Deluded diplomats are fed hopes of a vanishing Restoration
An enduring mystery in Anglosphere diplomatic corps is the way in which so many officials insist on believing that president Donald Trump is an imposter who will be washed away by impeachment proceedings prior to the 2020 presidential elections.
Two virtual diplomatic handbook periodicals proffering this point of view are The Economist and the Financial Times.
Most foreign affairs officials believe that these two publications are owned in Great Britain.
They are not.
The Economist is controlled by the Agnelli dynasty of Fiat fame.
The Financial Times is owned by the Japanese Nikkei company, famed for its Nikkei index, the counterpart of the FTSE index.
Both these organisations are committed to globalisation, the outstanding roadblock to which is president Trump.
Whitehall regards these two publications with a Delphic reverence and to the extent that even after the Trump victory in 2016 its diplomats, notably those in Washington, believed that the Trump ascension was an ephemera, and would somehow evaporate.
This belief was so solidly grounded that it took three dimensional form in the shape of sourced print-outs to this effect, widely circulated, and which, surprise, surprise, found their way to the Daily Mail.
The belief fanned by the two periodicals is that one of the revolving door impeachment actions against president Trump will somehow sink him.
To date they have had the opposite effect of the one intended and the current iteration of the impeachment attrition is another one in this genre.
President Trump has presided over the strongest economy in living memory. Unemployment is at record lows, inflation is nearly non-existent, and new jobs are being created at a startling pace. Anyone who studies presidential politics knows that strong economies are the most important factor driving support for the incumbent.
Here’s the rub. Horrified by free trade regime of the WTO, and the leverage it bestowed upon China, Trump wants managed trade that better supports U.S. economic aspirations.
It is this apostasy that the two tut-tutting once British owned publications cannot get past.
The Economist and the Financial Times have been allowed to bypass slews of history such as that the most controversial presidents tend to roll up the biggest reelection victories.
Also when a party takes the White House, they tend to stay there for at least eight years.
Casualties of this higher-level media indoctrination to date have included the Australian Labour Party which lost its unloseable general election after constructing it around the vaunted globalist IPCC playbook.
Hardly renowned for its world-view the Australian Labour Party might still have learned from France’s president Macron who squandered most of his electoral capital doing the same thing and ignited the yellow vest protests.
New Zealand’s outgoing National (conservative) government in 2016 allowed itself to be utterly persuaded that Donald Trump would be washed out of history and committed the country to the censure of Israel and a long term commitment to the Clinton Foundation.
How have these two periodicals been able to get away with their continuing dangerously misleading prophecies?
The answer is that they chime with exactly the viewpoint of their foreign service adherents to the effect that there will be a restoration of the globalism world order with all its attendant civilities.
The two publications express the yearnings of Gerard Araud, the French ambassador to Washington and who upon Donald Trump’s ascension tweeted his dismay at a collapsing world order.
"It is the end of an era, the era of neoliberalism. We don't yet know what will succeed it,"adding "After Brexit and this election anything is possible. A world is collapsing before our eyes. Vertigo.”
Dizzy diplomats fed by publications with a face value mercantile priority can now heed (two-term) president Clinton’s indelible and winning electioneering axiom “It’s the economy, stupid.”