Wednesday, November 9, 2016

Nov. 9: Trump? It doesn't matter.

Normally, Thursday is a day off for the blog. But this Thursday (tomorrow as I write this), it will appear, and be devoted to Remembrance Day for those who died in our wars. Some people will not like it.
_______________________________________________________________________________
And Trump's won. What's to say? So far, he has no policies of any worth. Neither did Clinton. Both are disasters and, thanks to a combination of greed and ignorance, U.S. democracy has come, not to a turning point, but to the end of the road.
_______________________________________________________________________________
As usual, there's nothing in the irving press. Well, there is an intiguing story that the head of a 'think tank' on energy policy has been hired by Ottawa to revamp the National Energy Board. The irving press didn't make any effort to find out what "think tank" means in this case.

Most think tanks are propaganda fronts set up by big business. This one is called the New Brunswick Energy Institute. It  has a checkered past  (to say the least) and, given the number of research fellows, it has produced remarkably little.
This all looks very much like the dirty tricks department of our federal government and the oil business at work.
_________________________________________________________________________________
It would be nice if the irving press were to publish some articles about agriculture chemicals like glysophate. Insead, it prefers to ignore the question altogether.

http://truepublica.org.uk/global/agrochemicals-cesspool-corruption/
__________________________________________________________________________________
Did Trump win the election? Or did the Democrats lose it? I suspect it was the latter. Trump really had nothing to offer but anger. Democrats were a prime group to be angry at.  
       
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/11/09/why-trump-won-why-clinton-lost/

So what will happen when it becomes obvious that Trump has nothing to offer, either? I'll deal with that at the end of this blog.
_______________________________________________________________________________
And here's a surprising look at who supported Trump. It wasn't really the angry poor and downtrodden. Or, at least, that is an over-simplified reading. The proportion of white, wealthy and educated who voted for Trump was high. That means the white, wealthy, and educated in the U.S. see problems in the society - but don't have a clue how to deal with them. Any real answer would, I suspect, be seen as unAmerican.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/09/white-voters-victory-donald-trump-exit-polls
________________________________________________________________________
The following article is long - and it has no connection to the U.S. election.   (The latter point is a good reason to read it because most election reactions are premature, anyway.) This article is really about who we think we are - and who we aren't.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/09/western-civilisation-appiah-reith-lecture
__________________________________________________________________________________
Canada's immigration officers were swamped last night with calls from Americans who want to move to Canada. That's nice - maybe. But I'm not sure I would look forward to a Canada populated by the kind of people who would vote for either Trump or Clinton.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/09/canadas-immigration-website-crashes-as-donald-trumps-us-election-lead-grows
________________________________________________________________________
Here is one of the few, worthwhile articles on Donald Trump. He is not a change. He is the way American capitalist 'democracy' works and has worked for many, many years. The writer uses Trump's empire-building foray into Scotland as an example of how democracy has been subverted all over the world by capitalism - and how Trump is just a variation on that theme.

http://www.countercurrents.org/2016/11/09/congratulations-america-have-you-just-been-trumped/
__________________________________________________________________________________
An item little mentioned in western news is that Russians are suffering from severe economic sanctions imposed by the U.S. Economic sanctions cause severe hardship, and are a favourite tool of U.S. governments to use against countries that don't roll over and play dead.

http://www.countercurrents.org/2016/11/08/at-risk-of-being-dupes/
________________________________________________________________________________
What is disappointing so far as I go through the day's news is the failure of any news medium to talk about the role of news media in this - or any other - election. The American people cannot pick a worthwhile leader because their news media keep them in ignorance of what their choices are or could be. That ignorance is what produced two leaders are are not much different from each other. Americans (and Canadians and most others) don't have a clue what the economic, political and social options are. So they are incapable of making a logical choice between leaders.

In the same way, they are raised in a myth about who they are and what they are. The only world they know is a world of constant propaganda.

The result is that even the angriest Americans simply went for a president who is not very different from the ones who have preceded him since 1776. They have all represented the monied - from cotton planters to clothing and mining millionaires to weapons makers.
________________________________________________________________________
Largely unnoticed, the U.S. is planning mass troop movements to threaten Russia. The reason given is cute. You know what those evil Russian are doing? Well...according to 'western sources', they are building up Russia's defences. Isn't that a terrible thing to do?

The U.S. army says it will take 180  days to deploy the massive force it intends to use. 180 days. In that time, there will be a relatively small force of Canadian and other troops in position near the Russian border. And how long would they last if a war broke out in that 180 days?

Two to ten days.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article45809.htm
______________________________________________________________________________
Here's another story the irving press hasn't given much of a damn about.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/11/08/standing-rock-and-imperialism-itself/
__________________________________________________________________________________
Here's another war the irving press doesn't give much of a damn about.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article45805.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
The informationi below has been known for a very long time. But western news media have played D and D with it. (sorry, deaf and dumb.)

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article45805.htm
_______________________________________________________________________________
Here's an article   by an authority on environment. But we don't need him. We have Mr. Irving who has a degree in .....?     He'll tell us what to think.

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/david-suzuki/2016/11/extinction-crisis-signals-its-time-to-change-course
______________________________________________________________________________
Some things won't change at all in the Trump presidency.

https://theintercept.com/2016/11/08/trump-transition-lobbyists/
______________________________________________________________________________
Britain and the U.S. are remarkably alike - in the worst, possible ways.

http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2016/831-flagship-of-fearmongering-the-guardian-mi5-and-state-propaganda.html
_____________________________________________________________________________
Haaretz has nothing different from most papers on the Trump election. And Russia Today is little different from western papers on the election. In fact, none of the news media, corporate or alternate, have shown much capacity for thought in dealing with the American election.

None made much of Trump's only coherent policy plank - the wish to come to a peaceful settlement with Russia and, presumably, of China. Since the alternative to such a peaceful settlement is almost certainly nuclear war, one would think this deserved some attention. But it was rarely mentioned. Nor am I sure that such a settlement would work in the long run.

The rise of capitalism has given us a political and economic system that is rooted in what its advocates call competition - but which is really nothing more than old-fashioned greed. That has  given us expoitation of ourselves, profound corruption in our governments, and an almost constant state of war  to increase profits.

It's not a system for people. It's a system for greed.

That's very obvious in the U.S. But it's also obvious in Canada, Britain, France - and it's also the system in Russia and China. Nor is there any reason to believe the wealthy of China and Russia are less greedy and less dismissive of human life than ours are. Nor is there any reason to believe that Trump or Clinton would be a change.

Capitalism  has been the cause of almost all wars in the last  three centuries and more. It has been the cause of millions of dead, many more millions of displaced and miserable lives. It has been the cause of mass torture - carried out by the nicest people. It is the cause of the rise of secret police who spy on all of us in the'free' world.

 It is  the cause of the threat, whether by  environmental destruction or nuclear war, to destroy the whole planet.

Yesterday's election has made not the slightest change in all that. The problem isn't us or Muslims or latinos. It's us and the US and Britain and Russia and China. The problems is an economic system that just naturally corrupts.

We have created and we celebrate a world that is morally bankrupt. And yesterday's election changes nothing.
_________________________________________________________________________________

2 comments:

  1. Mr, Decarie, would you please name a country that actually gets it right for it's people "first". And, would you list other countries with ratings.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Scandinavian countries seem to get it right. Cuba got it as right as it could, though severely hampered by American hostility and trade sanctins. Britain appeared to be getting it right into the 1950s and 60s' but has since blown it in a big way. Canada was doing it right for a time (If slowly) - but really blew it with and after Mulroney.
    China has come a long way - much of that because of the severity of the problem in China. It has come a long way in the last twenty years or so - though I'm not sure it can sustain that, and it still has some way to go.
    Generally, I would put the Scandinavians as the ones with the best rankings. But it's hard to set ranking because the scale of the challenges can be bigger and more complex is some cases than others. to modernize China is a hell of a lot more difficult than modernizing Sweden.

    ReplyDelete