this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2025
1088 points (98.8% liked)

News

36909 readers
2609 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 110 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Fascists are nothing if not predictable. Tariffs arise naturally from far-right ultranationalism. There's a few reasons for this.

One is that it plays directly into notions of national/racial exceptionalism. "Our country/race is better than all the rest. Other nations/races should have to pay exorbitant fees just to do business with us."

Second is that it severs ties with international mechanisms of diplomacy and peacekeeping. It serves as a convenient way to detach a state from its allies (who stand in the way of its conquests). This is typified by events like the Japanese Empire's withdrawal from the League of Nations, in that case not over tariffs but a war of conquest, but tariffs can provide similar opportunities to break apart treaties and start preparing a populace for the conditions of all out war.

Thirdly is that it stops trade with other nations. This forces manufacturing facilities to be bolstered in the nation, isolationism. This means that once all-out war is declared, the nation has the full-scale production facilities to create machines of war at the pace required to sustain large-scale conflicts. This creates the precarious situation of having more production than you do resources (because you can't trade for them anymore), but this problem is solved by conquering territories rich in natural resources.

And fourth, it serves as a direct prelude to declaring all out war. Trade wars are nearly always present prior to full-scale conflicts in modern history. Both Nazi Germany and the fascist Empire of Japan were widely sanctioned internationally in the years leading up to the Western, Eastern, and Pacific fronts of World War 2. These trade wars actually served fascist interests in so far as they made the lives of their citizens already feel constrained and pressured. An escalation to all-out conflict wasn't that great a change when already all their sons were being drafted and common household goods were becoming scarce and rationed.

Trump is not original. We've seen these events play out before under a variety of different circumstances. The move of economically isolating the United States from the rest of the world perfectly serves the fascist conquering aspirations of his Christian white nationalist voting base. They'll grumble about cost of goods, but they lap up his ultranationalist "making the world pay us" rhetoric like they're dying of thirst.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 23 points 11 months ago

Yup. There's a significant cost to having a war with a country you do a lot of trade with. You don't want to pay that cost while having a war at the same time. That could lead to economic collapse. It could even result in your military lacking the resources need to execute the war.

But if you sever trade beforehand, pay the costs of that first, then once your economy has stabilized you can invade other countries without risking economic collapse.

[–] some_designer_dude@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

It is tragic how society fails to realize how good they have it and start voting Right. Then the Right takes hold, treats them like shit, but tells them it’s all in the name of a bright future for them.

They see someone taking drastic action to make their lives better. That they believe him is likely due largely in part to how stupid he is (not how stupid they are).

Boring old guy trying to make progress at a snails pace is not satisfying when there’s a rich (powerful) guy seemingly trying to fight for the little people and willing to do batshit crazy things to do it.

What we need are some Leftist fascists, I guess? They need to be rich, benevolent, kind of stupid, and batshit crazy about doing what is necessary to get everyone healthcare and a living income.