Perhaps it's time to come up with a new term to describe what's going on in America.
We know that the Soviet Union was founded through a violent coup by a minority of dedicated revolutionaries, on a nation that was largely rural and uneducated. That coup was cemented in place by violence on a previously unprecedented scale--repeated purges, terror campaigns, deliberately caused famines.
We also know that Western revolutionaries have adopted largely non-violent tactics to impose their own neo-Marxist utopia in more modern times through variations on the ideological theme of Cultural Marxism.
The difference between today and the Soviet era is that the target of our revolutionaries is not a largely rural, backward nation, but the most technically advanced nation in history with a highly educated and, presumably, informed population.
A week or two ago I got involved in an exchange with an anonymous commenter who maintained that 70-80% of the American population are "decent" people, and that the explanation for our politics lies in electoral fraud alone. I don't buy that. A populace that statistically "decent" would never have led to the situation we're experiencing today in almost every area of our lives--the thing is simply not possible. Rather, I believe that the American people have, to an alarming extent, become corrupted and have either embraced or acquiesced in evil. Ideas have consequences, and the ideas that underlie our present culture have been percolating through the collective mind of America for several generations. Ultimately, the society we have must be placed at the feet of the people who compose it.
My purpose here is not to trace the intellectual history of this process. Rather, thanks to an article today by Victor Davis Hanson, I want to point out a new phenomenon--although one that has long been predicted, notably by Alexis de Tocqueville in Democracy In America (1835, 1840). That phenomenon has typically been termed "soft tyranny," but I designate it with a riff off Hanson's article: Cultural Sovietism.
What did de Tocqueville mean by "soft tyranny"? A search of "de tocqueville and soft tyranny" will provide you reading material for a long time. However, Wikipedia provides a handy summary of what de Tocqueville had in mind--Soft Tyranny:
Soft tyranny is an idea first developed by Alexis de Tocqueville in his 1835 work titled Democracy in America. It is described as the individualist preference for equality and its pleasures, requiring the state – as a tyrant majority or a benevolent authority – to step in and adjudicate. In this regime, political leaders operate under a blanket of restrictions and, while it retains the practical virtues of democracy, citizens influence policymaking through bureaucrats and non-governmental organizations. This is distinguished from despotism or tyranny (hard tyranny) in the sense that state of government in such democratic society is composed of guardians who hold immense and tutelary (protective) power.
Note that the "citizens" who "influence policymaking" in this scheme are the ideologically activist minority--those whose "pleasures" derive from imposing their own notion of "equity" on others. As we now see, modern Marxist ideologies have largely devolved into theories of "equity" that are imposed on human nature--or, more precisely, replace human nature.
The soft tyranny that Tocqueville envisioned is described as "absolute, minute, regular, provident, and mild." Here, the state is analogous to a parent and is run by "benevolent schoolmasters" who secure the needs of the people and watches over their fate, creating an "orderly, gentle, peaceful slavery" under an administrative despotism. As the objective and the authority of the state provide for people's gratifications, the exercise of the free agency of man is no longer useful or used less frequently, with his will circumscribed within a narrower range, finally reducing him to a perpetual childhood. According to Tocqueville, the danger of this form of government comes amid the satisfaction of material well-being because it puts the individuals' critical faculties to sleep. In this condition, people who are used to a culture of gain, comfort, career, and wealth shudder at the thought of revolution and the emergent consumerism drives the society's cultural decline.
Tocqueville explained that the principle of equality is partly responsible for this phenomenon because it has disposed men to endure such kind of tyranny and made them look on it and its features as benefits. Some consider soft tyranny a phenomenon of modern societies (or of the future) because these are considered infertile grounds for hard tyranny. The thinker cited that there are those such as the Americans who overcome the danger soft tyranny by ascribing to the ideal of liberty, one that is understood as taking responsibility for one's self-governance and this tradition, for Tocqueville, allows America to avoid soft despotism.
I submit that Americans are well described in the first two paragraphs--having submitted to a tutelary administrative state. The "ideal of liberty" guarded by a population that takes responsibility for its own "self-governance" is now relegated to political formalities--such as regular elections, which are also controlled by the "guardians". This is not the sign of an overwhelmingly "decent" people--unless you wish to quibble about the meaning of "decent."
Hanson's article is titled Are Americans Becoming Sovietized? I suggest that what Hanson is actually describing is a state of "soft tyranny" or, as I believe may resonate more today, Cultural Sovietism.
Hanson offers ten signs that Americans have become Sovietized. My contention is that we should carefully differentiate this process from the violent Bolshevik style revolution in a backward nation. Nor, for the most part, has the American people embraced Cultural Marxism as an ideology. Rather, we have arrived at this state of Cultural Sovietism through the process described as the advent of "soft tyranny" in a technically advanced but intellectually flabby nation. That there should be similarities between a Bolshevik union of soviets and the federal republic of America--as it has become under a soft tyranny--is hardly surprising. Human ingenuity in political matters is distinctly limited.
Here are Hanson's ten markers. Obviously, they are designed to make his case, but I have to say that they constitute a pretty fair portrait of 21st century America--Culturally Sovietized. I've excerpted the ten points. In the article Hanson offers his own comments for each of the ten. Each category is basically self explanatory:
1. There was no escape from ideological indoctrination—anywhere. A job in the bureaucracy or a military assignment hinged not so much on merit, expertise, or past achievement. What mattered was loud enthusiasm for the Soviet system.
American Exceptionalism! Who we are as Americans! Right and Left.
2. The Soviets fused their press with the government. Pravda, or “Truth,” was the official megaphone of state-sanctioned lies. Journalists simply regurgitated the talking points of their Communist Party partners.
3. The Soviet surveillance state enlisted apparatchiks and lackeys to ferret out ideological dissidents.
Remarkably, under this heading Hanson fails to mention our Tech overlords and the Zhou plan to subcontract domestic spying. However, his focus on educational commissars of ideological purity--our degraded institutions of education/indoctrination--is fully justified.
4. The Soviet educational system sought not to enlighten but to indoctrinate young minds in proper government-approved thought.
5. The Soviet Union was run by a pampered elite, exempt from the ramifications of their own radical ideologies.
6. The Soviets mastered Trotskyization, or the rewriting and airbrushing away of history to fabricate present reality.
7. The Soviets created a climate of fear and rewarded stool pigeons for rooting out all potential enemies of the people.
8. Soviet prosecutors and courts were weaponized according to ideology.
The degradation of our "justice" system. What could be more clear?
9. The Soviets doled out prizes on the basis of correct Soviet thought.
10. The Soviets offered no apologies for extinguishing freedom. Instead, they boasted that they were advocates for equity, champions of the underclass, enemies of privilege—and therefore could terminate anyone or anything they pleased.
But, but ... all the Soviet constitutions had more explicit freedoms than here in the USA!ReplyDelete
Heck, supposedly the sex was better for the women even.
And ... they just didn’t do it right. China, well, yeah, they gettin it right.
(Rolling my eyes in heavy sarcasm and disgust)
Americans are into following rules, generally. We are a high trust culture, and we try to be nice. We like to believe people, and generally trust our institutions.ReplyDelete
Unfortunately the left is taking advantage of this, and have taken control of the institution that have corrupted elections, and created a huge echo chamber. It's been an amazing leftward Gramscian march through so many institutions, from higher education to teacher education, and through the unionization of government workers, through the government bureaucracy. And the product of the top schools has had missionary like zeal on spreading their ideas into the work place. So we have a converged social and internet giants, that only allow certain thoughts, that the majority of the US rely on for news, as well as a news media that is similar for the most part to Pravda. And the propaganda works, to move the US to a more left position. And by using the cultural issue of high trust, and not wanting to be labeled racist, or being against helping kids, the road is paved with good intentions to a more and more dysfunctional, corrupt, oligarchical controlled society in the US.
On the electoral fraud, I think it's much bigger than I can imagine. It seems to start at a low level, so only the right candidates get pass the primary by both parties, and into the actual election results. It was used against Bernie very effectively. The Glenn Greenwald on how allegations of he said she said were used against progressive candidates to save establishment Democrats is another example.
This is an excellent column. I would guess your readers are already familiar with the concept of "soft tyranny" in this country, if not by that name. We have seen a long very intentional movement in this direction on the part of the federal government - first under Wilson, then FDR, and increasingly ever since. Read Diana West's "American Betrayal" for details of the FDR period in particular.ReplyDelete
What is interesting is that we all have been to one degree or another co-opted into being partners in this without us even knowing it - even those of us who are horrified by it. The pervasive influence of the educational system and the media have been beyond our escape. Two immediate antidotes: quit watching/reading the MSM and don't send your kids to public schools. Also, learn and exercise critical thought. Be well-versed in the principles and documents of classical liberalism and expose your children to them. Finally, to state the obvious, every one who wishes to understand the "American Experiment" - where it was and where it is going - needs to read de Tocqueville. Thanks!
Great post. If we are submitting to a 'soft tyranny' I would argue that it is ultimately no more than a naked power play by the Elite to insure its own wealth and control...as, I think, VDH suggests.ReplyDelete
Another takeaway for me is the ironic (if that's the right word) result is that the goal of totalitarians on both the Right (Hitler) and the Left (Stalin) is absolute power and control. My naïve belief for most of my life has been that the genius of the American system is that it constituted a democratic alternative (with guaranteed basic rights and the rule of law) that avoids the excesses of totalitarians (no matter how altruistically motivated).
In a comment to another one of Mark's excellent posts yesterday Ray-SoCal wrote: "My take is the Biden Administration is afraid of a Tea Party 2.0, the so called America First, forming against their actions."
I responded to Ray this morning, writing (and I'm re-posting my slightly-edited response since I believe it is also relevant to the discussion here):
...I am increasingly of the view that what Biden/Uniparty/Deep State/Elite is really afraid of is nationalism. And they are desperately afraid of it...to the point of engaging in hypocrisy, lies and their own criminal behavior.
As devil's advocate, I might say their fear is with some good reason. Nationalistic movements in the past have also led to extreme and criminal excesses, the two best 'modern' examples being Hitler and Stalin. But there are plenty of others.
Despite conservatives' protestations to the contrary and the absence of evidence, the Elite is afraid that a nationalist movement in the United States will ultimately unleash elements of white supremacy, anti-black racism, anti-Semitism, anti-LGBT bigotry and, ultimately, wide-spread violence. Therefore, it must be stopped at all costs. How else to explain the Russia Hoax, the Flynn entrapment, and the two Faux Impeachments? And Open Borders, Big Tech Censorship and Electoral Fraud.
They are also afraid that in the big picture nationalism will overwhelm globalism and put an end to not only their socialistic One World dreams, but also the gravy train that Globalism represents for the financial interests of the Elite (at the expense of the Deplorables).
This is how I explain (to myself, at least) the Elites fear of Putin. While you or I might conclude that Putin is merely protecting Russia's own security and parochial interests, the Elite see Putin as an immoral, criminally inclined totalitarian bent on global hegemony and the destruction of the United States. This is a lie, of course, but the kernel of truth is that Putin (like Trump) is a nationalist, and if the nationalists prevail (and there are many more around the world in addition to Trump and Putin) it will be the end of globalism, at least in its present incarnation. This will be sad for the idealists, but it will be disastrous for the globalists who must prevail to retain their power and wealth. At the end of the day it's about money and power, as it always is.
So there you have it. A witch's brew of power, wealth and fear which is motivating the Elite's iron-clad opposition to anything like Tea Party 2.0 or Trump 2024 or MAGA, regardless of the logic for or truth of elements of opposition to globalism or the plight of 'normals'. Its the logic that allows them, for example, to demonize a black conservative like Tim Scott or argue that the demonstrations were ok because they were 'mostly peaceful'. Or tear up the Constitution and ignore the rule of law.
While I think I am coming to see more clearly what is going on, I have to admit I do not yet see clearly how this story is going to end.
@Cass; terrific summary of your thoughts and they do echo mine as well. Couldn't have said it better than you've written. As you suggest, "the Elite is afraid that a nationalist movement in the United States will ultimately unleash elements of white supremacy, anti-black racism, anti-Semitism, anti-LGBT bigotry and, ultimately, wide-spread violence." To me this is how they reference conservatives as Neo-Nazi and Fascists. This is exactly what they're afraid of and to your point exactly how they view Putin. Well put.Delete
I assert that Nazism is not right, but left. Mussolini’s Fascism is right wing and in line what we are experiencing today by supposedly leftists.Delete
@Texas, while Nazism as socialism was certainly left, many would argue that it's aryan supremacy was a right phenomenon.Delete
My argument is that their racism is largely irrelevant. They would not have been empowered to do what they did if not for the leftward drift of Germany's embrace of Marx.
For a while I thought that might happen in America: that there would be a revolt by godless conservatives against the centralization of power and that atrocities would ensue. But it appears that the left has nearly cut off the ability or likelihood of conservatives to rebel and also that they are quite ready and willing to commit the atrocities themselves. And the maybe 50 percent of their voters who actually believe they are voting for "the little guy" are culpably clueless.
The greatest lie of the 20th Century is that Nazism was “right wing”. Nazism & Communism are both based in Marxism & both have an intense hatred of Capitalism. Remember the word Nazi is an acronym, meaning “nationalsozialist” or “National Socialist”; Socialism is not “Right Wing” but rather Left Wing. These “Right/Left” designations were borne out of the French Revolution. In reality Communism & Nazism/National Socialism are two sides of the same coin: both totalitarian. Nazism is slightly to the right of communism - due to its nationalist aspect - but it’s still on the Leftwing side of the spectrum.
Anyone on the “Right Wing” wants a small, unobtrusive govt that doesn’t tell us what to do/where to go/mask up, etc. On the Right is where freedom lies, the Left slavery.
FTR - Fascism founder Benito Mussolini defined Fascism as the “melding of corporate & political power” (we see that in action right now: Big Tech/Big Business etc.) & was a former Communist himself.
Cass, on "Nationalistic movements in the past... the two best 'modern' examples being Hitler and Stalin.":Delete
I see calling Stalin's a "Nationalistic movement" to be quite a stretch.
On the larger points here, decades ago, a fair-minded Lefty, Sheldon Wolin, foresaw a drift to what he called Inverted Totalitarianism, whereby "the faceless anonymity of the corporate state" ran things, behind the curtain.
He can be forgiven, for not anticipating the exact (Sil. Valley) form that this hegemony would acquire, but his thought is well worth a look, see
"I see calling Stalin's a "Nationalistic movement" to be quite a stretch."Delete
He killed more Slavs than any other Georgian in history.
I concede that my claim that Stalinism was a nationalistic movement is arguable, especially in light of the theoretical anti-nationalism of orthodox Marxism and Leninism. But I can argue that the Stalinist, and post-Stalinist, Soviet Union became increasingly 'nationalistic'. See for example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_nationalism, and https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/writers/harber/1945/national.htm.
In any event, and whether or not Stalinism is accurately defined as nationalistic, it was certainly totalitarian. The Elite would have us believe that Trumpism is totalitarian. I don't buy that. Quite the opposite.
There are two items, IMO, that make this form of tyranny more difficult to root out, as well:ReplyDelete
1-in the absence of flagrant mass violations of person and property (such as a televised firing squad or burning a few cities to the ground), any push-back against the ever-present burden of bureaucracy which accomplishes a very similar result to the aforementioned violence; is regarded as a conspiracy theory and hyperbole.
2-Further, any questioning of benevolent intent is baked into the process to appear as selfish. Therefore, the only reason you might want to keep more of your income or be able to do as you please with your property, rather than "share" it with everyone, must be because you are a self-indulgent sociopath. And each successive generation becomes more virulent in their fervor to find those who are not helping society be better, whatever that means to them at the moment.
"...we have arrived at this state of Cultural Sovietism through the process described as the advent of "soft tyranny" in a technically advanced but intellectually flabby nation."ReplyDelete
100%. The only thing I would argue there is that as a nation we're beyond "flabby" and are staring at intellectual 'morbid obesity'.
Our country's drift toward socialism has been accelerated in recent years by mass immigration, by COVID-19, by election fraud and some other factors.ReplyDelete
Even without those accelerants, though, our country has been drifting toward socialism. The portion of the electorate that values liberty and free enterprise is shrinking, and the portion that values regulation and wealth re-distribution is growing.
The climate-change issue will accelerate that political dynamic in the coming years.
The most we can do is to slow the momentum of that shift very slightly for a few years. As our generation dies off, the portion of the electorate that values liberty and free enterprise dies off.
Perhaps I should add that the portion of the electorate that values Christian culture likewise dies off.
After us, the Deluge.
it's important to note that this drift, though real, is largely a result of brainwashing through theft of the culture by leftists.Delete
We let them do it, so we deserve what's coming.
This can manifest itself in many ways. Joy Pullman has a great article on the CDC at The Federalist:ReplyDelete
Climate Of Fear? Colleagues Silent On CDC Retaliation Against ‘Superstar’ Scientist Who Tried To Prevent Vaccine ‘Pause’ Disaster -
This climate of secrecy, retaliation, and intimidation is not a good look for a supposedly apolitical agency many Americans suspect is scientifically compromised.
None of the 10 doctors on the committee that advises the Centers for Disease Control on COVID-19 vaccines would say if they support the CDC removing a world-leading scientist from that committee for opposing a pause that may have spooked Americans off COVID vaccination.(Snip)
It’s not just conservatives thinking the CDC’s constant self-contradiction, dating back to the very beginning of the pandemic when officials repeatedly insisted masks were not needed or helpful, is devastating public trust in scientific institutions at a crucial moment. It’s also doctors and scientists thinking this, including many on the political left.(Snip)
Boosting this suspicion are recent revelations the CDC allowed teachers unions to influence and even write regulations the CDC issued in February about school reopenings. That would explain why the CDC’s recommendations have been out of step with the rest of advanced nations’ willingness to open schools and childcare facilities as early as an entire year ago, while U.S. public schools influenced by a politicized CDC still mostly remain closed to full-time in-person instruction. The negative ripple effects of this politically motivated stance will last for generations.
This dynamic will also likely retard scientific advancement by chilling scientists’ speech and free exploration of socially important questions in their work. University of Wisconsin at Madison life sciences communication professor Dietram “Scheufele worries that if people start viewing researchers and their institutions as agents of the Democratic Party, science’s bipartisan support could crumble,” he told Chemical and Engineering News for a January article.
The story of what happened to this noted doctor is behind the first (Snip).
I wasn't so crazy about Pullman's article. Given how little transparency we've had re the testing and safety of these vaccines (see Tucker--official stats show more deaths already than all other vaccines for last 15 years)--it seems erring on the side of caution (benefit of doubt) was wiser than this guy's position of a partial pause only. It's not as if there was a ton of data. To me that makes him look reckless. The notion that removing him from that panel will "retard scientific advancement" seems way over the top to me.Delete
On a panel like that an exhibition of bad judgment should play a role in membership.Delete
I was born in 1952, and I grew up in a family of two parents and seven children in a small town in Nebraska. My father taught at a Lutheran college, and my mother was a housewife. I attended the Lutheran elementary school and Lutheran high school in that town.ReplyDelete
My high-school class had about 25 students. In a few weeks, I will attend my high-school class's 51-year reunion (the 50-year reunion was postponed because of COVID-19).
My high school ceased to exist decades ago. The college still does exist, but maybe not for long. I hear that Critical Race Theory and other such nonsense if being taught there.
The society and culture that I grew up in is disappearing. I still enjoy many fond memories of my childhood and youth there. However, I recognize that I am remembering a lost world, which is being replaced by something very different.
I can definitely ID with that.Delete
I grew up till I was 14 in East Dallas. We had a race riot in a middle school due to some dorks who wrote racial epithets on the outside school walls. There was mandatory busing. It’s safe to assume, but not PC, to say that if not for the busing, epithets and riot would not have occurred. Yeah, I was hit.Delete
I was born in 1970. My son experience is that what we are seeing now is a continuation of what I experienced in middle school in Dallas, Texas and it is on steroids with flat out Marxism as the public goal, along with racism.
Having been born in 1950, I can totally relate to your life experience. Frankly, the country we grew up in is mostly gone, along with most of the people who lived in it with us. It and they have been replaced with strangers from a strange land--even the ones born here. I have little attachment to anyone or anything here outside of family now, and even those connections are becoming attenuated. I understand the wisdom of ages past and am almost looking forward to "slipping the surly bonds" that keep me here and setting off for Grey Havens to board a ship sailing for the Undieing Lands over the sea.Delete
Just want to chime in -- in agreement with you my fellow Boomers -- and acknowledge that we sure aren't living in the country we grew up in.
Mark, my eyes are playing tricks on me in my dotage...at first glance, I read "soft tranny" and thought "what fresh hell is this?" Of course, after reading the piece, I then thought "what the heck difference does it make?" We are going to hell in a handbasket and I don't even know what a handbasket is!ReplyDelete
LOL! Did you see the Cori Bush tweet referring to 'birthing persons'?Delete
@Hotlanta; "soft" handbasket you meant to say.Delete
from the Z man
"...we are headed for a period where we go from crisis to crisis as the white population comes to terms with demographic reality and their own dispossession."
The Christian aphorism of "love your neighbor" seems to have been overused over the centuries - I think there should have been an added phrase "if he's in your tribe"
Why I don't bother reading Z man. Demographic reality is that the white population won't be less than a majority for a very, very long time--if ever. Absent mass immigration. Dispossession? Tell that to the tech overlords.Delete
@Frank, perhaps you're joking, but I have to disagree with your little re-write. The best example of how far Jesus intended his teaching is the story of the good Samaritan. I'll not bother with re-telling it for this educated audience, but only note that the Samaritans were loathed in Judah for ... drumroll ... being the descendants of inter-bred Jews and Gentiles.Delete
While that says much to me about how I should treat my neighbors regardless of their ethnic origin, it doesn't really tell me much about what my country's border policy should be.
America has been both very generous and very meddlesome with our neighbors. It's a mixed bag. But it doesn't follow that all of their problems are our fault.
Sure, I realize it wouldn't have worked to add that phrase. I'm just saying. However, I do think Christian governments overdid it with the compassion and virtue thing.Delete
But you don't actually need a majority, you just need something like ~10%, (IIRC, I forget the exact %) and the system starts to become unstable. Sort of like what's happening in France and other parts of Europe now. Never in the history of the world have there been separate-but-equal-population cultures, living side by side. Always only one of them wins.
And as well you have the drop in IQ over the last several decades, for various reasons. A democracy can only be sustained with a high enough IQ.
Yet the higher IQ types seem rather problematic for America.Delete
I agree, high IQ doesn't guarantee ethics or morality, but low IQ does guarantee criminality.Delete
Sorry, forgot to signDelete
"with a highly educated and, presumably, informed population."ReplyDelete
You give WAY too much credit my friend... Book smart maybe but dumb as rocks otherwise!!!
I do agree with you, 70-80% is probably closer to <20%. People just like to point fingers and be highly hypocritical about their political officiation.
If you want to see how sad our true nature is, get neck deep in a natural disaster here. Hurricanes in Florida taught me a serious lesson in humanity where a basically civil society looses it! You've got 72 hours, and that's all "Educated" upper middle class in knock down drag outs over a gallon of gas and swiping things from shelves they don't even need just because they couldn't use a credit card. (No power, no phones, no data lines). Pure spite, greed and hate and driving off in $80k cars. 🙄
Thanks for the reply, good point on the fear of Nationalism. Nationalism is seen as a relic of a prior era, as Obama and Good Europeans believe, we have outgrown. Unfortunately nobody told the Russians, Chinese, and most of the rest of the world.
The only evils that are taught in us public schools are Nazi’s, Racism, Sexism, and US Slavery.
So everything counter to this “virtuous” left anointed elitist worldview, that has a mission to improve the world, and they know that the world is always improving on the way to their socialist utopia, must be one of these evils and/ or a traitor.
And since Nazism is blamed on Nationalism, it’s evil.
Whites are evil due to the original sin of slavery.
And somehow lots of anti Semitism is ignored, because it’s politically inconvenient and does not fit the allowed world view.
Same thing with lots of Asian Hate / Violence, the races when non White are whitewashed. I’m surprised the Asian hate crimes are still being reported, since the race of the offender when caught, is obvious. Or May be it’s because I read the ny post and daily mail, that includes pictures and video.
To tbe extent that Mark's dialogue about 70-80% of the population concerned my prior comments, I should clarify. I do not mean to contend that there hasn't been a dramatic shift in attitudes or values in the last generation or two, only that we be open to the idea that our perceptions of reality (or more precisely our society) is skewed, distorted, and manipulated by the very same forces that made most of think for the last 20 years that Republican politicians had our best interests at jeart, that elections were fair and generally honest, that government employees and judicial systems were mostly fair, etc... We have all remarked in these comments for months about how many deceptions and illusions have been exposed this year. All I ask is that we consider the possibility that our perceptions about voters and this wave of Soviet Culture may be an illusion, largely. As evidence I point to the 2020 election. Despite all the BS and lies of Big Media Trump won an astonishing landslide drawing on record numbers of diverse voters, many of whom never voted before or not for years. How could that many people vote for a man who was painted as Satan in Hitler clothing if we are so far gone into depravity? Isn't it possible that much of this is a mass media sell job to convince us that we are alone and hopelessly outnumbered?ReplyDelete
“ Isn't it possible that much of this is a mass media sell job to convince us that we are alone and hopelessly outnumbered?”Delete
Yes, not only possible, but real event.
I agree that there is a vast and deep deception taking place.Delete
But even if we believe the rumors that Trump won 80M to 66M that's still 66M people who voted for Biden. We can speculate about how many of them are deceived or naive, but that's a lot of adults voting for a man who was a corrupt idiot before he was senile.
Trump is hyper focused on fixing the election system, over 95% of his posts are related:ReplyDelete
He sees this as the key issue.
>Trump won an astonishing landslide drawing on record
>numbers of diverse voters
One of the many problems with installing a low-intelligence and increasingly cognitively challenged old school pol in the office of the most powerful person in the World, is that he will inevitably have trouble keeping his story straight.
Re keeping his story straight:Delete
Biden to Black America: “We have all seen the knee of injustice on the neck of Black America. Now is our opportunity to make some real progress.”
Biden to (Elite) White America: "This is not punishing anybody...All those folks are still going to have two homes or three homes and their jets. It won't matter. Not gonna change their standing one little bit."
The root of all this evil comes down to fake money. The decay caused and reinforced by printing recklessly, shamelessly, greedily.ReplyDelete
Cassandra - a swag, I hope I’m right...ReplyDelete
>of installing a low-intelligence and increasingly cognitively
> challenged old school pol
Is nobody believed he won legitimately.
Biden’s election will help to clean up our corrupt election system.
So many were in denial, including me, about how corrupt the election process is in the us. I thought it was bad, but I severely under estimated how bad it is.
This gives me hope:
As well as Trumps continued focus on the election.
And other actions that are taking place.
Yup. That's why I wrote 'installed' and not 'elected'.
And yes...I, and others, have noted here that one of the most important contributions of Donald Trump has been, is...and hopefully will be...his uncanny ability to expose the lies, corruption and hypocrisy of the Elites. He did it to Mrs Clinton...he does it to nearly every opponent who takes him on. He did it with China, and NATO, and the Fake News Media, and the Deep State...and many, many other cases. And now he is doing it with our corrupt election systems.
I don't think there is another American politician with this extraordinary capability to expose the truth.
Trump is deliberately provoking all the parties covering up the election fraud.
I realized this after My daughter pointed out Trumps language was not appealing to the more sensitive in his From the desk of communications. And I thought, why is that?
Trump would deliberately provoke his opponents into over reacting during his term, as a way to discredit their positions. He would get in their ooda loop. My guess is he’s doing the same now focused on the election steal.
Look at how Rep. Cheney over reacted, and how that destroyed her credibility. Or May be that was just her natural arrogance on display. What Trump did was bring it front and center, so it can’t be ignored.
I would look who and what Trump is picking fights on. I’m surprised at his discipline.
"Trumps language was not appealing to the more sensitive ..."
I had lunch with a liberal (sensitive) friend the other day who expressed profound relief that he no longer has to hear Trump's voice on a daily basis.
I get that. Trump was fingernails on a blackboard to many...which you would have thought would be the kiss of death politically. Yet so often it had the exact opposite effect.
As you say it somehow always prompted an overreaction from his target which resulted in the exposure of the lie or hypocrisy which would otherwise have remained hidden.
I kinda think we're going to actually get to the bottom of the election fraud. In no small part because...Trump.
@ray and @cass, we don't have to believe Trump is Jesus Incarnate, to believe in his seriousness and discipline as a master persuader. That is the paradigm we're talking about here. He's taking them all on at their propaganda game and he IS winning. We know he's winning because there's barbed wire around the US Capitol for no obvious reason. As time goes by and the Jan 6 insurrection narrative fizzles further, your FBI, DOJ and IC will see their credibility erode further with vasts swaths of citizens who have now been persuaded. Same with CDC, WHO, Fauci, and Covid. Trump sticks to authenticity and let's his opponents show their phoniness. When he's being annoyingly authentic they put up their phony outrage, they do that because the actual stakes are very high, persuasion of the citizens to your argument, it's just that Trump has taken the high ground so to speak by forcing them into these tactical disasters, these pickett's charges of political operations, trying to persuade citizens that Trump is not being Authentic, ie trying to destroy his credibility, trying to persuade citizens Trump is not in fact who he claims to be ( he's actually a Russian plant or a shyster, or a failed businessman who is in over his head, or a white supremacist). They find themselves mirabile dictu on the playing field of Trump's choosing. Of Trump's considerable advantage. All he has to do is be authentic, and watch them ruin themselves. I've absolutely no doubt 2020 election will play out exact same way. Mark ADelete
The Hill today: "The Biden administration is putting America into an increasingly dangerous situation by expanding the class of people who simply don’t want to work, preferring instead to simply collect government checks."
Question: Does anyone believe that the Americans 'who simply don’t want to work, preferring instead to simply collect government checks' aren't also working in the black, under the table market?
Cass, I know for a fact that they are NOT working--many of them, anyways. Our lake house is in the county of a northern state with the lowest per capita income. The fellow who installs docks for us and many neighbors is unable to find help--because of the unemployment benefits.Delete
I asked: "Don't you pay cash? You don't report it do you?" And the answers were as you'd expected--yes, it's cash, and it's not reported as income.
He STILL can't get them to leave their screens and beer to do actual work.
These are not the children your momma and dad raised. It has not a thing to do with skin color, or religion, and they are all pretty much third or fourth generation Americans.
Thanks. I've been wondering about that and, given human nature, I am surprised that more Americans aren't gaming the situation.
Maybe the govt-sponsored fear of Covid is keeping them at home?
Political formalities -- I prefer the term, because I think it provides a better visual, Kabuki theater.ReplyDelete