Thursday, April 17, 2025


No Winners in Trump’s Anti-China Posture


 April 17, 2025Facebook

Photograph by Nathaniel St. Clair

During his first term in office, President Donald Trump’s anti-China policies seemed as aggressive and assertive as they are now. Paradoxically, though those centered around a totally different issue, they certainly had a negative impact on US, Trump himself and of course greater part of the world. Yes, this was Trump’s claim that the disease Covid-19 was a “Chinese virus.” It was alleged that the pandemic leaked from a Chinese laboratory and Trump promoted the same. A speculation of it having been engineered as a possible biological weapon was also entertained. A team of scientists appointed by WHO conducted a 12-day investigation at Wuhan, which included a visit to the laboratory, concluded that the “lab-leak” theory was “extremely unlikely.” Irrespective of whatever was the source of Covid-virus, there is no doubt, it’s impact affected the whole world at large. There is a view, had US not made so such noise about it, most people – particularly from the developing world – would have not been affected so severely. Some ailment or other has them grappling with each year, especially during rainy season. But this is other side of the story. It may be recalled, Trump himself, as reported, was affected by the virus. Clearly, the Covid-phase strongly displayed the apparent animosity Trump entertained towards China. Banning entry from China, though with gaps, hardly succeeded in checking the spread of Covid in US and other countries. However, travel restrictions along with Covid lockdown were subsequently followed by other countries which led to a major economic downfall at several levels for all across the world, from which they haven’t yet totally recovered.

Now, it is feared, Trump’s ongoing trade war with China may spell catastrophic economic problems for the whole world with far more severe consequences with impact on US itself as it is being seen. Most countries, including strong European allies of US, seem to have been compelled to consider stronger regional unity as well as better ties with China. Clearly, China is trying to make the best of the situation by asking European countries not to be “bullied” by US. China is in favor of “teaming” with Europe against US, that is Trump’s “tariff-war.” Certainly, it is too early to expect any ally of US and one that has not entertained smooth ties with China to suddenly give importance to this offer of Beijing. Nevertheless, there is no denying Trump’s trade-war has cautioned them all of the risk of being too dependent on US. Prospects of their gradually giving greater importance to moving beyond the US-camp cannot be side-lined. The 90-day pause initiated by Trump on tariff for most countries except China has certainly given his allies sometime to consider their options and hold talks with US. During this pause until July 9, the baseline tariff remains in place. China has chosen to raise additional tariff on US goods from 84% to 125% in respond to Trump’s decision to impose 145% tariff on some Chinese goods. This is not just a tit-for-tat diplomatic feud taking place between US and China. It’s multi-lateral impact on most countries is too strong to be ignored. The manner in which their economy has been hit, with US itself not being spared, has spelt shocks for their market, loss for investors, consumers and so forth.

Ironically, from one angle, there is nothing surprising or new about economic aggression being engaged in by Trump. Iran, Syria, Libya, Iraq, Russia are among the countries against whom economic sanctions have been imposed by US and its western allies. The difference is that now even US allies face the economic aggression because of Trump’s tariff-war. Where does this place the Arab countries, which seem comfortably placed with their oil wealth? Besides, US is not a key importer of their oil. In addition, the key Gulf countries have alongside their warm times with US, maintained good ties with Russia as well as China. Economically as well as diplomatically, they don’t appear to be caught in as frustrating situation as are other countries.

Paradoxically, on one hand, while Trump has gone overboard against China in the trade-war, on the other hand, as comments from White House suggest, he is “optimistic” about a “deal” with China (April 11, 2025). “The president,” according to White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, “would be gracious if China intends to make a deal. If China continues to retaliate, it’s not good for China.” It is possible, Trump did not expect China to retaliate as it has by raising duties on US goods. Now, he is considering options of a “deal” with China. But as apparent, China is not taking him seriously nor does it give the impression of it being keen for any deal with US. Rather, China is exploring opportunities of attracting US allies to its side. In addition, Trump probably expects China to pay instant heed to his comments, prospects of which may be viewed as limited. In other words, chances of Chinese President Xi Jinping taking the initiative to hold talks with Trump regarding the “deal,” the latter has suggested, may be viewed as fairly remote. This is also marked by Chinese comments on it not backtracking in tariff-war with US but if these “infringe” on China’s interests in a “substantial way,” China will take “countermeasures” and “fight to the end.”

The impact of Chinese retaliation on US stocks is reported to be “worst” since the “Covid-crash.” Incidentally, China was Trump’s primary target during the Covid-phase and so it is in his tariff-war. China prefers facing Trump’s “war” without yielding to what has been described by China as his “bullying.” Given that this is Trump’s second term in office, he has limited time. But the same cannot be said about Xi, who has time on his side. One thing is clear, just as Covid-phase only had negative impact, this “tariff-war” has no winners, at least, at present!

Nilofar Suhrawardy is a senior journalist and writer with specialization in communication studies and nuclear diplomacy. Her latest book is Modi’s Victory, A Lesson for the Congress…? (2019). Others include:– Arab Spring, Not Just a Mirage! (2019), Image and Substance, Modi’s First Year in Office (2015) and Ayodhya Without the Communal Stamp, In the Name of Indian Secularism (2006).


Is Trump a Neanderthal?

April 17, 2025

Facebook

Image by Crawford Jolly.

It may be a politically incorrect to say it, but desperate times require words commensurate with the existential threat of Donald Trump in his 80th day in office.

English is the only language that turned Neanderthals, the long extinct Paleolithic hominin, into an insult and epithet. Since the naming of “Neanderthal Man” after the discovery of a skull cap with protruding brow ridges in Prussia in 1856, the species (or subspecies) has had a bad rap as a foil and lesser doppelganger of Homo sapiens. But it was only in the 1920s that their name became synonymous with archaic, regressive ideas and behaviors. Although the Neanderthal metaphor was widely used to described sports figures (especially boxers), outdated technology, and forms of masculinity threatened by waves of feminist progress, it was especially relevant to politics. Hitler was a Neanderthal, and so was Stalin (recall Arthur Koestler’s denunciation of the “Neanderthal mind.”) Closer to home, after World War II, a string of reactionary, often racists Republican politicians, from Theodore Bilbo to Barry Goldwater to Richard Nixon, earned the epithet that appeared widely and unselfconsciously in newspaper reporting and commentary. It bothered no one to make use of one kind of human to slander another, so long as they were extinct; the progressive Left widely adopted the other N-word to criticize their foes and their ideas, obstacles to equality, liberty, and justice.

Already in 1940, the indefatigable ant-racist anthropologist Ashley Montague denounced the metaphoric use of Neanderthals, and since then, a campaign to rehabilitate them has waxed and waned. By the 1980s, the political insult was in decline when two causes, feminism and environmentalism, gave it new life. By the early twenty-first century, archaeological findings filled the newspapers with claims that “Neanderthals weren’t so dumb” and “Neanderthals were humans, too.” The mapping of the Neanderthal genome in 2010, coupled with the growth of personal DNA ancestry tests, restored Neanderthals to a certain humanity, revealing that we have all have inherited, even African populations, modest amounts of their DNA through millennia of interbreeding. By 2016, in an extension of politically correct politics to the Stone Age, the metaphor had virtually disappeared, at least in print.

Then came Trump, who single handedly restored the use of the insult, and even assured its expansion into languages where “Neanderthal” had hitherto only named an extinct human species. Trump’s sexual politics, revealed in the October 2016 Access Hollywood tape, justified the epithet, but it was not his Neanderthalic remarks about women alone. In his first term, Trump showed his cards as a paleoconservative, or at least a fellow traveler, with his atavistic MAGA nationalism and global isolationism, his faux-Christian ethics, his anti-abortion and LGBTQ proclivities, and his racism. It was these, coupled with his evident stupidity and cluelessness, that earned him the epithet of “Neanderthal” in newspapers from South Africa to Armenia. In the United States, the insult was again receding when, during Covid, Joe Biden (who came of political age when the Neanderthal epithet was common usage) accused Governor Greg Abbot in March 2021 of “Neanderthal thinking” in dropping the mask mandate in Texas. Republicans rose to the defense of the extinct hominin as part of the culture wars. It was Neanderthal’s swan song, at least in print, since major news outlets then distanced themselves from the term, worried about not offending anyone, dead or alive – although the insult continues to resonate on social media platforms.

Here’s a modest proposal: that those among us who oppose Trump, and I suspect we will become a larger and larger group, make use of a word rich in historical and symbolic resonance for the Left. There are few words so evocative of Trump’s stupidity and incompetence, of his war on knowledge institutions from public libraries to museums and research universities, of his racist and sexist attack on DEI, and now of his ignorant engendering of a global economic catastrophe. Trump is truly a Neanderthal, looking backward to a long extinct world of mercantilist protectionism, of white supremacy, and male dominance, while we have all evolved. I know it’s not fair to Neanderthals, but by calling Trump one, we only insult ourselves, since we’re all a little bit Neanderthal – especially those who voted to put him back in office.

Peter Sahlins is Professor of History Emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley, and author of the forthcoming Neanderthals Among Us: A Cultural History (Oneworld, 2026).





Breaking Bad and America’s Dark Shadows



 April 17, 2025
FacebookTwitter\Reddit\BlueskyEmail

Photo by Denis Oliveira

I first watched Breaking Bad a few years ago, after the show had completed its original run. During these past two months, I’ve rewatched the entire series, which–in light of the Trumpian reign of terror–seems oddly cathartic.   

The locus of Breaking Bad is Albuquerque, New Mexico. Its protagonist is Walter White (Bryan Cranston), a downtrodden, underappreciated high school chemistry teacher.  White, we learn, is a onetime scientific hotshot and had been a core founder of a startup business–an endeavor that made a fortune after his own ignoble exit, robbing him of money and prestige. He lives in a sort of purgatory.

White is suddenly faced with the catastrophic medical diagnosis of advanced, most likely fatal, cancer. A high school teacher has insurance coverage, of course, but in White’s case it is not adequate enough for the first-rate care that will potentially extend or save his life. The show presents this without editorializing or even explanation: It is simply understood that the system will not fully provide.

White taps into his reservoir of chemical expertise and—joining forces with his scabrous (and very funny) ex-student, Jesse Pinkman (played brilliantly by Aaron Paul)—begins to manufacture meth, ostensibly to cover his medical expenses and leave his family a nest egg when he’s gone. Breaking Bad chronicles White’s gradual, pathological transformation from teacher to ruthless criminal mastermind.

A survey of Breaking Bad’s many plot complexities and vast, vivid canvas of characters could fill a book. There is perhaps the most stunning montage I’ve ever seen, delineating the beginning of Walt and Jesse’s new business endeavor. Incongruously juxtaposed with a sprightly lounge-jazz tune and bright, cheery lyrics, Jesse makes his sales rounds amid desolate parking lots, a mostly empty laundromat, and the subsistence-level motels that can be found all over the United States. His meth-consuming clientele ranges from the rough-looking, the haggard, the sinister—and in one telling instance, the prosperous.  It is life in these United States.

Breaking Bad loosely follows in the Godfather lineage, in which enshrined American archetypes are utilized for nefarious purposes. Vito Corleone arrives at Ellis Island with nothing, and thanks to his discipline, hard work, and foresight, rises to the top. It is the classic American success story. Likewise, Walter White, faced with catastrophe, takes a can-do attitude and uses his scientific skills to save himself and his family.

The Godfather canon also explicitly links organized crime to capitalist success: the idea that the Mafia is a business is an ongoing trope. This is made even more explicit in Breaking Bad. (And interestingly, both Michael Corleone and Water White start out as criminal neophytes, and both eventually out-brutalize hardened criminals.)

White has followed the classic entrepreneurial playbook by launching his own startup. This particular startup is illegal, but it mimics legitimate business models and harnesses those cherished concepts of “disruption” and “innovation.” His meth has a distinctive blue tint that makes for effective branding. The quality and purity of the product keep the customers coming back. White even brands himself with an attention-grabbing alias: Heisenberg, in a perverted homage to the German scientist-philosopher Werner Heisenberg.

White takes immense pride in his product, its purity, and in that blue tint. But like so many entrepreneurs, Walt and Jesse certainly have the technical know-how, yet are lacking in expertise when it comes to effective product distribution. It could be grist for a TED Talk.

In order to move their product, they enter into a business alliance with Gus Fring, the straitlaced, courteous owner of the Los Pollos Hermanos fast-food chicken chain: paragon of respectability, civic booster, friend of the police—and, in reality, a brutal drug kingpin.

Breaking Bad is set in a United States full of sinister nooks and crannies. The high school teacher produces meth. The friendly fast-food outlet is, in reality, a crime epicenter. Even the local vacuum cleaner store is the place of nefarious secrets. The proprietor of one such store—played by the late Robert Forster, in his final role—is known as the “disappearer.” For a large sum of money, he can provide you with an entirely new identity and place to live. The viewer is not privy to any backstory; we have no idea who this disappearer really is. All we have is shadowy conjecture.

In the Breaking Bad constellation, there are deceptions large and small, violence at every turn, white supremacists. The New Mexico desert is simply a utilitarian device to dispose of contraband or bodies.

Authority figures are inept: White is growing his burgeoning drug empire under the very nose of his brother-in-law, a highly placed drug enforcement agent. If they’re not inept, they’re part of the rot and grand deception. There is the twisted, cheerfully amoral lawyer and fixer Saul Goodman (titular character of the Better Call Saul spinoff) and the ruthless henchman Mike Ehrmantraut, who is a defrocked Philadelphia policeman.

Breaking Bad is a study in fear: If one enters Walter White’s orbit, the threats come from a wide array of sources. Nobody will help you. And it is strongly implied that nobody will help you, really, even if you stay out of Walter White’s orbit.

The United States as a whole is saturated with shadow and incongruity. Are there other countries this continuously frightened?  We are being invaded by fearsome migrants, so ferocious as to eat household pets. There is ANTIFA, Black Lives Matter—posing threats nobody can define–Venezuelan gangs, a trans and gay “agenda”—which also has no definition–and a president who was secretly a Kenyan. We are being visited by UFOs that potentially bear the threat of annihilation—and the government knows this and is keeping the salient details hidden. In the outside world, we are beset with a growing list of lethal threats: Iran, China, North Korea, Cuba, Islamic fundamentalism. And in the Trump universe, even the dead have malevolent power: they vote, they collect Social Security benefits.

Breaking Bad is fiction and comes to a delineated conclusion—which may be why watching it has been cathartic. It is a startlingly accurate look at the twisted, frightened American psyche.

Our unfolding political and social catastrophe is, of course, very real. There is no conclusion, delineated or otherwise. In fact, this is just the beginning.