With US in decline, voters who usually avoid extremes are now okay with it
Now, Trump is not the sole example of what Wolf called 'patrimony' - as opposed to liberal democracy - where rulers use jingoistic nationalism to justify limits on free speech and other human rights, attacks on independent institutions, and inward-looking economic policies promoting domestic jobs and manufacturing even if it means higher prices for consumers. Other examples of populist strongmen within a democratic framework include Recep Erdogan in Turkiye and Viktor Orban in Hungary.
But a separate event suggests that right-wing populism may not be the outcome of relative US decline. The Democratic Party primary election for the next mayor of New York was won handily by the 33-year-old (Muslim) Zohran Mamdani. New York city is overwhelmingly Democratic. So, Mamdani is bound to become the next Mayor of New York, a political position that has propelled others into the race for US president. Mamdani is the son of Mira Nair, who directed films like Salaam Bombay!, Mississippi Masala and Monsoon Wedding. His father is a distinguished anthropologist at Columbia University. He was born in Uganda and became a US citizen as recently as 2018. He beat a powerful (Christian) rival, somewhat tainted by corruption allegations, Andrew Cuomo, once governor of New York state.
Mamdani represents the extreme left, just as Trump represents the extreme right. The former is an unflinching supporter of Palestinian rights. He has promised to arrest Benjamin Netanyahu for war crimes if the latter comes to New York. Wow. Right-wing analysts and politicians have denounced Mamdani as an antisemitic supporter of terrorism. In interviews, TV anchors focused on his views on Israel, expecting to scupper his chances. Instead, he won handsomely, proving that the Israel lobby carries more weight with the rich and powerful than ordinary voters. Jews constitute almost 11% of New York's population. But that did not matter. He says many young Jews have voted for him.
Donald Trump Jr, Trump's eldest son, shared a post by 'anarchist' writer and former Fox News commentator Michael Malice a.k.a. Michael Krechmer: 'I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it,' adding his own line, 'New York City has fallen.' Elise Stefanik, one-time Trump pick for UN ambassador, branded Mamdani 'a Hamas terrorist sympathiser'. New York City councillor Vickie Paladino called Mamdani 'a known jihadi terrorist'. The reaction of New York voters has been 'So what? Let us tackle the problems of the city, not of the Middle East.'
One swallow does not make a summer. Mamdani's performance may well mean that the Democratic Party is turning left sharply. But that does not guarantee Trumpism's defeat. Democratic Party has been looking defeatist and flaccid after Trump's big victory in last year's presidential election. It has been unable to fiercely combat the president's proposals on foreign or economic policy.
US elections are typically won by centrists like Barack Obama or Joe Biden, not extremists like Bernie Sanders. But the combination of grievances highlighted by Wolf that have fuelled extremism in the Republican Party may do so in the Democratic Party, too. The next Democratic candidate for president can't be Mamdani because (like Elon Musk) he is not US-born (he was born in Kampala, Uganda), an essential condition. But look out for other leftists. The US is in relative decline, though still the strongest global power. Managing decline is difficult, as shown by ancient Greece and Rome, and more recently by Britain. Voters are not interested in being told they are still the best-off in the world. They feel the decline, and are fed up with the waffling of centrists who cannot end decline and its accompanying grievances. So, voters who normally avoid extremes are now willing to do so.
Much depends on how Trumpism works out in the next four years. Pessimists like me believe that economic growth will slow and inflation will rise in the US, dismaying voters. Despite Trump's claims, the US trade deficit will not shrink. It represents not unfair practices by others (as Trump claims), but structurally-embedded US overspending, where domestic savings are grossly inadequate to finance its investment. It requires large capital inflows from abroad, the mirror image of which is a large trade deficit. If Trump fails, an extreme left candidate like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez may be the next US president. Will India be happier with extreme leftism than Trumpism? That is unclear. Both Mamdani and Trump favour protectionism, reduced defence assistance to friends abroad, and reduced spending on international public goods (like policing sea lanes). India needs to build its economic strength fast to stand on its own feet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
How the Republican spending bill super-charges immigration enforcement
By Ted Hesson How the Republican spending bill super-charges immigration enforcement WASHINGTON, - The major tax-cut and spending bill that Republicans hope to bring to final passage in the U.S. House of Representatives this week would devote an unprecedented $170 billion to immigration enforcement, according to an analysis by the pro-immigration American Immigration Council and a Reuters review of the bill text. DETENTION The bill, which passed in the U.S. Senate on Tuesday, would provide $45 billion for immigration detention to increase from the currently funded level of a daily average of 41,500 people to at least 100,000, by far the most on record. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which administers the immigration detention system, was over its funded capacity as of June 15, with 56,000 in custody. President Donald Trump, a Republican, visited a temporary detention facility on Tuesday dubbed "Alligator Alcatraz" because of its location in the Florida Everglades, a subtropical wetland. Trump said other states could follow the same model as Florida, which quickly constructed large tents and expects reimbursement via federal emergency management funds. BORDER WALL The bill devotes $46.6 billion toward construction of a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border. During Trump's 2017-2021 presidency, his administration built about 450 miles of border barriers although much of that replaced existing structures. The entire border spans 1,954 miles . Another $5 billion would go toward upgrading U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities and checkpoints. The number of migrants caught crossing illegally has dropped to record lows since Trump took office in January. HIRING MORE OFFICERS The legislation provides $30 billion for ICE's arrest and deportation operations - more than double the $10 billion appropriated for the agency this year. The funds would pay for the hiring and training of new ICE officers. The money could also be used to ramp up arrests across the country through partnerships with state and local law enforcement. While the Senate bill does not specify how many officers, the House version of the legislation had set a level of 10,000 ICE officers over five years. ICE has about 21,000 full-time employees, according to a budget document published in June. The measure gives $4.1 billion to hire more CBP personnel, including Border Patrol agents. REIMBURSEMENTS TO STATES The bill creates a $10 billion fund to provide reimbursements for spending use to support the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's efforts to secure the border. Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, sent a letter in January to U.S. lawmakers requesting reimbursement for more than $11 billion the state spent on border security efforts. FEE INCREASES The legislation will raise fees for various immigration applications, potentially deterring or delaying some migrants from seeking legal status. The bill for the first time will create a $100 fee for an asylum application. Asylum seekers would also face a new $550 work permit fee. The American Immigration Council estimates asylum seekers would pay at least $1,150 over a five-year process to obtain asylum. Fees would also rise for programs that offer temporary legal immigration status and protection from deportation, which Trump generally opposes. People applying for Temporary Protected Status would see registration fees rise from $50 to $500. Those seeking humanitarian "parole" would have fees increase from $630 to $1,000. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
India needs to be careful after US-Vietnam deal: Experts
India needs to tread carefully in its trade negotiations with the United States, keeping in view the terms proposed under the latter's trade deal with Vietnam, trade experts say. As per the new trade pact announced by President Donald Trump , the US will impose a flat 20% tariff, besides a 40% tariff on transshipped goods from Vietnam. Beyond a deviation from the previous commitments under the 2000 US-Vietnam Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA), where Vietnamese goods were subject to 2-10% tariffs, the new deal seeks to tax transshipped goods, which differs from the rules of origin on which tariffs or duty concessions are based. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Ултрапреносими 2-в-1 таблети - 50% отстъпка в последния ден LYH Купете сега Undo "The terms are that Vietnam will pay the United States a 20% tariff on any and all goods sent into our territory, and a 40% tariff on any transshipping," Trump said in a post on X. "India needs to be cautious as these transshipment tariffs could be a different form of 'rules of origin', which could have a detrimental impact on our pharmaceutical and electronics exports where the import component is high," said trade expert Biswajit Dhar. Live Events Indian trade negotiators are in the US since last week to thrash out a deal before the July 9 deadline for an interim deal to avoid US reciprocal tariffs, but India has hardened its stance to protect its sensitivities.
India.com
2 hours ago
- India.com
Deal Or Deceit? US Pressures India To Open Farms – Is Washington Pushing A One-Sided Trade Trap?
New Delhi: The clock is ticking. Only a few days left before the July 9 deadline set by U.S. President Donald Trump. Hopes of a limited trade deal between India and the United States still linger. But the mood around the negotiating table feels anything but settled. The White House has publicly hinted that the deal is all but done. In New Delhi, officials have echoed a similar sentiment, calling the potential agreement 'big, good and beautiful'. Trump claimed it would open Indian markets to American goods. But behind closed doors, things remain tangled in tough back-and-forth. Key concerns have refused to budge. Agriculture, auto parts and steel tariffs continue to dominate the conversation. Indian negotiators have extended their stay for another round of talks. On the other side, India has made it clear that there will be no compromise on protecting farmers and dairy producers. The United States, however, keeps pushing for greater access. Time is running out. Optimism hangs in the air, but so does doubt. Experts tracking the talks believe the coming week could bring clarity. Either a small deal materialises or both sides walk away. At least for now. Agriculture remains the biggest sticking point. The United States wants access for corn, soybean and cotton. India resists. Food security and the livelihood of small farmers weigh heavily on the Indian side. Experts say India is unwilling to slash support prices or reduce public procurement. These programmes offer a safety net to millions of rural families. No cuts expected on rice, wheat or dairy tariffs. These sectors carry political risk. Over 700 million people depend on them, directly or indirectly. Rural India cannot afford shocks. A policy paper by a government think tank recently recommended tariff reductions on several U.S. agricultural goods. Rice, dairy, poultry, corn, apples, almonds and GM soy were all listed. But officials have yet to confirm if this reflects the government's official position or remains a draft proposal. Experts warn that if the United States insists on farm access as a precondition, the deal might collapse. They believe expectations from Washington may have been set without considering India's political realities. Non-tariff barriers are another headache. The United States has raised concerns over India's increasing quality control orders. More than 700 are now in place, most tied to the Make in India campaign. These rules aim to block low-grade imports and boost domestic manufacturing. But they have also made it harder for American goods to enter the Indian market. Some Indian economists have described these policies as restrictive. They argue that such controls hurt small and medium businesses by driving up compliance costs. Trade in agriculture between the two countries already stands at $8 billion. India sends rice, shrimp and spices. The U.S. ships almonds, lentils and apples. But the United States sees a trade gap of $45 billion. It wants to shrink that by exporting more farm produce. Experts fear tariff relaxations could open the door to pressure on India's support programs. The worry is not abstract. It is political, economic and rural. A mini-deal now appears more likely. Something modest. A gesture. A step forward, if not a leap. Experts suggest the agreement could include tariff cuts on industrial goods, especially in automobiles. In return, India may grant limited access for items like ethanol, raisins, olive oil and select wines. But agriculture will likely remain off-limits. No major concessions expected there. Beyond goods, Washington wants India to make big-ticket purchases – oil, gas, aircraft, helicopters and even nuclear reactors. Foreign investment rules in retail also remain on the table. U.S. companies like Amazon and Walmart stand to benefit. New Delhi has been cautious. The United States is also eyeing flexibility in regulations for refurbished items. That would ease entry for used electronics and other products. Experts say if this mini-deal happens, it will revolve around tariff cuts and strategic purchases. Larger issues like digital trade, intellectual property and service exports will be shelved for future rounds. Initially, the two sides seemed aligned. A simple principle guided them – America would focus on capital-intensive goods and India on labour-driven ones. That equation now feels out of sync. If the talks collapse, the fallout may be limited. Experts do not expect Trump to reimpose the full 26% tariff on Indian goods. A flat 10% under Most Favoured Nation (MFN) rates seems more likely. These are the standard tariffs World Trade Organisation (WTO) members apply to each other. In April, 57 countries faced those U.S. tariffs. Only the United Kingdom managed a deal. Singling out India would raise eyebrows. Still, observers remain cautious. Trump is known for surprises. And surprises can override expectations.
