Populism Remains Triumphant
Donald Trump continues to provide us with great entertainment. We think it was Mr. Kasich who first referred to him as a “wrecking ball”. In a recent comment on the New Hampshire primary, Stefan Molineux has amended this to the more precise definition “funny-haired wrecking ball”. As he correctly notes, a large part of the Republican base has simply had it with the establishment GOP – and Mr. Trump’s success is reflecting that.
Evolution strikes unexpectedly and hard
Cartoon by Arthur “Chip” Bok
The same is happening on the Democratic side, where Bernie Sanders has clearly become a serious challenger of Hillary Clinton (who in turn incidentally remains in danger of being indicted over her sloppy handling of top secret emails while secretary of state). This is getting a lot less attention than Trump’s triumphs, but it reflects the very same underlying trend: people have had it with the political establishment.
Of the recent South Carolina (Republican) primary and Nevada (Democratic) caucus , CNN tells us “Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton win big”. Well, no, this isn’t really so. Granted, Trump definitely did win big. He even managed to get Jeb Bush, the by far best-funded neo-con dream candidate to throw the towel (we greatly enjoyed his strenuously politically correct after-the-fact whining). Hillary Clinton didn’t “win big” – she just about scraped by, considering who her opponent is and how much more money she is able to draw from the cronies. Here are the statistics:
Trump wins 50 delegates, outdistancing his nearest rival by 10% and essentially destryong the presidential bids of Bush, Kasich and Carson, even if only Bush has so far decided to drop out.
It is a decent majority for Hillary, but so far she won one primary by tossing coins (Iowa), lost one and in this one, Sanders still got more than 47% – something that would have been deemed impossible a year ago and shows that his support remains very strong.
As Justin Raimondo has pointed out after the New Hampshire primary, one can hardly call the surge of Trump and Sanders an unalloyed blessing. However, what is undoubtedly a blessing is what their success tells us about the likely crumbling of the reigning order and the imperialism, cronyism and welfare-warfare statism it represents:
“However, the peccadilloes of these two individuals, while not entirely beside the point, matter less than what their ascendancy tells us about the seismic changes that are transforming the American political landscape. The political and corporate elites that have ruled, unchallenged, since the end of World War II, and whose perspective is globalist, imperialist, and mercantilist, are facing a serious insurrection: the peasants with pitchforks are gathering in the shadow of the high castle, their torches illuminating the twilight of the West. Whether they succeed in penetrating the fortress and violating the inner sanctum matters less than the destructive effects of the battle itself. Does our ruling class have the will to fight and win? We’ll have the answer shortly.”
Keep in mind that this change in the social mood is not only a US phenomenon – it is a global one. The European elites are increasingly under fire as well. This has among other things major implications for stock markets.
Powerless Mainstream Media
Trump’s continued success has revealed another gratifying trend: the ability of the mainstream media to shape public opinion and keep the serfs in line has practically collapsed. The more they attack Trump (Sanders is far less susceptible to attack as he is a self-declared socialist), the more his support seems to be growing.
Ron Paul’s 2012 campaign was inter alia rendered ineffective because the corporate media decided to simply ignore him (here is the famous Jon Stewart report on this blatantly biased reportage). They can’t do that with Trump and Sanders though – that would simply be too freaking obvious. Besides, we assume that these two gentlemen are drawing a great many viewers and readers – so it is a question of money too.
Europe’s leftist press is positively apoplectic – possibly because it is misunderstanding a major point (more on this below). Or maybe it actually isn’t misunderstanding the point – if one studies the European media closely, it becomes clear that whether they are more inclined to supporting socialist or conservative viewpoints (there is no support for classical liberalism/ libertarianism in Europe), they are all in thrall to what the Germans refer to as “Trans-Atlanticism”. Here is a recent cover of German weekly magazine “Der Spiegel”:
German magazine Der Spiegel on Donald Trump – an example of European style “factual, value-free reporting”: in great red letters it says “Madness” – the subtitle is “America’s rabble-rouser Donald Trump”.
Endangering the War Racket
What is the point we think they either haven’t grasped or are more likely willfully ignoring? After all, the left is probably not overly worried about Trump’s truly terrible ideas on trade (a “populist” evergreen). If you watch Stefan Molineux’s video on the New Hampshire primary we have linked to above, at around 47:07 in the video, he mentions a point that strikes us as very important.
Paraphrasing: when Republican candidates were asked what they would “do about North Korea”, they all seemed eager to bomb, nuke, invade, or otherwise militarily subdue it. The prospect of potentially killing 100ds of thousands or perhaps millions of Koreans in the process seemed not to figure in anyone’s calculations for even a micro-second.
The only anti-war approach to the problem was offered by Trump (i.e., the guy who allegedly “can’t be trusted with the nuclear codes”), who noted that China has as much influence over North Korea as the US has over Puerto Rico and should therefore be asked to handle the problem. Since China enjoys most favored nation trading status with the US, it could surely be prodded to do so.
Trump’s biggest drawbacks in the eyes of the cronies seem to be the following: 1) he is the only candidate not under the control of the donor class. Trump uses his own money to campaign, which allows him to say whatever pops into his mind. And 2) he is the only candidate besides Sanders who promises to be a thorn in the side of the war racket and is likely to upset Washington’s imperial neo-conservative foreign policy consensus (of which Hillary is just as much a representative as Jeb Bush is).
We return to Justin Raimondo regarding this topic, who notes the following:
In the debate leading up to the South Carolina primary, Trump even dared remind people of the deception attending the Iraq war – something one had to be willfully blind not to recognize in real time while it happened, all post facto attempts at exoneration notwithstanding (honest mistakes were made! Yeah, right). As Raimondo remarks:
“Pardon me while I sit back and enjoy the panic of the Republican – and media – elites as the GOP frontrunner takes up that old left-wing antiwar slogan: “Bush lied – people died!” That’s the essence of what Donald Trump said at Saturday’s South Carolina GOP presidential debate when moderator John Dickerson – who smirked his way through the entire debate – asked Trump if he still thought George W. Bush should be impeached as he supposedly said in a long ago interview:
“George Bush made a mistake. We can make mistakes. But that one was a beauty. We should have never been in Iraq. We have destabilized the Middle East.”
DICKERSON: “But so I’m going to – so you still think he should be impeached?”
TRUMP: “You do whatever you want. You call it whatever you want. I want to tell you. They lied. They said there were weapons of mass destruction, there were none. And they knew there were none. There were no weapons of mass destruction.”
The storm of booing from that crowd, which seemed mainly to consist of members of the Lindsey Graham Ladies Home Garden Club, conjured in my memory another signal moment in the history of GOP presidential debates: when Ron Paul said that the 9/11 attacks were “blowback” resulting from half a century of propping up Arab despots in the Middle East. Remember how everyone declared that Paul was finished: that by saying the un-sayable he had forever dashed all hopes of making a political impact on the Republican party and that he was now consigned to the margins? What happened, however, was nothing of the sort: instead, that moment of speaking truth to power catapulted him to national prominence and was instrumental in creating a national movement that lives and grows to this day.
Note the “storm of booing from the crowd”, so out of sync with that the base apparently really thinks. That’s because tickets to primaries are controlled by donors as a way to stack the deck against candidates like Trump. Only a handpicked crowd of Deep State supporters is invited. Hence the incongruous clapping and booing there, which is completely out of line with the results.
Obviously, Trump hasn’t been hurt in the least by pointing to the failings of the Iraq invasion – specifically the glaringly obvious fact that the “reasons” for the war were, well, completely trumped up.
Trump fails to “misremember” what Bush and his neo-conservative clique did to drum up support for their catastrophic Iraq invasion (aided and abetted by the sycophantic mainstream media as well, lest we forget).
Cartoon by Steve Bell
War is the health of the State, as Randolph Bourne famously said. A candidate’s stance toward militarism and empire strikes us as an extremely important issue. And obviously, a non-militarist stance will invite strong opposition – we are after all talking about the greatest racket of all time here. Even the global warming gravy train pales by comparison.
Is no-one surprised that the leftist European press has overlooked this little detail about Trump, instead preferring to be outraged over his allegedly Hitleresque opposition to immigration?
Lest we be misunderstood, we think that all candidates are terrible in their own way (as in nearly every election). And yet, we certainly like the fact that Trump and Sanders are busy shaking the establishment to the core. Less than a year ago we were still willing to bet that Americans would be faced with a race between Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton, which we called a “pitiful choice”. Surprisingly, one of these two members of what Bill Bonner calls “America’s expensive nobility” is gone from the race already, and there’s a good chance the other one could be dethroned in advance of the election as well.
That fact alone is quite fascinating and gratifying. Instead of the usual electoral dullness, we have entertainment pure! It is also telling: a big social mood shift is underway and it is not going the way the political elites would like (the threatening “Brexit” falls under this heading as well). We intend to discuss some of the policy proposals of Trump and Sanders in more detail in upcoming posts.
The topic we plan to tackle next is the one on which we think Trump is completely wrong, namely trade. He would be correct to criticize the current “managed trade” regime, but he wants to restrict trade even more – an economically illiterate position, and frankly quite an odd one to take for a man who inter alia happens to be in the export business himself. Stay tuned.
It is that time of the year again – our semi-annual funding drive begins today. Give us a little hand in offsetting the costs of running this blog, as advertising revenue alone is insufficient. You can help us reach our modest funding goal by donating either via paypal or bitcoin. Those of you who have made a ton of money based on some of the things we have said in these pages (we actually made a few good calls lately!), please feel free to up your donations accordingly (we are sorry if you have followed one of our bad calls. This is of course your own fault). Other than that, we can only repeat that donations to this site are apt to secure many benefits. These range from sound sleep, to children including you in their songs, to the potential of obtaining privileges in the afterlife (the latter cannot be guaranteed, but it seems highly likely). As always, we are greatly honored by your readership and hope that our special mixture of entertainment and education is adding a little value to your life!
Bitcoin address: 1DRkVzUmkGaz9xAP81us86zzxh5VMEhNke
3 Responses to “Funny-Haired Wrecking Ball Strikes Again”
Most read in the last 20 days:
- Gold Price Skyrockets in India after Currency Ban – Part III
When Money Dies In part-I of the dispatch we talked about what happened during the first two days after Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi banned Rs 500 and Rs 1000 banknotes, comprising of 88% of the monetary value of cash in circulation. In part-II, we talked about the scenes, chaos, desperation, and massive loss of productive capacity that this ban had led to over the next few days. Indian prime minister Narendra Modi – another finger-wagger, as can be seen in this...
- Gold Price Skyrockets in India after Currency Ban – Part II
Chaos in the Wake of the Ban Here is a link to Part 1, about what happened in the first two days after India's government made Rs 500 (~$7.50) and Rs 1,000 (~$15) banknotes illegal. They can now only be converted to Rs 100 (~$1.50) or lower denomination notes, at bank branches or post offices. Banks were closed the first day after the decision. What follows is the crux of what has happened over the subsequent four days. India's prime minister Nahendra Modi, author of the...
- Gold Price Skyrockets in India after Currency Ban – Part IV
A Market Gripped by Fear The Indian Prime Minister announced on 8th November 2016 that Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 banknotes would no longer be legal tender. Linked are Part-I, Part-II and Part-III updates on the rapidly encroaching police state. The economic and social mess that Modi has created is unprecedented. It will go down in history as an epitome of naivety and arrogance due to Modi’s self-centered desire to increase tax-collection at any cost. Indian jewelry...
- A Note on Gold and India – What is Driving the Gold Price?
Hidden Motives It is well-known that India's government wants to coerce its population into “modernizing” its financial behavior and abandoning its traditions. The recent ban on large-denomination banknotes was not only meant to fight corruption. Obviously, this very bad Indian has way too much cash. Just look at him, he looks suspicious! Photo via thenewsminute.com In fact, as our friend Jayant Bhandari has pointed out, fresh avenues for corruption ...
- India's Currency Debacle – An Interview with Jayant Bhandari
A Major Crisis Last week Jayant Bhandari related the story of the overnight ban of certain banknotes in India under cover of “stamping out corruption” (see Gold Price Skyrockets In India after Currency Ban Part 1 and Part 2 for the details). Banned 500 rupee banknotes The problem is inter alia that the sudden ban of these banknotes has hit the Indian economy quite hard, given that 97% of all transactions in the country are cash-based. Not only that, it has...
- Will the Swamp Swallow Trump?
Permanently Skewed TRUMP HOTEL, New York – Trump’s rambling army – professionals, amateurs, camp followers, and profiteers – is marching south, down the I-95 corridor. There, on the banks of the Potomac, it will fight its next big battle. Lieutenants in Trump's army: Bannon, Flynn & Sessions Photo credit: Drew Angerer / AFP Here at the Diary, we do not like to get involved in politics. But this is a special time in the history of our planet – a...
- There Are Two Types of Credit — One of Them Leads to Booms and Busts
Stumped by the Bust In the slump of a cycle, businesses that were thriving begin to experience difficulties or go under. They do so not because of firm-specific entrepreneurial errors but rather in tandem with whole sectors of the economy. People who were wealthy yesterday have become poor today. Factories that were busy yesterday are shut down today, and workers are out of jobs. What has caused the bust? The modern-day economic orthodoxy continues to be unable to provide...
- All Aboard! Trump’s Express Train to the Future
Free Money! BALTIMORE – Last week, the Dow punched up above 19,000 – a new all-time record. And on Monday, the Dow, the S&P 500, the Nasdaq, and the small-cap Russell 2000 each hit new all-time highs. The last time that happened was on the last day of December 1999. Ironically, two events that were almost universally expected to trigger large stock market declines were followed by quite rapid and strong gains. Would the market have fallen if Hillary Clinton had won...
- Attaining Self-Destruct Velocity
Bad Monday Some Monday mornings are better than others. Others are worse than some. For one Amazon employee, this past Monday morning was particularly bad. No doubt, the poor fellow would have been better off he’d called in sick to work. Such a simple decision would have saved him from extreme agony. But, unfortunately, he showed up at Amazon’s Seattle headquarters and put on a public and painful display of madness. Good-bye cruel world! On this our planet,...
- Gold Bull Market Remains Intact – Long Term Fundamentals Outweigh Short Term Market Gyrations
A Strong First Half of the Year, Followed by Another Retreat In early 2016 gold had a big bull run. The precious metal rose close to 25% this year, pushed higher in a summer rally that peaked on July 10th. Gold experienced a bumpy ride over the remainder of the summer though, as investors became increasingly concerned about a potential rate hike by the Federal Reserve. Uncertainty returned to gold market and has intensified further since then. Initially, gold rallied sharply...
- Too Early for “Inflation Bets”?
The Trump Trade After 35 years of waiting... so many false signals... so often deceived... so often disappointed... bond bears gathered on rooftops as though awaiting the Second Coming. Many times, investors have said to themselves, “This is it! This is the end of the Great Bull Market in Bonds!” The long bond's long cycle – red rectangles indicate when the post 1980 bull market was held to be “over” or “over for sure” or “100% over”, etc. We have...
- About that Economic Inequality
Illusory Riches, Obvious Impoverishment I address this essay to two groups. One group is those among the liberty movement, who believe that there’s nothing wrong with inequality. These are often Objectivists, who unknowingly defend a regime that artificially suppresses working people. And suddenly, you feel much lighter... The other group is those among the Left who still call themselves liberals. They say they don’t like inequality, but nevertheless...