[America Without a Helmsman]
April 15, 2025 Author: J. Bradford DeLong
It is now clear that the second Trump administration has no policies, nor does it have any policy-making process. The only thing that matters is the "intuition" of an ignorant person and the eager mindset of those around him who prioritize their personal interests over the fate of the nation.
Berkeley News - Eight years after U.S. President Donald Trump abandoned the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and unilaterally disarmed in the trade war he launched against China, Treasury Secretary Scott Beersant during his second term hopes to renegotiate the TPP and use it to form a united front against China.
As Chris Anstey of Bloomberg explained, Beersant has a "grand encirclement" plan, borrowing from the Obama administration's large-scale trade agreement, the TPP... (aiming) to form a Pacific Rim alliance where these countries will become increasingly connected with the United States rather than being drawn into China's orbit.
The problem is that reviving Obama's strategy may no longer be feasible. The TPP now exists in the form of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), and none of the partners that Beersant hoped to work with consider Trump a "trustworthy negotiating counterpart." Beersant hopes to cooperate with "countries like Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, and India," but despite their friendly demeanor, none of these countries are foolish enough to make any meaningful concessions when they find themselves among the first groups required to make sacrifices during negotiations, as happened when the Trump administration renegotiated the North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada.
Moreover, when Beersant implied the views of the Trump administration, he was clearly either self-deceived or lying. No one has the authority to speak on behalf of Trump, whose decisions change in an instant. He might instantly agree with Beersant's policy proposals based on "intuition," but if the next person he meets tells him otherwise, Beersant may have to explain why he cannot deliver on his promises. This is life in a mad king's court.
Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers has a different perspective. "If what the president says is the sole basis for government policy... the president has the right to have advisors who believe in his policies... individuals have the right to act according to their conscience."
But this is "rationalized sophistry." Summers knows full well that there is nothing worth trusting in terms of policy. Policies reflect clear objectives, not to mention the work of relevant personnel, model building, and analysis of various possible scenarios. What we see now is an ignorant person surrounded by sycophants, wandering around and babbling nonsense in front of the camera.
For Trump, all of this is business as usual; he is simply playing the role he portrayed in The Apprentice. The difference is that The Apprentice had very capable producers and editors who could turn all the messy raw material into engaging and polished products. Here, however, there is only a chaotic White House.
The comparison between Trump and Ronald Reagan is instructive. Reagan had his own set of ideas about the American people. He had confidence in their diligence, generosity, and goodwill, while harboring skepticism toward the policies, programs, and bureaucracies established by the Democratic Party since 1933. Reagan (who was also an actor) had confidence in his ability to memorize lines and perform, as well as in his role as president.
However, Reagan had his own ideas and knew he was the protagonist, but he did not consider himself the boss. He trusted the professional networks that helped him become an effective leader. When his confidence was justified—when he had high-quality White House staff—the results were usually good. When his confidence lacked justification—such as when Colonel Oliver North was allowed to mess up Middle Eastern policies related to Iran—the Iran-Contra scandal erupted.
Trump's White House lacks editors and has only public relations "doctors." Trump says whatever he pleases, and some advisors rush to claim: "Look! That’s the plan!" But these advisors are not always the same group. Sometimes, economic advisor Peter Navarro seems to take precedence; sometimes, Elon Musk does; and at other times, the influence of Beersant, the Commerce Secretary, and others can be detected.
If the Republican Party did not elevate flattery to the status of a governing principle, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune could have nominated qualified individuals to oversee domestic and foreign policies, which would ultimately be approved by Trump. In speeches, they would write that otherwise, some of us would ally with Democrats, and you would have to deal with Representative Hakeem Jeffries. "These are checks of confidence in the policy process."
In reality, Trump will give in. He has already insulted Canada at random, and now Prime Minister Mark Carney of Canada, who I think would perform excellently in this position, might not perform well because of this reason. This situation will happen, and more similar situations will occur. This is why America and the world are in serious trouble.
Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1829976015214979/
Disclaimer: This article represents the author's个人观点.