Terri, all the above of course is true and it is often remarked that Trump is trying to destroy America, and, at present it seems he will succeed.

I am attempting to understand those going along with Trump but the answer may simply be what they are getting out of it. If you have a portion of a ruined economy you are still better off than the person next to you who, because they resisted Trump, may have little or nothing at all.

You made several interesting points in that positive actions are being subject to ideological interpretation, women's rights, in fact all the improvements seen by Trump from the time when he was a child. As an entitled youth and man, he did not have to be aware of women's feelings, nor was he charged with seeing women as something other than sex objects. I imagine he will attempt to degrade women taking away rights and power.

I am uncertain of the reasons for some of his actions except through actions taken by Putin, which were similar in nature and ended up with giving men the right to hit their wives-Putin and the Russian church together.

This will go on several sites as this deals with accusations against Trump of pedophilia within the Epstein group.

Trump KILLS HIS TERM with MAJOR BLUNDER in WAR

the information is at the end but deals with homeless girls in his Florida home.

Terri

I cannot agree with you more but psychiatric versions of damage are just one affecting at best nervous systems and elements of behaviour. As a tool for understanding human nature it is inadequate. Equally for human responses. It anyway pivots on the negative, whereby other viewpoints pivot on the positive. It is a tool I know a great deal about, eagerly rejecting it as both authoritarian and limited. Psychiatry owes far too much to individual and group subjectivity drugs and invasive treatments to be a science.

That the successes of authoritarian actions seems to have a particularly strong impact on human developments I think is the case. This may simply be connected to lesser or lower rationialising to do with power, something that has been largely investigated through sociology. Simply I accept your premise on the greater damage but not the means of rectifyng that damage. Using one authoritarian ideology to overthrow the damaging effects of another seems a bad idea to me.

Mr. Trump may well become the Gorbachov of the USA if there is not more insight into the complicated interrelationships of the world system.

Stephen,

He has none but nor do those he represents. Creating a war between migrants and pure blooded Americans could end up damaging America even more. Trump is looking for small wars involving not just the small nations surrounding USA but identified elements within. Lefties, non-Maga, anyone imposing ethical standards and appropriate conduct.

Why Gorbachov though?

Mr. Gorbachev has ruined the Soviet Union; Mr. Trump, with his disruptive strategies, can achieve the same result with the USA. Stanley Wilkin Of course, it is not the same agenda, but leading a world power without knowledge of political economy is always disastrous. Gorbachev=katastroika; Trump=catastrump.

Stephen,

Interesting. But I cannot see that Putin and the other one Boris Yeltsin did any better.

Stephen your views on this would be welcome.

Drawing parallels between Gorbachev’s reforms and potential impacts of Trump’s strategies, emphasizes the importance of understanding political economy in leadership. Comparing “katastroika” and “catastrump” captures the idea that leadership decisions—whether in the Soviet Union or the USA—can have profound and sometimes destabilizing consequences if not carefully managed. It highlights the significance of informed governance and the potential risks when economic and political complexities are overlooked.