President Trump & the Establishment (Part 2)

Terry Melanson

Webmaster/editor of Conspiracy Archive; author of Perfectibilists: the 18th Century Bavarian Order of the Illuminati.

You may also like...

8 Responses

  1. paul says:

    You write with great fluidity and although you exhibit faux neutrality, great praise must be given for your efforts to be neutral. The issue for me lies in the fact, you don’t know Donald Trump, so you and everyone else can only allude to conspiracy which simultaneously blocks any hope of progression for yourself as it keeps you bogged down in the conspiracy myre. I love the fact a ego maniac is in charge as most great leaders are, Jesus is the greatest narcissist ever, when you apply rational perspective. (Not linking the two) it really depends on what purpose lies in the design, you mention and others the 1% well what about the percentage directly underneath the 1% the 2,3, 4,5,6, 7% who are still more astronomically richer and more powerful than the rest. The ones who receive no media or conspiracist attention. It all becomes skewed for me, when the usual suspects are rolled out. For me having conducted my own research into Trump I can confidently say, DT is genuine, he is also aware of outside opinion but he is in the best years of his life and wants his grandchildren to have the opportunities afforded to him in his life. I know thats boring and not conspiracist enough but with the 2034 agenda set for a cashless society, it really takes on a different outlook for these billionaires on a personal level, yes he is aware HRC eats childrens DMT, yes he supported her previously, in business you dine with the devil with a smile on your face, if its assures the devils gaze is not upon you. If we constantly live in pseudoo they are out to get us state, then that is exactly what will happen. If conspiracy theorists are genuinely on the publics side they have to work with Trump to bring to light the evil surrounding America & the world not become polarised by having to be proved right on truly wild assumptions when you havent and will never have the true perspective of what is really going on. Great writer though.

    • Will B. says:

      “Faux neutrality”? No, I really am aspiring to be objective here. The point I am trying to get across, however, is that even though Trump really is working against key parts of the liberal internationalist (or “liberal cosmopolitan” order according to the hacks at Vox) program, the fundamental problem is that he is a rich man, he inherited his wealth, and he still reflects the interests of inherited wealth. This is reflected in key parts of his agenda, the tax cuts for the rich, renovating Obamacare to make it harder for low-income earners, and the re-deregulation of the financial industry. He has taken a step away from free trade, but the rest of his foreign policy seems incoherent, a jumbled mess of anti-interventionist rhetoric undermined by a growing US military presence in Syria, sabre-rattling against Iran, and giving Israel what it wants.

      But in examining Trump we have contemplate two seemingly distinct, but closely interrelated factors: the proclaimed agenda and the ability of said proclaimer to carry it out. The agenda, as I have intimated, is compromised by Trump’s class interests. He can’t help being rich and inconsiderate and obsessed with his brand. Despite his proclaimations he really doesn’t care about the people of “Fly Over Country”, he loves their adulation and their votes, but he is indifferent to their fate. On the latter question the shallowness of Trump’s thought processes, his fixation on always winning, of responding to all and any slights against him, that he can be manipulated on some issues, and the fact he has appointed a mish-mash of plutocrats, ex-military and some insiders into his government, with his first priority being loyalty, casts doubt on his ability to achieve anything. An erratic boss overseeing constantly warring subordinates is not a recipe for success.

      The problem with backing Trump is that he is not entirely what he seems. Not necessarily because of his dealings with the Clintons – which I presented not as an argument but as an example of the theories questioning his outsider status – but because of the fact of his plutocracy. Then there is presence of Bannon and Conway (courtesy of the Mercers) in his campaign at a critical point and now in the White House in critical positions shows he can be bought, by another billionaire! Part Three, due very shortly will explain.

  2. paul says:

    Thanks for reply, my faux neutrality comment lies in the clear fact there is no positive slant on your piece from pro trumpists so a reader can only arrive at faux neutrality.

    In my honest opinion, we as a society are on the edge of self destruction, I say this not lightly but genuinely, Trump regardless if he is only squeezing the carcass out of the terminally ill society. If it buys clever, concerned and exceptional individuals like you an extra 50 years or so to figure all this out and rectify it then im all in and tbh that is why trump carries the lets face it. The poor white vote, its not because they are dumb, stupid or deplorable its that they haven’t gave up on you figuring out a solution, its academia who have given up on them.

    The travel ban is extraordinary to me. How can it be racist? When the accepted position is we are all one nation under god. So once accepted the slant of the argument must change. As its not racism but a clear rejection of Multiculturalism as it stands currently. Though polticans and media and conspiracy theorists ramp up the racism undertones as it deflects away from the real problem.

    We as a society must apply the plain meaning rule and ask for clear definitions from our courts and congress, as without plain meaning a society is at the wim of assumptions of the individual.

    • Will B. says:

      “Faux” means fake. I think that is misapplied in this case. After the anti-Trump epigraphs, the first paragraph of the article opens with quotes from those who take Trump at his word and believe him to really be the outsider he campaigned as. Given that the outsider credentials of countless other presidential contenders have been contested and found wanting, I fail to see why should Trump be exempt from such consideration.

      Yes, Trump was the only candidate who ran against the real problems. He was the man who seized the moment, but his conduct whilst in office shows he is probably not the man who can fix things.

      The globalization genie cannot be put back into its bottle quite so easily as it seems…

  3. paul says:

    No it can’t and it certainly won’t while attitudes remain fixed on conduct, only though as it would appear, selectively. There lies the problem, if people are waiting to wrestle back control back into the people’s hands then the people will have to become less uppity and selective when it comes to opportunities presenting themselves and who represents the opportunities. Smacks a bit of virtue signalling from the very people who export the claim of wanting to free humanity does it not?

    The common ground is there to support Trump, the common good, the common sense is crying “Massive beachhead folks” Trump is a showman he will do whatever is necessary to carry a populus. Instead we are allowing the very people who have created this Leviticus Nightmare of the current climate, to cover up the very obvious fact that if people stop holding Donald Trump to account for every perceived worry they have, we the people would be ensuring we hold him accountable for implementing a lot of good stuff because the major flaw in populism is popularity. Wouldn’t it be great to have a public president who is genuinely petrified of public opinion? Trump is openly claiming to be exactly that, but while you hold him to account for his conduct you almost willingly hand back your opportunity to change everything.

    • Will B. says:

      Trump may seem to represent such an opportunity, but when a lot of power is concentrated in a one position and person i.e. POTUS, the personality and knowledge of that person can count a lot towards things being able be done. When you have an erratic, intellectually shallow showman, whose first concern is what he can say as opposed to what can he do to provide him the love and adulation he clearly craves, the options do not look so good. Trump is not a deep thinker, he holds grudges, he values loyalty, but is not particularly ideological. People hoping for change at the bottom of the pile are likely to find themselves massively shortchanged, while those at the top, the sort of people Trump wanted in his Cabinet (any Joe Sixpacks in there?), the 0.01 percent, will get the breaks they really don’t need. Hillary represented more of the same globalist consensus, just with a different package. Trump represented a change, but more of a step sideways into another darker corner of the plutocracy, one that the Mercers and Koch brothers had been reshaping through massive political donations and funding for various think-tanks and foundations. The Mercers, through Bannon and Conway, have a direct line to the White House; the Koch brothers also have a direct line through Pence and other former supplicants. It’s not about being “uppity”, it’s about not following false gods or prophets. Many other countries have been in this place before, sought change, there was a revolution and they got something much worse…

  4. Eduardo Andre says:

    Excellent text, part 1 and 2, waiting for part 3, the sooner the better!

    The point of Trump representing the triumph of na elite faction is a good one. It seems the same is going on in UK, regarding the BREXIT. The poor non-metropolitan working class vote, as your (I’m a Foreigner writing from abroad) rust belt somehow matched the view of an antiglobalist elite faction. Perhaps, this struggle among elite factions about the trends of society is related only with money (old business, industrial sectors, against financial, tech, sectors), which are being eaten up by foreign competition,; maybe this is due to more a nationalistic or even conservative way-of-life view, part of the 1% trying to defend values they felt threatened by the globalization drive.

    But no doubt, in a political sense, he is an outsider, despite being a millionaire. It’s clear, watching from outside, the estabilshment is moving to impeach him. The degree of vitriol is amazing by mainstream media. I’ve never seen this in my life and I’m almost 50 and live in Brazil, a country where politic turmoil is seasonal.

    If we study roman history, you learn of the many aristocrats who sided with the Populares (the political faction which seek the reformation of the Roman Republic, by the rule of the assembly of the people above the Senate, andopening it for all citizens). Of course, I1m not comparing Trump with Marius or Caesar. The only thing in which Trump can compare with them is their EGO. He lacks the political qualities to propose and lead a reform, much less a revolution movement. Unfortunately.

    Strained with both parties, he shall put himself in a position of a Ceasarist President, having to appeal directly to the people to govern. This was a common feature in Latin American History, but, of course, not possible in US Constitutional regime, and, as far as I know, never happened there. If one becomes presidente thru the system, one should govern by the rules of the system or it will eat him alive.

    Trump loose time and energy with insignificant themes like building a “big, big wall” or moving the capital city of Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalém. He already lost in busting Obamacare in the first months! Much more importante is the end of NAFTA which will be a real blow in globalization , but, when he tries his already shrinking political strenght will be gone.

    He, as POTUS, could challenge the Deep State, and, last but not the least. the surveillance state, but, it’s obvious, he will not manage to, provided that he really wants to do that.

    Again, thank you for the text, this website is great, treats the subject in a very scientifical approach, cross checking facts. I guess the predudice against the word “conspiracy” prevents many enlighted people to read and offer valuable comments.

    I apologize to you and all readers for my english language mistakes, not my native language.

    • Will B. says:

      Part 3 is coming. Just needs some reordering as yet more information floods in, but the picture is becoming a little more clearer about what is happening.

      But Trump, at least the America Firsters who support him and occupy key positions in his administration represent a new faction. They are mainly backed by the Mercers. There are other, more Establishment Republicans also occupying many positions in the Trump Administration, some ironically brought in through the recommendation of Trump’s son-in-law, the ubiquitous Jared Kushner (there’s quite a few people in this category such as Cohn and Powell), which represents a clever play on the loyalty card. The problem is that this is a battle within the ruling class; it represents the entrenchment of plutocracy, rather than its demise. With a billionaire at the helm and with others in his Cabinet, and their proxies spread throughout key positions, it takes the form of plutocratic direct rule.

      Trump does not represent a defeat for those unrepresentative elites he claimed had fatally compromised democracy, but rather the apotheosis of elite rule. There are new faces, even a promise of a new program, and some of it is new, but in practice it is a government for and by the very, very rich for the very, very rich…

Leave a Reply to Eduardo Andre Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *