I’m so Bored With the USA: Personality Crisis 

 

“Personality crisis, you got it while it was hot
It’s always hard to know when frustration, heartache is all you’ve got” 

 

The oh so boring Yanks are at again. This time it’s Mini-Me Deputy President J D Vance, lecturing the EU at the Paris AI summit, telling that: “America wants to partner with all of you. We want to embark on the AI revolution before us with the spirit of openness and collaboration

 

He echoed Trump’s comments on potential enforcement against US Big Tech companies, saying: “However, the Trump administration is troubled by reports that some foreign governments are considering tightening the screws on US tech companies with international footprints. America cannot and will not accept that, and we think it’s a terrible mistake, not just for the United States of America, but for your own countries.” 

Tech and tech money appears to be the power behind the throne of King Donald. Musk chipped in $270m to fund his campaign, support in attracting the Crypto brigade. Social media via X, and the use of podcasts enabled Trump to  capture a far larger share of young voters than the Democrats expected.  

The Techbarons are fast becoming the real power in the US, using their wealth and power to direct government in their favour, and to preserve and grow their dominant position. 

 

‘The Techbarons are fast becoming the real power in the US’

 

This highlights how the uber rich have the means directly or through influence to ensure that their wealth is protected/allowed to accumulate produces a vicious cycle, an inequality trap covered previously in “Left Behind, Inequality, and Why it Matters.” 

Musk is the closest to government with his so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) which is bulldozing its way through the roughly 20 government agencies. This week Musk has been defending the departments lack of transparency and claims that it operates in deep secrecy, as it pursues aggressive cost-cutting measures. 

The Doge team is reported to be seeking the removal of career officials who stood in their way and accessing sensitive data systems. 

During his defence, Musk, without offering any corroborating any evidence, said that some officials at the now gutted USAid had been taking “kickbacks” and that “quite a few people” in the government had “managed to accrue tens of millions of dollars in net worth while they are in that position”. 

Vice President Vance is a key part of the new US power equation, and will likely seek the MAGA mantle as Trump’s successor. Perhaps Trump’s vision is to establish MAGA as the base of his own political dynasty, and breakaway from the Republicans? Or, perhaps the Republicans will become part of MAGA? 

The point that highlights the power of the Techbarons, is the fact that Vance’s place as Trump’s running mate was the price of their support. Peter Thiel, David Sacks, Chamath Palihapitiya, Bill Ackman, Founders Group, et al funded Vance’s campaign and the price of their support for Trump was Vance at his side. 

Silicon Valley is becoming a loose confederation of US tech entrepreneurs united under the banner of ensuring US Tech industries dominate the global markets. Trump and Vance are their representatives on the World Stage.  

The latest representation of this power was Americas refusal to sign the AI summit’s declaration on “inclusive and sustainable” artificial intelligence, which means there is unlikely to be a concerted approach to developing and regulating the technology, unless it is driven from America. 

What was a surprise was the UK supporting the US and not signing either. Our Technology Secretary Peter Kyle described the U.S. as an “unignorable force and one that we engage with absolutely.” 

“When you see the trends in AI, it is that the trends are being set by the power of the technology itself, and America is adapting to those realities in the same way that we are.” 

Sorry, but to me this looks like a clear declaration of intent; we are Trump’s bitch! 

 

‘this looks like a clear declaration of intent; we are Trump’s bitch!’ 

 

Which brings me to PM Starmer’s personality crisis. He appears so confused by what he is and what he believes that becoming trans can’t be ruled out. 

Adding to the picture of slavish devotion to the US was the governments reaction to Trump’s decision to include the UK in the 25% tariffs he is imposing on steel and aluminium imports. Asked how the government would respond a No.10 spokesperson said the government would take a said: “It’s important that we take a considered approach to this and ensure we work through the detail.” 

That means we will do nothing. More accurately, what can we do?  

From what I can see No.10 is starting to resemble the Trump administration. Perhaps this is part of a cunning plan to undermine Farage and Reform? Or, just further evidence of a government out of ideas, and seeking a direction? 

Typically, you would expect a Labour government to maintain the state, perhaps not increase, but certainly not shrinking it, but aping Musk/Trump, Starmer is complaining about the “tepid bath of managed decline”, the state bloated with bureaucracy and therefore, inefficient. The question is, when does slashing government serves become austerity? 

“Efficiency” need  not mean require frugality. Public money should always be spent carefully, but cutting the public sector can cause future problems. As the Covid inquiry has shown, the pandemic hit an underfunded NHS, and the system couldn’t cope no matter how much the staff tried.  

The true value of the public sector only becomes apparent when the private sector has failed, for example, bailing out the banks in 2008, and Covid. 

 

‘The true value of the public sector only becomes apparent when the private sector has failed’

 

In “A Dystopian Nightmare”, I wrote about how the government had removed Marcus Bokkerink as chair of the Competition and Markets Authority, Apparently, he took the role too seriously, wanting to prevent the formation of corporate monopolies. As the previous article said he was replaced by Doug Gurr, a former country manager of Amazon UK and president of Amazon China.  

Whilst this might appear so-what it isn’t, Firstly, Amazon are well known for their monopolistic practices. Secondly this is Trump behaviour: “kick out the regulator and insert someone from a company they were seeking to regulate.” 

Then there is the governments approach to planning protections, which were described as “weeds” that needed to be “cleared out”, or barriers that should be “ripped up”, “torn down” and “kicked down”.  The message weas clear; the regulator should stop risk (which is what they exist to do) and “deliver growth”. Surely, regulators are there to manage risk, not drive growth!? 

In true Trump style Starmer is dismantling the planning system, and is going to “build, baby, build”. As for regulation: “This government will sweep it away.” 

 

‘Starmer is dismantling the planning system, and is going to “build, baby, build”’

 

As a result of his personality crisis, Starmer’s government is styling itself as “disruptors” and “insurgents”, telling his cabinet they must become “disrupters if you don’t want to be disrupted”. He meant disrupted by Reform. 

There are clear signs that the government, rather than being appalled by Trump, plan to mimic him, using shock and awe to deliver change. 

Disruption means changes away from the norm, and that is, or was the fundamental basis of Labour. All through history the established norm was government by the haves for the haves. Labour, as the UK’s socialist party, is supposed to champion the workers, redistributing wealth. 

Being disruptive would be dealing with the cost of living crisis. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation projections that real disposable incomes will fall under Labour rule shouldn’t be the case. Where is the realisation that to fix our crumbling public services the haves needs to pay more tax? 

Maybe the £392m committed to deporting undocumented migrants could be used to nurses or teachers. 

I have never accepted that people like Johnson and Farage are anti-establishment. I know Johnson was supposed to stop austerity and deliver levelling-up but he didn’t, perhaps Covid stopped him, but we will never know? Their backgrounds and neoliberal economic policies are establishment, the only difference is that Farage is a racist, but that isn’t being disruptive, it simply being nasty! 

Starmer’s personality crisis is driving him to copy Reform’s policies, and appears aimed at outflanking them in both the polls and in becoming Trump’s best buddy. 

For anyone with their eyes open this is simply endorsing the importance of Reform, their policies, and their leaders relationship with Trump. It highlights both the power of Reform and the impotence of Labour 

Back in 2015 the rise of Farage’s first party, UKIP, so unnerved the Tories that their leader, David Cameron, promised that fateful, and ultimately destructive Brexit referendum. 

Post-Brexit, Farage has turned his attention to immigration, and is using that in the same way as he did the EU in 2015. 

 In fairness, Labour has grounds for concern, Reform and Farage’s success doesn’t look to be a bubble. Unlike their predecessors,  UKIP and the Brexit party, Reform no longer lag behind the traditional parties of government. The current polls show a three-way tie between Reform, Labour and the Conservatives, all on C.25%. 

The Farage threat is strategic for Labour, but for the Conservatives it is existential. Seven months on from their worst-ever general ­election result, the Tories are still going backwards. In the latest Opinium poll, the Conservatives lose one in six of their 2024 voters to Reform, while one in three of their 2019 ­supporters now back Farage’s party. 

 

‘The Farage threat is strategic for Labour, but for the Conservatives it is existential’

 

All this throws up numerous scenarios. For example, tactical co-ordination among Conservative and Reform voters would increase the electoral threat to Labour and the LibDems. Conversely, should the Tories push into radical right terrain, this could make them unacceptable to liberal professional voters, with the spectre of Farage boosting anti-Conservative local campaigns. 

Labour appears threatened on either flank; 30% of Labour voters would consider a Reform vote, whilst >40% are thinking about the LibDems or Greens. Should Labour become more populist in their attempts to outflank Reform, they risk alienating socially liberal, anti-Farage voters, putting at risk hundreds of marginal seats where Reform is out of the running, but where Labour needs a united progressive front to prevail next time. 

In addition, Labour attempts to get Reform-style tough on immigration, won’t attract voters away Reform, it will merely confirm that they were to switch to Reform. Why have decaf when you can have a real espresso? 

This isn’t supposition, this is based on facts, which I wrote about in “Europe and the New Right”  in December 2023. 

The latest evidence was in February this year, when the current CDU leader, Friedrich Merz, proposed crackdown on asylum seekers was narrowly passed by the Bundestag with the full support of the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD). 

The vote was caused by a knife attack in a park in Bavaria, in which the suspected perpetrator was an asylum seeker, Merz broke a public pledge he had made as recently as November not to put forward any motion for which there was no agreement with the Social Democratic party (SPD) and the Greens (and which might draw the support of the AfD). By doing exactly the opposite, Merz handed a gift to the far right and damaged his own credibility.  

Recent polling by Forschungsgruppe Wahlen suggests Merz’s political gamble has not boosted support for the CDU. Instead, overall support for the AfD has stabilised at 20% of the vote share, which would make it the second-largest political party in parliament after the CDU.  

Mainstream parties in France, Austria and Holland have been equally unsuccessful with this approach. This confirms the theory about centrists copying the populist right: on tougher migration measures, voters generally prefer the original to the copy. 

 

‘Labour and Starmer are out-of-ideas, and a now grasping at straws’

 

In my opinion this approach only serves to highlight a government not able to deal with the real issues such as falling living standards and failing public services which are the real reasons for the grievances that trigger anti-migrant scapegoating. Since Mussolini in the 1920’s right-wing politicians have prospered by exploiting perceived issues by making them the issue, because mainstream parties have failed to identify or deal with the actual problems driving voter discontent. 

This leads me to conclude several things. 

Labour and Starmer are out-of-ideas, and a now grasping at straws. Their economic policy of “growth, growth and growth” is little different to anything we have seen before, and relies on the so-called trickle-down effect that Starmer had previously rubbished, if it is to help the majority. 

Elsewhere, he is slashing government, appointing yes-people, getting tough on benefit claimants, and immigrants. All of this is Trump and Farage territory. 

Finally, we are going to be America’s bitch more than ever before. Trump demands totally obedience and we will provide that in the hope he throws us a few scraps. 

 

 

“Directionless, so plain to see
A loaded gun won’t set you free” 

 

‘There are two overall themes this week.

Firstly, whilst there is the ongoing madness in King Donalds’ America, it is interesting to see where the real power might lay. The reports showing that the price of the Techbarons support and money was J D Vance as vice president, confirms what Biden told us in his farewell address, that: “Today, an oligarchy is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power and influence that really threatens our entire democracy, our basic rights and freedom.”

The US rejection of signing up to the Paris AI summit declaration shows their intent. This is going to be led by the US tech providers. Personally, I am all in favour of Chinas’ “Deepseek”.

Secondly, the personality crisis our PM is going through. He clearly has no idea what he believes, therefore he has no idea what to do. His government has only been in power for 7-months and we have had more resets, restarts, and direction changes than any government I can remember.

The latest, and most misguided, is driven by two events; the success of Reform in the polls and Trump’s election. Both have resulted in a misjudged lurch to the right. Domestically, this has done nothing but enhance Reforms’ credibility. All they need to do is to keep organising and observing whilst Labour shreds itself.

Overseas, we appear to have sided with the US regarding the AI summit, and the mealymouthed response to US steel tariffs is embarrassing.

Labour have defeated themselves. This is already a  failed government. It went wrong from the outset, when they thought doom and gloom speeches about the economy would get the public to buy into cuts, such as the winter fuel allowance.

All this achieved was to suck any business and consumer confidence out of the economy, helping to plunge the government into crisis. Now, with no clear vision for the country, Labour is floundering, and there is little to show they have a plan. Bashing migrants isn’t clever, it achieves nothing other than endorsing Farage. Reform and the electorate can smell the panic.

Musically, this has bought me a treat.

We start by highlighting the PM personality crisis with the New York Dolls classic “Personality Crisis” from their hugely influential 1973 debut album. Our best wishes go to David Johansen, the band’s singer, who is suffering from stage-4 cancer.

We finish with the equally classic “New Dawn Fades” by Joy Division in recognition of the enormous disappointment the Starmer government is proving to be. New dawn vanishes might have been more appropriate but that song is yet to be written.

Oh, for something, anything to enjoy!

Philip

 

@coldwarsteve

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

Philip Gilbert is a city-based corporate financier, and former investment banker.

Philip is a great believer in meritocracy, and in the belief that if you want something enough you can make it happen. These beliefs were formed in his formative years, of the late 1970s and 80s

Click on the link to see all Brexit Bulletins: