I crave the opportunity to see an antiestablishment candidate win the election. I would exult in seeing our corruptÂ establishment shattered. So, while I do not like Trump the man (as it would appearÂ he hasÂ never doneÂ anything that didn't entirely serveÂ his own self-interest and pompous ego), I have thoroughly enjoyed seeing him upset establishment Republicans and establishment Democrats alike. (And, yes, they are "alike," so let's just call them "the establishment" because whether they are Republican or Democrat is not relevant; both partiesÂ exist to serve the same rich people and themselves either way.)
I'll even acknowledge that perhaps it takes someone as brazen and blusterous as Trump in order to stand up to such a powerful assemblageÂ of egoists as we have embedded in congress and in the president's administration, which now rules by decree.Â Nearly all of them striveÂ to make sure you have only globalist options to vote for; but their new-world odor is, I'm sure, a stench that rises all the way to heaven.
This derelict congress is a worse evil than either candidate as it continues to sinkÂ the US deeply into debt with no plan or action to right the economy since it first capsized in the waves of theÂ Great Recession. Each party is more worried that the other party will get credit than they are concerned about saving the nation, and there is nothing less patriotic than putting your party before you country.
My desire to see the economy righted and the establishment overturned (peacefully), however, is exactly what makes me cautious about any gold-plated politician who has lived all of his life in the realm of the one percenters and who has defaulted on more grandiose debts than anyone I know.Â Nevertheless, while I have neverÂ liked this particular publicityÂ whore, I'd put up with his relentlessÂ boasting and forgive his audacious past if it takes that kind of brassy, risk-taking adventurer to findÂ someoneÂ with enough spineÂ toÂ stand up to the intimidations of congress. I'm willing to admit that it might take all of that, so whether or not I like him is not important unless it is leading me to see flaws that may mean TrumpÂ is not what he makes himself out to be.
Call a spade a spade even if it trumps everything
Overturning a vast global establishmentÂ is the kind of battle that will take someone with unbelievable tenacity, intelligence, and courage. The opponents are rich, and you can be sure some are willing to kill to keep the status quo that is making them immensely rich (and have killed).
Unfortunately, I have seen often in life that bellicose people are usually nowhere nearÂ as brave as they sound. PeopleÂ like Ike, who was strong in war and humble in attitude, are usually the ones with real courage. It is not usually the most blustery people who have the deepest strength to carry through withÂ the right thing for the right reasons, regardless of cost to themselves.
Trump is aptly named for how often he blows his own horn in order to create his own image; but his actions show heÂ backed out of previous presidential races when it was clear they weren't going to be an easy win after getting lots of publicity for teasing people with the possibility that he'd run.Â He has also backed out of many a business deals when things got rough, rather than push forward to try to make things work.
You can do that in business through bankruptcy, but you don't have the option when you are president and things are not going your way; and a triumphantÂ TrumpÂ is guaranteed to have a congress that does not go his way (unless he capitulates to the Republican side â¦ as he now appears to be doing with every decision he makes).
Is Donald Trump a Trojan Horse?
Trump looks like victoryÂ to us antiestablishment voters on the outside, but what lurksÂ inside of this man? Is he as hollow as his mouth is big? (You could land an airliner in that thingÂ and still have room to park the USS Nimitz.) The reservations I'm going to express aboutÂ Trump in this short series this week areÂ based solely onÂ his political actions, not on the brassy stuff that I personally dislike. That's why I cleared those concerns out of the way first to make it clear that I acknowledge that a huge ego could be what it takes to combat the establishment.
Much to my disappointment, Trump'sÂ actions run completely opposite ofÂ his words every time we see him make an actual political decision.Â While TrumpÂ sounds so bold in his political incorrectness that I might be inclined to think as many others do that he was actually trying to throw the election by being as unlikable to the majority as he can be, I know and he knows (and you do, too) there are a lot of angry people who need someone to voice their anger.
TrumpÂ knowsÂ he can tap intoÂ a huge vault of anger; and, as a media mogul himself, he knows better than anyone how to play the media for free publicity by being outrageous â something for which he's always had a near whackyÂ knack. We've seen him do it for years, even when he was not running for office or when he ran and quit. He's done it to keep the Trump name, as a brand, always in the media, always on the public mind, always associated with "greatness" and "wealth" because that is the kind of real estate he develops and sells. He caters to the wealthy. That's his brand, and nothing could give it more cache than the presidency of the United States.
While those are my reservations, it's his latest political actions that concern me. In the few places where we have seen Trump make actual political decisions so far, his choices have been 100% pro-establishment as I pointed out in a recentÂ article titled "Whirled Politics: Would you rather be Trumped or Pillaried?" I wished very much to see something different than what I am seeing.
From Trump'sÂ choice of a 180-proofÂ neocon vice presidential candidate to an embeddedÂ Goldman-Sachs campaign financial manager to the Heritage Foundation's dream team of budget advisors he assembled, TrumpÂ has selectedÂ people who whollyÂ embody the establishment. Everything these people have ever done or said has been in support of the Wall StreetÂ one-percenters, in support of financial deregulation, and, for the most part, in support of the military-industrial complex at the cost of any debt imaginable. The team he creates says everything about where he intends to head.
To be clear, I am for a strong military and not against all wars. I believed and still do believe that going to war in Afghanistan was right and justifiable, butÂ it was stupid later on to divert available resources from AfghanistanÂ to Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11 nor with sponsoring terror against the US nor with developing weapons of mass destruction. We should have spent that money winning the peace in Afghanistan by building something good there in the place of what we tore down. Instead, we created a power vacuum in the now disintegrated nation or Iraq, whichÂ is rife with internal rivalries and, so, became the ideal incubator for ISIS. That is exactly the kind of result I told friendsÂ I feared when I first heard King George Bush II wantingÂ to engage Iraq in a war.
I think neocons have taken us intoÂ ill-conceived, unjust, pre-emptive wars aimed at recreating the world in our image. We have slaughtered hundreds of thousands of unseen people who never raised a finger against us and most likely never would have in wars thatÂ have been monstrousÂ failures. After Iraq, we backed a coup in Crimea, a civil war in Libya, and seem to be shooting ourselves in the foot in Syria because we've returned to the Vietnam practice of fighting wars from Washington. (That, however, is due to Obama and his ilk, not due to the neocons.) We've now got war everywhere.
If we think the people who remain alive in those countries are going to thank us for killing their brothers and sisters or sons and daughters or their fathers and mothers in order to save them from a single despot, we are sadly and deeply self-deluded. We may think the despot was their deepest concern; however, as with all people, it turns out family is first. We have created nations filled with people who hate us just because weÂ think we know best what government is good for them (and, frankly, for oil and the economic gain that fighting brings us).
Politicians like Killary and Trump's VP, Pence, backed these warsÂ 100% and have spent a nation's ransom trying to force change uponÂ a world that has no intention of changing â a world that,Â if it did becomeÂ democratic, would use its vote to declare war onÂ us for killing theirÂ brothers and sisters. Hillary started some of these wars herselfÂ (at least, initiated our involvement in them). Pence strongly advocated for every one.
Power-drunkÂ politicians in both partiesÂ support these missions in orderÂ to control the world and its wealth, for most of themÂ are globalists and elitists at heart who serve Wall Street. The rest are misguided fools whose minds have been consumed by their own dogma. They vote for these wars because numerous American corporations get wealthy making equipment to replace the machinery that gets blown up; they get wealthy pumping fuel into the engines and making new tires to replace rubber that is too worn to meet the road. The more of that equipment weÂ burn through, the more theyÂ can get the government to pay to replace it.
These politicians are owned by theÂ corporations that make this hardware. The best of them believe that, by serving those corporations, they are serving the American economy; the worst of them are courtesans who simply love to be wined and dined and admired.
And why do I point all that out? Because these are the people Trump is assembling has his leadership team.Â So, ifÂ you think Trump is any threat to the establishment, you may be ridingÂ a Trojan horse. As soon as I learned that Trump chose Larry Kudlow and Steven Moore to be his Senior Economic Advisors, I feared he was sellingÂ out to the establishment in order win Republican support (and probablyÂ because Trump is a big-idea man who always looks to others to come up with the particulars that will make a big idea work, but he's picked the wrong others).
I have a file full or articles on Kudlow that I keep in my "Idiot Box" where I store the stupid things economists and Wall Street moguls say. Larry is soon to become (again) an article of his own.
That is the team assembled inside the Trump horse. On the outside, it is all Trump, brazen and shiny and bold. On the inside, it is entirelyÂ Wall-StreetÂ warriors and neocon combatants. In the next article in this series, I'll dig intoÂ the Kudlow-Moore tax plan which gives us the major components of Trump's action plan in order to show how deeply establishment Trump's plan is in its debt-based economic expansion and itsÂ retreaded, spiffed-up, establishmentÂ ideas that got us where we are today.
Be careful that you don't believe something just because you want to believe it so badly. That is how the citizens of Troy were conquered in the Trojan war. I'd love to have an anti-establishment candidate roll in, too. Sadly, I don't think I do. The time to hold Trump to task is now, not after the establishmentÂ makeover turnsÂ him into their Trojan Trump card, but while they are trying so that they don't succeed.
The brazenly boisterous, blusteringly bellicose, trumpeting Trump. Who is the man behind that mighty mouth?
If there is one thing certain about Trump it is that he stirs up conversations all over the globe, but is heÂ anything more than a grand snake-oil salesman? Has he ever stoodÂ for or served anything greaterÂ than himself? Does he exemplify integrity of leadership in the deals heÂ makes, or does he just pursueÂ whatever course is expedient at the time, regardless of how selfish or wrong? Does he own his failures or blame them on others? Does he play by the rules as he demands impoverished immigrants do or treat rules as inconveniences to be ignored Â by the wealthy when they go against his own wealth building? Does he care at all about whom he hurts or ever even stop to think about it? IsÂ he a man who is willing to speak out against stupid political correctness, regardless of personalÂ cost, or just an opportunist whoÂ loves to hear himself and who knows how to tap into public rageÂ as a potent force for his own purposes? Is he force or farce? Is he more interested in building a brand or in building a nation?.