Boo this country! Boo!

This is our (very long!) reading list on the United States:

These books are general histories of the US which do not fit neatly into any of the below sections.

These books focus on the military, state oppression, and surveillance:

These books focus on the environment:

These books focus on the 18th century:

These books focus on the 19th century:

These books focus on the 20th century:

These books focus on the 21st century:

These books focus on black history and politics:

These books focus on the Black Panthers:

These books focus on indigenous history and politics:

What is the general ideology of the political elite?

White supremacism that ranges from a conviction that ranges in form between the belief that cultural whiteness and Anglo social norms are inherently superior, commonplace support for and the comfortable acceptance of the de facto existence of racial segregation, and overt white supremacism;

A desire for racial segregation and the strict categorization of people into arbitrary and socially constructed racial groups that focuses on who belongs within and who is excluded from the “white” group, with the boundaries between those groups being strictly defined, albeit by arbitrary and frequently downright illogical rules that have been socially agreed upon by the dominant white group;

Neoliberalism, being the belief that society is best run as a largely private matter by a group of its most wealthy individuals, making the dominant political structure of the country a networked group of economic silos. This system differs from traditional European power structures that we could vaguely call agrarian feudalism only really due to industrialization and thus the emergence of capitalism. As land ceased to be the most important economic resource (approx 1800-1850), ownership of land ceased to be the source of power. The difference this means for neoliberalism compared to feudalism is that now the hereditary elite mostly exercise control over the industrial modes of production rather than strictly the agrarian modes, detaching the elite from a land-based nobility to instead become a financial oligarchy that is even more strictly hereditary in practice than feudalism;

The idea of “American Exceptionalism”, which is a particularly extreme example of jingoistic nationalism. Essentially the belief that America is inherently good, which it entails that its actions must be good in a definitional sense or at least selfless, and therefore that whatever America does is justified or excusable. A peculiar fusion of religious notions of destiny, fate, being appointed or “chosen” by god, combined directly and freely with elements of secular ideologies and economic power hierarchies such as militarism, colonialism, capitalism, and nationalism. Particular emphasis is placed on indoctrinating the young with this quasi-religious state ideology, particularly among the dominant white race. This state ideology infuses the culture being attached to all aspects of life such a sporting events, the culture overwhelming majority film and media including children’s cartoons, even casual everyday activities such as purchasing groceries is often infused with a socially required deification of state militarism as a virtuous and inherently good activity. Paradoxically there is widespread agreement that many or even almost all examples of US interventionism and colonialism are bad, this constant stream of horrific violence is framed as somehow aberrant. The quasi-religious notion of American Exceptionalism, of America being somehow a chosen nation, holds that because goodness is assigned to America, the factual material reality of the world doesn’t challenge this notion, which in effect deifies presidents and their actions as the personification of the quasi-devine state;

Just as Exceptionalism justifies or exculpates the state for imperialism and violence, the concept of moral goodness as moral “worth” is conflated with financial success and economic worth, justifying the privileges and actions of the ruling elite as well as freeing them of almost any consequences or accountability for their actions;

Do they tend to be protectionist nationalists, or are they more free trade globalists?

They strongly tend to be protectionist nationalists with domestic production heavily defended from international competition with trade barriers, economic subsidies, demands for unequal or unfair trade agreements, or often even outright colonial imperialism to subjugate foreign production for the profit of the ruling elite, as well as neo-colonialism that used modern financial structures to give the ruling elite economic ownership, often by enlisting the foreign comprador economic elites to act as a colony of the US elites and the use of military force to destroy or contain economic systems that resist such a neo-colonial relationship.

Are they compradors put there by foreign powers?

Technically, no.

Are they socialists with wide support by the population?

Not one.