Re: Trump, North Korea & Bonapartism

John,

The exhibit answers a different question than the one you are asking it. Read the third sentence. The reason given is not North Korea, and it is not China. It is that Seoul declined to join the war on Iran. The "somewhat unrelated (?)" is not a digression; it is the operative clause, and the question mark is Trump telling us he knows it is not unrelated at all. South Korea withheld a service and lost a favor.

There is also a material story here that needs ruling out before autonomy from the capitalist class gets invoked. The George Washington is leaving the Pacific to relieve the Lincoln in the Middle East. The western Pacific is without a carrier. An administration running an open-ended war on Iran is cutting a posture somewhere in Asia whether or not anyone in the White House has ever heard of Kim Jong Un. Overstretch explains the drawdown on its own. The Bonapartist reading has to explain something overstretch does not, and so far it has not been asked to.

The more profound problem is with the test. You are treating divergence from the perceived interest of the majority of the bourgeoisie as evidence for Bonapartism. But divergence is the premise of the category, not the finding. In the Eighteenth Brumaire the bourgeoisie gives up political rule precisely in order to keep social rule, and Bonaparte crosses its political preferences continually while guaranteeing the conditions of accumulation. If policy friction counted as proof, we would have proof every week, and the concept would be doing no work.

The question that discriminates is whether capital retains the institutional means of reversal. That is measurable, and we can measure it this week. Ulchi Freedom Shield starts Monday. "Substantially reduce" is undefined. Watch whether INDOPACOM delivers a token trim or an actual cut, whether the armed services bloc and the Korea hands force a walkback, and whether anyone is fired for slow-walking it. If the order survives contact with the apparatus, you have something. If it does not, you have a man talking.

Which brings me to what I think the post actually shows. The warrant offered is a personal relationship. The instrument is a named household officer rather than a process. The sanction is withdrawal of favor from a client who refused a personal request. The signature treats the office as a possession. This is patrimonial administration described in the ruler's own voice, and on that it is very strong evidence.

The two halves do different jobs, and we keep collapsing them. Bonapartism names a relation between the executive and the contending classes. It requires an account of the equilibrium being brokered and the mass base underwriting it, and I do not think this list has produced that account. "Patrimonialism" names the form the apparatus takes: staffing by loyalty, jurisdiction as a grant rather than an office, and allies held as clients in a tributary relation to the ruler's person rather than as states in a treaty relation to a state. That is not a decorative addition to the Bonapartist thesis. It is what makes the thesis falsifiable, because it predicts the specific failure mode we should expect, which is that the ruler's word and the state's action come apart, repeatedly and visibly, in exactly the way a Bonapartist consolidation would not tolerate.

There is a hazard in reading the stake of a social media post, and it is a hazard the patrimonial form is designed to produce. A patrimonial ruler speaks as though his word were already the apparatus. When we take the utterance as the act, we are accepting his account of his own power.

Last point. The premise that the capitalist class is near-unanimous on Korea is asserted rather than shown. Burden-shifting and the Asia drawdown have had a constituency on the right since 2019, when Trump was calling these same exercises expensive. Some of the class wants this. What none of them wants is finding out about it from Truth Social on a Sunday night.

Tony

--
Tony


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#43047): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/43047
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/120784041/6024700
-=-=-
POSTING RULES & NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
#4 Do not exceed five posts a day.
-=-=-
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/10173629/6024700/1441833971/xyzzy [[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-