Behind the Façades in France: What expats and the mainstream media (French and American alike) fail to notice (or fail to tell you) about French attitudes, principles, values, and official positions…
It was inevitable that der Führer would unleash an Adolf Hitler Rant Parody of Disney's Snow White "and the seven CGI abominations."
The first couple of minutes are far from unfunny, I suppose, but if you want to go straight to the yelling and screaming of the Hitler rant, it starts at 2:22.
Best excerpts:
• "All those who would prefer to eat a poisonous apple than watch anymore of this [garbage], please leave" the room!!!
• "Disney has finally made a movie nobody is going to pirate!!!"
• "Walt Disney will be rolling in his cryogenic chamber!!!"
• "The trailer is so bad, I could've used it as a weapon of mass destruction to scare the Soviet Army away and defeated STALIN!!!"
If you have ever wondered about Donald Trump’s economic policies, ROF's Sébastien Laye explains Trumponomics to you at Policy Sphere: What it entails, how it is misunderstood, and what is Donald Trump's Endgame.
Donald Trump’s economic policies, often labeled “Trumponomics,” have sparked intense debate ever since his first term and remain a polarizing topic after his Liberation Day. Beyond the usual noise in the news cycle, analysts here should only refer to Arthur Laffer and Stephen Moore’s books: the seminal “Trumponomics” and the more recent “The Trump Economic Miracle”. At their core, these policies center on tariffs, tax cuts, deregulation, and a rhetoric of restoring American industrial might. Considering trade policies alone without coherent domestic measures would be nonsensical.
To many, Trumponomics appears erratic—Critics argue it lacks coherence, while supporters see it as a bold reimagining of America’s economic role. This text seeks to clarify what Trumponomics really entails, why it confounds so many, and what Trump might ultimately aim to achieve (in my humble opinion).
What Trumponomics Entails: A Simplified Breakdown
Most journalists (due to a poor training in basic economics) misrepresent Trumponomics. At the core, it can be distilled into three interlocking components: protectionism, fiscal stimulus, and strategic bargaining. Each reflects a departure from the neoliberal consensus that has dominated U.S. policy since the late 20th century, and achieve more than meets the eye. Tariffs, for instance, are not just new levies, but very often a negotiating tool to lower protectionism worldwide or spur neighbors to solve problems (fentanyl)
Protectionism via Tariffs The most visible element is Trump’s use of tariffs—taxes on imported goods—to shield American industries and level the trade playing field. When the US, under the neoliberal consensus established in the 1990s, welcomed new countries in the WTO and lowered its own barriers, it gave access to its huge domestic market while most countries maintain their barriers. Hence, neoliberal globalization spurred global growth at the detriment of US manufacturing workers. That is NOT TO SAY that the US did not profit it, but that only global US-corporations and billionaires enjoyed the ride: not so much regular people, except fr cheap consumer products. Tariffs, in our view, aim to make domestic production competitive again. Historical examples like 19th-century America, postwar Japan, and South Korea—nations that built industrial bases behind tariff walls—lend credence to this approach. Critic argue that tariffs increase prices and will reduce domestic consumption. But Trump also pursued policies to force the appreciation of our trading partners currencies, which very soon will compress the price impact on imports.
Fiscal Stimulus through Tax Cuts and Spending Trumponomics pairs tariffs with tax cuts, notably the 2017 reductions extended into his current term, and selective deregulation. Their broader intent is to incentivize investment in U.S. manufacturing, countering decades of offshoring. The logic is straightforward: if tariffs could make imports costlier, tax breaks act as a counter-measure here and make staying home profitable.
Strategic Bargaining on the Global Stage Beyond economics, Trump uses tariffs as a geopolitical tool, a lever to renegotiate America’s place in the world. He sees the U.S. as overburdened by its role as provider of the global reserve currency—the dollar—which props up foreign economies while hollowing out American industry. It is time for a reset, what I would call an anti Nixon shock (more on that later). Tariffs are less about immediate trade balances and more about forcing concessions—currency adjustments, manufacturing relocation, or purchases of U.S. goods—from trading partners. This hub-and-spokes vision positions America as the central negotiator, dealing with nations individually rather than through multilateral frameworks. Trump wants one-on-one discussions.
Why Most People (including economists) Do Not Understand Trumponomics
The apparent simplicity of Trumponomics belies its complexity, leading to widespread misunderstanding. Three factors—conceptual, practical, and perceptual—explain this disconnect.
…/…
What I believe is Trump’s Endgame
What, then, is Trump aiming for? While his tactics appear disjointed, a plausible endgame emerges when we stitch together economic and geopolitical threads. Here’s what I think Trump, Hassett, Bessent, Lutnick and others have in mind (or what I would advise them to pursue).
Restoring Industrial Might At its heart, Trump seeks to reverse America’s manufacturing decline. He believes the dollar’s hegemony, while a geopolitical asset, overvalues U.S. goods, pricing them out of global markets and flooding the country with imports. But still he is appreciative of the strategic power brought by the dollar exorbitant privilege. The trick here is to lower the value of the dollar (to spur the industrial renaissance) while maintaining, or only slightly weakening, the dollar status. We are running out of time to operate this delicate reset and we will not be able to do it in 5 or 10 years because otherwise, other powers might succeed in replacing the dollar with their currencies.
Rewriting the Global Order Trump’s tariffs are a means, not an end. Varoufakis in Europe suggested a two-phase “masterplan”: first, shock foreign central banks into depreciating their currencies (easing dollar pressure), then negotiate bilaterally to lock in advantages—currency swaps, manufacturing shifts to the U.S., or forced exports like weapons. …/… We need to convince the Europeans to swap their US bonds into ultra long term or perpetual bonds and lower our costs of borrowing. They should also buy our weapons and when required, maintain factories and data centers in the US (Germans, are you listening ?). In exchange, we will provide the security and safety shield we had been providing ever since WWII (without any advantage to us): it is easy to see the chess game at play here around Ukraine: despite grandiose goals, the Europeans will not be able to build their common Army. They will soon come back to Big Brother, and this time there will be a price tag but peace and serenity will be back over the European continent in 18 months. This will be a monumental deal for the US, and Putin will accept it as long as it does not extend to former USSR countries: does he really care that Italy or the Netherlands turn into US vassals. And the European Union in all this ? I forgot to tell you that its future is bleak: Von Der Leyen and Macron, in their insane pursuit of an authoritarian European superstate, will fail.
Engineering a Controlled Reset A bolder interpretation posits Trump deliberately courts a downturn—squeezing debt-fueled excesses—before sparking a rebound via tax cuts and deregulation . Think Thatcher or Reagan: short-term pain for long-term gain. If true, this gambit aims to reset America’s economy on firmer industrial ground, even if it risks (short term) alienating voters or investors. The payoff would be a leaner, stronger U.S., less beholden to foreign creditors or Wall Street’s whims.
Trumponomics channels a historical playbook—protectionism as nation-building—while addressing real grievances: the hollowing out of America’s working class amid globalization’s unequal gains. Its tariff-centric, bargain-driven approach defies neoliberal norms, which is precisely why it baffles so many. Trump’s endgame likely blends industrial renewal with a reassertion of U.S. power, aiming to reshape both domestic and global economies.
The key thing to remember: these tariffs are a CEILING.
Trading partners who lower their barriers will see these increases reversed.RECIPROCITY.
Common sense, for true free trade.
L’essentiel à retenir : ces tarifs sont un PLAFOND.
Les partenaires commerciaux qui abaissent leurs barrières verront ces hausses annulées. RÉCIPROCITÉ.
Du bon sens, pour un vrai libre-échange.
#Trump#LiberationDay
Droits de douane américains: "C'est un plafond, libre à nous de voir comment on peut favoriser des échanges égaux", affirme Nicolas Conquer (porte-parole des Republicans Overseas) pic.twitter.com/cSuWGBjCww
In the meantime, besides ruffling feathers on LinkedIn, ROF's Sébastien Laye was on La Matinale de Radio Courtoisie telling its listeners, as well as Liselotte Dutreuil and Alexandre de Galzain, that "The American economy will continue to grow and create jobs. It's better to do the hard things now to get results before the 2026 midterm elections."
"L'économie américaine va continuer à croître et créer des emplois. Il vaut mieux faire les choses difficiles maintenant pour avoir des résultats en vue des élections de mi-mandat de 2026"
💥 "L'économie américaine va continuer à croître et créer des emplois. Il vaut mieux faire les choses difficiles maintenant pour avoir des résultats en vue des élections de mi-mandat de 2026" #DonaldTrump
— Ligne Droite • La matinale de RC (@Ligne__Droite) April 3, 2025
Sébastien
Laye, entrepreneur et conseiller économique du parti américain
Républicains en France. Auteur pour Contribuables Associés d’un rapport
intitulé La Simplification Administrative : sortir de l'enfer
bureaucratique français et Richard de Seze, directeur de la rédaction de
Radio Courtoisie.
Why does Trump bother the elites in France and in Europe so much?
As an American citizen myself, and considering that these largely outdated and bankrupt élites in France had nothing legitimate to say on the subject, I asked myself this question.
To take France as an example, French graduates of the École Nationale d'Administration (l'ENA) have feared Trump since his re-election:
1. Trump is the antithesis of their mental software ENA graduates are trained in technocracy, norms, collective thinking, and risk avoidance.
Trump embodies:
• Absolute individual will,
• Action without safety nets,
• Personal judgment above consensus,
• A logic of brutal disruption.
Whether you like that or not, they fear him because they can neither anticipate nor decode his policies. It eludes their map of power.
2. Trump reveals their strategic impotence
The French state, over-administered, is slow, procedural, and inflexible.
Trump, for his part, acts like a pure capitalist actor:
• He redefines the framework (NATO, WTO, various trade agreements, etc…),
• He disregards institutions when they don't suit him,
• He confronts France with its strategic marginalization:
"What weight does Paris have in the face of a Trumpian Washington?"
His re-election underscores their dependence on an equilibrium they no longer control.
3. Trump shatters their illusion of a multilateral world
The ENA graduates live in the De Gaulle-Mitterrand legacy of "enlightened multilateralism," where France plays a moral role above its real power.
Trump, by demolishing this game (UN, COP, UNESCO, Paris Agreements, etc), exposes the fragility of their diplomatic storytelling.
He desecrates French soft power—in action, without asking permission.
4. He speaks to the people – not the elites
The ENA graduates have rarely boots on the ground, are often out of touch with the real people.
Trump, despite his billionaire status, understands popular anger and speaks directly to the crowds, without filter or perspective.
This profoundly destabilizes a French elite who still believe that legitimacy comes from education and abstract reasoning.
5. Trump could impose a new grammar for transatlantic relations
A France accustomed to a certain status quo (tacit American protection, hushed diplomacy, symbolic place at the UN) is seeing the arrival of a Trump:
• Who haggles over everything,
• Who values might over law,
• Who demands proof of strategic loyalty (as with Israel or Taiwan).
This forces the French elite to choose: fall in line or step aside.
In addition, ROF's Sébastien Laye was on La Matinale de Radio Courtoisie
telling its listeners, as well as Liselotte Dutreuil and Alexandre de
Galzain, not to mention Richard de Seze, that "The American economy will continue to grow and create
jobs. It's better to do the hard things now to get results before the
2026 midterm elections."
"L'économie américaine
va continuer à croître et créer des emplois. Il vaut mieux faire les
choses difficiles maintenant pour avoir des résultats en vue des
élections de mi-mandat de 2026"
💥 "L'économie
américaine va continuer à croître et créer des emplois. Il vaut mieux
faire les choses difficiles maintenant pour avoir des résultats en vue
des élections de mi-mandat de 2026" #DonaldTrump
Pourquoi Trump dérange t il autant les élites francaises ???? Américain moi-même, et considérant que ces élites largement dépassées et en faillite en France, n'avaient rien à dire de légitime sur le sujet, je me suis posé la question.
Les énarques français craignent Trump depuis sa réélection :
1. Trump est l’antithèse de leur logiciel mental
Les énarques sont formés à la technocratie, à la norme, à la réflexion collective, à l’évitement du risque.
Trump, lui, incarne :
• La volonté individuelle absolue,
• L’action sans filets,
• Le jugement personnel au-dessus du consensus,
• Une logique de disruption brutale.
Qu'on aime ou qu'on aime pas.
Ils le craignent parce qu’ils ne peuvent ni l’anticiper ni le décoder. Il échappe à leur cartographie du pouvoir.
2. Trump révèle leur impuissance stratégique
L’État français, suradministré, est lent, procédurier, peu agile.
Trump, lui, agit comme un acteur capitaliste pur :
• Il redéfinit le cadre (OTAN, OMC, accords commerciaux),
• Il méprise les institutions quand elles ne lui conviennent pas,
• Il met la France face à sa marginalité stratégique :
« Que pèse Paris face à un Washington trumpien ? »
Sa réélection souligne leur dépendance à des équilibres qu’ils ne contrôlent plus.
3. Trump fracture leur illusion d’un monde multilatéral
Les énarques vivent dans l’héritage gaullo-mitterrandien du « multilatéralisme éclairé », où la France joue un rôle moral au-dessus de sa puissance réelle.
Trump, en démolissant ce jeu (ONU, COP, Unesco, accords de Paris), expose la fragilité de leur storytelling diplomatique.
Il désacralise le soft power français – en actes, sans demander la permission.
4. Il parle au peuple – pas aux élites
Les énarques sont souvent coupés du terrain, du peuple réel.
Trump, malgré son statut de milliardaire, a compris la colère populaire et s’adresse directement aux foules, sans filtre, sans surplomb.
Cela déstabilise profondément une élite française qui pense encore que la légitimité vient du diplôme et du raisonnement abstrait.
5. Trump pourrait imposer une nouvelle grammaire des rapports transatlantiques
Une France habituée à un certain statu quo (protection américaine tacite, diplomatie feutrée, place symbolique à l’ONU) voit arriver un Trump :
• Qui marchande tout,
• Qui valorise la force sur le droit,
• Qui exige des preuves de loyauté stratégique (comme envers Israël ou Taïwan).
Cela force l’élite française à choisir : s’aligner ou s’effacer.
Sébastien Laye, entrepreneur et conseiller économique du parti américain Républicains en France. Auteur pour Contribuables Associés d’un rapport intitulé La Simplification Administrative : sortir de l'enfer bureaucratique français et Richard de Seze, directeur de la rédaction de Radio Courtoisie.
Over at X, Sébastien Laye
reacts to the news regarding the Marine Le Pen ban from public office, calling upon Donald Trump to use Washington's economic weapons against his country:
The US should sanction France for anti-democratic practices since the main political opponent (once again like in 2017) has just been barred from running for the next presidential election
In France, indeed, these judgments have not only targeted members of the "far right", but members of the traditional, or institutional, right as well. As Sébastien Laye points out in the French version of his tweet, three other politicians that judges have targeted in the past eight years are favored 2017 presidential candidate François Fillon (his surprising embezzlement investigation in the middle of the 2017 presidential election allowed Emmanuel Macron to win the Élysée palace), party honcho Patrick Balkany, and former President Nicolas Sarkozy. By the oddest of coincidences, all three are members of Les Républicains, once one of two mainstay parties in the French Republic.
Demandons des sanctions internationales contre la France qui DEGAGE systématiquement via les juges toute opposition depuis F.Fillon
What is ironic, and what few in the power structure seem to notice, is that for decades they have dismissed or demonized le Front National as being brainless paranoids for denying the democratic aspect of this country central to Western Civilization (« tous pourris » — all of 'em rotten to the core). What does the judge's decision do but confirm — and not just to le Rassemblement National's members — that there was truth in what Jean-Marie Le Pen and his daughter have been saying all these years?
On a general note, in recent years, there have been a flurry of rightist governments around the planet who have picked a fight against the countries' respective supreme courts. They include nations as various as Poland, Hungary, Israel, Brazil, and, needless to say, the United States. In MSM media, both in America and abroad, the rightist governments are invariably presented as undemocratic (and indeed, dangerous and deranged) rightists going against democracy and against civilization itself, politicizing what should be a neutral position, and demonizing innocent people (judges of all stripes) who are simply doing their jobs.
As seen recently in Romania, as well as in Brasilia, it turns out that, generally speaking, the situation is exactly the opposite: the politicization came, in the past, from the left, and what the right is doing is restoring, or trying to restore, the status quo of the judicial branch as a neutral and impartial arbiter.
