He's filling his cabinet with hawks, he brags to the world that America "is back in the game" aka bombing people in the Middle East and fighting wars for Israel, he thinks Russia is the #1 enemy instead of China (hmm wonder why that is), he also wants wants Antony Blinken for SoS, known warmonger. Not to when both him and Biden proposed their psychotic plans to partition Iraq.
So will Biden end up being more interventionist than Obama?
Trump has bombed A LOT in the Middle East. I've heard this recurring "NO NEW WARS!" theme from Trump supporters time and time again, as if he were a pacificst. He isn't. In fact, he's broken records for bombing Afghanistan and Yemen.
The Trump base anti-war movement isn’t about bringing “peace” to people in other countries and respecting their lives and sovereignty though. They don’t care, just like democrats don’t too. You miss the point if you think they care whether Trump is a pacifist.
It is an anti-war movement with more nationalist arguments, such as protecting lives of Americans instead of unnecessarily risking their lives for nothing and also focusing more on internal issues than wasting time and money doing stuff in other places. Goes back to their “America First” slogan and calls to bring troops back to the country.
Don’t worry, it doesn’t sound that confusing to me to try to understand. I can at least get a sense of how it went down. Before it happened, when the debate was framed within lines of “Intervention/war = Protecting the US”, the nationalists were the ones more driven to support it because they really believed the nation was in danger even though Iraq had nothing to do with Bin Laden, that war actually benefited Al Qaeda goals.
Once the lies of the Bush administration became more evident, impossible to deny and the war also became more unpopular, that could’ve impacted the perception of nationalists, especially working class ones. They tend to be the ones who join military to fight in war and the paradigm shift from “I am doing this for my country which is in danger” to “I am doing this for the government and for rich elites who always explored me”, naturally this perception changed.
Same thing with globalists and internationalists, original meaning of war was “Bringing conflict to other places in the world, less global peace”, but once nationalists reacted with a push for isolationism, neoliberal leaders reacted because they benefit from these never-ending conflicts, pushing to convince their base that “Intervention/war = Cooperation with other places democracies”. These elites will always adapt their speech to what they consider to be more effective to make people do what they want in the moment.
In early 2000’s terrorism was a big thing that concerned people so naturally it appealed to nationalists, something most people are when their home is attacked. In 2020 Trump and his isolationism supposedly making the country lose its ground and relevance on the world stage is what scared lots of people so they just did the opposite thing by rehabilitating Bush/neoconservatives and pushing to keep the forever wars in order to manifest that power. Most internationalists also tend to be in bigger cities and be richer than the average, so they aren’t the ones who sacrifice themselves in big numbers. The demographics political polarization probably reflects some of these questions, or maybe not!
