Joshua Tartakovsky, 1 April 2006
1. The American middle class is vanishing. Transnational corporations are moving overseas for cheaper labor. Who supports protecting the economy and who supports “free-trade” which means Mexicans will be producing goods, not Americans? Who supports American workers and miners?
Trump supports protectionism. He wants to bring jobs back to America. He wants to tax imports so it will not be worth it for American companies to turn against American workers and move to Asia or Mexico.
Hillary does not. She supports transnational corporations and “free-trade” agreements. She works for the corporations not the American people. She is a slave of the military-industrial complex. No wonder that the corporate liberal media, and papers as the Financial Times and the Economiststrongly dislike Trump. Trump is for the American worker, first and foremost. They are for the American corporations, which is not the same. These American corporations moved overseas.
Also, when did Hillary utter a word about the dying middle class? Not since 2008 when she was competing against Obama (thanks Navid Nasr for the reference). I forgot that it’s taboo to mention the “M” word. The same applies for white poverty including rural poverty, which Bernie Sanders thinks does not exist as if ghettos can’t take on many forms. Bernie Sanders arrogantly denied. Denied. After all, he is from New England so what does he know about rural America?Poor whites must be trash and cannot possibly suffer from poverty. That the American Dream is dying is another forbidden truth.
2. Are all human lives precious? Or are American lives more precious than others? Do #GlobalLivesMatter?
Liberals would argue that all lives are precious. They would argue that Conservatives and Republicans are racists and that they look down at Blacks and Muslims. They point an accusing finger at Southern Conservatives and claim they support slavery.
But Hillary is not only to be faulted for causing the death of Ambassador Stevens and four other Americans at the Embassy in Benghazi. (Indeed, Benghazi veterans support Trump for a reason). She destroyed Libya and turned it over to the Islamic State and al Qaeda. She then handed over Gaddafi’s weapons to Syrian jihadists.
Libya is in an awful state today and most Libyans wish Gaddafi was not murdered. Tens of thousands were killed after Hillary said “we came, we saw, he died.” Hillary also supported the war in Iraq. Jihadists are now in control in large parts of Syria thanks to weapons they got from Gaddafi’s arsenal. But all that is OK. Lives matter only inside US borders. A president can be black or say she cares about minority rights while she arms jihadists in Syria who massacre Christian communities.
Trump didn’t kill anyone. But he is not politically correct. Which leads us to the next question, a rhetorical one.
3. Is it true that in today’s America, one who is not PC but has not killed anyone is demonized, but one who is PC but has the blood of tens of thousands on her hands is OK? If so, why don’t we have a more equitable system? Why don’t courts let murderers go and punish only slanderers? Or is there a different standard for politicians than for us ordinary Americans?
Trump opposes the wars in Libya, Iraq and Syria. He opposes NATO – the US-led international killing machine. But he got it wrong. It’s acceptable in America to support jihadists in the Middle East. It’s acceptable to destroy Serbia, Iraq, Libya and Syria. But it is not acceptable to oppose migration into America when jobs are scarce or when there is a threat of terrorism on American soil.
One can disagree with Trump and find some words at a bad taste, but Trump is not a warmonger.
Even if he becomes one after elected, although he cannot be bought, many countries will revolt and the NATO alliance will probably fall apart. It is hard to see people in the UK, France, or Germany, agreeing for a war led by Trump.
Trump made a big mistake which is why he is despised by the media and its mind-numbed liberal groupies who repeat what they read in the New York Times but do not understand global realities or believe that all lives matter. He didn’t realize that not being PC is nowadays illegitimate but being a warmonger is fine. Apparently, it seems that liberals are interested more in feeling better about themselves while they support slaughter around the world.
4. Trump is accused of supporting KKK. Besides the fact that even if he did, which he does not, KKK killed a negligible number of people in comparison to Madam Secretary, was the South really any better than the North during the Civil War? And does being progressive mean anything when the US itself was founded on the genocide of the Native Americans and has been practicing imperialism abroad ever since, including in its own backyard in Latin America?
It is true that white liberals like to think they are better than the primitive southerners. After all, many white liberals love to believe they are morally superior and that they come from the camp that abolished slavery. They uphold Lincoln as a model.
But what was the Civil War all about? Was it really about the altruistic abolition of slavery?
The civil war was more about the South upholding the Constitution and separating itself from the Federal Government while Lincoln had no legal right to invade the South.
But what about slavery?
In his book, U.S. Latin America Policy: Change or Continuity (Editorial Capitan San Luis, Havana 2015), Cuban political scientist Abel Enrique Gonzales Santamaria writes (my emphasis added):
[…] internal contradictions mounted between the northern capitalist, bourgeois and manufacture oriented states and the southern aristocratic, agricultural and slave states. The landed aristocracy in the South opposed the bourgeois protectionist policies in the North that encouraged manufacture and advocated slave work vis-à-vis paid free workers. The southern planters favored territorial expansion and kept striving to conquer new areas and profit from their agricultural exploitation. These contradictions deepened to the point where a civil war broke out that lasted four years and held back for some time the expansionist drive beyond the country’s borders. (p. 78)
He goes on to say:
Actually, the North and the South were economically interdependent. One side needed the raw material for its industry while the other required industrial production to develop agriculture. The North demanded cheap raw material to keep its industrial productions competitive, mainly with respect to Great Britain. The metropolis, still the main world economic power, kept control over the cotton, sugar and tobacco plantations in the South. (p. 83)
The war was to a large degree over the question of competing industries and how to best profit (for example, the South profited via cotton while the North via finance and industries). The North and South were not inherently different in their exploitation. The North was not inherently superior.
It was also to some degree a difference of perception. Lincoln was a “plain man” with an “unassuming rustic appearance” and this earned him popularity (Gonzales Santamaria, p. 80). Perhaps he was charismatic as Obama or Clinton at our time.
Lincoln, the liberals’ hero, plagiarized the line “government of the people, by the people”(Gonzales Santamaria, p. 82). The famous phrase was said two months before Lincoln’s speech, on September 17, 1863, by the former Mexican foreign minister Francisco Zarco. Lincoln repeated the phrase on November 19, 1863 after the Gettysburg battle.
5. Who supports Saudi Arabia, the international supporter of terrorism, the supporter and sponsor of the Islamic State, home to a reactionary, fanatical regime which is anything but democratic? Trump?
Trump, on the other hand, said he will stop buying Saudi oil unless they stop supporting ISIS.
That must make him a racist.
6. If Trump wants to protect the American workers, if he condemns the wars in Iraq, Syria and Libya, if he does not want to blindly support the Saudis, if he does not want to have a war with Russia, then who is the war monger and racist? Trump or Hillary?
Well, obviously Trump.
Because Trump does not receive donations from lobbyists, and is being campaigned against by the neo-Cons who are going for Hillary. This leads us to the final question.
7. Since the neo-cons and liberals both agree that Trump is racist and a danger to America, but support Hillary who destroyed entire nations and has the blood of thousands on her hands, than what is the major difference nowadays between liberals and neo-Cons?
*Thank you to Navid Nasr and Danny Haiphong for their feedback on the Civil War.