The decline of American power and Donald Trump: Reflections on human rights, neoliberalism, and the world order

Abstract

Is American power in decline? What is the relationship between the perceived decline of American power and the rise of Donald Trump and authoritarian politics elsewhere? Understanding the puzzle of American decline and the world order requires the recognition of how capital and wealth are unjustly distributed, entrenched, and sustained across the society. The core argument here maintains that American decline pertains not only to the decreasing economic vitality underscored by the concrete detrimental effects generated through sharpening material inequality within the US. Rather, decline also constitutes its decreasing appeal and legitimacy as a dominant actor in the international system. This paper contributes to current scholarly and policy debates on American power and authoritarianism in three ways. First, it offers a more holistic conception of American power, particularly by highlighting both its materialist and ideational foundations that co-constitute each other during its periods of ascent, consolidation, and decline. Second, it underscores the mutually reinforcing interdependence of domestic and transnational dimensions of US power. Third, while dominant scholarship on American decline rarely address its implications on international human rights, the paper highlights the uniqueness of the Trump presidency and the emerging authoritarian politics elsewhere: while neoliberalism's detrimental consequences to human rights within and beyond the US constitute a relatively long history, Trump and his allies have abandoned the legitimation tactics that their predecessors had so willingly used. Highlights: • American power constitutes the mutually reinforcing relationship of domestic conditions as well as transformative changes in the international system-an insight often ignored in dominant International Relations scholarship on American decline. • The decline of American power constitutes its decreasing appeal and legitimacy as a dominant actor in the international system. • Examining the status of American power includes its material position and legitimation tactics within the United States and in the international system. • While neoliberalism's detrimental consequences to human rights preceded the Trump administration, currently emerging discourses have abandoned the legitimation tactics that Trump's predecessors had so willingly used.

The Sustainability of Artificial Intelligence: An Urbanistic Viewpoint from the Lens of Smart and Sustainable Cities

“…Globally, we are moving towards another recession, if not already in. While some might blame the recent COVID-19 pandemic, the origin of the issue is neo-liberal capitalism and the consumeristic and materialistic practices that it reproduces [44,45] Only eight people, the richest in the world, have a net worth equivalent to that of the lower half of the world's population (about 3.8 billion people); this is the product of ruthless neoliberal economies [46]. Socioeconomic inequality is rapidly widening, and poverty and recession are making life harder for most people across the globe.…”

Socio-Economic Foundations of Trump's Domestic Policy and The Globalist Project in The United States (2016-2020)

“…The success of Trump's policy was also recognized by the opposition. It is acknowledged that the successes at the end of 2019 can be considered as the «strong stock market, record low unemployment, low inflation», «petrol prices below average, tax cuts, deregulation campaign...» (Regilme, 2019) In doing so, Trump articulated a commitment to the philosophy of North American imperialism, stating; There has never been a better time to hire, to build, to invest, and to grow in the United States. America is open for business and we are competitive once again (Farzanegan et al, 2021).…”

“…In the «solar belt» along the Mexican border, his plans to combat illegal immigration are strongly supported». The struggle to implement the new policy towards migrants has spread to the US courts (Regilme, 2019). At the same time, the Latin-speakers themselves oppose the influx of migrants across the border, realizing that Vol.…”

Comparing US and Chinese Foreign Aid in the Era of Rising Powers

“…First, China's official finance activities have a first-mover advantage in providing generous and non-conditional official finance and capital, especially on the African continent, where China's political footprint has been expanding due to its demand for key natural resources (Hodzi 2019). Second, fuelled by the foreign and domestic policy failures of the Trump administration, the US' decreasing political legitimacy (as a key global governance actor) has not helped to win new strategic partnerships abroad and consolidate existing alliances, particularly in ways that can match the ambition and scope of China's official finance strategies (Regilme 2019). The next two sections demonstrate how perceived geostrategic and economic interests and enhancement of the donor countries' social reputation in the international system shape both aid programs.…”

“…Since all post-Cold War era administrations up to that time had relied heavily on the discourses of democracy promotion, human rights and multilateralism in order to legitimise US foreign aid programs and military interventions abroad, Trump's antimultilateralism and exclusionary discourses, including his persistent threats to reduce US aid funding, may have contributed to the much lower Pew 25-nation favourability ratings for the US under his administration than under Obama's (Wike et al 2018). While former President Obama actively legitimised his policies through foreign aid and international cooperation, Trump abandoned those legitimisation discourses of American soft power, thereby contributing to the declining global confidence in the US government's abilities to provide global public goods (Regilme 2019). For instance, Trump's formal notification to the UN in July 2020 of his decision to cancel US membership and financial contributions to the World Health Organisation (WHO) signals the sudden departure from long-standing US commitment to multilateral forms of cooperation in global governance, including global public health.…”