This is a space for free and independent expression that exclusively reflects the points of view of the authors and does not compromise the thought or opinion of Las2orillas.
<a href="https://www.world-today-news.com/donald-trump-whats-behind-the-us-presidents-baltimore-attack/" title="Donald Trump: What's behind the US President's Baltimore attack”>Kamala Harris, the current Democratic candidate for the presidency of the United States, has said it and repeated it at different electoral rallies: “these are the most important elections in the history of America.” And I am sure that the liberal media public who around the world consider Trump to be a fascist who represents the greatest threat American democracy has ever known agrees with her in this superlative assessment. I, however, allow myself to disagree with this opinion and not because I ignore that Trump is a racist and an aggressive interventionist in the internal affairs of independent countries, but because I believe that Democrat Harris has many more points in common with him than expected. that she is never willing to acknowledge. Even less so are his supporters.
And I am not referring only or exclusively to the fact that, if it was Obama who began the offensive by declaring Venezuela a “threat to national security,” it was Trump who imposed the cascade of illegal sanctions that Biden has maintained. Who from the presidency has reissued, as we well know, the Juan Guaidó operation, this time with Edmundo González playing the role of virtual president.
As the experience of the last two years demonstrates, the coincidences between Harris and Trump, and ultimately between Democrats and Republicans, occur around two issues of enormous strategic importance: Israel and China. Both have competed in their unwavering support for Israel in these fourteen months of Netanyahu’s genocidal war in Gaza and in his attacks on Lebanon, Syria and Iran. Trump, true to his style, has done so stridently: he has supported the Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Harris, on the other hand, has played equidistance: she has supported “the right to defense” that Israel uses as an argument to legitimize the Palestinian genocide in Gaza, presenting it as a response to the attacks by Hamas “terrorists” on October 7 from last year. At the same time he has called to “alleviate the sufferings of the inhabitants of Gaza.” Omitting the fact that the Biden administration, of which she is a part, has not stopped the incessant flow of weapons to Israel for a single day. In fact, the amount of weapons sent by Biden to Netanyahu in these fourteen months amounts to $23 billion.
As for China, the coincidence is seamless. Both they, like the Democrats and Republicans, like the Deep Statethe deep state, agree that the Asian giant is the main enemy to defeat. All of them identify China as “the only power with the capacity to challenge America’s global primacy.”
Even the public disagreements between Harris and Trump over the Ukraine war have to do with what they call “the China challenge” and their “assertive” strategy. Trump has repeated, like a mantra, since the Russian invasion of Ukraine began, that if he becomes president again he will end said war “in 24 hours.” The hours he will spend calling Putin and discussing the terms of the agreement that will end it. This is a typically unrealizable electoral promise, which he could begin to break the day after his return to the White House.
But it could be more serious than it initially seems if Trump, on the other hand, is really committed to the goal he announced at a recent rally to “separate Russia from China.” Powers that, as is well known, have been united in a solid alliance by Washington’s decision to incorporate Ukraine into NATO and to breach both the Minsk 1 and 2 agreements signed by the Russians and Ukrainians, as well as to send the correveidile from Boris Johnson to kyiv to force the Ukrainian side to break the pre-agreement by signing with the Russians in Istanbul, a few weeks after the Russian invasion began.
In that sense, the apparently much more realistic peace proposal in Ukraine, recently formulated by JD Vance, Trump’s candidate for vice president, can be interpreted as a first step. It has three points: 1. Immediate ceasefire.2. Creation of a demilitarized zone around the current front line and 3. Opening of peace negotiations. And it could be the means that would allow Russia to be offered a hidden agreement that would exchange Ukraine’s neutrality desired by the Kremlin for its neutrality in the war against China or at least distancing itself from it. It would be a strategy opposite to the strategy designed by Henry Kissinger and staged with Richard Nixon’s meeting with Mao in Beijing in the 1970s. We cannot expect anything different from Harris than the escalation of the war in Ukraine promoted by Biden.
Regarding the urgency of reindustrializing the United States, both are once again in agreement, because as a senior Pentagon official has said, “the military power of a nation that is not backed by a solid industrial base is neither viable nor credible.” But the differences in how to do it and what to do it with are very important. Trump wants to do it with a mercantilist policy, a mixture of mercantilism and liberalism: impose tariffs on all imported products and exempt from taxes all industrial companies, both national and foreign capital, that settle and produce on North American soil. It is to be expected that Harris, on the other hand, will continue in the White House the same Biden industrialization policy that uses public subsidies and tax benefits for new companies, placing emphasis on companies that bet on renewable energies or guarantee the maintenance of American primacy in the field of cutting-edge technologies in computing and robotics. It has also opted for the production of a new generation of nuclear weapons.
Both also agree in defending at all costs the status of the dollar as a world reserve currency, only Trump is once again more aggressive and proposes sanctioning countries that refuse to do so.
The area where the differences between Harris and Trump are irreconcilable is in the cultural area.
The area where the differences between Harris and Trump are irreconcilable is in the cultural area. Culture in the traditional sense and in the postmodern sense. Trump, who is himself a patriarch, embodies the values of patriarchal culture and its cult of violence. And although he does not usually express his public opposition to abortion, his electoral results depend largely on those who militantly oppose it. On the other hand, he takes less care to make public his opposition to environmental policies: multinational gas and oil companies are at the top of the list of major donors to his electoral campaign. Followed a short distance by donations from the National Rifle Association, which defends the right of American citizens to arm themselves to the teeth. Who currently have 300 million firearms in their hands.
Harris, on the other hand, is considered a defender of the control and limitation of the sale of weapons to civilians, the right to abortion (the so-called reproductive rights) and all the objectives of the policy of defending gender identities, characteristic of the culture Woke.
-.
