General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Keith Ellison: [View all]JHan
(10,173 posts)it was offensive because it was based on xenophobia which was connected to race which was connected to whiteness which goes back to the original point Bainsbane raised: That race issues were the only consistent issue among most Trump voters ( I can give latitude to the usual banal "change" voters who rattle on about change without ever thinking what "change" actually means)
And I'm not reaching here at all:
Trump's stupid trade narrative summed up in a nutshell ""we've been letting china and mexico walk all over us. We're not winning anymore!!" yes , I'm sure Mexico and China and the rest of the world have been laughing at America, amazed at how America allows everyone to take advantage of her, yes I'm sure The impetus or the animus behind Trump's rhetoric was resentment.
It's amazes me that people who have lived most of their lives after WW2 have a problem with a globalised economy in which FTA's have played a vital role in lifting people out of poverty. Why fuss now? Why fuss about two trade deals involving non-white peoples ( Mexico and the Pacific Rim) when America has been the main beneficiary of trade agreements since the formation of GATT.
Far right populism based on xenophobic rhetoric found kinship with naive populism on the left : It was a clusterfuck I'm happy clinton/kaine didn't indulge for votes.
Trump "killing" the deal was PR but also because he's selling protectionism, but it will also ultimately hurt us in the end, and already Mexico is picking up on it and making threats.
And to throw a wench in these anti-trade narratives - In US, Record-High 72% See Foreign Trade as Opportunity