The Trump administration, the far-right and world politics

We contend that the Trump administration mainstreamed far-right politics through its foreign policy on China, the World Health Organization and its handling of the Covid-19 pandemic. Our Gramscian-Kautskyian theoretical perspective concentrates on elite power, class, and interconnections between advanced global capitalism and domestic inequality. We show that the administration amplified US far-right Sinophobia even as it deepened connections between US and Chinese corporate elites. Its foreign policy strategy attempted to appease transnational capitalist objectives through 'ultra-imperialism' and draw on far-right ideas to shore up its domestic support base. But the administration, much like previous ones, attempted to make China a subordinate 'responsible stakeholder' through integrating and pressuring it in the Liberal International Order. The Gramscian-Kautskyian approach highlights that Sino–US relations are a mix of security and economic competition and interdependency. Over all, we argue that the Trump administration was not such a threat to the establishment as commonly contended. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Globalizations is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Opportunistic oppression: U.S. migration restrictions and public health policy during the COVID-19 pandemic

As the COVID-19 pandemic swept the world in Spring 2020, the Trump administration invoked war against the coronavirus to severely restrict admission of migrants and asylum seekers into the United States. At the same time, it declined to enact national measures to control viral community spread and sharply criticised public health policies. We analyse this notable inconsistency as a case of opportunistic oppression whereby policymakers take advantage of a crisis to pursue pre-existing, and often unrelated, policy preferences. We identify how the securitisation of health and the crisis-enabled politics of enmity allowed the Trump administration to cynically erode migrant human rights protections while simultaneously failing to contain the pandemic. Opportunistic oppression represents an attractive strategy for states facing real and imagined emergencies to pursue political agendas that are not necessarily part of a coherent and effective response to the crisis at hand. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of International Journal of Human Rights is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

The Public Health Response of the US Federal Government to the Coronavirus Crisis and the Narrative of Donald J. Trump

Since first coming to the attention of the global public in January 2020, few countries in the world have been as severely impacted by the novel coronavirus as the United States. Though it holds just four per cent of the world's total population, as of mid-2020 the US leads the world with a quarter of confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Despite this dire situation, the Administration of President Donald J. Trump has frequently downplayed the severity of the virus, and Trump himself has often relayed misinformation to the American public about both the virus itself and his Administration's response to it. Accordingly, independent analysis has ranked the US last in "fact-based communications” about the coronavirus when compared to other nations with advanced economies. This chapter provides a chronological overview of how the coronavirus pandemic has unfolded in the US through September 2020, with a particular focus on the various comments made by President Trump. By drawing on Trump's many public statements, the chapter pieces together the narrative that Trump has constructed about the coronavirus crisis and examines that narrative in light of the broader public health response of the US federal government to the pandemic. In concluding, it finds that Trump's narrative has been erratic, divisive, and misleading and that this, combined with a chaotic federal response to the crisis, has undermined public health in the United States. © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021.

An intersectional and social determinants of health framework for understanding Latinx psychological distress in 2020: Disentangling the effects of immigration policy and practices, the Trump Administration, and COVID-19-specific factors

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted U.S. communities of color, such as the Latino/x population. The pandemic coincides with other major contemporary structural factors affecting Latinxs, including the effects of U.S. immigration policies and President Trump's xenophobic rhetoric and priorities. Yet, the independent and simultaneous implications of the larger sociopolitical climate and specific COVID-19 concerns for Latinx mental health remain less clear. The present study uses an intersectional and social determinants of health framework to examine these relationships. Multivariable regression models were estimated with three waves of population-based panel data from the Pew American Trends Study (collected between 2019 and 2020) with Latinx adults (n = 1,132). We simultaneously examined how worries regarding deportation, respondents' citizenship and legal status, perceptions regarding the Trump Administration, anti-Hispanic discrimination, and pandemic-related concerns predicted variation in Latinx self-reported psychological distress, after adjusting for other important covariates. We also conducted analyses separately by gender. The results indicated that worrying about a family member or a friend being deported, perceiving higher anti-Hispanic discrimination, and viewing coronavirus as a threat to respondents' personal health and finances were significantly associated with higher levels of psychological distress. Stratified analyses revealed that gender filters the ways that some of these stressors affect the mental health of Latinas, such as perceived threats about deportation, compared to Latinos. Taken together, this work demonstrates the diverse social determinants shaping Latinx mental health in intersectional ways early in the pandemic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Spanish) La pandemia de COVID-19 ha afectado de manera desproporcionada en EE. UU. a las comunidades de color, tales como la poblacion latina. La pandemia coincide con otros importantes factores estructurales contemporaneos que afectan a los latinos, incluidos los efectos de las politicas de inmigracion de EE. UU. y las prioridades y la retorica xenofoba del expresidente Trump. Sin embargo, siguen siendo menos claras las consecuencias independientes y simultaneas del clima sociopolitico mas amplio y las inquietudes especificas a la COVID-19 respecto a la salud mental de los latinos. El presente estudio utiliza los determinantes sociales transversales del marco de salud para examinar estas relaciones. Se estimaron los modelos de regresion entre variables multiples con datos basados en tres olas poblacionales del estudio Pew American Trends Study (reunidos entre 2019 y 2020) con adultos latinos (n = 1,132). De manera simultanea, se examino la manera en que las preocupaciones respecto a la deportacion, el estado legal y de ciudadania de los encuestados, las percepciones relacionadas con el gobierno de Trump, las discriminacion contra los hispanos y las inquietudes relacionadas con la pandemia predijeron una variacion en como los latinos informaron sobre su angustia psicologica, despues de adaptarse a otras covariables. Tambien se realizaron por separado los analisis segun el genero. Los resultados indicaron que preocuparse por un familiar o amigo que fuera deportado, percibir una mayor discriminacion contra los hispanos y ver al coronavirus como una amenaza a la salud y la economia personal de los encuestados estaban relacionados de manera significativa a niveles mas elevados de angustia psicologica. Los analisis estratificados revelaron que el genero filtra las maneras en que algunos de estos factores estresantes, tales como la percepcion de amenazas de deportacion, afectan la salud mental de las mujeres latinas, en comparacion con la de los hombres latinos. En su conjunto, este trabajo demuestra las variadas determinantes sociales de la salud que dieron forma a la salud mental de los latinos de maneras trasversales a principios de la pandemia. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) Impact Statement This study finds that worries about deportation, perceptions of anti-Hispanic discrimination, and having higher levels of COVID-19-related financial and health concerns were significantly associated with increased psychological distress among Latinxs in Spring 2020, net of other covariates. Gender-stratified analyses reveal that worries about deportation, legal and citizenship status, and pandemic-related effects on personal lives and health increased distress among Latinas but not Latinos. This highlights the array of gendered impacts and social determinants of health affecting Latinx psychological well-being during the pandemic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

A review of immigrant experiences during Trump administration and COVID-19: Differences by race

Purpose: Immigrants comprise about 14% of the existing population of the United States. The period under Trump administration and COVID-19 in particular have been challenging for immigrants. The goal of this review was to present a landscape of immigrants in the US and their experiences during the exclusionary environment under Trump administration and the pandemic. Method: The study presents descriptive findings and chi-square results utilizing data collected from a survey. Our sample (N = 490) was collected during the early 2021. Results: Findings indicate differences in COVID experiences, stress impact as a result of travel bans, and resiliency by race. Minority communities compared to those who were White were disproportionately impacted. Discussion and Conclusion: By drawing on the literature, research and policy briefs and the study data, we discuss mental health implications and increased discrimination against immigrants. We propose ways in which researchers, practitioners and policy advocates can enhance support for immigrants. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

How Not to Handle the Pandemic: Irresponsible Idiocy and Inequity in the US under Trump

The article analyzes the importance of pandemic management by governments, with special emphasis on that carried out by the Trump administration in the United States. It highlights the first actions of the Trump administration that underestimated the predictions made by the technical teams regarding the impact of the pandemic, in terms of the number of people who would become ill and could die. Contrary to what was recommended by specialists, President Trump took the position of considering that the effect of the pandemic was similar to that of the flu. This approach conditioned the two-month delay in decision making, as well as the failure of federal government coordination. These severe management failures aggravated the inequities in the control of the pandemic and ended up costing the reelection of the government. © Gac Méd Caracas 2022. All Rights Reserved.

How the Trump Administration's Pandemic Health Care Response Failed Racial Health Equity: Case Studies of Structural Racism and a Call for Equity Mindfulness in Federal Health Policy Making.

CONTEXT: The racial health equity implications of the Trump administration's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We focus on four key health care policy decisions made by the administration in response to the public health emergency: rejecting a special Marketplace enrollment period, failing to use its full powers to enhance state Medicaid emergency options, refusing to suspend the public charge rule, and failing to target provider relief funds to providers serving the uninsured. FINDINGS: In each case, the administration's policy choices intensified, rather than mitigated, racial health inequality. Its choices had a disproportionate adverse impact on minority populations and patients who are more likely to depend on public programs, be poor, experience pandemic-related job loss, lack insurance, rely on health care safety net providers, and be exposed to public charge sanctions. CONCLUSIONS: Ending structural racism in health care and promoting racial health care equity demands an equity-mindful approach to the pursuit of policies that enhance-rather than undermine-health care accessibility and effectiveness and resources for the poorest communities and the providers that serve them.

COVID-19: US federal accountability for entry, spread, and inequities-lessons for the future.

The United States (US) has been among those nations most severely affected by the first-and subsequent-phases of the pandemic of COVID-19, the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2. With only 4% of the worldwide population, the US has seen about 22% of COVID-19 deaths. Despite formidable advantages in resources and expertise, presently the per capita mortality rate is over 585/million, respectively 2.4 and 5 times higher compared to Canada and Germany. As we enter Fall 2020, the US is enduring ongoing outbreaks across large regions of the country. Moreover, within the US, an early and persistent feature of the pandemic has been the disproportionate impact on populations already made vulnerable by racism and dangerous jobs, inadequate wages, and unaffordable housing, and this is true for both the headline public health threat and the additional disastrous economic impacts. In this article we assess the impact of missteps by the Federal Government in three specific areas: the introduction of the virus to the US and the establishment of community transmission; the lack of national COVID-19 workplace standards and enforcement, and lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) for workplaces as represented by complaints to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) which we find are correlated with deaths 16 days later (ρ = 0.83); and the total excess deaths in 2020 to date already total more than 230,000, while COVID-19 mortality rates exhibit severe-and rising-inequities in race/ethnicity, including among working age adults.