monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Yes, there is this possibilty.

It's still disturbing when someone literally parrots this term which is rooted in prejudice.

But cj perhaps knows from his repeatedly used sources that "Globalist" is understood as code for "Jews".

That is not my understanding. Are some Jews globalists? Sure they are but so are also Islamists, Corporate leaders, Communists and corrupt politicians and bureaucrats in the EU and the US.

You seem to have more of a problem with Jews than I do.

This calmly explains what special kind of hypocritical the calls to unite are. Will Democrats and Trump haters ever take a look at themselves? They can if they watch this.

I do not care what you think is a dogwhistle. That terms is just a weapon in your propaganda war, it is used to promote hate and division like most of what you say. WOOF.

Someone's been keeping with their Zimmer reading.

The Origins of the 'Globalist' Slur

President Trump recently used the epithet to describe his outgoing National Economic Council director—but the seeds of its disparaging use were firmly planted 75 years ago.
MARCH 14, 2018

After National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn announced his resignation last week, President Trump offered a back-handed compliment to his departing adviser: “He may be a globalist, but I still like him.” Mick Mulvaney, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, chimed in with his own statement: “I never expected that the co-worker I would work closest, and best, with at the White House would be a ‘globalist.’”

Despite the seemingly joking use of the term “globalist” by Trump and Mulvaney, many were quick to point to the word’s unseemly past as an anti-Semitic slur, embraced in alt-right circles before spreading into broader political discourse. As the Anti-Defamation League’s Jonathan Greenblatt put it, “Where the term originates from is a reference to Jewish people who are seen as having allegiances not to their countries of origin like the United States, but to some global conspiracy.” Greenblatt said it’s “disturbing” when public officials “literally parrot this term which is rooted in prejudice.”

While the latest round of “globalist” name-calling may stem from the likes of Steve Bannon and Alex Jones, the word has a history that long predates the Trump era. To understand the complex roots of the “globalist” epithet, let’s turn the clock back 75 years, to 1943.
..................
Too go back 75 years:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/03/the-origins-of-the-globalist-slur/555479/

This is old, but we can read it with a sigh of relief:

Art of the no-deal: Is Trump a "transactional" president or a Hitler wannabe? Maybe it's both
Is Trump just an ego-driven salesman, or a discount-store dictator trolling democracy into its grave?

By ANDREW O'HEHIR
MARCH 24, 2018 4:00PM (UTC)


There’s a recurring and perhaps unresolvable debate about the nature of the Trump presidency that came into sharp focus after another week of apparent White House chaos. Is Donald Trump a “transactional” president shaped by the business world, as many of his defenders and normalizers argue, a non-ideological or anti-ideological CEO concerned only with wins and losses and the proverbial “art of the deal”? Or is he an aspiring fascist dictator, a discount-store Hitler scheming to subvert the Constitution, overthrow democracy and impose his will on a nation that largely despises him?

Those propositions sound as if they directly contradict each other, and are generally meant that way. One version generally supports the thesis that Trump might not be any big deal, in historical terms: He is a puzzling accident or one-off anomaly, a hurricane whose landfall could not have been predicted. Once we clean up the damage (which is admittedly extensive), our democracy will more or less return to the way it “functioned” before 2016. The second version presents Trump in stark apocalyptic terms, as an existential threat to democracy in his own right and a vivid symbol of a political, moral and cultural crisis that has been a long time coming.

I don’t think we can say that one of those Trumps is true and the other is false. If we carefully consider Trump’s words and deeds, and his apparent relationship to history, they start to look like two sides of the same coin. Trump is both a crafty, small-minded salesman and a vainglorious dreamer with a limitless ego. The strange tension between those things is a major source of his power. He is not driven by any recognizable ideology beyond a belief in his own greatness — but that belief is infused with the bigotry, misogyny and crude nationalism of a small-minded salesman from Queens.

In the past week we have seen Trump stage a remarkable consolidation of power, firing his secretary of state, his national security adviser and his personal lawyer — all of them members of the despised “establishment” — and surrounding himself with a core of right-wing zealots. Many observers, including Salon’s Heather Digby Parton, expect him to fire Attorney General Jeff Sessions or Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein next (if not both), leading to the direct or indirect shutdown of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation — and calling the bluff of the Republican leadership in Congress, which will of course capitulate.

That is the pre-fascist or proto-fascist Trump, surely, the Trump of the not-so-veiled threats of police-state violence, strongman rule or nuclear war. This is the Trump who constantly dares the media and political class to take his hateful insults seriously or to back away from them once again, ceding him another few inches of collective meaning and power. On the rare occasions when Trump himself is forced to retreat, he muddies the water by pretending he never said the offensive thing, or didn’t mean it. Did he say Mexico would pay for his nonexistent wall? Did he say some Nazis were fine people? Did he suggest that Hillary Clinton should be sent to prison? OK, he definitely said those things. But wasn’t it all in fun?

But we also saw the “transactional” Trump this week, who behaves in exactly the same gaslight-scented fashion. He imposed stringent-sounding tariffs on imported steel and aluminum, suggesting a return to the “economic nationalism” of Steve Bannon — but exempted most of the countries from which we actually import steel and aluminum. In a seemingly pointless piece of theater, the president briefly pretended on Friday that he might veto the “omnibus” spending bill that had just passed Congress by a large bipartisan majority. Ultimately someone convinced Trump (or he understood from the beginning) that even he could not get away with single-handedly provoking a government shutdown while blaming others for it.

I would argue that the transactional Trump and the fascist Trump are so closely integrated as to be one and the same. They are in tension but not in contradiction. His veto threat on Friday was both things at once, and not half as incoherent as it may have appeared. As so often happens, Trump apparently took his cues from coverage on Fox News, where commentators complained that the omnibus bill failed to fund the president’s border wall and, secondarily, failed to resolve the situation of the undocumented immigrants covered by DACA.

But to depict Trump as a reactive moron, simply parroting the talking points of “Fox & Friends,” misses the point. Rather, he seized on an opportunity to galvanize his core supporters and bind them to him, and a chance to appear mighty, magnanimous yet persecuted, all at the same time. If he had real power and wasn’t burdened by the sclerotic demands of the legislative process, then the dreamers would be showered with love, the big, beautiful wall would be erected tomorrow and America’s greatness would be restored. Instead, our leader’s feet remain mired in the swamp of “politics,” a word Trump frequently deploys as an insult, meaning “that which does not bend to my will.”


Effectively, Trump’s wannabe-dictator mode and his shifty-negotiator mode are different strategic approaches to the same problem: How to maximize his power and control political discourse without commanding anything close to majority support. This is a new problem in terms of American presidential politics, which have generally been based on the idea of patching together a majority coalition out of disparate demographic slices. Trump hardly even bothers to pretend to speak for the whole country, and when he talks about “Americans,” we all have a pretty good idea who is included and who isn’t.

There is a clear historical precedent for this, and yes, I mean what you think I mean.

Comparing Trump and the semi-reconstructed Republican Party to Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party is inexact in many ways. As Thomas Childers’ new one-volume history “The Third Reich” makes clear, the social and economic conditions are very different, and there is no reason to believe the outcome will be nearly as catastrophic. But one cannot read Childers’ book without concluding that as a cultural and political phenomenon, the rise of Trumpism echoes the rise of Nazism with an eerie resonance. (In case you’re not getting the point, Childers’ chapter on the decisive German elections of 1932 is titled “Making Germany Great Again.”)

It’s positively chilling to read Childers’ account of the extraordinary media blitz deployed by the Nazis in their 1932 election campaign, which was unlike anything ever seen in European politics. One could reasonably call it “social media,” as permitted by the technology of the time. The party produced 50,000 phonograph records of Hitler’s speeches, small enough to be mailed to voters’ homes. Short films — the campaign ads of the day — were brought from town to town and projected against outdoor walls at night. Special leaflets designed by the party’s “market research” division “were addressed to every conceivable social and demographic group — shopkeepers, civil servants, farmers, workers, Catholics, Protestants, the old, the young, women.”

We now think of the Nazis as the party of virulent anti-Semitism and attempted global conquest, understandably enough. But Childers explains that during the party’s electoral campaigns it emphasized spectacle and confrontation over ideology, and its positions were often incoherent or contradictory: They promised higher prices to farmers and lower prices to city dwellers. “Hitler and Goebbels understood that to an electorate grown cynical and angry, the facts didn’t matter,” Childers writes; no one wanted “a nuanced discussion of the issues.”

Hitler successfully mobilized a mass constituency of middle-class and working-class Germans from across the political spectrum, fueled by “deep-seated anger and anxiety” and drawn to his themes of overt nationalism and “vague, often contradictory promises of dramatic ‘change.’” But the Nazis never attracted even 40 percent of the vote in any remotely fair election; their theory, which proved to be correct, was that a fanatical and devoted cult following, even if a minority, could overwhelm a divided and confused democratic opposition. I don't think I need to ask whether any of that sounds familiar.

Whether or not there is any degree of intentionality in Trump’s echo of Nazi politics, that’s the right context for understanding his seemingly incompatible modes. His presidency is always intended to confuse his foes and invigorate his followers, and to enrage both audiences (albeit in different ways). By commanding the stage that way, Trump believes, he can both survive politically and expand his personal power and his greatness. He has yet to be proven wrong. Unlike Hitler, mercifully, Trump  has no organized party apparatus to speak of and no grand vision of a thousand-year American Reich (or anything else) after his own departure from the scene.

It has often been suggested that Trump is primarily a showman, a performer who has cast himself in the role of the “wrestling heel,” to borrow the analogy of my colleague Chauncey DeVega. That’s an important aspect of the Trump phenomenon, but it does not explain the whole thing. Like any great performer, Trump believes in the role he’s playing, until he moves on to another one. Like any great salesman, he believes the lies that come out of his mouth while he utters them — and is fully prepared, hours or days later, to deny he ever said them at all.

I’m not much interested in Donald Trump’s psychology or “inner life,” which is a field of pulverized bones if ever there was one. But the real problem in America is not him but us: We don’t know how to make sense of Trump, in the present tense, and we can’t tell what role he is likely to play in history. Is he an aberration, an interruption in the regularly scheduled program of democracy, soon to be corrected by Robert Mueller or impeachment or the 2020 election? Or is he the living embodiment of a long process of decay, a death’s-head jester jubilantly tweeting out the end of the American experiment? I’m pretty sure the answer lies somewhere in between — but more to the point, it's an answer we have yet to write.

I don't know what you're talking about and I doubt that you do either. If you're making a reference to Howard Zinn, I can inform you that I've never so much as cracked a page of any of his published work.

Ben Zimmer is totally qualified, unlike neocon "authorities". From Wikipedia:
"
Benjamin Zimmer (born 1971)[1] is an American linguist, lexicographer, and language commentator. He is a language columnist for The Wall Street Journal and contributing editor for The Atlantic. He was formerly a language columnist for The Boston Globe and The New York Times Magazine, and editor of American dictionaries at Oxford University Press. Zimmer was also a former executive editor of Vocabulary.com and VisualThesaurus.com.

Career

Zimmer graduated from Yale University in 1992 with a B.A. degree in linguistics, and went on to study linguistic anthropology at the University of Chicago.[1] For his research on the languages of Indonesia, he received fellowships from the National Science Foundation,[5] the Fulbright Program,[6] and the Social Science Research Council.[7] He taught at the University of California, Los Angeles, Kenyon College and Rutgers University.[1]

In 2005, Zimmer was named a research associate at the Institute for Research in Cognitive Science at the University of Pennsylvania and became a regular contributor to Language Log, a group weblog on language and linguistics.[8] He was named editor for American dictionaries at Oxford University Press in 2006,[9] and the following year launched "From A to Zimmer," a weekly lexicography column on the OUP blog.[10]

In 2008, Zimmer was appointed executive producer of the Visual Thesaurus, an interactive reference tool from Thinkmap, Inc.[11] He edits the online content of the Visual Thesaurus and its sister site Vocabulary.com, and writes a regular column on word origins entitled "Word Routes."[1]

Zimmer's research on word origins was frequently cited by William Safire's "On Language" column for The New York Times Magazine. On March 11, 2010, Magazine editor Gerald Marzorati announced the appointment of Zimmer as the new “On Language” columnist, succeeding Safire, the founding and regular columnist until his death in late 2009.[12] Zimmer's last "On Language" column was published on February 27, 2011. In it, Zimmer wrote that the column was "finally coming to a close" and that "it [was] time to bid adieu, after some 1,500 dispatches from the frontiers of language."

On December 18, 2011, The Boston Globe announced that Zimmer would be a regular language columnist for the newspaper's Sunday Ideas section.[13] His Globe column continued until June 28, 2013, when he began a new weekly language column for The Wall Street Journal's Saturday Review section entitled "Word on the Street."[14]

Zimmer's writing on language has appeared in two blog anthologies: Ultimate Blogs (Vintage, 2008, ISBN 978-0-307-27806-7)[15][16] and Far from the Madding Gerund (William, James, 2006, ISBN 978-1-59028-055-3).[17][18] He has also written for Slate,[19] The New York Times Book Review,[20] The New York Times Sunday Review,[21] and The Atlantic.[22]

Zimmer is the chair of the American Dialect Society's New Words Committee and has served on the society's Executive Council.[23] He is also a member of the Dictionary Society of North America.[24]

The Linguistic Society of America gave Zimmer its first ever Linguistics Journalism Award in 2014.[25] In January 2017, Zimmer was one of the speakers in the LSA's inaugural Public Lectures on Language series.[26]
"

My relief will occur when Trump and his cohorts, cronies, family and others have been cemented in the historical past. Shown as examples of how things should never be.

For now, it's too early to become lackadaisical and comfortably settled. The Republicans in both houses who allowed the destruction to happen, are still in office. The mechanism which brought the U.S.A. to this place, has yet to be located and destroyed.

Don't forget, Hitler struck, then regrouped having learned lessons. It would not be without reason to believe many Republicans might be trying something similar. Oh, it may be a different face at the helm; yet, the same agenda.

Do not get lulled into a false sense of security by the exit of Trump.

I vote that one. I never knew anyone who so obvious a "ME ME dictator" as he is and yet have some relatively smart people actually buying into what he been selling since the beginning of this nightmare in 2015. I'm not talking about congress who ought to know better, but just your everyday common man or woman. Trump fans are not always the red necked hicks who show up at his rallies.

This lady means business.

She has patriotic Americans behind her. You know the ones the Democrats have **** on for a long time. The final insult is stealing the election. They are going to get caught.

I hope Powell has enough security. I put nothing past Trump's and America's enemies.

Of course, not the jerks on these threads as they aren't too smart!

Thank you. He sounds like someone whose work I'd like to read.

whole lotta unsupported charges with no evidence given to back them up... she says they WILL have EVIDENCE IN A WEEK, I.E. THEY'RE KUST BLOWING SMOKE NOW,WITH PIE IN THE SKY INA WEK. rEMINDS ME OF TRUMP'S CLAIM ecvrump's charges he had crack investigators looking into obama's birth and he'd have sensarional new evidence in a week That was five yhears ago. Mever any such evidence, and Obama produced an undeniable birth certificste. jUst another loopy right wing conmspiracy theory.

Democratic hopefuls Warren and Klochubar are on record complaining about Dominion voting machines. Were they wrong? What are you going to do when fraud is proven?

Pay close attention to last meme. It is about men. Something the Democrats sadly lack.

Rudi should be disbarred - period

What is the excuse for that? Obvious cover up of massive fraud. It can be nothing else. Someone explain how it is not.[color]

[quote]
🚨Breaking News Alert🚨, according to @RepDougCollins on @newsmax, Georgia officials will now allow @GOP and 2020 Trump campaign officials to be at the tables and inspect ballots, so Republican observers will be allowed in now.

— President-Elect Brandon McAdory FORAMERICA1984 (@BMFORAMERICA45) November 13, 2020[/quote]
Snood, hightor, and others how is this fair?
https://qm.news/eyes-on-georgia-the-fight-is-on/