Trump won’t stop the decline of US imperial hegemony, but then neither would have Harris. It’s a process that’s been in motion for decades and has accumulated a lot of momentum.

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There is a difference to adding some more wood to a fire and placing jet fuel onto a fire.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It’s hard to say which would have accelerated it more, but for the sake of the global majority, it can’t end soon enough.

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's not hard

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You might think so, but today’s NASDAQ & NYSE seem to imply that Trump is the better choice for empire 📈

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Yes, because the disaster that is the stock market is really going to prove anything. Economies work best when small amounts change hands often and all these people who deal in stocks care about are big numbers and getting in on the action of stealing more and more money.

They’re excited about lower taxes, removal of regulation, and the ability to further exploit the working class for short term gain. That’s all. If they actually gave a shit about having a strong economy they’d be paying their people well enough to supporty and not be chasing infinite growth in a finite system.

[–] courgette@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is "the decline of US imperial hegemony" supposed to be a bad thing?

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago

That depends on whether you’re a US capitalist or labor aristocrat who benefits from US neocolonial exploitation of imperialized states.

It so happens that I do benefit, but I side with the workers of the world and against imperialism nonetheless.