Displaying posts published in

March 2025

Victor Davis Hanson: Can Trump Revolutionize America?

https://www.thefp.com/p/victor-davis-hanson-can-trump-reset

 https://newcriterion.com/article/maga-agonistes/\

The Trumpian agenda to “Make America Great Again” emerged during the 2015–16 campaign and ensured Donald Trump’s nomination and eventual victory over Hillary Clinton. This counterrevolutionary movement reflected the public’s displeasure with both the Obama administration’s hard swing to the left and the doctrinaire, anemic Republican reaction to it.

Although only partially implemented during Trump’s first term, MAGA policies nevertheless marked a break from many past Republican orthodoxies, especially in their signature skepticism concerning the goal of nation-building abroad and the so-called endless wars, such as those in Iraq and Afghanistan, that tended to follow. But like all counterrevolutions, there were intrinsic challenges in the transition from simply opposing the status quo to actually ending it.

There was a promising start during Trump’s first administration. Corporate interest in a porous border to ensure inexpensive labor was ignored; immigration was deterred or restricted to legal channels, and the border was largely secured. Deregulation and tax cuts, rather than deficit reduction, were prioritized. Selective tariffs were no longer deemed apostasies from the free market, but acceptable and indeed useful levers to enforce reciprocity in foreign trade. Costly middle-class entitlements were pronounced sacrosanct. Social Security and Medicare were declared immune from cost-cutting and privatization.

This “action plan to Make America Great Again” went hand in hand with an effort to transform the Republican Party. What had once been routinely caricatured as a wealthy club of elites was reinvented by Trump as a working-class populist movement. Racial chauvinism and tribalism were rejected. Race was to be seen as incidental to shared class concerns—notably, reining in the excesses of a progressive, identity politics–obsessed bicoastal elite. Athletes who in 2020 had bent a knee to express outrage at “systemic” racism were in 2024 celebrating their scores by emulating Trump’s signature dance moves.

Despite intense resistance from the media, the Democratic Party, and the cultural left, the first Trump term enjoyed success in implementing many of these agendas. After losing the 2020 election—in which nearly 70 percent of voters in key swing states voted by mail-in ballot—Trump left office without a major war on his watch. He had overseen a period with 1.9 percent annualized inflation, low interest rates, steady economic growth and, finally, after constant battles and controversy, a secure border with little illegal immigration.

Yet during the succeeding four-year Biden interregnum, the world became far more chaotic and dangerous, both at home and abroad. Biden’s general agenda was to reverse by executive order almost every policy that Trump had implemented. And while Trump was successfully reelected in 2024 after reminding voters that they had been far better off under the MAGA agenda than during Biden’s subsequent shambolic tenure, the changed conditions in 2024 will also make implementing that agenda even more difficult than after Trump’s first victory.

Trump has now inherited an almost bankrupt country. The ratio of debt to annual GDP has reached a record high of nearly 125 percent—exceeding the worst years of World War II. The nation remains sharply divided over the southern border. Trump’s own base demands that he address an estimated 12 million additional unvetted illegal aliens; diversity, equity, and inclusion mandates and racial quotas; and an array of enemies abroad who are no longer deterred by or content with the global status quo. The eight-year Obama revolution, in retrospect, did not change American institutions and policies nearly as much as the more radical four-year Biden tenure. And so often, when drastic remedies are proposed, their implementation may appear to the inured public—at least initially—as a cure worse than the disease.

Understanding President Trump’s joint session address By Ben Voth

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2025/03/understanding_president_trump_s_joint_session_address.html

On President Trump’s last occasion of speaking in the House for a State of the Union speech, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi tore up the speech while seated behind the President. Last night signaled important political changes since that time. Speaker Michael Johnson and Vice President J.D. Vance were seated behind President Trump. The speech was an important indication of the rapid pace of accomplishments for the president.

The tradition of speaking before Congress is relatively unique in American history. Speaking to Congress in this direct manner was a tradition that began just over 100 years ago when Woodrow Wilson sought to build various political foundations for a more powerful executive branch. The State of the Union message as specified by the Constitution as an annual report to Congress was delivered as a written letter until Wilson changed this tradition in the early 20th century. Wilson, FDR, Obama, and Biden have all made important efforts to expand the practical power of the presidency beyond its constitutional limits. Biden repeatedly ignored Supreme Court rulings against his executive actions, such as forgiving student loan debt. Democrat presidents played an important role in expanding executive power throughout the 20th century.

The Democrat congressional membership employed exceptional resistance tactics including the use of handbills and a speech by Texas representative Al Green seeking to interrupt the President’s speech. Speaker Mike Johnson ordered the removal of Green from the chamber. Green was the first House member to file impeachment charges against Trump in the current presidential term. One of the most consistent messages of the handbills was the word “False” presumably asserting that the President’s statements were false.

The important accomplishments President Trump pointed to included: 1) government waste discoveries made by DOGE, 2) reductions in illegal immigration, 3) the renewal of tax cuts and new tax cuts, 4) a new policy of tariffs on many foreign nations, 5) the introduction of new cabinet members. He ended the speech with an intensive peroration that reconnected with the assassination attempt against him in Butler, Pennsylvania. Calling for the nation to fight, fight, fight for the coming “golden age” of American formed a passionate ending to the speech.

The Democratic Party plan for resistance to the President did not appear to form a meaningful coherence. No singular complaint or message appeared to unify the opposition to the president. Nonetheless, the Democrat congressional members appeared exceptionally unwilling to applaud or provide meaningful evidence of support.

‘My house was attacked by anti-Semites’ Alex Ryvchin on the wave of Jew hatred engulfing Australia.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/03/05/my-house-was-attacked-by-anti-semites/

AN INTERVIEW BY BRENDAN O’NEILL

Anti-Semitism has exploded in Australia since Hamas’s attack on Israel on 7 October 2023. Synagogues have been set alight. The offices of pro-Israel politicians have been ransacked. Even a Jewish childcare centre was set on fire and covered in racist graffiti. Perhaps most infamously, two Australian nurses openly boasted on camera about wanting to kill Israeli patients.

Alex Ryvchin, CEO of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, was caught up in this wave of hate. In January, the house where he and his family used to live was attacked by anti-Semitic thugs. Alex joined the latest episode of The Brendan O’Neill Show to discuss what has gone wrong in Australia. What follows is an edited extract from that conversation. Listen to the full thing here.

Brendan O’Neill: What happened when your old family home was attacked?

Alex Ryvchin: My wife woke me up at about five in the morning and told me that our old house was hit. She showed me this footage, which was taken by our old neighbours across the street, showing an inferno right in front of our old house.

We lived there for five years and it was a really beloved family home. We bought that house because of my grandfather. He had been an engineer in Kyiv, but couldn’t find work when we first migrated to Australia, because he had health issues and couldn’t speak English. The only useful thing he could do was drive a bus for a Jewish social club of Holocaust survivors. The club would give him $5 a day, and that’s all he was able to earn at that time. I would go with him before and after school, and we would drive up and down this beautiful winding road in the eastern suburbs of Sydney. On one side, you can see views of Sydney Harbor, and on the other side you’ve got the Pacific Ocean. I remember how my grandfather would look at the houses on that road. To him, it was like a utopia. It was everything that he knew he personally would never have, but that he thought he could create for his family in Australia. So when I saw a house on that street for sale, we had to buy it. That house represented a great deal to me.

When more CCTV footage of the attack came out, you could see two guys get out of a car. They had a can of petrol, which they poured like a fuse across the width of the street, leading up to cars parked in the driveway. They lit it and these cars just ignited. They targeted one car in the driveway of the adjoining property, which was still owned by a Jewish couple in their 80s. They daubed it with ‘Fuck Jews’ on one side and ‘Fuck Israel’ on the other. I thought that was very poetic. It’s like two sides of the same coin.

Christopher F. Rufo What Junk Mail Reveals About the Culture War American institutions are abandoning DEI jargon in their public communications.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/culture-war-dei-jargon-junk-mail

The modern world floods us with junk, trash, and slop. Our mailboxes overflow with advertisements and brochures, and our email boxes with organizational announcements, corporate spam, and political fundraising appeals—usually unsolicited. While most of us focus on getting rid of these distractions, if we suspend our usual habit, we might see that they reveal the balance of power of the cultural status quo. In recent months, it has shifted dramatically.

Many Fortune 100 companies that once prominently featured DEI in their communications have now removed any mention of “diversity and inclusion,” with an increasing number shutting down those departments altogether. Ivy League universities, once quick to issue official statements on every news event, now emphasize outstanding research and academic excellence over race and gender activism. Primary and secondary schools have followed suit. In the aftermath of the George Floyd riots, they prioritized social justice and ideological observances, such as Black Lives Matter Week and the Transgender Day of Remembrance. But now, under sustained pressure from parents and the Trump administration, political messaging has notably disappeared from many American school districts’ standard communications.

These are welcome developments. Despite their flaws, America’s institutions remain adaptable, capable of course correction when experiments fail and responsive to demands for reform. The shift in institutional messaging reflects a broader cultural realignment. Many organizations appear to recognize—at least in their public communications—that they had strayed from their core missions. Their new messaging signals a return to fundamentals: companies focusing on profit, universities on knowledge, and schools on education. The “culture war” that many of us have waged for years has reshaped how institutions perceive themselves and engage with the public.

This does not mean the problem is solved. Left-wing radicals remain deeply entrenched in many institutions, particularly in education. They are tenacious, ruthless, and committed—but not invulnerable. The incentives and status signals around them have shifted in the conservative’s favor. The widening gap between these activists and the institutions they have influenced presents an opportunity. President Trump has seized it, dismantling DEI departments, removing full-time activists, and shifting legal and cultural boundaries rightward, encouraging the broader public—which largely follows prevailing norms—to adopt better customs and habits.

Archbishop Reveals Celebrity Priest Calvin Robinson Was Fired For Serial Antisemitism “You are no longer considered a priest in good standing, your license is withdrawn.” March 5, 2025 by Jules Gomes

https://www.frontpagemag.com/archbishop-reveals-celebrity-priest-calvin-robinson-was-fired-for-serial-antisemitism/

In late January, Archbishop Mark Haverland fired the British priest Calvin Robinson, who has become something of a celebrity in conservative political circles over the last few years, for mimicking a “Nazi salute” at a pro-life rally in Washington, D.C. Though Robinson maintains his innocence, the archbishop recently released a statement documenting a series of warnings issued to the celebrity priest concerning his antisemitism and political activism.

The Anglican Ink website published Archbishop Mark Haverland’s correspondence with the priest after Robinson maintained on X that he had “not received a single letter, phone call, zoom meeting or anything else” from his archbishop since he joined the Anglican Catholic Church.

“In December of 2024, Robinson began posting about Judaism, starting with a post on X about the Talmud,” Haverland noted, highlighting the celebrity cleric’s escalating antisemitic attacks, in a six-page statement released last Wednesday.

The initial offending post from Robinson read: “The Talmud is uniquely hostile toward Jesus Christ. Islam may play off Christianity — it is a Christian heresy — but Talmudic Judaism is explicitly anti-Christian.” He was citing a quote from Joel Webbon, pastor of Covenant Bible Church in Georgetown, Texas.

Evil Judaism?

Robinson invited Webbon onto his show, “Bros with Fros,” even though Webbon is “a public figure whose antisemitic priors are well established,” Haverland wrote. “During the interview Robinson sat nodding while Webbon stated, ‘religiously, spiritually, Judaism, I believe, is a pernicious evil.’”

Haverland said that he had “received expressions of concern” from clergy within and outstide his denomination that “Robinson was courting anti-Semites online” and “communicated his displeasure” about the priest to Bishop Patrick Fodor of the Diocese of the Missouri Valley, “telling him very clearly that such incendiary activity had to stop.”

Fodor warned Robinson that he was in trouble with his archbishop. On December 13, Robinson wrote to Haverland insisting he was “not antisemitic or a holocaust denier.”

The Donks’ Press Agents Are Panicking As more portents of doom appear. Bruce Thornton

https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-donks-press-agents-are-panicking/

Last week more portents of doom appeared for the Dems’ mouthpieces. The Washington Post’s owner Jeff Bezos, once a center-left stalwart, announced a radical shift in the paper’s editorial orientation. Going forward, commentary will now defend two pillars: “personal liberties and free markets.” Adding insult to injury, Bezos also said that “viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others.”

We knew Bezos was wobbly before the election when he didn’t endorse a presidential candidate, exercising Falstaffian discretion rather than endorsing Trump. But this shift to the right burns a bridge for the progressives, whose hatred of Donald Trump is all-consuming and absolute.

Another bad sign for progs, though not as certain as Bezos’ decision, regards the Associated Press’s failure to secure a court order that halts Trump’s banishment of the wire service from the White House, the Oval Office, and Air Force One, for thumbing its nose at Trump’s renaming the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America. And, according to The Wall Street Journal, the banishment was also for “more substantial complaints about bias and dishonesty in the influential AP Stylebook.”

Again, the outcome is uncertain for now, but a win for common sense and good journalism is still possible depending on the hearing on March 20. But the AP’s hubris––demanding special consideration as though it is entitled to ignore the Constitution’s separation of powers, and colonize the executive power’s proprietary space––needs some comeuppance, especially since the media’s endemic arrogance and self-regard are contributors to its excessive partisanship and haughty pretensions to superior intelligence and righteousness.

As Ukraine Distracts, China Advances in Our Own Hemisphere China is poised to gain control of the OAS, using Suriname’s foreign minister as a proxy to extend its influence across the Americas, with U.S. support wavering. By J. Michael Waller

https://amgreatness.com/2025/03/05/as-ukraine-distracts-china-advances-in-our-own-hemisphere/

With Ukraine as America’s primary foreign distraction, Communist China makes quiet inroads under our southern border.

China is ready to assume indirect leadership of the Organization of American States (OAS), the 34-nation regional entity that the United States created to promote peace, stability, and security in the Americas.

Without the Trump Administration’s quick action, the OAS is poised to elect a Chinese proxy on March 10 to run the organization.

That proxy is Albert Ramdin, the foreign minister of Suriname. Ramdin has gathered the 18 votes necessary to become the next OAS secretary general.

China’s Belt and Road bought influence south of our border

For decades, taking advantage of American neglect, China has slowly made a long march through the Caribbean. OAS was a soft target.

China extended its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to the hemisphere. BRI involves trillions of dollars in logistical infrastructure and development, with other tools to build its own hegemony to displace the U.S.

Almost two-thirds of OAS members have signed on to BRI.

China aims to dominate or replace the institutions that the U.S. created. The OAS was designed after World War II to help the region resist communist expansion by eradicating extreme poverty, fostering economic, social, and cultural development, and devising common defense and security actions.

In the first days after taking office again, President Trump effectively stopped China’s Belt-and-Road expansion at its most strategic chokepoint—the Panama Canal. That sudden clamp suggests more action once Trump’s Western Hemisphere team is in place.

The OAS still holds value for any country seeking to use it. It helped standardize and streamline counterterrorism, counternarcotics, and anti-human trafficking policies to comport with those of the U.S.

Zelensky Agrees to Trump’s ‘Marshall Plan’ for Ukraine by Con Coughlin

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21451/ukraine-trump-marshall-plan

Trump did not rule out considering US assistance to a European military force should that eventuality become necessary.

Trump clearly believes that it is important for him to take a tough line with Zelensky, to demonstrate to Moscow that he is acting as an “honest broker” to end the war and bring Putin to the table for a serious negotiation. If the US leader is seen to be too accommodating to Ukraine, then this will simply confirm Putin’s long-held suspicion that the US and its allies — including Ukraine — are working to undermine the Russian state.

Such a move should send a clear signal to Moscow that, despite the very public spat between Zelensky and Trump in the Oval Office, the Trump administration remains committed to Ukraine remaining a free and sovereign state that is not constantly subjected to acts of Russian aggression.

Certainly, any deal that does not send a clear message to Moscow that the US will not tolerate any further provocative acts by Moscow will simply be seen as Washington punishing the victim in the Ukraine conflict — Zelensky — while rewarding the aggressor — Putin.

After the unedifying spectacle of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s meeting at the White House with US President Donald J. Trump, the Ukrainian leader agreed to sign the vital minerals deal with the Trump administration as an important step to ending three years of bloodshed.

One of the main purposes of Zelensky’s visit to the White House — his first since Trump began his second term as president — was to sign a deal allowing the US greater access to Ukraine’s rare earth minerals, which the Trump administration believes is an important first step in its efforts to end the Ukraine conflict.

Trump: Redrawing the Future of the World by Drieu Godefridi

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21452/trump-redrawing-the-future

The true analogy [of Trump’s deal with Zelenskyy] is with the assistance granted by the United States to the United Kingdom during World War II: the Lend-Lease Act of 1941. Under Lend-Lease, the US provided Britain with goods and services… over the course of the war…. Adjusted for inflation to today’s dollars (as of February 2025), this amount equates to roughly $550 billion.

What, however, happens once the debt is repaid? Without a lasting strategic framework, financial leverage alone might not be enough to guarantee long-term security. The case of Hong Kong is a sobering precedent: the West was deeply invested in the city’s economy, but when communist China asserted control, international businesses largely packed up and left rather than confront Beijing.

At the moment, Trump’s unconventional proposal is probably the best offer for Ukraine — and the only realistic one. It gives the US “skin in the game,” enables Trump to have leverage when he approaches Russia, and prevents Putin, at least for a while, from retaking that part of the former Soviet Union.

Russia already has hundreds of miles of peaceful borders with NATO countries, including the Baltic states, and did not kick up a fuss when Finland joined NATO last year. The only country where joining NATO ostensibly appears to be a problem is Ukraine. Perhaps this exception should be regarded as a flashing red light, warning that Putin still might have his eye on Ukraine for its minerals, agricultural land and outlet on the Black Sea.

Trump has been a supporter of NATO but not as its guarantor. His worldview at the moment is that he rejects war, except as a last resort. To him, it seems, America’s true rival in the 21st century is not Europe, or Russia, and certainly not the amorphous, inconsistent entity known as the BRICs. It is China.

Although Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky finally agreed to the “Golden Parachute” US President Donald J. Trump offered him as a first step to have Russian President Vladimir Putin negotiate a ceasefire to the war he began three years ago, the meeting on February 28 between Trump and Zelensky — as the world, to its shock, saw on television — collapsed.

Trump seems to have been anticipating a signing ceremony; Zelensky seems to have been anticipating receiving assurances of greater security. Trump’s ultimate message apparently was: a Trump final offer is a Trump final offer.