I’m interested in a focused discussion about the fears surrounding the worst case scenario’s associated with the upcoming Trump presidency of the USA. By “focused”, I am somewhat ironically referring to the generalised, long term ramifications but with an emphasis on “the big picture” as it relates to the ideological social and political ramifications for the near and mid term future of the human population of the world.

I will firstly admit to two things:

1)I see great value in the ‘shaking up of systems’, in the challenge to prevailing attitudes and narratives; value in democracy as a dynamic, changing, and even unpredictable entity. I like it when people are shocked, because I think apathy is a killer and shock engenders interest, enthusiasm and concern. I think the Trump campaign was a shock to the system, so to speak, and I have an appreciation for it on those terms.

2) I really do not like the idea of Hillary Clinton as President. I don’t like the idea of Trump either, but I think there is a narrative which prevails within the upper echelons of Western Power which is destructive, regressive, overly aggressive and dangerous, and that the election of Clinton would certainly have empowered this narrative. I don’t think it is a partisan agenda, I think it an agenda which first found voice with GW Bush after 9/11 and which both Obama and Clinton and any number of the other recent Presidential candidates, Democrat and Republican, subscribe to, an agenda essentially of US world hegemony to be achieved through any kind of ruthlessness that the voters can be convinced to ignore. I do not approve of the tenor of Western Politics over the last decade and a half, and I am convinced that Hillary Clinton would have accelerated this descent in to madness in terrible ways had she won this election. For this reason I am favourably disposed to Trump in ways I definitely would not be were another option available. My problem is this – I know what Clinton would have done, and I am dissuaded from supporting her by this to such an extent that Trump is preferable to me. But only because I don’t know what Trump is going to do. He is unpredictable in a disturbingly calculated way (If you really he is a person driven by the basest desires, you are not crediting him enough, IMO.) That my preference should be for the unknown, rather than the known, is indicative of the contempt I currently hold for modern Western political parties and the direness that I see in our current situation.

Mostly for the two reasons given above, I’ve been happy enough that Trump beat Clinton.

But that support must be tempered by the reality of the situation.

Many of the people Trump is choosing to make up his senior advisers is very questionable.His recent performance at giving his first press conference as President-Elect is unacceptable. As a private citizen, as a Presidential nominee, he had the choice to talk about what he wanted to talk about and ignore or mock question from the press. As a government representative, he does not have that choice. He can not be allowed to pick and choose what questions he wishes to answer regardless of what worth he attributes to the organisations asking those questions. Transparency is key to freedom and liberty.

So Trump’s behaviour forces me to address Trump’s behaviour, and to consider the worst case scenario’s.

I worry that government of the United States has been co-opted by business interests, that the rich elite have decided lobbying and bribery is not as efficient as a simple hostile take-over of power and that their ambitions have been realised with the election of Trump. Corporatism and unrestrained capitalism are a possible reality far more disturbing than the fantasy of Russian control which the current US Government, Agencies and media is currently trying to push. Regulation is important to sustaining the power of the people, and regulation means individuals are forced to do things they would rather not do. In Trump’s case, it would seem he would rather not answer questions put to him by certain segments of the media. He should not be allowed to think that, as POTUS, he has a choice in this matter, and he must always be held accountable.
…..
(continued later), sorry, RL calling to me….

He is a hothead business man, so I guess we will see a more aggressive White House, a more aggressive military, as resources are linked to big business, American politics, and the trillion dollar defense industry and they are all closely;y intertwined, we will see more greed for other countries resources, all I see is a more aggressive American government, the south China sea will hot up, Syria might hot up and no doubt elsewhere where there was once calm will hot up as well.

I think there is a narrative which prevails within the upper echelons of Western Power which is destructive, regressive, overly aggressive and dangerous, and that the election of Clinton would certainly have empowered this narrative.

———

James ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis, new defence secretary says he enjoys shooting people.

Yes, I reckon he’ll shake things up a bit.

BTW, the doomsday clock moved up 2 minutes to 3 minutes to midmight in 2015. Plenty of headroom for Trump and co??

Ian said:

I think there is a narrative which prevails within the upper echelons of Western Power which is destructive, regressive, overly aggressive and dangerous, and that the election of Clinton would certainly have empowered this narrative.

———

James ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis, new defence secretary says he enjoys shooting people.

Yes, I reckon he’ll shake things up a bit.

BTW, the doomsday clock moved up 2 minutes to 3 minutes to midmight in 2015. Plenty of headroom for Trump and co??

It was 2 minutes in ’53

esselte said:

2) I really do not like the idea of Hillary Clinton as President. I don’t like the idea of Trump either, but I think there is a narrative which prevails within the upper echelons of Western Power which is destructive, regressive, overly aggressive and dangerous, and that the election of Clinton would certainly have empowered this narrative. I don’t think it is a partisan agenda, I think it an agenda which first found voice with GW Bush after 9/11 and which both Obama and Clinton and any number of the other recent Presidential candidates, Democrat and Republican, subscribe to, an agenda essentially of US world hegemony to be achieved through any kind of ruthlessness that the voters can be convinced to ignore. I do not approve of the tenor of Western Politics over the last decade and a half, and I am convinced that Hillary Clinton would have accelerated this descent in to madness in terrible ways had she won this election.

What are some concrete examples of this ‘ruthlessness’?

Witty Rejoinder said:

esselte said:

2) I really do not like the idea of Hillary Clinton as President. I don’t like the idea of Trump either, but I think there is a narrative which prevails within the upper echelons of Western Power which is destructive, regressive, overly aggressive and dangerous, and that the election of Clinton would certainly have empowered this narrative. I don’t think it is a partisan agenda, I think it an agenda which first found voice with GW Bush after 9/11 and which both Obama and Clinton and any number of the other recent Presidential candidates, Democrat and Republican, subscribe to, an agenda essentially of US world hegemony to be achieved through any kind of ruthlessness that the voters can be convinced to ignore. I do not approve of the tenor of Western Politics over the last decade and a half, and I am convinced that Hillary Clinton would have accelerated this descent in to madness in terrible ways had she won this election.

What are some concrete examples of this ‘ruthlessness’?

keeping in the family, Bush, Bush, Geb Bush etc

Clinton, Clinton etc

the Clintons touring around with the Obamas

so homey and cosy

many other examples

The multi Trillion Dollar Defense Industry

gun sales, gun carry and dun deaths all going up, up and up

the ignorants with their heads stuck in the sand

America is an aggressive country with a soon to be aggressive President Dumbass

Tau.Neutrino said:

America is an aggressive country with a soon to be aggressive President Dumbass

I think esselte has raised some interesting points, from which I am keen to know more, but all we ever get from you is a tirade of insults gathered from every dirty gutter and then coloured by you imagination. Why don’t you just listen for a change and maybe you might learn something.

PermeateFree said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

America is an aggressive country with a soon to be aggressive President Dumbass

I think esselte has raised some interesting points, from which I am keen to know more, but all we ever get from you is a tirade of insults gathered from every dirty gutter and then coloured by you imagination. Why don’t you just listen for a change and maybe you might learn something.

Fuck off pea brain

Witty Rejoinder said:

What are some concrete examples of this ‘ruthlessness’?

Recently, let’s start with Shock and Awe.

Shock and Awe was a military strategy based on a paper by Ullman and Wade

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/dd5e/dbb807518dc2f1e05c6957d6b8482db47c5f.pdf

who noted the effectiveness of the nuclear strikes on Japan, noted the extreme aversion of populations to nuclear options, and tried to reconcile the two. The idea of Shock and Awe was to cause the same kind of political, social and psychological paralysis that Japan experienced following Hiroshima and Nagasaki without actually using nuclear weapons. It was presented to the voting American public as a way to quickly win a war with overwhelming and virtually incomprehensible force without anyone having to press the big red nuclear button. It failed, perhaps because of inherent flaws in the doctrine or perhaps because the Bush government did not fully commit and tried to avoid collateral damage. Never-the-less, the wars Bush Jr started were not generally appreciated by the population and played a large part in Obama’s rise to power through his “Change…” campaign. The zeitgeist at the time was that Bush Jr was a war hungry madman, intent on bombing foreigners and basically making everyone’s day worse than it might have been. Obama won a noble peace prize as reward for his election for no other reason that he did not appear to be the war hungry madman that Bush was.

George W. Bush authorised the bombing by US forces of Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Somalia during his time as President. Barack Obama continued and expanded upon this to bomb Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, Libya and Syria. Obama’s “Change” was not worthy of a noble peace prize, it turns out. Rather, the opposite.

Hillary Clinton, from all accounts, intended to add Russia to this list. Russia, a country with something like 1,700 active nuclear warheads at it’s disposal.

The reasons for these attacks and projected attacks are multifarious and complicated, but can be reasonably simplified to US hegemonic ambitions.

Hillary Clinton acknowledged in a 2013 speech she gave to Goldman-Sachs that US interference in Syria would result in massive civilian casualties. The US government (provably) involved itself in Syria any way, and (speculatively) had a hand in setting off the Syrian civil war in the first place. Hillary Clinton as President would have continued this (not speculation, this is what she said she was going to do) and quite probably expanded it. Why are ‘we’ fighting in Syria? It’s not because Assad is an arsehole (though, he is)… it’s because Syria has essential geography to exporting oil and gas from both the Middle East and Russia, via pipeline, to Europe. Assad, allied with Russia, has more interest in allowing countries like Russia and (fellow ally) Iran building pipelines through his country than he does Qatar (US ally.) This does not suit the pursuit of US hegemony, hence “Russia is evil, Putin is the worst person evvvaaa…,” and impoverishing, de-miltarising and just generally denying the people of Russia basic dignity, is a good thing.

Masses of people die, with the implicit approval of voters like you and I, on the petard of American supremacy and world domination. When we cast a vote for someone like Hillary Clinton, we are saying “this is OK. We are on board with this”. People must die, because the culture that gave us Jerry Springer must prevail.

People dieing for no good reason. There’s no nobility can be claimed, no dignity afforded, no empathy inherent to any of this crap. It’s ruthless, unforgiving and unforgivable.

esselte said:

Hillary Clinton, from all accounts, intended to add Russia to this list. Russia, a country with something like 1,700 active nuclear warheads at it’s disposal.

Will you provide a reference for this claim please.

esselte said:

It’s not because Assad is an arsehole (though, he is)… it’s because Syria has essential geography to exporting oil and gas from both the Middle East and Russia, via pipeline, to Europe. Assad, allied with Russia, has more interest in allowing countries like Russia and (fellow ally) Iran building pipelines through his country than he does Qatar (US ally.)

Will you provide a reference for this claim please.

esselte said:

This does not suit the pursuit of US hegemony, hence “Russia is evil, Putin is the worst person evvvaaa…,” and impoverishing, de-miltarising and just generally denying the people of Russia basic dignity, is a good thing.

i assume you are referring to US sanctions. These sanctions, supported by US allies in Europe are a result of Russia’s actions in Ukraine. They were in place before Russian intervention in Syria.

esselte said:

Masses of people die, with the implicit approval of voters like you and I, on the petard of American supremacy and world domination. When we cast a vote for someone like Hillary Clinton, we are saying “this is OK. We are on board with this”. People must die, because the culture that gave us Jerry Springer must prevail.

You blame a US hegemon for these policies yet they are also supported by allies in Europe across parties of the left and right. Do you lump them together in one transnational conspiracy?

esselte said:

People dieing for no good reason. There’s no nobility can be claimed, no dignity afforded, no empathy inherent to any of this crap. It’s ruthless, unforgiving and unforgivable.

You’re certainly eloquent but I don’t think you are yet convincing in your argument.

James ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis, new defence secretary says he enjoys shooting people.

Goldeneye Xenia Part 5 Orgasmic Slaughter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUH3B1lPvYM

Tau.Neutrino said:

James ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis, new defence secretary says he enjoys shooting people.

Goldeneye Xenia Part 5 Orgasmic Slaughter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUH3B1lPvYM

I don’t think I’ll click on that

wonder where sibeen is.

ChrispenEvan said:

wonder where sibeen is.

He knew the consequences.
The Eastern Front may do him some good.

• wonder where sibeen is.

He made me promise not to say…

ChrispenEvan said:

wonder where sibeen is.

I haven’t seen him here for a couple of weeks. Please tell me he hasn’t… gone… on holidays?

• He made me promise not to say…

Not even one financial incentive from the media?

Rule 303 said:

ChrispenEvan said:

wonder where sibeen is.

I haven’t seen him here for a couple of weeks. Please tell me he hasn’t… gone… on holidays?

He hasn’t been away that long.

Voted for Trump? Proud now?

Tonight, the Republican Party voted to begin dismantling “Obamacare.” Rather than let them erase the law and its protections in one swoop, Democrats fought back by proposing amendments to save certain parts, like healthcare protections for veterans. Republicans voted against that. (But thanks for your service, vets!)

Then Republicans voted against the rule that says insurance companies have to cover “pre-existing conditions,” (so if you have had cancer, diabetes, or heart problems in the past, good luck keeping even your private insurance now.) Then they killed CHIP, which is the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which provided health care to impoverished sick kids. Again – they voted against health care for poor kids. (So Christlike.)

The Republicans then voted against continuing federal aid to rural hospitals, which is the only thing keeping many of them open. (I guess the joke’s on all those deep-red heartland counties who voted for this one-party rule.) All you pro-life folks – they also voted against contraception coverage. With no health coverage for their pregnancies, more women will choose abortions to avoid bankruptcy. (Oops!) Also, that rule saying you can keep your kids on your private insurance until they’re 26? Gone. Democrats also forced a vote to protect Medicare and Medicaid from being reduced, but Republicans voted against those, too. Old people and the infirm – to hell with them, right?

Democrats made them vote on every one of these topics – partly so voters could see exactly what was being voted against. And every time, like clockwork, the Republicans voted against the needs of human beings and in support of profits for insurance companies and tax cuts for the extremely wealthy, which paid for parts of these programs. It was sickening to see the votes unfold.

Democrats argued into the wee hours, but this is life under one-party rule. If you voted for Trump and his Republican majority, this is what you wanted. Abject human suffering. Drink deep. Here is your victory.
Not one Republican offered a single proposal to replace any of these services.

—Anthony Breznican

https://rewire.news/article/2017/01/13/total-abortion-ban-debuts-congress/

Life Accordion to Trump

The USA under Trump leadership could find itself not taken seriously but other world leaders and nations as they think he is a buffoon whose policies and ideas deserve no merit.

I wonder if there’s an increase in appointments for psychologists from people uneasy about a Trump presidency?

Divine Angel said:

I wonder if there’s an increase in appointments for psychologists from people uneasy about a Trump presidency?

Wonder if there has been any suicides attributable to his presidency?

Divine Angel said:

I wonder if there’s an increase in appointments for psychologists from people uneasy about a Trump presidency?

Yes

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2016/09/trump_induced_anxiety_is_a_real_thing.html

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/10/donald-trump-2016-therapists-214333

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/trumps-win-is-causing-a-surge-in-demand-for-mental-health-services-2016-11-10