Eric Draitser (The Curious Case of Pro-Trump Leftism, https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/07/27/the-curious-case-of-pro-trump-leftism/, Counterpunch July 27, 2018) does a nice job putting words in the mouths of those whom he calls "Left Trumpists" --- all without identifying any of them or linking to any of their writings.
Draitser may be writing from "back on Planet Earth", but from where does he get the notion that "those Trumpy lefties" don’t agree that "Trump has been the most bellicose president in recent memory"? Whether or not he is more bellicose than a President Hillary would have been or a President Pence might be is an entirely different question.
Speaking of Hillary, perhaps Draitser would like to explain what he means (even if he attributes this to so-called "Trump leftists") when he writes: "The Hillary-Comey-Maddow cabal hashed out a plan to destroy Trump by forcing the actual left into talking about Trump’s actual dangerous policies that are openly acknowledged and easily researched by anyone with an internet connection." What pray tell is the "actual left" and could it, or does it, actually need to be forced by Hillary, Comey or Maddow into talking about Trump's "actual dangerous policies"? What kind of left is that?
Nobody that I know of, right or left, spouts a "Trump-as-peacenik line". The analysis that I have seen considers only that Trump is attempting to reorient American foreign policy (à la Kissinger) and thereby split Russia off from its developing alliance with China. The neocons for the most part think that's a non-starter, and that may be one thing they are right about. In any case, no one is saying that Trump is an "anti-imperialist", only that he is considering a pragmatic move to split the imperial spoils when it is becoming obvious the US alone cannot continue to hang onto all of them.
So once again, Draitser is setting up a straw man with the following accusation: "These leftists championed Trump the anti-imperialist, the man who would rein in the US’s European war machine." Whose hat did he pull that one out of? And why do so-called “Trump leftists” reject the Russiagate narrative? Is it really because "Trump is merely trying to restore friendly relations and avoid a World War III apocalypse"? Or isn't it rather because there is "no there there" and the pro-Hillary deep state cabal is using this to further their own ambitions?
Draitser goes on to ask "Since when do leftists care about the political pressures a president faces? … And why, please tell, am I supposed to care?" Well, maybe that depends on the type of pressures being applied. If the pressures are anti-war, as in the Johnson and Nixon examples Draitser gives, then why not add to the pressure? If the pressures are to prevent dialog between nuclear powers, or re-install a "neoliberal/neoconservative consensus", then maybe those pressures are not such a good thing.
Draitser concludes: "One has to wonder, though…Would they also align with the hangman to spite the gallows-maker?" Good question. But if the hangman starts swinging an axe wildly, pretending to cut down the rope, and then striking at the gallows platform, why not just stand back a moment and enjoy the show – at least while you have no means to strike down the gallows yourselves? Even cheer him on if you’re so inclined (and you can stomach it). Cheap thrills, maybe, but then what else have we got?
Although no one expects the hangman to cause the platform to collapse, or to free the condemned, it's at least a small comfort to see the fright on the faces of the honchos in their gilded peanut gallery. Just maybe it will give others a few ideas of their own!
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!