A-Infos (en) France, OCL CA #353 - The Current Situation in the United States (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

The following article summarizes our introductory remarks to the debate 
on this issue held on July 15 at the OCL campsite. These remarks are 
largely based on a longer article published in issue 23 of Temps 
Critiques, entitled "United States: Political Revolution and Chaotic 
Reorganization at the Summit of Capitalism." ---- Priority to Politics 
---- Trump's second presidency is undoubtedly poised to disrupt many 
areas of social and political life in the United States. Rather than go 
into detail, let us limit ourselves here to addressing the most 
important aspects from our perspective (leaving aside that of 
international politics), especially those that pose theoretical or 
practical problems for currents that claim to challenge the social 
order. How should we interpret the Trump phenomenon? According to some, 
American society is heading straight for dictatorship or even fascism; 
Or they point out that the regime has just revealed itself openly 
oligarchic (as evidenced by the presence of major tech figures at the 
new president's inauguration ceremony). Others, on the contrary, point 
to the many elements of continuity with past presidencies, both 
Democratic and Republican: from the presence in all governments of 
representatives of major banks to unilateralism in foreign policy (one 
notable exception being the demonization of Putin), to the expulsions of 
illegal immigrants, which reached a record level under Obama that Trump 
is now obsessed with matching.

The problem is that both "maximalists" and "minimalists" are partly 
right. We are indeed witnessing an essentially political revolution, 
that is, one that does not fundamentally alter the distribution of power 
or wealth, but which raises a host of questions rarely considered by 
revolutionary currents. It is regularly asserted in our circles, for 
example, that governments are all in the service of capital. But if 
that's the case, what about the accusation of an oligarchic regime 
formed under Trump? While Trump has certainly appointed a record number 
of billionaires to key positions, isn't this rather a sign of crony 
capitalism? It's not the Silicon Valley "barons" who hold power; some 
are currently subjected to a degree of arbitrariness, even racketeering, 
never before seen. With the law just passed by Congress, the government 
has simply bought the goodwill of the business community with a tired 
rehash of the same old rhetoric preached by the Republican Party since 
the 1980s (deregulation, tax cuts, etc.).

Frustrated by conflicts with senior officials during his first term, 
Trump, who intends to wield undivided power, has taken care this time to 
assemble a perfectly cohesive team, even if it means surrounding himself 
with incompetent staff (recruited, notably, from among Fox News 
anchors). He has also succeeded in imposing a level of party discipline 
on Republican elected officials that is unprecedented in the country's 
history. As for the judiciary, thanks to his appointments and those of 
his Republican predecessors, the Supreme Court is unlikely to give him 
much trouble. Finally, even when lower court judges rule against the 
government, the latter tends to drag its feet, to appeal, to argue that 
it is not up to the authorities to uphold the law, but rather up to the 
citizen to file a complaint when they feel their rights have not been 
respected.

So it is indeed politics that prevails today. Consider the infamous 
customs duties that have generated so much discussion. No serious 
economist believes in Trump's current approach, and while some sectors 
of the economy might welcome some protection, to our knowledge, no 
significant fraction of American capital supports the idea of imposing 
import tariffs across the board (especially not against allied countries 
or countries with which the United States does not have a trade 
deficit), much less using them to punish Brazil for bringing Bolsonaro 
to justice. The idea is to show who's boss at all times, like the mafia. 
Tariffs are a dogma Trump has firmly believed in since his youth.

This prioritization of politics is evident everywhere: in the attacks on 
universities (too left-wing), the weather service (too supportive of 
theories of human-caused global warming), federal jobs (a source of 
votes for the Democratic Party), museums, and scientific research 
(ideologically suspect). This is leading to cuts in resources and 
personnel at a time when, like previous administrations, Trump's is 
convinced that the country must redouble its efforts in the face of 
Chinese competition. Are we therefore dealing with a "rational" response 
to this supposed threat? A "ruling class" that has reflected on the 
issues and is acting in its best interests? Rather, we have the 
impression that we are witnessing an empowerment of the political sphere 
and, more specifically, of the rigid system of electoral competition 
between the two rival parties, which constitutes what passes for 
democracy in the United States.

Anti-immigrant demagoguery
One aspect of this system is precisely what some denounce as populism, 
but which would be more accurately called demagoguery. In this case, 
Trump and his cronies have understood the usefulness of politically 
exploiting the influx of migrants at the Mexican border, which is very 
real and at times massive enough to begin to worry a significant portion 
of the population. There is xenophobia there, as elsewhere in the world, 
but let's beware of falling prey to the generic explanations we 
regularly read in right-thinking newspapers (such as "rejection of 
otherness"). In the November 2024 election, Trump was able to score well 
in border counties populated largely by individuals who themselves have 
Mexican immigrant backgrounds and are proud of it, because he promised 
to limit the chaotic arrivals of newcomers in municipalities where 
social and health services were already overloaded.

The government is thus banking on mass deportations of illegal 
immigrants. Yet the flow of migrants is tending to dry up (negative net 
immigration is even predicted for 2025, something unheard of in half a 
century), while the falling birth rate, although it began later than in 
Europe, is now a reality and the unemployment rate remains very low. 
This is therefore a policy that is harming a growing number of sectors 
of the economy: having been unable to make many arrests in the border 
areas, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) police have been 
ordered to organize raids throughout the country. ICE is now by far the 
most powerful repressive force in the country, a sort of private police 
force for the White House. Once again, it's hard to believe that the 
"interests of capital" would dictate a campaign of raids in strawberry 
fields in full harvest, slaughterhouses, garment factories, hotels and 
restaurants, and on construction sites-all sectors that employ large 
numbers of undocumented immigrants.

Would it at least pay off in terms of demagogy? Apparently, less and 
less so, especially since the spectacular and "performative" ICE attacks 
in Los Angeles in early June, which ended up shaking even Trump's loyal 
supporters.

The response to these attacks was very encouraging but still relatively 
small in a county of 10 million people, and it's strange to note that, 
on certain points, Fox News and Monday Morning seem to agree. According 
to Fox, Los Angeles was a city on fire and blood (with looped footage of 
five self-driving cars in flames), and was moreover given over to 
"invaders," given the occasional foreign flag; Victor Artola's otherwise 
highly relevant article, published in issue 480 of Lundi Matin, speaks 
of a "massive uprising" and the "end of assimilation" of immigrants.

However, the figures tell us otherwise. Undocumented immigrants, about 
5% of the population, work where there is a labor shortage; this is the 
case for more than 40% of agricultural workers. There is, of course, 
talk of artificial intelligence as a future solution, but this is hardly 
applicable to masons, roofers, or, for the moment, strawberry pickers. 
Let's not forget that Trump claims to want to reindustrialize a country 
where manufacturers are already struggling to recruit. It should also be 
noted that Hispanics now represent nearly a quarter of the youth 
population nationwide, and much more in cities like Los Angeles, New 
York, and Chicago. Finally, they have a high rate of intermarriage, a 
fairly reliable sign of... assimilation. To designate them as the 
internal enemy, as Trump has done, is to fight an absurd rearguard action.

A Reality TV Showman
Two related questions remain to be addressed: the root causes of this 
new regime and the rather limited reactions it has provoked. Some, 
generally with a Marxist background, emphasize the weakness of 
capitalist accumulation in recent decades as an explanation for 
America's political and social disruption and international tensions. 
This thesis is arguably valid, except that, despite the rise of China 
and the end of the absolute hegemony once enjoyed by the United States, 
American capital has lost none of its central place in the global 
"empire." One need only observe the current massive influx of capital 
into the field of artificial intelligence to be convinced of this. 
Rather, it is the stagnation of Japan and Europe that deserves to be 
highlighted.

On the other hand, the population of the country at the heart of this 
empire has had to endure far more extreme upheavals for decades than in 
old Europe, not to mention the impact of several lost wars on the 
physical and psychological health of its inhabitants. The Democrats, 
just as pro-capitalist as the Republicans, have stopped even pretending 
to be the party of workers and have reinvented themselves as defenders 
of minorities, plunging into an almost comical escalation of wokeness, 
while appealing to the wealthy to finance their election campaigns. They 
will not have been forgiven for bailing out the banks after the 2008 
crisis; the right-wing populism that emerged from it brought a reality 
TV show swindler to power, twice.

At first, the "people of the left" were stunned, but ultimately 
organized the largest day of mobilization in the country's history on 
June 14th (approximately 2% of the population reportedly participated). 
This may, of course, not go beyond a dress rehearsal before the midterm 
elections in November 2026, but it was indeed the expression of a spirit 
of revolt against despotism. The same goes for the mobilizations against 
ICE, which are continuing and spreading across the country. While we are 
far removed from the patterns of class conflict that have long 
constituted the common language of radical circles in Europe, the 
American population is nonetheless not docile. Faced with the 
inconsistencies and excesses of the team in power, we can bet that the 
situation will not stabilize anytime soon. One last point. We have an 
idea of what activism is like in a pre-modern country where bourgeois 
democracy, which we have always denounced, is struggling to take root. 
But what does it mean to be an activist today in one of the countries 
most representative of the history of this same democracy and which, 
while flouting its founding principles, is turning its back on a large 
part of the heritage of the Enlightenment?

Larry Cohen, August 21, 2025

Note: The subheadings are from the Journal Commission

http://oclibertaire.lautre.net/spip.php?article4522
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en