Trump est-il une trump card ?

Trump est-il une trump card ?

Une de nos lectrices nous ayant demandé ce que dedefensa.org pensait de la candidature présidentielle du milliardaire Donald Trump, – qui n’en est pas à sa première tentative, – nous répondrons que nous ne savons (pas encore?) quoi penser sinon qu’une telle candidature ne peut en aucun cas être pire que toutes les autres réunies, et que l’extraordinaire incertitude de l’époque peut susciter des surprises. Trump est un “super-riche” (capital de $4,1 milliards), ce qui conduit finalement à une sorte de vertu puisqu’il s’agit de l’indépendance du candidat à l’égard de tout donateur, pouvoir d’intérêt, etc., et que Trump financera lui-même sa campagne. Autre vertu, l’establishment ne l’aime pas du tout, comme le signale l’appréciation du New York Daily New du pro-israélien Mort Zuckerman (la candidature Trump est “une blague” et Trump “un clown”). Les neocons le détestent parce qu’il a de bonnes relations avec Poutine et que son discours le rapproche d’un Pat Buchanan, populiste, un tantinet isolationniste et pas loin d’être protectionniste, soit un anti-globaliste (Trump n'aime pas les traités TPP et TTIP) et un adversaire décidé du multiculturalisme et de l’immigration (Trump a des plans grandioses pour boucler la frontière Sud des USA).

Trump est candidat pour les primaires républicaines (il le fut déjà en 1996 et n’y fut pas ridicule). Éventuellement, on pourrait croire que dans l’uniformité extraordinairement médiocre et corrompue de la politique US, Trump pourrait amener un peu de désordre bienvenu, de type antiSystème, au milieu du duel annoncé Hillary Clinton-Jeb Bush. S’il voit que le Politburo du parti républicain veut lui barrer la route, il peut choisir d’être candidat indépendant. Une analogie à cet égard est celle du milliardaire Ross Perrot, qui obtint un résultat remarquable de 18% de voix en 1992 comme candidat indépendant. Le temps d’alors était celui d’un désarroi US prononcé (“une crise d’identité”, écrivait William Pfaff), mais à des années-lumière du désordre de la Grande Crise générale d’aujourd’hui qui peut faire naître des circonstances exceptionnelles. Dans UNZ.com, Ilina Mercer fait un portrait somme toute flatteur de Trump, ce 19 juin 2015.

«...Trump claims he opposed the invasion of Iraq. If this is true, it would make him better than almost all his Republican competitors, who mulishly continue to justify the most disastrous military campaign in American history (besides the War Between The States). Decisive and to the point was Trump about liberalizing ties with Cuba: “It’s time!” he stated. The man who wrote “The Art of The Deal,” however, would rather a “deal” with Cuba favored ordinary Americans and Cubans, and would know how to “deliver the goods.” We inhabit a world of managed, not free, trade. Trump is no rent-seeking political rat like every other Republican competing for the throne (besides Ben Carson, who is similarly motivated). Better than any self-interested politician, Trump can probably negotiate winning deals on all Treaties in Force, to the benefit of Americans.

»“I’m really rich,” Trump swanked disarmingly. Being independently and stupendously wealthy means that this American individualist can continue to march to his own drumbeat; be as blunt and bold as he wants and pander to nobody. “His fellow GOP presidential candidates,” explained Trump, are “totally controlled by their donors, by the lobbyists and by the special interests. If we have another politician, this country’s going down. … I’ve watched the politicians, I’ve dealt with them all my life. They will never make America great again. They don’t even have a chance.”

»In the productive, non-parasitical economy, Trump has been enormously successful. Career politicians have created the hot mess that is America. The Founding Fathers wanted regular citizens to serve the public, not live off it as a vocation. Such upstanding Americans were to return to their careers after serving. The consummate homo economicus, Trump is a rational actor in the market place. Unlike the rest of the GOP contenders who’re guided by political calculations; Trump speaks like a man to whom rational economic choices are second nature. And so he gets that the “stock market is bloated”; that the Stock Exchange is a laughing stock, and that soaring stock prices are a consequence of centrally planned, monetary stimulus.

»The business mogul surprised Bill O’Reilly with the revelation that he’d “have a great relationship with Vladimir Putin.” This is a good thing. Whereas in the past, Trump was motivated by the sense that the nimbus of great power that surrounds the U.S. was dissipating—he now seems prepared to search closer to home for the causes of America’s economic inertia. Also to O’Reilly, Trump “promised to build a wall along the southern border and make Mexico pay for it. ‘The Factor’ host stated that there’s no way they will pay for it.” Although Bill is likelier than Dana Perino to comprehend the workings of tax and trade policy, Trump opted to calm the host down: “You have to let me handle that. They will pay for the wall, and the wall will go up.” D.C. insider Perino hit the roof: “On what planet is that actually true? Do you think you can make Mexico pay for a permanent wall between Mexico and the United States?” You can do that?”

»A guide to the perpetually perplexed: Trump must be thinking of taking the populist path advocated by Pat Buchanan, whose patriotism is unimpeachable: tariffs. Levying a tariff on Mexico could indeed pay for a wall. Trade tariffs are not this libertarian’s bag. But walling off the deluge of Democrats crossing the southwest border is...»

Mis en ligne le 20 juin 2015 à 11H46