Hi all! I used to post actively here at PM_ME_ECON_ARTICLES, before then having a new account disparaging Bernie which I thought was a bit too bitter, and now I've settled on this account. First order of business is to get silver privileges back, and I have the perfect thing to RI anyway.

Politicalcompass.org, one of the bigger "political ideology tests" online, has always been questionable. Its test, despite its frequent use by teachers, is far from scientific, and it has constantly been guilty of badpolitics by suggesting that basically everyone in American politics is both extremely authoritarian and extremely economically right-wing.

Well, they've now dropped all pretense of objectivity with their new editorial titled "Reflections on the US Presidential Election Result."

Some of this may drift into being badpolitics, but I will try to focus on the parts that are badecon.

The US election result was less a victory for sexism and racism than the defeat of Wall Street’s globalisation project — the one percent who benefit from arms contracts and free trade deals.

Wow, what a first sentence.

First, it is laughable to suggest that globalization is some sort of conspiracy directed by corporations in the United States. The truth is, even if Wall Street as a whole coalesced around some sort of heavily nationalist culture, globalization would still happen. One of the biggest causes of globalization is simply inevitable improved technology and communication, which while incredibly intuitive is also an idea that can be backed up in an academic context.

The next part of the sentence is even better (worse!). The "one percent" who benefit from arms contracts and free trade deals? Focusing on the free trade part of that - I'm all for nuance on trade. I get that while it benefits the globe overall, there can be losers in trade. But to suggest that only the infamous "top 1%" benefit from trade is patently ridiculous.

Skipping a sentence or two, we get to this:

He was the outsider who won not because of the Republican Party, but in spite of it.

No badecon here, but I'd like to remind everyone that Reince Priebus was just chosen as Trump's Chief of Staff.

Neither will he do anything to reverse the country’s moral and intellectual decline.

Not even gonna touch that.

Thanks to Wikileaks, we now know of the party’s manipulation of its primaries. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, Hillary would receive the nomination. The candidate of the military industrial complex and international finance capital was entitled to it.

Considering Sanders' consistent outspending of Clinton during the primaries, I'm not sure how "international finance capital" (what?) came through for Clinton and bought her the nomination.

Jumping forward again to a line everyone here will appreciate:

In the wound-licking to come, might the party move closer to its pre-Clinton, pre-globalisation Keynsian past?

I certainly hope not. The effects of such an attitude are hard to trace partly because such a pre-Clinton Democratic Party didn't really win elections for the most part. But as our friend Mr Bernke has reminded us, when such "pre-globalisation" politicians did have the opportunity to put their ideas like super awesome tariffs into place, it was extremely counterproductive.

[Trump] will also hopefully fulfil his promise to tear up the planned Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, which many nations are being dragged into. Far from being merely about free trade, the TPPA gives corporations unprecedented and dangerous engagement in many aspects of governance.

Dragged into? I would genuinely be interested to see any evidence suggesting that the participants in the TPP negotiations were doing so against their will.

As for the "unprecedented engagement in governance" on the part of corporations, I luckily get to be lazy here and refer to /u/SavannaJeff's super awesome post on the ISDS.

Everything I skipped is far more close to the badpolitics side of the spectrum, though I encourage you to read the whole thing if you need more pain in your life.

Well, that's that, and I'm always open to critiques and questions!