Trump. A traitor to the thought of a free world

Trump's policy is to throw out the American imagination of global governance, alliances based on common values (including the same values – freedom, democracy and human rights) and the thought of supporting states and democratic movements in the world, among others, by intervening against crime authors. Trump doesn't isolate himself from the world. It remains at its center as the most crucial figure of the globe, hungering for attention and considerations a mention point in all matters and for all another actors.

The most crucial event of 2025 is the abandonment by the United States of the function of leader of the free world. Not long ago, erstwhile we heard specified a conclusion, we would presume that the US had returned to the isolationist themes of its political tradition and decided to quit its active abroad policy or to engage in the problems of another regions of the globe. Indeed, in Donald Trump's administration since January of this year, there are no shortages of dogmatic isolationism and the themes inspired by it frequently appeared in the President's speeches, especially erstwhile he was only moving for office. Declaratively Trump suggested his America First as turning our backs on wars and another problems distant to Washington places in the planet and addressing the interests of our own country.

However, the practice of power over these 10 months has shown that Trump's strategy is far worse than isolationism in terms of désintéressement. Trump remains a hyperactive president in global relations. His isolationism is not minimizing contacts with another countries. This is isolationism against the values, goals, strategies and doctrines of American global policy, which were unanimously implemented and sustained by its predecessors over the past 8 decades. Trump's policy is to throw out the American imagination of global governance, alliances based on common values (including the same values – freedom, democracy and human rights) and the thought of supporting states and democratic movements in the world, among others, by intervening against crime authors. Trump doesn't isolate himself from the world. It remains at its center as the most crucial figure of the globe, hungering for attention and considerations a mention point in all matters and for all another actors. In global politics, he is an overactive, but oriented president of the full achievements of American diplomacy from the three-four last generations.

Out of the way

The isolationist note has long dominated American politics, especially by Republican organization presidents. The first major breach in this mentality was the work of politician Woodrow Wilson, and the push to defend her succeeded another Democratic organization president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in the dramatic realities of planet War II and the attack on Pearl Harbour. The lesson of the past of the war against the Axis states, and then the reality of the emerging “cold war”, was compromised by isolationism, which for many years could only function on the exotic margins of American politics. The thought of America as the leader of the alleged free world, understood on the 1 hand as a community of the destiny of states with liberal-democratic regimes, based on constitutionalism and the mechanisms of the regulation of law, defending human rights and individual freedoms (of course it will frequently weaken) as well as utilizing free or social marketplace economy models in the economical sphere; and, on the another hand, as an alliance of opponents of planet communism and a block of communist regimes oscillating around the USSR (the second included sometimes besides non-democratic states).

The first act and the chief foundation for the construction of specified an understood free planet was the Atlantic Charter, Roosevelt's Declaration and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill of 1941. According to its provisions, the conditions for achieving unchangeable peace after the Second planet War were to be a collective safety strategy (replaced by the permanent collapse of the fleeting power system) and close economical cooperation, expressing many trade and investment links. Already the first glance at these priorities from 1 and on Trump's move, on the another hand, allows us to conclude that the current president of the United States is withdrawing the geopolitical clock until 1940 and the erstwhile years, so to the times erstwhile world-wide war was the most likely script (and in a minute already implemented). At the level of concretes, the Atlantic Charter laid down principles that are besides worth reading again in the context of Trump's current events and policies. These included, among others, the renunciation of force in global relations and the disarmament of aggressors, the resignation of states from territorial expansion, the complete ban on territorial change by force and without the consent of the parties afraid and the right of nations to self-determination.

The second act of establishing a free planet strategy under the leadership of the United States followed the first in 1944, erstwhile at the Bretton Woods conference the states established a framework for post-war economical governance, making it, in accordance with the instructions of the Atlantic Charter, a close and intensive economical cooperation overriding principle. Against the politics of the American Presidents of the Isolationist Age (especially until the end of the 19th century and in the 1920s) and against the politics of the current President, who first referred to the practices of the then Republican administration after 1933, the Bretton Woods conference called for a maximum simplification and then the elimination of all trade barriers between free marketplace economies, including, of course, customs barriers. Trade ties have rightly been identified as an antidote to war.

The aftermath of both events was the establishment of organization infrastructure. Both NATO, the UN and, somewhat later, the European Communities headed by the EEC (the predecessors of the European Union), as well as the planet Bank and the global Monetary Fund were yet born of the spirit of the Atlantic Charter, and thus of a policy which is now the subject of a violent attack and effort to dismantle or even nullify by the Trump administration. It should be made clear that the demolition of the institutions and ideas underlying the construction of the free planet is back to the earlier realities of global policy – both in terms of the return of the alleged "melody" of the alleged power performance and the force to rebuild the spheres of influence without any votes of opposition from weaker states, as well as customs wars radically polluting the atmosphere of common relations, as well as in terms of safeguarding the rights and freedoms of individual citizens of democratic states, which will be easier to degenerate towards semi-authoritarianism.

What's the tune?

Donald Trump broke up with the politics of six of his Republican predecessors at the office of the president of the United States – both Presidents Bush, Regan, Ford, Nixon and Eisenhower – who not only supported the imagination of American engagement in the function of the leader of the free planet and defenders of his institutions, but were engaged in this policy with full conviction, even emotionally, on the basis of the premise derived from their conservative values. Although motivations have sometimes been different, in practice there was a broad consensus on the pillars of U.S. abroad policy between them and their liberal predecessors/replacers – Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, Obama and Biden. erstwhile Trump rejects politics present (including Roosevelt) a full of 14 erstwhile presidents, this is not the gist of his conservative outlook. American conservatism clearly co-created a policy of leading the free world, even if American liberalism spawned it. The impulse for this administration to reject this 80-year-old consensus is that under Trump the Republican organization departs from in any way understood conservatism in favour of a yet-definite ideological path. However, whether it will yet follow the way set by Curtis Yarvin (technological and totalitarian even "libertarianism", copying for political power the model of an unlimited and full power chief manager in a large corporation, allowing utmost social inequality in the name of the sole goal of maximising the profits of the fresh elite of the platoons big tech) whether or not Nick Fuentes (a population populism based on a traditionalist turn towards the past in social relations, powerfully overwhelmed by sexism, racism, anti-Semitism, but demanding state support for the struggling folk class and precarriage), this is simply a separate issue. no of these roads in any case match classical conservatism, which possibly the last hero was John McCain, and no of them will reconstruct the religion of the American right hand to missions related to the endurance of the free world.

Donald Trump has bad intentions, but besides a deficiency of courage that he hides under supposedly radically assured superficiality, shoe, arrogance, and brazenness. However, these deficits can be seen well erstwhile 1 of the "rights of Trumpism" is established, which is given the abbreviation TACO in algorithmic media, from Trump Always Chickens Out (i.e. “Trump always gets a level and withdraws”). As TACO, further remarks on the alleged peace plan for Ukraine presented on 20 November as the US President's plan, will possibly be obsolete erstwhile this text is published on 12 December... Already on the day of his writing we have the first signals that the “plan”, the agreement Ukraine had to give, according to Trump's request, in a fewer days, does not constitute a “final offer” at all, is not a “president's project”, but a more negotiating position containing Russian demands, etc. Trump was frightened by the violent reaction of global opinion, any members of his own team, just as he panicked, seeing the financial markets respond to his horrendous duties. So it looks like another cancer withdrawal.

Peace by surrender

However, it is worth looking at the content of the "plan" anyway, due to the fact that – no substance what the Washington fairy tale around it in December – it was originally adopted by the president of the United States as a basis for forcing peace by pacifying Ukraine and bringing it to a complete surrender not well veiled Wording ‘plan’. It is besides worth looking at this text in the context of the violation of the Atlantic Charter.

When any affirmative aspects for Ukraine appear in the ‘plan’, specified as confirmation of its sovereignty or declaration of granting safety guarantees, the paper runs distant from formulating any particulars. All its further content does not let anyone here to admit that they treat Ukraine as a sovereign entity or a nation with the right to same - determination. Furthermore, this paper deprives any of the sovereignty of another states as well, and is simply a departure from the thought of collective safety in favour of a model of spheres of influence and balance of powers. It places NATO's right to adopt fresh members on 1 level and the sovereign right of states to apply for NATO membership, with Russia's "right" to act aggressively against another countries, erstwhile it proposes that in exchange for Russia's refraining from starting more wars, NATO will refrain from further expanding. The "Plan" is so not only a dictatorship towards Ukraine, but besides states specified as Moldova and countries of the Western Balkans, which closes the way to the Alliance and, as a result, puts it in the sphere of influence of Moscow.

Further we read about the conclusion of a "comprehensive agreement" between Russia, Ukraine and the countries of Europe, which will explain all the "unclearness" over the last 30 years, and thus fundamentally including Poland's admission to NATO. 1 of the “unclearness” is, therefore, the presence of NATO troops in all countries that joined NATO after the end of the “cold war” (contrary to the appearance of this direction of geopolitical revision, it strengthens the point that “European fighters will station in Poland” as it may be understood as a ban on another NATO armed formations and alliance states in Poland, and as a ban on even fighters in another countries of Central Europe). With very average "successes" in the field of the fight against Ukraine, Russia would so have achieved its request to reduce the safety position of all countries of Central Europe. Trump shows his willingness to throw a light hand into the basket of advancement in expanding and strengthening the free planet in the last 35 years, in fact he agrees to undermine all the conquests that the U.S. gained through triumph in the “cold war”, while Russia opens the way to alleviate almost all consequences of the USSR's defeat in this clash. In addition, the US establishes themselves as NATO's intermediary in further talks with Russia about "deescalation", meaning that European states are being removed from the table, while the US includes a curate over them and admits themselves the right to further lower their safety level as part of the comprehensive improvement of the US-Russia relation (e.g. further weakening NATO forces in exchange for a lucrative business contract for US companies in Russia).

As for Ukraine: deprived of the right to enter NATO (the resignation must be recorded in its constitution) and real safety guarantees ("the plan" establishes a ban on NATO troops being stationed in Ukraine), it must reduce the army's numbers to 600,000 and reconcile with territorial losses – the full of Donbas (including areas that Russia has failed to occupy despite 11 years of struggle) and part of another regions according to the current front line. Thus, the Atlantic Charter's provisions on punishing aggressors (Russian criminals are to include amnesty) and the deficiency of designation of territorial changes forced by violence, land in a dumpster at Trump's desk. Additionally, Ukraine – whatever its constitution decides about it – is forced to hold elections within 100 days. Earlier in this country, all centres of Russian propaganda will be sanctioned, headed by the Moscow Church and forced introduction of the threads of "tolerance" towards Russia and its culture into Ukrainian schools and media. Russia will be released from all sanctions, will return to the global community, and will besides be able to recognise the provisions of the "plan" as being unheard of in the event of any attack on itself by Ukraine (which can, of course, be framed under a abroad flag). The another provisions concern circumstantial issues – where money is involved, the plan provides for crucial gratuities and prospects for US entities.

The "peace plan", which can be called the Trump-Putin Pact, is so a comprehensive, point by point, a negation of the Atlantic Charter and a waiver by the US of the position of leader of the free world. In this place, Washington declares its aspirations to presume the function of curator of Western and Central European countries (although possibly only temporarily, until fresh political-business arrangements with Moscow) and to cover their relation according to the logic of the "power and its sphere of influence".

The "Plan" most likely reveals an epochal geopolitical change in the most bright way, but Trump's administration has already shown its contempt for the foundations and principles of the free planet in erstwhile months. This expressed the removal of the assessment of another states' political governance from a set of factors determining Washington's conduct towards those countries. Trump is far from condemning dictatorships for crimes or human rights violations (one of the most fresh statements suggests that he does not see a major problem with the execution and dismemberment of writer Jamal Khashoggi by the Saudi government in Turkey). He is willing to condemn dictatorships only for actions incompatible with US expectations and interests, as Donald Trump himself understands them. And as we can see, the president is not reasoning in a way that is compatible with the ideas of the free world. Besides, for entering into clashes with American interests Trump dictatorships and democracies is willing to condemn and sanction equally.

Through customs towards war

In addition to politics towards Russia and Ukraine, the most striking manifestation of Trump's departure from the thought of a free planet is his customs policy, which is simply a clear denial of the conclusions of Bretton Woods. In addition to the totally arbitrary, frequently changed and frequently horrendous level of duties imposed on different countries (the analysis of their amount does not let us to see here the key of preferences for free planet countries), the link to rejecting the rules of the free planet in an economical dimension is Trump's attitude towards the planet Trade Organisation (WTO), an institution whose mission is to reduce trade barriers and increase the volume of global trade. Already in his first term, Trump attempted to paralyze the WTO, blocking key nominations to its arbitration institutions. Trump completely rejects the thought of basing abroad trade on the principles of global law. Exports and imports should so be entirely dependent on Washington's unilateral decisions, subject solely to American interests and based on force policy. This strength is easier for the US to usage in bilateral trade agreements with much weaker economical and political partners, where extortion, force and blackmail can be utilized freely. The strategy of specified bilateral treaties besides allows unequal treatment of partners and discrimination on the basis of non-economic factors.

Thus abroad trade and investment policy ceases to be an component of economical policy in the pure sense of the word. The abroad economical policy of the free marketplace economy states fundamentally assumes that the government and its agendas support private companies in the improvement of commercial or investment projects abroad in order to increase their profits and expansion, which besides has an image aspect in the form of global brand popularisation made in the USA (and to attract abroad investment in their own territory, for example, in order to make jobs and increase GDP). The aim of these actions is yet to increase profits and private operators stay autonomous in their strategies and geographical directions of activity. Governments only impose certain restrictions in exceptional situations erstwhile direct risks to national safety may arise.

Modern realities (also due to technological progress, increasingly comprehensively affecting safety aspects) are characterised by the gradual shift of trade and abroad investment policy from the economical policy area to the national safety policy area. The autonomy of private entities is narrowed down and the practice of consulting or even obtaining government permits for individual abroad projects becomes a standard. In the case of Trump administration practice, we observe efforts to closely link owners and managers of the most crucial companies with the government. In exchange for the unparadoxed engagement of the government and its diplomacy in defending the interests of these companies, they commit to a marina to cover the government's curate erstwhile designing fresh strategies. However, Trump's release is no longer just about national safety issues as a origin limiting the freedom of private companies. Trump uses the assets and possible of American corporations to exert political force on another states. On the 1 hand, it threatens with higher duties in the event that the State has passed laws which hit the business models of American investors, and on the another hand, it has an asset in the form of making the desired American investments in the country dependent on its political behaviour. This tool of force is, of course, at odds with the Bretton Woods system, which suggested the maximum usage of all circumstances to strengthen economical ties between countries.

The Fall of Freedom Within the United States

The leader of the free planet can only be a state that sustains and defends the fundamental principles of the governance of freedom internationally, supports another free countries, and treats murderous countries harshly. Both in the political and global safety sphere and in the economical and trade sphere. However, even more primal is naturally gathering the criteria of a free state in its interior policy – the leader must set an example. Meanwhile, Trump America is simply a place where freedom and the liberal-democratic strategy are rapidly and dramatically degraded.

In a conversation with me for the “Political Review” at the very beginning of the current presidency, writer “New Yorker” Adam Gopnik, proposed to admit the further destiny of comedian programs from the band Late night in what direction and how the United States will rapidly change under Trump with respect to individual freedoms, peculiarly freedom of speech and media. Stephen Colbert has since lost his program, and Jimmy Kimmel was 1 step distant from sharing this destiny until strong protests in his defence prompted the broadcaster to change his decision. Trump and his men are constantly putting force on media companies to make Kimmel, as well as Seth Myers or Jon Stewart vanish from the air.

The force on the media is ubiquitous. All journalists, apart from those representing utmost right-wing identity media (such as Newsmax), are constantly subject to ridicule and accusations of lies and manipulations by the president and his people, especially the barking and record-breaking White home spokesperson, Karoline Leavittt. Trump defines ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN as fake news, argues that the situation in which 97% of the news about it has a negative impact should be ‘illegal’ and the licences of these media received.

Next to the media, Trump's second main front of the attack on freedom of speech opened an administration – universities. In the first days of the fresh administration a long list of "forbidden words" was created, which cannot include investigation projects if they are to apply for national grants. Then, not only grants were threatened, but full universities, which let specified studies to be carried out on their cathedrals. Trump fights the DEI programmes and besides brings together the concept of "anti-Semitism" all criticism of the current Israeli government, for example in the context of operations in the Gaza Strip. So it turns out that criticism of killing civilians, including children, is considered by the U.S. government to be “anti-Semitism”, which is just as grotesque as the designation of Volodymyr Zelenski and the government in Kiev by the Kremlin as “Nazi”. A hit in the DEI and a list of prohibited words found a convenient justification in the actual ideologies woke at American universities in fresh years. However, the fight against censorship based on utmost left-wing sensitivity and political correctness Trump leads, introducing censorship based on worldview and political correctness of the utmost right. In the background of course, there is simply a renaissance of racism in the US, which, for the first time since the 1960s, finds specified a clear and strong support in US government policy (as racist elements of politics, undoubtedly present in both Nixon's and Reagan's administration's activities, were, for a reason, embarrassingly "packed" in the slogan of politics Law and order or ‘the fight against drugs’). This administration of racism is not ashamed.

It is besides readable in the approach to foreigners surviving in the United States, legally and illegally. Legally surviving and working or studying foreigners were deprived of their freedom of speech by Trump. For participating in a pro-Palestinian demonstration or writing an article in defence of Gaza, there is simply a threat of arrest, transport to an unknown place and deportation. Persons who, on their profiles in algorithmic media have critical content against the US or Donald Trump, are not allowed into the US. Recently, there has even been a task to refuse entry into the country to obese foreigners who have cancer or chronic diseases. All of this constitutes discrimination about eugenism. Of course, against this background, it is not amazing that the Trump government acts violently against illegal foreigners in the United States. They become the subject of the “hunts” of the government agenda of ICE, which bring associations with the captures of the business period in Poland. Especially since any of the captured were directed to a peculiarly notorious prison in El Salvador (a circumstantial “dead”). Protests against the inhumane actions of the ICE by any local authorities in the cities ruled by the Democratic organization prompted Trump to consider these metropolises to be "fallen cities" and to mention the National defender to them with a national mandate to replace the local police in order.

Hysteria to preach views incompatible with the tastes of the administration came out with all force the days after the assassination of utmost right-wing hater Charlie Kirk, who was killed by the bomber's bullet after he repeatedly defended the rights to carry arms and disregarded the number of firearms victims in the US. It was announced that all negative assessment of Kirk's life's achievements would be the basis for the deportation of a foreigner from the United States, as well as attempting to make lists of people outside the United States who would be prosecuted by the government even abroad. The collapse of freedom of speech in the United States has thus gained a global dimension. 1 of the regrettable manifestations of the degeneration of freedom in the United States is the arbitrary rejection and non-subordination of certain judicial judgments, especially in migration cases, the gratification of judges issuing "bad" sentences, the application of lawsuits of so many SLAPP against the media and law firms (e.g. that in the past they represented the another sides of the Trump trials) and the usage of the Justice Department and the FBI – headed by the absolute loyalists Trump, respectively Pam Bondi and Kasha Patel – to conduct investigations and to press charges against Donald Trump's enemies, specified as James Comey and John Bolton.

***

These are only any of the stories from the land which until late was the leader of the free world, a country admired by many friends of freedom and hated by many murderers, an object of jealousy. There was a time erstwhile everyone wanted to live “as in America”. Now you'd should be out of your head to want for it.

Whether or not in the US it is possible to establish any form of undemocratic model of power, or whether the country will defend itself against these trends and reconstruct the regulation of law as after the 2020 election, the degree of devastatement of the global order of the free world, born from the Atlantic Charter and the conclusions of the Bretton Woods conference, will most likely be so large that simple restitution will not be possible. Russia will be able to push forward in east Europe and formulate a fresh list of ultimats, besides to Poland. In Western European countries, including France and the United Kingdom, the forces of the Trumpist nature will most likely take over and question the affiliation of these countries to the free world. Poland and another countries of Central Europe will either follow the same way or become liberal-democratic survivors without strong adequate allies in the west.

Trump demolishs the order of the free planet in the name of ill-conceived political and business interests of the narrow cliques of people that can already be called American oligarchs today. Their attachment to democracy is as insignificant as their Russian counterparts 2 decades ago, who became the carrier and tool of Putinism. Trump, in addition, is completely alien to ethical reflection on the destiny of states, people and nations in any form. He's a man demoralized to the core. For him, this erratic bravado, which he has been presenting to the planet since January, seems to be just good entertainment, an thought for interesting spending the last fewer years of his life, a game of the small ones.