I don't mean a fraud in the sense that there are two shitty candidates running in an election, I mean this is a straight up fraud, a Hollywood production, it's entertainment and not even good entertainment at that.
During tonight's episode of political Jerry Springer, while the audience waited for Clinton's expected knockout blow to Trump - much as the world awaited Wikileaks knockout blow to Clinton only to be equally disappointed - a large number of lies and propaganda were slipped into the conversation regarding U.S. foreign policy but with the various lewd comments, sexual assault accusations, and other "issues" front and center of this "debate" it would be understandable if you missed that.
Recently Chris Martenson put out an extremely important publication regarding clear propagandizing of the western nations, particularly the US, in preparation for a war with Russia. He compares it to the same propaganda techniques used to gain social license for the invasion of Iraq. He points out talking points and phrases you can expect to hear a lot more of many of which were featured in tonight's "debate" the few times real policies actually came up. These phrases and keywords were not injected by the candidates, but by the moderators, asking questions based on the lies regarding Syria, and Russia repeated in every western newspaper about the "humanitarian crisis" in Aleppo. The candidates of course play along, answering these questions with additional lies. The answers have to be lies, as the only truthful response would be to correct the person asking the question regarding the historical context of Syria. A historical context that since Russia's invitation into syria the west has been trying to rewrite.
They've done a good job and repeat "Russian aggression" so often that people I know, who should know better, believe it. To go hand in hand with this the U.S. state department has without evidence of course tied "Russia" to the DNC hacks, and it should be no surprise that Russia is being tied to Trump too.
Lets stand back and take a look at what you're really voting for. On the one side you have Hillary Clinton, the front(wo)man for the status-quo. You're not really just voting for Clinton though are you? Behind her stand all of the other shitty presidents and members of the status-quo and architects of the financial and military quagmire the west has been drawn in to (when did the opinion of George W. Bush start to mean something to 'progressives'?). She doesn't represent the Democrats, she represents a continuation of exactly everything that has already been done.
On the other hand you have Donald Trump, a complete buffoon that says a lot of lewd remarks, inbetween other sensible statements like regarding the low-interest ponzi-conomy and the Federal Reserve. Statements that echo the likes of Ron Paul or Jill Stein. The anti-establishment viewpoint. There are a lot of people these days with anti-establishment viewpoints and isn't it interesting that they've been provided such a useless mascot to represent them? A mascot that just happens to be getting tied to Russia at the same time the U.S. is trying to start a war with Russia? And where does this leave your dear voter? Between Trump and a hard place.
Is it even a real election if the entire status quo everyone ever voted for ever is all sitting under the same umbrella, thus providing a default mandate to continue doing exactly what they've been doing while giving you this guy for the opposition and barring the third party candidates from the debates? Isn't it interesting how the media has people convinced Jill Stein or Gary Johnson is too crazy, or too stupid to debate against the likes of Trump, and Clinton? Surely with Trump running Stein couldn't possibly be "too crazy" to debate, could she? And yet much of the mainstream talk simply dismisses her based on some misquoted hyperbole about vaccines. How convenient.
Isn't it interesting how all of the GOP powerbrokers now backing Clinton were "helpless" to stop his rise? And why was that, because Trump has money? They have more. But what's more interesting is that they all know each other. Trump talks frequently about golfing with Clinton, and yet somehow some of these obviously easy to obtain recordings which would have easily vetted him out just couldn't be found? All of these guys who have business dealings just weren't around? All of these people now coming out against his character just weren't around? The big money resources of the GOP just couldn't find anything huh? You have to be in a complete state of cognitive dissonance to believe the GOP story about the rise of Trump, they had unlimited resources to stop him they weren't helpless and yet, they didn't. One can only conclude they never wanted to stop his rise in the first place.
I see a lot of talk of the U.S. becoming a fascist state if you vote for this candidate, or that candidate. The hyperbole is equal on both sides. I have a different theory: the U.S. is already a fascist state and this is exactly the type of election such a fascist state would run. A race that isn't really a race at all, a race where at the end of the day the population is left with no alternative but to vote for the fascist policies that have been active for nearly 2 decades now, and of course war with Russia.
The emotional exchanges those observing this election are being drawn into are intended, as so long as you are emotional you are not thinking critically. When you're not thinking critically you are much easier to influence, your defenses are down and you can have your opinion formed by carefully planted suggestion.
I think I've made my point, if you have any specific questions comment below.
I called this post 'things break down', and what you are observing this "presidentual race" is what happens when an empire starts to break down. Fascism is already here. War is already here. If you're concerned about these things and think that voting one way or the other will make a difference then you haven't been paying attention to the events unfolding while you've been distracted by the presidential reality show.
When you don't control your government...
Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.
Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink
Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.
No comments:
Post a Comment