The fall of the house of Trump.

What I do is deconstruct nationalism in order to see good and bad for what they are, i.e. widely distributed patterns of practices throughout the world. So, if you really want to study and understand any form of abuse, exploitation, corruption, etc. you should examine it closely as a practice and analyze it and figure out why/how it would be supported in one social/political/cultural context more than others, and/or how it might be more hidden in some places than others, or how cultural variations make different cultural practices seem more different than they are.

There is a global economy where all sorts of flows of commodities and people are moved around to serve various interests. Various corporations in the US, including the US government, are subject to global influence in various ways. You cannot assume the the US government or anything going on with US people is immune from influence. If you have noticed how much negative press has befallen the Trump administration for attempting to stand up to trade and illegal trafficking, you should understand that the interests behind all that negative press are rich and powerful. This is not the global poor who are funding the anti-Trumpism.

More bafflegab. Trump is a terrorist and war criminal just like every other US prez since WWII. The US is the major cause of all the world's problems and the vast suffering of the world's poor.

Syria, Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Cuba, Libya, ... the list goes on and on chronicling US evil.

I talked with someone who lived in Tehran who said the air was filthy with car exhaust. How can you blame the US for poverty in that area if that fuel is being wasted on driving around a city instead of used for farming and shipping/distribution of farm produce (food)?

You should have talked to some people in US cities where the air is equally filthy.

You should have talked to some people in Tehran that could fill you in on the US terrorizing Iranians since the US government illegally overthrew the government of Iran in 1953.

You should address the US's long long history of war crimes, terrorism, genocides, ... .

I have been watching the Iran nuclear deal since it created a path to nuclear power under Obama's logic that nuclear would be a good source of energy if the weapons threat could be prevented. Once the deal was cut, investors started pulling their investments, which certainly must have taken a toll on business earnings in that area, but the real cause of those investors pulling their money was not that the nuclear deal was pulled but because the global economy has done insufficient diligence to move beyond the need for toxic forms of power like nuclear. It was as irresponsible for the Obama administration to promote nuclear power as it is for the Trump administration to promote 'clean coal' or as it is to promote the idea that oil conservation is no longer necessary, as I also read in a recent article.

The bottom line is that people can live well without nuclear power or other unsustainable industries. The fact that people have cars and fuel to drive around in Tehran is proof that they could be using those vehicles and fuel for agriculture and food transport, which means they are not poor. If you say that humans don't live on food alone, I agree with you but there's no reason to blame the US or anyone else for failing to support nuclear power and other unsustainable and unsafe forms of energy for all.

What really amazes me is that the world has committed to that Paris accord to reduce CO2, yet there is insufficient will to reform industry and consumer lifestyles to levels conservative enough to be sustainable indefinitely. Really, when people live very conservatively there's not much difference between poverty and prosperity. You don't need to buy lots of new things all the time. You just need to buy things you need sometimes when the old ones break. If people would just accept that, there would be enough to go around for everyone and it wouldn't harm the environment or be unsustainable because everyone's footprint would be very small.