Saturday, October 15, 2016

Elites/Globalists Attempt To Smear Populism, 'It's Not An Election, It's A War'

Elites Link Populism to Emerging ‘Bullyboys’ Like Trump

Donald Trump Is One More Bullyboy in a World of Strongmen … Watching Donald Trump skulking behind Hillary Clinton on the debate stage Sunday night, muttering about locking her up if he wins, was a reminder that we are drifting toward a kind of bullyboy-world, where power is everything.  – RealClearPolitics/Washington Post

Populism has now been linked directly to tyranny as we can see from this above article. We have been reporting on the elite-generated “populism versus globalism” meme here and here.
We suspected there would be a further move and now it is taking place. If you are a political populist, you are also legislator to whom “power is everything.”

Analyzing this sort of meme reveals the importance of understanding elite propaganda in this modern age.

The idea, as we have stated previously, is to compare and contrast globalism to populism. Globalism is to be presented as the preferred societal choice, but one that is under attack by short-sighted populist leaders and their followers.

The question for us was always how populism would be negatively portrayed and whether it would be aimed directly and decisively at Trump himself. This article gives us the answer by extending populism to include such people as North Korea’s Kim Jong-un.

In fact, we had our answer in September when Barack Obama gave a speech at the UN, which ABC reported under the headline, “Barack Obama hits out at ‘populist strongmen’ Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump in last UN address.”

Hard to get more obvious than that. Increasingly, therefore, populism will equate with tyranny whereas globalism will be portrayed as the enlightened choice of empathetic leaders. The sex-abuse attacks on Trump surely reinforce this meme.

Time will tell how this meme is being applied and how it evolves. But the next step seems to have been taken. Populism is tyranny now and Trump is an incipient dictator, even though we should also recall that elite memes often work in reverse. (“Peace-keeping” is one that comes to mind.) Within this context it may well be that Hillary Clinton would take on the behaviors this meme predicts rather than Trump.

In any event, the world’s media and enlightened politicos will stand on the other side of the divide, beckoning people toward a renewed and more generous globalism that may even include debt forgiveness.
If you are aware of these trends please don’t be fooled by the rhetoric.  Ultimately modern politics makes little difference, though to be sure we would prefer Trump to Hillary.
But ultimately as wars draw closer and economies worldwide continue to be undermined in the service of additional globalism, you will have to take care of yourself and your family as best you can.

One of John Podesta’s emails released by WikiLeaks this week exposes how progressive elites seek to exploit the unwashed masses. The email features one of Podesta’s colleagues from the Center for American Progress admitting that the institutional left “conspires to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry,” ostensibly to impose their radical agenda on us without much resistance.

The correspondent is Bill Ivey of Global Cultural Strategies, “the online representation of the ideas, writings, and affiliations of author/consultant Bill Ivey.” He is an author trained in folklore and history, a trustee of the Center for American Progress, a former team leader in the Barack Obama presidential transition in 2008, and the former chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts in the Clinton administration.

In the email from March of 2016, Ivey expresses concern about the rise of “opinionated blowhard” Trump and frets because the “citizenry” seems to be awakening.

Well, we all thought the big problem for our US democracy was Citizens United/Koch Brothers big money in politics. Silly us; turns out that money isn’t all that important if you can conflate entertainment with the electoral process.
Trump masters TV, TV so-called news picks up and repeats and repeats to death this opinionated blowhard and his hairbrained ideas, free-floating discontent attaches to a seeming strongman and we’re off and running. JFK, Jr would be delighted by all this as his “George” magazine saw celebrity politics coming. The magazine struggled as it was ahead of its time but now looks prescient. George, of course, played the development pretty lightly, basically for charm and gossip, like People, but what we are dealing with now is dead serious.
How does this get handled in the general? Secretary Clinton is not an entertainer, and not a celebrity in the Trump, Kardashian mold; what can she do to offset this? I’m certain the poll-directed insiders are sure things will default to policy as soon as the conventions are over, but I think not.

And as I’ve mentioned, we’ve all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry. The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly. This problem demands some serious, serious thinking – and not just poll driven, demographically-inspired messaging.

I’m not insulted.  I actually feel a bit sorry for your ignorance.  Mr. Ivey, you make the same mistake that most other progressives make.  Oh, there’s a lot of couch potatoes around who like to watch night time sitcoms, wear stupid clothing and cheer for their favorite band of criminals on Sunday.

Similarly, messaging won’t change things for us.  When I say “us,” I mean more people than you know.  Donald Trump is a symptom, not the disease.  The only other candidate who had any chance of winning was Ted Cruz, and he was as hated by the establishment as Trump is.  Trump didn’t ascend to the top because of his television persona, but because it’s all being burned down by the people.  Trump is the vessel.  The people threw gasoline and lit the match.

As for the goal of conspiring to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry, you’re far too late for that.  America is the most heavily armed nation in the world.  I’ve seen your plans.

The legislation has already been written. H.R. 4269 would enact a national, permanent ban on the manufacture and sale of so-called “assault weapons” and all firearm magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. The bill, introduced last December, already has149 Democratic co-sponsors(218 are needed to pass the House).
H.R. 4269 would ban all AR-15 and AK-type rifles and all civilian versions of military rifles produced anywhere in the word within the past 60 years or so. The bill would also ban all parts kits, stripped receivers, “bump-fire” stocks, thumbhole stocks, trigger cranks, so-called “compliant” rifles, and “any… characteristic that can function as a [pistol] grip.” Law enforcement is exempt from the bill’s provisions.
H.R. 4269 is not a “kick down the door and confiscate ‘em” bill. Existing rifles and magazines are “grandfathered” (but the transfer of existing magazines is permanently prohibited). Gun banners know that it is literally impossible to perform a door-to-door gun confiscation in a nation of 300 million people, and that any attempt to do so would certainly be met with violence. Consequently, they have pre-empted the “Come and take it” crowd by employing a long-term strategy. Once the manufacture and sale of certain weapons is prohibited, it is only a matter of time before the legislation would be amended to outlaw the transfer of “grandfathered” rifles as well as magazines, thus enacting a de facto confiscation within a generation.

This won’t work.  No one will comply.  You don’t honestly think we’re going to spend our hard earned money on guns and ammunition, teach our sons to shoot and fend for themselves, and then turn the guns over to you in our wills, do you?

As I said.  It’s too late.  There is an inevitable split coming to America.  Your plans for collectivism can’t control the American spirit.  Every turn of the screw by you will only make matters worse and the people more ungovernable.  But since your world view works from the top down, I don’t expect you to understand this.  That bodes darkness for the near term.

“The next step in this is going to be the need to use deadly force against the Iranians. I think it’s coming, it’s going to be a maritime confrontation and if it doesn’t happen immediately, I’ll bet you a dollar it’s going to be happening after the presidential election, whoever is elected.”
—Admiral Stavridis on why a deadly confrontation with Iran is coming sooner or later

There are an awful lot of people out there who still think this is a conventional election, that we are choosing between two candidates on the basis of experience, policies, and character.

This is not a conventional election.  This is, as the late, great Andrew Breitbart put it, "war!"
An all-out culture war.

It's not a war that conservatives started or have ever wanted.  It is a war that has been thrust on us.  But if we don't treat it as a war, if we don't take it seriously as a war, we will lose and lose miserably.  We will lose not just for the next four years, but for the next 40 years, and possibly the next 400 years.
In other words, this is not a skirmish or a tiny battle, as the #NeverTrump crowd imagines.  If we don't defeat the enemy in November, there may not be another chance for a long time to come.

When you're at war, your tactics change considerably.  For your leader, you don't want a gentleman warrior or an intellectual who is good at articulating ideas but not very good in the trenches.  Those are peacetime leaders, perhaps, but not wartime generals.   
At time of war, you pick a general who is tough as nails and will lead you confidently into battle and be victorious.  You choose someone who knows how important it is, as Winston Churchill said, to "Never give up!  Never give up!  Never, never, never-never-never-never!"  
The general you pick may be foul-mouthed, crude, or brusque.  He may have any number of personal failings.  Those things don't matter in war.  What matters is:

Is he on your side?
Is he a fighter?
Can he rally the troops?
Can he weaken the opponent?
Can he administer death blows when needed?
Can he emerge victorious?

In short, you need someone who is strong, fierce, and not easily taken down.  Ironically, the Republican symbol of the elephant is the perfect metaphor – a creature who, on the one hand, is often seen as big, clumsy, and lovable, but who turns out to be of the most dangerous animals on Earth.  A creature who has been known to be vindictive and can trample even a rhinoceros – so a donkey shouldn't be that hard.

Is this Donald J. Trump?
Absolutely.  He has shown that no matter what dirt gets dug up and thrown at him, he will not back down.  He is the first Republican candidate to come along in more than 25 years who isn't afraid to battle the Democrats – and the media – with the same firepower they bring into battle.

Scott Adams, the creator of the cartoon Dilbert, has written extensively on the "persuasion" elements of this election and says that Trump's temperament is predictable, that "when Trump counter-attacks, he always responds with equal measure. Words are met with words and scandal mentions are met with scandal mentions. (And maybe a few words.) But always proportionate and immediate."
So what we are seeing, and what we may see for the remainder of the campaign, is Trump responding in full force to the media and the left-wing onslaught.

In short, he's bringing out the big guns.
But he's bringing out the big guns because that's what the other side already has aimed at him.
Consider the 2005 video of Trump's lewd comments.  The Democrat-controlled media thought they could take Donald Trump down and end his candidacy for good by airing the video two days before the second presidential debate.  But, unlike almost every other Republican you can name, Trump didn't back down.  He came out swinging.

Debate moderator Anderson Cooper called Trump's 2005 comments "sexual assault," and said, "You bragged that you have sexually assaulted women.  Do you understand that?"
Trump corrected him and subtly undercut the claim: "No, I didn't say that at all.  I don't think you understood what was said.  This was locker room talk."  He then apologized to his family and the American public and masterfully switched the subject:

You know, when we have a world when you have ISIS chopping off heads and frankly drowning people in steel cages, where you have so many bad things happening … we should get onto much more important things and much bigger things.

The moderators and the Democrats were stunned that their many shots at Trump did not succeed.  He outgunned them at every turn.  When he said Hillary should be in jail, they were reeling.  No one has ever gone after Hillary the way Trump has.  

Now, having failed round one, the left has brought out even bigger guns – women who claim that Trump groped them and sexually assaulted them on numerous occasions going back to the 1980s.

But the media is again trying to slay the elephant.  For example, CNN senior media correspondent Brian Stelter immediately jumped into the fray, calling Trump's speech "paranoid" and "dangerous."
This is war, ladies and gentlemen.  It's not a conventional election, and it's not a gentlemen's disagreement or a skirmish or a fistfight.  You can't sit at home with popcorn and enjoy the show, because eventually the lights will come up, and we will be saddled with either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump for four years.
If it's Hillary, then you can gird yourself for what will surely be daily battles over guns, free speech, Supreme Court nominees, higher taxes, more immigration, more years of a bad economy, and a multitude of other bad decisions.

No comments: