Originally posted on 03/04/2016:
I agree to a certain extent. Interventionism can be incredibly destabilizing as we have seen in the last 15 years. Unfortunately nation building seems to be the most suitable solution in the absence of any better alternatives. Trump's foreign policy is a strange combination of both interventionism and isolationism.
Trump is a populist to the core. He says what he thinks his supporters want to hear. One of the most common praises of trump I hear is that he doesn't play the "the game" (a term I find incredibly vague and ambiguous) but I think he plays it better than almost anyone else.
America has a long and recurring history with populism. It makes sense that it would reemerge on the American political landscape. What Trump is doing is not new, rather I would say that it's the media circus surrounding him that is unique. It's a reemergence of the sentiments that brought George Wallace into the political spotlight during the late 60s.
Wallace's downfall had much to with his running as an independent. He and Perot are the two independent candidates of the last 50 years that actually managed to make some waves.