The Rogue State Era

Sometimes you know a moment is a turning point in history. 

Sometimes you only know it when you look back years later.

The classic recognize-it-now case is December 7, 1941, that "day that will live in infamy." It moved the U.S. from a neutral bystander into a belligerent. September 11, 2001, is another, a day that shaped the past quarter-century of our relations to the countries and religions of the Middle East.

Some turning points are evident in hindsight. Betty Friedan's book, The Feminine Mystique, comes to mind. Published in 1963, it identified something in the cultural and economic environment: the dissatisfaction of American women with their roles. It was a catalyst for the enormous repositioning of women in American life. At the time my attention was on other things: Black civil rights, the Vietnam War, the Beatles. The giant impact of feminism was evident only later.

I expect histories written 50 years from now to understand Trump's second term as a turning point and the beginning of a named era.  The "postwar world" that established a certain role in the world for the U.S. is over. Trump ended that. In hindsight, named eras makes sense of the noisy confusion of current events. 

This might simply be "The Trump Era," and it may last for a decade or more. If things work out very poorly, in 50 years it might be described the way the Chinese describe the disastrous turmoil of their Cultural Revolution with an indirect term, "The Troubles." If events bring us to a nuclear exchange with Russia or China, historians who survive may call it "Pre-War." If the republic survives and the Constitution stays as written, but under a system where its words are interpreted to allow essentially unitary government by the executive branch, it may be understood as "The Strong Man Era." 

Historians may cite events of the recent news.

-- The Supreme Court disallowed Trump's unitary tariffs, but Trump immediately reestablished tariffs citing a different law. The executive can no longer be constrained by courts.

--  They can cite Trump's open grift, with multimillion dollar gifts, with the Trump cryptocurrency, and his flagrant pay-to-play use of presidential discretion to reward business allies. They will note that Congress was silent. This means that in practice the executive can take whatever he wants for personal use.

--  The strike against Venezuela may be understood as part of a series of acts of hemispheric hegemony, the precursor of the actions against Cuba and Greenland. Trump said at his inauguration that the U.S. should grow in territory. 

--  They may cite Trump ignoring international law and traditional rules of warfare. They could cite the unapologized-for bombing of the girls school. They will cite Secretary of War Peter Hegseth:

No stupid rules of engagement, no nation building quagmire, no democracy building exercise, no politically correct wars. We fight to win, and we don’t waste time or lives, as the president warned, an effort of this scope will include casualties.

--  The U.S. started a war but did not consult with our allies and affected nations. The closure of the Straight of Hormuz was an obvious risk to the world. Retaliatory strikes against hotels and civilian infrastructure in our Gulf State allies were predictable. We acted anyway, on our own. We could, so we did. 

I doubt that historians will cite this as the Golden Age predicted by Trump in his inaugural address. This doesn't feel like a golden age. My guess is that historians will understand this to be an era when the U.S. abandoned "global thinking" and global leadership. Trump thinks that is a fool's game. It is a us-versus-them world, and always has been, and the U. S. stands alone, heck with anyone else. 

Trump has rung that bell and it cannot be un-rung. It will take a long time to repair the damage it caused. We are living in "The Rogue State Era."

[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog by email go to Https://petersage.substack.com. Subscribe. The blog is free and always will be.]