Login
You're viewing the assemblag.es public feed.
  • Oct 17, 2026, 8:35 AM

    RE: masto.ai/@Nonilex/117453794779

    The insanity of this is that Trump is funding a country who is supplying armaments to Iran, who the US is at war with.

    This is such a perfect illustration of the obscene veil of geopolitical nonsense when it's pulled back.

    There are men who want to cling onto power. They will do anything, fund anyone, kill any number of civilians, ruin any number of healthy economies.... just to hang onto their own personal power a few minutes longer.

    💬 19🔄 29⭐ 0

Replies

  • Oct 17, 2026, 9:09 AM

    So, there are some possible options:

    1. Trump's attention span is so short and so narrow, he doesn't register this dichotomy.

    2. There are people behind him suggesting shit to a compliant Trump who are architecting this incoherence for their own purposes.

    Are there others I'm not seeing? Can you think of some frame in which the logic of this makes sense?

    💬 9🔄 0⭐ 9
  • Oct 17, 2026, 9:27 AM

    In essence, Trump's rise and enablement has been an incremental destruction of the hegemonic liberal western geopolitical order.

    If I had been a Stalinist operative looking to destroy it, this would be a very successful outcome.

    This is, in every way, what consecutive heads of the USSR and Mao would have dreamed of - this kind of collapse.

    💬 3🔄 2⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:03 AM

    I'm not ruling out contingency, of course. There were always the seeds of its own diminution nestled in the belly of the structure of the US. The UN never had any teeth because of the structure of vetos. The EU's unanimity provision was always problematic. Nato's overdependance on a single state has a built-in fragility.

    All I'm saying is... instead of trying to psychologise the players, perhaps it is more helpful to look at the outcome and ask who benefits.

    💬 2🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:08 AM

    The only coherent answer I can come up with is that the super-rich, with their ability to inure themselves to the agony on the ground of a radically shifting landscape, do benefit.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 9:20 AM

    @Remittancegirl@mstdn.social I think it’s a combination of both options. tRumpty Dumpypants is a simpleton, and very prone to be manipulated by the destructive personalities that he surrounds himself with. And those destructive personalities are echoes of his perverted desires, the prime of which is a sick need for adulation. As if his narcissistic tendencies aren’t bad enough.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 1
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 9:26 AM

    @Remittancegirl

    Really an extension of 2, but the people in charge are letting Trump tank himself - the Russian debacle is the stuff which happens when a genuinely stupid person makes some decisions unaided - so that they can remove him and put a comparatively statesman-like Vance in charge. After the midterms, and I'm going to take Jan 6th 2027 as the day it's put in progress.

    Then they'll claim Murrica is back on track. It'll *look* normal at a superficial level, but obviously Vance won't actually undo anything, just refrain from additional chaos. The Dems will continue to take the money and hush up, and with a bit of wrangling, Vance will actually get 2.5 terms.

    Being right will keep me warm around the post-apocalyptic campfires.

    💬 3🔄 1⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 1⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:48 AM

    @Badgardener @Remittancegirl
    Huh?
    Jan 6 202*7* ?
    As an anniversary?

    2028 is when Trump3 will start, and first-Mon would be Jan 3.
    Which Trump (animatronic meat puppet, child, child-in-law?) doesn't matter, as long as the dynastic norms are established.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 2:26 PM

    @WellsiteGeo @Remittancegirl

    I'm picking the date out of the air, obviously, but it would have a pleasing symmetry if the start of his replacement process came on the day he went full tantrum.

    My contention is that Trump is getting replaced, in the next few months, and Vance is being installed in his place for the rest of the term (and for as long afterwards as he can cling on). In order to facilitate the process of finding him unfit for office, he's currently being allowed to escalate without restraint.

    Everybody has a theory: this is mine.

    💬 0🔄 1⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 1⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 2:53 PM

    @Remittancegirl @WellsiteGeo

    There are crazier things out there.

    But none of us really know - if Trump has *really* got the fix in (not just redistricting and postal ballots, but right-at-the-heart Kremlin-style lying), he'll stay on till the end, and it will all just get worse and worse.

    But I can't see Thiel et al standing for it, after the money they've put in for Vance. Putting Vance to a public vote for the first time in 2028 would be too risky because, as you say, he's no cult leader - so they need him to become president for a couple of years without the need/potential downfall of an election, and then promote him from there.

    After Trump, putting my cat in charge would restore sanity, so 2028 would be Vance's to lose. The big boys get to keep all of their money, the racists are kept happy and the uncritical masses see some improvements at the petrol pump and supermarkets. Why vote for change after that?

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 2:56 PM

    @Badgardener I agree with you that I think Thiel and the boys believe this. But actually, Vance has a serious 'disgust' factor, that people like the tech-bros would probably not recognize. I remember seeing footage of him in a donut shop. He will not get elected in anything even approaching a free election. @WellsiteGeo

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 9:27 AM

    @Remittancegirl In line with the original post you quoted, I think that Putin and his advisors realise Trump is moving further away from reality and needs to be squeezed as much as possible since his time of geopolitical influence is close to ending (he’ll remain in post longer, all decisions will come from others). Therefore, they’re maximising the use of kompromat while they can.
    I imagine if he does alter tack on this one post mid-terms we get some anonymous source releasing material implicating Trump in illegal/nefarious acts.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 9:29 AM

    @spanghero I don't really buy the compromat angle. I think Trump is too far gone to care, and his followers are to brainwashed to care.

    But ego manipulation, sure.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 9:33 AM

    @Remittancegirl The reason I think there’s kompromat is that he usually appears to respond to the last person he speaks to but in this instance it’s Russia all the way, regardless. In terms of the kompromat I don’t think it’s as salacious as some believe. I think it’ll be dubious and illegal financial deals over the decades.
    Edit: which of course, doesn’t exclude manipulation of his ego.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • SeiðrIlluminatus@mstdn.social
    Oct 17, 2026, 9:38 AM

    @Remittancegirl I mean, yes, but let's remember he wouldn't be where he is without many, many factors associated: the destruction of the meagre measures of equity and equality that held the social fabric initiated by Reagan, the continuation by his successors of either party, the War on Terror hysteria and the police state measures by the GOP, the racist backlash against Obama that the GOP rode in on…

    💬 1🔄 3⭐ 0
  • SeiðrIlluminatus@mstdn.social
    Oct 17, 2026, 9:40 AM

    @Remittancegirl Nothing the Russians may have been involved with absolves at least a pair of generations of USAmericans of their willing embrace of the worst parts of their sociohistorical tendencies of racism, theocratic authoritarianism, and greedy selfishness.

    💬 1🔄 2⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:27 AM

    @Remittancegirl @Illuminatus

    We know how successful the Nazis were at keeping America out of WW2. It was that idiot Hitler who ruined their work by declaring war on the US.
    And because of a "treaty", even! What an idiot. I'm surprised he made Corporal.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 11:11 AM

    @Remittancegirl @Illuminatus
    IIRC, *Hitler* then declared war on the US, because he had a treaty with Japan.
    After Pearl Harbour, there was no need for America to enter the European theatre any more than the sales they were already making. Which the German propaganda machine was trying hard to reduce.

    That would have made both wars a 1-front war (assuming Raj India could fight for itself as a 3rd war).

    Between that, & Op.Barbarossa, no wonder the German generals put a bomb under his table.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 11:56 AM

    @Remittancegirl Chaos rarely benefits the poor.

    Cf Rees Mogg and others setting up hedge funds and business units outside of the UK in the EU to bet against Brexit.

    The rest of us do not have the capital to cushion the blows of such changes.

    I am beginning to think that the best thing for the world is for Trump to fall out of a window or down some stairs.

    Although, I do not know if the person who would take over as POTUS would be any better for the rest of us.

    thenational.scot/news/16461814

    💬 0🔄 1⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:11 AM

    @Remittancegirl It's also worth considering why people voted for this stuff, notwithstanding that nobody asked for these specific outcomes...
    The west seems to have trouble coming to terms with its own exploitativeness. We don't want other regions and developing economies to succeed, because we expect them to screw us over. Even on the environmentalist left we worry that the economic expansion yet to come will worsen the environmental crisis. We're riding a monster we can't get off.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:15 AM

    @kbm0 You know, I used to think it was worth considering, but I'm starting to feel it isn't.

    A majority of people are short-sighted, weak and petulant. Which makes them easily manipulable and prone to gestures linked to identity rather than communality.

    I'm not for a moment suggesting people don't have absolutely legitimate grievances. But they always have. Regular people have always been instrumentalised by those in power, with more or less misery attached.

    💬 2🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:24 AM

    @Remittancegirl Yeah I sort of agree, but I try not to get too inevitablist about it. If the problem is both the people (too weak and petulant) and the "leaders" (too manipulative) then it's hard to know where to start.
    In the UK at least, I do think there has been a slow shift away from an (albeit conservative) civic-mindedness, towards a more consumerist attitude.

    💬 2🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:27 AM

    @Remittancegirl For example, people have always been annoyed with the BBC. But now they want to get rid of it, rather than fix it.
    People get upset with their political party because of single issue X, so they look for another party, expecting to find one that is tailored to their views. That is a consumer mindset.

    💬 1🔄 1⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:30 AM

    @kbm0 Absolutely. And I do not know how to change that mindset within the time period necessary to stop certain systems from collapsing. Not spectacular collapses, but systems so eroded - like the BBC - as to be approaching uselessness.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 1
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:29 AM

    @Remittancegirl @kbm0
    "A majority of people are short-sighted,"

    Like I've said for decades, we still haven't understood the consequences of these "agriculture" and "pottery" technologies.
    10kyr clearly is not time enough.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:08 AM

    @Remittancegirl I have a half-baked theory about this. But I'm just a rando, so feel free to disregard.

    It makes sense of quite a lof of what is going on, which is both good (it has explanatory power) and bad (maybe it has too much explanatory power).

    My theory in sum is that what we might call, for lack of a much more precise and lengthy characterisation, the US foreign policy elites, have an essential disagreement between two factions I'll called optimist and pesimist.

    Optimists are the people who were in charge pre-Trump. They are liberals, in the technical sense of upholding free markets and so on, and believe their own propaganda. They're the sort of people who think Fukuyama was right and which believe capitalism is more efficient and soft power matters. Who think GDP measures power, financialisation has no negative sides, and industrial production is something that can be done elsewhere and paid for. Who regard China as abnormal, and on a permanent edge of crisis, and consider it will inevitably adopt more capitalist forms because it will otherwise run into a dead end. Optimists trust the US's ability to ultimately outcompete its rivals and regard persuasion and diplomacy as key tools.

    The pessimists have similar terminal values (US hegemony, private property) but aren't convinced that there's anything more efficient or automatically victorious about them. They see China as an existential threat to the model, and aren't invested in upholding rules if that means they might lose. They also see the present moment of US power as historically unique, a peak, and so they see its current allies as resource bases to be extracted from, and its military as a tool to create facts on the ground that cannot later be reverted. Under this frame, US power is fragile and temporary, so it makes sense to use it now before it's lost.

    This makes sense of very strange things, like the urgency to intervene in Venezuela, the concern with Panama, Canada, Iceland, Greenland, and the otherwise inexplicable support for the war in Iran. The way I see it, this is the pessimist faction gaining the upper hand and deciding having a big and scary military is no advantage if you never do anything with it, and since the hegemonic status is ultimately temporary, this is the time to act.

    💬 1🔄 1⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:26 AM

    @Remittancegirl
    I assume the simplest explanation is that the narcissist sociopath does whatever benefits him personally or emotionally, and that he can get away with.
    A lot of money went into making sure the supreme court said he can get away with literally anything, so there are no brakes on the clown car.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 11:01 AM

    @Remittancegirl
    Yeah, it's more than one plan for sure, and several of them aren't very coherent, like "do more racism" or "modern evidence based medicine is communism" or "make God do the end times early". Trump was useful for getting the factions close to absolute unaccountable power, but he's just a very unreliable conduit for it. IMO

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:38 AM

    @Remittancegirl there are people suggesting things to a narcissistic Trump who is easy to manipulate. Those people are in conflict with each other, some of them are Christian dominionists, some are just frauds, some are tescrealists, some might have literal Russian handlers

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 11:48 AM

    @Remittancegirl Trump's behaviours remind me more and more of someone in the earlier stages of dementia or another age related condition.

    Short attention span, inability to hold more than one thought at a time thus unable to compare two thoughts, reacting to individual demands as isolated events with no reference to past decisions.

    That, or Putin really has something on Trump that Trump never ever wants to come out and Trump is now properly desperate.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 18, 2026, 11:52 AM

    Shameless and unrepentant self dealing in every circumstance. If trump and his entourage can personally benefit from a deal where American, never mind allied lives are traded for their enrichement, the deal will be done.
    @Remittancegirl

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 9:49 AM

    @Remittancegirl the Russians will manipulate the middle term elections big way.. he needs Congress and Senate to complete the remaining 45% of project 2025...

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 9:57 AM

    @Remittancegirl every day I silently thank all the americans who did not vote for Kamala Harris. Their actions two years ago is what brought us all here, and we should be thankful and proud of what they did to us. /s

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:04 AM

    @unkx
    I want you to notice that you have posted a statement that cannot be replied to with any coherence.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:17 AM

    @Remittancegirl yeah i added the sarcasm tag there for a reason.

    However it does not change the fact that trump is in power because enough people decided not to vote for Kamala Harris, thereby ensuring that trump won, which resulted in the world now being a much less safe and enjoyable place for billions of people who had no say in the matter.

    💬 1🔄 2⭐ 1
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:18 AM

    @unkx I know. It was just framed in a way that had no response. And while sarcasm can feel good, it really isn't terribly easy to engage with. I like your restatement far better. It's undeniably true.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:28 AM

    @Remittancegirl yeah sarcasm is hard. Especially online with people from dlfferent cultures and backgrounds etc.

    And personally I suck at remembering that whenever I’m trying to say something ”meaningful” and get the bright idea to use sarcasm as the framing device…

    (Also english ain’t my native language, so some idioms that are ”natural” to me make no sense in english, and some english language idioms i still don’t get to this day…)

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:31 AM

    @unkx Also, I think using sarcasm can protect us from the full, tragic gravity of what we're saying.

    Anyway, I'm so glad we're past that! :ablobcatenjoy:

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:13 AM

    @Remittancegirl Oh, he'll happily kill an indefinite number of US service members too. They've already signed away their rights, so are cheaper.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:23 AM

    @ariaflame Apparently executive orders are whatever the president of the US deems them to be.

    If the Dems take back control of the House and the Senate, they should ammend the constitution to codify this. But they won't. I fear they will just go back to pretending things are normal.

    💬 1🔄 1⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:25 AM

    @Remittancegirl I mean they are only directives to departments. They don't get to contravene the law. But since he doesn't actually care what is illegal and nobody is holding him to account, it doesn't matter. If the constitution said he couldn't do it he wouldn't care either. After all, he's doing things that are forbidden by that as well.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:26 AM

    @ariaflame True, but if it were codified in the constitution, even the current supreme court would have problems upholding it. (not all the members, but a majority)

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:37 AM

    @Remittancegirl
    Perspective matters. Is the person making the decision an agent of Russia with a goal of destroying the US? He might be doing a fantastic job. I don't see any inkling that he has more concern for anyone besides himself and Russia.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 10:54 AM

    @Remittancegirl
    Given the Epstein files, the sex offender convictions and the open corruption of Donald Trump one shudders to think how bad the kompromat must be for Putin to have him so firmly on his goosing finger.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Oct 17, 2026, 11:03 AM

    @Stevenheywood Do you really think he needs to goose him? I think Trump is absolutely in awe of Putin. I think he complies because he wants this man to admire him, desperately. He wants approval from him. They way he craved approval and acceptance for NY high society but never actually got it.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0