Skip to main content

A Trump Victory, Another Nail In The Globalist Establishments Coffin!

Get used to him...

Another major blow to establishment has just happened. The populists scored another victory over the elitist, the globalists, their puppets and political entrenched power. Populism is essentially pure democracy whichever way you slice it. The entire Obama presidency has just been repudiated. If the polls and the talking heads in media were to be believed, a Trump victory over the Wicked Witch of the West was nearly impossible, just as we were lead to believe similarly for #BrExit. In both cases I grew to believe it. It wasn't because I did not believe people had had enough, but rather because I thought that people would be persuaded otherwise.

The first surprise was BrExit as I wrote previously:

And now this surprise, a Trump win over Clinton. We have dodged a MAJOR bullet here. Don't get me wrong, I dislike Trump as much as anyone else but I won't be slut-shamed into being forced by the liberal Nazi's into forming a political decision based on pathetic political correctness issues, the mark of a small mind and a brain-washed sheep.

It's not about Trump, it's about any fresh approach not owned by the establishment, and if the the smaller independent parties don't get a fair shake I'd begrudgingly take my chances with an outsider in Trump over an Insider like Clinton anytime. Why don't we actually look at the issues and decide based on those what we can expect from Trump and how we can score him going forward?

GLOBALIZATION: The globalists and multinationals.
Outsourcing labor, manufacturing and jobs will be under the microscope with Trump, and the Clinton cronyism with their foundation and influence being an infamous globalist/oligarchy pillar. The Clinton Foundation, The Carnegie Foundation, the Open Society Foundation, the Council On Foreign Relations, the Tri-lateralists etc will all have something to think about as global meddling takes a back seat to the benefit of local industry.

The Economic Recession.
As any reader of this blog probably knows, I have always targeted the 2016 presidential election as the kick-off for events resembling some sort of financial collapse as the old globalist economy. I have no reason to change my view on this but how will Trump manage this without people blaming him? Will people understand this was always coming from well before Trump appeared on the scene? How will Trump handle the Fed?

This is a question mark. Will Trump pander to Clintons backers from the Military Industrial Complex and Israel/Saudi Arabia and waste tragic amounts of money overthrowing governments like Libya, Syria and all the rest? Perhaps this is not certain but Trumps favorable perceived stance with Putin and his love for the bottom line suggest he will be much better in this department than Clinton who is an infamous warmonger.

The Media.
This should be fun. Trump is at war with the talking-head establishment media. This media functions as a mouthpiece and echo-chamber for special interests and Trump knows it. The battle here is not over, it's barely even begun!

The Pentagon.
Few people truly grasp how powerful the Pentagon really is and that Ash Carter essentially operates with impunity or accountability just like Rumsfeld did before him. I see Trumps ability to reign in the secretary of defense, whoever that may be, and the sprawling Military Industrial Complex with their powerful influence as the greatest challenge to his presidency.  The State Dept (the department of clowns) is basically just a PR office for the Pentagon. I wonder how much Trump could change this?

There are a lot of questions here, but at least things are shaken up from their stale and predictable path. We may have more extremes, more downs and more ups but mixing things up gives a small amount of hope at least for the people of the world who are engaged in a battle against the influential elite. I'll take it!

Popular posts from this blog

Dīvide et imperā: How To Defeat The Most Effective Social Control Weapon In Human History

Many different empires, cultures and nations have existed in history and while the details, styles, values and aesthetics keep changing, the core structure remains unchanged. In order to benefit from social coperation and steal reward in excess of the labour and value you invest, you cannot take it by brute force for extended periods of time without facing the wrath of the crowds. The crowds need to give it to you willingly or unknowingly. There was one exception to this synopsis, the Feudal System  but there is more to that than people realise, it's a post for a later day and deserves full scrutiny and parrellels do manifest. The support of the home crowd is also needed to win wars. No army has ever been effective fighting under duress, they would assemble, arm  and immediatly turn on you.

Before the current reigning Judeo-Christian Anglo American Empire of today there were other more monolithic empires that the loosely ideologically aligned old money banking dynasties, globalis…

Scientific Consensus is that Consensus is overturned 100% of the time

Everything you know is wrong. There is a very good reason why science succeeds more often than politics does.  Unlike politics, It's not a consensus or a vote,  it's actually method.  The scientific method. Anyone who has read this blog before probably knows I'm a lifelong science junkie as well as someone who spends thousands of hours breaking down the the political and economic agendas behind the special interest groups that guide public policy.  In many ways I'm actually uniquely qualified to tie these angles together in ways not well understood by the overwhelming majority of people.  That actually includes scientists. Scientists are notoriously naive in the political and economic forces that drive the human world.

For example if you are of the opinion that the earth has one moon, the earth revolves around the sun etc you are already wrong. Well sort of. The politicpl world is black and white, the scientific world is nuanced, see…

CO2 is not a pollutant, it is greening the earth!

Whatever your persuasion is on CO² and AGW, nobody disagrees on the tremendous benefit it provides plant life. Many of the past famine disasters and desertification has CO² decline listed as a contributor.

I feel I've already blown the notion that humans are the main cause of climate change out of the water. Or rather I've used the reasoning of others and put it together in a convenient outline. See my previous post above for starters.  However, I recognize that humans do increase CO² levels, no matter how tiny. Increases are likely to be very short lived because the earth has an effective feedback mechanism, but we can apparently get small increases, and it's been put forward on very poor science that this is a bad thing. That assertion hinges completely on bad models. More on that in the bottom most link.  Model's and the measurement sample dates are dubious at best.

Furthermore, the main increase in CO²  as…