W.J. Astore
Answering a friend’s challenge
Recently, a friend wrote to challenge me to “write a great article about Trump’s introduction of ‘lightning war’ into politics,” citing Nazi Germany’s use of Blitzkrieg in the opening campaigns of World War II. My friend sympathizes with Trump, so his political Blitzkrieg comparison wasn’t meant pejoratively.
Whether you call it Blitzkrieg or a “flood the zone” strategy, there’s little doubt Trump’s rapid-fire orders and actions have put those who oppose him on the defensive. Democrats are throwing up their hands in surrender-like motions. Democratic House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries plaintively asked: “What leverage do we have?” Then he added: “They [the Republicans] control the House, the Senate, and the presidency. It’s their government.”
The Democratic battle flag is a white cross on a field of white. They claim they can do nothing to stop Trump and his rampaging billionaire sidekick, Elon Musk.
It’s funny: When the Democrats had control of the House, Senate, and presidency, I often recall them complaining they couldn’t get much done due to obstruction by Republicans. How come Republicans can obstruct but not Democrats?
Leaving that aside, what about my friend’s praise of Trump as having launched Blitzkrieg politics? Reversing Clausewitz, is politics simply a continuation of war by other means?
America, so I’ve been taught, was founded as a republic with a Constitution. We claim to be a nation of laws. We like to think we’re a representative democracy. The House and Senate are supposed to be deliberative bodies where laws are made and money is spent in accordance with the will of the people.
I know: nice fantasy, right?
The U.S. government has become corrupted by money and special interests. We know our representatives rarely represent us. They represent their owners and donors. That breeds cynicism and a certain level of affection among some for Trump as a disruptor.
But smashing government isn’t the smartest and most effective way of reforming or even of rebuilding it. Empowering autocrats and plutocrats like Trump and Musk isn’t going to produce democracy and a government that serves the people. A Trump “political Blitzkrieg” will likely echo the Nazi Blitzkrieg of 1939-41, featuring widespread destruction and subjugation of “enemies.” It’s not a method conducive to greater justice and a more perfect union.
So, to my friend’s challenge, I say this: Political Blitzkrieg may provide an illusion of victory, but “victory” for whom, and for what? Wars, whether real shooting ones or political ones, are corrosive to liberty, freedom, and equality. In war, it’s typically the workers and poor who suffer most, the rich who profit most, as power congeals at the top.
Trump’s so-called Blitzkrieg, combined with a Democratic attitude of surrender, is producing a government by and for men like Elon Musk, even more so than it already is. If you truly desire plutocracy and one-party rule, Trump/Musk is your dynamic duo.
I still prefer democracy, however imperfect, and a system that doesn’t elevate and empower the richest among us as dictators.
Bracing Views 
US President Donald Trump has reportedly greenlit the transfer of 11-ton bombs, dubbed the “Mother of All Bombs” (MOAB), to the Israeli regime, a decision his predecessors avoided.
Trump’s West Asia envoy, Steve Witkoff, unveiled the historic agreement to deliver the GBU-43 Massive Ordnance Air Blast, as the bomb is officially named, to Tel Aviv, according to German media.
Israel has coveted non-nuclear mega-bombs since the early 2000s, yet successive US presidents, including George Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden, had been reluctant to greenlight it.
Even Trump himself had declined to authorize such transfers during his first term.
The unprecedented delivery of the MOAB signals a new era of deepening American-Israeli military collaboration, one that analysts warn could dangerously heighten regional tensions.
LikeLike
An interesting take on Trump’s early successes, Mr. Astore. We are far from smashing government, but disruption in the spirit of reform is wonderful to see.
Meanwhile, as you allude to, the Dems have fallen back to their core set of skills: slandering, cheating, and hating. Reminds me of the famous Navy Seals saying about performance in a crisis…”In times of crisis you don’t rise to the occasion…you fall back to your level of training.”
This time around, Trump knows that the Dems will do absolutely anything (legal or otherwise) to resist. Know your enemy…key.
I do hope Progressives resist the Crab Barrel mentality and support some of the good changes being introduced. In your article I noted no acknowledgement of the massive savings already generated or the corruption unveiled. I’ll be watching and listening closely as the Trump DOGE Team rolls through Progressives’ favorite whipping boy (the DoD); will the successes that will no doubt come be hailed, or will they be pooh-poohed? America is thinking objectively now, and (as I have said before) Progressives need to do the same if they want to be taken seriously.
Trump’s blitzkrieg will probably (and should) continue until the midterms. At that point, with wins on improving the economy, fixing the border, reducing fraud, waste & abuse, and elimination of crazy, harmful Progressive policies, Trump will be positioning Vance nicely for 2028. Hopefully with Tulsi as a running mate. Four years of Trump, eight with Vance, and eight with Tulsi has a nice ring to it. Twenty years of genuine Leadership to save and rebuild America for a great future.
LikeLike
This fantasy regarding Trump’s strategy is consistent with the delusive thinking besetting his most ardent followers. The approach is meant to paint democrats as the party that has “fallen back to their core set of skills: slandering, cheating, and hating”. This is the usual inversion of MAGA supporters. The bizarre assertion that Trump’s “blitzkrieg” will make big improvements with”…wins on improving the economy, fixing the border, reducing fraud, waste & abuse, and elimination of crazy, harmful Progressive policies…” Two reputable economists expect that tarrifs will result in a loss of $1700 to each American household. So if these are the “wins on improving the economy”, this pie in the sky kind of thinking will result in victims to blame when the economy begins to flounder. Also, the so-called “reduction of waste” seems to mean the elimination of the only international agency that is highly regarded abroad, the USAID Agency.
LikeLike