Holy Alliance/Unholy Conflict: America as a White Christian Nation Joined with or vs. Orthodox Mother Russia

      Some 24 minutes into "Week in the News" on NPR's On Point Friday, 13 Jan. 2017, Elaine from Wisconsin praised Donald Trump (and Jesse Ventura) for friendship with Vladimir Putin as the strong leader who has overseen the re-Christianizing of Russia and making it (therefore?) a free country. So let us consider the possibility that some groups of voters who'd been pretty reliably anti-USSR could lately become pro-Russia, now that Russia is free of godless Communism and helping Christendom become great again.

      I grew up with the image of Alexis de Tocqueville in the middle-ish 19th century looking at a map and predicting the competition for global influence in the 20th century would be between the Russian Empire and the USA; and I figured that's what was happening, with the godless Communism v. Capitalist free-market freedom schtick largely propaganda. I knew that some "old China hands" took the "godless" bit very seriously, but .... But I underestimated how seriously many of my fellow Americans saw us as "one nation under God" and not in Great-Power competition with the Russians but a Manichean, Apocalyptic, John-of-Revelation struggle against godless Evil.

      Now that Czar Vladimir, The Shirtless, has come to Jesus and dragged a lot of Russian culture with him, hey, he's okay.

      Uh, no. Not exactly.

      The Russians are still competitors with us for influence and power, and those competitions can get very rough without major ideological issues: Europe's Wars of Religion were major horror shows in the late 16th and 17th centuries, but World War I was sufficiently nasty, thank you — plus there's also the possibility of the USA as a secular Republic v. Holy Mother Russia, the Third Rome and Protector of the Orthodox Faith (and traditional reactionary empire).

      We need to cooperate with the Russians on Syria and the "Levant" more generally, plus issues of nuclear overkill and proliferation plus climate change plus anti-terrorism plus ... well et bloody cetera. However, the competition and conflicts are there and serious and a bunch of Americans enthralled with Putin the Pious would be "useful idiots" for him, reinforcing what may turn out to be the US "Idiot in Chief" (if Trump isn't a political genius, fooling enemies, such as I into underestimating him).

      The problem with literal Manichean views is that they're more figuratively Manichean, dividing the world into neat categories and allowing people to zip over from hating the USSR and its godless Communism to enrapture with a new Russia basking in freedom (for the Church).

      Buckle up, buckeroos, and be sure the airbags are working; it's going to be a rough ride through minefields in the era of Donald of Orange and Vladimir the Revanchist and and other strong men of an ancient, and deadly, tradition.

A Good Reason to Vote for Donald Trump

         A fellow member of our local Democratic Club said that he'd yet to hear an intelligent argument for voting for Donald Trump. Well, I heard one, from an older woman of, apparently, working-class or lower-middle-class background. It went like this: "I'm a conservative. I vote for the conservative party — and if that jackass is leading this mule-train, well I'm on for the ride."

         Now, people pushing radical changes shouldn't call themselves conservatives, but I get her point, and it looks more and more like she made an intelligent choice in voting for Trump. Instead of the usual bait-and-switch of Republican politics that Thomas Frank talked about in What's the Matter with Kansas (2004), Trump may've offered her some solid chum. She will get economic "conservatism" of the rampant capitalist variety, plus, eventually, with any luck for her, a Supreme Court that will chip away at abortion rights — and maybe overturn Roe v. Wade. Etc., depending on the Supreme Court's calendar and opportunities. She won't get a wall on the Mexican border nor truly massive roundups of Mexican nationals on US territory — but she may not care much about such issues: obviously she displayed a healthy skepticism about "that jackass" running for President.

         She will get cutbacks in socialistic programs like the "social safety net" and a comfortable jingoism in domestic politics. Abroad, she may get that jingoism combined with old-fashioned right-wing isolationism, in uneasy balance with movement toward cooperation and perhaps alliance with such reactionary regimes as those of the latest version of the Russian Empire and, of all places, the Philippines.

         Plus, possibly, she will see a rapprochement with the Nationalist Chinese that would delight old China Hands, and striking out against obstreperous Muslims and such remaining godless Communists as those in Cuba.

         Her support of Trump helped bring about a regime that will screw over a lot of Americans, greatly harm the environment, and help destabilize a fragile world order — but in terms of choosing effective means to achieve her ends, her choice makes sense and, in amoral terms, was almost brilliant.