The Trump phenomenon

Donald Trump is a curious figure, but then the world of politics is full of curious figures.

As I write, the USA is looking towards its next presidential elections, and the propect of Donald Trump being the Republican candidate cannot be ruled out.  Neither can the prospect of him becoming president.

I have just read an essay in a national newspaper by the veteran columnist and obnoxious idiot Max Hastings, in which he examines the Trump phenomenon.  He refers to Trump the racist, Trump the liar, Trump the opportunist, and I have three questions.

First, what is his definition of the word racist?  Second, in what sense is Trump any more of a liar than hundreds of other American politicians?  Third, in what sense is Trump any more of an opportunist than hundreds of other American politicians?

Hastings also refers to moderate, rational Americans, but fails to make clear who these people actually are.  So far as I am aware, I have used the word moderate in only two of my previous blog posts, and in both cases I asked what the word means.  I have used the word rational in only one previous blog post, and in a context which I think made my meaning clear.

I am not a fan of Donald Trump, but he comes across as a man who speaks bluntly about issues that matter to ordinary Americans, and I am not surprised that many ordinary Americans warm to him.  Hastings does not warm to him, however, and claims that:

The policies of Donald Trump, if they can be dignified as such, include building a wall across the U.S. border with Mexico to keep out illegal immigrants, and making South Koreans pay cash for the presence of American troops to defend them from the North.

While I accept that building a wall along the frontier with Mexico would be very expensive, and also that it might not prove very effective, I am not prepared to dismiss it as a bad idea.  If nothing else, it suggests that Trump is at least taking the immigration debate seriously.

As for making South Korea pay for American troops, I would prefer to see American troops removed from South Korea altogether.  If North Korea with its struggling economy can afford to maintain a threatening stance towards South Korea, then surely the far more prosperous South Korea can afford to maintain a more terrifying stance.

Perhaps the most revolting assertion made by Hastings is that millions of whites hate him [Obama] — for not being white.  If white people hate Obama, then it is perhaps more likely because they hate what he has achieved - or not achieved - during his two terms in office.

Will your tumble dryer catch fire?

In November last year, the American company Whirlpool announced a major recall of tumble dryers, after it emerged that hundreds of them have caught fire.  The dryers which caught fire were apparently manufactured by either Indesit or Hotpoint, both of which are subsidiaries of Whirlpool.

The affected dryers were apparently all manufactured between 2004 and 2015, and so it seems that for around eleven years a large multinational company was selling large firebombs without apparently realising it.  I can't help but wonder how many overpaid muppets were on the payroll of Indesit and Hotpoint during those years.

People who report owning one of these dangerous tumble dryers are being put on a waiting list to be visited by a repair man (described as an engineer) who will supposedly make the appliance safe.  To speed things along, some people have been given a free replacement, while others have taken advantage of an offer to buy a new dryer at a discounted price.

While it might seem at a glance that Whirlpool are taking this seriously, the truth would appear to be very different.  Consider the following points:

• At least one national newspaper has reported that it may take more than three years for Whirlpool to fix every faulty tumble dryer in the country.  How many houses will burn down in the meantime?
• People who are disabled or who care for disabled people are rarely given any priority.
• A Hotpoint tumble dryer owned by Dennis Marinakis caught fire even after it had been modified and supposedly made safe.
• Modification work is prioritised by date order, which hardly makes sense in rural areas.  Once an engineer has driven a long distance to a remote town or village, it would make sense to modify all the dryers in that location on the same day.

Reading the comments posted in the national press about the ongoing recall, some people are saying that Whirlpool should be made to reimburse the Fire Brigade for all of the tumble dryer fires they have to attend.  At least one person has argued that someone should to to prison over this debacle.

I find it curious how - so far as I am aware - not one of Britain's elected politicians has dared to speak out on this matter.  Surely it would not be hard for either David Cameron or Jeremy Corbyn to make a public statement urging Whirlpool to move a bit faster.

Update: a national newspaper has recently observed that:

Leon Livermore, the chief executive of the Chartered Trading Standards Institute has ... told the Observer: ‘Central government itself does have back-up powers to force companies into recalls and to take action. So we would call on the government, in particular the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, to take action before someone dies.’

Another update: Whirlpool has now given in to pressure from Trading Standards, and is now advising customers to disconnect their faulty tumble dryers until the modification work has taken place.

It appears that this in turn resulted from Trading Standards giving in to pressure from Which Magazine and from London Fire Brigade, who believe that a faulty tumble dryer caused a fire in a tower block in Shepherd's Bush in August 2016.  I wonder if anyone in either Whirlpool's head office or in the British government is going to resign over this fiasco.

Asylum and hypocrisy

It is reported that the United Nations has spoken out about the ongoing residence of Julian Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.  I won't comment on what they have said, but rather on the situation as a whole.

Since 2012, Assange has been living in the Ecuadorian Embassy in a bid to avoid being extradited to Sweden to stand trial for rape.  For most of that time he has been granted asylum by the Ecuadorian government.

On the one hand I do not think it is right that Ecuador should help Assange to avoid criminal charges, but on the other hand I am aware that the United Kingdom has for many years now allowed foreign criminals to avoid justice in their own homelands by allowing them to remain in this country as refugees.

I am reminded in particular of two Indian men who were wanted on terror charges in India who were allowed to remain.  Asylum is supposed to be granted where people are under threat of persecution because of their beliefs, not because they have committed crimes.

I'd be surprised if there have not also been many abuses of asylum status by criminals taking refuge in Sweden.

Related previous posts include:
Air strikes against Iraq are wrong