rigorousintuition.ca

First Brexit, now "anti-establishment" President Trump. At least that's what the establishment wants us to believe, because Trump is anything but anti-establishment. The American public, not to mention, the UK, is being set up, making them think that their vote really counts when it does not. So what's really going on?

I keep wondering this myself. See my response in the general election results thread. Maybe it's just time to kick this full-tilt control into action.

Hi everyone. I haven't posted her in quite a while. I guess that's because there's just been this slow, steady march into neo-fascism where nothing jumped out at me as really deserving comment. It was also just dreary and depressing and predictable. The election of Trump truly surprised me though. I was 99% sure that the Establishment had selected Hillary and would see her in office come hell or high water. They certainly had the means to do so with voting machine shenanigans (many of which were owned by open Hillary supporters). Wall Street overtly supporter her. There seemed to be a faction of the intelligence community that was against her, but at the end of the day the FBI gave her the stamp of approval. The military seemed to be in her camp. The freakin Bush family endorsed her. Trump himself was so ridiculous that he seemed like a Hillary plant.

So what's going on? Did They just heck up? Did their pet clown get out of control and the popular vote was so in his favor that they weren't able to convincingly give Hillary the victory? Or was this the plan all along? And to what end? To polarize American society to never-before-seen heights? Are they really pushing for race war / civil war in order to clamp down hard? I don't think it would actually come to that, but the threat of it would be enough. What are your thoughts?

I think it was a case of the establishment not realizing just how much people hate them, and how fucking stupid people can be in general. They got lazy, thinking that Trump will never get elected because Reasons. Same as with Brexit.

As they say: assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups.

DrEvil » Wed Nov 09, 2016 11:18 am wrote:I think it was a case of the establishment not realizing just how much people hate them, and how fucking stupid people can be in general. They got lazy, thinking that Trump will never get elected because Reasons. Same as with Brexit.

As they say: assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups.

I pretty much agree.

1. Anti-establishment / DC outsider sentiments of frustration and hate and twisted patriotism.

2. Stupid people / voters that are proud and fearfully protective of their ignorance.

3. Failure of Establishment to provide a viable moderate candidate; distain toward voters that needed to be retained to win a national election; and belief in theor own propaganda tossed by the captured media.

Why did the establishment select Trump? I wrote my hypothesis back in June. They want, "Faster, please." Trump will deliver that. And he'll get great ratings for the media. Win/win for TPTB.

PufPuf93 » Wed Nov 09, 2016 1:28 pm wrote:

DrEvil » Wed Nov 09, 2016 11:18 am wrote:I think it was a case of the establishment not realizing just how much people hate them, and how fucking stupid people can be in general. They got lazy, thinking that Trump will never get elected because Reasons. Same as with Brexit.
As they say: assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups.

I pretty much agree.

1. Anti-establishment / DC outsider sentiments of frustration and hate and twisted patriotism.
2. Stupid people / voters that are proud and fearfully protective of their ignorance.
3. Failure of Establishment to provide a viable moderate candidate; distain toward voters that needed to be retained to win a national election; and belief in theor own propaganda tossed by the captured media.

Yup. This is proof that people do not really operate fully out of desire for their own self interest. This is was a like a collective self harm episode of the body politic. I think the desire to punish, harm, send a message, humiliate, get even, with those who are perceived as getting preferential treatment (wall street, insiders, minorities, women, the establishment, the elite, celebrities, professionals, etc.) won over what was best for those already feeling left behind. The little guy just elected the archetypal slumlord and evil corporate downsizer (your fired!). I think many are willing to sacrifice their stake as long as they can watch some of those they resent suffer. Trump has given them as much with his Empire of Dirt so far. He's delivered up the hurt so far. The little guy can understand that language, and it is compelling coming from someone who is already is succesfull and does it even at the expense of everything else. There will be blood.

You could have it all
My empire of dirt
I will let you down
I will make you hurt

.

The story here is not that the establishment chose either one. A smaller set of factions in it absolutely did back Trump, sensing the opportunity, while a larger set backed Clinton, fearing instability. The former are pirates, so they're seeing a golden age of plunder starting today.

The U.S. establishment is in a crisis. This is not a crisis yet of control over the institutions, or of a revolutionary challenge to their class as a whole. It is one of their own vision. They don't know how to respond as a class to the world as it has developed around them. They are in internal confusion. They may crack up. This ideological (for now) putsch by the gang who coalesced around Trump was made possible by this crisis.

By the way, did Trump get the highest share of the votes? No, he did not. No he did not.

But what is the establishment, anyway? Perhaps your question lacks for a definition. Here is mine:

The establishment may be a useful term in describing a concentration of institutional power and awesome wealth in a small minority, a class, such that the members of this class cumulatively tend to be generationally stable (a large share of them are born into it), broadly similar in world-view, well networked among themselves, share certain broad interests, and get to make the important decisions about how industry is developed, land and resources are used, policy is made, jobs are distributed, and to a large extent how the world itself is perceived by the majority who go through the schools and grow up in the culture. While consensus building processes tend to create coherence within this establishment, it does not meet as a council to choose who wins a U.S. election. (Some smaller, deeper bodies within the establishment have tried to function this way, as in the watershed elections of 2000 and of course November 1963.) Their choices are more along the lines of how the system around the election is arranged: maintenance of the for-profit private corporate ownership system of Wall Street, MIC, media system, food system, international trade and capital flows, and everything else; what is legal in terms of lobbying and campaign finance; what issues are considered to matter; what is a worthy voter, etc. etc.

.

Much like Trump benefiting from tax policy, the wealth and political Establishment on all sides of the aisle will likely willfully benefit as a whole from Trump as POTUS (regards taxation, government regulation, etc.).

The distribution of wealth and power may differ but the descent into global feudalism will march on.

Will be interesting if Trump leads a major investment in infrastructure - public expenditure, building of private fortune, and privatization are likely parts of a Trump led infrastructure initiative.

The Establishment as a whole is likely to benefit in short and long term from a Trump style investment in infrastructure.

I personally strongly support investment in infrastructure but what is likely to happen more likely favors wealth and power - The Establishment - more than a infrastructure investment under say a Sander's administration.

That the GOP also will control both houses of Congress and several USSC nominations over the next several years is troubling.

Trump has already surrounded himself with some personalities (Ghouliani, Christie, Newt, etc.) but what will be interesting is that I expect some strong personalities to come to prominence out of the ether.

operator kos » 09 Nov 2016 18:14 wrote:Hi everyone. I haven't posted her in quite a while. I guess that's because there's just been this slow, steady march into neo-fascism where nothing jumped out at me as really deserving comment. It was also just dreary and depressing and predictable. The election of Trump truly surprised me though. I was 99% sure that the Establishment had selected Hillary and would see her in office come hell or high water. They certainly had the means to do so with voting machine shenanigans (many of which were owned by open Hillary supporters). Wall Street overtly supporter her. There seemed to be a faction of the intelligence community that was against her, but at the end of the day the FBI gave her the stamp of approval. The military seemed to be in her camp. The freakin Bush family endorsed her. Trump himself was so ridiculous that he seemed like a Hillary plant.

So what's going on? Did They just heck up? Did their pet clown get out of control and the popular vote was so in his favor that they weren't able to convincingly give Hillary the victory? Or was this the plan all along? And to what end? To polarize American society to never-before-seen heights? Are they really pushing for race war / civil war in order to clamp down hard? I don't think it would actually come to that, but the threat of it would be enough. What are your thoughts?

You have pretty much echoed my exact thoughts on this.

I had been 100% convinced that this whole election was a completely orchestrated farce to install Clinton come hell or high water. I thought Trump was foisted upon us because he was the only buffoon scary and clownish enough to lose to evil queen Clinton.

Now I don't know what to think. The only upside I can see for our ruling class is increased rancor and division among this Disunited States of America's have nots. Rednecks vs. reds! Black Lives vs. Crackers! We are not the exploiters you are looking for!

PufPuf93 » 09 Nov 2016 18:28 wrote:

DrEvil » Wed Nov 09, 2016 11:18 am wrote:I think it was a case of the establishment not realizing just how much people hate them, and how fucking stupid people can be in general. They got lazy, thinking that Trump will never get elected because Reasons. Same as with Brexit.

As they say: assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups.

I pretty much agree.

1. Anti-establishment / DC outsider sentiments of frustration and hate and twisted patriotism.

2. Stupid people / voters that are proud and fearfully protective of their ignorance.

3. Failure of Establishment to provide a viable moderate candidate; distain toward voters that needed to be retained to win a national election; and belief in theor own propaganda tossed by the captured media.

So they just didn't bother to cheat because they didn't think it was necessary?

Thinking out loud, maybe the republicans have never given the dems the black box codes?

If as we all assume (I assume) and suspect its all rigged, then It is the puzzle.

So far no one has come up with a convincing case, but I have no answer.
As I'd said in other spots, much as I so wished it were not so, I can believe it was actually legit.

And sure the rich will continue to get richer under Trump.

But economic inequality accelerated under Obama and would have continued that acceleration under Clinton.

Maybe this could serve as cover for Wall Street and other corporatist elites? As in "Don't blame me. I was with her."

Maybe our coming pain will be scapegoated on Trumpian anti-globalism?

I have no idea. But it feels like 9/11. Except many many more people will suffer.

9/11/01 <---------> 11/9/16