What can I say about the outcome of the election in the United States? Apart from the fact that given the Americans' acute dilemma of having had to choose between the lesser of two evils (as a direct result from their apathy and placid complacency), what else but a catastrophe could we expect? For whatever has been said, a lesser evil is still evil. Period. Never mind from which appropriate or inappropriate body orifice the lies and rubbish come out, for that matter.
If only the self-righteous (not necessarily toilet trained) judgemental prisses, otherwise professing tolerance and objectivity, could get their heads out of the inappropriate place they keep it and stop mocking and calling all Americans morons and other rude, derogatory names, arguing that's what they deserve. Whilst there is, of course, some truth in all that, these people are mainly hopeless ignorant gullible victims struggling for a way out.
Besides, this is beyond the scope of the American political context as the whole world is also directly and greatly concerned. Especially since we'll soon have to face the same challenge over here, in France, in a few months' time. Not much to brag out about. Really. My late great-uncle Charley, a World War II G.I. who lived the rest of his life beneath these skies without ever seeing his homeland again, must be turning over in his grave. Not just he, for sure.
Ey@elWell, this appropriately is the presidential palace in Estonia, in the capital Tallinn where I'm speaking this coming weekend. Like all over the world today, the conversations here have been about the happenings in the United States — in another presidential palace, if you like, called the White House — and who is the new president.
And there are many ways of looking at this result today.
One is that more than 300 millions people in America were given the choice (in my view anyway) between a catastrophe and a disaster. And that says something massive about the nature of the political system that claims that it represents the interests of the people and the choices of the people. It's not difficult to manipulate choice if you control what those choices are going to be. In this case, it was Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.
If we call Clinton (I think appropriately) the catastrophe, then America has dodged the bullet in that sense today and literally so. Because one thing for sure is that if Clinton had won the presidency, then America and the Western world was almost certainly going to war with Russia. That might still happen, but it was a certainty if she'd had come to power. And this is what the demonisation of Russia and the build-up of forces along the Russian border (NATO's forces) have been all about.
Instead, a majority of those who voted have chosen Donald Trump. And the question is why? There are some positive expressions of that, even though I think that Trump will be a disaster and I think that those who put their faith in Trump are going to be deeply disappointed with what happens during in his time in the White House. However, there are some positive things about this which reflect something that's happening — and I'm seeing it on this world tour all over the world (we saw it with Brexit in the United Kingdom) — and that is a change — a very obvious change in increasing sways of the collective human psyche, which is looking at the world anew and rejecting the political establishment.
Now, I don't think for a second that Donald Trump is an outsider. But that is irrelevant to the fact that he was perceived by vast numbers of people to be an outsider — to be someone who was challenging the establishment, who, in the phrase that was so often used, “was draining the swamp”.
So, to look at why this result happened, we need to look at perceptions. Because from perceptions come actions like how you vote. So we had the perception (and it was an absolutely correct one quite obviously and demonstrably) that Hillary Cliton was establishment to her DNA as her whole political career is based on corruption, manipulation and merciless destruction of opponents (I mean Bernie Sanders's recent case). And therefore, she was always going to be a really, really difficult sell. And if she'd had been against almost anyone except Donald Trump in terms of candidate that people saw in anyway positive, then she would have lost by an even greater margin.
So, on one side, you've got the perception of Clinton as an establishment clone to her core and therefore it was always a difficult sell even in normal times. But these are not normal times. These are changing times. She proved to be an impossible sell when the shift in the psyche is happening where people are rejecting the political class and the political establishment that's dictated the direction of the world and the fine details of people's lives for so long.
So it's not so much what Donald Trump is that brought this about, it is what so many people perceived him to be, which is an outsider of the system.
And the outcome of this election mirrors, in terms of, I think, the motivations behind it, what happened with Brexit in the United Kingdom where, again, there was a massive rejection of the political class and the political establishment, virtually the entirety of which was urging people with threats of dire consequences to stay in the EU. We are in changing times and while I don't think for a minute that Donald Trump is going to deliver what so many people thought he was going to deliver — put that aside and look at the reasons for why he attracted so much support.
Yes, a significant amount would have been support for Donald Trump because he wasn't Hillary Clinton and they had been given the choice of the two. And again, a significant part of Clinton's votes — which states an even bigger statement about her given the votes she got — was because she wasn't Donald Trump.
It was an extraordinary — almost culmination — of this political stitch-up that the motivation of so many was to vote against the person they liked the least. However, it's also an expression of this gathering and ever-gathering rejection of the political establishment which Trump was perceived to be a vehicle for expressing.
Where does it go from here?
Well, it depends where Donald Trump goes from here and how much he himself becomes in office just another clone of the political establishment. I think people are going to be disappointed and I hope that, should that happen, that people will go on to the next stage of this awakening. And that's to realise that the political system itself, no matter how you perceive the person you put in office to be, is the problem. The way society is structured, the way it is dictated to by the hidden hand — the hidden network that ultimately controls these people whether they're Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton or whoever else.
And we have to go to the next stage of the awakening to the world and realise that it's not the political system that's going to change anything. It's the vast majority ceasing to co-operate with the actions of the few and the dictates of the few whether they are one party or the other party — whether they are Clinton or Trump or Bush or Obama or whoever. Because the few (what's called the political class, the political establishment, the financial class, the financial establishment) can only dictate to the vast majority because the vast majority co-operate with the diktats and the laws imposed by the few.
When we stop co-operating with laws that are unjust — with laws that are simply designed to take our freedoms away, designed to control our lives and what we can do and what we can't do in terms of free choice and free thought. When we stop co-operating with them and say: “We're not doing it! No, we're not abiding by that. We're not gonna let you build a prison and we put the bricks together, thank you very much. We're not doing it!”
If someone comes out of the White House (Clinton or Trump or anybody else) or out of Downing Street and said we had a meeting and decided this is what's gonna happen, it only happens if people (the vast majority) say: “Well, we'd better do it, it's the law.” Well, that means whoever (the tiny few) who dictates the laws, whatever they may be, impose their will on the vast majority.
This is the next stage of awakening to how the world works. Not seeing some person as an outsider who's gonna come and change everything. I think we're going to see in coming months that it's not the case in terms of what people think will happen. But to realise the only way to stop the few imposing their will on the many is for the many to stop co-operating with the few and the dictates and the laws, the rules and regulations of the few where they are specifically designed to destroy free thought, free expression and freedom of choice.
Well, I can say people are going to be disappointed with what follows on.
This is another significant expression that people have had enough. It's like a primal scream, a cry for help, a scream of frustration that was expressed through this vote for Trump. A scream of frustration at having no one to listen to to you. Having no one to think about your interest when they're stitching up the world. And that's a good thing. But there are many stages I would suggest for this to go yet. And one of them is that we don't think that any person through the political system is gonna change the world for the better. Because WE have to do that. And we have to do that TOGETHER.
Original text by DAVID ICKE
transcribed by EY@EL
© La Pensine Mutine. All rights reserved. Reproduction prohibited.
FR
