Politics

A Regime Change to Call Our Own

It was bound to happen, sooner or later. America’s long history of regime change has finally come home to roost. Those who pushed so ardently for it elsewhere are now pushing for it here. Ah, the irony of it all. Wonder how this one’s going to turn out. If past events are any indication then fasten your seat-belt. It could well be a bumpy ride.

Regime change can be a messy and nasty business, and there’s certainly no shortage of nastiness going around Washington. It’s hard to imagine it getting worse, but no doubt it will. The entrenched establishment wants Trump gone so bad they can taste it, and they’re doing whatever they can to make it happen. They’re desperately looking for anything they can use to impeach him. They are also using the well-documented formula of funding and inciting a color revolution to help bring about this regime change. It’s nothing other than an intelligence op courtesy of the CIA and backed by the establishment.

Getting student youth involved to form protest movements is a strategic factor in regime change. Youth can be easily manipulated because of their idealistic innocence and lack of life experience. They want to participate in the crusade; to stick up for what they see as wrong done to others. Or perhaps there’s no real motivation other than being part of a movement and getting their fifteen minutes. Whatever their motivation is they’re missing critical pieces of the picture. They’re following obediently along and putting their focus where they’re being directed to put it. Are they not concerned about anything else, or are they merely prey to an effective process of distraction and misdirection?

Where is their indignation about the high cost of tuition? Or the poor job prospects? Or the death, destruction, chaos, and de-stabilization wrought by foreign policy? Or the poverty and worsening life standards people everywhere face?  Or the loss of rights and privacy concerns? Where are they with their signs and slogans and marches? Where were they even before the election? They’re being used as pawns in a scheme that in the end will not benefit them in the least. Someday they’ll wake up to find that while they were busy defending the rights of certain groups and focusing all hatred and anger on Trump, we all lost our rights.

Notice too, how academia as a whole has jumped on the bandwagon. The social pressures to conform to the extremes of political correctness have certainly done its job. The threat of having funding withheld or losing one’s job is a great motivator too. Higher education is, after all, a business. The universities are so intent on following the approved agenda they’re putting the state of higher education in jeopardy. Its value is being greatly diminished as the focus is not on teaching students how to think critically for themselves, but programming them on what to think. This is dangerous and should be raising red flags.

The mainstream media is also deeply complicit in this attempt at regime change. Full-blown state propaganda has taken over in the western world. They are the tip of the spear, and have proven themselves to be unreliable, unprofessional, and biased. Indeed, there is much that happens in the world that is ignored by them. If it doesn’t fit the approved corporate and political narrative, then it’s not news, or it’s deemed to be fake news. Anyone who doubts this should considerably widen their research to include other sources and perspectives.

And let’s not overlook the money. There’s plenty of funding to help fuel the flames of regime change. This is a well-documented practice in other countries and it’s happening here now. The U.S. gave five million (and some cookies) to fund the regime change in Ukraine. Why would the same not happen here? There are many other sources too that provide money to various NGOs, institutes, and foundations that are willing to push the agenda of the U.S. and the world’s elites. This is standard practice. Look it up.

What we’re witnessing is a vendetta against one man – Trump. Was he a poor choice for president? Yes, he was, but so was Clinton. They’re both equally scary in their own ways. It’s doubtful, though, that we would’ve seen the backlash had Clinton won, but that’s because she was an establishment candidate. Trump is considered an outsider to be disposed of.

What does this tell us about the political state of the country? It tells us that the problems go much deeper than the office of the president and we should be focused on the system that presented us with these very poor choices. America is not ruled by one man alone and it is not a democracy. Changing the president and nothing else is like putting a bandage on a wound that requires major surgery.

What we need is a vendetta against the established elite and the system that has been hijacked and manipulated to benefit them, and only them. Too many people aren’t recognizing this and the very real dangers it presents.

Changing the president isn’t going to rid the country or the world of the inherent problems we face. We’ll still be plagued with corruption and greed at all levels of government. We’ll still have an aggressive foreign policy. We’ll still have a fragile economy with people unable to make a livable wage. The infrastructure will continue to deteriorate. The healthcare system will still be an increasingly expensive and dysfunctional mess. And the shadow government will still be in place exerting their influence in politics and people’s lives.

Those who back regime change because of their dislike for one man should be careful what they ask for. Such a move may only erode our system of government even more. It may depend on the methods and means used to make it happen. But every action taken by the government seems to open the door to further change that is detrimental to us in the end and is ultimately leading to a system that bears no resemblance to what was intended. It will also set a very dangerous precedent. Is this really what we want?

Resources:

www.opendemocracy.net/globalization-institutions_government/colour_revolutions

www.globalresearch.ca/color-revolution-against-donald-trump

www.voltairenet.org/article195455.html

www.pbs.org/independentlens/democracyondeadline/mediaownership.html

archives.cjr.org/resources/index.php

Politics

What’s Behind The Russian Hacking Allegations

The cries of Russian hacking have finally begun to subside. They were a convenient diversion which seems to have run its course – for now anyway. But diversion is exactly the point. Continuous diversions and accusations are being used as distraction and misdirection tools and not just by Clinton and the Democrats. There are plenty of Republicans in that mix too. In fact, anyone who is a part of, or has been hoodwinked by the Establishment is absolutely furious. Their agenda has been upended. Blaming Russia for something is usually a part of that, but as with most things there are unsaid motives behind this story.

Clinton, the Democratic Party, and their supporters absolutely refuse to accept any responsibility for the election loss, or perhaps their psyche just renders them incapable of it. The blame must be placed elsewhere. Not only that, but they seem to be unable to move past the loss. They were blindsided and humiliated, and now they are extremely angry. Now should be the time to regroup, rethink, and rebuild. Instead, they have embarked on a new campaign; a campaign consisting of revenge, slander, and propaganda. There is no interest in rising from the ashes, only in stoking the embers.

They desperately want to direct focus away from the content of the Clinton emails and their implications, and onto a source. They also want to downplay that she used a private email server. The last thing anyone in the political structure wants is people looking too closely at their inner workings. No better way than to distract people with allegations of Russian hacking. It has become clear that there are major problems and some very questionable practices, and people, within the Democratic Party. Clinton will claim innocence and try to hide her deceit to her dying day, but she is dishonest, and this has long been known. She may have been “cleared”, but she is far from guiltless. In the current political climate placing blame is more important than admitting to it, especially when the stakes are so high.

Interference in elections by any country other than the U.S. is not acceptable. If that isn’t the pot calling the kettle black then I don’t know what is. It’s become a normal part of U.S. foreign relations policy to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries. According to a study done by Don Levin of Carnegie Mellon University, there were “81 times the United States has attempted to influence presidential elections in other countries between 1946 and 2000.” I wonder how many more can be added from 2000 to present. And this study didn’t even include military coups and regime changes supported and enacted by the U.S. If Russian hacking did influence the election I hardly think we have any room to complain. Both countries are guilty of trying to interfere in the past.

Russia must, at any cost, be the enemy. This is especially true of a strong and independent Russia. Russia’s foreign policy has been one of reason and constraint, proving much more stable and effective than the U.S. policy. This has proved embarrassing to the Establishment, and so the warmongers are beating their drums ever more loudly. It’s long been their strategy to intentionally worsen relations with Russia by portraying them as the evil aggressor, so a Russian hacking movement was considered an opportunity too good to be wasted. The military industrial complex needs to keep the money-making machine rolling. This is a high stakes game and they are willing to risk all to keep it going.

The voters are stupid. They are unable to come right out and say the voters are stupid for choosing Trump over Clinton, but they’d probably love to. Politicians have long thought voters stupid. As it would be stupid of them to say that publicly they did the next best thing – blame Russia. They would have us believe that Russian hacking of emails, and subsequent disclosures by WikiLeaks were the reason for the election loss. They can offer up no proof for this, only lots of suspicion, innuendo, and “fake news”, believing that all voters are stupid enough to buy it.

Putin and Trump are both hated and feared. Why? Because these two are viewed by the Establishment control freaks as rogue players on the world stage. They follow their own script, not the Establishment approved one, and for this they are both hated and feared. Control is slipping and panic is setting in. World upheaval and unrest are real. People want change from worsening life situations. Do Putin and Trump signal a change in world leaders that will continue? There are important European elections coming up this year. What is the Establishment to do? Probably blame Russian hacking if they don’t get the results they want. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Stay tuned, it’s going to get interesting.

Of course, none of this will ever be publicly acknowledged through plain speaking. Consider that they are willing to risk nuclear war, or civil war, to maintain control and achieve their ends. This speaks volumes and none of it good for us. Meaningful dialogue and diplomacy is not in the toolkit, and with their obstinate attitudes the risks have been ever-increasing. We are in a state of perpetual war now. We’ll see where it leads.

 

RESOURCES:

http://www.vocativ.com/388500/election-interference-us-45-countries/

http://www.france24.com/en/20161230-eu-elections-2017-le-pen-fillon-wilders-immigration-france-germany-netherlands

Politics

Re-Directing the Anger Post-Election

So Trump is to be the next president. What a huge surprise as so many didn’t think he could do it. What should be far more alarming than Trump’s win are the resentments and divisions it’s causing between people. Like it or not, Trump was a legitimate candidate, and any who voted for him had every right to do so. As we continue to move farther into the post-election season, it’s important we don’t get stuck in a cycle of hate and re-direct anger towards those who deserve it and away from each other.

The people who voted for Trump had their reasons for doing so, as did those who voted for Clinton. Some voted for a third party, but many people don’t view this as an option. Instead, they believed they had to make a choice and decide who was the lesser of two evils; a truly sad state of affairs. The campaign was ugly and brutal. The main focus for both sides was one of personal attacks and blame with little attention devoted to issues. They certainly did Jerry Springer proud.

So, whose fault was this? It isn’t our fellow citizens, it’s the establishment. These are the choices we were presented with. So why are people continuing to direct their anger towards each other in this post-election season? Where is it written that you must vote the way others want you to? The ballot box has always been regarded as a sacred and important part of how we define our country. Don’t be so quick to abuse it or in future it may come back on you. Harassing those who didn’t vote your way accomplishes nothing.

But undoubtedly, the establishment loves to see this happening. If our anger is directed at one another then it’s not directed at them – where it belongs. This is playing right into their hands, and the talking heads of the mainstream media is complicit in this. They accomplish this by appealing to people’s emotions and avoiding logic by way of misleading and false news. This is not beneficial, and is in fact a dangerous tactic. The more we take out our frustrations and anger on each other and not the establishment, then the less motivated they will be to make any changes. They just sit back and enjoy the show. Is this really the result we want?

Voting may or may not be rigged, but the system surely is. The political parties, corporations, banks, and lobbyists, aided by their mouthpiece the mainstream media, have molded and deformed the system to suit their needs and ignore ours. That’s why the election choices we had weren’t much of a choice at all; but the result was a start. The win for Trump signified, more than anything else, that Americans are fed up with the status quo. Perhaps this will lead to reform and better choices in the future. This is where we should be directing our energies in this post-election season and moving forward.

Real and meaningful reforms will have to be pursued doggedly and forcefully. They will not change or give anything up lightly or willingly. But it’s going to take perseverance and hard work to make it happen, and we can’t do that if we’re divided. You make might not like him, but Trump has won so let’s see where he takes us and how he does. After all, there will be another election four years from now. If we can keep the spotlight and pressure on the establishment, and they see we’re serious and united against their corruption, then hopefully we’ll see better choices next time around. If we allow this division to continue and build, we may see civil war instead.

Politics

Where Would You Like Your Conflict Served?

Ever found yourself eating in a greasy diner – not because you want to – but because it’s the option at hand? The environment is unclean and the menu choices are not very appetizing or healthy. This presents a conflict between the need to eat and the desire to. But since it’s what’s available you cross your fingers, make a choice, and hope for the best. Sounds a lot like our presidential election this year, doesn’t it? Except there is much more at stake than just indigestion or food poisoning.

So how to decide which poor choice to go with at the polls? It’s common practice for lies to be told and campaign promises to be broken, so other factors need to be considered. One important area is the potential for increased future conflict and war, and both candidates show signs of it. The difference between them is where it’s most likely to be played out.

An escalation in international conflict and war under Clinton is highly likely. She has aligned herself with the neoconservative warmongers and in fact doesn’t hide it. She will be an aggressive president pursuing aggressive policies all over the world. Top of the list is Russia. Further and severe deterioration in relations with Russia will occur. We have been pushing and provoking them for quite a while now. Eventually they are going to push back. What then? Assuming they could be easily defeated is a dangerous mindset to have. Such things rarely proceed and play out as people expect.

Nuclear war has been avoided for many decades, but cooler and saner heads in Washington no longer prevail. I cannot help but wonder if mutually assured destruction is turning into self-assured destruction. If Clinton is elected – and this is the most likely outcome – be afraid. Be very afraid. The tension level is going to ratchet up considerably. She is going to push them, and she will push hard.

While Clinton’s penchant for conflict lies abroad, Trump’s  – with the exception of Mexico – lies mostly at home. He is adept at bringing to the surface people’s base emotions. Perhaps because he is so expressive with his that people feel more freedom to vent their own. He likes to stir the pot because he is good at it and he knows it. Stirring the political pot hasn’t been a bad thing because our political system needs shaken up. But I very much fear that this would be his normal mode of operation in domestic matters if he is elected.

Tact and diplomacy don’t seem to be traits Trump possesses. If he does he hides them well. His aggressive rhetorical style has the potential to raise tensions in this country to an extremely uncomfortable level. Of course some of that over the top rhetoric is because it’s campaign season. It always increases during this time. However, in Trump’s case I don’t think it can all be put down to that alone. I think we’ve been getting just a little taste of his true personality. He is good at antagonizing prejudices, thereby undermining efforts of cooperation and negotiation. He could very well be a president of one step forwards, and two steps back.

I realize that this is an oversimplified generalization of both candidates. But when I step back and view them this is what I see. Clinton representing increased international conflict and war, and Trump increased domestic conflict and – who knows – a possible future Civil War. Perhaps I’m wrong. In this case I definitely wouldn’t mind being wrong. In this present environment of worldwide unrest, conflict, and war – anything is possible. Anything is what we should be prepared for.