I just wanted to add, in my poor english, that there are some other big mistakes and omisions in the original article, wich i also consider quite interesting and still a good intellectual efford.
First of all, that whathever happens in the modern world, you can’t dissasociatte the movements of the national states (including wars) from the monopolic movements of the enterprises and, generally speaking, capitalism. Sorry for being ‘that classical marxist’, but there’s no way to explain the international policy of the United States in the world in the last decades if not seeing lead by some of their biggest industries.
Yet you can try to explain the history of the recent decades without having a marxist background (ok, lets say it’s just a theory, and i don’t think you have to put the class struggle in everything you want to analyse) but there’s some things that you may not want to forget. Since the ‘60’s, the United States and Europe have been promoting the civil war in half of the world, from Latin America to Middle East, from the caribean states to some African countries post institucional de-colonisation. For the populations of the countries from the third world (wich may be by far more than half of the world population) there’s no chance that Trump could be worst than George W. Bush. The way that Tobias’s article is written may give the impression that we come from several decades of peace and developement but that may be true just for the white middle-class population in the central countries. But even beside this fairy tale of the western civilisation, is the black people that fullfits the prisions in United States (the ‘biggest’ country in terms of prisionalisation), and there’s still a part of the white population who really wants to come back to the confederate years. Of course, United States is a “big” country in terms of economic and war power, but not in terms of developement or equality of opportunities. The have big problems in terms of poverty and children developement. Trump is not just a dictatorship who accidentaly felt from the sky: ¿why he may be worst than George W. Bush?, and more important, ¿why are we forgetting that Bush -a war criminal- was elected president two times, and that it has been only 7 years since his last time in the white house?.
As Tobias suggest, it’s neccesary to read several voices of the history. So, let’s not forget recent history; more than ever, it’s neccesary to read about how the US gave aid to the islamic extremist in Middle East just to disturb some socialist experiments like Afganistan (not really aligned with the URSS) and some progressive movements like Iran the late 70's. Yes, that experiences felt out, and most of the rebels from the middle east are now part of the ISIS. Lets not forgget Osama Bin Laden being supported by the CIA as an example of this tricky turn of history, and lets not forget about the NATO countries going to the middle east just for helping US enterprises to get oil (yes, as absurd it is). We also have to read about the feminist kurdist resitance, against the ISIS and also against the Turkish state. We have to read about the ‘Plan Condor’ in Latin America, and the way that the CIA gave financial and military aid to the neoliberalist dictatorships in Chile, Argentina and many countries across the continent to understand why it doesn’t matter for us if the president of the US is republican or democrat (we’ll be fucked up anyway), and we have to make a strong critique to the mainstream economic theories born from Milton Friedman and the Chicago School, because in fact, they were personally supporting this genocidal goverments here while Kissinger was given a Nobel Prize. And they’re still being teached in the schools (from popular schools in the third world to the most famous world universities as just “economics”) without having a real and solid scientific background. You can also think in the role of France in Algeria, Belgium in the Congo, etcetera, etcetera.
So, it’s neccesary for the liberal people in the academy from the first world to know that they’re not just the world but just a small part of it, that most of the world just doesn’t share your problems, and that while you’re lamenting about Trump there are strong problems that neither Obama wanted to solve. I don’t want to sound agressive, i mean that the way you put the problems is not neccesary the way to get it solved. In fact, why are we talking why did Trump won the Republican elections and not why didn’t Bernie Sanders became the Democratic candidate? I find it would be interesting to debate why such a strong movement lost to an inpassionate candidate who is the same and same as always (at least the Republican movement took some riskes). Also, why are we just thinking about Brexit and not of the fall of the UK, wich may be a good thing for the world history? It made surface for Scotland the possibility of the independence, and for Ireland the possibility of reunification, and also it makes weacker the monarchy, wich is a good thing for the democratic developement.
I want to make also another remark. Vladimir Putin may not be a good president, may not be a democratic gobernor, and yes, he’s authoritarian and narcissistic. But he just doesn’t seem to be the person that wants a nuclear war all over the world. Yes, he’s full of shit and he may be a criminal war. But just not as criminal and irresponsable as the last president of United States before Obama (GWB). He’s not the same as Trump as Trump is not the same as Hitler (i know you didn’t wrote in that way), but more than Hitler, again, we should think about the social movement below him, as someone told before in the comments.
So, i’ll finish by making this point. We may be near to the apocalypste or a III WW, but it’s not that different from last year, or 5 years ago, or 10, or whatever. The distance is the same, the difference is that the scenarios have change by litte situations. Faces and institutions may be differents but the posibilities are just the same. So, it may be important to make the efford to think in the first domino piece, but as the general reflection of John Robert says, we have to see the entire game and all the relationships. History is not mechanic and the future is not written. And i personally think that more than ever, it’s neccesary to put in crisis the western hegemony since it just give the impression of stability even to well-thinked academics, who may think there’s kind of peace, but instead it introjects a different form of colonisation ruled by the economic and moral domination of the central states.
Again, sorry, not for not being able to write perfect english, but for not being able to have the best communication.