FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

“Trump’s” Overwhelming Majority

by

There is an abundance of articles and media messages which are appearing regularly which tell us that assorted examples of arrogant, toxic, vicious policies and actions by this  administration are to be classified as “Trump’s” this or “Trump’s” that. Most of them which I have  run across are coming from people who consider themselves to be opposed to these policies  and actions. It always stands out to me like a piercing shriek of delusional thinking when it  occurs, especially if “Trump’s…” is part of the title of an article.

My distaste for this sort of delusional description of the behavior of this administration is  because it is a misleading message – a half-truth – if you will. Most of what Trump and Company  are implementing and/or expanding is in direct descent from the policies and actions of the preceding corporate worshiping administrations and congresses, whether they were democrat  or republican. It is also the same kind of rubbish which has been used to pretend that Obama and Bush were the singular creators of the scheming manipulations which they  helped sell and which were largely supported by majorities in congress.

The most deluded misrepresentations are coming from those who identify as democrats.

These are people who desperately sought to elect Hillary Clinton as a way of avoiding the obvious crudeness and the appeal to bigotry which were central to the Trump campaign.

What makes this delusional behavior so slimy is that much, if not most, of what is cited as  “Trump’s” abominable  behavior is almost exactly what could have been expected from  Hillary Clinton and Company. Her record of promoting vicious militarism, predatory  corporate malfeasance, and obstructing investigations have been central to most of her  career. Beyond this, both Trump and Clinton are hardly aberrations to the promoted policies and actions of their political parties. The main difference between the republicans and the democrats is the degree to and methods by which they claim they are opposed to what they actually have supported and helped implement for decades.

During the campaign (a singular event for democrats and republicans, despite their insisting that they are opposition parties) for president in 2016, as has been the case for  decades in the corporately sponsored pretense of political theater in the faking U$A, the voters were subjected to the impression that it was imperative that they limit their options to choosing between one blatant corporate fraud or another blatant corporate fraud.

Anything from outside of this insulated electric fence surrounding the corporate feedlot was  portrayed as either just not pragmatic or as ridiculously unrealistic. There was an air of  salivating corporate malfeasance which relished its own vain manipulative cynicism and the  corresponding desperate delusions of the vast majority of voters who swallowed the  media-fed gruel as if it was a source of insightful brain food. In all, that campaign has  proven to be a huge success by and for privatized corporate control of governance and  the singularly prominent  proof of their success in cynical debauchery is to be found in the obsessive reactionary delusion that “Trump’s” presidential-seal-of-approval offensiveness is not connected to what has transpired before or to what Hillary Clinton would have almost exactly also done. It now seems that the rude misogyny and ethnic  bigotry which Trump callously and indifferently distributes is the only real difference in how the republicans and democrats try to appeal to the voters. The Clintonians prefer not to be so blatant and they prefer to give the impression that they are ardently opposed  to such misogyny and racial bigotry while they support policies which depend upon an indifference to the use of racial bigotry and misogyny against other, more vulnerable citizens and nations in order to reinforce their shared devotion to liberating privatized corporate malfeasance from any responsibility for the detrimental social and environmental effects which are inherent in their scheming.

Arguably, the worst examples of manipulated dim-wittedness are the people who still  cling to Bernie Sanders after he betrayed his own supposed message and loudly pushed  his supporters to cling onto a candidate who was/is as much a version of  Dick Cheney in drag  as she is a friend to corporate malfeasance. There is no upside to either Hillary Clinton  or to Donald Trump because they are both agents of the same religion of private corporate domination and vanity. Sanders set people up by limiting the options to one version of corporate malfeasance or another version of the same agenda when he, early on in his supposed campaign, stated that he would support whoever the  democrats put forward as their candidate. Based upon his pledge to submit to the party choice, the democrats could have decided to promote Dick Cheney himself and Sanders would have again supported their candidate because he proudly honors his word when it  has to do with subservience to the party. In reality, there are few possible democrat  candidates who could be more Cheney-like than Hillary warmonger Clinton.

A prime example of the shared corruption is the smug indecency of the US attacking  Syria immediately after the US corporate control center AGAIN made another unsubstantiated  claim that the Syrian government had unleashed another gas attack on its own people. There  was no hesitating for proof of the accusation and the US quickly started another deadly attack.

The difference between the action taken under the smarmy egotism of Trump and what the smarmy egotist Hillary Clinton wanted to do was in the extent of the US attack. Clinton wanted  to do more attacks and she wanted to cripple the airports in Syria. In both scenarios –  what Trump achieved and what Clinton proposed – Syria would suffer and ISIS would benefit.

Another prominent example which shows that the democrats and republicans only vary in their preferred methods of or extent of their shared devotion to global corporate controls is the current attack on the so-called Affordable Care Act. The ACA was designed to stop the push for Single Payer healthcare. It followed in the decades old  pattern of gradually turning more and more of Medicare over to privately profiting corporate “supplemental” policies. It was designed to make sure that the private insurance industry was in some control of everyone’s access to healthcare. Early in 2016,  Hillary Clinton smugly boasted that single payer healthcare would, “Never, ever happen.”

Now, the ACA is under reinvigorated attack and the majority of its delusional supporters  seems to think that the attempt to crush the ACA is going to limit the possibility of ever  achieving single payer healthcare. The truth is that the ACA was a part of the shared democrat/republican manipulations to prevent single-payer from having any chance of  becoming reality. The difference between the democrat creators of the ACA and the republicans who are eager to destroy the ACA is their preferred method of eliminating  any chance for single payer. No healthcare will be allowed to get in the way of private profits from insurance sales by either the democrats or the republicans.

During the campaign of 2016, very consistently, the actions of Clinton and Trump   revealed that there were very few instances where the democrat’s choice was NOT an advantage to the republican’s choice and where the republican’s choice was not an advantage to the democrat’s choice. Their supposed opposition to each other was/is that they are two fronts of the same negative energy resisting each other through the power of the same shared negative, life-draining energy and there is no positive energy allowed to reduce the effects of their shared power. When Clinton and Trump dominated, the same force dominated.

The tens of millions who voted for either Clinton or Trump, that is to say approximately 98% of those who cast votes in 2016, are part of the system which encourages the corruption which so many are trying to put on Trump alone. Trump and his team seem to be highly effective in stimulating the outrage of the supporters of Clinton’s team while Clinton’s team ardently embraces the lie that their team is not owned and controlled by the same devotion to unrestrained, privatizing, predatory capitalism (of which Trump is a prominent example).

If you voted for Clinton or Trump, you need only look in the mirror when you feel outrage because neither Clinton nor Trump has failed to achieve their shared agenda.

More articles by:
February 20, 2018
Nick Pemberton
The Gun Violence the Media Shows Us and the State Violence They Don’t
John Eskow
Sympathy for the Drivel: On the Vocabulary of President Nitwit
John Steppling
Trump, Putin, and Nikolas Cruz Walk Into a Bar…
John W. Whitehead
America’s Cult of Violence Turns Deadly
Ishmael Reed
Charles F. Harris: He Popularized Black History
Will Podmore
Paying the Price: the TUC and Brexit
George Burchett
Plumpes Denken: Crude thinking
Binoy Kampmark
The Caring Profession: Peacekeeping, Blue Helmets and Sexual Abuse
Lawrence Wittner
The Trump Administration’s War on Workers
David Swanson
The Question of Sanctions: South Africa and Palestine
Walter Clemens
Murderers in High Places
Dean Baker
How Does the Washington Post Know that Trump’s Plan Really “Aims” to Pump $1.5 Trillion Into Infrastructure Projects?
February 19, 2018
Rob Urie
Mueller, Russia and Oil Politics
Richard Moser
Mueller the Politician
Robert Hunziker
There Is No Time Left
Nino Pagliccia
Venezuela Decides to Hold Presidential Elections, the Opposition Chooses to Boycott Democracy
Daniel Warner
Parkland Florida: Revisiting Michael Fields
Sheldon Richman
‘Peace Through Strength’ is a Racket
Wilfred Burchett
Vietnam Will Win: Taking on the Pentagon
Patrick Cockburn
People Care More About the OXFAM Scandal Than the Cholera Epidemic
Ted Rall
On Gun Violence and Control, a Political Gordian Knot
Binoy Kampmark
Making Mugs of Voters: Mueller’s Russia Indictments
Dave Lindorff
Mass Killers Abetted by Nutjobs
Myles Hoenig
A Response to David Axelrod
Colin Todhunter
The Royal Society and the GMO-Agrochemical Sector
Cesar Chelala
A Student’s Message to Politicians about the Florida Massacre
Weekend Edition
February 16, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Jeffrey St. Clair
American Carnage
Paul Street
Michael Wolff, Class Rule, and the Madness of King Don
Andrew Levine
Had Hillary Won: What Now?
David Rosen
Donald Trump’s Pathetic Sex Life
Susan Roberts
Are Modern Cities Sustainable?
Joyce Nelson
Canada vs. Venezuela: Have the Koch Brothers Captured Canada’s Left?
Geoff Dutton
America Loves Islamic Terrorists (Abroad): ISIS as Proxy US Mercenaries
Mike Whitney
The Obnoxious Pence Shows Why Korea Must End US Occupation
Joseph Natoli
In the Post-Truth Classroom
John Eskow
One More Slaughter, One More Piece of Evidence: Racism is a Terminal Mental Disease
John W. Whitehead
War Spending Will Bankrupt America
Robert Fantina
Guns, Violence and the United States
Dave Lindorff
Trump’s Latest Insulting Proposal: Converting SNAP into a Canned Goods Distribution Program
Robert Hunziker
Global Warming Zaps Oxygen
John Laforge
$1.74 Trillion for H-bomb Profiteers and “Fake” Cleanups
CJ Hopkins
The War on Dissent: the Specter of Divisiveness
Peter A. Coclanis
Chipotle Bell
Anders Sandström – Joona-Hermanni Mäkinen
Ways Forward for the Left
Wilfred Burchett
Vietnam Will Win: Winning Hearts and Minds
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail