Vlodymyr Zelenskyy and Donald Trump Blow-Up: Transcript for the Record, and Discussion

I want to understand why the discussions blew up between President Vlodymyr Zelenskyy and President Donald Trump and Vice-President JD Vance that took place 28th February 2025. I want to understand the Why, not what happened nor who was to blame (I take is as axiomatic that all are to blame).

So, I have made a trascript as close as possible to the bit of discussion where this unprecedented blow-up occurred. I record here exactly what happened in case it turns out to be a hinge-point of history, adding a few observations en-route (smaller text). The BBC Radio 4 The World Tonight played a lengthy piece of it in full, to which I carefully listened to try to get it right, including tones of voice, because these evince some deeper meanings and attitudes.

What I conclude from this part is that it was JD Vance who sparked it off, by inserting six put-downs. Vlodymyr Zelenskyy began to respond, seemingly rationally, then Donald Trump took it up and from then on it was him bellowing. I also add some reflections of my own at the end, if you wish to read them.

[Once I made this available, a respondent sent me a recording of the entire conversation, and another a complete transcript.]

Contents:

• The Conversation
• My Conclusion from That Transcript
• Responses from RLDG
• New Conclusion After The Responses
• Notes and See Also

----- The Conversation

The discussion had gone on amicably for around 40 minutes.

# JDV: And then JD Vance mentioned about "the path of diplomacy" with Vladimir Putin.

# President Vlodymyr Zelenskyy (VZ) then explained and enumerated in some detail why he believed there could be no agreement with Vladimir Putin, on the grounds that Putin had broken agreements he himself had signed with him. VZ seemed quite calm and reasonable. [Note 1]
# Then he said:

# VZ: "What kind of diplomacy, JD, are you asking about? What do you mean?" It sounded a rhetorical question, but in fact might have been a genuine question that VZ could have listened to.

# But instead of listening to that and perhaps answering that in detail, JD Vance replied with a superior tone in his voice, "I'm talking about the kind of diplomacy that is going to end the destruction of your country." His tone and attitude seemed to be
# VZ then began to answer "But if .."

[But JD then immediately overrode him with a string of sentences that seemed to me a kind of verbal attack, or at least a shut-up or put-down. Six of them, numbered below.]

--- JD Vance's Six Put-downs

[I sensed this from the fact that all 6 sentences were disjointed from each other, with non following on from the previous one. Each seemed to be a separate issue he could use as a put-dpwn. None of them seemed relevant to what had just been said. I will number them one after the other, but they actually were said one after the other with no intervening gaps.]

@ JDV: 1. "Mr. President, Mr. President, with respect, I think it's disrespectful for you to come to the Oval Office and try to litigate this in front of the American Media."
# 2. "Right now, you guys are going around and forcing conscripts to the front lines, because you have manpower problems."
# 3. "You should be thanking the President for trying to bring an end to the conflict."
# VZ: "Have you ever been to Ukraine. You say what problems we have? ..." ["..." = could not hear what VZ was saying]

[JDV seems to have been wrong-footed at this, and stumbled a bit.]

# JDV: "I have been to /" # VZ: "... ??become?? one"
# JDV: "I have actually / I have actually watched and seen the stories."
# 4. "And I know what happens is you bring people, you bring them on a ??propagator?? tour, Mr. President."
# 5. "Do you disagree that you've had problems? Bringing people in your military "
# VZ: [one or two syllables not easy to hear]
# 6. "And do you think it is respectful, to come to the Oval Office of the United States of America and attack the Administration that is trying to prevent the destruction of your country."

[To be honest, I did not hear VZ "attack[ing] the Administration" in his explaining why he thought that Putin could not be trusted, but JDV took it as an attack on the Administration.]

--- Vlodymyr Zelenskyy Trying to Answer

# VZ: "A lot of / A lot of questions. Let's start from the beginning." # JDV: "Sure."

[VZ's voice was slightly more gruff and lower at this point, possibly indicating that his mood had changed.]

# VZ: "First of all, during the war everybody has problems."

# "Even you."

[VZ made a 'you' statement. This is unwise in arguments. The tone of his "you" was slightly put-downy. Not surprising, given the barrage from JDV, but maybe unfortunate.]

# "But you have a nice ocean, and don't feel now."

[I hear the "nice ocean" as a slight put-down.]

# "But you'll feel it in the future."

--- Donald Trump Comes In

# VZ: "God bless / God bless / God bless, you will not have a war."
[At the first "God bless" Donald Trump came in. interrupting.]
# DT "You don't know that. You don't know that. You don't know that."

[Each "You don't know that!" came immediately on the "bless /" and interrupted what VZ was about to say, so VZ began the sentence again. The same thing happened. So VZ began a third time, got a little bit further. VZ then gave up, leaving DT to say the following.]

# DT: "Don't tell us what we're going to feel. We're trying to solve a problem. Don't tell us what we're going to feel / "
# VZ: "I'm not telling you, /" [couldn't hear next words because DT bellowed over him]
# DT: "/ because you're in no position to dictate that. Remember this. You're in no position to dictate what we're gonna feel."
# "We're goina feel very good."

[To me, this felt rather puerile.]

# VZ: "You're going to feel influence."
# DT: "We're goin to feel very good and very strong"
# VZ: "You'll feel influence ..."
[From then on, though I could hear VZ speaking, he was drowned out by DT's strong, clear, bellowing voice, which filled the conversation with repeated phrases. Only occasional words or phrases from VZ could I decipher.]

--- Donald Trump Dominates the Conversation

# DT: "You're right now not in a very good position."
# DT: "You've allowed yourself to be in a very bad position, and it happens to be ??right about??"
# VZ: "From the very beginning of the war /"
# DT: You're not in a good position."

# DT: "You don't have the cards right now."
# "With us you start having cards."

[That was a good point that perhaps VZ should have listened to, but it had descended too far into the playground shouting match where each was just trying to show the other to be wrong. And the thing deteriorated from there, with DT saying some not nice things about VZ and Ukraine.]

# VZ: I'm not playing cards. # DT: "You're gambling with the lives of millions of people. You're gambling with World War 3. You're gambling with World War 3."

[DT loves to repeat his statements, especially those he finds he quite likes when they come out of his mouth.]

# DT: "And what you are doing is very disrespectful of the country, this country.""
# VZ: "I thank you ..."
# DT: "Which has backed you far more than many people said they should have."
# JDV: "Have you said Thank you once? You went to Pennsylvania and campaigned for the opposition in October. Offer some words of appreciation to the United States of America and the president who's trying to save your country."
# VZ: "Please. You think that if you speak very loudly about the war im Uk/"
# DT: "He's not speaking loudly. He's not speaking loudly." [True. JDV was not bellowing, but DT was.]
# DT: "Your country's in big trouble. Can I / " # [VZ then tried to come in.] # DT: "No no. No no. You've done a lot of talking. Your country is in big trouble." # VZ: "I know." # DT: "You're not winning. You're not winning this." # DT: "You have a damned good chance of coming out of this OK because of us."

[From then on it seemed to be just verbal point-scoring by DT and VZ, with DT speaking very loudly over VZ. DT was making what might be valid points from certain perspectives. VZ was trying to make valid points from a different perspective. Both were right, but ...]

----- My Conclusion from That Transcript

Both parties seemed to be saying things that are valid points from their own perspectives, but there was just no meeting of perspectives - which is what we need. Each perspective has something meaningful to say, and all meaningfulness is made possible by the Creator. So I look for a way to see both perspectives within a wider picture. (And I find a useful conceptual tool for this in Dooyeweerd's aspects.)

I heard three things pointed out, which I think might be valid points.

• Duty of hosts. Should not the host have called a halt to the public nature of the event at this point, or even earlier, and then gone into private session? Is is not universaolly accepted in all cultures that hosts have a responsibility to their guests?
• Why did the Vice President take such an active part when usually VPs do not?
• DT acted childishly. This one I can very much agree with, given his tirade after he took over.

However, now I want to come to the deeper, and more important, conclusion.

It seems to me that the two parties came to the event with certain attitudes that were not helpful to the way we conduct diplomacy - though maybe understandable logically. Similar to David and Goliath. DT and JDV seemed to have the attitude of Goliath, "We are the strong ones. We hold all the cards. You should submit to us, and accept all we offer, unconditionally." Macron and Starmer, a few days earlier, had gone to pay their respect to DT, almost (in my view) like fawning courtiers of old who would give the mediaeval monarch gifts to sweeten him and would praise him to the skies. Unlike them, VZ seemed to have an attitude of "I am David against this Goliath." The problem is that David was "a man after God's own heart" and God was involved.

I wonder: Is God involved here? Ukraine had just had a national day of prayer, and all the people were praying for VZ as he went to sign a treaty with DT for the USA to exploit a lot of Ukraine's minerals, oil and gas. That would have locked us into ever-increasing fossil fuel production, because the money from this would have gone into a fund, half of which was for Ukraine recovery. Given that we urgently need to reduce the use of fossil fuels, to prevent planetary disaster for future generations and to honour God, might it have been God who scuppered the deal? Is it a bit like Jehoshaphat's attempt at a treaty with Ahaziah to build a fleet of ships for trade - which were wrecked and never sailed [II Chronicles 20:35-37]? Maybe not. But maybe so.

--- From CM, 250301

I haven't got time atm, but you might compare this transcript:

https://foreignpolicy.com/2025/02/28/trump-zelensky-meeting-transcript-full-text-video-oval-office

And the other articles in FP (which takes a particular editorial position, NB) if go up via FP's menu.
The transcript doesn't require a subscription, maybe does require registration. Not sure about the rest.

[So I have copied it into the start]

--- From MM

-- MM 1, On 250301

But it does leave one pivotal question unanswered namely why did Vance throw those statements in?

Whilst that is, from our outside perspective, a question we do not have a definitive answer to. However I believe it is unprecedented that the Vice President to intervene in this way so why? It seems reasonable that he would have been part of the planning process on how the session should go so it seems totally reasonable that reports that this was a pre-planned tactic of throwing grenades into the meeting could well be true. Or maybe he is worse than Trump?

The one thing in my mind observing what has been said by Trump of late is that the whole situation is unstable.

Not least that obscene video released a few days ago of Trump and Netanyahu at the riviera of Gaza.

Thanks again for this thoughtful response.

-- MM 2, On 250302

No problems in quoting me - but better quote Jeremy Bowen

https://feeds.bbci.co.uk/news/articles/c2d4e395jxeo?utm_source=chatgpt.com

writing yesterday

"There are suspicions now that the public row was - in the words of one diplomatic observer - a planned political mugging: either to force Zelensky to do America's bidding, or to precipitate a crisis that would allow them to blame him for whatever happens next."

Hope that helps what you write

[AB: Hang on: The source is ChatGPT! So what trust can we place in it?]

-- MM 3, on 250302

On Sun, 2 Mar 2025, 14:50 Maurice Manktelow, wrote:
Have you seen the latest? - see the video produced by Tump in this link.

I note that there is no mention by Trump about a deal he wanted signed giving America mining rights in the Ukraine. I also not that despite what he says in this video there was no mention on Friday of giving Ukraine any security guarantees.

Maurice

Sir Michael Caine shares perfect three-word response to Trump-Zelensky row - MSN

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/sir-michael-caine-shares-perfect-three-word-response-to-trump-zelensky-row/ar-AA1A2aWz?ocid=winp2fptaskbarhover&cvid=f705df88e8604d2b944be3eb135ec413&ei=11

Sir Michael Caine has given a blunt three-word response to Donald Trump over his row with Ukraine's President Zelensky. Alongside author Stephen King, the British actor, 91, made his thoughts ...

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/sir-michael-caine-shares-perfect-three-word-response-to-trump-zelensky-row/ar-AA1A2aWz?ocid=winp2fptaskbarhover&cvid=f705df88e8604d2b944be3eb135ec413&ei=11

-- MM 4, on 250304

This report in London's Evening Standard contains a lengthy quote from Vance which shows the thinking going on in the White House etc. at the moment. It includes a statement that Ukraine has reached out to the White House but Trump turned it down.

Does Trump want peace in the Ukraine from any high motive or is it just to get mineral wealth and reduce America's reliance on China?

Donald Trump halts US military aid to Ukraine and demands 'commitment to peace' from Volodymyr Zelensky | The Standard

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/us-military-aid-to-ukraine-paused-donald-trump-zelensky-jd-vance-b1214484.html

[AB: Do these tell us anything about Trump's heart, which is what God judges? ]

--- From SM

-- SM 1, On 250301

Andrew here's a video of the preceding 45 mins

https://x.com/CollinRugg/status/1895590525454983416?t=K3r88hNiAfZXrc1biV38wQ&s=09

[I then copied that to the start of the page.]

-- SM 2, On 250301

Andrew et (anonymous) al, for what it's worth, I blame the EU commission for this situation as far back as 2012, and I largely agree with John Mearsheimer

https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Why-the-Ukraine-Crisis-Is.pdf

I keynoted at NATO Ambassador's summits where the US implored the EU to spend more on defence. The EU (UK then included) arrogantly and shamefully laughed at the US' concerns.

Now we have Sweden and Finland being allowed to join NATO without any consideration or debate in existing members about clause 5.

Trump and Vance are at least seeking peace. I suspect it will be on terms not palatable to the Western European left. The left seem happy to fight wars with the lives of their citizen's sons.

Very happy to debate this with anyone on the list, but gird your loins!

Jaw jaw / war war?

[At which I replied "Yep, I partly blame the EU too. But I am not interested in whom to blame. 'All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.'"]

-- SM 3, On 250302

Blame is not necessarily a pejorative Andrew.

We will have to give account for our lives, why then should holding our institutions to account for situations like this so undesirable?

Recognising blame is part of accepting fault which is part of repentance and seeking forgiveness. It is as necessary in our bodies corporate as in our body singular 1 Corinthians 12:12-27.

Similarly rejecting 'false' blame and standing behind one's decisions is part of moral character and moral fortitude. Discerning between the two is the essence of morality.

Do we presume that Christ would support continuing to arm Ukraine? Is Ukraine 'right' and Russia 'wrong'? Does the West question itself about how its actions are perceived? In the Cuban missile crisis the US brought the world to the very edge of nuclear war - what the EU conspired in with Ukraine was essentially the same from a Russian point of view. So much for 'do unto others ...'

There is clearly vanity (Ecc 1:2) in international relations. Vance & Trump's response were prompted by a vain conceit. But there is also a moral arrogance in Ukraine's position, and in that of France, Germany, and the EU. The Uk's position is simply obsequious as it has been since Blair post 9/11.

Ecc 3:8 A right time to wage war and another to make peace. How do we discern? Blessed are the peace makers Mt 5:9 .. how do peacemakers make peace?

I humbly submit these as lines of thought that need to be included in your abxn page. Similarly a link to the full transcript. Vance responded to Zelensky's aggression - that's not to fault Zelensky per se - but there's alot happening at the moment and a proper response merits wider consideration - Germany, Belarus, Poland, the Baltics, N Korea, china, Taiwan, Israel, Iran, Qatar, Saudi are all primary parts of what is happening. [AB: Should we include the horrendous wars in DRC, Sudan and other African nations?] The European Commission is politically incompetent and ambitious which is dangerous. Russia is a member of the UN Security Council which reveals the fundamental fracture at the heart of the post war Bretton Woods structures. The 'Global South' is corrupting the functioning of the Bretton Woods organisations as well (based on a fundamental dysfunction in the West in the functioning of the ethical aspect which we see in the EU with immigration policy and in the UK with welfare policy <- on this latter something JD Vance spoke eloquently to recently)

Trump (like him or hate him) said in terms that he had to make nice with Putin to try to bridge a deal. There's a photo of Churchill with Stalin! Ukraine is fundamentally corrupt, even more so than Russia. The European Commission is corrupt, (and our membership of it steadily corrupted our politics).

I think the answer is to yearn for peace, and then justice. Justice requires attribution of wrong. Denying this is in my opinion is a fundamental dysfunction in the juridicial aspect which inevitably corrupts the ethical and pistic functioning of people, society, countries.

Wow - quite the essay! Blessings

[AB: To be honest I am still reeling from that, 6 days later, not knowing quite how to respond. While there are some useful points, has SM's "anti-left" perspective led him into "the anger of man that does not work the righteousness of God" (James 1:20) but rather leads to fruitlessness? Or am I too sensitive?

However, on a more constructive note, I might suggest that what "justice" means in the Bible when it links it with peace is not the "Justice [that] requires attribution of wrong." That presupposes wrong, which implies that it is relevant only to a state of sin. By contrast, what is translated as "justice" (and also "righteousness") in both OT and NT, does not, but is important even in a sinless situation. As I argue in my discussion of the Hebrew and Greek words, in Tsedeq, It is best described as "right relationships among all things in the Created order" [Paul Marshall]. What SM seems to be referring to is more like the Hebrew mishpat but even that does not presuppose wrong. ]

--- From TB

-- TB 1, On 250301

Hi Andrew, thanks for this and interesting analysis as I've too been analysing the content and seeking to put impartial eyes on it. I've seen this story as three people that I've illustrated as the headmaster (Trump), the unhappy boy in school who has suffered bullying (Zeilinskj) and the bully who has been excluded form the school but still trespasses on the playground (Putin). As it wouldn't be right for a headmaster to side with one pupil to the defeat of the other, he has to stop tensions between the two pupils whenever they cross paths in or out of school and there's responsibility on both pupils for that.

This is the kind of narrative I was seeing in the discussion and as you point out, there were errors on both parties to help that process and it was a lose-lose negotiation. One was a businessman who used business tactics to aim to strike a deal fast, while the other was a victim with high demands for charity and those two personalities didn't rub well together to enter into a negotiation and both have got to meet again, slow down and overcome that which I hope happens soon.

One thing I would add that I have been observing is how the tension subtly rose in the first 40 minutes and a lot of analysis in the media has directly omitted that as it's not interesting to readers. But I copied this set of observations of that time period that were posted on Twitter that I copy below.

Then that shows your analysis of Vance, where things 'snapped' ultimately was I think building up from the actions listed here below. Given where Vance was sitting on the sofa in line of sight to Zeilinskj on the front of his chair so often, I sense the body language both ways was mounting and thus things got competitive.

I like your point in the Note 1 at the end about the responsibility of the West. Also I would add to that in there's inevitably widespread campaigning going around "standing with Ukraine" just like it did in February 2022, but all along I've said I'd personally never do that. For sure I'd speak out as having compassion for Ukraine and its people, but if there's anything to stand with it's a peace process. I think if many stood with that, both the key people and the observers, we'd probably be a long way onward and it does I think reflect a Christ centred viewpoint or at least I've not found any alternate so far.

Those are my two pennies worth anyway. Thanks,

Tim.

2:00 Trump compliments Zelenskyy
4:00 Zelenskyy calls Putin a terrorist
12:00 Trump cracks joke with Zelensky
13:56 Zelenskyy interrupts Trump
17:20 Zelenskyy throws his hands up in seeming frustration
19:00 reporter asks Zelenskyy why he's not wearing a suit
19:22 Trump commits to sending arms to Ukraine
19:41 Zelensky raises eyebrows and rolls eyes at Trump's statement
22:55 Trump takes the edge off of the suit question by joking with Zelensky that he likes his outfit
23:49 Zelensky contradicts Trump and keeps painting Putin in a negative light
24:19 Zelensky says Putin will never accept ceasefire and pushes for American security guarantee
25:55 Zelensky says Putin hates Ukrainians
27:00 Zelensky says Putin should pay all reconstruction costs
29:19 Zelensky shakes head as Trump speaks
32:22 Zelensky says Putin wants to annex Poland
32:30 Zelensky says Putin will attack America
33:00 Zelensky interrupts Trump
39:19 This is when Trump went on the offensive by calling out Zelenskyy hatred for Putin and started to escalate
39:14 Vance says Zelensky has been disrespectful, and conversation continues to escalate

[AB: To which I replied:

"Thank you hugely. I had not seen the whole, only heard the extended bit put on the radio. Looks like VZ was unwise. Youngster. I would like to add this to the page."]

[But then, having read more carefully, "In the timeline I can see the gradual escalation. Can you please send me the source ref of the timeline. According to it, VZ was absolutely the culprit, and Trump was a victim or angel. So I infer it was written by a T supporter and tells only partial truth, if that. Eg it says Z Interrupted T twice in 40 mins. But it does not mention T interrupting Z several times in the few minutes I heard. I was given a link to recording of the entire conversation, so can check , but I wd like to cite it."]

[AB: I have yet to receive a reply from TB about the source. However, having watched most of the conversation before the blow-up, I find that timeline not only biased but even false. I came away with the feeling that (a) Trump is sincere in wanting peace. (b) Trump is arrogant, hogging the attention. (c) DT kept on taking swipes at Biden; VZ kept on taking swipes at Putin - but DT was worse, both in quantity but also in morality in that the victor should not keep on swiping at the defeated. ]

-- TB 2, on 250309

Hi Andrew, yes the timeline is from the twitter page below but not sure if you can access it
https://x.com/BartlettChrisJ/status/1895744535743119644

I think the motive of the writer was to go against at the time the notion that the White House were planning to ambush Zeilinskj and bring out the lead up to it that also some had viewed on the full unedited version of the 40 minute event athttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7QxUHdvpk8

Certainly from analysis in any case regardless who did what at the Oval Office, it's clear from reports beyond that there's two conflicting agendas, one where Ukraine wants all the army power behind them it can get, while the US wants to mediate with Russia for peace and there is quite a polarised division across the world around those two views and the big question is as I see it is how they are going to reconcile.

Thanks,

[AB: To which I replied with thanks. I could not access the Chris Bartlett link. Nor could I find any web page about him. However, TB's suggestion that CB's motive was to go against the idea that VZ was deliberately ambushed. However, having watched the actual conversation from the start, I could not see CB's timeline as true - but nor do I think an pre-planned ambush was set up.

What I did notice was the many swipes that DT took at Biden, and the ones, slightly fewer, that VZ took at Putin. VZ is a war leader, in a position of weakness, and swipes are therefore understandable. DT is in a position of power and they are not. In my old-fashioned view, he should have grown out of his peevishness by now.

Polarized division across the world: Yes, I see that too. I am not cionvinced that CB's approach is the way to handle it. In my view, only Christ is. ]

--- From AS

-- AS 1

Thanks - will def. read that later.
Couple of off-the-cuff comments:

- Real operators like Putin have tried to push Zelenskyy around and failed. The idea that [redacted phrase] Trump and Vance could bully him is for the birds, they're wasting their time.

-The guy is also a war leader and I suspect he can't afford to be obsequious (polite term) like our leaders when he talks to powerful men with millions of Ukrainians watching him.

- A right wing reporter asked at the conference, 'Why don't you wear a suit, isn't it disrespectful not to?' Z's reply: 'I'll wear a suit when this war is over'.

[AB: Interesting point, about the inner strength of VZ, which I have not heard from others. And of course, being a war leader puts him in a rather different position than people like Macron and Starmer. ]

[AB: The redaction was at AS's request, since I had asked for permission to include it, and AS felt he had not worded things well because he wrote that late. ]

-- AS 2, 250302

Thanks for the thing on Zelenskyy ... a few comments, for what they're worth:

- why: it happened because the US wants Ukraine's mineral reserves ($$$!), and Zelenskyy'll only go for that if the US provides some security, which they won't do. Problem for Z. is that without access to those reserves, the Ukraine's got nothing to offer the US.

- your comment about JD Vance was very revealing: there's an argument to say Vance, Musk and maybe others linked to Tiel and books like The Sovereign Individual (reprinted in 2020 with a preface by Tiel) are actually the brains behind the policies of Trump. Which would support the idea I've heard that the Washington meeting was an ambush to sink Z.

- Maybe God is as work. If so you better pray He doesn't work round here. Because Trump's US ('drill baby, drill), home of the consumer dream, is winning all the tricks at the moment, and Big Oil (BP etc.) are reversing green initiatives in the face of (probably US) investors. And they're all coming up smelling of roses. By contrast, poor old Ukraine gave up it's nuclear armaments and gets invaded, and refuses to allow the US to pillage its gas reserves and gets tossed back to Putin for dismemberment. I know God works in a mysterious way, and you may be right, but I can't see it.

- I agree there's no 'goodies and baddies' here (just 'baddies' on different sides. It only matters (to Europe) because Putin invaded another country to change borders by force. The post-war settlement (which gave us a generation or two without war in Europe, thanks to our parents' sacrifices), has been kept until now (barring the disintegration of Yugoslavia). A lot of folk in Europe (including me I think) reckon Putin should be stopped, or it'll be us next (appeasement has a bad track record). That doesn't make us 'goodies' of course, but I think it's the responsible thing to do.

- I suspect humanity's innate ability to turn everything into a shambles might destroy life as we know it before climate change does.

Well, not sure any of that is accurate or helpful and do point out any glaring failures in logic!

Best wishes,

For the Tiel - Vance link see this:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/antoniopequenoiv/2024/07/16/jd-vance-and-peter-thiel-what-to-know-about-the-relationship-between-trumps-vp-pick-and-the-billionaire/

... or, a more extreme version, here:

https://newrepublic.com/article/183971/jd-vance-weird-terrifying-techno-authoritarian-ideas

(I was unaware of this connection until DS pointed it out.)

[AB: Interesting the idea that what Trump does/is is actually driven by a few shadowy 'Sovereign Individuals', including Thiel, Musk, Vance. [I looked Vance up, and he does not seem to be yet-another-billionarire. Interesting that he converted to Roman Catholicism at the prompting of Thiel.] However it's only a speculative hypothesis, rather than a fact - yet I find it compels me. My "no goodies and baddies" actually obscures a gut bias I have against Trump and such cronies around him, and a gut flag-waving to support Ukraine at all costs. But I reject my gut bias. So I am freed to see that DT might make some sense, in that my gut flag-waving can lead only to prolonging the war and countless people dying, and continued redirection of huge finance to the waste and harm that is war. However, I do not trust DT's wanting peace. I am old enough to be appalled by the idea of appeasement, which is what DT seems to be doing to Putin, just as Chamberlain did with Hitler. All this talk, however, fires my gut anger ("anger of man") and I see it as my sin and want to be rid of it. But that does not mean I support Trump etc. like NO does. I find it useful to think in terms of aspects, in each of which we sin, and that "all have sinned". ]

--- From DS, 250303

Just a couple of additions:

it's Thiel not Tiel!

It was suggested to me last week that I'm in some kind of social media bubble or tribe because I mentioned that I thought Thiel was a very dangerous individual. I don't look at any social media. I first became aware of Thiel in around 2010 when I discovered that he had managed to get a stake in Facebook in the early days when Zuckerberg was fairly weak, and have been keeping a vague eye on him since then. So my concerns are my own.

Palantir (one of Thiel's companies) runs some or lots or all (???) of NHS data processing. It's possible that it might be given/already have government contracts in other areas.

The Sovereign Individual was written in the mid 90s. It has some startlingly prescient suggestions as to what would happen with the development of IT. The main thrust is that a few Sovereign Individuals will be able to become extremely powerful and wealthy by exploiting these developments and using everyone else in the world as cannon-fodder, and that this is a good thing and to be encouraged. I've read the book and this is my own summary. Thiel was an enthusiast for the book and JD Vance is his protege. In an extended non-confrontational interview with someone close to the Trump regime in the FT in the last day or so the interviewee said something like "In many respects this is a Thiel-inspired administration". He said this approvingly. Unfortunately I can't find the article now to check who it was and the exact wording.

Business news is incredibly useful in seeing what is going on. For example Elliot Investments have built up a share in a number of UK businesses inc. BP and more or less forced a change of environmental policy in BP at least - others ongoing I think.

Trump's modus vivendus is "I'm stronger than you - do as I want or I'll smash your face in". We now know that that's his "Art of the Deal". With that in mind nothing he says or does can be approved of or judged as godly, whatever the detail.

You may remember that we said in 2016 that the US was the greatest threat to the UK (when Obama was still president). Not changed my mind on that. (I'm interested in the UK because I have to live here and the majoirty of the people I know and care about also have to live here, not because I have the slightest feeling of affiliation.)

I do have lots of thoughts on the wider landscape you set out in your post, which is interesting and thought-provoking, but not really able to put in an email or clear enough yet.

[AB: DS seems to cover two things. 1. The power of Sovereign Individuals. 2. Re DT, what his heart attitude is like, and whether he is of God or not. ]

--- From NO

-- NO, 1

I haven't followed much in detail- devoting time to other pursuits. However, I want to compliment you and all for pressing on with noble efforts.

I will provide a few of my two cents worth of comments and observations on this Z affair and Trump's methods - as I have observed and lived in his era in the States. Maybe this will provide some clarity.

'what interests me is WHY it occurred' -

Consider two aspects: Personalities and the Underlying geo-political objectives of the parties.

Personalities-

Z has come from a comic clown to riches and power. Although observed less than Trump, it has been reported that he 'trusts his gut.' You can say that his 'stiff-neck' approach has paid off for him. (For his fellow citizens is another question.)

Before the meeting with Trump, he met with our Democratic party leaders (why?) and received their very bad advice to 'not back down' to Trump. It is remarkable that he would listen to people who just had their election heads handed to them. They have proven they don't know how to handle President Trump.

Trump and JD Vance are in a hurry to make many (needed) changes to our government and country. It was clearly previously indicated to Z that they were looking for peace and a mineral deal (which is a form of US security, but not the bullets and boots Z wants).

Both also do not react well to confrontation in public- especially Trump - he will counter-attack. Everyone should know this by now.

Trump's negotiation style is to 'disorient and confuse' opposition. He will say many things that may be overstatements or off the wall, but the intent is to put off and misdirect. This gives him the following: 1) They blunder and reveal what is really important to their position. 2) they get mad - which gives him space to redirect again - and control the process. 3) He gets to reframe the discussion to make his points.
What is important about Trump is not what he says (in detail) but the later actions taken.

Geo-political objectives-

Sorry, I will be quite blunt about this, but there is no morality in the Kingdom of the World (geopolitics). I believe that John Mearsheimer's theory of offensive realism is correct. Essentially, great powers are driven by the rational desire to secure themselves - regionally or more. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Mearsheimer Please NOTE I do not agree with all his conclusions or moral behaviors.

In the USA, Trump's view (and mine), the conflict in Ukraine was provoked by the prior USA and EU policy of NATO expansionism. This was unnecessary, and sadly over a million people have now been killed for it. Collaterally, Ukraine's eastern territories are largely ethno-linguistic Russian and have consistently voted against the Western Ukraine leaders and policies.

The conflict militarily is over. Especially without the USA's support. I enclose an update from the Austrian military, which is outside the bubble of news we are fed - in the US and UK. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDRjughhXMg
640,640 views Premiered Feb 21, 2025, The Ukrainian Purgatory --sterreichs Bundesheer

USA equipment - shown at 16:26 of the video

The US military has been run down over the last twelve years - most damaging the four years of Biden's policies. Also, China's CCP has made significant inroads in its military strength and world control. Quite simply, the USA must pivot westward with its resources. I can add much more evidence as to why this is critical now more than ever.

Finally, Trump and JD Vance - realize that countering the CCP and rebuilding the USA is where their bread will be buttered, so to speak.
Europe must live with the fruits of their 'save the world' policies, bureaucratic overloads, and now expensive energy.

If Z does not agree to concede the territory held by Russia, I am afraid we will pull out. As Trump said, they can fight on, but it will be just more death and destruction to prove what? Russia is not a threat to run across Europe. Certainly not after the last three years of fighting. Stop the war and live for another day.

I hope this does not disturb you unduly. It is all in God's hands in any case. I am happy to clarify as needed.

Best regards,

[AB: There is a lot here, thank you, NO. Interesting to categorise the Why under personalities and geopolitics. And I like the ending that can re-orientate us towards God.

Many of NO's statements I can agree with or at least can see the logic in. Among these are:

• "USA must pivot westward." DT's fear of China, and wanting to focus on that rather than Europe and Russia, makes a lot of sense, at least from the point of view of seeing enemies in the world.
• NATO expansionism was wrong [and in my view is one of the ways we wrongly and unwisely humiliated Russia].
• Trump's tactics can "reveal what is really important" [but he does not listen; he seems to believe that he alone is right] and he also does not react well to confrontation in public.
• Trump is looking for peace [and, having watched the earlier conversation, I would believe that; however, I would ask what kind of peace and I remember the horror with which people spoke of Chamerberlain's 'appeasement']

Many I either disagree with or question, including:

• "Russia is not a threat to run across Europe." and the derogatory description of Europe: the view of someone who does not understand but comments from afar. (Europe "expensive energy" - onshore wind is the cheapest!) [But might the view from afar be somehow more accurate?]
• "Trump's negotiation style is to 'disorient and confuse' opposition." I agree it may be, but I disagree that we should accept it. Though very clever, I see it as evil, or at least very unlike our Saviour.
• "Z has come from a comic clown to riches and power." So what. The Ukrainians believe him to be God's man for the time. If the fact that he was a comic rules him out, then it should have ruled Ronald Reagan out.
• "Collaterally, Ukraine's eastern territories are largely ethno-linguistic Russian." Good point, but what about bits of the USA that are ethno-linguistically different from the majority? Do I detect hypocrisy there?

Though there are a few points from NO which I find of little value or which I might argue against, most I find of great value and can see as true, and it all helps me understand something of why the blow-up occurred. The points are clear and concise: thank you, NO. The Why points that NO makes are meaningful in several aspects - and that is why I do believe many of NO's points are valid. Some of these came through from DT in the earlier part of the conversation.

However, there are also Whys meaningful in other aspects, which are not set out here, one of them being the heart attitude of DT, which others have commented on and I believe God judges. DT's functioning in some aspects might be OK and even wise, but in other aspects is highly dysfunctional (sinful).

I am trying to 'collect' all the relevant aspects of the Why, and especially see them all in the light of Scripture. What NO has given us here is a clear concise set of aspectual Whys.

(For a useful suite of aspects, see Aspects of reality.) ]

--- From JC, 250307

Here is my response.

As you were seeking to understand the "why" it happened, I will respond to what is pointed out on the possible specific responses now published on the page and what you point out in the transcript. I hope to signal where the breakdown in coherence occurs that would normally point to the aspectually harmonious expectations as just another point of that occurring for a deeper analysis of what is "going on" in the states at this moment. In the end, I hope to clearly show the why what happened is because of fear and hate. This will be written not espousing a hand or participating of an intervening God as I do not believe a God that calls us to dominion, or healthy flourishing and Shalom are in this place nor in this relationship because it is dominated by the fear and hate that caused it in the first place.

Fear:

N: an unpleasant emotion caused by the belief that someone or something is dangerous, likely to cause pain, or a threat.

V: be afraid of (someone or something) as likely to be dangerous, painful, or threatening.

Hate:

N:intense or passionate dislike.

V:be afraid of (someone or something) as likely to be dangerous, painful, or threatening. [AB: looks like repetition, a slip.]

In diplomacy there are standards that flow with retropancy with the pistic ideal guiding the preceding aspectual occurrence of things from the Ethical through the Sensitive aspects that reinforce one another over time. The Sensitive aspect informs the foundational core spark of intention as it is what creates the path or observance to an entity's basis for outward expression that moves beyond the autonomic nervous system. JD's actions when first speaking up show a fundamental fear, "an unpleasant emotion caused by the belief that someone or something is dangerous, likely to cause pain, or a threat".We cannot know for sure what there is fear of specifically, but I would venture to say that it was the first public showing of a subservient individual within the Trump power structure trying to "score points" with what they fear most, their own loss of power and what they wish to accomplish with it through the vulnerable narcissism embodied in my fellow human being, Donald Trump. This perceived loss of power does mean that Trump is nothing more than a tool that others are using to accomplish their hoped for ends. So the why that I will examine is why fear drives people to do countervailing things to the established norms of diplomacy, and, ultimately, it is because we dropped the bomb, and, maybe more importantly, we may have a new "bomb".

JD's core accusation and perceived lack, or the thing feared is that Zelensky did not "Thank Trump" and "attack[ed] the administration". This is when the emperor had no clothes. It ultimately comes to this, when someone does not explicitly thank Trump or honor Trump, it is perceived as an attack and a sign of disrespect. This can be explained by someone learning that Trump is in fact a narcissist that obsesses on perceived past slights against him directly and conflating all actions that are aware to him being about him, either "For Trump" or "against Trump". These are things he says, President Trump, referring to himself in the third person. I do not wish to litigate whether or not Trump is narcissistic or is a narcissist, I do state this is a core foundation to my analysis and it does explain a lot of what goes around him. I am happy to speak about this or write about this in another response. But, what JD signals so clearly, is that Zelensky did not properly thank Trump, and by not doing so, he attached the Administration. So why did this happen?

JD wants to show Trump he is first and foremost there to support the feelings of superiority and strength and honor that Trump demands in order to keep you inside his sphere of power. He capped off his previous two weeks of carrying forward not America First, but Trump above all, and then America First. This is where the absence of God is clear. There is no charity, no benefit of the doubt for the other, there is simply paying homage to this one man, and we are right in our actions because this one man "has an overwhelming mandate" to do x,y,z. It also is a situation where numerous times, JD and others in his cabinet state over and over "Only Trump could do x". Anytime you hear that from this moment forth, instead of laughing at the absurdity of it and the sheer demonic nature of the saviour complex that others are building within Trump, Just say, "what end is this person driving towards by using Trump as a tool"? So, the "Why" It is simple, JD wants power. He wants the ring. Ultimately, it is the desire for the ring of power to accomplish their own individual view of what's right. The difficult thing is that many people do come to understand what is right and wrong, and, have demonstrated acting in ways that move towards the right away from wrong in humble, charitable, and loving modes of being. America did this as a diplomatic and military apparatus with the direct partnership of the UK, Europe, Japan, and most of the industrial world post WWII as demonstrated by the Marshall Plan and multiple trade deals which further enhanced capitalist market forces around the globe, ultimately draining the USSR of resources and causing it to fall. After the fall, the monopolar world continued on with deepening international trade agreements and stronger currencies to continue this proliferation of trade above all with American consumerism, UK financial work, and Chinese manufacturing driving this unrelenting hellish desire to buy more stuff at a cheaper cost, regardless of the aspectual impact on environment, exploitation of labor, and appropriate limitations of nation state sovereignty.

JD watched the impacts of this globalized trade first hand, as did I. We both grew up in Appalachia, specifically, Kentucky, West Virginia, and Southern Ohio. He witnessed first hand the abandonment of stable jobs and energy derived from the coal mines and the structure of international care and aid superseding the restructuring of other commercial and governmental support in that region of the country. When Japanese and Chinese manufacturing took root in the late 70s and early 80s, it set the precedent for the other demolition of a region of the country as well as its dependent supply chain support that was once held almost exclusively in and throughout the rust belt. The beginning of the rust belt though was in those mountains that span across Pennsylvania, into West Virginia, and Kentucky, the heart of coal country. And when manufacturing, steel fabrication (from now my home city of Pittsburgh) and, and coal mining dried up with no policy informing a Marshall Planesque retooling of the labor force, Appalachia fell into abject despair. I watched this happen over my lifetime. The loss of mining, manufacturing, and meaning through a job or vocation destroyed the formative aspect of the culture of this region of the country. What was left in that carving out of America's manufacturing base was caucasian, Christianity (or vestiges there of found in countless Baptist and non denominational or 4 square churches throughout the region), and coal. Coal wasn't wanted, Christianity was in perceived decline from further internationalization and domestic migration of human beings throughout the country, and caucasians were beginning to perceive slights against "white America" as other human beings with varying amounts of melanin and that for the majority did not specifically experience the specific collapse of culture inside Appalachia moved across the region and throughout the country. JD grew up specifically in this space. Then, the real pain and death arrived.

Dreamland, https://www.amazon.com/Dreamland-True-Americas-Opiate-Epidemic/dp/1620402505, to use a book not written by JD Vance, tells a the other story of what may be motivating JD's fear. Summary is this, opioids flowed through the region and killed hundreds of thousands of people over the past 20 years. Addiction held JD's own mother for most of his life, and Addiction flows through most of Appalachia in some way. Most people that grew up in this area can speak of multiple people they knew personally that died of opioid use, typically illicitly. I can see the faces from my childhood of folks I played with at the pool that died due to opiod overdoses. These were not wealthy people or media darlings that died tragically due to the overwhelming loss of sense of self when they themselves become disjointed from reality, it is from when the reality around an entire community or region becomes disjointed from the formative aspects of meaning making for a region. No jobs, no identity, no honor, mixed with strong pride and entrenched pain from decades now of drug abuse and exploitation left the core of America broken and demanding answers. Now we have a cut off of border crossings and immigration. Now we have government grants to all universities reviewed, halting billions of dollars of research IN THE MIDDLE OF BEING DONE, just to review if there are mentions of diversity or equity or inclusion or other terms the administration consider or will consider to be not exclusively based on "merit". (one note, a quick aspectual analysis of merit can show how easily that word can be used to mean different things, like love, justice, morality, strength, and dominion). We have Tariffs enacted yesterday that the administration will bring in protection of jobs, manufacturing, and goods made in America. We have enormous new military facilities and contracts pouring into Ohio specifically geared towards autonomous vehicle of all types exclusively for war fighting. We have an enormous, and very necessary crack down on the flow of fentanyl into our country. This super opioid kills even more efficiently than the Heroin and hydrocodone. So, all these policies do point to a desire to purify and reorder American priorities. JD Vance could be seen as making sure Trump stays happy and is thanked effusively just so that the things JD think will save his region of the country and America broadly, get done.

Then there is the new bomb. A few weeks ago I shared with my wife that this insanity that is pouring out in our policy and country could reflect an informed, calculated decisions to sure up our borders, trade lines, policies, interests, budgets (DOGE), and overall American policies because we are about to harness a form of technical efficiency unknown in the world, what some people call artificial general intelligence (AGI). I could see JD Vance and many people in the cabinet trying to make sure Trump is appeased and all the priorities they individually perceive are necessary are built around the successful launch of and stewarding of AGI. The major industrial announcement was "stargate" in the first few days of the administration, I think at around $500 Billion. It is an odd name. But, it will make sense.

So, when you see that JD Vance saw first hand the ravages of the impact of globalization you see why he could speak up in such a radical way to make sure Trump's ego is properly stroked. JD probably hates the ravages of drugs, cultural dislocation, and other pains he saw dealt out in Appalachia. That Hate, led to Fear. That Fear of losing what he felt is necessary to restore America came out in his response. But, why that response in that meeting?

A World War where we (America) no longer can divert all our resources to owning AGI as a country, or only ingroup coalition that is to be determined, would derail Trump's(read all his praisers') policies. We would not be able to get to where some think only the western values found in America can get us. And this, this is where fear based on an ideal, and serious Godless conceit, is found.

Elon Musk's main driving force is for humanity to become a multiplane species. He sees AI as a necessary tool, as well as rapidly reusable rockets, as the only means by which we can get there realistically before we blow each other up in nuclear war. He gave ~$250 million to the Trump campaign and has focused on establishing clear understanding of all departments, agencies, and expenditures on the federal budget through is DOGE interveinings. I believe he is creating Los Alamos 2.0 and that one of the key departments will be the Trinity sight. I believe that the current US administration knows that AGI is right around the corner and that the US is justified to use ANY policy and any action to make sure America first gets to use and control AGI. this is inherently evil. Or Profoundly wicked. It does imbue an social aspect of assumptions that our values in the West far superseded any other values as the only values that can hold in goodness this new technology. Right or wrongly it has been our stance on emerging technology since the space race. President Kennedy shared that America should be the only ones with Space technologies at the closing of his Rice University speech. We were supposed to be the only ones with Nucs. I believe that the current administration is structuring things to be that America only has AGI and it will dole out access to AGI to the human beings it deems worthy in coming years.

The fear of it falling into other hands and therefore other "values" I think is the driving force of JD vance, alongwith his lived experience watching the world fall apart around him in Appalachia growing up.

So, why did I mention Hate in the beginning? Where does it fall in this plan or response. It is the deeper engine driving this.
Over a decade ago I had the opportunity to sit across the table in a private meeting with a very wealth man. I asked him a question, "If you could do one thing with the remaining days you have, what would it be"? He smiled at first, and said "I'm already doing it". Then, he went into a rage, "I and (the other two human beings) are going to destroy the public education system in our country. We already started. We hate what we see and will destroy it." I said what about it being the single cultural thread that ties our nation together across our land and across generations? What are you going to replace it with? "It's already started. Christian education, vouchers in states to undermine the state system. Frankly, I don't care. But, until my toes curl up and they wheel me out of my place, I will fight to destroy the public education system in the US." The anger and rage in this man's voice and tone have sat with me for over a decade.

[AB: Interesting. Does this guy, supposedly a Christian, have a different god, the god of Destroying Public Education? ]

I saw more of it in 2011, 2012, and 2013 when I attended CPAC in DC and saw the growing vehemence and hate towards others, foreigners, and the "international order" trying to harm America. In these CPAC meetings I came to learn of deeper hates and fears, most of them structured against the perceived threat of "~those not like us gaining power" whether those "those" are non whites, different nationalities, a new world order, different lifestyles, etc. These figments of hate have informed the policies of the white house every step of the way under trumps two terms. Now, we have them in full bloom. This same undercurrent of hate and fear I can see and feel in the actions and responses of JD.

[AB: A huge amount here. # One of the few who mention environmental problems and how our economic activity wrecks it. # Discusses JDV rather than DT: who has an undercurrent of hate and fear. However, I tend to see something more raw as well in JDV, pistic dysfunction etc. ]

----- New Conclusion After The Responses

--- Overall Considerations (Philosophical)

# By and large, those who support DT tend to have clear, compelling logic. When people try to argue against it, they often come off worse, because the proponent keeps forcing the argument back onto that one logic. The argument is compelling only from the perspective of one aspect. The thing we too often forget is that each aspect has a different logic. So, if we restrict the argument to one single aspect, we miss a lot - and that way lies foolishness rather than wisdom (as espoused by Proverbs).

# It seems to me that DT himself focuses on only one or two aspects - economics and pride - to the exclusion of and detriment to all the others. These two aspects mixed together in his anger and hatred towards what he sees as other nations having "ripped off" the USA. When we narrow our focus to one or two aspects, we enter reductionism - which is harmful because it robs us of awareness of other aspects. It is not just harmful overall but counterproductive because all the other aspects still operate and if he ignores them, they might some day 'come back to bite him'. We need to take all aspects into account, all the time. But so are his critics ignoring aspects. The dozen or so aspects that he is ignoring will [Note: Aspects].

# Indeed the multi-aspectual nature of reality is one reason why I have taken pains to present as many 'sides' of this affair as wanted to contribute, and to understand each in their own terms - rather than seeking to attribute blame or take sides.

# The other reason I am not interested in attributing blame nor taking sides, as I indicated to SM. It is because "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". And, because what seems important sin to us often differs from what seems important to in God's eyes,, I do not even wish even to compare sins.

--- The People

# First, Zelenskyy. The age difference spoke louldly to me. VZ is much younger than DT, and hence maybe has less worldly experience. Moreover, as someone pointed out, VZ is a war leader seeking to rescue his country from a massive foe. So, I was not at all surprised at his view narrowly fixed on military support (yes, likewise reductionist and hence counterproductive, as we saw). But DT should have taken that into account and showed wisdom rather than aggression and arrogance.

# VZ, along with others before him, tried to argue benefits-and-costs (that the USA will one day feel it too) but it did not wash at all. This is because DT does not think like that. So let us turn our attention to Donald Trump.

# Much more important to DT than issues meaningful in the economic aspect are things meaningful in the aspect of pride. As someone put it, there is a goal, a strategy and tactics, with the goal determining the rest. Tariffs are tactics. The strategy to meet the goal is to refashion the economy. The goal is MAGA or even MDTGA - Make Donald Trump Great Again. (Actually what is DT's goal, strategy, etc. might be discussed.)

# What does seem clear to me is that God sets more store on the heart than on the behaviour, speech, logic, etc. These latter come from, and reveal, what a person's heart is. They are, if you like, evidence of the hidden heart.

# What DT's heart is, I cannot tell with certainty, but several things above may be evidence of an evil heart, arrogant, unconcerned and haughty. For example, DT seems not to listen to anyone who does not 100% agree with him. DT kept on talking over Zelenskyy. DT was right in his own eyes.

# What seems very clear is that DT is self-absorbed (some call it "narcissism"). Almost , he wants to be worshipped and utterly obeyed. Evidence: making up his team with yes-people, getting angry and aggressive with anyone who disagrees with him, hogging the discussion with VZ (yes, most of the questions were directed to him, but he could, as a host, pass to his guest sometimes), and his throw-away remarks about being even greater than past famous presidents, then defending himself with "Of course I'm joking" - but then adding "- but maybe?", and numerous other bits and pieces, often throw-away remarks. If I am correct in my evaluation (and all that is not just an actor's mask that he puts on), this self-absorption evidences a deeply sinful heart.

# Moreover, DT not only believes consciously but subconsciously presumes he is right, against all those 'losers' who have other views, and is proud of it. (saviour complex?) In some ways, he is to be credited with seeing things differently and stating it, but he is unwise to thereby deny and disdain all the others.

I too see things differently (I am on the autism spectrum: have Asperger Syndrome) but I recognise that the mainstream also contains some truth and validity, which I would wish to take into account. I use the idea of aspects of reality to do so.

# Also DT seems totally unconcerned about "the poor and needy" [c.f. Ezekiel 16:49] and about the destruction of God's Earth, this too evidences a deeply sinful heart. Both beliefs and attitudes towards others are components of the heart; see my discussion of The Heart.

# DT prides himself as a great Negotiator. But is he? Which negotiations during his first term succeeded to make a lasting good impact - especially in the longer term?

# Some have suggested that the real power lies in people around Trump and he is little more than a front-man pawn in their games: JD Vance, Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, etc. Interesting idea. Conspiracy theory? I suspect there may be something of that, but also that that is far too simple a view. Each of these people, including DT is a human being and a sinner, probably especially sinful in heart.

--- The Politics

# However, what does he mean by peace? It seems that the main thing he wants is absence of fighting. I am reminded of Chamberlain's returning from visiting Hitler, with assurance of peace - but we in the UK have long since despised (maybe not totally fairly) that as "appeasement". Is DT's peace like that?

# Why does DT want peace? I can see two reasons, possibly both valid. One is that, now that he has all power, what else is there to aim for but a Nobel Prize for Peace (like Obama received). That is a heart attitude.

# The other is that DT sees China as the main threat, and wants to be free to concentrate on that. So he wants to 'solve' the problems of Ukraine and the Middle East and get Russian on his side against China. Sounds reasonable. This reason has been adduced to explain why he - the self-described Great Negotiator - has given away all his best cards to Russia before negotiation even began.

# However, I would ask two things:

• Should DT see China as such a rival or threat? Is that valid? Is it wise? Is it even realistic? Is it not just a self-fulfilling prophecy? My investigations of Canaanism suggest that to see the world in terms of enemies and potential warfare is the very opposite of what God intended and therefore ultimately self-defeating. (Europe's attitude seems likewise addicted to warfare and rivalry.)

• Is the rest of the world really as inconsequential as he assumes? It is akin to the reductionism discussed above.

# The minerals deal with Ukraine (and now the USA to take over Ukraine's nucelar power stations), without military security. DT argues that if the USA has economic interests in Ukraine then the USA will ensure that Russia does not invade or interfere. Sounds very reasonable, and an interesting idea. But I do wonder: is there some hidden trap in this, which the USA will spring sometime in the future? Or some hidden flaw, which means that Russia can still destroy Ukraine?

# The humiliation of Russia in the past. I do believe that the West was wrong to humiliate Russia, and NATO to seek to expand eastwards. Nobody should be humiliated (though arrogant people should be humbled by God). Since the collapse of the Soviet Union - a massive humiliation in itself - the West has arrogantly humiliated Russia several times. NATO expansion. Obama remarking that Russia is a "regional power" rather than a world power. The boycotting of the Winter Olympics (over a relatively minor issue, the promotion of homosexuality to minors). The sanctioning of Russia and Putin. No wonder that Putin has restored to war. In some ways, I see DT as beginning to right this wrong.

# The Democrats' advice to Zelenskyy to "not back down to Trump": was there any sense of 'using' VZ in their vendetta against Trump (ven if subconscious)? Understandable if so, but wrong.

# DT's accolytes like JD Vance and others, as revealed in the Atlantic magazine recently, "hate European freeloading". His team,a s well as DT, is driven by angry hatred. Again, this is a manifestation of what I call Canaanism.

----- See Also

• Thank you, Donald ... Trump (for reducing world trade and hence overall ecological footprint)!
• On The Human Heart
• Aspects of Reality

----- Notes

Note on Aspects of Reality. I find Dooyeweerd's ideas of irreducibly distinct aspects of reality useful. They are "modalities of meaning", "spheres of law", "modes of being", "modes of functioning", with each aspect giving us a different set of possibilities, a different norm, different way in which things are meaningful, and a different rationality. See Aspects of Reality. In summary, there are:

• Mathematical aspects: quantitative, spatial, kinematic,
• Pre-human aspects: physical, biotic, sensitive,
• Aspects of individual human behavious: analytical, formative, lingual,
• Aspects of social activity: social, economic, aesthetic,
• Aspects of societal structure: juridical, ethical (love), faith ("pistic").

To send comments, queries, suggestions please send an email to:

- an email address made up as follows:

• After the 'at' sign is the domain, which is "kgsvr . net" without the spaces

• Before the 'at' sign is "xn" - just those two letters, which is my abbreviation for "Christian".

(I apologise that I have to make it a little complicated; it is because I don't want automated spamming systems to find the email and send junk that will swamp your genuine messages. Thank you for your understanding - as well as for your comments.

About This Page

Copyright (c) Andrew Basden at all the dates below. But you may use this material subject to certain conditions.

Written on the Amiga with Protext in the style of classic HTML.

Created: 1 March 2025. Last updated: 2 March 2025 responses. 6 April 2025 more editing, aspects, uploaded; contents.