Domestic Policy, Foreign Policy, Politics

Victory or Stalemate?

Due to family and medical reasons, my posts have been few and far between since the mid-term election last year.  I am deeply grateful and honored by those of you who have nevertheless continued to read, share and subscribe to this website and its versions on Substack, Facebook and Twitter (or X, as Elon Musk now calls it). Your loyalty led to New Nationalism being recently named by the Feedspot e-zine  as one of the top 80 WordPress political blogs in the world. Now that we are approaching a potentially pivotal presidential election, the need for this kind of unifying debate on the real issues American voters will face next year is urgent.  This debate begins, as TR said above, with a look back at the past year and where we are going.

It is tempting to survey the current state of America and feel both secure and, indeed, triumphant. We enjoy record low unemployment and the inflation rate has come down, though is still higher than it was over the past few decades.   Overseas, American assistance has enabled Ukraine to expose Russian military weakness and Chinese ambitions are being challenged by an Asian coalition led by the United States.  So, why are Americans so glum? What could go wrong?

In fact, quite a lot.  Americans care not just about the present, but even more about the future of their children and, as a result, of the nation they will live in. They survey the public landscape and see rising tensions leading to talk of war, lagging wages, continuing economic inequality, and a warming climate. Meanwhile, the response of the American political system is a stalemate at best on these issues and at worst, divisive and irrelevant personal vendettas. Worse, the two major parties in next year’s presidential election appear poised to offer a only a choice between the increasingly feeble and increasingly deranged.  

The mission of this site is to offer a third way that Americans can rally around based on the nationalist philosophy of Theodore Roosevelt. We believe America is exceptional not because of ethnicity, but because of its values of liberty, equality and the pursuit of the American Dream. We also recognize the reality of a world in which other nations are embracing and acting on their own nationalist traditions and ambitions, whether in the form of Russian revanchism, Ukrainian heroism or Chinese threats.  Relying solely on an ideology of globalist liberal hegemony essentially amounts to a form of unilateral disarmament and threatens the survival of our values not just abroad, but here at home as well. 

Over the next year, our goal will be to continue to challenge the conventional wisdom of both parties and develop a progressive nationalist platform that voters can use to challenge the candidates. It will highlight the new, real political debate between globalism and nationalism without condemning those who take the opposite side. All Americans will have to work together if we are to succeed and accomplish our mutual goal of remaining free and prosperous at home and the beacon of liberty abroad. I invite all of you to join in this journey over the next year on any of these platforms:

Main website: www.newnationalism.com

Facebook: www.Facebook.com/newamericannationalism

Substack: https://robertclaude.substack.com/?utm_source=discover_search

Twitter (X) : @nationalismnew

2022 Election, Foreign Policy, Politics, Uncategorized

2022 American Nationalist Voting Index – Speaking Softly

The foreign policy debate has been dominated by the reaction to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and its effect on our relations with the rest of the world. As I mentioned here, TR’s heart, soul and perhaps body would have been with the Ukrainians as they defend their independence against Vladimir Putin’s brutal attack. However, a realist foreign policy would recognize that the US and the world have other important interests as well (see this previous post). It is not appeasement to keep the door open to the potential for negotiations for a peaceful end to the war, if simply because this is how almost all wars end. Meanwhile, the challenge of China and Central American stability potentially impact the American future as much, if not more, than the outcome of the war in Ukraine.

The most important foreign policy issue, though, arises here at home.  TR was a strong proponent of presidential power, but the abuse of the war power by recent presidents has led us into forever wars far afield from our core interests. Our continued involvement in Iraq is a classic example.  The House has considered a resolution to finally repeal the Bush Administration’s 2003 Authorization for use of Military Force under the War Powers Resolution.  The only record vote occurred in the House of Representatives and can be found here

https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2021172

The resolution needs to be strengthened to prevent further abuses (see here), but cleaning up the past excesses is at least a start. 

Not much further from home lies the instability in Central America, which has fueled the immigration crisis. Congress passed a bill to address one aspect of the crisis through strengthening the fight against corruption in Nicaragua, which the former Sandinista guerrilla leader Daniel Ortega has turned into a family dictatorship. Those votes can be found at

S 1064 – Reinforcing monitoring of corruption & Human rights in Nicaragua

https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2021354

The oppression of China’s Uighur minority is just one example of Chinese President Xi Jin-Peng’s increasingly dictatorial rule. Indeed, it is not only a symbol of the brutality of the regime, but also its cynical mercantilist economic policy to monopolize the solar power and clean energy industries (see my previous post on the subject here).  HR 6256 imposes importation limits on goods produced using forced labor in China, especially in the Xinjiang Uighur Region, and imposes sanctions related to such forced labor. It was passed by a unanimous voice vote in both the Senate and the House and has been signed by the President. It is one of the few examples of when politics did stop at the water’s edge, enabling Congress to act across party lines to defend both human rights and our own economic strength.

Foreign Policy

Ukraine – The War within American Foreign Policy

Source: Adobe Stock

Joe Biden arrived in Washington promising a plethora of conflicting foreign policy goals. Much was made of a new “foreign policy for the middle class”, which appeared to be a rejection of the old liberal hegemonic model of his predecessors Bush and Obama. Yet Biden also claimed “America is back” to being an international leader throughout the world.  Climate change also was supposedly a driver, as well as the old Obama Administration “pivot toward Asia”.   These priorities have now been eclipsed by the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the Administration’s stated goal of weakening Russia. If Ukraine and Europe remain the top priority, this new priority will prevent any real progress on any other foreign policy goals.

The administration’s focus on defeating Russia in Ukraine conflicts with the rest of the world’s more pressing priority of ending the war as soon as possible.  For developing nations, the war is causing a hunger crisis that threatens their people’s lives and national stability. Russia and Ukraine supply 28% of the world’s wheat exports, 29% of barley and 15% of maize.  They are also leading exporters of potash and fertilizer, which allows other nations to grow their own food. Ukraine itself provides the calories necessary to feed 400 million people (see the recent leader in The Economist magazine “The Coming Food Catastrophe”). In response, India and other nations are embargoing the export of domestically grown wheat and other foodstuffs in a move reminiscent of protectionist measures taken during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Moreover, the call to uphold the international rule of order rings hollow with nations that experienced invasion and conquest by western nations in the past.  Whether it is China, India or other countries, they remember their colonial past and do not believe that they should sacrifice trade and other relations with Russia for a far-away conflict.  As I mentioned in this previous post, their past has made them the ultimate realists dedicated to preserving and building their own sovereignty against more direct threats. 

President Biden’s Russia-Ukraine myopia also weakens the effort to respond to more direct challenges. Japan, India, Indonesia and Southeast Asia nations are more concerned about the threat from China than Russia. They are undoubtedly wondering if the vaunted pivot to Asia has now turned 180 degrees towards Europe.  Latin America also needs our attention and is equally unconcerned about Ukraine. Indeed, Russia has threatened another Cuban missile crisis by proposing to station military assets with fellow anti-American authoritarian regimes in Cuba and Venezuela.  A policy centered on Ukraine may thus result in a direct strategic threat to the American homeland.

Washington’s obsession about Ukraine thus endangers its ability to achieve other critical foreign policy objectives. It makes it more difficult to recruit developing countries to fight climate change and protect America from real national security threats. Something will have to give. At this point, the climate change agenda is most at risk.  The only other way to accomplish all of these objectives is to paper them over with billions of American budgetary dollars.  Russia’s invasion highlights the need for increased domestic commitment on the American home front, but a spending spree of that scale currently lacks any real American public support and could endanger our own economic goals. If the Administration wants to take that road, it must prepare the American people to make significant sacrifices in taxes, spending and domestic policy.  The choices this may entail will be the subject of the next article in this series.