Trump, Putin shaping a 21st century United States and World without many of the basic institutions that many consider key 20th century advances

By Crimson Tazvinzwa

Trump and Putin whose countries both possess nuclear weapons; are two tyrannical leaders  challenging the post-world war order that was designed to prevent another world war






US President Donald Trump, Russian President Vladmir Putin are ushering in a new Geo-political order bereft of institutions, law and order. They are the only two nuclear superpowers. Therefore; should we be worried?

Seems American democratic values together with core traditional institutions like the press, legislature and the Justice System are falling apart. Not only these; think about global institutions that help put some order into this complex world we live in; some of whose countries  often led by dimwitted, chaotic and dangerous individuals. Think about the whittling down; the slash and burn and denigration of such important institutions like the United Nations, International Monetary Fund, World Bank, World Trade Organisation, North Atlantic Treaty Organization and European Union – think about traditional allies being slapped in the face right, left and centre. Lest we forget this is an existential issue for smaller and less developed countries who are dependent on the sanctity and reliability of these institutions.

What does this mean for you and me? Every human being that cares about life, moral values, human rights and the rule of the law should be very worried; and be very very scared.

‘Real Time’ host Bill Maher and his guests – Charles Blow, Kristen Soltis Anderson, and Steve Schmidt  did not hide their worries as they discussed President Trump’s recent attacks on the press on August 3, 2018.

Maher said: “I feel like we are becoming like one of those countries, you know, like every week you know, one of those countries where they have military parades; one of these countries where the president appoints one of his kids, all the, you know.

“And it’s not like he has not attacked the media before. But we take this a little serious right? But when it gets to this nasty label . He called today … the media “horrendous, horrible and sick people, disgusting and enemy of the people,” he remarked in frustration, And Nancy chimed in: “They want to transform our constitution in a radical and fundamental way and we are all being distracted by the president’s tweets while this is going on.”

Charles M BLow, an American journalist, commentator, and current visual op-ed columnist for The New York Times couldn’t  hide his fears far enough:

“Every American needs to be passionate about this.

“And when we have people like the president; with the power and [megaphone] of the presidency trying to whittle at that to attack the only true savers of the truth, the seekers of the truth … anybody seeking the truth he attacks; once you have removed the truth anything can sprout out to occupy its place.” Bow concluded.

“Free press in this country predates the Constitution… It is one of the things that makes America different, that makes America special, that makes America great.” –

RELATED: Unions: A decimation of the 120-year-old union movement, most recently with last month’s Supreme Court ruling weakening the funding of public unions.

RELATED: Black votingIn 2013, the Supreme Court invalidated a key part of the Voting Rights Act, and last month the court decided that counties can purge voter rolls of people who don’t regularly vote.

RELATED: Women’s rights: A primary conservative goal is the invalidation or weakening of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion.


  1. “RELATED: Women’s rights: A primary conservative goal is the invalidation or weakening of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion.”

    This so-called right to abortion is based on a web of legal fictions. A case of judicial abuse of authority. Laws are made in the legislative branch of government (by elected representatives) and ought not be made by jurists legislating from the bench.

  2. So long as the law remains a prerogative of the legislature and not jurists I’m fine with it. Because this ensures that laws continue to originate from the governed through their elected reps. Nevertheless these laws are explained and interpreted by appointees ie jurists and justices who are often compromised especially so Supreme Court Judges who are appointed by the President. etc.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.