Against the Stream: America First – What Next for Gaza and El País Liberal Hypocrisy

Against The Stream · 2025-01-16

Core Argument

The central thesis of this episode is that the Gaza ceasefire deal, forced through by Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff against Netanyahu's sustained sabotage, reveals a fundamental shift in US foreign policy under Trump: the abandonment of liberal interventionist "primacy" in favour of a narrower, more realist "America First" doctrine that accepts the relative decline of US imperialism and seeks to consolidate core interests rather than police the entire globe.

The hosts argue that Biden's approach — attempting to maintain US dominance everywhere simultaneously, backing Israel unconditionally while waging proxy war against Russia — has proven both disastrous and unsustainable. Trump's intervention in Gaza, by contrast, demonstrates a willingness to impose discipline on client states when their wars no longer serve US interests. The ceasefire was not a humanitarian gesture but a recognition that Israel's war aims were unachievable, that the war was weakening Israel internally, and that continued escalation served neither US strategic interests nor Trump's domestic political project.

The second thread concerns European liberal hypocrisy: El País's editorial panic over Elon Musk's political interventions is exposed as a defence of elite-managed democracy against popular discontent. The hosts argue that the real crisis is not "disinformation" but the complete delegitimisation of bourgeois institutions — media, judiciary, parties — which drives people toward outsider figures. The liberal response, exemplified by Romania's cancelled election, is to restrict democracy itself in the name of defending it.

Theoretical Grounding

The analysis draws on the Marxist theory of imperialism, particularly the Leninist understanding of interimperialist rivalry and the uneven development of capitalist powers. The hosts deploy this framework to interpret Trump's foreign policy not as an aberration but as a rational response to the objective decline of US hegemony — a decline rooted in the overextension of American military power (Iraq, Afghanistan), the relative economic rise of China and Russia, and the internal contradictions of the US capitalist state.

The concept of the "relative decline of US imperialism" is central. This is not a claim that the US is collapsing, but that its share of global manufacturing, GDP, and military dominance has diminished to the point where it can no longer act as the world's policeman. The hosts reference Alan Woods's earlier analyses of the Iraq War — "pride comes before the fall" — to situate this decline as the predictable outcome of imperial overreach.

The discussion of Israel's internal crisis draws on a class-fraction analysis of the Israeli ruling class, distinguishing between Netanyahu's personal survival project (dependent on far-right, ultra-Orthodox factions) and the broader interests of Israeli capital, which requires regional stability and normalisation (the Abraham Accords). The war is understood as having deepened contradictions within Israeli society — between settlers and secular liberals, between the military's manpower needs and the Haredi exemption, between the hostage families and the war cabinet — that will eventually create conditions for class struggle.

The critique of European liberalism is grounded in the Marxist understanding of the bourgeois state as a committee for managing the common affairs of the ruling class. The hosts argue that liberal panic about "disinformation" and "populism" is actually panic about democracy escaping elite control — a point illustrated by Robert Kaplan's frank admission that the founders feared "pure democracy" and that party elites should have prevented Trump's nomination.

Conjunctural Relevance

The episode was recorded on 16 January 2025, four days before Trump's inauguration, and addresses several concrete conjunctural developments:

Gaza ceasefire: The deal — phased Israeli withdrawal, prisoner exchanges, Hamas remaining intact — is virtually identical to the May 2024 proposal that Netanyahu sabotaged. The hosts cite the Guardian's destruction statistics: 46,000 confirmed dead, 90% displaced, 95% of schools damaged or destroyed. They note that Hamas is already rebuilding, with Muhammad Sinwar (brother of Yahya) leading reconstruction and recruitment. The Wall Street Journal is quoted: "the pace at which Hamas is rebuilding itself is higher than the pace that the IDF is eradicating them."

Trump's foreign policy: The hosts draw extensively on a Financial Times podcast with Dan Caldwell, a Trump-aligned strategist from a Koch-funded think tank. Caldwell's key admissions: the Iraq War was a "crime" costing $2 trillion+; the US "cannot afford financially, militarily, and on an industrial level to keep doing all the things we're trying to do"; the pursuit of "primacy" has made the US weaker; Ukraine is not a vital US interest; and "I would not trade Taipei for Los Angeles" — meaning nuclear war with China over Taiwan is unacceptable.

European crisis: The El País editorial "Democracy Itself Is at Risk" is analysed as a symptom of European capital's impotence. The hosts note that the Italian military has contracted Elon Musk's Starlink because Europe cannot offer an alternative — a concrete illustration of technological dependency. The Romanian election cancellation (December 2024) is cited as the logical endpoint of liberal "defence of democracy": cancelling elections when the wrong candidate wins.

Israeli internal crisis: The hosts report that conscription turnout has dropped 15-20% since June, that the Supreme Court has ruled Haredi exemptions illegal, and that the Israeli economy is in deep crisis with technology companies relocating abroad. The contradiction between the far-right's demand for total victory and its refusal to serve in the army is identified as a growing fracture.

Where the Argument Continues

The episode deliberately leaves several threads open:

The fate of the ceasefire: The hosts note that Netanyahu has not yet signed and that far-right ministers (Smotrich) are opposing it. The deal's implementation — particularly phase two and three — remains uncertain. This is likely to be addressed in subsequent Against the Stream episodes as events unfold.

The Ukraine question: The episode establishes Trump's likely approach (cutting off or reducing aid, forcing European burden-sharing) but does not develop the implications for the war's trajectory. The Spectre of Communism series has previously covered Ukraine in depth, and listeners are directed to Alan Woods's early analyses arguing the war was unnecessary for US interests.

The crisis of European capitalism: Nicholas's article on the car industry crisis is referenced as a companion piece. The broader question of European deindustrialisation, technological dependency, and political fragmentation is identified as a developing story that will require ongoing analysis.

Class struggle in Israel: The hosts argue that the war has broken the "false unity" of Israeli society and that internal fractures — between settlers and liberals, between military needs and Haredi exemptions, between hostage families and the war cabinet — will eventually create conditions for class-based politics. This is a long-term prediction, not a current observation.

Connections

Within the corpus: This episode connects to previous Against the Stream analyses of the Gaza genocide, the Ukraine war, and the crisis of European capitalism. Listeners are directed to Alan Woods's articles from the Iraq War period ("Pride Comes Before the Fall") and Nicholas's recent piece on the European car industry crisis on marxist.com.

Broader Marxist texts: The analysis of interimperialist rivalry draws on Lenin's Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism and Trotsky's writings on uneven and combined development. The critique of liberal democracy's crisis of legitimacy echoes Engels's observation that the bourgeois state is ultimately a committee for managing the common affairs of the ruling class.

Contemporary analysts: The hosts engage seriously with Dan Caldwell's FT interview, treating it as a rare honest expression of the realist wing of US capital. Robert Kaplan's New Statesman article is cited as evidence of liberal elites' contempt for democracy. The Wall Street Journal's reporting on Hamas rebuilding is used to counter the official Israeli narrative of military victory.

What to read alongside: The Guardian's destruction statistics article; the Wall Street Journal piece on Muhammad Sinwar (13 January 2025); the FT podcast with Dan Caldwell (12 December 2024); Alan Woods's Iraq War analyses on marxist.com; Nicholas's article on the European car industry crisis.

Key Quotes

1. On the ceasefire and US power: "It's really been the decisive intervention of Trump's envoy and Trump himself that has changed the balance and forced Netanyahu to sign this ceasefire... This is a first taste of Trump's foreign policy."

2. On US decline: "The United States exists in a world where its power is more limited than it's been since the end of the Cold War and arguably before that. We simply cannot afford financially, militarily, and on an industrial level to keep doing all the things we're trying to do around the world without risking a financial catastrophe." (Dan Caldwell, quoted approvingly)

3. On the impossibility of destroying Hamas: "The pace at which Hamas is rebuilding itself is higher than the pace that the IDF is eradicating them... The very brutal nature of the genocidal campaign of the IDF in Gaza is acting as a recruiting sergeant for Hamas."

4. On liberal hypocrisy: "In the name of freedom of expression they propose censorship, and in the name of defending democracy they propose cancelling the election... The problem is that all the institutions have become so discredited that if you allow democracy, people will vote against these elites in smoke-filled rooms."

5. On the real meaning of "America First": "Trump is expressing the interests of US imperialism: we don't care about nations, borders, or anything else. These are our interests, we're going to achieve them. At least he is being honest about it, tearing away the veil — which is why they hate him."