October 3, 2016 – It is significant that this text-only resumes ZeroHedge.com the 1st October 2016, which comes from T. J. Brown of the Foundation for Economic Education, has been put online by the author on 14 September 2016. In more than two weeks, by the time that run where a new sensational is forgotten in two days, this text has not only taken a ride, but appears even more relevant today 3 October (1er October) on 14 September. The author addresses a general theme that is underlying this debate within US that has overall dimensions mandatory, but is becoming more in addition : this presidential election is not only the worst, but one of survival… Each citizen is faced not with a choice of preference, but the choice of the lesser catastrophic effect possible :”Usually, during a presidential election, you see the optimism of the public in the process to exalt the qualities of his preferred candidate. This year, nothing like it… Which of the two poisons [given me] is the least radical ? ”
This text is welcome because it expresses more clearly and in a way that argued the general feeling surrounding this presidential election, if we judge according to the usual view, a sentiment extremely pessimistic, wrecked voters vis-à-vis the event. We want to say by that it is not a revelation, sensational, or an argument brilliant, etc, – even if some perceive it as such – but rather, a convincing form of a general feeling which pervades the whole of this election campaign. The word “survival” (“survival”) is used in the title (” Vote for survival : the theme of the election of 2016 “) by the author, T. J. Brown ; which has in addition to the characteristic symbolic of being African-American, so a member of a community that is presented as a claimant of a point of societal importance, while its text provides a comprehensive view of the election that makes all the arguments the societal, ideological, etc, without any relevance to the issue that he himself describes.
Here is the first part of the text, which presents this perception of the feeling prevailing in the USA in this election without precedent or such, in any circumstances, and in this respect most important to our sense that the de1860 that we were talking about recently in conjunction with USA-2016..
“Is it just me, or does this year appear to be the most pessimistic election season ever? Typically during presidential elections, you notice people’s optimism as they extol their preferred political candidate. This year, however, not so much.
“Which Poison Is the Least Potent?
“Of course there are plenty within each political party who support their parties s nominee. But the mainstream vibe I’ve been getting is mixed. Most people aren’t cheering campaign slogans of Hope & Change. Most people aren’t enthusiastic about the future they’re being promised by their elected representatives.
“There is a sense of betrayal held by supporters of the Bernie Revolution, which promised to oppose corporate corruption in politics, only to endorse the person who is possibly the most cronyistic political candidate Washington has to offer.
“The rebranding of social media hashtags such as #ImWithHer to #IGuessImWithHer exemplifies dispirited submission, rather than positive momentum. Ask a Hillary vote why they’re supporting Hillary, and chances are it’s not because of her policies or her personality. It’s because they are disgusted by and terrified of the opposing candidate, Donald Trump.
“It is the same with Trump’s base. Many are supporting him solely because they feel threatened by a Hillary Clinton presidency. They fear her quasi-socialist economic plans, her hawkish history on foreign policy, and her disregard of the second amendment.
“And even third-party candidates feel the same. I’ve often said that much of Gary Johnson’s momentum is not due to his charisma or ideas, but more because many people have equal disdain for both Trump and Hillary, who in many ways are ideologically interchangeable.
“The voice of the American people is so disenfranchised that people are no longer voting based on the desires they want their government to satisfy. Rather, they’re voting based on the least negative inevitable effect the new administration will have on their life.
“There is an upside to this. Even cause for hope.
“How Did We Get to This Point?
… “… Even a reason to hope ” (“Even a cause for hope”) ? This does not seem to us insured, and anyway we let the domain of observation to the domain of advocacy and foresight. The idea is less interesting for our analysis. However, it should be noted that the author is trend libertarienne, nor pro-Clinton nor pro-Trump, opposed to the idea of a government is omnipotent, and who considers that the root cause of the situation is a government that has taken the proportions huge and it has become uncontrollable. We also think of well to the hypothesis dramatic Rumsfeld September 10, 2001 (see September 11, 2001), and, more generally, one thinks of the idea central to we System. It should therefore be noted all the same, for our purposes, the quick analysis that Brown is the central cause of the present situation, where we find the idea of the creation of an entity (for Brown, he is a “monster”), that some might judge to be an egregore, which is formed at the time of incontrôlabilité and a constant pressure threatening :
“As with any monster, as government grows, it becomes more threatening and uncontrollable. The democratic process once used to proactively control the state’s power, has now transformed into a tool of defensive opposition to the threat that same state now poses to our liberty and happiness. Some people will claim that this reckless condition of government overreach is due to greedy interests, bad leaders, and bad laws. But the truth is, this beast we find ourselves fighting is of our own creation. It is government created by the people, of the people, but not for the people.
These details will help you better understand why Brown explores this state of mind of the presidential election as if it were actually a field of wailing exposing a extraordinary pessimism abroad usual for the citizens of the Great Republic, and, more precisely, the feeling, the less visible that the anger or hatred that we encounter here and there, “a big disappointment and anxiety evident.It is the feeling that it mattered little whether it be Clinton, or Trump, or any other among the candidate side, as the printing which is more and more is the observation that in the climate that is created in America, in the context crisique as well developed, nobody is really able to confront and control the situation, with the assumptions that were terrible, and the unknown result of the election”. (Quote from our text presentation the week of 24 September to 1er October 2016, first page and home page of this site.) It is not an accident, this feeling that we will expose Brown, but a confirmation… For example, this perception and this analysis as a confirmation of other perceptions and analyses as we noted already, in exactly the same framework ; particularly that of the columnist of the Washington Times Pruden, we presented the 13 July 2016, with our title (” The election of all terrors “) and his title to him (” The election that we terrifies all “) :
“Pruden sums up the current situation, around and at the heart of this election, not dwell on the arguments : the two candidates also hated, full of defects, – Trump and his insults, its insupportabilité of any questioning of him-even as it is, even the most pathetic ; Hillary with his lies, his corruption, his greed extraordinary (beautiful image : “If it was in front of a agony with a clipper, she arracherait teeth to get the gold back that there would be possibly”).
” Of his text, we extract as soon as the paragraph, always marked by the polemical tone and the image ricanante, but who actually said any of the sense of the thing, and who precisely says in the background this exceptional case, and tragic, of which we are speaking : “It is the election that is going to push its theory so long repeated by the observers according to which God takes care of little children, of alcoholics and of the United States of America.Small children grow up, alcoholics become sober, but this year it seems that the United States of America have pushed the boat out a little too far. It’s as if it was the fortune of fate, and if we all played lightly, with the grace of God.” ”
Thus, we can measure sustainability, extreme, and even in the consistent emphasis of this sense is considerable, its installation in the structures of the psychology of the public but rather as a revolt against the psychology américaniste which forced the System as it is developed. Of course, it applies to the situation than we know, – that it takes the form of the bureaucracy [of the Pentagon] that denounced precisely Rumsfeld, in describing it as “a more serious danger than the USSR”, or the “monster” that has become the US government and denounced Brown. It is a critical structural that we consider as fundamental and which became a classic for us, with the idea of “System” we have developed according to our own perception and that guide our whole approach. There’s no ideological dimension in our head, and certainly and especially not, and this is reflected in the fact that the two examples cited (Rumsfeld and Brown) are both distant in time and come from two men ideologically opposed to it, – a sign of both the power of the analysis, which resists and increases in strength with time, and its complete indifference to the ridiculous maneuvers ideological, where like so many critics, especially among the antiSystème. What is most striking in the critical approach to Brown, this is the observation of the helplessness of human in the face of this situation, in the leader of the political elites.
(We do not say “elite-a System” because it is not a question of this issue in the context that we quote.Brown is a complete departure from this approach, this question of “operational” that we study regularly, – which becomes, essentially, in the case of the election, whether Trump is a antiSystème serious enough, powerful enough, enough “high performance” one might say, on the one hand to achieve to be elected at the meeting, or even in eliciting the feeling antiSystème of the public, on the other hand, if he was elected, to cause an attack to be truly serious against the System.Brown, in good libertarian who grows a big distrust against everything that is institutional and centralizing [including the function of president of the USA] believes that it is up to the individuals, who practice individualism that recommends the design libertarienne, to deconstruct “the monster”, this government has become ungovernable and uncontrollable, and that this should be a cause of hope, of all the ways…”If the first step [toward this goal] is a total loss of confidence in the political leaders, that it be so provided that this is accompanied by a renewed faith in the ability of individuals and society to achieve greatness without being hampered by so-called planners counting centers.“)
Trump is a “cocktail-Molotov-human” ?
Let’s move on to something else because it is clear to us that the conclusion of Brown is too much marked by the ideology libertarienne as much as too theoretical to give an account of the current situation in its dimension as a meta-historical, which is what we are interested in essentially. Let’s move on to another way, by lending an ear to Michael Moore and you will see that it is for our own account to continue the same idea by a different path and thus allowing us to progress in our investigation…
Since documentary films one of which was crowned at Cannes, Michael Moore became a symbolic reference to the progressive left of the democratic party, in a very activist and populist left by its proximity with the disaster that has struck the world of traditional workers in the USA, especially in her hometown of Flint. It was also a reference in France, with its three awards in 2002-2004, the Caesars and twice at Cannes.This success reflects the ambiguity of the positions, between anti-americanism-antiSystème sustainable, and exists today more than ever, and on the other hand, ideological opposition to the administration GW Bush, who became, in France, in a support ecstatic and “societal” in the same policy-structured of the USA as it has been echoed by Obama & Co.This recall is not of pure form : the ambiguity of the positions and changes of positions relative to the phenomenon of the election of the USA-2016 is manifest in the pronouncements of the most recent Moore, who enable us to pursue our purpose.
In a certain sense indeed, and in a sense that needs to be stressed as the most powerful according to us, in a very recent during the broadcast of NBC’s Meet the Press, Moore continues about Brown on the popular sentiment in his interpretation of the support received by Donald Trump. Here, too, it is aside the idéologisation which has for us an interest altogether secondary in the same time it holds the danger of fuming classic master System in the tactic of inversion… The idea is interesting in particular because it is known that at the beginning of the emergence of the phenomenon, Moore has been very critical of Trump, in the sense the more progressive and the more ideological as possible, making its own all interpretations are ideological and “societal” anti-Trump (basically the hitler-fascism, racism). This time, it completely changes target and attacks mainly the democratic party, with its dizzying corruption and its submission to the System ;by doing this, it gives an interpretation completely different from the phenomenon-Trump and directly, albeit in his own way, in the theme of the about Brown. (His interpretation is so radical that the speaker is led to wonder, and to ask Moore if he won’t vote for Trump : Moore will not vote for Trump, but the fact that the question comes to the mind is significant.) Here are the essential passages of the intervention of Moore, according toDaily Caller of the 2 October :
“During an interview with Chuck Todd on NBC”s “Meet the Press” Sunday, the filmmaker said the establishment has abandoned voters and argued that they may vote for Donald Trump out of frustration. “I don’t think people do trust the Democrats anymore,” Moore said. “How else does a socialist win 22 states?” “I mean, in my state of Michigan, Bernie Sanders won. If Hillary Clinton and the Democrats had a tough time with him, that should have been the red flag to everybody that there is a mood out there where people are upset at the Democrats and the Republicans.”
“During his interview, Moore said Americans see Trump as a “human Molotov cocktail.” “Across the Midwest, across the Rustbelt, I understand why a lot of people are angry,” he said. “And they see Donald Trump as their human Molotov cocktail that they get to go into the voting booth on Nov 8. and throw him into our political system.” “I think they love the idea of blowing up the system.”
“Moore, who clarified that he is not voting for Trump, said people don’t pay attention to the media or “people in power” any longer. “People don’t trust the media, they don’t listen to it, and for good reason — because the media has let them down. The rich and powerful has let them down. A lot of them used to vote for the rich and powerful and they aren’t going to do that anymore.” ”
The intervention of Moore, is of greater interest still if we place in the logic, or the logical evolution, rather, of the interpretation he gave of the nomination-Trump in August last, and which has been fairly widespread in the communication system at this time. Putting then aside, his critique is the ideological candidate (hitler-fascism, racism, etc), it was Trump, in a very different way, a candidate can completely involuntary and a prisoner of an initiative become elusive ; it was even said that Trump didn’t want to take it, he was trying to sabotage knowingly his candidacy, but seem to lose, – the billionaire hates the concept of “loser”, – but rather in trying to stir up against him the hatred of his opponents, the fury of the System, etc, so that he could say at the end “I was sabotaged while I was going to win.” The text of the August 17, Moore’s on his site is interesting, without a doubt, and especially in light of what he says now.
With Moore on 17 August, we start from an assertion extremely peremptory : “Donald Trump has never actually wanted to be president of the United States. I know this because it is a fact. […] […I]t is some people who read this text now, they will recognize, and they know that each circumstance is described in the following paragraphs are absolutely the real…“Follows the story of the circumstances that led to Trump his candidacy, without hope or, indeed, the slightest interest for him that it succeed effectively. But it happened something, that is much less dependent on the possible genius of Trump, the charism unlikely character, particularly in its early days in the competition USA-2016 ; it all happened so as if Trump had been chosen by a certain collective dynamics to express a powerful sense of community absolutely radical :”And then, something happened. To be honest, if this happened to you, you would react probably the same way. Trump, to his complete surprise, aroused the country, particularly among those people who are the opposite of billionaires. It became number one in the polls of republican voters. Its meetings attracted up to 30,000 supporters enthusiastic. The TV in the highlighted… “
We shall not linger here in the circumstances described by Moore for sticking to this thesis, which is to him a fact, a Trump which is where it is located without having wanted to. (We may observe in passing, but not without interest that the thesis, if it is not exciting to the character of Trump, sprays absolutely the idéologisation of the nomination-Trump hysteria “fascism-racism” cries that the System directs its various zombies to express, in fact, critical ;it should be noted that the System is critical to stick to this approach because it has the virtue of “credibility” of the election, therefore to give to the candidate that is important to him a little bit of substance beyond rot, absolute is made of Hillary Clinton.) We are interested rather in the description that Moore makes of the situation, compared to what it wrote in last August ;and we will conclude that Trump is not able to get out of this “bad” where it was made (the presidential race), that on the contrary it is now completely a prisoner of this “collective dynamics [expressing] a powerful collective sense absolutely radical”. It has been transmuted into “cocktail-Molotov human” intended to be launched against the System – because this dynamic has only one idea that showed his common sense and his strategic sense of the essential, the idea is to blow up the System (“I think they love the idea of blowing up the system “).
And Moore joined-Brown in his interpretation, but in returning the situation : the complete disregard and judgement catastrophic, where the population takes its direction is certainly cause anxiety, but also because of anger. The paralysis possibly caused by the first is annihilated by the energy generated by the second up to the idea of a manipulation, and Trump is turned nimbly in the “cocktail-Molotov man”.It seems then inevitable to find interesting this general logic that we have described, which has the advantage that we avoid discussions of counter and Coffee Trade throughtalk shows and shows about conspiracies and the dangers of fascist and racist threatening our democracies trembling, as much as the under we suggest ways of explanation that go off the beaten path for a reason-subverted , and any acquired in the System, even when it pretends to combat it.The complete Mystery that is this election the USA-2016, it also output nothing like Trump, – no one could predict at the beginning of 2015 that there would be such an event in 2016 in the USA, within the institutional framework of the System, – to merit such an effort conceptual research at the time of its causes, its meaning, perspectives that it opens. It seems obvious to us that the event escapes the explanations, psalmodiées by the expert-System whose sole purpose is to lead us kindly in conclusion, up to the TINA (There Is No Alternative the System and its devastation).
What will happen ? What does one make of Trump handled the “cocktail-Molotov-human” if he is elected ? What does one make of this anguish and this anger folk who have manipulated Trump if Trump is not elected ? These are questions without answers because these are not the issues of the day and every day is enough our questions-of-date. We live day to day, not by adherence to the thesis of the“eternal present” which characterizes post-modernity, but total hostility in this thesis that does not cease to describe our future enchanted by reducing it to a “future” content in “the eternal present”. We remain at day to day because we believe in the dimension immediately metahistorical event, and we forbid therefore to speculate on a future that would be reduced to a “future” itself is reduced to the simple extension of the“eternal present” that we offer the ideology of postmodernity, – ultimate idéologisation imposed by the System.
The only insurance that lives in us for the moment, for this day, it is one of the fundamental significance of this election, USA-2016, without any relationship with the political System that guide our judgments agreed, without any relationship with the idéologisation who dressed so many steps involved, including, – oh, so many ! – both steps that would antiSystème. This fundamental importance is a measure of the truth-of-situation – of-the-election-USA-2016,that has nothing to do with the maneuvers of idéologisation, which is basically recorded to the contrary in the battle between System and antiSystème.