It takes a nation to protect the nation
Donald Trump: Disruptive Technology for the U.S. Political System
At the recent gathering, we had some discussion of the meaning of the Trump phenomenon. Related to this in the Autumn 2015 Crossbow magazine (page 25), Ed West discusses "the blob, or the Cathedral, or new establishment, but whatever we call it, it is understood this new church is all-powerful and institutionally hostile to conservatism". I think these two discussions are connected.
The Cathedral and the MIASM
The Cathedral is a concept described and explained at great length by Mencius Moldbug, and it is remiss to degrade the term by calling it "the blob". The Cathedral is said to consist of the main stream media, the social media with its SJW (Social Justice Warriors), and the Power Elite, which would be the key movers and shakers of society, those with great financial and political power. It is easier to distinguish this Power Elite in the U.S., because only those with sufficient financial means or backers, are able to throw their hat into the political ring. For the rest, it's a waste of time. This model is complex and difficult to describe precisely. I prefer to call the media subset of the cathedral, the Mainstream Including All Social Media, as the MIASM, which is indicative of the illness it can spread.
Sometimes a well supported political actor like Obama the senator, can implant concepts into the MIASM, as he did with 'Yes we can' and drive the narrative. Other times the MIASM will promote a concept so powerfully that Obama the president is driven to adopt that narrative as well, as happened with the "Hands up don't shoot" lie. So you cannot say what is the central driver of this process, sometimes it's the political leaders, sometimes it's the mainstream media, sometimes it's the social media. Noam Chomsky’s term term for this in his enemies is ‘a conspiracy of common interest’, such that a group moves together with no co-ercion or direction being visible - but we can use that term too. The end result of this MIASM is the same for all conservatives: it will produce a narrative designed to constantly pull conservatives to the left and destroy them.
Trump is the classic anti-progressive (like Margaret Thatcher). He appeals to a conventional or traditional set of values, which the Left loathes, partly because of its 'irrational' appeal to inherited values, but mostly for the values themselves. Thus anti-progressives in the line of Edmund Burke may also be called conservatives or traditionalists, since they wish to be more cautious about the rate of change and introduction of new and untested models. Alternatively they can be called nationalists, since nationalism identifies with a set of values unique to that place and time, and hence it wishes to preserve them against change. But all these terms have been tainted by the narrative of the Cathedral to have negative connotations. A Conservative is painted as a posh speaking twerp from a public school. A traditionalist is someone who just can't get with the times, and would certainly be lost on Strictly Come Dancing. Finally, the Nationalist is the worst of all, since he is a 'far right' xenophobe, who is prejudiced against people of other nations and cultures.
So I suggest a better term for an anti-progressive is a Preservationist: someone who wishes to preserve something we currently have that is of value and under threat, as we do with Wildlife reserves and archaeological museums. This Preservationist term attacks the fundamental fallacy and trick of the term Progressivism: its suggestion that all progress is beneficial and an improvement. A moments thought shows that this clearly cannot be the case.
Firstly, all movement forward involves giving something up, so when you build a railway to Tibet, it loses its isolation. Is that all good? Not if the latter is an instrument for population replacement.
Secondly, even if the things you are giving up are not considered of value, the 'progressives' must at some point, climb up the front side of the hill of obstacles, and achieve the Utopian goal they demanded at the beginning of their social crusade, of an equal meritocratic society, for example. So what does 'progressivism', or movement forward, mean, when you've attained the defined goal, i.e. reached the peak of the hill? Well, it has to mean that you move forward, away from the peak, down the other side of the hill, and 'progressivism' becomes 'regressivism', movement away from the defined peak.
Thus we see the movement in the US, away from an egalitarian, meritocratic society, to one that once again discriminates against people based on their ethnicity or culture, under the guise of positive discrimination. Thus Chinese and Korean students must obtain higher grades than the others, in order to obtain entry to the top universities, in order to satisfy the latter's quota systems. To escape from this seeming contradiction, the MIASM now re-casts the original meritocratic goal of 'Equality of opportunity' with a new Marxist one of 'Equality of result'. Discrimination on the grounds of race or culture is once again seen as normal, even going as far as demands for the racial segregation of 'Safe Spaces'. Martin Luther King, who asked that people be judged according to the quality of their character not the colour of their skin, must be turning in his grave. That is how progressivism, applied over decades, ultimately takes you to a place unthinkable at the beginning. It's also why I believe one of the most important guiding principles of the conservative position is a warning on the law of unintended consequences,
The Post Dialogue World
The field of argument on these topics has now been so messed up by the Alinskyite dirty tricks of the progressives, that it is no longer possible for a normal, untrained person, to argue against their agenda, in an attempt to protect and preserve his current world and its values. Because the dialogue is messed up, many normal citizens feel that the current narrative, as hammered into them by the MIASM, is grossly unfair to them, but they are unable to argue against it. That is now a job for a few hardened professionals. Thus we have entered the post-dialogue world.
What Trump is doing is tapping into the doubt and alienation created by the MIASM. Trump is not doing this deliberately. Trump supporters are relieved that finally a Preservationist has appeared to stand up for them, vindicate their beliefs, and protect their lifestyles, since they feel they are right, even though they do not have the technical equipment to prove that they are right.
In fact, I don't think even Trump has the equipment to make that proof, either. But he just doesn't care. As the Leftist media spin their classic deceit and trickery around him, trying to trap him in a web of self-contradiction or ambiguity, he just says "Whatever" and walks through, leaving threads of spider silk trailing in the wind. Indeed, why should he care? The MIASM has given a free pass on self-contradiction and ambiguity to everyone from Islam to Obama for the past 40 years, so I think we are immured to it by now. We've listened as learned Imams trample all over the law of non-contradiction, with barely a flutter of our post-Hellenic eyelids. Aristotle also, must be turning in his grave.
So that is the source of Trumps power, and it is the reason for the MIASM's uniform bafflement at his rise. They can't understand how some of their 'demos' can reject the authorised narrative. Even worse, they can't understand why their classic weapons have not worked against him.
If Trump gains the Republican nomination but loses the presidency, it will not be because he hasn't touched a nerve and connected with a core of the American people. It will be because he was outgunned by Hilary's money, outplayed by a media largely supporting her, outnumbered by voters imported through the Southern border, and outsmarted by the devious trickery of those for whom politics, has been a decades long metier.
But that will be yet another sad step in the loss of a functioning democracy in the US, and a step further towards the one-party, single-media, biased-judiciary, partisan-executive - state. Bizarrely, we tend to hate those most who contain some aspect of ourselves. Perhaps that's why Russia's totalitarianism really gets Hilary Clinton going.
Can you name any other Republican that would lay into the press like Trump does? It is priceless, and his point is so true, they make a criticism, then when that is shown to be false, they never go back and retract or correct it, they just leave the damaged impression in the minds of their readers. As far as they're concerned, they've achieved their goal of tarnishing Trump, and the truth can go hang.
American tribalism & chaos ; https://www.bitchute.com/video/UpraI1vAnv0V/
It is a wonder to see that the leftists can cheat and lie and then deny it. I think they actually believe that they are without sin. Do they really understand the kind of ideology that they support? It's like those that welcome and assist refugees, they do not connect in their minds the damage that these refugees do. All of the violence and crime is a result of their inviting these deplorables in. They, the left, are responsible for every immigrant crime that is committed.
Did they ever ask themselves why they hate Trump.
A sane person would see that the uncontrolled immigration is destroying stability, I can only conclude that those that will dismantle borders are stupid. Or deranged.
I sure hope that Trump gets elected again. And I am hoping that the press' lies will backfire on them and piss of enough americans to ensure victory. And that Biden fucks up entirely.
What a revelation! and what a sad statement of Trump's political naivity.
With the recent FBI raid on Donald Trump’s Florida home, the Democrats and the Biden administration have raised the political stakes to a level from which this country as we have known it may never return. All one can say to those that are demanding a criminal prosecution of the former president is: Be careful what you wish for; you just might get it.
Although the raid ostensibly was to see if Trump took classified documents from the White House when he left in a chaotic move in January 2021, former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy believes the Biden administration was again attempting to find that proverbial “smoking gun” tying Trump to the January 6 Capitol riot. Whether or not Attorney General Merrick Garland is able to grab the brass ring and prosecute Trump after yet one more fishing expedition is another story, although I doubt that any president has seen as many resources used to investigate him as has Donald Trump, but the Department of Justice has not filed charges yet.
Understand that anyone reading this article has committed a federal crime at some point, perhaps more than once. I adopted four children from overseas, and while I was not involved in the details (done through legitimate and registered adoption agencies), I can be held criminally responsible if anyone paid bribes in the countries where the adoptions took place. Even if investigators could not prove someone paid bribes, they could still charge me with a crime on a mere pretext. And the charges would stick, and most likely a federal jury would vote to convict.
Remember that Democrats wanted Amy Coney Barrett’s adoption of two children from Haiti investigated. While the demands were overtly political, it was clear that the Democrats believed in using criminal law to achieve political purposes in her case, but using the law that way hardly is limited to operatives of the Democratic Party.
(Lest one believe I exaggerate, read this account about lobster importers charged with federal crimes for allegedly violating Honduran lobster regulations—with the attorney general of Honduras telling the FBI there was no violation. A federal jury convicted the men, and they were sent to federal prison for eight years.)
Anyone who has Democrat friends on social media knows that they are obsessed with having Trump charged, convicted, and thrown in prison. Because I spent many years researching and writing about federal criminal law, I can say that if federal authorities wish to charge someone with a crime, nothing, not even the law itself, stands in their way. So, if the Biden administration really wants to charge Trump with something, the FBI will have no trouble cooking up something to order.
Furthermore, if the DOJ were to charge Trump with something, he would be tried in Washington, DC, facing a jury made up entirely of DC Democrats that almost surely will have decided guilt even before the trial begins. While the feds already know this, they also know something else: if they file criminal charges against Trump, they know they will be unleashing a mix of anger and political forces that they cannot control. If one believes there is a red-blue divide in the United States now, the public anger from those who have supported Trump will dwarf anything we saw January 6, 2021.
We also are hearing the usual “no one is above the law” platitudes from David French and Nancy Pelosi, as though the DOJ had never placed its thumb on the scales when engaged in other investigations and prosecutions of politicians and politically connected people. One journalist who does understand what is happening, someone who called out the bogus “Trump Dossier” that turned out to be a dirty Hillary Clinton campaign trick is Matt Taibbi, a man of the Left but also someone interested in the truth.
Not surprisingly, Taibbi has weighed in on this latest development and he sure doesn’t sound like the New York Times. He writes:
We’ve reached the stage of American history where everything we see on the news must first be understood as political theater. In other words, the messaging layer of news now almost always dominates the factual narrative, with the latter often reported so unreliably as to be meaningless anyway. Yesterday’s sensational tale of the FBI raiding the Mar-a-Lago home of former president Donald Trump is no different.
As of now, it’s impossible to say if Trump’s alleged offense was great, small, or in between. But this for sure is a huge story, and its hugeness extends in multiple directions, including the extraordinary political risk inherent in the decision to execute the raid.
The top story today in the New York Times, bylined by its top White House reporter, speculates this is about “delayed returning” of “15 boxes of material requested by officials with the National Archives.” If that’s true, and it’s not tied to January 6th or some other far more serious offense, then the Justice Department just committed institutional suicide and moved the country many steps closer to once far-out eventualities like national revolt or martial law.
The editors of the NYT, CNN, David French and his fellow “Never Trumpers,” and most of Twitter really don’t care if Trump really committed a crime or not. They want him in jail for purely political reasons. These are the same people that insisted that the Hunter Biden laptop affair was nothing more than a “Russian disinformation” effort, and since it involves Hunter and his famous father, Joe, it is clear that there will be no effort by the FBI or Merrick Garland, or anyone else in the DOJ, to investigate beyond something cursory, enough to have the authorities claim “there is no there there.”
At this time, we have no idea if Trump violated federal criminal laws or if we are looking at yet another bogus investigation, a road we have been down before. This is not to defend Trump’s presidency or agree with his insistence that the Democrats stole the 2020 election. The former president’s postelection antics certainly do not speak well of his character or the prospect of another run for the presidency.
But we should not fool ourselves about the consequences of the jihad against Trump and the never-ending “jail to the chief” efforts of America’s political elites. Sooner or later, other people will be in power, and since the elites have shown no restraint in pursuing Trump and his allies, one can be sure that no one else will show restraint, either. If the political classes have not yet turned the USA into a Third World country, they are well on their way to finishing the job.
FBI seizes privileged Trump records during raid; DOJ opposes request for independent review: sources.
(Trump says the secret documents found were declassified and I believe him. He was President of the United States of America and I do not believe that he would steal and keep from the White House documents that would get him a very long jail sentence if discovered).
I'm interested to see how these repeated attacks on Trump play out in the next election, as Trump says mud sticks.
Trump was already cooperating and handing over any documents requested before this raid occurred. And would most likely have continued to do so.
"A source close to Trump told Fox News that Trump has been cooperating in the investigation into the NARA records for a year. On June 3, the FBI visited Mar-a-Lago to retrieve the requested documents in the subpoena, which Trump complied with, a source told Fox News. "
As president, he can declassify whatever he wants anyway - or so I've been told.