning, and they must be forgotten. Neoliberal think-tanks generally respond to desperation and social irreverence with the cliches of neoliberal economic rhetorics: free trade and NAFTA stimulate competition and innovation, and the knowledge-based economy will replace the industrial economy and people need to adjust. What is happening, according to the neoliberals, is a natural process that is not subject to human governance. People and their communities have to adapt or are doomed to vegetation. They talk about the market as if it is not a human creation, but a mystical element, a divine force that is not subject to human interference. Not all succeed in making this transformation. The excellent example, the city of Akron in Ohio - the world capital of tires in the twentieth century, where the American giants Goodyear, Firestone and General Tire overwhelmed the world with their production, managed to rebuild the local economy and became one of the significant research and development centers in the field of polymers. However, Akron is the exception. The emblem of the "Rust Belt" is Detroit - the headquarters of GM, Ford, and Chrysler, the leading automotive giants. For a few years, nearly one million and two hundred thousand people have gone. Unemployment reached one-third of the remaining population, and the city went bankrupt. Since 2000, more than one hundred thousand enterprises nationwide have been closed and exported abroad. According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics in 1994 5.5 million jobs have been eradicated. In the textile industry, employment dropped from 836,500 jobs to just 128,900. In 1994, you could still buy Ralph Lauren's clothing labeled Made in the USA. Nowadays this is ruled out. In the automotive industry, the drop was from 1.1 million to 944,600 jobs. Much 13

of the legendary American automotive brands and spare parts are already being made in neighboring Mexico and on other continents. In 2017, Mexico imported 1.69 million vehicles into the US. The magnitude of the disaster for US industrial production is even more tangible if we look at new technologies: by 2008, of 1.2 billion cell phones sold worldwide, none were physically manufactured in the United States3. Workers in computer manufacturing in 2010 are less than in 1975. Dell Inc, Apple and dozens of others export their production facilities to China. If you use iPhone, look at the labels on the back: Designed in the USA, assembled in China. The powerful automotive, steel industry and textile industries, and some other industrial sectors that have shaped the US economy and have held high-paying jobs for decades emigrate to China, Mexico, South America, Asia, and Africa in search of cheap labor and higher profits. In the United States remain the growing wealth of corporate owners, managers and their serving clusters of financiers, lawyers, scientists, advertisers, and public relations specialists. So does the broken destinies of millions of industrial workers whose life is thrown into the street. Even only these fragmented facts outline the scale of economic changes induced or accelerated by the neoliberal free trade model and the magnitude of their social cost. Of course, the reasons for the loss of so many manufacturing jobs cannot be attributed solely to NAFTA and other FTAs. Automation also contributes to this process. However, as the former Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich (R), says: at least NAFTA did not help4. Globally, the realities are cruel - instead of freedom and prosperity, massive social inequality and hyper-concentration of wealth in the hands 3 4

Source: The American Prospect, Dec. 21, 2009. Gingrich, N. Understanding Trump. Center Street, 2017, 368 p.

14

of few. Prof. Branko Milanovic from the City University of New York depicts the neoliberal reality in his pervasive book Global Inequality. A New Approach for the Age of Globalization (2016) with the so-called "elephant chart."5 It records the income growth of each ventile of the global income distribution throughout 20 years in the period 1998-2008 through a study of results for 196 households around the world, ranging from the poorest 10% to the wealthiest 1%. There is a significant increase in middle and high-income groups, and an almost invisible rise in the income of the social bottom - between 75th and 85th percentile (see Figure 1).

In recent years, these data have become a model example in the debates around the world to designate an incubator of discontent against the elites - the victims of free trade and globalization. Also, according to Oxfam International in January 2018, 82% of the wealth generated in the 5

Milanovich, B. Global Inequality. A new Approach for the Age of Globalization. Cambridge, MS: Harvard University Press, 2016, 312 p.

15

previous year has gone into the hands of the wealthiest 1% of the world's population, while half of humanity - 3.7 billion people have not increased their income. At the same time, 62 people, in numbers and words, own money, property, and assets as half of the world's population.

16

§ 2. Superclass

A "superclass" concentrates financial and power resources that are unmistakable in human history. The American political scientist and journalist David Rothkopf argue this superclass governs the world6. Its core, according to him, is about six thousand people who are not only wealthy but also have essential power levers and the desire to influence governance and politics. On the top are the 199 managers of seventeen transnational corporations such as the giant Blackstone who manage assets for more than $ 41.1 trillion7. Several clusters frame this core — first, facilitators - international financial institutions and elitist organizations such as the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Club. Second, advocates - senior military personnel, private security companies, and military contractors. Third, ideologists who are funded to frame and pursue the policy of neoliberal globalization - critical figures in corporate media, high-ranking members of international non-governmental organizations, academic circles, lobbyists, analysts, and columnists. The decisions and positions of these six thousand people predetermine the lives of the six billion world population. The source of their power is not a democracy, nor the nation-states and societies to which they belong as citizenship and nationality. Giant corporations empower them. Look at the magnitude of this power: 51 out of the 100 largest economies in the world are private corporations. Only 49 are countries’ economies. Another 6 7

Rothkopf, D. Superclass. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2008, 416 p. Phillips, P. Giants. The Global Power Elite. New York: A Seven Stories Press, 2018, 352 p.

17

example, if we exclude the nine largest economies (US, China, Germany, Japan, France, Italy, the United Kingdom, Canada, Brazil) from the account, then the GDP of the other 182 countries amounts to a total of $ 6.9 trillion. While the volume of revenue of the top 200 corporations is $ 7.1 trillion, Wal-Mart is larger than the economies of 161 countries, including Greece, Poland, and Israel. Mitsubishi is bigger than the fourthlargest Indonesian state, General Motors - from Denmark, Ford Motors from South Africa, and Toyota from Norway8. However, let us put aside statistics and theoretical descriptions and hear the voice of some prominent figures of the superclass. Recently, onehour video from a meeting of Sergey Brin, Larry Page and senior corporation staff immediately after the US presidential election in 2016 was leaked from Google's corporate citadel. One of the regular weekly meetings known to their corporate jargon as TGIF - Thank God It is Friday. The video reveals a startling reality that can not be ignored merely as an "exchange of personal opinions" as they try to do after the recording has been leaked. It is a corporate meeting to assess the political situation and to identify measures to counter the results of the just-held democratic elections in the United States. In addition to the offensive words addressed to the President-elect Donald Trump and his voters, the corporate pack in question also plans to counter the increasing resistance in the world against the dominance of the superclass and the status quo of neoliberal globalism. Here are some highlights from the video published in the American media Breitbart 9:

8

Barnet, R. and Cavanagh, J. Global Dreams: Imperial Corporations and the New World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994, 480 p. 9 Source: Breitbart - https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/12/leaked-video-google-leaderships-dismayed-reaction-to-trumpelection/?fbclid=IwAR1vZRGxqhHNWcpEyQZHA5fiu_kezi-_rAfW6GUFiJwFI_AKkci3Gefjoog

18

- Sergey Brin (00:00:00–00:01:12): He says most people in the corporation are disappointed, and he is deeply offended by the election of Donald Trump who opposed all of Google's values. He further defines the voters of the new US president as "extremists" and compares them with the supporters of fascism and communism (00:58:22). Speaks about increasing funding for Progressive groups by Google and its employees (00:27:30 ). - Walker, Google Vice President (00:09:35 - 00:09:55): Describes the rise of Trump as a sign of "tribalism that is self-destructive in the long run" and announces that Google and its employees have their history. Declares that Google has to fight populism around the world (00:56:12).

So more and more. People in the former Soviet area are well aware how undemocratic were the "party organizations at the workplace" in the totalitarian past and the role of private companies in attempts to control voters in the years of the transition to democracy. In this case, it is something far larger and more vicious. Orwellian reality? No, it is worse - private corporations, uncontrolled and opaque, intervene in politics. Hidden behind the false mask of "political neutrality," they are behind the scenes trying to replace democracy, manipulate public opinion, impose censorship, and tell people what to think and what to believe in and vote for. This is a brilliant illustration of the power and claims of the superclass to determine the political agenda and to impose its will on society. The construction of the governance and ideological architecture of neoliberal globalism is a product of this "superclass," the transnational corporate elite and the media, non-governmental organizations, lobbyists working for it. Prof. Manfred Steger of the University of Hawaii, a member of the editorial board of the American Political Science Association, is also

19

convinced that the formation and dissemination of neoliberalism is the result of the interests of the global power elite, involving senior management of the transnational corporations, corporate lobbyists, influential journalists and analysts, popular intellectuals and celebrities, bureaucrats and politicians. They frame public discourse through the idealization of consumer culture and free trade. Navy Taleb, the author of Black Swan, described this group on his Facebook profile on March 9, 2016:

“What we are seeing worldwide, from India to the UK to the US, is the rebellion against the inner circle of no-skin-in-the-game policymaking “clerks“

and

journalists-insiders,

that

class

of

paternalistic

semi0intellectual experts with some Ivy league, Oxford-Cambridge, or similar label-driven education who are telling the rest of us 1) what to do, 2) what to eat, 3) how to speak, 4) how to think… and 5) who to vote for.”

The interests of the superclass are directly related to the establishment of neoliberal globalism as an imperative ideological framework of politics and public discourse in general. Their beadles are trying to dominate publicity at all levels and in all dimensions - political, economic, cultural and even in everyday life. The 2008 financial and economic crisis and how this "superclass" of transnational capitalists shifted their failure, greed, and robbery to the ordinary people through brutal austerity measures, and rescuing private banks with public money generates mass social discontent. Discontent, which has begun to develop into a political change.

20

§ 3. The American Turnaround

In 2016 a radical political turnaround happened in the United States. The American Midwest was a traditional Democratic Party stronghold. However, in 2016 the key states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin voted for Donald J. Trump. From the predominantly blue, the electoral map of the "rust belt" turned into red. The Democrats and their analysts have been quick to explain this reversal through the prism of identities they announced that dominant populism of Donald Trump who is a symbol of white privilege seduced the white working class. This was the easy yet infantile and deeply untrue explanation of the political turnaround in the Midwest. A closer analysis of the electoral picture shows that not only white workers punished Hillary Clinton and the Democrats in 2016. It was also the Afro-Americans in the "Rust Belt." They did not vote for Trump, but they did not go to the polls to vote for Hillary Clinton. The facts show that the voter turnout in the African-American community declined significantly in 2016 compared to the 2012 election that was won by Obama - 12.3% decline in Wisconsin, 12.4% in Michigan, 7.5% in Ohio, 2.1% in Pennsylvania10. According to Pew Research Center poll published in May 2017, nationwide turnout for African-Americans declined for the first time in twenty years by as much as 7% - from 66.6% in 2012 to 59.4% 2016. About 5 million white voters who previously voted for Obama, in 2016 supported Trump, and about 1.6 million AfricanAmericans stayed home on election day in 2016. The words of John Vass, 10

Data from U.S. Census Bureau, published May 89, 2017 in Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/05/08/why-did-trump-win-more-whites-andfewer-blacks-than-normal-actually-voted/?utm_term=.64499e970b3a

-

21

a 66-year-old retired engineer from Youngstown, Mahoning County, Ohio, who, throughout his conscious life, supported the Democratic Party are saying it all. Speaking to the British Guardian reporter in the early hours of the 2016 elections, he said:

“All the media and all the pollsters just didn’t understand that the little people like us all over the country were quietly supporting Donald Trump,” said John Vass, a 66-year-old engineer, and former Democrat. And today we made our voices heard… My 97-year-old mother, Mary Ann also was a hardcore Democrat much of her life. Moreover, Trump is her guy, too.”

The two neighboring counties in the once super-industrialized Mahoning Valley in Ohio - Trumbull, and Mahoning are typical of voters' attitudes in the region. Over the last hundred years, voters always supported Democrats. They usually beat Republicans in a ratio of 60:40. Only two times in Mahoning, Democrats have dropped below 50% of the vote – with Adlai Stevenson in 1956 and George McGovern in 1972. In 2016 Trump won Trumbull County, and in Mahoning County Hillary Clinton won, but with less than 50 % of the votes and a minimal lead of 3500 votes to the next 45th President. For comparison, four years ago, Barack Obama defeated Republican contender Mitt Romney with more than 35,000 votes (64%). The same was in 2008 when Obama defeated John McCain. The swing voters in the Rust Belt has added to the traditionally dark red states supporting the Republicans, which opened the doors to the White House for Donald J. Trump. Not because people naively believed that good old days would return and the protectionist policy promised by the billionaire can restore most jobs. Such promises had been heard for years by previous candidates, even by Hillary Clinton. For the first time, 22

however, a public figure of Donald Trump's scale turned directly to them, spoke mainly about their problems, showed an understanding of their social drama, and engaged in policies for their benefit. At the same time, for the rest of the candidates and in the megaphones of the public debate, their fates were still muted by essential priorities such as ensuring "equal access" of transgender people to restrooms that match their gender identity. Moreover, Hillary Clinton and all progressive and liberal pundits have continued to compete in favoring Latino voters, African-American voters, LGBTI voters and seeking solutions to the problems of all possible minorities, but underestimating and often totally ignoring the issues of the vast silent majority. The decline of the Midwest is not just a matter of economic statistics. It is not measured only with lost jobs, closed factories, and public spending cuts. Deindustrialization also has profound psychological significance. The fate of millions of people has changed dramatically; they have lost their social status and life perspective. The factories in which they had passed their lives were cut into scrap, and the manufacturing jobs exported to China, India, Bangladesh, Mexico and elsewhere overseas. Their children left their home states looking for jobs. Their selfconfidence of the creators of the industrial power of a great nation was annihilated. In a nation that has embraced the principle of "no one left behind," many Americas felt abandoned by the establishment in Washington, DC. For nearly four decades towns and cities of the "old economy" were just a stopover on election campaigns for political candidates who only cemented this sense of abandonment. Donald Trump returned these people on the map of the US politics, made them visible again, showed them they are important and gave them a new and powerful voice that the elite is unable to mute or marginalize. Trump drew from the depths of social implosion their dignity of people who built America. While for Hillary Clinton and the Washington status quo they 23

were "deplorables." Something like Agamben’s Zoe11, who does not deserve to be even mentioned - their problems cannot be a vital political priority of national politics. The events after Trump's victory in 2016 showed that the moods of the "deplorables" are not transient. Midterm elections in the United States, which took place on November 6, 2018, refuted the overweening expectation of the elite that a “blue wave” will diminish the support for Donald Trump. The election results showed that massive anti-Trump propaganda is impotent. The Republicans, with the unusually active engagement of the acting president in the campaign, won 2:1 - a strengthened Republican majority in the Senate, a majority at the state level, and the opposition scored an "honorable goal" - a majority in the lower house of the federal Congress. However, it should be borne in mind that Trump was not on the ballot in these elections, and not all of his supporters necessarily support Republicans. The victory of the presidential party in midterm elections is a rare precedent in American political practice. It happened only twice in the last hundred years the president’s party to win a majority in both chambers of US Congress - with F. D. Roosevelt (1934) and George W. Bush (2002). Only three times in American political history happened the current configuration with a majority in the Senate for the president’s party, and the lower house in the hands of the opposition party - with J. F. Kennedy (1962), Richard M. Nixon (1970) and Ronald Reagan (1982). In the last midterms, Democrats lost Senate seats in some states that are of crucial importance for the presidential vote in 2020 - Florida, Missouri, Indiana, North Dakota. Democrat nominee Beto O'Rourke failed to defeat Ted Cruz in Texas. The majority in the Senate is key to all necessary appointments in the judiciary and the executive, strategic foreign policy guidelines, and is 11

In the writings of Giorgio Agamben, this term refers to "the bare life," i.e., the life of people whose existence is reduced to biological survival - see. Chapter Two, par. 2 "Liberalism and NeoLiberalism."

24

instrumental for blocking of potential impeachment proposals voted by the House. The House of Representatives itself is just the "first floor" of the legislative and budgetary process, which is sine qua non but has no independent law-making function. It can hold hearings and investigations but does not have a decisive impact on American politics. Against the backdrop of Barack Obama's first term of office, when Democrats lost the House with 63 mandates in the midterms, their current 36-seat majority looks modest, especially in the context of the enormous financial and media resources they mobilized. When the opposition has a majority in the lower chamber, it could be an active political factor only through bipartisan cooperation. As a rule, these are the expectations of US citizens alike. A poll conducted immediately after the 2018 midterm elections show that 68% of Americans believe that the Democratic majority should focus on policies and issues that can work with President Trump to achieve positive results for society. Only 26% believe that the primary task of the Democrats is to trigger Trump's impeachment (Rasmussen Reports, November 2018). At the state level, Republican domination is clear: in 23 states where 42.1% of the population lives, the power is entirely in the hands of the Republicans (the two chambers of the state legislature and the governor), while Democrats govern 14 states with 34.4% of the population. In the remaining 13 states, power is shared between the two parties. Regarding state governorship, the current situation is 33 Republican states, 16 Democratic, and Alaska with an elected "independent" candidate12. This topography of the US power testifies that President Donald Trump managed to build a "red wall" in which the blue wave” broke. Against the backdrop of the all-consuming anti-Trump propaganda that actively involved celebrities and media with massive 12

Source: www.ballotpedia.org.

25

infiltration, such results are an indication for the profound gap between the elite and the real attitudes, values, and interests of most of society. The elite has lost the fundamental quality, which makes a dominant class a leading force in society - its value leadership. A large part of American society unambiguously demonstrates that the positions, ratings, and moods of this elite are not essential. What is written on the pages of the New York Times, what Christian Amanpour says on CNN, or Joe Scarborough proclaims on MSNBC, or what Meryl Streep, Jim Kerry, and Robert De Niro think in real life outside their film scenarios does not have any political value for a significant share of the American public. People hear them, but they do not listen to them. The icons of today's American elite are no longer able to motivate the political choice of the majority. They have become speakers of a party opposition that does not want to believe that it has been democratically removed from power. Their messages are perceived as the communist propaganda of Moscow's Pravda in the final years of the Soviet era - just for information. This elite, which for years had and continues to have a powerful influence on intellectual fashions and behavioral stereotypes around the world, has been delegitimized in America. Because an elite lacking in value leadership is nothing more than a privileged caste that is based on the formal power and financial resources at its disposal and not on the recognition of society. Such domination of caste sooner or later provokes a riot of the oppressed. Such a rebellion is already underway in the USA and Europe. It is also kindled by the deliberate policy of neoliberal globalism to erode fundamental values and communities, such as the nation and nation-state, religion, family, and gender. Immigrant waves make many people feel threatened by growing labor market competition, low wages and socio-cultural changes that often undermine the identity of the Christian majority. All this is welcomed not only by the approval of the "superclass," but is actively encouraged by the elite with "open doors" 26

migrant policies, "free trade" and "multiculturalism." The political parties of status quo - left and right - defend the established neoliberal consensus on all relevant socio-economic themes. This makes an increasing number of people feel cheated, abandoned, and even betrayed by their politicians, intellectuals and community leaders. The need for political representation of these frustrated social strata becomes more and more blatant. Moreover, we see how political alternatives of the dominant status quo are emerging recently. Still amorphous, ideologically heterogeneous and chaotic, but gaining enhancing public support. On one side are the new left movements. In the United States, this is the wing of Bernie Sanders and Democratic Socialists in the Democratic Party who are trying to fill the vacuum after Hillary Clinton's failure and Obama legacy of poor governance. In Europe, left-wing formations emerged such as the Greek Syriza and Podemos in Spain. These parties reject "caviar socialists" infected with neoliberal globalism. The Leftists generate significant protest energy, which rises periodically in anti-globalist protests as well. Their strategic problem is the inability to formulate efficient economic solutions to win the support of the majority. The left-wing politics abdicated – argues the Harvard economist Professor Dani Rodrick - of the real struggle with neoliberal globalism because they have no convincing economic response13. It is also possible to add the inability of the new left-wing movements to completely free themselves from the principal vices of neoliberal globalism - hatred of the nation and nation-state, militant atheism, identity politics, and gender ideology. For this reason, Syriza in Greece became a symbol of the subjugation of the authentic left-wing cause to the "superclass," and Podemos in Spain is anchored as a small faction that fails to generate enough public support to win elections. Under the pressure of globalists from creditor countries, 13

Rodrik, D. The Abdication of the Left. - In: Project Syndicate, 2016, https://www.projectsyndicate.org/commentary/anti-globalization-backlash-from-right-by-dani-rodrik-2016-07

27

the government of Tsipras in Greece systematically endeavors to push the Greek Orthodox Church from its established place in the public arena, and along with it also follows the agenda of gender-ideology. Podemos, on their part, garnish their left ideas of solidarity and reduction of social inequality with a favorable attitude to illegal immigration and half-measures against the neoliberal model of globalization. All this greatly restricts the potential of new, "authentic" left movements to become a major legitimate expression of the inflamed social discontent. Instead of strengthening national communities, they advocate supranational governance; instead of focusing on a struggle against capitalism and the superclass, they devote significant time and resources to identity politics - gender and race issues. From individual trees, they cannot see the forest. Instead in analogy with the time of WWII to take a course towards a "united front," against neoliberal globalism, they are fighting mostly with the alternatives that come to the right, not with the status quo itself. Instead, in the political center and center-right, an adequate counteraction to the neoliberal globalism is consolidated that is gaining more and more the hearts and minds of the deceived, abandoned and surrendered both in Europe and in America. People consider neoliberal globalization, illegal immigration, and gender-ideology as a vital threat to their value system and an attack on the nation, national economy, religious values, and family. The necessity of protection of these foundations led to the wave of social conservatism and patriotism in Europe.

From

Poland

of

Kaczynski,

Hungary

of

Orban

and

Czechoslovakia of Milos Zeman, through Austria of Sebastian Kurtz, Italy of Salvini, Gert Wilders in the Netherlands and the rising force of Alternative for Germany. The French and Dutch referendums which rejected the globalist draft for a "European Constitution" in 2005; the failure of the Italian constitutional referendum in 2016 aimed at delegation of more power to Brussels; BREXIT; the rejection of the UN Global Pact on 28

Migration and the Istanbul Convention in a number of European countries; the yellow vests riots in France. These are vivid forms of the resistance that has grown into a rebellion of nations against the agenda of the global elite, the superclass. In this context, the most significant victory of intellectual, political and social resistance against neoliberal globalism is the election of Donald Trump for 45th President of the United States. If until the 2016 US election neoliberal globalists tried to marginalize and stigmatize social-conservative and patriotic movements, pundits and intellectuals, defining them as "populists," "far-right," "nationalists" and even “national-populists”, the political victory of Donald J. Trump gave them a robust political legitimacy and returned these ideas to the mainstream. It is a powerful impulse of the ideas, values, and policies that neoliberal globalism has been trying (and almost succeeded!) for four decades to mute and isolate in the periphery of politics and publicity. The Trump Doctrine, which we will talk about further in this book, has the potential to become an ideological and political catalyst of radical change in international relations and the world economy. To understand more thoroughly its fundamental ideas, one must trace history, follow the theoretical debris of the neoliberal globalism and distinguish it from the classical laissez-faire liberalism.

29

§ 1. Evolution of the Neoliberal Doctrine

TINA. This four-letter abbreviation, which means "There Is No Alternative," illustrates the idea of establishing the neoliberal economic doctrine as dominant in the 80s of the 20th century. The phrase is coined and introduced into political rhetoric by British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Her inspiration in is one of the classical theorists of liberalism Herbert Spencer. Thatcher repeated this phrase so often that even one of her biographers titled her biography - There is no alternative: Why Margaret Thatcher Matters.14 In this period neoliberalism has gained specific outlines and has become government policy in the USA as well - with the rise of Ronald Reagan and his trademark "Reaganomics." After the end of the Cold War in 1989, over several decades, the neoliberal economic recipe has become a guideline for all leading parties – right-wing and left-wing. It became a necessary framework for policy-making and legislating in the USA and Europe. In a matrix that is methodically and unconditionally imposed in international relations and on the developing countries and emerging democracies. The demarcation of boundaries between classical laissez-faire liberalism and neoliberalism is critical. Often, especially in the left-wing 14

Burlinski, C. There is No Alternative: Why Margaret Thatcher Matters. New York: Basic Books, 2008.

30

political discourse, the two ideological paradigms are regarded as entirely identical. This assertion is not correct. The difference is conceptual. Neoliberalism is a GMO of classical liberalism. They relate to each other as the Islamic fundamentalism to traditional Islam, or communism to social democracy. Neoliberalism is a radical ideological deviation, a sect. Economic and political realities have changed significantly after the carnage of the two world wars and the socio-economic devastation caused by the Great Depression (1929-1939) that led to the end of laissez-faire capitalism. The dominant intellectual and political thought between the 1930s to 1970s focus on the State as an active factor in the economy which must compensate for the failure of the "invisible hand" of the market. The FDR's New Deal, the needs of post-war recovery, and finally the breakdown of the Bretton Woods international payment system and exchange rates, turn Keynesian economics into a dominant ideological framework in Europe and the United States. At the same time, on the other side of the "iron curtain" - in the Soviet camp - the imperatives of the planned economy and collectivism excluded the free economic initiative. Government intervention and growing social engineering - this is the ideological and political landscape in which the neoliberal doctrine originates. Many fundamental historical and philosophical works reveal its evolution thoroughly15. It is believed that the term "neoliberalism" appeared in 1938 at the Walter Lippmann Colloquium. The influential French philosopher Louis Rougier organized the forum to discuss a book - The Good Society (1937) published by the popular American journalist and writer Walter Lippmann a year earlier. The central theme of the forum is the search for a conceptual alternative to collectivism, socialism, and Keynesianism after the laissez-faire failure. One of the participants in the 15

Mirowski, P. and Plehwe, D. The Road from Mont Perelin. The Making of the Neoliberal Thought Collective. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2009, 478 p.; Slobodian, Quinn. Globalists: The End of Empire and the Birth of Neoliberalism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2018, 397 p.

31

Walter Lippmann Colloquium - the German sociologist Alexander Rüstow is considered the author of the very term "neoliberalism." Later he became the leading figure of the social-liberal trend of the Freiburg School of Economics, which emphasized the social market economy and had a huge impact on the economic policy of post-war Germany. This ideological trend is also referred to as "Ordo-Liberalism" under the name of their theoretical edition - ORDO (Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft). Louis Rougier himself lost public positions after World War II. His commitment to the Vishi regime, his mission in England, commissioned by Marshal Pétain, which Rougier claims to have finished with a "Churchill-Pétain Accord," provokes angry reactions in France and criticisms in the United Kingdom. The initiative to reshape classical liberalism goes into the hands of Friedrich von Hayek and the Mont Pelerin Society, founded by him in 1947, with the sponsorship of influential bank circles (Credi Suisse). The subject of their discussions is unambiguous how to adapt and upgrade the ideas of classical economic liberalism of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, and Herbert Spencer to the radically changed socio-economic and political context. The new realities - in Hayek's words - are related to the "rising wave of collectivism." Marxism and Keynesianism rule the world. Members of Mont Perelin sought an alternative and a new economic recipe against government intervention and social engineering, which, in various modifications, defined the democratic and totalitarian regimes at that time. This task involved intellectuals and technocrats - economists, sociologists, philosophers, and historians, some of whom will later become Nobel laureates. Among the leading figures of the Mont Pelerin Society, and finally the Austrian School, besides the initiator Friedrich Hayek himself, are Ludwig von Mises, George Stigler, Wilhelm Röpke, Karl Popper, Milton Friedman.

32

In Masters of the Universe (2012), Daniel Jones defines three stages in the evolution of neoliberalism16. The first is from the 30s to the early 50s of the twentieth century. In turn, I will designate it as "Genesis." At that time the fathers of neoliberalism published their fundamental works: Hayek The Road to Serfdom (1944), Mises - Bureaucracy (1944) and Karl Popper The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945). The second stage, which I will call "Consolidation," has developed from the 1950s to the mid-1970s. At that time, neoliberalism won intellectual territories among business and academic circles. Milton Friedman's economic theory of monetarism, which is being deployed by the Chicago School, is also born. During this period, the basic principles of neoliberal doctrine have experimented on the ground. First in Chile during the Pinochet dictatorship. So then in Argentina, during the military junta, established in 1976, whose leaders Jorge Videla, Roberto Viola, and Leopoldo Galtieri implemented a "national reorganization" - a poisonous, authoritarian cocktail of crushing the political opposition, death squads, thousands of "disappearances" and free-market ideas of the Chicago School. In the meantime some, though very timid steps towards economic reforms based on neoliberal principles were made by Raymond Barre in France (1976-1981) and even in Germany during the social-liberal coalition and its government led by Chancellor Helmut Schmidt (1974-1982) and Otto Graf Lambsdorff as a Minister of Economy. The stagflation experienced by the United States and Great Britain in the first half of the 1970s opens the doors of neoliberal economic policy to government. The takeover of power by Margaret Thatcher in the United Kingdom in 1979 and by Ronald Reagan in the United States in January 1981 marked the beginning of the third stage in the evolution of neoliberalism. This 16

Jones, D. Masters of the Universe. Hayek, Friedman, and the Birth of Neoliberal Politics. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2012, p. 6-10.

33

particular economic doctrine turned into government policy and a package of measures applied by the international financial institutions as the Group the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. We can call this third stage "Triumphalism," because neoliberal economic principles receive broad political representation in key Western countries and are imposed as a universal matrix in the Third World countries. Neoliberalism is proclaimed as a superior doctrine in universities, media, scientific research, and conferences on the five continents. All this is reinforced by the impressive initial economic success of Thatcherism and Reaganomics - the shrunk economies have risen, unemployment is being curbed, income is rising. This is one of the reasons why the neoliberal economic recipe is adopted almost consensually by the left and right political forces. In the turbulent 1989, the so-called "Washington Consensus" summarized ten neoliberal economic principles that turn into the "symbol-creed" of the triumphant neoliberal doctrine that, although with national variations and conceptual nuances, is included in the political programs of all the leading political parties in the democratic world. The very term "Washington Consensus" was introduced by John Williamson in a report before a conference organized by the Institute for International Economics17. The triumph is stamped with the fanfareannounced "end of history" (Fukuyama). Although this "end" was already announced once in 1960 when the American sociologist Daniel Bell declared an "end of ideologies."18 According to Daniel Jones's periodization, this third stage of neoliberalism is still today. For its part, however, I will limit it only until 1989. The period after the collapse of totalitarianism in Eastern Europe 17

Williamson, J. A Short History of the Washington Consensus. - in: The Washington Consensus Reconsidered Towards a New Global Governance. Oxford University Press, 2008, pp. 14-31. 18 Bell, D. The End of Ideology: On the Exhaustion of Political Ideas in the Fifties. Harvard University Press, 2000, 501 p.

34

should be differentiated as a separate, fourth stage of the development of the neoliberal doctrine - "Domination." The failure of the economic model of socialism and the aspirations of the nations of the former "Evil Empire" to move on the road of freedom and democracy unconditionally legitimized the neoliberal model as the only model of market economy and democratic development. At the same time, during this period, neoliberalism became a symbiosis with important ideological trends coming from both sides of the political spectrum - neoconservatism and identity politics. As a result, the dominant ideology of neoliberal globalism has formed, which, with slight variations, conquered states, universities, think tanks, media, and non-governmental organizations on both sides of the Atlantic, and hence penetrated the rest of the world. From a political cliché used in the party struggles of the political arena, TINA has become an ideological dogma, asserted systematically and even fanatically. The public discourse was subordinate to this dogma. Talking heads of any caliber round the are competing to bow to the new ideological altar and deny any other democratic view as "outdated," "premodern," "archaic," "harmful," "undemocratic." In Eastern European countries, the opposition to the neoliberal dogma is stigmatized as "Putinist" and "anti-European." Even the mere expression of doubt in the postulates of the dominant neoliberal doctrine is often ridiculed, and its opponents bullied and mocked. Neoliberal globalism is a norm, and everything else is considered an extravagant deviation. Over the last decades, messianic neoliberal thinking has permeated into every fiber of modern society. Even Wikipedia, which claims political neutrality, is infected. A more rigorous look would immediately reveal that wiki-article on the most-watched TV channel in the USA - Fox News, proclaims that it is "described as practicing biased reporting in favor of the Republican

Party,

the

George

W.

Bush

and

Donald

Trump

administrations, and conservative causes." The sources of these 35

descriptions are correctly mentioned, of course. It seems this punctuality is ostensible, and it is more about subversive propaganda framing. It scours immediately by comparison with the wiki-article on CNN, where such evaluative framing is missing, although not a few analysts describe CNN as a TV channel which is favoring the Democratic Party, progressivism and the administration of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The same double standard exists in the wiki-articles for many of the leading online media. Those who are out of the neoliberal matrix, such as The Daily Caller and Daily Wire, are in marked as "conservative" and Breitbart as "far right." On the other hand, wiki-articles often conceal the ideological profile of "faithful" media and refer to them just as "American" - e.g., Time Magazine, The Intercept, The Atlantic. Alternatively, they mention ideological coloring somewhere, but in the form of "they self-identify" or "their readers describe them" - as is the case with the progressive-liberal Democracy Now site. The suggestion is clear – they are "American," i.e., national, neutral, non-biased. Others are ideologically and politically biased. Since 1989, the significant differences between the main political trends in society have been blunted. Only shades remain, beyond which the monolith of the global free market is continuously seen, as a common goal for the mainstream left and right parties on both sides of the Atlantic. Not surprisingly, the British researcher Richard Heffernan found that there are no radical differences between British Labor manifesto of 1997 and the political platform of the conservatives in 197919. Such convergence can be seen in the party systems of most European countries. On the European Union level, the differences between the European People's 19

Heffernan, R. New Labour and Thatcherism: Political change in Britain. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2001, 249 p.

36

Party (EPP) and the Party of European Socialists (PES) are rather declarative than meaningful. In the United States, as we shall see later, this convergence between the leading political tendencies is a reality since Ronald Reagan. However other essential ingredients have been added to this ideological cocktail in America. The first one is the neoconservative vision of the unipolar world in which the United States is an imperial center has a moral mission to export and impose a free market and democracy all over the world. The second one is identity politics, which defines society through the prism of race and gender. The mixture of neoliberal

economic

principles,

neocon

geopolitical

vision,

and

progressive identity politics forms the neoliberal globalism as a social, economic, cultural and political ideology aimed at establishing a global market, supranational governance and a new socio-cultural code of modern society in the name of market values.

37

§ 2. Liberalism and neoliberalism

Classical liberalism and neoliberalism construct the world in two different ways, both for the essence of power and its essential function and of the very structuring of society. The affix "neo" is not just an indication of the renewal of liberal doctrine to the experience of periodically erupting economic crises culminating in the Great Depression (1929-1939). It designates a different social paradigm. The world, seen through the optics of the classic laissez-faire liberalism, is a world of free market capitalism and a minimal, night-watchman state with the individual liberty on a high pedestal in its core. A world whose foundations are imperium (State) and dominium (ownership), and auctoritas (Church) is relocated from the public arena in the private sphere. A world in which the keywords that describe the purpose of state power are non-interference and pluralism. The market has an invisible hand that structures and balances supply and demand. The market economy is a state-free area. For its part, the sovereign nation-state, founded on democratic principles and run by elected officials, is the guarantor of economic and political freedom. It provides justice, security, and regulatory framework in which the market operates freely, without social engineering. In other words, a free market economy is embedded in a nation-state and pluralistic democratic society. The non-intervention of the state in the economy is a political imperative of classical liberalism. For its part, liberal society is multidimensional and pluralistic. It interacts and competes with many value-based communities - political, religious, social, cultural. The State is the guardian of this pluralism. The individual and his/her rights

38

are leading, and the individual manifests him- or herself in two ways: homo politicos and homo economicus. The citizen in a liberal society is a political person who participates in the formation of public authority and has contributes to the common good (bonum commune). Also, at the same time, it is an economic man who moves from his needs and interests. This is the core of classical liberal doctrine. It is the doctrine of individual freedom, pluralism, human rights and state non-interference, which contributes to the rejection of oppressive political, economic and sociocultural models and stereotypes. This seems to a large extent the modern world of the nineteenth century, which collapses with the outbreak of World War I in 1914. Neoliberalism projects another world that has recently been explored in significant works such as David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism20, Manfred Steger and Ravi Roy's Neoliberalism21, as well as in The Shock Doctrine22 where Neyomi Klein makes a relentless dissection of the consequences from turning it into government policy. A few more strokes can be added to their extensive, intelligent and in-depth analyses. In the world of neoliberalism, everything is a market — dominium without imperium and auctoritas. The market is not embedded in the state and the democratic society but absorbs them. Even in the area of religions, though metaphorically, there is a "market of religions."23 The market economy is transformed into a market society. The State and its bureaucracy are being wholly restructured on a market principle. Governance is no longer a value-driven process in which the political representation is dominated by ideological and political views at 20

Harvey, D. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. 256 p. Steger, M. and Roy, R. Neoliberalism. A very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010, 169 р. 22 Klein, N. The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Picador, 2008. 720 p. 23 Zucca, L. A Secular Europe. Law and Religion in the European Constitutional Landscape. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 93-117. 21

39

some point in time, but is an impassive and result-oriented technology that is subordinate to economic expediency. Hayek's view of the market as a catallaxy that is, as a spontaneous, self-organizing order, gradually goes in another direction. The market now has two "hands" - the "invisible hand" of the market forces and the "visible hand" of government power, which is a tool for maintaining and imposing the market and, above all, for protecting its driving force – the capital. Total non-interference is replaced by the admission of social engineering, which needs to adapt society to the market. Money is declared "god," and the market is "omniscient, omnipotent and ubiquitous."24 The market becomes a secular religion. Michel Foucault is categorical - if Adam Smith's classic liberalism aimed at freeing space for the market in an already existing political society, neoliberalism aims to transform political power according to market principles. "Neoliberalism should not be identified with laissezfaire, but with constant vigilance, activity, and intervention."25 The all-consuming market leads to erosion or market transformation of those social communities that are firmly bonded by their values and have value "anchors" that make them challenging to permeate for market relations. Those who resist must be destroyed or transformed by social engineering. State power is designed to clear the path of capital. Nation and religion are the two most universal social facts26. Therefore, their central institutions, the nation-state, and the church must be eroded and, pushed aside. Still, in this logic, the family and gender identity of the individual gradually become relativistic. Politics is dead; long live the market. Homo politicus must die to remain only homo economicus. The citizen who takes part in the nomination and control on power is 24

Hagen, J. and Welker, M. Money as God? The Monetization of the Market and its Impact on Religion, Politics, Law, and Ethics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 2014. 25 Foucault, M. The Birth of Biopolitics. Lectures at the College De France 1978-79. NY: Palgrave MacMillan, 2008, p. 131. 26 Ремонд, Р. Религия и общество в Европа. С.: ЛИК, 2006, с. 161.

40

transformed into a consumer, who is looking at the world through the prism of his economic interest. The common good is reduced to maximizing profits. The world that draws these ideas is social Darwinism in action. Survive the adaptable and competitive; the rest are useless. This world generates vast social inequalities. The provocative Italian philosopher

Giorgio

Agamben

introduced

three

images

into

contemporary social science: Zoe - biological, bare life, Bios - politically active life, and Homo sacer - the life of no value. In Roman law, Homo sacer is called the guilty one, who is deprived of all rights and outlawed, so that everyone can kill him without being legally responsible, but at the same time, his life has no value to making him worthy to offer sacrifice to the gods.27 A metaphor for the individual who is extracted from the legal order and is placed under uncontrolled and absolute authority for which his destiny and physical existence are irrelevant. This state, according to Agamben, exists in the purest form in the concentration camp and the state of emergency. We can adapt, with all the conditionality, these images to the picture of the neoliberal world. Then we see that the vast social inequalities generated by the unlimited, all-consuming and unregulated market transform substantial parts of society into a bare, biological life, into a Zoe - with a fuzzy identity, crushed by misery, deprived of civic will and real tools for political participation and oversight of supranational power. Also, those more than 10% of the world's population (over 700 million people, according to World Bank data), who live in extreme poverty at the global bottom are the postmodern Homo sacer. His life does not matter for a market where there is one "god" - the capital. I remember my surprise at the beginning of 1991 by the remarks of an American expert in Eastern Europe who commented on the need for "economic shock therapy." 27

Агамбен, Дж. Homo Sacer. Чрезвычайное положение. Москва, Издательство „Европа“, 2011, 148 с.

41

Questioned whether the social cost of the proposed economic measures would be unbearable, especially for the pensioners, he said quite simply: "Forget about them, they do not matter." The life of Homo sacer has no value, and it can be taken with impunity in the name of the market. Then I thought it was just a cynical statement by a man who came to sell us recipes for the future. Many years later I realized that this is the fundamental logic of neoliberal doctrine. In contrast to the market economy of classical liberalism embedded in the democratic system, in the neoliberal model, democracy is not necessarily a conditio sine qua non. Harvard economist Dani Rodrick introduces the famous "impossibility theorem": democracy, national sovereignty, and global economic integration are mutually incompatible and can only combine two of those, but never the three together.28 Globalization may be limited, he argues, to preserve democratic legitimacy at the national level. The other option is democratic global governance at the expense of sovereignty and national state. Hayek also said unequivocally in an interview with the Chilean newspaper El Mercurio in 1981: "My personal preference leans toward a liberal dictatorship rather than toward a democratic government devoid of liberalism." Over the years he has advocated for Pinochet's dictatorship as a necessity for establishing a free market in Chile. Regardless of the political regime, however, all countries should be conquered by the "golden corset" of neoliberal economic policies and the marketization of life.29

28

Rodrik, D. The Globalization Paradox. Why Global Markets, States, and Democracy Can’t Coexist. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011, p. 200-205. 29

Friedman, T. Understanding Globalization. The Lexus and the Olive Tree. New York: Farrar, Straus Giroux, p. 101-110.

42

§ 3. Neoliberalism and globalization

The neoliberal doctrine is invariably linked to globalization, as an understanding of an open society and an unlimited global market without administrative and political constraints and barriers. This, by definition, means shrinking national states to geographic concepts and establishing supranational governance based on global constitutionalism. Ulrich Beck denotes this understanding as an ideology of "globalism."30 Globalization in its kind is considered an inevitable and one-way process that does not depend on human intervention. Bill Clinton once explained to the workers fired by another factory moved to China, that this is a natural process and government can not stop it. As if it were a natural disaster. This neoliberal paradigm for globalization does not find unique support either in theory or in the practice of global economic, political and socio-cultural interactions. The truth is that globalization is not a one-way process and can be developed on different models. The current model of globalization is the product of political decisions for deregulation and the maintenance of a normative and institutional free-trade environment. It is not an unseen natural force, as the globalists argue. Even the professional preachers of neoliberal globalism, such as longtime Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, still admit that a fully globalized world with an unrestricted movement of commodities, capital, and people driven only by the pursuit of profits is a complete illusion.31 In what direction, at what pace and to what extent to develop the global market is a purely 30 31

Beck, U. What Is Globalization?. Polity, 2000, p. 23. Greenspan, A. The Age of Turbulence. New York: The Penguin Press, 2007. p. 365.

43

political issue that is solved by the political institutions of the nations. In this sense, the notion of "globality," as a state of interconnection, and "globalization" as a complex process must be distinguished. No one denies globality. The contradictions are about the process of globalization, that is, the way this state is reached. The world was in a state of globality even during the time of the Roman Empire, when in the Senate, Pliny the Old (23-79) strongly opposed the uncontrolled import of silk from China, because it led to value changes - he argued that it degraded the women who started to wear light and transparent garments.32 Globality is still present today in the era of smartphones and artificial intelligence. However, the look of globality depends on the parameters of the globalization process. Every social process is modeled by value, ideological and, ultimately, political statements and decisions. There may be different ideological approaches to globalization. For example, the radical left vision of globalization often referred to as "alter-globalization," focuses on community solidarity, sustainable development, climate change and the reduction of social inequalities. Conservative vision is more about the so-called "de-globalization," which emphasizes the preservation of the sovereignty of the nation-state, the right of nations to determine the political form of their existence and to limit supranational power. However, the neoliberal globalists, led by their "respect" to pluralism, argue that there can not be two views on globalization. For almost four decades, their vision dominates. Undoubtedly, this domination is also encouraged by the specificities of financial markets and the flexible, fluid and cosmopolitan financial capital that has been particularly vigorous since the 70s of the twentieth century. In the words of a senior manager at Goldman Sachs International, "the beauty of

32

Goldstein, N. Globalization and Free Trade. New York: Infobase Publishing, 2007, p. 3-5.

44

globalization is that it is out of control of people, governments and institutions." It is not by chance, however, that Manfred Steger talks about "globalisms," that is, about different approaches to this phenomenon, and refutes the view of the self-developing globalization process.33 According to him, there are at least three types of "globalism." The first is "market globalism," which is the neoliberal doctrine. The second is the left, progressive, viewing angle to globalization - justice globalism. Also, the third is the globalism of Islamic fundamentalism - jihadist globalism. Market globalization, which the world of the 1980s and 1990s knows, goes into "imperial globalism" that adds to the economic integration also accelerated political integration in the unipolar world with the hegemony of the United States. Without saying it in the straightforward text, Steger denotes the symbiosis between neoliberalism and neoconservatism that gives birth to the ideology and politics of neoliberal globalism.

33

Steger, M. Globalisms. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2009, p. 51-78.

45

§ 4. The Global Matrix

If we look at the world from the proposed perspective, we will find that in recent decades the neoliberal globalism imposed by the superclass with different speeds and intensities in Europe and America shapes society as a global matrix in three directions: - Erosion of the nation-state by (a) export of sovereignty to supranational institutions that are detached from direct democratic control, and (b) placing capital (corporations/investors) in a superior position vis-à-vis states in the established free trade system. - Unchurching of society by extinguishing religion from the public domain and replacing the secularism with militant atheism. - Transformation of the socio-cultural code of society through identity politics and gender-ideology.

The imposition of this global matrix fuel growing social discontent. Donald Trump's victory in the 2016 elections gave a political representation and voice of this discontent in the United States and legitimized resistance against neoliberal globalism worldwide. We can not fully understand the Trump Doctrine if we do not outline the contours of this global matrix, its conceptual foundations, and some of the essential academic and public arguments against it deeply embedded in the ideas and politics of the 45th US president.

46

A. The supremacy of the unelected

Sovereignty is the incense of the "devil" of neoliberal globalism. The horizontal Westphalian world, constructed in 1648 to overcome the feudal fragmentation of Europe, consists of sovereign states. Independence from others and non-interference in domestic affairs are fundamental principles of statehood and international relations. The globalists consider nationstate as a barrier to the free market and unlimited trade. Therefore, in the neoliberal vision, priority is given to building a network of supranational power instruments and institutions. They re-order the power map by transferring sovereignty from nation-states to a multi-layered, networked system of supranational organs that are far from the "whims" of democracy. Autonomy (national law) - in the words of Hayek - should be replaced with isonomy (unified law). In this paradigm, the sovereignty of the State shifts to "consumer sovereignty" of the individual.34 The consumer exercises his or her power to demand goods, services, resources without delegating this power to political institutions. In other words, the consumer does not need the mediation of the State to swim freely in the raging ocean of the global market that has no social constraints. Supranational power is more technocratic and subordinate to the global elite, rather than an expression of citizens' interests. It is power not of the democratically elected, but the selected and installed by the superclass, the global elite. Take a look at the curves of the complicated, generally remote, procedures for selecting the leadership and key functionaries of the World Trade Organization and international financial institutions. See also the current structure of the European Union, established after Maastricht and Lisbon treaties - how the Brussels bureaucracy, headed by

34

Hutt, W. Economists and the Public: A Study of Competition and Opinion. 1936.

47

the European Commission, its directorates and endless "comitology" is being recruited, where an essential part of the Union's policy is formed. To justify the eradication of the nation-state, theories of the gradual, mosaic

formation

of

"supranational

constitutionalism,"

of

"constitutionalism beyond the state," which in the future should be consolidated into "global governance" and "global constitutionalism," are developed.35 Globalists strive to rewrite constitutional theory and create a constitutional homunculus. These ideas are to some extent a new version of Hans Kelsen's outdated understanding that the law creates the state, in particular - that the constitution establishes the state.36 Modern constitutionalism has long cast as a foreign body this notion of "pure law" as being completely detached from the social environment and devoid of value. On the contrary, the state precedes the constitution and, in the words of Karl Schmidt, constitutes "the political status of an organized people in an enclosed territorial unit."37 The people themselves, as a spiritual entity, precede the state.38 For a constitution, a constitutionalmaking power is a fundamentally political decision.39 In a democracy, this is a solution of the citizens, in the absolute monarchy - the decision is the monarch. The constitution institutionalizes the basic value consensus in society and is the fundamental political decision on the way and form of existence of a people. The transfer of powers from the nation-state to supranational bodies does not create a supranational "constitution," including in the context of European integration. The delegation of sovereignty is not an act of original, constitutive, constitutional authority, and it is not a fundamental decision of the citizens. In this sense, the power of supranational institutions, such as the European Union bodies, or the 35

Dunoff, J. and Trachtman, J. Ruling the World? Constitutionalism, International Law and Global Governance. Kelsen, H. General Theory of Law and State. New York: Russel & Russel, 1945, 181-182. 37 Schmitt, C. The Concept of the Political. The University of Chicago Press, 2007, p. 19. 38 Близнашки, Г. Конституцията – същност, функции, върховенство. С.: УИ „Св.Климент Охридски“, 2018, с. 53-55. 39 Schmitt, C. Constitutional Theory. Duke University Press, 2008, p. 77. 36

48

World Trade Organization, is a very distant projection of the constituted authorities and not of the pouvoir constituant. States retain their "competence of competencies" (kompetenz-kompetenz), irrespective of the extent of the powers they confer on supranational authorities. In other words, they can always withdraw them. BREXIT or the United States' release from UNESCO and the UN Human Rights Council are a manifestation of this reality. It may seem that under the globalization process supranational bodies are becoming more autonomous and creating "complementary constitutionalism." However, in essence, this is an international law whose primary source is sovereign states. Attempts to justify an irreversible process of forming a "global" or at least "multilevel constitutionalism," even when motivated by creative scientific thinking, are inextricably linked to neoliberal globalism and its claim to freedom. Globalists argue that the emergence of supranational constitutionalism is related to the human rights standards created by international jurisdictions such as the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg or the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Such claims, however, are far from the truth. Emmanuel Joseph Sieyès, in his famous essay "What Is the Third Estate?" argues that the only limitation of pouvoir constituant is the principles of natural law. Among them, human rights have a leading role. It is also the conceptual

reason

why

human

rights

standards

produced

by

international courts are seen only as supra-constitutional constraints, but not as elements of an independent supranational constitutional order. Some modernist quests in legal theory can also be considered through the prism of globalism, such as the definition of law and legal systems as autopoiesis, that is, as an autonomous, self-replicating system that is severed from the social environment.40 In general, the detachment Tеubner, G. Law as an Autopoietic System. Oxford/Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers, 1993, European University Institute Series. 40

49

of the law from its social substrate, values and political dilemmas and consensus in society opens doors to its consideration as a technology that can be transferred into a monopoly of supranational power. It is the ideal of neoliberal globalism - global governance that has blotted the "limitations" on the global market inevitably created by the existence of sovereign states and nations with their political, historical and cultural specificities. This striving to "squeeze" sovereignty from states is particularly noticeable in free trade agreements. Initially, they exist mostly on a bilateral basis. In recent decades of dominance of neoliberal globalization, multilateral agreements of this kind have emerged - the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) (including the United States, Canada and Mexico), the Central American Free Trade Agreement - CAFTA (including the US, Guatemala, Salvador, Honduras, Costa Rica, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic), CETA - between the EU and Canada. In an advanced phase, until the election of the 45th US president, preparations were made for free trade agreements between the United States and the countries of the Asia-Pacific (TTP) and the European Union (TTIP). Under these agreements, a specific supranational justice mechanism is created to allow a foreign investor to sue a state where the investment was made - investor-state disputes settlement (ISDS). An investor could claim violations of international investment protection arrangements. Removal of disputes between foreign investors and national authorities outside the relevant national judicial system is for the first time implemented in an agreement to promote investment between Germany and Pakistan since 1959. It is also envisaged in the World Trade Organization system. The arguments traditionally advocated by the globalists to justify the need for this mechanism are related to the potential dangers for foreign investment that may arise in inefficient judicial bodies at the national level. Globalists believe that national judicial authorities can act unobtrusively under the influence of political interests or corrupt

50

motives. State sovereignty must, therefore, be withdrawn in the name of capital. These arguments are irrelevant. On all the basic indicators of independent and objective justice, supranational tribunals are inferior to national judiciaries in modern democracies.41 The publicity of the procedures is minimal. Guarantees of professional integrity of members of ISDS panels and against conflict of interest and corruption are insufficient. The parties to the process are not on an equal footing - states generally cannot sue investors before the tribunals. The possibility of appeal is totally absent or severely restricted. It is believed that, even in the context of an inefficient judicial system at the national level, these guarantees are far more deployed than the supranational investor tribunals provided for in the free trade agreements. The most significant flaw in this model, however, is the overly broad and inconsistent interpretation that is applied by the tribunals of basic concepts of international free trade and investment protection treaties such as "investment", "legitimate expectations", "measures" "Investor", "honest and fair treatment", "direct and indirect expropriation," etc. In this way, corporations receive a powerful weapon against national authorities, allowing them to block up any law, administrative measure, or local policy that is in the public interest, as they somehow limit even the hypothetically planned profits of the corporation.42 Just a few examples of the practice of supranational tribunals ISDS that suggest the magnitude of the dominance of private corporations in the states: Veolia v. Egypt: The case was filed in 2012 under the ISDS procedure provided for in the France-Egypt bilateral trade agreement. French Special Report: TTIP – The Road To Corporate Slavery. Author's team under the leadership of Borislav Tsekov, Sofia, December 2014, www.modernpolitics.org. 42 Tsekov, B. TTIP – Rule of Law or Rule of Corporate Interests. – In: Government Gazette, April 20, 2015, http://governmentgazette.eu/?p=6187 41

51

corporation Veolia, which has a concession for waste collection in the city of Alexandria, claims compensation of 82 million euros. The reason - the refusal of the local authorities to change the concession contract according to the demands of the corporation to raise service prices due to the alleged cost increase caused partly by the raising of the minimum wage in the country and by the mass robbery of garbage containers. Group of Investors Against Argentina: As a result of the severe economic crisis in 2001-2002, which has led to massive population impoverishment, the national currency is devalued, and the Argentine authorities freeze electricity and water prices. As a result, French, British and Spanish utility companies file 40 cases under ISDS, providing for bilateral trade agreements. Argentina has been ordered to pay more than $ 980 million in benefits. Vattenfall cases against Germany: The Swedish corporation Vattenfall has filed two lawsuits under the ISDS procedure provided for in the European Energy Charter. The first is from 2009 for compensation of EUR 1.4 billion and interest due to the imposed environmental restrictions and requirements for its thermal power plant. The second case is from 2012 when, as a consequence of the Fukushima nuclear power plant crash, the German authorities are changing their nuclear energy policies and are planning to close the nuclear power plant. Vattenfall filed a claim of EUR 4.7 billion for lost profits from the closure of two NPPs owned by the corporation. The truth is that legitimate public policies related to the quality of life and social development can be tackled through ISDS. In this way, private corporate interests are placed in a superior position over the democratic system. Corporations are becoming a participant in the political process external to the democratic political system, unilaterally inaccessible to other actors, including the state, a mechanism for

52

impacting on the regulatory environment, citizens' rights and socioeconomic development. The large financial benefits claimed by investors are often commensurate with the country's annual budget. It has a chilling effect on national authorities and the opportunities for pursuing policies in the public interest that do not like the capital. Sovereignty and the right of peoples to define their way of life have been sacrificed on the free market.

53

B. Unchurching society

Values that are not subject to economic influence firmly unite religious denominations. They are value-impregnated against external influences and factors. Moreover, together, they are a potent regulator of the individual behavior of billions of people. Judeo-Christian ethics and culture are part of the code of civilization for Europe and America. Religion is an antidote to the unlimited, profit-only market. That is why neoliberal globalization is trying to push it out of the public arena. Society must be dischurched — religion - locked in the temples and places for the worship of various denominations. It is only forum internum - the inner, intimate experience of faith, part of the freedom of conscience. Forum externum - i.e., the manifestation of faith in a social environment, the presence of traditional religious communities and their institutions in the public arena, as a partner of the state and an equal participant in the democratic debate, should be annihilated.43 In the market society, there is room for only one "god" - the market. Modernization is inevitably linked to the withdrawal of religion from publicity, Marcel Gosche said.44 These are the postulates of neoliberal globalism, which in this respect has as its ultimate ally the progressive and the extreme left. The principle of the secular rule is replaced by militant atheism. It is causing deeper breaks and strains in Europe and America. A typical example is the so-called "War against Christmas" - the policy of the authorities to replace the celebration of the Nativity in public discourse with some imaginary "winter holidays" to ensure "inclusion." In this connection, Orwellian newspeak has been introduced, according to Цеков, Б. Съвременни конституционни модели на държавно-църковни отношения. - Съвременно право, 4/2017. 44 Gauchet, M. The Disenchantment of the World: A Political History of Religion. Princeton University Press, 1997. 43

54

which "Merry Christmas" is replaced by "Happy Holidays," the Christmas bazaar in Brussels is renamed "Winter Pleasures," and the famous Winterval in Birmingham takes the place of the traditional Christmas festival. In the United States, dozens of lawsuits have gone on for the removal of military and other memorials depicting a Christian cross for nearly two decades - the cases against Mount Soledad and Mount Davidson in California. The federal Supreme Court is going to adjudicate in a case against such a memorial to veterans of the wars in Maryland. At the same time, Christian pastors are subjected to harassment and hate speech by LGBTI activists and various government agencies because they refuse to marry same-sex couples. Etcetera. The overcoming of extreme secularism as a state policy is also related to the question of the subtle difference between cultural diversity and multiculturalism. If the former is related to the integration of minorities, in which both their identity and the image of the national community are preserved, in multiculturalism all identities, incoming and newly formed are above all, often reaching the so-called "Paradox of multicultural vulnerability", associated with a certain silencing of traditional and majority identities. An iconic example of the multiculturalist type of thinking is the proposal to remove the Christian cross and symbolism from the church temple at the port of Stockholm in order not to hurt the feelings of arriving immigrants and sailors with Islamic denominations. Both regarding religion and nationstate, neoliberal globalists face growing resistance. In the words of Jürgen Habermas, the hypothesis of secularists that modernization and globalization require total secularization of society and the state is increasingly lost in popularity in the social sciences. The reason is that this hypothesis does not have enough support in the realities in many countries and societies that are generators of modernity.45 Habermas gives the typical example of the United States, where the religious 45

Habermas, J. Notes on post-secular society. New Perspectives Quarterly, 25/4.

55

consciousness of a large part of society is out of doubt; the activity of religious communities and organizations in the public sphere is tangible. These realities enter into dissonance with the undeniable fact that the United States is a powerful engine of modernity over the last two centuries. Habermas postulates that modern society is entering a new stage - post-secularism in which state power is secular, but religion is present in the public sphere and churches and religious organizations have the role of value spokespersons who contribute to the public discussion of value dilemmas, which set policies and laws. Religions have no veto over public policy, lose their function of structuring the state and society but retain their influence and importance for individual behavior, politics, and culture. Society is post-secular, Habermas said, because it needs to adapt to the sustainable existence of religious communities under the conditions of the secular rule. José Casanova goes even further, finding "deprivatization" of the religion today.46 Analyzing the realities in Spain, Poland, Brazil, and the United States, he emphasizes that there is an actual process of exiting religion from the private sphere in which she takes care of individual salvation and her return to the public domain where she is involved in shaping the public moral. In his analyses, Alfred Stepan, a political science professor at Columbia University, is categorical - as evidenced by the current state of the Western world, the strict separation of the church from the state and the closure of religion in the private sphere are not among the mandatory institutional requirements for democracy. Stepan formulates the concept of "twin tolerations" between state and religious authorities.47 It must be taken into account that the post-secular society (Habermas) does not mean the abolition of the secularism or desecularisation, as some scholars as

46

Casanova, J. Public Religions in the Modern World. University of Chicago Press, 1994. Stepan, A. Religion, Democracy, and the „Twin Tolerations”. – in: Rethinking Religion and World Affairs. Oxford University Press, 2012. 47

56

Peter Berger said.48 Dsecularisation would mean the return of religion as a factor determining politics and governance, and as a source of legitimacy of power while the meaning of post-secularism consists in subtracting religious motivation from the governance, coupled with the admission of religious communities as participants in the public discussion on law and policy. There is nothing accidental about the fact that in 2016, religious America supported Donald Trump, at a higher rate than previous Republican candidates as Bush, McCain, and Mitt Romney. According to Pew Research, the majority of Christians voted for Trump: 58% of Protestants, 52% of Catholics, 81% of Evangelists. 61% of Mormons also voted for Trump. Putting balance in the attitude towards religion, following the extremes of the militant atheism that has broken through Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, as we shall see later, is one of the foundations of Trump's doctrine.

48

Berger, P. The Desecularization of the World: A Global Overview. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999.

57

C. Identity Politics

The discrediting of the neoliberal model as a result of the severe financial and economic crisis of 2008 has forced neoliberal globalists to look for issues and ideologies to divert public energy from abuses of the elite, poverty, and growing social inequality. Thus, identity politics, which until then occupied the periphery of public life and was voiced mainly by the progressive circles in the United States, was brought to the fore. The administration of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton has turned identities into the central issue of US politics. From there, it slipped into Europe. "Identity politics” nowadays means the definition of individual and its status in society by absolutization of race and gender. In essence, identity politics is noble - it seeks to overcome the isolation and discrimination of various minority groups. However, to the extreme, it reduces public politics to a permanent identity war that instead of consolidating society, it furrows it with new and new divisions. The American nation should no longer be proud of the melting pot, allowing the diverse immigrant masses that are looking for happiness in the New World to become a nation centered around civil values. If ever Dr. Martin Luther King struggled for equality without regard to race, and his message was to unite society for the sake of equal rights for all, today's Black Lives Matter social justice warriors do not seek unity but instill division. The dream of a nation where the color of the skin will not judge people is defined by identity politics as "racist" and "form of fascism" because it is color-blind.49 White people are by definition "oppressors" and must, therefore, be attached to the shameful pillar of history. There must be a war against “whiteness.” Radical feminists, on the other hand, lead Punic wars against "male pigs" and men in general, because they are guilty of birth. 49

Williams, M. Colorblind Ideology Is a Form of Racism. – in: Psychology Today, 27.11.2011.

58

Transgender people are fighting against the "oppression of gender binary." And so on. How many identities, so wars in society. According to the famous left-wing critic of identity politics, Mark Lila, a professor at Columbia University, this type of social activism is a textbook example of how solidarity should not be sought.50 An example of this in practical politics, according to Lila, is Hillary Clinton, who in his speeches focuses on "Latinos, African Americans, women, LGBTI people," unlike Barack Obama, who turns to the nation with the unifying "we." This identityfocused approach inevitably provokes resistance from the "excluded" white, religious, traditionalists, and those individuals who belong to minorities and are proud not only of their minority identity but also of their belonging to the national community. Identity policy digs trenches around racial and gender identity. “The fixation on diversity in our schools” and the “moral panic about racial, gender, and sexual identity that has distorted liberalism’s message and prevented it from becoming a unifying force,” says Mark Lila (New Yorker, 2017). According to him, identity politics is a significant cause of Hillary Clinton's and Democrat failure and the rise of Donald Trump and the Republicans. If at the macro level neoliberal globalism seeks to expel and, if possible, to annihilate the nation-state and religion, because it is an obstacle to the market, attempts are made to re-format the individual values. Under the mask of "human rights" (and despite them!) And through ruthless social engineering (deeply anti-liberal), neoliberal globalism, in union with the progressives, strives to produce a "new man." The creator of this "new man," his "god," is the State that must decree to confuse people's souls, tell them what to think and talk, criminalize inconsistency, blur the natural differences between men and women and relativize the family. Books and national hymns are re-written, classical 50

Lilla, M. The Once and Future Liberal: After Identity Politics. New York: HarperCollins, 2017, 143 p.

59

works are censored, film images are deleted to unify not only the present and the future but also the past. Neoliberalism is willing to take on the policy of identities because the dichotomy is no longer "fair-equitable" and "labor against capital," but "my difference to your difference." Numerous groups and factions are fighting for their identity, while the big issues that form the national community - the state, the economy, the religion - are left in the background. The maxim is: get them to argue about gender and skin color, so they do not think about class and capitalism. Thus, the meaning of identity politics can be summed up from neoliberal globalism. Redirecting the public discourse from the socio-class structure of society to a mosaic of identities logically leads to the invention of Orwellian newspeak - the language of political correctness. Of course, tolerance for difference is the norm of modern constitutional civilization, but political correctness goes further and begins to act as silencing of different opinions. It replaces objective facts and science with Red Guards volunteerism. The brave to deviate even from the yoke of political correctness is filled with hatred, intolerance, psychological harassment and even violence from the social justice warriors. To say that Santa is invented as a "white man" means to speak out a historical truth aloud. However, according to the norms of political correctness, this is "racism" and humiliation for the non-whites. To state the objective truth that pregnant women are women, not "pregnant people," is not an insult to the feelings of people whose sex assigned at birth is male, but their gender identity is feminine. Neither the "mother" and "father" concepts should be replaced with "parent 1" and "parent 2" in order not to disrupt the feelings of LGBTI people. In the end, this suppresses the female and male identities to give way to something else. Taking over public discourse, the language of political correctness claims to be a monopoly. Pluralism is harmful. Any opinion consistent with the values of democracy is stigmatized if it is different. "Facebook-Gestapo" forbids it. Serious ideas are being discussed 60

to criminalize dissent — a kind of postmodern version of the Nazi "Gleichschaltung" - the policy of unifying German society. An important component of this policy is the so-called "Gender-ideology." There is a sharp contrast between the legitimate concept of "gender" as a social expression of sex and gender-ideology which argues that gender is not biologically determined and rejects the scientifically proven truth that nobody is "born in a wrong body" because sex is genetically coded and unchangeable from the moment of conception to the death of the individual. It does not change from hormonal and surgical interventions. An individual may have a different sexual orientation (hetero, bi-, homosexual), but that does not change his or her biological sex. The roots of gender ideology had come since the early 1990s when Judith Butler declared that gender is a personal choice.51 It is a vulgar development of the atheistic existentialism of Jean-Paul Sartre and his wife Simone de Beauvoir, which for some time had become an intellectual fashion in the 60s-70s of the twentieth century. Existence precedes essence. The individual is born without essence, without a project. He designs himself through the choices he makes. There is no God and Creator; man is "god" and must invent its identity and value, Sartre postulates. The idea of the social construction of gender is a further development of Peter Berger and Thomas Luckman's social constructivism for "social construction of reality."52 Identity politics, however, unfolds these ideas more and more creative. We

are

now

talking

about

transracial

people

who

are

anthropologically belonging to a race, but are self-identified with others as well as transabled - people who identify themselves as disabled and Butler, J. Undoing Gender. Routledge, 2005, 288 p., както и: Butler, J. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Routledge. 2011. 52 Berger, P. L. and Luckmann, T. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, Garden City, NY: Anchor Books, 1966. 51

61

deliberately damage and remove certain parts of their body to it may be consistent with their mental self-identification. The tensions and failures that gender ideology pose in modern society are not due to the unwillingness to respect individual choices and self-perceptions. They are the result of trying to transform a minority stereotype into a universal social norm that is binding on everyone. It is done through requests for indoctrination in schools and kindergartens of the belief that sex is irrelevant for gender identity, by fully accommodating the administrative and social order to the demands of the transgender minority, which is often at the expense of the rights, dignity, and identity of everyone else. It is not accidental that the United States has a widespread controversy over these issues, which is also growing in court battles and political campaigns. Donald Trump gave a voice and a political expression to that significant part of American society that does not accept the extremes of "gender-ideology."

62

§ 5. The capture of the two parties in the United States

Often, estimates in Europe show that there are no significant differences between the Democratic and the Republican political agenda. Especially in the sphere of foreign policy. Moreover, that was right for the last four decades. The reason is that the symbiosis of neoliberal economic principles with the neoconservative geopolitical vision conquered both parties.

A. Features of US Political Parties

US political parties are entirely different from the European view of a party subject. Parties in Europe are, as a rule, hierarchical membership structures centered around a specific ideology. They are an essential tool for forming and expressing the political will of the citizens. The coordinate system of the European political space is slightly one-dimensional. It differentiates parties in the spirit of the tradition established by the time of the French Revolution when the supporters of the "old regime" took the right-wing seats in the plenary hall of the French parliament, and the supporters of the revolution sat on the left side. Party loyalty and discipline are much more pronounced both because of the engagement that creates a membership and because of the relatively uniform ideological appearance of the individual parties.

63

Along with this, loyalty to the party structure dominates the commitment to political ideas. In Europe, a political party may be leftwing by its genesis, self-determination, and international affiliation, while at the same time carrying out right-wing policies and vice versa. The "renegade" and "nomads" are considered to be those who have left the party structure, and not those who cheat on proclaimed ideas. In the former socialist countries, and especially in Bulgaria, the loyalty syndrome to the party structure is particularly enhanced as an inheritance from totalitarian Bolshevism in which "the party is right even when it sins." Entirely another is the characterization of party entities in the United States. The two major parties - the Republican and the Democratic - are not single structures with membership, strict hierarchy and homogeneous ideology. They are rather broad electoral movements, consisting of multiple currents, pressure groups, and organizations that enter into complicated and fluid coalitions on an ideological or territorial basis or specific political and socio-cultural issues. That is why both parties have overlapping ideological cores. In both Democrats and Republicans, there are supporters of both the neoliberal economy and total deregulation, as well as the increased state interference in the marketplace; there are supporters of imperial thinking and interventionist foreign policy, there are also isolationists; there are left-wing centrists and right-wing centrists; Democrats-ecologists and Republican-environmentalists. US parties are primarily a tool for the allocation of government appointments, rather than as carriers of a unified ideology. The ideological aspect is determined by the dominance of one or another current or issues coalition in a given historical period. With some reservations, the ideological palette of the American parties is better illustrated than Nolan's famous chart, which goes beyond the traditional one-dimensional division along the left-right axis and tones the political spectrum at the same time in two vectors - the attitude to economic and personal liberty.

64

The US Constitution does not enshrine parties as constitutional entities and does not give them an explicit role in the political process. Moreover, this is not accidental - there is an understanding of nonpartisan governance among part of the "Founding Fathers." The first presidential election when George Washington was elected, as well as the first elections for the US House of Representatives in 1788-1789, were held on a non-partisan basis - voted for persons without designating party affiliation, and candidates were not nominated from parties. It was only later, with the formation of Jackson's and Jefferson's political movements, that political parties emerged in American politics. The Democratic Party emerged after 1829 by the Andrew Jackson-led faction, to which the white slave owners of the South join. The Republican Party was later formed after 1854, and at that time expressed the interests of opponents of slavery. An interesting exception to the US party system nowadays is only the state of Nebraska, which, in addition to its unicameral state parliament, is also characterized by the holding of elections on a non-partisan basis. Of course, the two big parties have their chapters there, they express political support, but thеrea are no parties on the ticket. Political differentiation in society follows the social and value divisions, the most durable of which are race, state-religion, city-village, employersemployees, which often encompass different strata of society. Thus, members of two minority groups may have common positions on fundamental civil rights issues, but their internal division of rich and poor or of religious and atheist differentiates other sections and differences between the two groups. From this point of view, the flexibility and fluidity of the American parties allow them to follow social cleavages more closely. It is also one of the reasons why the transition from one party to another in the United States is generally not seen as "renegade" or "repainting," but rather as consistency in ideas and a search for an adequate party tool for their realization. It is believed that it is more 65

rational for a politician to change his party to give more chances to the ideas he believes in than to stand firm on a party structure whose policy is now diverging from his worldview. The stances on issues are more important than the party emblem. There is no classic membership in the American

parties -

application, acceptance, membership rights,

responsibilities. The voter registration is rather an indication of political sympathies than membership. US politicians often switch from one party to another. Emblematic is the example of Ronald Reagan, who until 1962 was in the Democratic Party, and in 1964 officially transferred to the Republican camp with his support for Barry Goldwater in the presidential election. His speech on this case - "The price a democrat cannot pay" is considered to be one of the models of American political rhetoric. Later, as President, Reagan turned his ideas into a leading doctrine of the Republican Party for years. Among the many similar cases of change of party affiliation are also the names of Hillary Clinton, who at the beginning of her career is a registered Republican, Condoleezza Rice, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Michael Bloomberg, George Wallace, Leon Panetta, Jesse Ventura, Pat Buchanan. Donald Trump himself has also moved from one team to another. Initially, he was a Republican, and in 2000 he was a voter of the New York Independence Party, a local affiliate of the Ross Perrot Reform Party. Then, for some time, Trump was a registered Democrat, then an "independent voter." While in 2012 he registers again as a Republican party voter. In an interview for Playboy in 1990, Trump said he would be a more successful presidential candidate if he were nominated by the Democratic Party and not the Republican because he was a conservative, but the voters who liked him were mostly workers.

66

B. "The Orphans of Trotsky"

Somewhere in the late 1970s, the Republican Party of the United States was "besieged," and during the Reagan administration even "abducted," in the words of Pat Buchanan, by a new political movement. These are the neoconservatives that originally formed as an ideological movement within the Democratic Party. In the early days, future key figures of neoconservative Irving Kristol53, Sidney Hook54, Norman Podhoretz55 are in the circles of the The New York Intellectuals who lean towards the left and the Trotskyism. They call them the "orphans of Trotsky."56 In the late 1930s and early 1940s, most of them studied at the City College of New York (CCNY)57. Later, members of the Social Democrats of the USA (SDUSA) - today a member party of the Socialist International - are also joining them. The faded ideological footprint of Trotskyism is still visible today - in the neoconservative concept, the idea of "exporting democracy" is a remote reflection of Trotsky's "export of revolution." In 1965, Irving Kristol founded the well-known Public Interest Magazine (suspended in 2002) along with sociologist Daniel Bell, who has already declared the "End of Ideologies." The publication becomes a tribune to criticism of excessive state interference in the economy. In the

53

Irving Kristoll (1920-2009), a journalist and theorist. Considered to be the "father of neoconservatism." In his early years, he was a Trotskyist and furious enemy of the USSR; he participated in the so-called "New York Intellectuals." Author and editor-in-chief of some political and ideological editions that have played an essential role in American politics for several decades. He participates in the neoconservative tank-tanks American Enterprise Institute. His son, William Irving, is a co-founder and editor-in-chief of the iconic neoconservative The Weekly Standard, which dates back to 1995. 54 Sidney Hook (1902-1989), a philosopher who in the early years identified himself as a Marxist, and later became a neoconservative and furious anti-Communist. 55 Norman Podhoretz (1930), a theoretician and writer with a decisive influence on the formation of the neoconservative trend. He participated in the creation of one of the essential neoconservative structures "Project for the New American Century." Awarded with Presidential Medal "Freedom" by President G.W.Bush. 56 Dorrien, G. Imperial Designs. Neoconservatism and the New Pax Americana. New York: Routledge, 2004, p. 7-24. 57 Fukuyama, F. America at the crossroads: democracy, power, and the neoconservative legacy. Yale University Press, 2006, pp.15-16.

67

1950s and 1960s, future neoconservatives were supporters of the fight for civil rights and the movement of Martin Luther King. In contrast to the traditional views of the Republicans, who are opposed to the "big government" and government intervention in the economy during the FDR's New Deal, neoconservatives generally support this line but are disappointed by far more active social engineering program of President Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society." They do not believe in American isolationism and the politics of détente, but they see in Communism and the USSR the arch-enemy that must be destroyed or at least subordinate. The grave defeat of Democratic candidate George McGovern in 1972 by the influential Republican leader, Richard Nixon, who won a second term in a landslide58, mobilizes an attempt to revive the Democratic Party. Sen. (D) Henry M. Jackson, known as Scoop Jackson, creates the Coalition for a Democratic Majority - a structure that becomes an incubator of future neoconservatism. One of their ideologues, Irving Kristol, defines the first neoconservative as "a liberal who has been mugged by reality." Scoop Jackson is a fierce anti-Communist and Russophobe, an active supporter of the ever-growing budget spending on defense and arms, supports the concept of the welfare state and the role of trade unions. Among the participants in the coalition are the names of future icons of neoconservatism and neoliberal economic thought, such as Paul Wolfowitz59, Jeane Kirkpatrick60, Irvin Kristol, James Woolsey61, Samuel Huntington62, Daniel Moynihan63, Norman Podhoretz, and others. 58

In the 1972 presidential election, Richard Nixon won a second term, defeating 60.7 percent (47 million votes) against 37.5 percent and 29 million votes for McGovern, winning the race in 49 of the US's 50 states. 59 Paul Wolfowitz, Assistant Secretary of State in Ronald Reagan administration, Deputy Minister of Defense at George H.W. Bush, World Bank President (2005-2007). 60 Jeane Kirkpatrick, ambassador to the United Nations under Reagan administration. 61 James Woolsey, Deputy Minister of Defense in Jimmy Carter administration and CIA Director at Bill Clinton administration. Awarded with The Presidential Medal of Freedom by President G.W.Bush. 62 Samuel Huntington, a Harvard University scholar, author of the famous book Clash of Civilizations, an expert at the National Security Council in the Jimmy Carter administration. 63 Daniel Moynihan, a well-known American socialist and politician, held various administrative and diplomatic posts in the presidential administration Kennedy, Nixon, Ford, and Johnson, and from 1977 to 2001 he was a Senator from New York.

68

The National Review, as well as The Weekly Standard, published in 1955, played an essential role in the formation and strengthening of neoconservative views, in addition to Public Interest64. Neoconservatism is defined as a purely American version of conservative ideology: an intellectual movement created by former leftists that preach militant anticommunism, capitalist economics, and a minimal welfare state, governance by the traditional elites and return to traditional cultural values65. The Reagan era attracts some of the participants in the Coalition for a Democratic Majority to shift to the Republican Party. They become known in American politics as "Reagan Democrats." Indeed, it is during the Reagan administration that the ideological symbiosis between neoconservatives and neoliberal economic doctrine is mostly formed. Confrontation with the USSR, the establishment of the United States as a global hegemonic mission to intervene in all parts of the world, total privatization, deregulation, market fundamentalism - these are the foundations of this symbiosis. Under President George W. Bush, neoconservatives significantly expanded their positions in power. Meanwhile, the intellectuals of the former Coalition for a Democratic Majority, even with some nuances, mainly in fiscal policy and taxes, have made this doctrine a leading one for Democrats. The two parties become ideological brothers. A single "party" takes them and determines their political and ideological vision. It is the reason for the lack of significant difference, and not consensual national priorities, especially in foreign policy, between Reagan and George W. Bush on the one hand and Bill Clinton on the other; between Bush on the one hand and Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on the other. One of the neoconservative icons Robert Kagan, who is also the husband of US Assistant Secretary of State Vaïsse, J. Neoconservatism: The Biography of a Movement. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2010; както и: Hoeveler, D. Watch on the Right. University of Wisconsin Press, 1991. 65 Dorrien, G. The Neoconservative Mind: Politics, Culture, and the War of Ideology. Temple University Press, 1993, p. 8. 64

69

in the Obama administration Victoria Newland (the one with the phrase "Fuck EU" during the Ukraine Maidan protests), defines in one of its publications the core of neoconservative foreign policy66. Total US domination in the world through military and economic power under the veil of a moralizing mission in the name of human rights and democratic values. By the way, at the beginning of 2016, with the rise of Donald Trump, Robert Kagan left the Republican Party and supported his ideological sister, Hillary Clinton, defining Trump as "the monster of Frankenstein" and "the new Napoleon."67 Robert Kagan and William Crystal68 formulated the establishment of US "Benevolent Global Hegemony" as a major goal of US foreign policy. This goal, in their view, implies three major political imperatives: the expansion of the military budget, increased military patriotism and "moral clarity," which is reflected in the proliferation of the American concept of freedom, democracy, and the global market economy69. In general, neoconservatism is skeptical of international law and its institutions because they are an obstacle to unrestricted US interventionism. The regimes and ideologies that are unacceptable must be changed and democratized by the American model. Kagan and Crystal criticize the "indecisiveness" with which the US left Saddam Hussein in power in the Desert Storm operation, as well as limiting US intervention only to Kosovo, instead of spreading over all of Serbia.70 Neoconservatism pushes and marginalizes the traditional American conservatism, which was last in power with Richard M. Nixon. They call 66

Kagan, R. Neocon Nation: Neoconservatism, c. 1776 – in: World Affairs, 2008. Kagan, R. "Trump is the GOP's Frankenstein monster. Now he's strong enough to destroy the party.". Washington Post, February 25, 2016. 68 William Kristol, Chief of Staff to Vice President Dan Quayle (1989-2003), founder and editor of one of the leading neoconservative publications - The Weekly Standard. Co-founder and active agent in the neoconservative "Project for the New American Century" and the Manhattan Institute. He is the son of Irving Kristol. 69 Kristol W., Kagan R. Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy. – in: Foreign Affairs, July/August 1996. 70 Fukuyama, F. America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neoconservative Legacy, Yale University Press, 2007. 67

70

it "paleoconservatism" to frame it as an anachronism. Nixon's policy of détente in international relations, reducing the confrontation with the USSR, the signing of SALT I (Strategic Arms Limitation Talks), withdrawal of veto on China's UN membership in 1971, and establishing relations with Mao Zedong, is completely abandoned. Neoconservatives and neoliberals in both parties replace it with a strategy of global domination and devaluation of the USSR. Undoubtedly, this strategy initially played a positive role in the liberation of East European peoples from the totalitarian regime. However, over the past two decades, it has led to extreme levels of hostility towards Russia, a series of "regime change" interventions, and an escalation of international tension. The rise of the neoconservative concept of an interventionist foreign policy in both parties eliminates one of the significant differences between them. Historically, the Democratic Party is the bearer of the idea of a stronger US role in the world through economic aid and military intervention. This belief is fundamental to the doctrine of Democrat President Woodrow Wilson in the early twentieth century. It is taught to generations of Democrats and Left-Liberals in the USA. Wilsonianism, as it is often called, states that the USA is called upon to spread democracy and capitalism; opposes the isolationism of the traditional Conservatives in the Republican Party and offers an imperial vision of the US's global role.71 Conversely, traditional American conservatives instead follow the covenants of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, who are skeptical of entering into overly engaging international alliances. This ideological difference is essential for US military interventions from the Second World War to the re-emergence of neoconservative doctrine in the 1980s. It is no coincidence that presidents nominated by the Democratic Party wage both the Korean and the Vietnam War. Perhaps it sounds paradoxical for conventional European thinking about US politics, but during this period 71

Steigerwald, D. Wilsonian idealism in America. Cornell University Press, p. 31.

71

it is the Democratic Party that plays the role of a "party of war," while the Republican Party, dominated by the traditional conservatives, is rather the "party of peace." This contrast is particularly noticeable in the Vietnam War, which has escalated to extremes by Democrats John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, while Republican Richard Nixon has decisively taken the US out of the war. It is not just a matter of specific historical circumstances, but also a worldview. Only in his first term, despite the resistance of influential factors and circles on the American political arena, including some mighty pro-Democratic media, President Nixon cut military spending for Vietnam from $ 25 billion annually (at Lyndon Johnson) to $ 3 billion, and armed forces in Vietnam of 550,000 people have been reduced to 24,000.72 In mainstream media, and hence in mass consciousness, to this day Kennedy and Johnson are glorified as doves of peace, and Nixon is demonized as a "hawk." How familiar, is not it? Democrat Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize, which did not prevent him from "peacefully" destroying Libya and Syria and escalating militarypolitical tensions with Russia, while Donald Trump was named the "new Hitler," although he stated a more peaceful foreign policy. Wilson's tradition of open and active foreign policy intervention around the world is brought to the next stage in the Truman doctrine, and later neoconservatives transform it unceremoniously into the doctrine of global political, economic and military domination of the United States under the unipolar geopolitical architecture of the world. Not surprisingly, the historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. defines neoconservative as "Wilsonian with a machine gun." On this ideological background, in the United States has begun a gradual rehabilitation of traditional conservative values adapted to modern realities in the past few years. Even Fukuyama dissociated itself

72

Джонсън, П. Съвремеността - светът от 20-те до 90-те. УИ "Св. Климент Охридски", 1993, с. 528.

72

from neoconservatism73. Some emblematic neocons are increasingly pessimistic. Some have already called neoconservatism a form of "cultural nostalgia."74 Irving Kristol himself described it as a "generational phenomenon," and Norman Podhoretz in 1996 wrote the article "Neoconservatism: A Eulogy."75 At the same time, palaeo-conservatism, as in the mid-1980s the traditional conservative current of Nixonian type was called, gradually returned to the mainstream of American politics. In an original text published called the "Crunchy Con Manifesto" in the Dallas Morning News, Rod Dreher76 summarizes some of the core values of paleo-conservatism: "We are conservatives who stand outside the conservative mainstream; therefore, we can see things that matter more clearly. Modern conservatism has become too focused on money, power, and the accumulation of stuff, and insufficiently concerned with the content of our individual and social character. Big business deserves as much skepticism as a big government. Culture is more important than politics and economics. A conservatism that does not practice restraint, humility, and good stewardship - especially of the natural world — is not fundamentally conservative. Small, Local, Old, and Particular are almost always better than Big, Global, New, and Abstract. Beauty is more important than efficiency. The relentlessness of media-driven pop culture deadens our senses to authentic truth, beauty, and wisdom. We share Russell Kirk’s77 conviction that “the institution most essential to conserve is the family.”

Fukuyama, F. After Neoconservatism. New York Times, 19 Feb 2006. Вж. и: America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neoconservative Legacy, Yale University Press, 2007. 74 Judis, John B. Trotskyism to Anachronism. The Neoconservative Revolution. - in Foreign Affairs, July/August 1995, pp. 123-9 75 Podhoretz, N. Neoconservatism: A Eulogy. – in: Commentary, March 1, 1996. 76 Rod Dreher - editor of The American Conservative, created with the involvement of Pat Buchanan http://www.theamericanconservative.com/ 77 Russell Kirk - a well-known American historian whose book “The Conservative Mind”, published in 1953, has a vital role in the ideological development of the Republican Party of the United States. 73

73

Leading paleoconservative editions are the analytical magazines The American Conservative and Chronicles, and the news media - The Daily Caller, Newsmax, New York Post, Daily Signal and Breitbart. Among the most recognizable and vital figures in today's paleoconservative trend are Pat Buchanan, Paul Craig Roberts78, and Ron Paul79. Economic nationalism, protection of the working class by revising free trade agreements, a restriction of illegal immigration, tax cuts for the whole social ladder, ending the aggressive confrontation on the international arena, and reviewing the idea of America as a "world policeman" - these are the foundations of paleo-conservatism. It is these postulates that are the core of Donald Trump's ideological doctrine.

78

Paul Craig Roberts is a renowned American economist, Deputy Finance Minister in President Ronald Reagan's administration; one of the sharp critics of G.W.Bush's rule and the war in Iraq. 79 Ron Paul is a Republican and a longtime U.S. Representative for Texas's 22nd congressional district, a presidential candidate in 2012, a critic of neoconservatism and interventionist foreign policy.

74

§ 1. Gleams of three epochs

The last years of the nineteenth century expire. Tens of thousands of adventurers crawl to Klondike near the Yukon River and the small town of Dawson City in the remote frozen outback of northwest Canada. The Gold Rush. Dreams of infinite wealth, hunger, cold, death, conflicts, mortal efforts... Some choose the more direct route to the golden lands, climbing fifty kilometers through the Chilkoot Pass, carrying scarce luggage on their backs because cattle can not pass through the icy passages. Others choose the longer but more natural way through the White Pass, which can be crossed with horses and mules. The animals exhausted to death fall and die with thousands on the road. Contemporaries describe how people are gassing in a frozen mess of hair, blood, and bones. However, the pursuit of gold is stronger than all hardships and dangers. One man, however, goes to Klondike, not necessarily to seek gold near Yukon's icy waters, an occupation difficult and quite uncertain. There is another thought in his head - where there is a sharp shortage of food, shelter and any living conditions; someone needs to get them. There are also people willing to pay for that, which would give more secure revenues and profits than gambling of gold mining. That 75

is what the hard transition to Klondike convinces him. The active mind immediately sets up a tent restaurant along the trail in the middle of the White Pass, where he serves a nutritious horse-meat soup provided by the hundreds of exhausted and abandoned by adventurers animals. Later, with a partner in the town of Bennett, British Colombia, where adventurers built or bought boats to continue to Dawson City, he develops the extravagant hotel-restaurant "Arctic" which offers recreation and entertainment.80 Open 24/7, serving fresh fruit, ptarmigan, and horse meat. After the construction of the railroad through the White Pass, they also build a hotel in the town of Whitehorse on the Yukon River, where it is the final destination of the train. He spends plenty to secure his family, build a decent large house in Queens, New York, and buy a few plots of land that leaves as an inheritance.

*

*

*

The end of the 1920s - the roaring twenties - before President Hoover's social engineering to turn the cyclical economic crisis that lurked in 1929 into a profound, deep, and immeasurable economic catastrophe the Great Depression. He began building in Queens for the emerging middle class of teachers, doctors, petty owners. First a house. Sell it. Makes more, sells them. So he becomes the main building contractor in the vast Jamaica district in Queens. Depression initially crushed the real estate market, but he quickly adapted. He opens the first self-service grocery store in the neighborhood. At that time, the old business model dominated 80

Blair, Gwenda. The Trumps: Three Generations of Builders and a Presidential Candidate. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2015.

76

- a salesman behind the counter served customers. In other areas of Long Island, however, a new shopping concept is being pushed through by King Kullen's stores - customers take the goods out of the shelves themselves and pay to the cashier at the exit.81 It is the forerunner of the modern supermarket. It saves staff costs and makes it possible to sell cheaper. In the conditions of the crisis, more affordable products lead to more customers. He also creates such a supermarket in his neighborhood. Success is solid, and only after six months, he sells it to King Kullen with a good profit. Moreover, returns to the business he understands most - the real estate. During Roosevelt's New Deal he managed to get involved in statesubsidized housing programs and built thousands of cheap single-family homes and condominiums in Queens and Brooklyn. His entrepreneurial flair leads him to the construction of an entire neighborhood with luxury mansions - Jamaica Estate, where judges, lawyers, big owners live. He also lives there with his family. In those years, New York, and especially Manhattan, astonished every alien with his scale and boiling. Stunning buildings are erected, which stop breathing to this day. Not just corporate headquarters, boring administrative offices, hotels or residential cooperatives, but richly ornate gigantic palaces, towers, colonnades, and elegant facades. Gothic, art-deco, beaux-arts. Overcrowded docks, streets with multicolored crowds. Industrial dirt, glossy stores, chic advertising lights. A focal point of millions of immigrant flows and a gravity center for giant capital, corporations and commercial triumphs. However, he stays in his little world, where he has already earned an enviable social position. He builds, sells, rents amid the quintessential tranquility of Queens and Brooklyn. His office is modest, but he moves with a stunning "Cadillac" carrying his initials on the registration plate... 81

The King Kullen chain of stores, which still has thirty sites on the territory of Long Island, has been recognized by the Smithsonian Institution as the prototype of the modern supermarket.

77

*

*

*

America is now emerging from the fears and deficiency of the Great Depression and WWII. In 1952, on the bank of East River in Manhattan, the UN headquarters were established, highlighting not only the cosmopolitan atmosphere of the City but also the sense of capital of the world, the "navel of the world," a "city on the hill" where humanity stares. Television, photography, art, and advertising created in New York are becoming a powerful source of ideas, dreams, illusions, and delusions. They are a socio-cultural matrix with global penetration and influence which shapes the lifestyle, the tastes, and understanding of billions around the world. In this atmosphere, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, he began to look for his place under the "lights of the big city." Although not part of the big business family dynasty class, his parents have a decent status, built up by the real estate business that fits mostly in Queens and Brooklyn. He helps in the family business. However, his imagination goes beyond - to the rumbling Manhattan where is the playground of the big players, planetary phenomena, huge winnings, and dramatic failures. He lives alone in a relatively modest apartment on Upper East Side and travels daily to Queens with a sleek "Cadillac" carrying his initials on the registration plate. Despite the turbulent cultural and political booze, the city is gradually falling into the chasm of a severe economic and social crisis. Crime and unemployment are on the rise, filling the air with uncertainty. Many streets and neighborhoods become dangerous even for crossing. Bryant Park in Midtown until the early 1990s was a hacker for drug dealers. The streets around Times Square in the west are covered with a small pattern of subtle brothels and pornographic movie theatres. The gardens are deserted. Metro trains are disfigured from graffiti and 78

pored through urban dungeons and overhead lines like gloomy guards of anarchy and decay. The waste collection gets worse. 1975, the city went bankrupt. With debts more than two billion dollars, Mayor Abraham Beam sends a desperate request for a federal loan. On October 29, however, at a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, President Gerald Ford announced his refusal to save New York's poor government with taxpayers' money. "Daily Mirror" comes out with the notorious title: "Ford to City: Drop Dead!" Amid this decline, he sees new opportunities. His hour has come. He buys downcast buildings in emblematic locations, turns them into the new city icons of Manhattan, which tickle the self-confidence of New Yorkers. He unfolds his empire with large hotel complexes and casinos in Atlantic City. He draws large plans with the typical New York feel of exceptionalism, glamor, and godliness. Also, he realizes many of them. He is not just a successful billionaire but becomes a genuine celebrity - a centerpiece of media attention. Criticized, ridiculed, admired, even glorified. Нe writes books. Hosts a popular TV show and is rewarded with the dream of any real celebrity in the US - a star with his name on The Hollywood Walk of Fame in Los Angeles...

*

*

*

Gleams of three epochs. Friedrich Trump - the grandfather. Fred Trump - the father. Also, Donald J. Trump - the son. The newly elected 45th president of the United States of America.

79

§ 2. The information tsunami

Before Donald Trump's inauguration, his name dominated the media and the Internet. For example, at the beginning of 2017, January 4, 22.03 GMT, the search in the English version of Google gave the following results. The name of Barack Obama - 164,000,000 results. Hillary Clinton 182,000,000, Vladimir Putin - 66,800,000, and Pope Francis - 78,000,000. Search Keyword "Jesus Christ" showed 125,000,000 results. The introduction of Donald Trump's name in the search engine showed a total of 387,000,000 results! Even the name of a global pop icon like Michael Jackson at that time had "only" 243,000,000 results. Almost two years later, the situation is unchanged: Trump 771,000,000 results, Jesus Christ - 434,000,000, Michael Jackson 696,000,000, and Pope Francis - 95,300,000. Obama and Hillary are back with 123,000,000 and 111,000,000 results respectively. Even these data are a clear testimony to the information tsunami, which is Donald Trump's presence on the socio-political scene. Over the last few decades he has always been in the spotlight: tens of thousands of publications for him and from him on business, lifestyle and political topics in newspapers of any caliber and nationality — multiple TV and radio shows in all prestigious programs. Trump has been on the covers of all major magazines of our time long before he joined the presidential race in 2015 - Fortune (1984), Newsweek (1987), Time (1989), People (1990, 1997) Fair (1994), George (2000), Esquire (2004), Haute Living (2005), Success (2008) and dozens of others. He has cameo appearances in some films, including

80

Home Alone 2, Wall Street 2, Sex and the City, Zoolander, Eddie, and others. In 1989, Trump Game was launched on the market - a board game similar to the famous "Monopoly." Trump advertised the game himself in TV spots. Gradually his name becomes a brand not only in the real estate business and luxury but also in pop culture. Trump’s popularity is so vast that some use his name as advertising bait. In 1991, for example, Detroit Free Press, Chicago Tribune, and dozens of other national and local newspapers in the United States brought out the news of the new edition of one of the world's most substantial encyclopedic books - the World Book Encyclopedia.82 The reason is nothing but the lack of an article about Donald J. Trump in it.83 Richard Harmet, the editor of the Encyclopedia, admits that this is an advertising strategy - hardly the new edition will get a particular media response with the information that it is the first Encyclopedia that reflects the reunification of Germany that happened several months earlier. However, the lack of an article about Donald J. Trump provokes a media buzz. Wallman rink in Central Park in Manhattan also contributes to turning Trump into an institution of entrepreneurship and efficiency that is recognizable on a national scale. The ice rink is one of the lifestyle icons of New York City, where New Yorkers skate on ice in winter time, and in the summer – enjoy jazz concerts and have fun. In 1980, NYC authorities shut down the rink for reconstruction, which, according to initial estimates, should cost taxpayers about $ 9 million. They spent more than six years 13 million dollars, but the repair remained incomplete. The case annoyed New Yorkers and periodically entered national news as one of the noisy scandals relating to maladministration and waste of public funds during NYC Mayor Ed Koch administration. Among the outraged 82

The World Book Encyclopedia is published in 22 volumes since 1917 and includes more than 14,000 articles on various fields of science, technology, and social life. Issued by Scott Fetzer Company, owned by Berkshire Hathaway. 83 Detroit Free Press, Mar 7, 1991 (Detroit, Michigan).

81

is the entrepreneur Donald J. Trump. After some reluctance from the mayor, Trump was authorized to repair Wallman rink at his own expense against the right to operate the facility and its adjoining restaurant. Trump took a public commitment that the repair will cost $ 2.5 million and will be completed in six months. Against the backdrop of spending 13 million by the authorities, and after six years with no results, Trump's offer seemed more than acceptable. In fact, instead of six months, Trump completed the renovation for four, and the cost was a quarter million lower. Trump and mayor Ed Koch cut the tape. The city was delighted, and the media - replenished once again by the presence of Donald J. Trump as a symbol of efficiency, entrepreneurship, and organizational talent. Along with positive news, Trump is also the subject of a massive series of harmful publications in the media. However, it is the perfect confirmation of the maxim that there is no bad advertisement and it is better to be infamous than not to be famous at all. Broadway comedians organized two-hour satirical performances in which they read excerpts from his bestseller The Art of Deal and mock him most devastatingly. However, the book enjoys good circulation in the United States and has been published worldwide in a dozen languages. Commentators fill newspaper columns with venom and mockery against him. Jerry Schwartz of the Associated Press says "Trump is the person we love to hate," "he can buy buildings but not respect." Others shout "no, we do not hate him, but we despise him"84 or consider Trump as "a polyester man in the world of fine cotton."85 The yellow press like Spy magazine, published from 1986 to 1998, caricatured him consistently, called him a "short-fingered vulgarian" and watched with catty mockery every step he takes. Even at 84 85

The Journal News, February 19, 1989. St.Louis Post-Dipatch, February 23, 1989.

82

one point, he pulls out the big title "WA-A-A-A-H! Little Donald Unhappy at Last. Trump's Final Days". Trump angrily responded that this magazine would soon disappear from the market. So it happened - Spy magazine sank into oblivion in 1998, and Trump's rise continues nowadays. In 1988, Spy magazine registered a special fund that sent to fifty-eight personalities from New York establishment one dollar and eleven cents check to see how many of these multi-millionaires would bother to cash in on such a small amount. It turns out that twenty-six of them cashed this check. Among them are Henry Kissinger and Donald J. Trump. They send to these twenty-six people a second check, with even lower value - 64 cents. As a result, thirteen of them cash the check. Then they send a third check worth just 13 cents. Two cashed out that small change - Donald J. Trump and the arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi - the uncle of the US journalist Jamal Khashoggi murdered in 2018. Later, Trump bought the ultra-luxurious $ 100 million yacht owned by the troubled influential Saudi businessman for just $ 38 million. Then he sold it with high profit. The irony is that Spy Magazine become an unexpected prophet while attempting to ridicule Trump - in January-February 1988 they published an article titled "Nation to Trump: We Need You," in which, in a parodic style, announced that Donald J. Trump was finally supposed to run for president. Trump responded to all the mockery and insults with coolness and in a unique manner. His ostentation and lofty ambitions, made his name a true commercial brand. It makes critics and dogs in the manger of all kinds even more fierce. A Daily News columnist praises that if he wants to relax, he listens to some "Trump's stupidity." Others blame him for inundating New York with kitsch and ridicule Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue with its waterfall in the lobby. Social activists suddenly organize a "luncheon for the poor and homeless" in front of the aristocratic emblem

83

of New York - the Plaza Hotel, which for some time was owned by Trump. Then they threatened him with insults that he did not appear to share the "table.” The hostility of much of the establishment to Trump, however, is related to his origins considered not "aristocratic." For the "old money," he is a runt who is pushing into the world of the big and privileged. Trump is not a dot-com billionaire but dares to become a key player in one of the businesses that "old money" regards as their reserved area - real estate. Trump is not just a runt in the billionaire class, but a runt who becomes a trendsetter and claims to be the number one. "Old money" and their trusted people never forgive him this audacity. However, for his admirers, Trump is a remarkable person with lots of energy and vision to revitalize New York City after its urban decay in the 70s. As the Washington Post's Lois Romano wrote in 1984, Trump is a master of grand plans, and his buildings are not just gorgeous, they are stunning. In 1987 Lee Iacocca, the legendary president of Chrysler, says to New York Times: ''People say Donald's ruthless. 'It's just that he's smart and quick and really knows a good deal when he sees it.''86 However, even this long-standing popularity seems too lean in comparison to what happened on June 15, 2015, when Trump officially announced that he was running for president of the United States His name slammed the media. Since then, Time magazine has put him on the cover nine times. Nine US nationwide television networks mention Donald Trump in 2015-2016 a total of 1,361,403 times.87 The top three with a total of 374,080 mentions is CNN, followed by MSNBC with 368 915 and 289 524 in Fox News. By comparison, the total number of references to 86

New York Times. Trump Hints of Dreams Beyond Building, By FOX BUTTERFIELD. Published: October 5, 1987. 87 Data from the "Analysis by the GDELT Project using data from the Internet Archive Television News Archive". The survey includes CNN, FOX News, CNBC, Aljazeera America, Bloomberg, MSNBC, FOX Business, LinkTV, Comedy Central.

84

Hillary Clinton in the surveyed TV networks for the same period is half 646,289. Most are MSNBC - 171,915, followed by CNN - 161,141 and Fox News - 157,895. According to mediaQuant, which estimates the total free media time spent on a commercial product, brand, or political candidate, the media attention that Donald Trump received in the 12 months before November 2016 elections are equivalent to almost five billion dollars. By the same index, Hillary Clinton has achieved free media coverage for just over three billion dollars. Trump's achievement is a record in US political history. For comparison, in previous presidential elections in 2012, the media coverage of Barack Obama's media amounted to just over a billion dollars.88 It is enough to watch for a while any news channel - everybody talks about Trump, and it is all Trump. Tons of fierce criticisms, suspicions, systemic insults, and slander over him - this is the content of the mainstream corporate media. On the other side, a handful of independent online media enhance their audiences reporting more accurately on the Trump presidency. The rise of social networks has opened new communicative territories that Trump uses uniquely. He is not just an active user of Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. He is a real social media "empire" that sparks instant reactions and opinions, denounces opponents and enemies. Trump directly communicates with voters bypassing corporate media and in many cases forcing the media to follow his agenda. His personal Twitter account - @realDonaldTrump - has more than 56 million followers, Facebook page - more than 23 million fans, and Instagram - almost 11 million followers. Each of these profiles has a larger audience than any US television channel. For comparison, according to Nielsen Research, the audience of the most watched news channel in the US - Fox News, in the primetime of the 88

See more on mediaQuant website - http://www.mediaquant.net/2016/11/a-media-post-mortem-on-the-2016presidential-election.

85

2018 midterms coverage reached over 7 million viewers and CNN about 5 million. It is no coincidence that in the 2016 campaign, Donald J. Trump was the undeniable winner in the information war. Trump's domination is even more distinctive taking into account that the media environment in the USA is often politically biased: a majority of employees in leading TV channels - managers, producers, editors, reporters - politically oppose to Trump's agenda and are even hostile to him personally. Just an illustration: according to the Center for Responsive Politics in the 2008 presidential campaign, 1160 employees of ABC, CBS, and NBC donated to Barack Obama's campaign and other Democratic candidates for a total of $ 1,020,816. While only 193 are those in the media, who have given to the Trump campaign and to Republican candidates for a total value that is almost ten times lower - $ 142,863. It is the trend also with the corporate owners of the main TV channels. Again, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, published on their website OpenSecrets.org, in the election campaigns between 1990 and 2016, Time Warner made donations to both parties but averaged 10 to 1 in favor of Democrats. In 2016, the corporation funded Democrats and Hillary Clinton with $ 2,250,006, and Republicans and Donald J. Trump with only $ 258,275. The two most important TV channels owned by Time Warner are also one-way in their campaign donations: CNN and HBO funded Democrats with $ 14,638 and $ 317,498 respectively, and Republicans with $ 0 and $ 10,200 respectively. Sure, many in Europe will be surprised, but Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., whose portfolio also includes Fox News, usually funds Democrats rather than Republicans, albeit much more balanced than Time Warner. In 2016, for example, News Corp. gave the Democrats 1,149,805 dollars and the Republicans - 702,035. For the Fox News Channel, the data is $ 5,587 for Democrats and 2,201 for Republicans. In the 2018 midterm election, News Corp. kept his longstanding practice and donated more funds to Democratic Party candidates 86

- $ 569,621, while for Republicans - only 297,840. The owner of ABC - Walt Disney Co has given to the Democrats 1,924,488 and 1,510,874 dollars for the 2016 and 2018 campaigns and significantly less - 715,723 and 227,728 dollars to Republicans. So in this unfavorable media environment, different agencies measuring social media impact show that in the 2016 election Hillary Clinton spent more money on television advertising and organized more people on the ground in key battleground states, but Donald Trump has managed to reach a much larger electoral base. According to 4C Insights data from October 1 until the election day on November 8, 2016, Donald J. Trump has achieved a 58% positive attitude on Facebook and Twitter, while Clinton - 48%. These are just some of the dimensions of the information tsunami that shook the world and American society for the second year after the presidential vote in 2016. Among the reasons, of course, is the adept marketing and provocative style of Trump, which often goes on the brink of the scandal. However, the political reason for saturation of the information space with Trump is that he not only successfully provoked American and global public opinion but also opposed the status quo of neoliberal globalism and the absurd dogmas of political correctness vigorously. We see floods of speculations and fake news about Trump’s political stands and actions. His political opponents spew all sorts of exaggerations, assumptions or breakthroughs of catastrophic forecasting garnished with bigotry and hatred. All these are part of the signs that the 2016 elections did not just reshuffled the White House administration and political party in power but shifted critical layers in US politics. The past two years of Trump's presidency are a vivid testimony for a real ideological turnaround in Washington, DC. For the first time in almost four decades, axiomatic priorities and trends of US foreign and economic

87

policy have changed. The almost monopolistic public discourse of neoliberal globalists and their beadles in the media, think-tanks, and the various leaders of public opinion is being pushed into its normal public boundaries. Trump's victory legitimized and returned to the political mainstream the traditional American conservatism, coupled with the rebellion against the superclass, which created and sustained the world order of neoliberal globalism.

88

§ 3. The Long Road to the White House

Over the years, there has been the impression that in Europe traditionally dominated the sympathy for the US Democratic Party. Probably this is because Democrats’ views are closer to the European social model and also to their foreign policy openness to Europe and the Euro-Atlantic dimension. The Republican Party is much less interested in Europe because its eyes look more towards the traditional allies of the United States - United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, and also towards the main competitors - Russia and China. The Old continent looks at American politics mostly through European optics or in terms of interpretations of US-based analysts, media and research centers leaning toward the US Democratic Party. Thus European perspective to US politics is often one-sided and biased. Europe is often "surprised" by political developments in the United States. Trump was precisely such a "surprise" for the overwhelming European public opinion. Often the analyzes which do not go down the surface of CNN, New York Times and Washington Post's reports are more of an example of what philosophy calls an "argument of ignorance" - I have not heard of this fact; therefore, it does not exist; or "the argument of personal conviction" - "I do not believe it. Therefore, it is not possible to be true". So for many Europeans, Trump's success in politics was not just a surprise but a random populist whim to a plutocrat who has no ideas, but improvises and follows the public moods to win votes. These allegations

89

are deeply false. The truth is that Donald J. Trump builds prerequisites for his presidential bid for almost thirty years. Three decades! However, his main ideas, in general, have not changed significantly. All important Trump's political issues have been formulated and publicly proclaimed repeatedly and long before 2016. It is enough to trace his public statements from the late 1980s or read his four books published between 2000-2015, in which he thoroughly explains his views and management ideas. Trump's name began to appear as a potential presidential candidate quite early in 1980 in an interview with the prestigious Hollywood reporter Rona Barrett. Asked if he wanted to become President of the United States, Trump replied: "I do not believe I will be, Ronna ... I think it's a very unattractive life." Later, in 1984, New York Magazine wrote praise for him and also questioned him about possible presidential ambitions. Trump changed the subject with the words that he would not run because of "fake smiles" and "bureaucracy." In 1987, however, Trump undertook an open and farreaching political move – he paid a full-page ad with Open Letter to the American People airing his foreign policy views in three mainstream newspapers – The New York Times, Boston Globe and Washington Post. He sharply criticized the White House's foreign policy. This letter for the first time publicly argues that US allies must meet their financial commitments to the US defense - a public Trump's stand nowadays. The Open Letter addresses wealthy and influential countries like Japan or the Gulf states:

“Make Japan, Saudi Arabia, and others pay for the protection we extend as allies. Let’s help our farmers, our sick, our homeless by taking from some of the greatest profit machines ever created – machines created and nurtured by us. “Tax” these wealthy nations, not America. End our huge deficit, reduce our taxes, and let America’s economy grow unencumbered by the

90

cost of defending those who can easily afford to pay us for the defense of their freedom.”89

Three decades later reciprocity in international relations continues to be part of the foundations of Trump's foreign policy vision. NATO and the allies have to take their fair share of defense costs, and not to count on US taxpayers. A few weeks after publishing the Open letter, which is the occasion for the political establishment in New York and Washington, DC to speculate whether Trump does not declare political ambitions, the young celebrity holds his first political rally. The New York Times notes that Trump is already looking beyond the construction business.90 On October 22, 1987, he landed his helicopter in New Hampshire and headed for an old Yoken's restaurant in Portsmouth. Local Republican Party organizer Mike Dunbar has invited him to a Rotary club meeting because he thinks Trump is the best presidential nomination, which after the reign of Ronald Reagan, the Republicans can nominate in the 1988 election. As Trump spoke, a group of college students armed with ''Trump for President'' placards rallied outside. Dunbar later tells the pivotal moments of Trump's speech in the media.91 These are the same that 28 years later Trump will make a part of his election platform for the 2016 elections. America is plundered by poor governance and unfair trade agreements with Japan (nowadays with China); wealthy allies of the United States have to share the defense spending; Trump is a robust and experienced negotiator who can secure fair deals in the international arena and protect America's national interest. ''I am tired of nice people already in

89

90

New York Times. September 2, 1987. New York Times. Trump Hints of Dreams Beyond Buil.ding, October 5, 1987. woodworker was the first guy who tried to make Trump president, Aug 18, 2016.

91 USA Today. This

91

Washington,'' he added. ''I want someone who is tough and knows how to negotiate. If not, our country faces disaster.''92 On December 21, 1987, in a portrait published in the small local newspaper Poughkeepsie Journal (New York state), Trump said about the New Hampshire meeting:

"When I go to New Hampshire - keep in mind that I am not a presidential candidate - I gather a great audience ... Politicians gather a much more modest audience while people are fighting for me. Why? Because people do not want to be robbed. And the country is now plundered. I think if I run, I will win."

Again, on December 21, 1987, one of the most significant figures of the American politics since World War II, Richard M. Nixon, who served as Congressman, Senator, two-term Vice-president, and two terms President of the USA, sent a letter to Donald J. Trump after the young entrepreneur appeared in Phil Donahue's popular talk show93: “Dear Donald, I did not see the program, but Mrs. Nixon told me that you were great on the Donahue Show. As you can imagine, she is an expert on politics, and she predicts that whenever you decide to run for office, you will be a winner. With warm regards, Richard M. Nixon.”94

92

The New York Times. New Hampshire Speech Earns Praise for Trump. October 23, 1987. The Phil Donahue Show was a talk show which runs on national television for 26 years. It was discontinued in 1996, and in 2002 it was included in the TV Guide's ranking of the "50 Top US TV Stations". 94 The Archives of the Presidential Library and Richard Nixon Museum keep the original of the letter. (https://www.nixonlibrary.gov). 93

92

Next, in 1988 Trump gave an interview to Oprah Winfrey, and again the question of his presidential bid was raised. About his open letter on US foreign policy, Oprah says: "It sounds like a presidential talk," and asks if Trump intends to run for office. Trump replies cautiously: "I would rather not run, but I would not dismiss this opportunity altogether, because I am tired of watching what is happening to this country ..." He highlights the advantage of George H.W. Bush of the Republican camp and says good words about two of the leading figures in the fight for the Democratic Party nomination - African-American leader Jesse Jackson and Michael Dukakis, who eventually won the Democratic nomination in 1988. Oprah Winfrey is an institution in American publicity. With this interview, Trump's name became part of the US Presidential candidate catalog. He is still at the bottom of this catalog, but more importantly, he is already among the potential "suspects." This recognition marks the symbolic beginning of Trump's transformation from a prominent business leader and celebrity in American pop-culture into a factor in the US national political arena. That same year, Trump has been participating for the first time in the Republican National Convention. The media are now showing increasing interest in his political aspirations. Asked if this is not a sign that he will seek a nomination in the future, he replies that would run for office only if he can win. Later, in a biography book, President George H.W. Bush confirmed that the name of Donald Trump had spun briefly in possible candidates for Vice president in 1988 but defined this as "strange" and "amazing" to that moment. With the capture of the two major American parties from the symbiotic of neoliberals and neoconservatives, Trump begins to look for an alternative. Such appears, albeit fleetingly, in the presidential election in 1992, when billionaire Ross Perot got 18.9% as an independent candidate. As a result, he created the most successful "third party" of the American political scene since the Second World War, the US Reform 93

Party. In the upcoming elections in 1996, Ross Perot appears again, but already as a candidate for that party and still gets a decent result - 8.4%. Reform Party attracts prominent figures such as Pat Buchanan, the legendary leader of the movement to protect consumers Ralph Nader, the famous former athlete Jesse Ventura, who even was elected governor of Minnesota in 1998 with a ballot of the party. Donald Trump also joins the Reform Party thus making another small step to the White House. In 2000, he set up an exploratory committee with the task of identifying the potential for winning the presidential nomination of the Reform Party. He then publishes the book The America We Deserve, which summarizes his political platform. As we shall see later, his views on major issues of American politics have not changed significantly compared to his presidential platform in 2016. However, in this period the Reform Party fell in deep internal contradictions, which significantly weakened its position for the 2000 elections. Trump has therefore relinquished the fight even before the primary election. “The Reform Party now includes a Klansman, Mr. Duke, a neo-Nazi, Mr. [Patrick] Buchanan, and a communist, Ms. [Lenora] Fulani. This is not a company I wish to keep,” he says in a statement saying he will not accept the Reform Party nomination for president. The reason why Trump defines Buchanan as a "neo-Nazi" (a false and speculative definition pronounced in a fierce domestic struggle) is the position of Buchanan at that time that the United States should not have interfered in World War II. Years later, Buchanan actively supported Donald Trump's campaign in 2016. After the exhausting internal struggles, the nomination grabbed Pat Buchanan, who got a humiliating result - 0.4 percent of the vote and later re-joined to the Republican party. After this unsuccessful presidential bid, Trump is convinced that the road to the White House passes through the major

94

political parties. In 2004 and 2008 campaigns there was media gossip that Trump is considering running. However, he chooses to invest his efforts in creating the popular reality show The Apprentice. It brings him the popularity of a great Hollywood celebrity, including a star at the Hollywood Walk of Fame. The success of this show is also the publiclyacclaimed motif by Donald Trump refusing to take part in the Republican Party nominations for the 2012 election. Although, after Mike Huckabee's withdrawal, Trump's potential bid then gains real chances of success in the primary, he soberly analyzes the weak prospects of Republicans to defeat Obama. Moreover, he takes another step back. Before retiring, however, he held several meetings in which he attracted an impressive audience. It also becomes a voice of the birthers opposition movement, which spreads speculation about Obama's origins, and urges him to show his birth certificate to verify whether was actually born in the United States and therefore whether he has a legitimate right to be President. These are the main milestones in the decade-long political road that Donald Trump walks patiently in the run-up to the presidential election in 2016.

95

§ 4. Framing the Doctrine (1988-2015)

“For the first time we do not know what to expect from the new president," "Silicon Valley does not know what to expect from Trump," "Indian tribes do not know what the new president will do"... These are only a part of dozens of similar headlines in the American media in 2016 from the Washington Post to the government radio Voice of America. Analysts and politicians in Europe are also struggling to argue that President Trump's intentions and policies are vague and unclear. They are scribbled by his assessments of Russia and his demands for negotiating a new and more mutually beneficial basis for US-Chinese economic relations. Leaving aside bona fide political criticism of Donald Trump's views from other ideological perspectives, these suggestions of "ambiguity" are a complex mixture of authentic ignorance and toxic propaganda. Some do not know, but they do not bother to learn because they are captive of the automatism of the uncritical cliché reproduction and one-sided assessments made by neoliberal globalists on both sides of the ocean. Others frankly speculate. No matter how thick this diaper of ignorance, manipulation and real lies is, the facts are merciless. In the US presidential elections in 2016, Donald Trump was the only candidate in both party camps that systematized and justified a comprehensive and long-term vision not just during current campaign speeches and interviews, but long before. And not in one, but four books. Trump set out his views on domestic and foreign policy, the welfare, education, health

96

and immigration in the book The America We Deserve95 in 2000 - sixteen years before he was elected president in November 2016. In 2011, he further developed his political platform in It's time to get together: to make America again great.96 After officially announcing his candidacy in June 2015, he updated this vision with the book Crippled America: How to Make America Great Again.97 In the election year, 2016 Trump published a new edition: Great Again; How to Fix Our Crippled America.98 The political platform set out in these four books outlined the fundamentals of the entire Trump campaign in 2015-2016. Even his sharp criticism of the fake news media and the political propaganda of the mainstream media is justified on the pages of Crippled America. The four books have been loudly advertised and commented over the years, and can be found in any US bookstore. The Trump program speech delivered in Gettysburg on October 22, 2016, is a synthesis of all these ideas that have been upgraded with more than thirty specific policy proposals Trump intends to hold as President of the United States. However, all these facts did not prevent his opponents, enemies, and haters from repeating round the clock that they did not know what to expect from him. The analysis of Trump's four books, as well as the critical moments in the election campaign and the Gettysburg program speech, unambiguously show that Donald Trump's politics is not a chaotic bunch of vague, populist and divergent ideas. Trump has a doctrine - a system of geopolitical, economic and domestic political ideas and principles. This doctrine is built on the ideological

basis

of

traditional

American

conservatism

(paleoconservatism) in the sphere of foreign, economic and immigration policy and is centrist in the field of civil rights and social policy. FDR's

95

Trump, D.J. The America We Deserve. New York: Macmillan, 2000, 304 p. Trump, D.J. Time to Get Tough: make America great again. Regnery Publishing, 2011, 256 p. 97 Trump, D.J. Crippled America: How to Make America Great Again. Threshold Editions, 2015, 193 p. 98 Trump, D.J. Great Again; How to Fix Our Crippled America. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2016, 208 p. 96

97

once anti-crisis policy was marked by the triad of the three "R" - Relief, Recovery, Reform. In the process of shaping the Trump doctrine, two similar triads crystallize: in foreign policy - Realism, Detente, Deglobalization; in domestic politics - Jobs, Restoration, Anti-corruption (draining the swamp). The foreign policy principles of the Trump doctrine are paleoconservative - they deny interventionism and the imperial approach, they do not accept the role of the United States as a global hegemon, who is called upon to impose its interests, rules, and values with economic and military-political interference all over the world. Unlike isolationism, which is traditional for the new conservatives of the early twentieth century, Trump is a realist in international relations. Reciprocity and competition are the two fundamental principles of his foreign policy. For him, the US must maintain a leading role in world affairs, but relations with other countries must be based on a reciprocal basis, not ideological prejudices. His main point is that security and defense of the Allies must not be a unilateral commitment by the United States, the price of which is paid by US taxpayers. Germany, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Japan, Kuwait are some of the examples Tramp usually gives as wealthy and influential states for whose security Americans are paying. He calls them "money-making machines," which, however, do not provide reciprocal commercial advantages to the US business. Through the same prism, Trump sees NATO as well:

„I’ll tell you the problems I have with NATO. No. 1, we pay far too much. We are spending — you know, in fact, they’re even making it, so the percentages are greater. NATO is unfair, economically, to us, to the United States. Because it really helps them more so than the United States, and we pay a disproportionate share. Now, I’m a person that — you notice I talk 98

about economics quite a bit, in these military situations, because it is about economics, because we don’t have money anymore because we’ve been taking care of so many people in so many different forms that we don’t have money — and countries, and countries. So NATO is something that at the time was excellent. Today, it has to be changed. It has to be changed to include terror. It has to be changed from the standpoint of cost because the United States bears far too much of the cost of NATO.“99

Along with that, Trump does not accept the unilateral US domination and Messianic claim to implant American values and ideas anywhere in the world. According to him, this is a debilitating mission at the expense of the decline of the US economy. His understanding is that in the international arena each of the great powers has its legitimate interests, and the relationship between them must be based on realism and competition. It is the paradigm that Trump believes. These are, in fact, the principles of traditional American conservatism. That is why his attitude toward Russia is sharply contrasting with the paranoid russophobia that preached Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton or John McCain. Trump follows the line of diligence that was deployed by Richard M. Nixon and Henry Kissinger in relations with the USSR in the 70s of the twentieth century. In the world of Trump, the United States and Russia are sharp opponents and fierce competitors on many issues in the international arena, but also the United States respects legitimate Russian interests and seeks partnership on critical topics, including the fight against Islamic terrorism. It is no coincidence that Kissinger meets reasonably often with the 45th American president, and in hard situations, he has supported Trump over the past two years of his mandate. 99

New York Times, March 26, 2016

99

First in Crippled America, and then in the 2016 election campaign, Donald Trump added another accent - peacekeeping. It is the headline of the chapter devoted to foreign policy in this book: Fighting for Peace:

“The career diplomats who got us into many foreign policy messes say I have no experience in foreign policy. They think that successful diplomacy requires years of experience and an understanding of all the nuances that have to be carefully considered before reaching a conclusion. Only then do these pinstriped bureaucrats consider taking action. Look at the state of the world right now. It’s a terrible mess, and that’s putting it kindly. There has never been a more dangerous time. The so-called insiders within the Washington ruling class are the people who got us into this trouble. So why should we continue to pay attention to them? Some of these so-called “experts” are trying to scare people by saying that my approach would make the world more dangerous. More dangerous? More dangerous than what? More dangerous than where we are now?”100

Trump is a long-standing supporter of ending the nuclear arms race. As early as 1986, he publicly states that nuclear weapons are a problem, and he may be the best negotiator with the USSR to reduce them. The curious fact is that this interview, with a clear and especially topical at that time political message, was published on page 42 - Sexiest Man of the Year - in Playgirl along with Hollywood celebrities like Bruce Willis, Michael Jay Fox, and the politician Bob Dole. "It will take an hour and a half to 100

Trump, D.J. Crippled America... Chapter 4, p. 31.

100

learn everything I need for nuclear missiles, and I think I know most things," Trump said with his natural self-confidence. The following year, famed American journalist Ron Rosenbaum, author of a number of publications and a book devoted to the nuclear arms issue, interviewed Trump on this subject in Manhattan, Inc. Trump suggests that Ronald Reagan's administration is bound to partner with the USSR in the nuclear field to prevent further proliferation of nuclear weapons. In an interview with NBC in April 2016, Trump declared that he would be the last to use nuclear weapons. The fight against terrorism is another accent that Tramp traditionally puts in his political statements and books. He believes the United States should be more effective in fighting terrorism and its facilitators and defines "Islamic State" a significant threat to America. Trump, in his books, also announces the need for new principles of US military engagement. He argues this should only happen if there is a clear and immediate danger recognized by the American public. On that basis, Trump criticized the war in Iraq. About Iran, Trump has consistently criticized the agreement reached by the Obama administration. He points out that Iran continues to be aggressive towards Israel and the United States, has nuclear potential, finances terrorist organizations, and has nevertheless received a bargain from Obama and lifting the sanctions that have put the Iranian economy in serious trouble. Trump remembers the maxim for successful negotiations - "the party most in need of the deal should get the least." Like a red thread in Trump's books, it is the understanding that America is humiliated on the international stage due to the weak and short-sighted government. In the book "Time to Get Tough: make America great again," published in 2011, Donald Trump declares his decision to run for president of the United States:

101

“I’ve written this book because the country I love is a total economic disaster right now. For starters, we are in debt $15 trillion and soaring. Let me help you wrap your mind around that number. If by some miracle the so-called leaders in Washington could find a way to save one billion dollars of your tax dollars every single day, it would still take thirty-eight years to pay off the debt. And that’s not even taking into account the interest. We don’t have thirty-eight years to turn this thing around. The way I see it, we have four, maybe eight years tops. Every day in business I see America getting ripped off and abused. We have become a laughingstock, the world’s whipping boy, blamed for everything, credited for nothing, given no respect. You see and feel it all around you, and so do I.”

In a political vision depicted in this book, Trump proposes rethinking the unilateral engagement of the United States in the Middle East. In very logical order, he criticizes US multi-billion dollar spending in Iraq. He criticizes the non-reciprocal policy towards Saudi Arabia, which he thinks would hardly survive as a state without Washington's military support, but does not provide any economic benefits against it. He did not save criticism of Obama for his inaction against the oil cartel OPEC, which is playing oil prices:

“Excuse me, but OPEC—these twelve guys sitting around a table— wouldn’t even be in existence if it weren’t for the United States saving and protecting those Middle Eastern countries!”

102

Further, in this book, Donald Trump defines a new US policy towards China that reflects the current issues in bilateral relations and economic competition between the two countries. His thesis is - tax China and save US jobs. “Get it straight: China is not our friend. They see us as the enemy. Washington better wake up fast, because China is stealing our jobs, sending a wrecking ball through our manufacturing industry, and ripping off our technology and military capabilities at Mach speed. If America doesn’t get wise soon, the damage will be irreversible.”

Trump formulates three significant threats that China is harming US interests: non-market manipulation of the yuan, which promotes Chinese exports; systemic efforts to undermine US manufacturing power; mass industrial espionage and cyberwar that China is leading against the United States. According to him, the Obama administration is too disoriented in this respect. The US president must show firmness and put Beijing ahead of severe sanctions. "Slap a 25 percent tax on China’s products if they don’t set a real market value on their currency. End of story," Trump argues, referring to economic estimates that such a policy could return between 300 and 700 thousands of jobs in the US. As a further measure, he proposes a legislative option for import duties to vary according to the degree of underestimation of the respective national currency of the country commodities origin. So along with that - serious sanctions against China's theft of intellectual property. Instead of "outsourcing," that is, exporting operations and services to third countries, Trump insists on "harvesting" them in the United States.

103

"We need a president who will crack down on China’s massive and blatant intellectual property theft that allows China to pirate our products (maybe if Obama didn’t view entrepreneurs and businesspeople as the enemy he’d be more aggressive about this). Most of all, we need a president who is smart and tough enough to recognize the national security threat China poses in the new frontier of cyber warfare."

These are the goals that US foreign policy must achieve according to Trump's vision to have a fair deal with China and build on this basis friendship and partnership with Beijing. The other essential of Trump's foreign policy thesis is deglobalization. In this direction are the measures he proposes to better protect the interests of American workers and the middle class and hence reduce social inequality. The term "de-globalization" has recently defined the process of restructuring the world economy and political system to strengthen the national state and the national economy under pressure from neoliberal globalization. Unlike the neoliberal model of globalization dominated by transnational corporations, in the process of deglobalization, the world economy integrates around the interests and needs of nations, people and their communities. Again, unlike the unification, to which neoliberal globalization is driving, de-globalization is expected to stimulate local specifics and diversity.101 Donald Trump is a traditional opponent of free trade agreements such as NAFTA, the Trans-Atlantic Partnership for Trade and Investment (TTIP) or the Trans-Pacific Agreement (TPP). Over the years, he has repeatedly called these legal instruments of neoliberal globalization "job killers" that have led to the deindustrialization of the United States. In its 101

Bello, Walden. Deglobalization: Ideas for a New World Economy. Zed books, 2005.

104

economic outlook, Trump traditionally focuses on economic nationalism to protect jobs. It was also one of the key promises of the 2016 campaign to be the most job-creating president in US history. In his books, speeches, and platform, he lays down measures against deindustrialization and a new deal with China. It also offers tax cuts for all sections of the population, especially for the middle class and the poor, debureaucratization of the state, renovation of the infrastructure and restoration of the industrial power of the United States. This policy can reduce massive economic inequality, argues Trump. Regarding taxes, Trump shares the traditional conservative understanding that excessive income taxes does not make sense of the efforts of those who work hard and hence reduce productivity and entrepreneurship, which leads to economic stagnation and more social inequality. In his books, he gives an example of social programs to combat poverty under Lyndon Johnson's "The Great Society" program. Trump emphasizes that they not only have not reduced poverty but have made generations into government-dependent passive social welfare users while the budget for social programs has increased 13 times since the late 1960s, also taking into account inflation. People who work more and who improve their qualifications should not be penalized with higher taxes. The more you tax labor, the less the desire to work; the more you tax investments, the less investment are made. Taxes have to be paid to sustain the social system and defense, but in reasonable proportions:

"Look, paying taxes is a part of life, and we need to fund the things individuals can’t do for themselves, like national defense and infrastructure, and yes, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s,” the Gospel of Matthew reminds us. But as one fellow Christian

105

told me, “God only asks me to tithe 10 percent to do His good works. Obama wants far, far more.”

To progressives who think they should pay higher taxes, Trump jokingly recommends sending more money to the federal government – e.i. to “Gifts to the United States Government Fund” established by the Treasury Department in 1843. He also recalls the experience of the “Tax Me More Fund,” created in Virginia for people wishing to pay more taxes. The fund has netted an amount so tiny it cannot even fund the salary of a single part-time state worker - only about 12 thousand dollars.

“We need a tax system that is fair and smart—one that encourages growth, savings, and investment. It’s time to stop punishing hard work and entrepreneurship.”

In his book, Trump offers radical tax reform in five major steps. First, lower income tax and a simplification of the tax system, which is so complicated by various rates, exceptions, alleviations, and preferences that many are forced to pay much money to accountants to complete their tax return correctly. According to some estimates, Americans lose a total of 6.1 billion hours a year for this purpose. The Trump's Tax Plan proposed in 2011 is:

"Up to $30,000, you pay 1 percent. From $30,000 to $100,000, you pay 5 percent. From $100,000 to $1 million, you pay 10 percent. On $1 million or above, you pay 15 percent. Clear and fair for all, and along with it can

106

be filled on the back of a postcard, which will save the Americans a lot of money for accountants and time to decode the tax code".

Second, according to him, is the abolition of the "death tax," which amounts to 35% of the value of the estate of the deceased - it is not fair to tax the property for which a person has spent all his life and for which he has already paid taxes. "Your children deserve your estate, not the federal government," Trump argues. Third, lower tax rates on capital gains and dividends - the higher they are, the more jobs and investment they "kill," Trump says. Fourth, lower the U.S. corporate tax rate. Fifth, hit with a 20 percent tax those who outsource jobs overseas and reward companies who stay loyal to America.

“If an American company outsources its work, they get hit with a 20 percent tax. For those companies who made the mistake of sending their businesses overseas but have seen the light and are ready to come home and bring jobs with them, they pay zero tax. Bottom line: hire American workers, and you win. Send jobs overseas, and you may be fine, but you will pay a tax.”

Besides, Trump offers a 20% import duty:

“If they want a piece of the American market, they’re going to pay for it. No more free admission into the biggest show in town—and that especially includes China.”

107

A few years later, in its 2016 election platform, summarized in Crippled America, Trump retains its tax philosophy but formulates a new goal of reform - to remove legal loopholes and tax cuts for special interests and wealthy people, hedge fund restrictions. He offers a new progressive tax scale.

“If you are single and earning less than $25,000 or married and earning less than $50,000, you will not owe any income tax. This will immediately remove some nearly 75 million households from the income tax rolls. Second, the tax code will be simplified. Instead of multiple tax brackets with multiple variations, there will be only four brackets: 0%, 10%, 20%, and 25%.”

He once again proposes a repeal of the death tax and 15% corporate tax. Trump is a traditional advocate for seriously optimizing bureaucracy and its costs. Shares the maxim of President Gerald Ford: “a government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.” On the campaign trail he is referring to statistics that the federal government has an income of $ 6 billion every day and spends $ 10 billion:

"If it is a private company, it will go bankrupt. We have to have a government that we can afford.”

108

Criticizing Obama's administration, Trump lists a series of examples taken from the Government Audit Office, how the state is wasting taxpayers' money. Among them, 200 billion a year goes to more than 2,100 data centers that can consolidate, and the cost to be reduced. Another 601 million for pensions are "paid" to deceased people. In 2010 700,000 dollars were spent on research on the causes of cows burp. Six hundred thousand dollars to create a video game, and in 2008-2012 the Obama administration funded a survey of male prostitutes in Vietnam with nearly 1.5 million dollars. In the spirit of the traditional American understanding of everyone's personal responsibility to their own lives and family, Trump sharply criticized the welfare policy of Democrats which, he argues, led to transforming social benefits and food stamps into a permanent way of life for many people instead of being a temporary measure of assistance between jobs. The federal government has become a lifelong donor even to people who do not have such an acute social need, and if they lack the opportunities provided by the law to survive on social welfare, they would return to the labor market and cope with life. Social benefits, Trump argues, must be tied to qualifications and retraining, with consistent efforts to find a job. Trump has given a positive assessment of Florida's state legislation that provides for social benefits after a drug test because it is not fair for taxpayers to subsidize someone's drug dependence. As far as healthcare is concerned, as early as 2012, Trump has announced the immediate repeal of Obamacare, which has led to an increase in the value of health insurance and hits small and medium-sized businesses. Earlier, Trump has expressed some sympathy for the Canadian health system and the introduction of a universal state health system.

109

In his books, he also presented a plan to curb illegal immigration in the United States. In this respect, his position is entirely in the spirit of traditional conservatism. He argues that being an illegal immigrant is not a human right, but a violation of the law which is supposed to be sanctioned. No one can derive rights from their unlawful behavior. Illegal immigration hurts the social system, takes jobs away from Americans, and is often related to human trafficking, drug trafficking, prostitution. Later, in Crippled America and 2016 campaign, this policy is re-affirmed, adding the proposals to withdraw federal subsidies for sanctuary towns, and the suggestion that gave rise to the most heated debates - building a wall along the border with Mexico. In fact, on this critical political topic in the United States, Trump has always had a consistent attitude. As early as 1999, in an interview with the New York Times, he advocated closing the border for illegal immigrants.

“People say that I have self-confidence. Who knows? When I began speaking out, I was a realist. I knew the relentless and incompetent naysayers of the status quo would anxiously line up against me, and they have: The politicians who talk a great game in campaigns—and play like total losers when they try to actually govern because they can’t govern; they don’t know how to govern. The lobbyists and special interests with their hands in our pockets on behalf of their clients or others. The members of the media who are so far lost when it comes to being fair that they have no concept of the difference between “fact” and “opinion.

110

The illegal immigrants who have taken jobs that should go to people here legally, while over 20 percent of Americans are currently unemployed or underemployed. Believe me; they’re all over the place. I see them. I talk to them. I hug them. I hold them. They are all over the place. Congress, which has been deadlocked for years and virtually unable to deal with any of our most pressing domestic problems, or even the most basic ones, such as passing a budget. Think of it: a little thing like passing the budget. They don’t even have a clue. Meanwhile, the bedrock of this country—the middle class—and those 45 million Americans stuck in poverty have seen their incomes decline over the past 20 years. Understandably, their disenchantment and frustration at what is happening grow every day, and it gets worse and worse and worse.”102 These highlights from the development of Donald Trump's political views, formulated and expressed publicly between 1988 and 2015, show that there is nothing accidental and nothing of a conjunctival nature in the political platform he won the presidential election in 2016. It is neither a mash-up populism nor a hurriedly mixed pre-election cocktail. Whether or not one agrees with them, they are clear and systematically upheld views on crucial issues of the US foreign and domestic policy and national economy. These views are the core of the Trump doctrine that American voters supported in 2016. It is a Doctrine against the dominant elite and a political alternative of neoliberal globalism.

102

Trump, D.J. Crippled America... Preface.

111

§. 5. The Trump Doctrine in Action (2016-2018)

In the first two years of his term, President Donald J. Trump deeply disappointed his opponents, who were haughty expecting he would act like them - talk and promise before elections, and obey voluntarily or under pressure to the status quo of neoliberal globalism as soon as he came into power. Trump, however, brought his doctrine into action. The dismantling of the status quo began in its three strands highlighted in Chapter Two, "Neoliberal Globalism." The revival of sovereignty as a guiding principle in American politics and the defamation of key institutions of global governance replaced the nation-state erosion in favor of supranational authorities. The geopolitical architecture of the world began to rearrange - from a unipolar world with the USA as an imperial hegemon and the EU as its privileged periphery, into a multipolar, based on fierce competition and balance between the three world militarypolitical colossus - the US, Russia, and China. In the spirit of economic nationalism, significant steps were taken to revise the neoliberal free trade model. Militant atheism was driven out of the White House policies, and identity politics entirely abandoned.

112

A. America First or über alles? The foreign policy vision of the Trump doctrine is "America First" a slogan which is rooted in America's political history. Anti-Trump propaganda has tried to discredit it. First, they decided to frame it as a modern version of the notorious Nazi slogan "Germany Over All" (Deutschland über alles). Such an interpretation, of course, is not only malicious but also deeply ignorant. Both understandings about the role of the State in the international arena are different. The German "über alles" is a claim to world domination. Donald Trump's "America First" is a denial of the ambition of world domination and a priority of the national economy and interests, to the export of democracy all over the world. The second line where the status quo tries to downplay and transcend the foreign policy vision of the Trump doctrine is by trying to bring it to the well-known American isolationism. At the beginning of the 20th century, America First was the slogan of the Woodrow Wilson supporters, who did not engage the United States in World War I. Then, in the 1920s, it was embraced by the supporters of Republican President Thomas Harding, who opposed Wilson's call to join the United States of the League of Nations. It is also a false comparison with the America First Committee led by Charles Lindberg, who, on the eve of World War II, opposed FDR's policy of helping Great Britain against Nazi Germany. Trump's interpretation of America First is far from isolationism. It is a reformulation of US involvement in world affairs through the prism of sovereignty

and

national

interest.

Refusal

of

indiscriminate

interventionism and use of the giant US national resources to "export democracy" and "regime change". Revamping foreign policy from imperial aspirations towards a unipolar world and global leadership in the name of the free market to preserving American influence, wherever it is necessary for American interests, in the conditions of the multipolar 113

world. Trump's America First is "to take care of ourselves first and then of the whole world." It is neither fascism nor archaic nationalism, as the antiTrump propaganda, uncritically copied by some European analysts, claims. Interestingly, these same analysts did not see such ghosts when the American hero, neocon and globalist John McCain had chosen as a slogan in the presidential campaign in 2008 “Country First.” The ideological twist that Trump implements in US foreign policy is not just a matter of phraseology and slogans. In the first two years of the mandate, the change was materialized in the US National Security Strategy, promulgated on December 17, 2017.103 The Goldwater-Nichols Act from 1986 provides the adoption of a strategy document on national security. A total of 17 such documents have been adopted by the White House so far.104 The comparative analysis shows the depth of change that introduced the 45th American president into the country's foreign policy. With the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the bipolar world, the US has gradually embarked on a unique course towards establishing neoliberal globalization as a dominant ideology and model for the development of international relations and economics. At the beginning of his term in 1994, Bill Clinton took the priority of "engagement and enlargement" the United States in world affairs. In 1997 and 1998 the updated versions of the US National Security Strategy adopted by the Clinton administration stressed on the "imperative of engagement" and proclaimed the USA "must be prepared and willing to use all appropriate instruments of national power to influence the actions of other states and non-state actors." These documents proclaim the USA as the driving force behind globalization and the globalization itself is explicitly defined as "a process of accelerated economic, technological, cultural and political 103

National Security Strategy of the USA - https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final12-18-2017-0905-2.pdf 104 National Security Strategy Archive - http://nssarchive.us/.

114

integration." In the last strategy announced by the Clinton administration in 2001, the idea of "engagement" on a global scale acquires even more specific outlines:

“A primary element of our strategy of engagement has been to help fashion a new international system that promotes peace, stability, and prosperity. This has involved remolding and shaping both sides of the Cold War bipolar system. It has meant both adapting our alliances and encouraging the reorientation of other states, including former adversaries.”

George W. Bush developed further the globalist approach during his two terms in the White House. His administration drew up two strategies - in 2002 and 2006, in which the new US political mission has been proclaimed: "to seek and support democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world." In George W. Bush's strategies, the American exceptionalism and idea about the messianic mission of "chosen nation," is based entirely on the globalist perceptions of the neoconservatives who in power at that time in Washington, DC. In their view, the United States has a global mission to protect the freedom, rights, and dignity of man. In the name of this mission, US intervention anywhere in the world is not only justified but imperative. Barack Obama's 2010 and 2015 strategies continued this line. The image of Pax Americana is now complemented by "rules-based international order that promotes global security and prosperity as well as the dignity and human rights of all peoples under strong and sustained American leadership." The neoliberal model of globalization as a key element of US national security is uniquely attached. To this end, markets must be open to US goods, services, and investment through a network of free trade agreements. As part of the global goals, the fight against 115

"climate change" and the related concept of rebuilding the world economy to the production and use of "clean energy" are added. President Donald J. Trump made a radical turnaround. The messianic approach of the globalists is transformed into "principled realism." The globalist agenda has changed with a national agenda and the vision for a unipolar world - with a multipolar one. The new US National Security Strategy of 2017 delineates four pillars: Protect the American People, the Homeland, and the American Way of Life; Promote American Prosperity; Preserve Peace through Strength; Advance American Influence. "Leadership" is replaced by "influence." The pursuit of domination - with the recognition that "competition is healthy when nations share values and build fair and reciprocal relationships." There is no claim to a global mission to impose freedom and democracy. The goal of the United States is no longer to establish a "rules-based international order that promotes global security and prosperity as well as the dignity and human rights of all peoples under strong and sustained American leadership.". The new strategy develops a vision of "a world of strong, sovereign, and independent nations, each with its own cultures and dreams, thriving side-by-side in prosperity, freedom, and peace." Trump's strategy has one major priority in the international arena - a strong, sovereign and independent America that has its "sovereign right to determine who should enter our country and under what circumstances." If in all previous versions of the US National Security Strategy the notion of "sovereignty" and "sovereign" occurs only sporadically, then in Donald Trump's strategy of 2017, it is used 30 times and the concepts of "border" and "reciprocity"/"reciprocal" respectively 25 and 19 times. Even only this content analysis suggests the depth of change that the new administration is making. The remarks of the 45th US President to the 72nd Session of the United Nations General Assembly in September 2017 confirmed the

116

rejection of global domination: "we do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to watch." At the next to the 73rd Session of the United Nations General Assembly in 2018, Trump said unambiguously: "we reject the ideology of globalism, and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism." The new national security agenda does not include climate change policies. It postulates that "the United States will seek to ensure universal access to affordable, reliable energy, including highly efficient fossil fuels, nuclear, and renewables, to help reduce poverty, foster economic growth, and promote prosperity." Also: "Unleashing these abundant energy resources—coal, natural gas, petroleum, renewables, and nuclear— stimulates the economy and builds a foundation for future growth." During the first two years of his term, Donald J. Trump has consistently implemented this strategy. He has started the rearrangement of world politics based on new value priorities both as a structure and intensity of relations. In a problematic domestic political battle, the 45th American president began stepping down the international order of neoliberal globalism, in which the United States is a global hegemon and imperial center, the EU - its privileged periphery, and Russia - subordinate and vassal. Despite the pressure of the globalists, President Trump seized the strategic initiative in the complex power structure that drives US foreign policy. The United States has unequivocally placed before NATO allies the question that the protection of their security cannot continue to be at the expense of US taxpayers. With his expressive and sometimes extravagant assessments and diplomatic moves, Trump has shown the wealthy G-7 countries and the European Union that the time they viewed the US as a "cash box" and free guards has already passed, at least as long as the Trump doctrine prevails. He deliberately pressed NATO countries with heavy financial requirements to show that the pact as such does not

117

fully meet American interests from the perspective of the new White House administration. He tossed into the trash the paranoid russophobia fueled by neoconservatives and neoliberals which set the world on the brink of war. The traditional American conservatism, which formerly dominated the Republican Party from the beginning of the 20th century until the end of Richard Nixon's era and is today represented by Donald J. Trump, has always been founded on principles of mutual respect and competition of the superpowers. A concrete expression of this philosophy was also the Trump-Putin bilateral meeting in July 2018. Both as content and as public communication, this meeting aimed at demonstrating that two superpowers have the will to deal directly in bilateral dialogue with global problems without the mediation of international institutions, the EU or NATO. It is no coincidence that the only name of a foreign government leader, which was publicly mentioned by Trump and Putin at the press conference after the meeting, was that of "our friend" Xi Jinping. It was another confirmation of the US administration's new understanding that the Washington-Beijing-Moscow triad is the crucial factor determining the global agenda rather than unilaterally America and its close allies. A direct bilateral commitment of the US and Russia to partner in critical areas such as the fight against terrorism and cybersecurity was an emphasis. The issues that the old status quo in Washington, DC which American voters rejected in 2016 with the election of Trump, posed as a hostile ultimatum to Moscow - Ukraine, Crimea, Donbass, were left behind and discussed pragmatically without any unnecessary emotions. That is, in the spirit of the "principled realism" proclaimed by the National Security Strategy of 2017. As a whole, the Trump-Putin meeting has set a cautious new beginning in US-Russian relations. However, there should be no doubt that the United States and Russia will continue to compete fiercely against all azimuths. However, 118

they will not bang weapons so openly and unnecessarily escalate tensions in the world. In the spirit of America First strategy, Donald Trump also undertook a serious economic confrontation with China about the massive trade imbalance in favor of Beijing caused by the neoliberal economic policy. He exposed the Chinese policy of intellectual property theft and unfair commercial practices. As an instrument, Trump uses the imposition of tariff barriers for imports from China. As of July 2018, the US imposed customs duties on Chinese goods worth a total of $ 250 billion. Beijing replied with tariffs for more than US $ 110 billion. At this stage, the trade war has given concrete positive results for the United States, despite the catastrophic predictions of critics. At the G20 summit in Buenos Aires in early December 2018, Trump and Xi Jinping announced a "temporary truce." The United States will not proceed with the increase of 10 percent to 25 percent of tariffs for China's import for about $ 200 billion planned for 1 January 2019. Beijing is committed to buying significant quantities of American agricultural products, energy, and other industrial goods. The “armistice” term is 90 days. In this period two most powerful economies will seek a lasting solution to the tradeeconomic disputes. Besides, over the past two years, Trump has made two key and historical breakthroughs in international relations. First of all, he has executed a promise that was ever-unfulfilled but generously declared by all US presidents over the last decades - the relocation of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. A move that does not unravel the Gordian Knot of the Arab-Israeli conflict but gives a clear sign in support of Israel's national aspirations. The US withdrawal from the nuclear agreement with Iran is another move in the same pro-Israel context. It was one of the primary foreign policy commitments in the election campaign in 2016

119

when Trump repeatedly defined this agreement as "catastrophic." With the withdrawal of the United States, the president has put a new blow to Obama's global legacy, but also to the self-confidence of the European Union, which, unlike the United States, is profiting by the lifting of the sanctions against Iran. The second significant breakthrough was the thawing of relations between the two sides of the divided Korean Peninsula and the meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, which was pledged to denuclearise Pyongyang. Trump's experience and instincts in bargaining gave a concrete result that was unachievable for the stereotypes and clichés of previous US leaders. He pressed to the extreme with an aggressive attitude to the enemy. Then, instead of humiliating the North Korean leader invited him to the negotiating table. The Trump doctrine also addressed climate change and US involvement in supranational structures that do not meet Washington's views. The United States left the Paris Climate Agreement and disengaged from the UN Human Rights Council and UNESCO, and significantly reduced funding for the UN Population Fund. Naturally, the voices of neoliberal globalism have judged Trump's foreign policy as "catastrophic" and even "returning to the Nineteenth century." For them, abandoning the role of a world hegemon is a disaster, and a meeting with Putin a "treachery." These interpretations are blindly circulated in most European media that view the United States only through the optics of liberal American media such as CNN, Washington Post and The New York Times. The mainstream European perspective completely ignores the other America - the one which democratically elected Donald Trump, and whose values are reported in leading American media such as Fox, Newsmax, New York Post, Washington Times, Daily Caller, Daily Wire, Lifezette. Who called Trump "traitor" for the

120

meeting with Putin? Not America, but the current political opposition in America. Former CIA Director Brennan, appointed by Barack Obama and fired by president Trump called him a “traitor." It is understandable that the opposition will react angrily. It is its job description. Is there an opposition in the world to praise the ruling party? However, in Europe, we see mainly one-dimensional and black-and-white media reporting on American politics. "Trump is not America," some liberals say. It is just as accurate as the claim that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are not America. A vibrant, pluralistic society as the American society is never based on a uniform and unified political vision on day-to-day politics. In Europe, commentaries on US politics and especially on Donald Trump most often ignore the harsh realities of political party struggle in the United States. They also do not take into account the diversity of ideas and the differences in values and priorities between the USA and Europe. Trump's foreign policy is criticized in the United States by the opposition, the Democratic Party, which has fallen from power. Also, from the neoconservatives, like the deceased John McCain, whom Trump and the traditional conservatives sent to the periphery of the Republican Party. American voters have rejected neoliberal globalism and world domination preached by neocons such as McCain, who, among other things, bear historical responsibility for the failed US policy in the Middle East that has brought mainly destruction, hundreds of thousands of innocent civilian casualties, escalation of Islamic terrorism and massive spending for US taxpayers’money. Regardless of the domestic resistance, Trump continues the revision of the old international order. Another crucial element of Trump's policy of strengthening of nation-state during the first two years is the vigorous opposition to illegal immigration. One of the critical foreign policy moves in this direction was

121

the refusal to join the UN Global Compact for Migration announced in Donald Trump's speech before the 73rd Session of the UN General Assembly in September 2018. Along with that, despite the criticism of the political opposition and the series of lawsuits against his acts, he eventually managed to introduce restrictions on immigration from several countries considered to be a source of radical Islam. The opponents and anti-Trump propagandists framed this policy with etiquettes "racist" and "xenophobic." The facts, however, completely refute such framing and expose the double standards used by anti-Trump camp. As we will see, similar and often more restrictive measures on illegal immigration have been carried out by the predecessors of Donald Trump, including Democrats Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. However, they are never defined as "racist" and "xenophobic." There have never been such Hollywood hysteria and dramatic remarks by Rihanna and other liberal celebrities before. Take the famous wall along the border with Mexico. This idea may or may not be supported, but it is untenable to define it xenophobic. Mexico is also discussing the rise of a wall along the Guatemalan border. In Europe, solid border fences exist between Bulgaria and Turkey, between Hungary and Serbia, and along the Norwegian-Russian border against the influx of illegal immigrants on the "Arctic Route." As for the USA and the wall that Trump has made one of the central images of the presidential campaign in 2016, the truth is that he wants to enforce a Secure Fence Act. Who voted this law? It is undoubtedly not Donald Trump. The bill was proposed in 2006 and provided for the construction of a strongly reinforced fence/wall along the US-Mexico border, with a length of 700 miles, with cameras and other security equipment. George W. Bush's administration adopted this law, but more importantly, in this case, it was then backed by 27 Senate Democrats. Among them are Barack Obama,

122

Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden. Anyone can refer themselves to the online Senate voting database. Moreover, today's fierce border wall critic Bernie Sanders has not yet been a senator when voting on the Secure Fence Act in 2006 but has voted in 2007 in favor of border wall funding. That does not prevent Obama, Clinton, Sanders, and Biden from blaming Trump for something they have introduced and supported. These facts testify that today's hysteria, fired by Trump's opposition, is not due to general considerations. Protecting the border of a sovereign nation is a legitimate subject for political debate. The stigmatization, as a "xenophobia," of the view that a stricter regime and measures against illegal immigrants are needed is a sign of undemocratic mentality. In the American case, illegal migrants are generally not refugees from wars and threats, but economic immigration from South America. The hypocrisy, the double standards, and the revealed lies of anti-Trump propaganda, which attempts to frame it 45th US president as a "racist" and "xenophobic," are also clear in hysterical criticism about the deportation of illegal immigrants. This a longstanding debate in the United States. When Trump announced that he would deport two million illegal immigrants, the racist and xenophobic labels flew with terrible force. However, what is the facts? According to official data, Barack Obama is a record-holder in this regard - deporting 2.5 million illegal immigrants. 91% of deportees in 2015 had previous criminal offenses105. Is Obama "racist" and "xenophobe"? The Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations have also deported more than 1 million people. Are Clinton and Bush "racists" and "xenophobes"? Why did not such epithets exist, given that even Human Rights Watch evaluates Bill Clinton's immigration legislation by introducing "arbitrary detention, expedited 105

Homeland Security statistics/yearbook

Yearbook of Immigration

Statistics

-

https://www.dhs.gov/immigration-

123

procedures for deportation and family breakdown?"106. If they are not all "racists" and "xenophobes" (and they are not really!), then why did Donald Trump's identical politics be so defined? The same dishonesty broke out and very recently on the occasion of the caravan of thousands of migrants from Guatemala and Salvador, who is trying to infiltrate illegally on US territory. Anti-Trump propaganda pours tons of sloth in connection with the use of tear gas by border police. Leftist Hollywood erupted in sobs and curses toward Trump, ranging from "national disgrace" to "reborn Hitler." The US authorities are doing nothing that they have not done routinely in recent decades. According to US Homeland Security, during the administration of Barack Obama tear gas was used at the border to repel illegal migrants more than twenty times a year. Singer Rihanna, however, called Trump's "immoral pig" and accused him of destroying the state. Impressive "awakening." Because there was Twitter when Barack Obama tear gassed illegal migrants, but Rihanna was not so excited about it at the time. Alternatively, perhaps Obama's tear gas is a sweet perfume that welcomed illegal migrants.

106

Human Rights Watch. US:20 Years of Immigrant Abuses Under 1996 Laws, Arbitrary Detention, Fast-Track Deportation, Family Separation April 2016 - https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/04/25/us-20-years-immigrantabuses

124

B. Economic Nationalism vs. Free Trade

The Trump doctrine enshrines economic nationalism at the expense of the neoliberal free trade model. It renounces multilateral free trade agreements, which seize judicial sovereignty from nation-states and launch supranational tribunals where rules and procedures are in favor of corporations, is being dismantled. The 45th American president, as we have seen in the previous chapters, is a consistent opponent of this type of agreements because they damage the working class of America and catalyze

deindustrialization

through

unimpeded

relocation

of

productions to low-cost countries. The repeal of free trade instruments of the Obama-Clinton era – TTIP and TTP - was among the first acts after Donald Trump's inauguration. He declared: "For too long, Americans have explained that giant multilateral trade agreements, uncontrolled international tribunals and powerful global bureaucracies are the best way for their welfare and success. However, as these promises went, millions of jobs were destroyed, and thousands of factories closed." There were even more severe steps that changed the rules of world trade in depth. The administration of Donald J. Trump has created preconditions for blocking the work of the supranational tribunal at the World Trade Organization (WTO). The White House, using procedural reasons, refuses to support the appointment of new judges at the WTO's 7-member Appeal Tribunal. Following the expiry of the mandate of some of the judges at the end of September 2018, only three remained on duty, as is the minimum needed to hold legitimate sessions. Recently, however, the US official in the WTO said straightforwardly that the tribunal is unacceptable to the United States because it often exceeds its authority, distorts the facts and the national legislation of the Member States. The mandate of two more judges expires at the end of 2019. It is expected that

125

the US will continue blocking the nomination process until an agreement on radical WTO reform has been reached. Trump has also been successful with another pre-election promise in this area - the NAFTA repeal. In the first year of his mandate, critics speculated that it was impossible to revoke or revise the deal. After NAFTA was left behind and replaced by the USAMCA agreement, their unsubstantiated allegations passed into a squeak of teeth and a nagging remark that nothing had changed significantly. It, of course, is far from the truth. The tripartite agreement signed at the G20 in Buenos Aires in early December 2018 includes substantial improvements to the US national economy and, in turn, brings the country's sovereignty back from NAFTA supranational tribunals. The US industries most affected by the neoliberal free-trade model get a serious sip of air. USAMCA requires 75% - up from 62.5% - of the parts that go into a vehicle be made in North America (not Europe or China) to qualify for tariff-free treatment, 45% of a car be made by workers earning at least $16 an hour - a measure aimed at discouraging companies from shifting work to lower-wage Mexico. Another breakthrough is the opening of the practically inaccessible Canadian market for American agricultural produce - dairy, eggs, chicken. Also, particularly important - tribunals are abolished in the trade relations between the US and Canada, and with Mexico, they are maintained only in the sectors of energy, oil, telecom, and transport. The economic nationalism characteristic of the Trump doctrine goes together

with

the

elimination

of

unnecessary

regulations

and

administrative burden and a comprehensive tax reform aimed at simplifying the legal framework and reducing taxes across the scale. The US economy is stifled by a bunch of federal regulatory regimes, many of which were adopted in Obama's eight years. About 67 federal departments, agencies, and commissions are currently working on more

126

than 3,200 new regulations in various stages of development. According to estimates by the Competitive Enterprise Institute federal regulations and intervention cost Americans $1.9 trillion in 2017. It exceeded the $1.88 trillion the IRS collected in both individual and corporate income taxes in 2017. For illustration, if federal regulations were a free economy, they would be the eighth largest in the world. Calculated per household - this is equivalent to $15,000 per U.S. household each year, more than Americans spend on any category in their family budget except for housing. According to the National Association of Small Businesses in the United States, small businesses need more than eighty hours of work to deal with administrative requirements and spend an average of $ 83,000 in the first year of their start-up to bring their work to the governmental regulations. The reform that Donald Trump undertook during the first two years of his mandate led to a sharp reduction in federal regulations the 2017 Federal Register contained 61,308 pages, the lowest count since 1993 and a 36 percent drop from Obama’s 95,894 pages in 2016, the highest level ever recorded. So the budget is already saving more than $ 600 billion. Meanwhile, Donald Trump managed to push the tax cuts and jobs Act (TCJA) through the legislature. By an unwritten rule, every Republican attempt to cut taxes is met by Democrats with: they benefit the rich at the expense of the poor. Over the years this has been true, sometimes not. However, about Trump's tax reform, it is a severe lie. A relatively accurate and impartial view of US taxation issues gives three authoritative and non-partisan analytical centers, whose estimates can be trusted. These are the Joint Committee on Taxation, which assists the US Congress and was set up in 1926, as well as the Tax Policy Center, a nongovernmental think tank established by the Brookings Institution in 2002,

127

whose economic views tend to progressives, and the Tax Foundation founded in 1937, which is more right-wing in the ideological spectrum. All three are unanimous - Trump's tax reform has lowered the tax burden on low-income and middle-class and thus contributes to increasing their income. The Tax Policy Center emphasizes that the average tax cut is $ 1,600, with taxes of 80% of all Americans lower, 15% will not see change, and "losers" will be only 5% of the population, which is largely the highincome population. It is also essential for the Trump tax reform that reduces corporate tax - from 35% to 21%.The allegations made by the progressives that Trump's tax reform is "a gift to the rich" do not meet the facts and the legal norms adopted. The truth is that President Trump personally urged the Republican majority in Congress not to allow tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, and that was respected in the final version of the tax law passed. The assessment of the progressive Tax Policy Center shows that 80% of American families, who pay a total of 33% of all federal taxes, receive from the Trump tax reform 37% of the tax cuts introduced. At the same time, the 1% wealthiest taxpayer, who pays 27% of all federal taxes, received only 18% of tax cuts. As a result, wealthier families will bear a more significant part of the federal tax burden. For its part, the Joint Committee on Taxation underlines that the most massive tax cuts are received by families with incomes below $ 50,000 a year. So far, their share in total tax revenues was 4.4%, and after the new tax law - 3.8%. The economic policy of Donald Trump's administration has contributed to recovery and record low levels of unemployment. Obamanomics, whose weaknesses were significantly amplified by the 2008 financial and economic crisis, remained a lousy memory. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics since early 2017, nearly 4 million new jobs have been created, of which more than 400,000 are in industrial production.

128

Unemployment, which in the first year of Obama's mandate - 2009 was 10%, fell to 3.7% in November and 3.9% in December 2018 - the first year of Trump's administration. New unemployment claims recently hit a 49-year low. The jobless rates for adult women are lowest for 65 years. African-American,

Hispanic-Americans

and

Asian-Americans

unemployment have achieved the lowest rate ever recorded. For illustration, the figures for the two major minority groups are the following: for the Hispanics, 4.4% (Dec. 2018) at 12.8% (2009); African Americans - 6.6% (Dec. 2018) at 15.8% (2009). In October 2018, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that unemployment in ten US states has been at its lowest since the agency began measuring this indicator in 1976. These states are Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Washington, California, Missouri, Oregon, New York, Texas, South Carolina. The Economic Optimism Index (IBD/TIPP) jumped to 58% in the second half of 2018 - the highest level of nearly fifteen years. In other words, Donald Trump's economic policy may be criticized, but it would be profoundly false to say that it is unsuccessful and has no positive effect on the lives of American citizens. This policy aims at economic growth, but not at the expense of ordinary people, but rather the opposite. During these two years, under the pressure of the White House, the Federal Drug Administration has approved the most significant number of cheap generic medicines since it existed – this fact exemplifies the social dimension of Trump's efforts. Medicare has been pledged to overturn the practice of hospitals charged extremely high drug prices for low-income adult patients.

129

C. Against Unchurching of Society and Identity Politics

Over the years, Donald Trump has always expressed anger at the "war against Christmas," led by secularist and progressive organizations often with the support of the Democratic Party officials and the liberal judges. After the inauguration, President Trump began to restore the lost balance in the attitude of the government to religious freedom. He also took some measures to neutralize the extremism fueled by identity politics, and by gender-ideology in particular. A series of instructions were issued to the administration of the Ministries of Labor and Justice, which imposed the observance of religious rights and freedoms as imperative for their adopted regulations and ongoing work. On May 4, 2017, on the occasion of the National Prayer Day, the President signed an executive order to limit the scope of the notorious Johnson Amendment. Once submitted by Senator-democrat Lyndon Johnson, it banned religious organizations of expressing political views and campaigning in favor of or against political candidates, fearing to lose their tax allowances on equal terms with all non-profit organizations. Employers have also been forced to finance the purchase of contraceptive devices for employees even if this is not in line with their religious views. Furthermore, in the first month of his inauguration, on February 22, 2017, the president issued instructions to the federal authorities to cancel Obama pro-transgender policies. The Discrimination Proceeding that the Department of Justice had opened during the Obama administration against the state of North Carolina about the use of toilets that are not intended for the relevant biological sex was stopped. As a result, the state authorities have adopted a much more balanced law that protects both the rights transsexuals and of students who do not want to use shared toilets. 130

Instructions were also issued on respecting the rights and ending discrimination against Christians expressing opinions and arguments against same-sex marriages. Symbolically, the White House website has removed the leading accent on the rights of sexual minorities favored by the Obama administration. US President signed an executive order to discontinue recruiting of persons who identify themselves as a transsexual in the regular US Army. After the repeal of this executive order by a court of the first instance, the federal Supreme Court uphold it in early 2019. Overall, in the first two years, the Trump administration overcame Obama's legacy, which focused strongly on minority issues and so opposed to the neglected majority. Trump’s policy is for all and received recognition of moderate circles of society including various ethnic and other minorities. An essential guarantee for the longterm effect of this approach is the appointment of Judge Brett Kavanaugh as a member of the US Federal Supreme Court. In this way, a majority in the Court was cemented that will interpret the US Constitution as written and not by inventing minority rights at the expense of everyone else. At this stage, it can be said without much hesitation that President Trump has been able to bring more balance to society by blocking the most extreme manifestations of neoliberal globalism aimed at the erosion religions communities and the family.

131

The rise of Donald J. Trump and his policy during the first two years of the presidential term began to change impressively the United States and the world. In the context of a fierce domestic political struggle, Trump dismantles some of the pillars of neoliberal globalism. There is a historical, ideological turnaround in the White House which brings to existential horror the "superclass" of global capitalism, the removed from power globalist US establishment and its political nomenclature installed in Europe. After the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet camp, the neoliberal economic order seemed to be without a reasonable alternative. It was gradually indoctrinated as the only possible model of a market economy. It has become a genuinely ideological GMO, embracing the symbiosis with the neoconservative vision of the United States as a global hegemon, and the progressive identity politics that has torn the social fabric, causing severe divisions and conflicts in society. The neoliberal globalism conquered publicity and its advocates were rooted in supranational bureaucracy and national political elites. Let us borrow a comparison from Ben Shapiro's popular book Bullies: How the Left's Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silenced America.107 It describes the approach of conservatives and liberals (right and left) in the United States. However, the comparison could also be used to illustrate the difference between opponents and supporters of neoliberal globalism. The first are evangelical missionaries - they go from door to door and try to persuade Shapiro, B. Bullies: How the Left's Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silenced America. Threshold Editions, 2013. 107

132

people in their values. While the latter, the globalists, are like Islamic jihadists - they take power, impose sharia, and want to turn the whole population into their ideology forcibly. Neoliberal globalists used instruments of government power, media influence, and channeled finance such as those of the notorious George Soros or various soft power mechanisms launched during the Obama and Hillary administration thus fueling a network of loyal supporters, lobbyists, opinion-makers, social climbers and claqueurs who are upholding the globalist agenda. They are the beadles who shed with the sulfuric acid of fanaticism, hatred, and intolerance any different opinion that rejects neoliberal globalism and the interests of the global capitalist class. A global ideological sect that stigmatizes and seeks to annihilate any other democratic view. The mentality of the globalist elites remarkably resembles the old Soviet and totalitarian nomenclature in the USSR, Central, and Eastern Europe - they regard themselves as an "enlightened avant-garde" which bears the absolute truth and is called upon to lead the ignorant masses to the final victory of the global market. With the fall of the Berlin Wall, the socialist nomenclature for a long time could not understand its historical time was over. They framed as "extremists," "fascists" and "anarchists" the emerging democratic movements in Central and Eastern European countries. The reactions of neoliberal globalists today are similar. The elites and the mainstream media call opponents of neoliberal globalism "populists", "fascists", "nationalists", "xenophobes", "transphobes", "homophobes". This propaganda framing and stigmatization is focused on the emerging democratic political alternatives that listen more to the voice of the people than to the interests of the elite. Of course, some of them are populist or nationalist, but not all of them. Moreover, even less the policy of Donald Trump. The globalists have been conducting, in the same manner, the European discourse for years as well. Any criticism of the neoliberal dogmas and policy of the European Union 133

is instantly framed as "Euroscepticism" and "anti-Europeanism." As if there can be no other concept of European integration or another view of the distribution of sovereignty between member-states and Brussels. If we are correct, as Euroscepticism must be defined only the denial of the very need for the EU to exist, but not the different views on the model of its functioning and institutional design. The Trump doctrine, Brexit, the rejection of the draft European constitution and the proposals of the proBrussels referendum in Italy, the rebellion of the yellow vests in Paris, the emergence of new leftists (Podemos in Spain, Syriza in Greece) and the right-wing leaders and movements (Viktor Orban in Hungary, Alternative for Germany, UKIP in Great Britain, Salvini in Italy, Kaczynski and Law and Justice in Poland, Sebastian Kurz in Austria, etc.), regardless of national features and nuances, have a single root. These are the problems and legitimate fears of the people that the old parties not only do not solve but do not even want to hear. According to Fukuyama, with the label "populism," political elites today denote the politics they do not like but is supported by ordinary people.108 Trump and his breakthrough in America's ossified status quo are proof that the TINA dogma (There Is No Alternative) went to the dumping ground of history. The time has come for alternatives, the time of TIBA (There Is a Better Alternative). The political system that considered itself without an alternative would have to get used to the fact that there is another democratic vision of the economy and government. Not only one. Trump and his policy have already shown such another vision. The leftists can also forge their own as long as they abandon the postulates of neoliberal globalism, which divert them from people - the identity politics and the striving for the erosion of the nation-state. 108 Fukuyama,

Fr. American Political Decay or Renewal? - In: Foreign Affairs, July/August, 2016.

134

Recently, one of the freeloaders of neoliberal globalism in Bulgaria with barely concealed sadness wrote in the New York Times that there should be no delusions - after Trump the world will not return to its former status quo because in the US is already growing a generation that does not accept the messianic role of its country in the world. He is right - restoration will hardly happen. However, he is wrong about the reasons. It is unlikely to return to the old status quo because the processes in society reject neoliberal globalism. People need their foundations - the nation, the sovereign state, the national economy, the freedom of religion, the protection of the family. Donald Trump is the right person at the exact historical time. His policy has not turned to the past of the 19th century, as the globalists argue. Because any policy that is based on the values, interests, and needs of people, not of the elites, is a policy of the future. From today's point of view, no one can predict with certainty how the political path of this unusual American president will end. However, the victory of Donald Trump and the first two years of his term are already an essential page in world history. He is pushing for the next, even better, democratic alternatives to today's social, economic and political status quo in the world.

135

This addendum presents in full text five program speeches and remarks of the 45th US President Donald Trump:

- Announcement speech, June 2015; - Acceptance speech, Republican National Convention, July 2016; - Gettysburg speech, Contract with the American Voter, October 2016; - Victory speech, November 2016; - Remarks by President Trump to the 73rd Session of the United Nations General Assembly.

The full text of Trump’s contract with American voters is also included that specifies the political objectives, priorities, and measures that Donald Trump has followed in term so far. In this way, the reader can also make an independent judgment about Donald Trump's platform and politics. To check analytical assessments in this and other books and comments without relying solely on biased media reports that often hold back or even falsify the messages and actions of the current US president.

136

Trump Tower, New York, NY, June 16, 2015

Our country is in serious trouble. We are not respected by anyone. We are a laughing stock all over the world. ISIS, China, Mexico are all beating us. Everybody is beating us. Our enemies are getting stronger, and we are getting weaker. Politicians are all talk and no action. They will never be able to fix our country. They will never bring us to the Promised Land, and I cannot sit back and watch this incompetence any longer. Ladies and gentlemen, I am officially running for President of the United States. While I love my company and what I have built, I love my country even more. When was the last time the US won at anything? When was the last time we beat China or Japan in trade? Or Mexico at the border? Or anybody in negotiation? When was the last time we had a military victory that was so complete and total that the other side just said: “We Quit!” It just doesn’t happen for the US anymore. Our country needs and deserves a comeback…but, we are not going to get that comeback with politicians. Politicians are not the solution to our problems-- they are the problem. They are almost completely controlled by lobbyists, donors, and special interests—they do not have the best interests of our people at heart. We will never achieve our full potential if we send yet another politician to the White House. They will grow government, not cut it--they will grow

137

debt, not stop it. We are right now in a massive bubble that could be ready to explode—real unemployment in the range of 20%, artificially induced low-interest rates, and a stock market that bears no relation to reality-- are symptoms of something that could be catastrophic. We better have a great leader who truly understands what’s going on. Our country has a debt which will soon pass $20 trillion. We have unsecured borders. There are over 90 million Americans who have given up looking for work. We have 45 million Americans on food stamps and nearly 50 million Americans living in poverty. Clearly, our so-called “leaders” in Washington are failing us. They have failed to honor their sacred duty to care for our veterans and their families. They have failed to keep our military strong and vibrant. Through gross incompetence, we give billions of dollars of high-grade military equipment to our enemies. Our President truly doesn’t have a clue! At the same time, the world is becoming far more dangerous every day. Iran is racing towards developing nuclear weapons. China is exponentially expanding its military power; ISIS is beheading Christians simply for being Christian. In Benghazi, Islamic terrorists killed our diplomats without any consequences. Iran and ISIS, separately, are taking over vast areas in the Middle East and with it the largest oil reserves in the world. Our President has no plan. The America we love will continue its decline because Washington is broken. We will never fix Washington from the inside unless we send someone to Washington from the outside. It is time for the government to be run efficiently and effectively. It is time to get things done, and by done I mean properly done!

138

This is our time to make our government once again a government of the people, by the people and for the people. That is why today I am declaring my candidacy for President. I will Make America Great Again! We will change Washington together and defeat the special interests. I am not a politician. I can’t be bought. I won’t be running around the country begging people for money for my campaign. I won’t owe anybody anything. I won’t be beholden to anyone except to you, the American people, if you elect me to serve as your President. It is time to take our country in a bold new direction. It is time to get Americans back to work. It is way past time to build a massive wall to secure our southern border – and nobody can build a bigger and better wall than Donald Trump. A country without borders is, quite simply, not a country. Mexico is not our friend. They are beating us at the border and hurting us badly at economic development. They are sending people that they don’t want—the United States is becoming a dumping ground for the world. It is of primary importance to take care of our veterans and their families -- to make sure that every veteran has access to great medical care and attention. Our veterans are our heroes but are treated as third class citizens. It is essential to rebuild our military, so we have a strong presence that will send a clear message to our enemies that America is the leader of the free world. As President Reagan proved, there is only peace through strength. The government must honor its obligations to our seniors. We must protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, without cuts… there will no longer be any waste, fraud, and abuse on my watch.

139

ObamaCare must be repealed and replaced with something far superior and at far less cost. Likewise, we must greatly simplify our tax code. Our middle class, which has been totally forgotten, will thrive once again under President Trump. It is time to stop sending jobs overseas through bad foreign trade deals. We will renegotiate our trade deals with the toughest negotiators our country has… the ones who have actually read “The Art of the Deal” and know how to make great deals for our country. It is time to close loopholes for Wall Street and create far more opportunities for small businesses. It is necessary that we invest in our infrastructure, stop sending foreign aid to countries that hate us and use that money to rebuild our tunnels, roads, bridges, and schools—and nobody can do that better than me. We have to stop Common Core. We must keep education local and under parental control. Unelected Washington bureaucrats shouldn’t determine what is best for our children. It is important for our allies to know they can once again depend on us. We will no longer bow down to our enemies. We must stand by Israel. We will remind the world that a threat against Israel is a threat against the United States. We need to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons. We cannot allow a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. It is time to defeat ISIS. With a proper plan, it can be done quickly and effectively.

140

It is time to get tough with the Chinese on currency manipulation and espionage. We will tax China for each bad act, and if they continue, then we will tax them at an even higher level. Quite simply, it is time to bring real leadership to Washington. The fact is, the American Dream is dead -- but if I win, I will bring it back bigger and better and stronger than ever before. Together we will Make America Great Again! Thank You!

141

Friends, delegates and fellow Americans: I humbly and gratefully accept your nomination for the presidency of the United States. Who would have believed that when we started this journey on June 16, last year, we — I say we because we are a team — would have received almost 14 million votes, the most in the history of the Republican party? And that the Republican Party would get 60 percent more votes than it received eight years ago. Who would have believed it? The Democrats on the other hand, received 20 percent fewer votes than they got four years ago, not so good. Together, we will lead our party back to the White House, and we will lead our country back to safety, prosperity, and peace. We will be a country of generosity and warmth. But we will also be a country of law and order. Our convention occurs at a moment of crisis for our nation. The attacks on our police and the terrorism in our cities threaten our very way of life. Any politician who does not grasp this danger is not fit to lead our country. Americans watching this address tonight have seen the recent images of violence in our streets and the chaos in our communities. Many have witnessed this violence personally. Some have even been its victims.

142

I have a message for all of you: The crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon — and I mean very soon come to an end. Beginning on January 20th, 2017, safety will be restored. The most basic duty of government is to defend the lives of its citizens. Any government that fails to do so is a government unworthy to lead. It is finally time for a straightforward assessment of the state of our nation. I will present the facts plainly and honestly. We cannot afford to be so politically correct anymore. So if you want to hear the corporate spin, the carefully-crafted lies, and the media myths — the Democrats are holding their convention next week. Go there. But here, at our convention, there will be no lies. We will honor the American people with the truth, and nothing else. These are the facts: Decades of progress made in bringing down crime are now being reversed by this administration's rollback of criminal enforcement. Homicides last year increased by 17% in America's fifty largest cities. That's the largest increase in 25 years. In our nation's capital, killings have risen by 50 percent. They are up nearly 60 percent in nearby Baltimore. In the president's hometown of Chicago, more than 2,000 have been the victims of shootings this year alone. And almost 4,000 have been killed in the Chicago area since he took office. The number of police officers killed in the line of duty has risen by almost 50 percent compared to this point last year.

143

Nearly 180,000 illegal immigrants with criminal records, ordered deported from our country, are tonight roaming free to threaten peaceful citizens. The number of new illegal immigrant families who have crossed the border so far this year already exceeds the entire total of 2015. They are being released by the tens of thousands into our communities with no regard for the impact on public safety or resources. One such border-crosser was released and made his way to Nebraska. There, he ended the life of an innocent young girl named Sarah Root. She was 21 years old and was killed the day after graduating from college with a 4.0-grade point average. Her killer was then released a second time, and he is now a fugitive from the law. I've met Sarah's beautiful family. But to this administration, their amazing daughter was just one more American life that wasn't worth protecting. One more child to sacrifice on the altar of open borders. What about our economy? Again, I will tell you the plain facts that have been edited out of your nightly news and your morning newspaper: Nearly four in 10 African-American children are living in poverty, while 58% of African-American youth are now not employed. 2 million more Latinos are in poverty today than when the president took his oath of office eight years ago. Another 14 million people have left the workforce entirely. Household incomes are down more than $4,000 since the year 2000. That is 16 years ago. Our trade deficit in goods reached — think of this — our trade deficit is $800 hundred billion dollars. Think of that. $800 billion last year alone. We will fix that.

144

The budget is no better. President Obama has almost doubled our national debt to more than $19 trillion and growing. Yet, what do we have to show for it? Our roads and bridges are falling apart, our airports are in third world condition, and 43 million Americans are on food stamps. Now let us consider the state of affairs abroad. Not only have our citizens endured domestic disaster, but they have lived through one international humiliation after another. One after another. We all remember the images of our sailors being forced to their knees by their Iranian captors at gunpoint. This was just prior to the signing of the Iran deal, which gave back to Iran $150 billion and gave us absolutely nothing. It will go down in history as one of the worst deals ever negotiated. Another humiliation came when President Obama drew a red line in Syria, and the whole world knew it meant absolutely nothing. In Libya, our consulate, the symbol of American prestige around the globe was brought down in flames. America is far less safe, and the world is far less stable than when Obama made the decision to put Hillary Clinton in charge of America's foreign policy. I am certain it is a decision he truly regrets. Her bad instincts and her bad judgment, something pointed out by Bernie Sanders are what caused the disasters unfolding today. Let's review the record. In 2009, pre-Hillary, ISIS was not even on the map. Libya was stable. Egypt was peaceful. Iraq had seen a big reduction in violence. Iran was being choked by sanctions. Syria was somewhat under control.

145

After four years of Hillary Clinton, what do we have? ISIS has spread across the region and the entire world. Libya is in ruins, and our ambassador and his staff were left helpless to die at the hands of savage killers. Egypt was turned over to the radical Muslim Brotherhood, forcing the military to retake control. Iraq is in chaos. Iran is on the path to nuclear weapons. Syria is engulfed in a civil war and a refugee crisis that now threatens the West. After 15 years of wars in the Middle East, after trillions of dollars spent and thousands of lives lost, the situation is worse than it has ever been before. This is the legacy of Hillary Clinton: Death, destruction and terrorism and weakness. But Hillary Clinton's legacy does not have to be America's legacy. The problems we face now — poverty and violence at home, war and destruction abroad — will last only as long as we continue relying on the same politicians who created them. A change in leadership is required to produce a change in outcomes. Tonight, I will share with you for action for America. The most important difference between our plan and that of our opponents is that our plan will put America first. Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo. As long as we are led by politicians who will not put America first, then we can be assured that other nations will not treat America with respect. The respect that we deserve. The American people will come first once again. First, my plan will begin with safety at home which means safe neighborhoods, secure borders, and protection from terrorism. There can be no prosperity without law and order. On the economy, I will outline reforms to add millions of new jobs and trillions in new wealth that can be used to rebuild America.

146

A number of these reforms that I will outline tonight will be opposed by some of our nation's most powerful special interests. That is because these interests have rigged our political and economic system for their exclusive benefit. Believe me. It is for their benefit. For their benefit. Big business, elite media, and major donors are lining up behind the campaign of my opponent because they know she will keep our rigged system in place. They are throwing money at her because they have total control over every single thing she does. She is their puppet, and they pull strings. That is why Hillary Clinton's message is that things will never change. Never ever. My message is that things have to change and they have to change right now. Every day I wake up determined to deliver a better life for the people all across this nation that had been ignored, neglected and abandoned. I have visited the laid-off factory workers, and the communities crushed by our horrible and unfair trade deals. These are the forgotten men and women of our country, and they are forgotten, but they will not be forgotten long. These are people who work hard but no longer have a voice. I am your voice. I have embraced crying mothers who have lost their children because our politicians put their personal agendas before the national good. I have no patience for injustice. No tolerance for government incompetence. When innocent people suffer, because our political system lacks the will, or the courage, or the basic decency to enforce our laws, or worse still, has sold out to some corporate lobbyist for cash I am not able to look the other way. And I won't look the other way. And when a Secretary of State illegally stores her emails on a private server, deletes 33,000 of them so the authorities can't see her crime, puts our country at risk, lies about it in every different form and faces no

147

consequence — I know that corruption has reached a level like never ever before in our country. When the FBI director says that the Secretary of State was "extremely careless" and "negligent" in handling our classified secrets, I also know that these terms are minor compared to what she actually did. They were just used to save her from facing justice for her terrible, terrible crimes. In fact, her single greatest accomplishment may be committing such an egregious crime and getting away with it, especially when others who have been far less having paid so dearly. When that same Secretary of State rakes in millions of dollars trading access and favors to special interests and foreign powers, I know the time for action has come. I have joined the political arena so that the powerful can no longer beat up on people that cannot defend themselves. Nobody knows the system better than me, which is why I alone can fix it. I have seen firsthand how the system is rigged against our citizens, just like it was rigged against Bernie Sanders. He never had a chance. But his supporters will join our movement because we will fix his biggest issue: Trade deals that strip our country of jobs and the distribution of wealth in the country. Millions of Democrats will join our movement because we are going to fix the system, so it works fairly and justly for each and every American. In this cause, I am proud to have at my side the next Vice President of the United States: Governor Mike Pence of Indiana. And a great guy. We will bring the same economic success to America that Mike brought Indiana, which is amazing. He is a man of character and accomplishment. He is the right man for the job.

148

The first task for our new administration will be to liberate our citizens from the crime and terrorism and lawlessness that threatens their — our communities. America was shocked to its core when our police officers in Dallas were so brutally executed. Immediately after Dallas, we have seen continued threats and violence against our law enforcement officials. Law officers have been shot or killed in recent days in Georgia, Missouri, Wisconsin, Kansas, Michigan, and Tennessee. On Sunday, more police were gunned down in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Three were killed, and three were very badly injured. An attack on law enforcement is an attack on all Americans. I have a message to every last person threatening the peace on our streets and the safety of our police: When I take the oath of office next year, I will restore law and order to our country. I will work with and appoint, the best prosecutors and law enforcement officials in the country to get the job properly done. In this race for the White House, I am the law and order candidate. The irresponsible rhetoric of our president, who has used the pulpit of the presidency to divide us by race and color, has made America a more dangerous environment than frankly, I have ever seen and anybody in this room has ever watched or seen. This administration has failed America's inner cities. Remember, it has failed America's inner cities. It's failed them on education. It's failed them on jobs. It's failed them on crime. It's failed them in every way and on every single level. When I am president, I will work to ensure that all of our kids are treated equally, and protected equally. Every action I take, I will ask myself: Does this make life better for young Americans in Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, 149

and Ferguson who have really come in every way, have the same right to live out their dreams like any other child in America? To make life safe in America, we must also address the growing threats from outside the country. We are going to defeat the barbarians of ISIS. And we are going to defeat them bad. Once again, France is the victim of brutal Islamic terrorism. Men, women, and children viciously mowed down. Lives ruined. Families ripped apart — a nation in mourning. The damage and devastation that can be inflicted by Islamic radicals have been proven over and over. At the World Trade Center, at an office party in San Bernardino, at the Boston Marathon, and a military recruiting center in Chattanooga, Tennessee. And many other locations. Only weeks ago, in Orlando, Florida, 49 wonderful Americans were savagely murdered by an Islamic terrorist. This time, the terrorist targeted the LGBTQ community. No good. And we're going to stop it. As your president, I will do everything in my power to protect our LGBTQ citizens from the violence and oppression of a hateful foreign ideology. Believe me. And I have to say as a Republican. It is so nice to hear you cheering for what I just said. Thank you. To protect us from terrorism, we need to focus on three things. We must have the best, absolutely the best, gathering of intelligence anywhere in the world — the best. We must abandon the failed policy of nation-building and regime change that Hillary Clinton pushed in Iraq, Libya, in Egypt, and Syria. Instead, we must work with all of our allies who share our goal of destroying ISIS and stamping out Islamic terrorism and doing it now,

150

doing it quickly. We're going to win. We're going to win fast. This includes working with our greatest ally in the region, the state of Israel. Recently I have said that NATO was obsolete because it did not properly cover terror. And also that many of the member countries were not paying their fair share. As usual, the United States has been picking up the cost. Shortly after that, it was announced that NATO would be setting up a new program to combat terrorism. A true step in the right direction. Lastly, and very importantly, we must immediately suspend immigration from any nation that has been compromised by terrorism until proven vetting mechanisms have been put in place. We don't want them in our country. My opponent has called for a radical 550 percent increase — think of this, this is not believable, but this is what is happening — a 550 percent increase in Syrian refugees on top of existing massive refugee flows coming into our country already under the leadership of President Obama. She proposes this despite the fact that there's no way to screen these refugees to find out who they are or where they come from. I only want to admit individuals into our country who will support our values and love our people. Anyone who endorses violence, hatred or oppression is not welcome in our country and never ever will be. Decades of record immigration have produced lower wages and higher unemployment for our citizens, especially for African-American and Latino workers. We are going to have an immigration system that works, but one that works for the American people. On Monday, we heard from three parents whose children were killed by illegal immigrants Mary Ann Mendoza, Sabine Durden, and my friend

151

Jamiel Shaw. They are just three brave representatives of many thousands who have suffered so greatly. Of all my travels in this country, nothing has affected me more, nothing even close than the time I have spent with the mothers and fathers who have lost their children to violence spilling across our borders, which we can solve. We have to solve it. These families have no special interests to represent them. There are no demonstrators to protect them, and none to protest on their behalf. My opponent will never meet with them or share in their pain. Believe me. Instead, my opponent wants sanctuary cities. But where was a sanctuary for Kate Steinle? Where was the sanctuary for the children of Mary Ann, Sabine and Jamiel? Is so sad even to be talking about this. We can solve it so quickly. Where was a sanctuary for all the other Americans who have been so brutally murdered, and who have suffered so horribly? These wounded American families have been alone. But they are not alone any longer. Tonight, this candidate and this whole nation stand in their corner to support them, to send them our love, and to pledge in their honor that we will save countless more families from suffering the same awful fate. We are going to build a great border wall to stop illegal immigration, to stop the gangs and the violence, and to stop the drugs from pouring into our communities. I have been honored to receive the endorsement of America's Border Patrol agents and will work directly with them to protect the integrity of our lawful, lawful, immigration system. By ending catch-and-release on the border, we will stop the cycle of human smuggling and violence. Illegal border crossings will go down. We will stop it. It will not be happening very much anymore. Believe me.

152

Peace will be restored by enforcing the rules for the millions who overstay their visas, and our laws will finally receive the respect they deserve. Tonight, I want every American whose demands for immigration security have been denied and every politician who has denied them to listen very closely to the words I am about to say: On on January 20 of 2017, the day I take the oath of office, Americans will finally wake up in a country where the laws of the United States are enforced. We are going to be considerate and compassionate to everyone. But my greatest compassion will be for our own struggling citizens. My plan is the exact opposite of the radical and dangerous immigration policy of Hillary Clinton. Americans want relief from uncontrolled immigration, which is what we have now. Communities want relief. Yet Hillary Clinton is proposing a mass amnesty, mass immigration, and mass lawlessness. Her plan will overwhelm your schools and hospitals, further reduce your jobs and wages, and make it harder for recent immigrants to escape from the tremendous cycle of poverty they are going through right now and make it almost impossible for them to join the middle class. I have a different vision for our workers. It begins with a new, fair trade policy that protects our jobs and stands up to countries that cheat — of which there are many. It's been a signature message of my campaign from day one, and it will be a signature feature of my presidency from the moment I take the oath of office. I have made billions of dollars in business making deals. Now I'm going to make our country rich again. Using the greatest businesspeople of the world, I'm going to turn our bad trade agreements into great trade agreements.

153

America has lost a nearly-one third of its manufacturing jobs since 1997, following the enactment of disastrous trade deals supported by the bill and Hillary Clinton. Remember, it was Bill Clinton who signed NAFTA, one of the worst economic deals ever made by our country. Or frankly, any other country. Never ever again. I am going to bring our jobs back our jobs to Ohio and Pennsylvania, and New York and Michigan and all of America and I am not going to let companies move to other countries, firing their employees along the way, without consequences and not going to happen anymore. My opponent, on the other hand, has supported virtually every trade agreement that has been destroying our middle class. She supported NAFTA, and she supported China's entrance into the world trade organization. Another one of her husband's colossal mistakes and disasters. She supported the job-killing trade deal with South Korea. She supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership which will not only destroy our manufacturing, but it will make America subject to the rulings of foreign governments. And it is not going to happen. I pledge never to sign any trade agreement that hurts our workers, or that diminishes our freedom and Independence. We will never ever sign bad trade deals. America first again. American first. Instead, I will make individual deals with individual countries. No longer will we enter into these massive transactions with many countries that are thousands of pages long and which no one from our country even reads or understands. We are going to enforce all trade violations against any country that cheats. This includes stopping China's outrageous theft of intellectual property, along with their illegal product dumping, and their devastating currency manipulation. They are the greatest that ever came about; they are the greatest currently manipulators ever.

154

Our horrible trade agreements with China and many others will be totally renegotiated. That includes renegotiating NAFTA to get a much better deal for America and will walk away if we don't get that kind of a deal. Our country is going to start building and making things again. Next comes the reform of our tax laws, regulations and energy rules. While Hillary Clinton plans a massive, and I mean a massive, tax increase, I have proposed the largest tax reduction of any candidate who has run for president this year, Democrat or Republican. Middle-income Americans will experience profound relief, and taxes will be greatly simplified for everyone. I mean everyone. America is one of the highest-taxed nations in the world. Reducing taxes will cause new companies and new jobs to come roaring back into our country. Believe me. It will happen, and it will happen fast. Then we are going to deal with the issue of regulation, one of the greatest job killers of them all. Excessive regulation is costing our country as much as $2 trillion a year, and we will end and it very quickly. We are going to lift the restrictions on the production of American energy. This will produce more than $20 trillion in job-creating economic activity over the next four decades. My opponent, on the other hand, wants to put the great miners and steelworkers of our country out of work and out of business. That will never happen with Donald J trump as president. Our steelworkers and are miners are going back to work again. With these new economic policies, trillions of dollars will start flowing into our country. This new wealth will improve the quality of life for all Americans. We will build the roads, highways, bridges, tunnels, airports, and the railways of our tomorrow. This, in turn, will create millions of more jobs.

155

We will rescue kids from failing schools by helping their parents send them to a safe school of their choice. My opponent would rather protect education bureaucrats than serve American children. That is what she is doing, and that is what she has done. We will repeal and replace disastrous Obamacare. You will be able to choose your own doctor again. And we will fix TSA at the airports, which is a total disaster. Thank you. We are going to work with all of our students who are drowning in debt to take the pressure off these young people just starting out in their adult lives — tremendous problems. We will completely rebuild our depleted military. And the countries that we are protecting at a massive cost to us will be asked to pay their fair share. We will take care of our great veterans as they have never been taken care of before. My just-released 10 point plan has received tremendous better support. We will guarantee those who serve this country will be able to visit the doctor or hospital of their choice without waiting five days in a line and dying. My opponent dismissed the VA scandal, one more sign of how out of touch she really is. We are going to ask every department head and government to provide a list of wasteful spending projects that we can eliminate in my first 100 days. The politicians have talked about this for years, but I'm going to do it. We are also going to appoint justices to the United States Supreme Court who will uphold our laws and our constitution. The replacement of our beloved Justice Scalia will be a person of similar views, principles and

156

judicial philosophies. Very important. This will be one of the most important issues decided by this election. My opponent wants to essentially abolish the 2nd Amendment. I, on the other hand, received the early and strong endorsement of the National Rifle Association. And will protect the right of all Americans to keep their families safe. At this moment, I would like to thank the evangelical community because, I will tell you what, the support they have given me — and I'm not sure I totally deserve it — has been so amazing. And has been such a big reason I'm here tonight. They have much to contribute to our policies. Yet our laws prevent you from speaking your mind from your own pulpits. An amendment, pushed by Lyndon Johnson, many years ago, threatens religious institutions with a loss of their tax-exempt status if they openly advocate their political views. Their voice has been taken away. I will work hard to repeal that language and to protect free speech for all Americans. We can accomplish these great things and so much more. All we need to do is start believing in ourselves in our country again. Start believing. It is time to show the whole world that America is back, bigger and better and stronger than ever before. In this journey, I'm so lucky to have at my side my wife Melania and my wonderful children Don, Ivanka, Eric, Tiffany, and Barron: You will always be my greatest source of pride and joy. And by the way, Melania and Ivanka, did they do a job? My dad, Fred Trump, was the smartest and hardest working man I ever knew. I sometimes wonder what he'd say if he were here to see this tonight. It's because of him that I learned, from my youngest age, to respect the dignity of work and the dignity of working people.

157

He was a guy most comfortable in the company of bricklayers, carpenters, and electricians and I have a lot of that in me also. I love those people. Then there's my mother, Mary. She was strong, but also warm and fairminded. She was a truly great mother. She was also one of the most honest and charitable people I have ever known, and a great, great judge of character. She could pick them out from anywhere. To my sisters, Mary Anne and Elizabeth, my brother Robert and my late brother Fred, I will always give you my love. You are most special to me. I have loved my life in business. But now, my sole and exclusive mission is to go to work for our country, to go to work for you. It is time to deliver victory for the American people. We don't win anymore, but we are going to start winning again. But to do that, we must break free from the petty politics of the past. America is a nation of believers, dreamers, and strivers that is being led by a group of censors, critics, and cynics. Remember: All of the people telling you can't have the country you want, are the same people, that would not stand, I mean they said Trump does not have a chance of being here tonight, not a chance, the same people. We love defeating those people, don't we? Love it. No longer can we rely on those same people in the media and politics who will say anything to keep a rigged system in place. Instead, we must choose to believe in America. History is watching us now. It's we don't have much time. We don't have much time. It's waiting to see if we will rise to the occasion and if we will show the whole world that America is still free and independent and strong. I am asking for your support tonight so that I can be year champion in the White House. And I will be a champion. Your champion. 158

My opponent asks her supporters to recite a three-word loyalty pledge. It reads: "I'm with her." I choose to recite a different pledge. My pledge reads: "I'm with you the American people." I am your voice. So to every parent who dreams for their child, and every child who dreams for their future, I say these words to you tonight: I'm with you, and I will fight for you, and I will win for you. To all Americans tonight, in all our cities and towns, I make this promise: We will make America strong again. We will make America proud again. We will make America safe again. And we will make America great again! God bless you and goodnight! I love you!

159

What follows is my 100-day action plan to Make America Great Again. It is a contract between myself and the American voter – and begins with restoring honesty, accountability, and change to Washington. Therefore, on the first day of my term of office, my administration will immediately pursue the following six measures to clean up the corruption and special interest collusion in Washington, DC: ● FIRST, propose a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress; ● SECOND, a hiring freeze on all federal employees to reduce the federal workforce through attrition (exempting military, public safety, and public health); ● THIRD, a requirement that for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated; ● FOURTH, a 5 year-ban on White House and Congressional officials becoming lobbyists after they leave government service; ● FIFTH, a lifetime ban on White House officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government; ● SIXTH, a complete ban on foreign lobbyists raising money for American elections. On the same day, I will begin taking the following 7 actions to protect American workers:

160

- FIRST, I will announce my intention to renegotiate NAFTA or withdraw from the deal under Article 2205. - SECOND, I will announce our withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership. - THIRD, I will direct my Secretary of the Treasury to label China a currency manipulator. - FOURTH, I will direct the Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Trade Representative to identify all foreign trading abuses that unfairly impact American workers and direct them to use every tool under American and international law to end those abuses immediately. - FIFTH, I will lift the restrictions on the production of 50 trillion dollars’ worth of job-producing American energy reserves, including shale, oil, natural gas, and clean coal. - SIXTH, lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks and allow vital energy infrastructure projects, like the Keystone Pipeline, to move forward. - SEVENTH, cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fix America’s water and environmental infrastructure. Additionally, on the first day, I will take the following five actions to restore security and the constitutional rule of law: FIRST, cancel every unconstitutional executive action, memorandum, and order issued by President Obama. SECOND, begin the process of selecting a replacement for Justice Scalia from one of the 20 judges on my list, who will uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. THIRD, cancel all federal funding to Sanctuary Cities.

161

FOURTH, begin removing the more than 2 million criminal illegal immigrants from the country and cancel visas to foreign countries that won’t take them back. FIFTH, suspend immigration from terror-prone regions where vetting cannot safely occur. All vetting of people coming into our country will be considered extreme vetting. Next, I will work with Congress to introduce the following broader legislative measures and fight for their passage within the first 100 days of my Administration: 1. Middle-Class Tax Relief And Simplification Act. An economic plan designed to grow the economy 4% per year and create at least 25 million new jobs through massive tax reduction and simplification, in combination with trade reform, regulatory relief, and lifting the restrictions on American energy. The largest tax reductions are for the middle class. A middle-class family with 2 children will get a 35% tax cut. The current number of brackets will be reduced from 7 to 3, and tax forms will likewise be greatly simplified. The business rate will be lowered from 35 to 15 percent, and the trillions of dollars of American corporate money overseas can now be brought back at a 10 percent rate. 2. End The Offshoring Act Establishes tariffs to discourage companies from laying off their workers to relocate in other countries and ship their products back to the U.S. tax-free. 3. American Energy & Infrastructure Act. Leverages public-private partnerships, and private investments through tax incentives, to spur $1 trillion in infrastructure investment over 10 years. It is revenue neutral. 4. School Choice And Education Opportunity Act. Redirects education dollars to gives parents the right to send their kid to the public, private, charter, magnet, religious or home school of their choice. Ends common

162

core, brings education supervision to local communities. It expands vocational and technical education, and make 2 and 4-year college more affordable. 5. Repeal and Replace Obamacare Act. Fully repeals Obamacare and replaces it with Health Savings Accounts, the ability to purchase health insurance across state lines, and lets states manage Medicaid funds. Reforms will also include cutting the red tape at the FDA: there are over 4,000 drugs awaiting approval, and we especially want to speed the approval of life-saving medications. 6. Affordable Childcare and Eldercare Act. Allows Americans to deduct childcare and elder care from their taxes, incentivizes employers to provide on-site childcare services, and creates tax-free Dependent Care Savings Accounts for both young and elderly dependents, with matching contributions for low-income families. 7. End Illegal Immigration Act Fully-funds the construction of a wall on our southern border with the full understanding that the country Mexico will be reimbursing the United States for the full cost of such wall; establishes a 2-year mandatory minimum federal prison sentence for illegally re-entering the U.S. after a previous deportation, and a 5-year mandatory minimum for illegally re-entering for those with felony convictions, multiple misdemeanor convictions or two or more prior deportations; also reforms visa rules to enhance penalties for overstaying and to ensure open jobs are offered to American workers first. 8. Restoring the Community Safety Act. Reduces surging crime, drugs and violence by creating a Task Force On Violent Crime and increasing funding for programs that train and assist local police; increases resources for federal law enforcement agencies and federal prosecutors to dismantle criminal gangs and put violent offenders behind bars.

163

9. Restoring the National Security Act. Rebuilds our military by eliminating the defense sequester and expanding military investment; provides Veterans with the ability to receive public VA treatment or attend the private doctor of their choice; protects our vital infrastructure from cyber-attack; establishes new screening procedures for immigration to ensure those who are admitted to our country support our people and our values 10. Clean up Corruption in Washington Act. Enacts new ethics reforms to Drain the Swamp and reduce the corrupting influence of special interests on our politics. On November 8th, Americans will be voting for this 100-day plan to restore prosperity to our economy, security to our communities, and honesty to our government. This is my pledge to you. And if we follow these steps, we will once more have a government of, by and for the people.

164

Donald Trump's victory speech Thank you. Thank you very much, everybody. Sorry to keep you waiting. Complicated business. Complicated. Thank you very much. I've just received a call from Secretary Clinton. She congratulated us. It's about us. On our victory, and I congratulated her and her family on a very, very hard-fought campaign. I mean, she fought very hard. Hillary has worked very long and very hard over a long period of time, and we owe her a major debt of gratitude for her service to our country. I mean that very sincerely. Now it is time for America to bind the wounds of division, have to get together. To all Republicans and Democrats and independents across this nation, I say it is time for us to come together as one united people. It is time. I pledge to every citizen of our land that I will be President for all of Americans, and this is so important to me. For those who have chosen not to support me in the past, of which there were a few people, I'm reaching out to you for your guidance and your help so that we can work together and unify our great country. As I've said from the beginning, ours was not a campaign but rather an incredible and great movement, made up of millions of hard-working men and women who love their country and want a better, brighter future for themselves and for their family. It is a movement comprised of Americans from all races, religions, backgrounds, and beliefs, who want and expect our government to serve the people -- and serve the people it will. Working together, we will begin the urgent task of rebuilding our nation and renewing the American dream. I've spent my entire life in business,

165

looking at the untapped potential in projects and in people all over the world. That is now what I want to do for our country — tremendous potential. I've gotten to know our country so well. Tremendous potential. It is going to be a beautiful thing. Every single American will have the opportunity to realize his or her fullest potential. The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer. We are going to fix our inner cities and rebuild our highways, bridges, tunnels, airports, schools, hospitals. We're going to rebuild our infrastructure, which will become, by the way, second to none. And we will put millions of our people to work as we rebuild it. We will also finally take care of our great veterans who have been so loyal, and I've gotten to know so many over this 18-month journey. The time I've spent with them during this campaign has been among my greatest honors. Our veterans are incredible people. We will embark upon a project of national growth and renewal. I will harness the creative talents of our people, and we will call upon the best and brightest to leverage their tremendous talent for the benefit of all. It is going to happen. We have a great economic plan. We will double our growth and have the strongest economy anywhere in the world. At the same time, we will get along with all other nations willing to get along with us. We will be. We will have great relationships. We expect to have great, great relationships. No dream is too big; no challenge is too great. Nothing we want for our future is beyond our reach. America will no longer settle for anything less than the best. We must reclaim our country's destiny and dream big and bold and daring. We

166

have to do that. We're going to dream of things for our country, and beautiful things and successful things once again. I want to tell the world community that while we will always put America's interests first, we will deal fairly with everyone, with everyone. All people and all other nations. We will seek common ground, not hostility; partnership, not conflict. And now I would like to take this moment to thank some of the people who really helped me with this, what they are calling tonight a very, very historic victory. First, I want to thank my parents, whom I know is looking down on me right now — great people. I've learned so much from them. They were wonderful in every regard — truly great parents. I also want to thank my sisters, Marianne and Elizabeth, who are here with us tonight. Where are they? They're here someplace. They're very shy, actually. And my brother Robert, my great friend. Where is Robert? Where is Robert? My brother Robert, and they should be on this stage, but that's okay. They're great. And also my late brother Fred, great guy. Fantastic guy. Fantastic family. I was very lucky. Great brothers, sisters, great, unbelievable parents. To Melania and Don and Ivanka and Eric and Tiffany and Barron, I love you, and I thank you, and especially for putting up with all of those hours. This was tough. This was tough. This political stuff is nasty, and it is tough.

167

So I want to thank my family very much. Really fantastic. Thank you all. Thank you all. Lara, unbelievable job. Unbelievable. Vanessa, thank you. Thank you very much. What a great group. You've all given me such incredible support, and I will tell you that we have a large group of people. You know, they kept saying we have a small staff. Not so small. Look at all of the people that we have. Look at all of these people. And Kellyanne and Chris and Rudy and Steve and David. We have got tremendously talented people up here, and I want to tell you it's been very, very special. I want to give a very special thanks to our former mayor, Rudy Giuliani. He's unbelievable. Unbelievable. He traveled with us, and he went through meetings, and Rudy never changes. Where is Rudy? Where is he? Gov. Chris Christie, folks, was unbelievable. Thank you, Chris. The first man, first senator, first major, major politician. Let me tell you; he is highly respected in Washington because he is as smart as you get. Sen. Jeff Sessions. Where is Jeff? A great man. Another great man, very tough competitor. He was not easy. He was not easy. Who is that? Is that the mayor that showed up? Is that Rudy? Up here. Really a friend to me, but I'll tell you, I got to know him as a competitor because he was one of the folks that were negotiating to go against those Democrats, Dr. Ben Carson. Where's Ben? Where is Ben? By the way, Mike Huckabee is here someplace, and he is fantastic. Mike and his family Sarah, thank you very much. Gen. Mike Flynn. Where is Mike? And Gen. Kellogg. We have over 200 generals and admirals that have endorsed our campaign, and they are special people. We have 22 Congressional Medal of Honor people. A very special person who, believe me, I read reports that I wasn't getting along with him. I 168

never had a bad second with him. He's an unbelievable star. He is ... that's right, how did you possibly guess? Let me tell you about Reince. I've said Reince. I know it. I know it. Look at all of those people over there. I know it, Reince is a superstar. I said, they can't call you a superstar, Reince, unless we win it. Like Secretariat. He would not have that bust at the track at Belmont. Reince is really a star, and he is the hardest-working guy, and in a certain way, I did this. Reince, come up here. Get over here, Reince. Boy, oh, boy, oh, boy. It's about time you did this right — my god. Nah, come here. Say something. Amazing guy. Our partnership with the RNC was so important to the success, and what we've done, so I also have to say, I've gotten to know some incredible people. The Secret Service people. They're tough, and they're smart, and they're sharp, and I don't want to mess around with them, I can tell you. And when I want to go and wave to a big group of people and they rip me down and put me back down in the seat, but they are fantastic people so I want to thank the Secret Service. And law enforcement in New York City, they're here tonight. These are spectacular people, sometimes underappreciated, unfortunately. We appreciate them. So it's been what they call a historic event, but to be really historic, we have to do a great job, and I promise you that I will not let you down. We will do a great job. We will do a great job. I look very much forward to being your president, and hopefully at the end of two years or three years or four years or maybe even eight years you will say so many of you worked so hard for us, with you. You will say that -- you will say that that

169

was something that you were -- really were very proud to do and I can — thank you very much. And I can only say that while the campaign is over, our work on this movement is now really just beginning. We're going to get to work immediately for the American people, and we're going to be doing a job that hopefully you will be so proud of your President. You will be so proud. Again, it's my honor. It's an amazing evening. It's been an amazing two-year period, and I love this country. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you to Mike Pence.

170

Madam President, Mr. Secretary-General, world leaders, ambassadors, and distinguished delegates: One year ago, I stood before you for the first time in this grand hall. I addressed the threats facing our world, and I presented a vision to achieve a brighter future for all of humanity. Today, I stand before the United Nations General Assembly to share the extraordinary progress we’ve made. In less than two years, my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country. America’s — so true. (Laughter.) Didn’t expect that reaction, but that’s okay. America’s economy is booming like never before. Since my election, we’ve added $10 trillion in wealth. The stock market is at an all-time high in history, and jobless claims are at a 50-year low. African American, Hispanic American, and Asian American unemployment have all achieved their lowest levels ever recorded. We’ve added more than 4 million new jobs, including half a million manufacturing jobs. We have passed the biggest tax cuts and reforms in American history. We’ve started the construction of a major border wall, and we have greatly strengthened border security.

171

We have secured record funding for our military — $700 billion this year, and $716 billion next year. Our military will soon be more powerful than it has ever been before. In other words, the United States is stronger, safer, and a richer country than it was when I assumed office less than two years ago. We are standing up for America and for the American people. And we are also standing up for the world. This is great news for our citizens and for peace-loving people everywhere. We believe that when nations respect the rights of their neighbors and defend the interests of their people, they can better work together to secure the blessings of safety, prosperity, and peace. Each of us here today is the emissary of a distinct culture, a rich history, and a people bound together by ties of memory, tradition, and the values that make our homelands like nowhere else on Earth. That is why America will always choose independence and cooperation over global governance, control, and domination. I honor the right of every nation in this room to pursue its own customs, beliefs, and traditions. The United States will not tell you how to live or work or worship. We only ask that you honor our sovereignty in return. From Warsaw to Brussels, to Tokyo to Singapore, it has been my highest honor to represent the United States abroad. I have forged close relationships and friendships and strong partnerships with the leaders of many nations in this room, and our approach has already yielded incredible change.

172

With support from many countries here today, we have engaged with North Korea to replace the specter of conflict with a bold and new push for peace. In June, I traveled to Singapore to meet face to face with North Korea’s leader, Chairman Kim Jong Un. We had highly productive conversations and meetings, and we agreed that it was in both countries’ interest to pursue the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. Since that meeting, we have already seen a number of encouraging measures that few could have imagined only a short time ago. The missiles and rockets are no longer flying in every direction. Nuclear testing has stopped. Some military facilities are already being dismantled. Our hostages have been released. And as promised, the remains of our fallen heroes are being returned home to lay at rest in American soil. I would like to thank Chairman Kim for his courage and for the steps he has taken, though much work remains to be done. The sanctions will stay in place until denuclearization occurs. I also want to thank the many member states who helped us reach this moment — a moment that is actually far greater than people would understand; far greater — but for also their support and the critical support that we will all need going forward. A special thanks to President Moon of South Korea, Prime Minister Abe of Japan, and President Xi of China. In the Middle East, our new approach is also yielding great strides and very historic change. Following my trip to Saudi Arabia last year, the Gulf countries opened a new center to target terrorist financing. They are enforcing new sanctions,

173

working with us to identify and track terrorist networks, and taking more responsibility for fighting terrorism and extremism in their own region. The UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar have pledged billions of dollars to aid the people of Syria and Yemen. And they are pursuing multiple avenues to ending Yemen’s horrible, horrific civil war. Ultimately, it is up to the nations of the region to decide what kind of future they want for themselves and their children. For that reason, the United States is working with the Gulf Cooperation Council, Jordan, and Egypt to establish a regional strategic alliance so that Middle Eastern nations can advance prosperity, stability, and security across their home region. Thanks to the United States military and our partnership with many of your nations, I am pleased to report that the bloodthirsty killers known as ISIS have been driven out from the territory they once held in Iraq and Syria. We will continue to work with friends and allies to deny radical Islamic terrorists any funding, territory or support, or any means of infiltrating our borders. The ongoing tragedy in Syria is heartbreaking. Our shared goals must be the de-escalation of the military conflict, along with a political solution that honors the will of the Syrian people. In this vein, we urge the United Nations-led peace process to be reinvigorated. But, rest assured, the United States will respond if chemical weapons are deployed by the Assad regime. I commend the people of Jordan and other neighboring countries for hosting refugees from this very brutal civil war. As we see in Jordan, the most compassionate policy is to place refugees as close to their homes as possible to ease their eventual return to be part of

174

the rebuilding process. This approach also stretches finite resources to help far more people, increasing the impact of every dollar spent. Every solution to the humanitarian crisis in Syria must also include a strategy to address the brutal regime that has fueled and financed it: the corrupt dictatorship in Iran. Iran’s leaders sow chaos, death, and destruction. They do not respect their neighbors or borders, or the sovereign rights of nations. Instead, Iran’s leaders plunder the nation’s resources to enrich themselves and to spread mayhem across the Middle East and far beyond. The Iranian people are rightly outraged that their leaders have embezzled billions of dollars from Iran’s treasury, seized valuable portions of the economy, and looted the people’s religious endowments, all to line their own pockets and send their proxies to wage war. Not good. Iran’s neighbors have paid a heavy toll for the region’s [regime’s] agenda of aggression and expansion. That is why so many countries in the Middle East strongly supported my decision to withdraw the United States from the horrible 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal and re-impose nuclear sanctions. The Iran deal was a windfall for Iran’s leaders. In the years since the deal was reached, Iran’s military budget grew nearly 40 percent. The dictatorship used the funds to build nuclear-capable missiles, increase internal repression, finance terrorism, and fund havoc and slaughter in Syria and Yemen. The United States has launched a campaign of economic pressure to deny the regime the funds it needs to advance its bloody agenda. Last month, we began re-imposing hard-hitting nuclear sanctions that had been lifted under the Iran deal. Additional sanctions will resume November 5th, and more will follow. And we’re working with countries that import Iranian crude oil to cut their purchases substantially.

175

We cannot allow the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism to possess the planet’s most dangerous weapons. We cannot allow a regime that chants “Death to America,” and that threatens Israel with annihilation, to possess the means to deliver a nuclear warhead to any city on Earth. Just can’t do it. We ask all nations to isolate Iran’s regime as long as its aggression continues. And we ask all nations to support Iran’s people as they struggle to reclaim their religious and righteous destiny. This year, we also took another significant step forward in the Middle East. In recognition of every sovereign state to determine its own capital, I moved the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. The United States is committed to a future of peace and stability in the region, including peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. That aim is advanced, not harmed, by acknowledging the obvious facts. America’s policy of principled realism means we will not be held hostage to old dogmas, discredited ideologies, and so-called experts who have been proven wrong over the years, time and time again. This is true not only in matters of peace but in matters of prosperity. We believe that trade must be fair and reciprocal. The United States will not be taken advantage of any longer. For decades, the United States opened its economy — the largest, by far, on Earth — with few conditions. We allowed foreign goods from all over the world to flow freely across our borders. Yet, other countries did not grant us fair and reciprocal access to their markets in return. Even worse, some countries abused their openness to dump their products, subsidize their goods, target our industries, and manipulate their currencies to gain an unfair advantage over our country. As a result, our trade deficit ballooned to nearly $800 billion a year. 176

For this reason, we are systematically renegotiating broken and bad trade deals. Last month, we announced a groundbreaking U.S.-Mexico trade agreement. And just yesterday, I stood with President Moon to announce the successful completion of the brand new U.S.-Korea trade deal. And this is just the beginning. Many nations in this hall will agree that the world trading system is in dire need of change. For example, countries were admitted to the World Trade Organization that violates every single principle on which the organization is based. While the United States and many other nations play by the rules, these countries use government-run industrial planning and state-owned enterprises to rig the system in their favor. They engage in relentless product dumping, forced technology transfer, and the theft of intellectual property. The United States lost over 3 million manufacturing jobs, nearly a quarter of all steel jobs, and 60,000 factories after China joined the WTO. And we have racked up $13 trillion in trade deficits over the last two decades. But those days are over. We will no longer tolerate such abuse. We will not allow our workers to be victimized, our companies to be cheated, and our wealth to be plundered and transferred. America will never apologize for protecting its citizens. The United States has just announced tariffs on another $200 billion in Chinese-made goods for a total, so far, of $250 billion. I have great respect and affection for my friend, President Xi, but I have made clear our trade imbalance is just not acceptable. China’s market distortions and the way they deal cannot be tolerated. As my administration has demonstrated, America will always act in our national interest.

177

I spoke before this body last year and warned that the U.N. Human Rights Council had become a grave embarrassment to this institution, shielding egregious human rights abusers while bashing America and its many friends. Our Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, laid out a clear agenda for reform, but despite reported and repeated warnings, no action at all was taken. So the United States took the only responsible course: We withdrew from the Human Rights Council, and we will not return until real reform is enacted. For similar reasons, the United States will provide no support in recognition to the International Criminal Court. As far as America is concerned, the ICC has no jurisdiction, no legitimacy, and no authority. The ICC claims near-universal jurisdiction over the citizens of every country, violating all principles of justice, fairness, and due process. We will

never

surrender

America’s

sovereignty

to

an

unelected,

unaccountable, global bureaucracy. America is governed by Americans. We reject the ideology of globalism, and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism. Around the world, responsible nations must defend against threats to sovereignty not just from global governance, but also from other, new forms of coercion and domination. In America, we believe strongly in energy security for ourselves and for our allies. We have become the largest energy producer anywhere on the face of the Earth. The United States stands ready to export our abundant, affordable supply of oil, clean coal, and natural gas.

178

OPEC and OPEC nations, are, as usual, ripping off the rest of the world, and I don’t like it. Nobody should like it. We defend many of these nations for nothing, and then they take advantage of us by giving us high oil prices. Not good. We want them to stop raising prices, we want them to start lowering prices, and they must contribute substantially to military protection from now on. We are not going to put up with it — these horrible prices — much longer. Reliance on a single foreign supplier can leave a nation vulnerable to extortion and intimidation. That is why we congratulate European states, such as Poland, for leading the construction of a Baltic pipeline so that nations are not dependent on Russia to meet their energy needs. Germany will become totally dependent on Russian energy if it does not immediately change course. Here in the Western Hemisphere, we are committed to maintaining our independence from the encroachment of expansionist foreign powers. It has been the formal policy of our country since President Monroe that we reject the interference of foreign nations in this hemisphere and our affairs. The United States has recently strengthened our laws to better screen foreign investments in our country for national security threats, and we welcome cooperation with countries in this region and around the world that wish to do the same. You need to do it for your protection. The United States is also working with partners in Latin America to confront threats to sovereignty from uncontrolled migration. Tolerance for human struggling and human smuggling and trafficking is not humane. It is a horrible thing that’s going on, at levels that nobody has ever seen before. It’s very, very cruel.

179

Illegal immigration funds criminal networks, ruthless gangs, and the flow of deadly drugs. Illegal immigration exploits vulnerable populations that hurts hardworking citizens and has produced a vicious cycle of crime, violence, and poverty. Only by upholding national borders, destroying criminal gangs, can we break this cycle and establish a real foundation for prosperity. We recognize the right of every nation in this room to set its immigration policy in accordance with its national interests, just as we ask other countries to respect our own right to do the same — which we are doing. That is one reason the United States will not participate in the new Global Compact on Migration. Migration should not be governed by an international body unaccountable to our own citizens. Ultimately, the only long-term solution to the migration crisis is to help people build more hopeful futures in their home countries. Make their countries great again. Currently, we are witnessing a human tragedy, as an example, in Venezuela. More than 2 million people have fled the anguish inflicted by the socialist Maduro regime and its Cuban sponsors. Not long ago, Venezuela was one of the wealthiest countries on Earth. Today, socialism has bankrupted the oil-rich nation and driven its people into abject poverty. Virtually everywhere socialism or communism has been tried; it has produced suffering, corruption, and decay. Socialism’s thirst for power leads to expansion, incursion, and oppression. All nations of the world should resist socialism and the misery that it brings to everyone. In that spirit, we ask the nations gathered here to join us in calling for the restoration of democracy in Venezuela. Today, we are announcing

180

additional sanctions against the repressive regime, targeting Maduro’s inner circle and close advisors. We are grateful for all the work the United Nations does around the world to help people build better lives for themselves and their families. The United States is the world’s largest giver in the world, by far, of foreign aid. But few give anything to us. That is why we are taking a hard look at U.S. foreign assistance. That will be headed up by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. We will examine what is working, what is not working, and whether the countries who receive our dollars and our protection also have our interests at heart. Moving forward, we are only going to give foreign aid to those who respect us and, frankly, are our friends. And we expect other countries to pay their fair share for the cost of their defense. The United States is committed to making the United Nations more effective and accountable. I have said many times that the United Nations has unlimited potential. As part of our reform effort, I have told our negotiators that the United States will not pay more than 25 percent of the U.N. peacekeeping budget. This will encourage other countries to step up, get involved, and also share in this very large burden. And we are working to shift more of our funding from assessed contributions to voluntary so that we can target American resources to the programs with the best record of success. Only when each of us does our part and contributes our share can we realize the U.N.’s highest aspirations. We must pursue peace without fear, hope without despair, and security without apology. Looking around this hall where so much history has transpired, we think of the many before us who have come here to address the challenges of their nations and of their times. And our thoughts turn to the same 181

question that ran through all their speeches and resolutions, through every word and every hope. It is the question of what kind of world will we leave for our children and what kind of nations they will inherit. The dreams that fill this hall today are as diverse as the people who have stood at this podium and as varied as the countries represented right here in this body are. It really is something. It is a great, great history. There is India, a free society over a billion people, successfully lifting countless millions out of poverty and into the middle class. There is Saudi Arabia, where King Salman and the Crown Prince are pursuing bold new reforms. There is Israel, proudly celebrating its 70th anniversary as a thriving democracy in the Holy Land. In Poland, great people are standing up for their independence, their security, and their sovereignty. Many countries are pursuing their own unique visions, building their own hopeful futures, and chasing their own wonderful dreams of destiny, of legacy, and home. The whole world is richer; humanity is better, because of this beautiful constellation of nations, each very special, each very unique, and each shining brightly in its part of the world. In each one, we see an awesome promise of a people bound together by a shared past and working toward a common future. As for Americans, we know what kind of future we want for ourselves. We know what kind of a nation America must always be. In America, we believe in the majesty of freedom and the dignity of the individual. We believe in self-government and the rule of law. And we

182

prize the culture that sustains our liberty – a culture built on strong families, deep faith, and fierce independence. We celebrate our heroes, we treasure our traditions, and above all, we love our country. Inside everyone in this great chamber today, and everyone listening all around the globe, there is the heart of a patriot that feels the same powerful love for your nation, the same intense loyalty to your homeland. The passion that burns in the hearts of patriots and the souls of nations has inspired reform and revolution, sacrifice and selflessness, scientific breakthroughs, and magnificent works of art. Our task is not to erase it, but to embrace it. To build with it. To draw on its ancient wisdom. And to find within it the will to make our nations greater, our regions safer, and the world better. To unleash this incredible potential in our people, we must defend the foundations that make it all possible. Sovereign and independent nations are the only vehicle where freedom has ever survived, democracy has ever endured, or peace has ever prospered. And so we must protect our sovereignty and our cherished independence above all. When we do, we will find new avenues for cooperation unfolding before us. We will find a new passion for peacemaking rising within us. We will find a new purpose, new resolve, and new spirit flourishing all around us and making this a more beautiful world in which to live. So together, let us choose a future of patriotism, prosperity, and pride. Let us choose peace and freedom over domination and defeat. And let us come here to this place to stand for our people and their nations, forever strong, forever sovereign, forever just, and forever thankful for the grace and the goodness and the glory of God. Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the nations of the world. Thank you very much. Thank you. 183

Agamben, G. (1998) Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Series: Meridian: Crossing Aesthetics. Barnet, R. and Cavanagh, J. (1994). Global Dreams: Imperial Corporations and the New World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster. Bell, D. (2000). The End of Ideology: On the Exhaustion of Political Ideas in the Fifties. Harvard University Press. Bello, W. (2005). Deglobalization: Ideas for a New World Economy. Zed Books. Berger, P. and Luckmann, T. (1966), The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books. Berger, P. (1999). The Desecularization of the World: A Global Overview. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Blair, G. (2015). The Trumps: Three Generations of Builders and a Presidential Candidate. New York: Simon & Schuster. Burlinski, C. (2008). There is No Alternative: Why Margaret Thatcher Matters. New York: Basic Books. Buchanan, P. (2004). Where the Right Went Wrong: How Neoconservatives Subverted the Reagan Revolution and Highjacked the Bush Presidency. New York: Thomas Dunne Books. Butler, J. (2005). Undoing Gender. Routledge. Butler, J. (2011). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Routledge. Casanova, J. (1994). Public Religions in the Modern World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Coultier, A. (2016). In Trump We Trust. New York: Penguin Random House.

184

Dorrien, G. (1993). The Neoconservative Mind: Politics, Culture, and the of Ideology. Temple University Press. Dorrien, G. (2004). Imperial Designs. Neoconservatism and the New Pax Americana. New York: Routledge. Dunoff, Jeffrey and Trachtman, Joel (2009). Ruling the World? Constitutionalism, International Law and Global Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Foucault, M. (2008). The Birth of Biopolitics. Lectures at the College De France 1978-79. NY: Palgrave MacMillan. Friedman, T. (2017). Understanding Globalization. The Lexus and the Olive Tree. New York: Farrar, Straus Giroux. Fukuyama, F. (2006). America at the crossroads: democracy, power, and the neoconservative legacy. Yale University Press. Fukuyama, F. (2007). After Neoconservatism. New York Times, 19 Feb 2006. Fukuyama, F. (2017). America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neoconservative Legacy. Yale University Press. Gingrich, N. (2017). Understanding Trump. New York: Center Street. Goldstein, N. (2007). Globalization and Free Trade. New York: Infobase Publishing. Gauchet, M. (1997). The Disenchantment of the World: A Political History of Religion. Princeton University Press. Greenspan, A. (2007). The Age of Turbulence. New York: The Penguin Press. Habermas, Jurgen (2008). Notes on post-secular society. New Perspectives Quarterly, 25/4. Hagen, J. and Welker, M. (2014). Money as God? The Monetization of the Market and its Impact on Religion, Politics, Law, and Ethics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,

185

Harvey, David (2005). A Brief History of Neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press. Heffernan, R. (2001). New Labour and Thatcherism: Political change in Britain. London Palgrave Macmillan Hoeveler, D. (1991). Watch on the Right. University of Wisconsin Press. Johnston, D. (2016). The Making of Donald Trump. New York: First Melville House Printing, Jones, D. (2012). Masters of the Universe. Hayek, Friedman, and the Birth of Neoliberal Politics. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Judis, John B. (1995). Trotskyism to Anachronism. The Neoconservative Revolution. - in Foreign Affairs, July/August 1995. Kagan, R. (2008). Neocon Nation: Neoconservatism. – in: World Affairs. Kelsen, H. (1945). General Theory of Law and State. New York: Russel & Russel. Klein, N. The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Picador, 2008. Kristol W., Kagan R. (1996). Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy. – in: Foreign Affairs, July/August 1996. Lilla, M. (2017). The Once and Future Liberal: After Identity Politics. New York: HarperCollins. Milanovich, B. (2016). Global Inequality. A New Approach for the Age of Globalization. Cambridge, MS: Harvard University Press. Miller, D. (2010). How Neoliberalism Got Where It Is: Elite Planning, Corporate Lobbying and the Release of the Free Market. – In: Birch, Kean, and Mykhenko, Vlad. The Rise and Fall of Neoliberalism. London & New York. Zed Books. Mirowski, Ph. and Plehwe, D. (2009). The Road from Mont Perelin. The Making of the Neoliberal Thought Collective. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

186

Phillips, P. (2018). Giants. The Global Power Elite. New York: A Seven Stories Press. Podhoretz, N. (1996). Neoconservatism: A Eulogy. – in: Commentary, March 1, 1996. Pollak, J. and Schweikart, L. (2017). How Trump Won. The Inside Story of a Revolution. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing. Rodrik, D. (2011). The Globalization Paradox. Why Global Markets, States, and Democracy Can’t Coexist. New York: Oxford University Press. Rothkopf, D. (2008). Superclass. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux. Savage, M. (2017). Trump’s War. His Battle for America. New York: Centre Street. Shapiro, B. (2013). Bullies: How the Left's Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silenced America. Threshold Editions. Schmitt, C. (2008). Constitutional Theory. Duke University Press. Slobodian, Q. (2018). Globalists: The End of Empire and the Birth of Neoliberalism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Steger, M. and Roy, R. (2010). Neoliberalism. A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. Steger, M. (2009). Globalisms. NY: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Steigerwald, D. (1994). Wilsonian Idealism in America. Cornell University Press. Stepan, A. (2012). Religion, Democracy, and the „Twin Tolerations.” – In: Rethinking Religion and World Affairs. Oxford University Press. Stone, R. (2017). The Making of the President 2016. How Donald Trump Orchestrated A Revolution. New York: Skyhorse Publishing. Tеubner, G. (1993). Law as an Autopoietic System. Oxford/Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers, European University Institute Series. Trump, D.J. (2000). The America We Deserve. New York: Macmillan. Trump, D.J. (2011). Time to Get Tough: make America great again. New York: Regnery Publishing. 187

Trump, D.J. (2015). Crippled America: How to Make America Great Again. New York: Threshold Editions. Trump, D.J. (2016). Great Again; How to Fix Our Crippled America. New York: Simon and Schuster. Tsekov, B. (2015). TTIP – Rule of Law or Rule of Corporate Interests. – In: Government Gazette. Vaïsse, J. (2010). Neoconservatism: The Biography of a Movement. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Williamson, J. (2008). A Short History of the Washington Consensus. - In: The Washington Consensus Reconsidered Towards a New Global Governance. Oxford University Press. Williams, M. (2011). Colorblind Ideology Is a Form of Racism. – in: Psychology Today. Zucca, L. (2012). A Secular Europe. Law and Religion in the European Constitutional Landscape. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Бек, У. (2001). Что такое глобализация. Москва: Прогресс-Традиция. Близнашки, Г. (2018). Конституцията – същност, върховенство. София: УИ „Св.Климент Охридски“.

функции,

Джонсън, П. (1993). Съвремеността - светът от 20-те до 90-те. София: УИ "Св. Климент Охридски". Ремонд, Р. (2006). Религия и общество в Европа. С.: ЛИК Цеков, Б. (2011). Ню Йорк – олтарът на модерния свят. София: Сиела. Цеков, Б. (2017). Съвременни конституционни модели на държавноцърковни отношения. - Съвременно право.

188

Borislav Tsekov is a constitutional lawyer and political analyst. He graduated from the Faculty of Law of Sofia University "St. Kliment Ohridski" and has studied also in the USA at the Harvard University, Belgium, Japan, South Africa. Currently a Member of the Legal Council of the President of the Republic of Bulgaria and member of the Consultative Council on Constitutional Affairs with the national ombudsman. He served as a Legal Advisor to the Bulgarian Parliament

(1996-2001),

elected

Member

of

Parliament

(2001-2005),

Ombudsman's secretary-general (2005-2010), National President of the World Jurist Association (1999-2015). Founder of the Institute of Modern Politics in 2009 – a Sofia-based think-tank awarded Second Place “Think-Tank of the Year 2012” by Prospect Magazine, UK. He is the author of legal research publications on constitutional law, as well as many analyzes on political and legislative issues. Author of the books (in Bulgarian) New York - the Altar of the Modern World (2011), Anti-Jewish Legislation in Europe and Bulgaria during WWII (2015), and The Trump Doctrine (2017).

189