zazen

There are enough checks and balances to prevent them from doing anything crazy, which is why I'm not panicking in the first place. What people should panic about is the larger cycle of history we are in which no candidate or party can do anything to stop. The national security state and corporate dominance is a prevailing factor no party has much say in affecting change in, yet these two have much say in the lives of many, and not usually in their favour. Getting thrown a bone or two here and there and being able to make slight socio-cultural shifts is one thing, but affecting change in the state apparatus's war machine and corporate dominance is a whole other. This is why they always talk a big game about being able to make changes and being anti-war or helping the vast majority, but there are stubborn and stiff gears in the state machinery which prevents them from ever acting on that rhetoric. Any economist or business owner would shrivel up at hearing Kamala's economic takes. Unrealized gains tax and equity as equality of outcome will only have corrosive outcomes for the economy. They penalize success before its even realised, and disincentivize it to begin with.

Me critiquing the excesses of the left, and observing how this plays into a reactionary right who have their own excesses - isn’t me endorsing the right or overlooking their crassness either. I’m simply pointing out the rise of populism that is based upon economics as the gut punch, with cultural dislocation layered on top as the slap in the face. The whole left isn’t some caricature of “wokism” and neither are the whole right a caricature of some “ATV riding hillbilly” excited to show off his rifle. The institutional sway is clearly progressive. One side clearly controls the cultural narrative that is adopted by academia, media and corporations. Progressivism basically has an ideological monopoly over institutions that have an outsized, disproportionate influence. This makes conservatives feel uneasy and want to rebel. That’s why they celebrate Musk buying Twitter or The Daily wire being what it is - they’re building parallel networks because they feel the existing ones deviated too far from their core values. We are seeing a phenomenon we see in every empire that reaches a stage of peak prosperity of dominance and decadence. At the end of an empire’s cycle, we see moral experimentation, a loosening of boundaries and an indulgence in individual freedoms that can feel to some like chaos or “moral decay.” Societies at this stage of the cycle often spiral into divisiveness and moral fluidity. The difference is that while past forms of decadence indulged in an excess of the senses ie feasts and orgies in Rome - US/Western decadence is redefining foundational claims about our senses, about reality, about the reality of identity and biology. Another difference is that past decadence was an elite past time confined to aristocrats, today it’s mainstream because of media and institutional buy in which then disseminates this decadence. Promoting decadence is speed running a society into decline - I”m not a doomer nor a moral bible thumper, this is simply observational and has a causal chain that would make this post to lengthy to go into. The right’s resistance to progressive issues isn’t solely about hatred or bigotry either, although that exists in its extreme factions. It’s often about a fear of losing any sense of order or stability in a world that seems to be reimagining the very foundations of reality. That’s not an excuse for prejudice, but it’s a piece of the larger picture. When you push people’s norms to the breaking point, there’s going to be pushback. When you force one version of progress without a balanced dialogue, people dig their heels in. The paradox of progressive values - compassion, universal human dignity, equality - is that they have roots in the ethical teachings of Christianity itself. Christianity introduced these values to the Western world as a counterpoint to the more individualistic, honor-based morality of Europe’s pagan past. It’s as if the cultural left has inherited Christianity’s ethical framework but stripped it of its religious context, advocating for what are essentially Christian values without acknowledging their origin. They’re promoting an ethic of kindness, inclusivity, and justice, which were revolutionary ideas introduced by early Christianity into the hierarchical and often brutal societies of Europe. These values have secularized and embedded themselves in Western culture to the point where they’re seen as simply “human” values rather than specifically religious ones. Meanwhile on the other side, we see a similar irony among many on the religious right, particularly evangelical neocons. Although they claim to defend Christianity and see themselves as champions of “Christian values,” their focus often leans toward nationalism, militarism, and capitalist individualism - ideals that align more closely with a pre-Christian, pagan ethos of dominance and power. They embody the warrior ethic or “master morality” that Nietzsche described as characteristic of Europe’s pagan past, even as they claim the mantle of Christianity. In essence, it’s almost like a role reversal or a change in costume. The progressives have adopted Christianity’s ethical core but shed the religious shell, while many conservatives have held onto the religious identity of Christianity but seem to have embraced an ethos that often contradicts its teachings on compassion and humility. This contradiction is a fundamental part of Western identity: it’s a civilization at war with itself, torn between the humility and compassion it claims to cherish and the conquest driven, imperial instincts it can’t seem to shake. Western politics is a battleground between these two impulses, with the secular left pushing for the communal values rooted in the East, and the conservative right clinging to an identity it often doesn’t understand, mistaking power and dominance for faith. In the end, the West is haunted by the very ethos it borrowed and transformed. It’s a civilization that took on Christianity, tried to bend it to its old pagan ideals, and now finds itself forever in conflict between these two. And as long as the West clings to its myth of moral superiority while hiding its imperial intentions under noble rhetoric, it will remain a culture divided - struggling, as it always has, with its own reflection.

I think thats exactly the appeal of Trump - he isn't sterilised and scripted like Kamala but is more raw and authentic, even if that means people see him as an authentic buffoon. For the more logical minded who still vote Trump, perhaps they aren't voting for him as much as they are the team and party - they're betting on and hoping that Trump won't get in the way of the team doing some good work. Both sides are viewing this as existential, as the last vote for their party ever. MAGA - because Democrats will let masses of migrants in to legalise and vote for blue, solidifying the party for decades to come. Democrats - because they think Trump will go scorched earth and install some Christian Nationalist theocracy. There are extreme fringes on both sides, that both parties don't want to deal with and cater too, in order to secure election victories. But then those idiots galvanize the opposite side to go against them even harder and here we are in a polarized situation. The middle of both sides needs to get their houses in order. Aren't there enough checks and balances in the system to prevent what we’re all fearing the worst of anyway? America survived 4 years already.

Red pill of a video. Listen from 1hr 04min to learn about Ukraine. Quite tough as a Westerner to come to the realisation that Western states, in particular the US and Israel are such terrorist states.

In the backdrop of a US election and as peoples attention is drawn elsewhere. The US government has been ‘deeply concerned’ for over year, and telling their ally to investigate the laundry list of atrocities. The fake virtue signalling face of the West is on full display - and they ain’t even gonna take the costume off for Halloween tonight. https://x.com/kahlissee/status/1852015247160443026?s=46&t=DuLUbFRQFGpB8oo7PwRglQ

Chadistan incoming

A good discussion to compliment OP’s video.

@Scholar @Nemra It's a immature view of freedom as 'do whatever the fuck you want'. No mature adults in the room function that way, that's called being stuck in adolescence. Like Sholomar wrote above, this is leftism taken to far, to the point all they do is destroy the meaning of things with their moral relativity and construct awareness, then act like it is enlightenment when they are simply stuck in a rebellious teenage phase of being contrary for the sake of challenging authority. They don't understand that there is a certain order that needs maintaining. They don't understand the 2nd, 3rd etc order affects of their actions and how certain freedoms when used as license to 'do as thou wilt' unravel society. There's a reason most leftists are young and become more conservative as they get older, it takes time to mature towards certain understandings. When you need to build a business or raise a family, the importance of certain principles become starkly evident. Progressive values aren’t coming through like an invitation to the conversation. They’re rolled out like commandments from the institutions on high. Academia, media, corporations - these set the cultural narrative of the country at large making these values feel imposed and inescapable. It's not that people don't have the freedom to live conservatively in America, it's that their freedoms to think differently is squeezed to the margins and their made to feel like dinosaurs from a liberal progressive elitism. Its ideological monopoly, with cultural hall monitors ready to cancel you for critiquing the main narrative. These progressive values feels like a baseline moral code has been set by institutions with disproportionate influence that permeate the country. I'm not saying these liberal values are bad, but wokism and leftist have taken them to absurd degrees. ''The West gets free markets wrong the same way that they get freedom wrong. No one individually is free to act immorally in the public sphere because people have a right to live in a society where their values are not being assaulted. Whereas you say that everyone has a right to act any kind of way in public - they can say whatever they want to say in public, behave in all kinds of immoral and indecent ways, all in the name of personal liberty. Never mind how much tension, how much misery, how much division, how much animosity that creates in your society. But you let a fringe group of people oppress the general public by violating the values and the morals of the majority, all in the name of freedom. To you, freedom means: Freedom from responsibility Freedom from accountability Freedom from morality Freedom from decency And then you apply this same understanding to the business sector and the so-called "free markets."

Usually, any hints of right leaning, conservatism or traditionalism invokes a triggered response. The irony of spiral dynamics is that those that self-identify as higher up on the stage, have barely integrated or understood the value of the previous ones. If they had, they wouldn't knee jerk react and dismiss them so easily. I was like that too, especially after studying Osho I had my own phase of ''anti-religion/tradition, down with the old and the right wing ''. I became idealistic rather than pragmatic. But there is a way of coming full circle to these things with a higher understanding that actually empathizes with them and validates their core principles better than even they could. Theres a evolution that takes place where a hippie touches soil and thinks all order is bad - that we should be as free and wild like Gaia. Who then becomes a laptop liberal interested in politics and activism - working to bring down the patriarchy and capitalism. Which then touches grass again and realises all that it takes to grow that grass out of the soil they once rolled in as a hippie. That order, hierarchy, discipline aren't inherently bad, but humans can make them so. Europe was already experiencing a populist surge well before Trump came onto the scene in 2016. Trump’s rise may have emboldened these movements as US politics has global influence for sure, but he didn't light the matches, just threw fuel on them. Some examples: In the UK, Brexit happened before Trump was elected. In France, Marine Le Pen’s National Front gained traction as early as 2012. Germany saw the rise of the AfD around the same time, and in Italy, Meloni’s party (now in power) was founded in 2012. Hungary’s nationalist leader Viktor Orban came to power in 2010, and in the Netherlands, Geert Wilders Party for Freedom (now the largest in the House of Representatives) gained traction in 2006. The reason Europe’s populist movements began earlier and surged quicker than America is due to increased waves of migration that the US hadn't experienced on the same scale. This mass migration is driven by a combination of neoliberalism (foreign policy) and progressive liberalism (domestic policy). The Neoliberal paradigm the West operates from emphasizes freer markers and interventionist policies, which creates economic instability and conflicts, which drives migrants to seek refuge and economic opportunities in Europe. Then comes progressive liberalism which provides the ideological basis for open borders and human rights (valid noble ideals taken too far) to the point of strain on local resources and cultural cohesion. Europe suffers the consequence of this foreign policy rather than America simply due to geographic proximity. It's a feed back loop - neoliberal foreign policy causes the migration that progressive-liberal policies at home then attempt to manage or embrace with liberal naivety. In fact, it’s a perfect cover - progressive liberalism rainbow washes the crimes of neoliberal foreign policy abroad and its economic exploitation at home. We need to spread Democracy to emancipate minorities and women’s hair in Iran. We need to save the planet by carbon taxing and surveilling every breath you take - you know, for the environment and all. On top of this, Europe faces an imposed liberal-progressive culture that feels out of touch with traditional or conservative communities. EU policies on green energy impact farmers productivity and bottom line, while LGBTQ+ and secularist values are promoted across the union, sparking resistance from more religious or traditional countries, especially in Eastern Europe. This is a slap in the face that fuels further discontent - just like in the case of America. But more broadly, the anti-establishment rhetoric we see today is the result of many failures in Western institutions, which has eroded trust in multiple domains over the last two decades. Just look at the timeline we've lived through: - The Middle Eastern wars of the early 2000’s was sold to the public based upon lies, that our men had to die for. - The 2008 financial crises catalysed by a housing crash shattered trust in banks and financial institutions as they were bailed out while citizens lost their homes, jobs and savings. - Social media became popular in the late 2000’s which challenges the mainstream media, laying bare the propaganda and lies. - The 2010’s had migration surges in Europe due to more Middle Eastern wars in Syria and Libya, adding more pressure. - The latest in chapter in nuking credibility was COVID from 2020 where people lost trust in government and public health due to imposed locked, coerced vaccines and shady contracts elites would make money off of. Through each of these stages - foreign policy, finance, borders, media, and public health - people have been given new reasons to feel that their institutions are either out of touch, self-serving, or outright deceptive. That’s why from what I see, populism isn’t on the whole manufactured. It’s the natural immune response and backlash from people who’ve had enough of: neoliberal economic and foreign policies that exploit and destabilize, progressive cultural domination domestically that feels imposed rather than embraced and organically grown, and institutions that have lied and failed time and again.

Great watch. Toms podcast is great.

@Bobby_2021 True. Its ironic, Western intervention across the world doesn't help countries become more democratic, in fact the opposite happens as they hunker down against it. On the micro, it regresses the development of people as they become defensively dogmatic and traditional, on the macro, countries become politically centralized to secure themselves against outside meddling - or use it as a excuse for something they already wanted to do. Some countries are oppressive and dictatorial by their own agency but no doubt Western influence doesn't help spread the democracy they claim they wish to spread. Western influence has either given dictators excuses to be in power, put dictators in power for their own interests or caused countries to reflexively become dictatorships to shield themselves from interference. A great video and channel for everyone to understand geopolitics: From above: ''In Georgia, one of the fundamental problems is that many NGO's are funded by the west, by the European Union, but to put this in context, the number of NGOs in Georgia is somewhere up to around 10 and a half to 11,000. Now, the country's pretty small - I mean, how many NGOs are there per square kilometer? It's ridiculous, it's totally disproportionate. And I think, as well, what was very telling at the time when they had these protests against this "foreign agent" law, but I don't see why the average Georgian would be remotely concerned about this because it doesn't affect them, it's not an issue for them. And it was quite strange and very telling when several European ministers at that time traveled to Georgia, they actually marched with the protesters and gave speeches in support. And they talk about Russian interference in countries - I mean, it's laughable. The US as well, the state department came out and basically said, "We've warned Georgia of further consequences if the Republic's government does not change." Of course, I mean, talk about dismissing democracy out of hand - it's like, "Well, it's not our democracy, you're not doing what we say, so it's not democratic." Whereas, of course, that's what democracy is. And in fact, the United States' attitude is anything but democratic, it's completely undemocratic. But it comes back to the point in the West, if you elect the wrong political party, they will have to find ways to remove that party and put the government they want in office. Or even in the European Union, we had referendums that were either ignored or, as it happened in the Netherlands or in Ireland, they made them vote three times until they got the result they wanted. I mean, again, that is not democracy. Democracy effectively is an illusion in the West, and democracy is long since being dead. And if people think getting to vote every four or five years is a democracy, I'm sorry, you're being deceived or you're very naive, one of the two, because you cannot seriously believe that it's a democracy in the country you live in because nothing ever changes. The policy decisions just basically are the same from government to government.''

@Joshe For sure man, those conspiracies were out of control. I’m glad we haven’t had to see so much Qanon content this cycle lol. I saw a funny comment which said Project 2025 is like Qanon for Democrats - guess we’ll see if any of it comes true if Trump wins. There’s definitely demagoguery happening, it’s fuel on the fire. There’s enough truth in these grievances to keep people hooked, with enough theatre to keep them raging and loyal to the party and saviour who says he’ll save them. I’d say it’s roughly 60-70% legitimate grievance as the foundation of the movement with the rest being a circus with demagogues as the main act. Thats how I currently see it just by looking at polling data and trends over the decades, what I see online among right wing media and anecdotally from what I’ve heard, seen and felt on the street. The fact that the same pattern is happening in many places where we don’t have such cartoonish showmen like Trump to pull on strings also indicates this isn’t solely due to demagogues.

@Joshe So there is a problem and the government needs fixing? So there are legit grievances that aren’t just manufactured? I think the distinction is that you’re viewing liberalism from just the cultural component, which I’d agree isn’t enough by itself to tip the conservative minded into populist rage. But it’s the combination of neoliberalism which is the economic component causing material issues + a liberal cultural component that causes conservatives to become culturally protectionist and feel even more disillusioned. It’s the tone deafness of the elites to emphasise marginal progressive politics whilst brushing aside the economic discontent of the many. All the while mocking them as culturally regressive and deeming the masculine essence that half of humanity carry as toxic and needing of reigning in. They want to police, me too and cancel culture the masculine spirit into an effeminate obedience to a progressive utopia where pregnant men are as real as gravity, where we need to address things in woke terminology like ‘chest feeding’ and ‘birthing person’. Like @Jodistrict said above, there’s more important issues than these marginal ones. Neoliberalism creates bipartisan economic grievances for everyone. But a dominant liberal culture on top of this intensifies the discontent on the right. It’s a double whammy for them. Economics is the foundational grievance for all, a punch to the gut. But cultural dominance of a progressive bent is the slap on the face for conservative oriented people. Democrats and liberals feel perfectly at home in this cultural environment. And because they align closely with the Democrats on these cultural issues, they assume the party will fix their economic problems too, despite evidence to the contrary. Their populist rage is culturally pacified.

@Joshe Saying populist grievances are manufactured actually reinforces and validates their critique of elite dismissiveness. For sure media figures and demagogues amplify and channel these grievances - but they can't amplify thin air or channel grievances that don't exist. What they install is the framework of how to interpret those grievances and direct them towards the 'wrong' solution - but they acknowledge they exist which is why they get the populist vote. The liberal world view requires believing that millions of people are simply hallucinating the worsening of their own material conditions, that is being worsened by a imperialistic corporate parasite that neoliberalism gave birth to. Neoliberal capitalism is doing exactly what its critics have warned about - concentrating wealth while causing mass discontent that goes beyond borders and even continents. The media machine serves theses parasitic vampire elites by gas lighting the public into thinking its raining while they're being pissed on. The lived reality hugely differs to the portrayed one which is why when Trump blurts out 'fake news' so many resonate with it. The global nature of populist movements counters the idea that these grievances are just installed and not true. How did Trump and Tucker cause farmer protests across Europe or give rise to populists in Brazil - was their a demagog conference where they taught their best tricks in demagoguery? People are responding to conditions that transcend national boundaries, because bipartisan neoliberalism transcends boundaries to serve a transnational elite class of vultures - it hasn't worked well enough, for enough people. Young people are locked out of a housing market they're parents easily entered, student debt and health care costs are high, stagnant wages, the 2008 housing crash followed by bank bail outs, lies about war after war, poll after poll showing trust in institutions were already in the basement before Trump ever came https://news.gallup.com/poll/1597/confidence-institutions.aspx Trump didn't create a crises of legitimacy. Western institutions have long nuked their credibility before his cheeky grin rode down that gold escalator in Trump tower, and their burying the remains of it in the rubble of Gaza. Demagogues don't create the conditions they exploit.

Take a look at the comments: “US mAkEs tHE wOrLD StabLE bRo” Perhaps Western anti-democratic practices abroad ensures or forces countries to centralise themselves into authoritarian control to shield themselves from foreign interference. They can’t open up into the Democracies the West claims the world should aspire to become because that means opening themselves up to Western interests weasling in.

We need more cringe too.

No need to offend or be rude to a new user to the forum. He’s correct in that it doesn’t show in search, which guarantees it won’t show in recommended or related videos - only by going on Rogans YouTube page. A video that viral with that many views in one day, being suppressed like that is so blatant. Dim of you to not have understood OP. @Average Actualizer Welcome to the forum.

Such juvenile, distasteful rhetoric. This is the ugly underbelly of Trump supporters including how Trump himself speaks brashly. A lot of MAGA take “freedom of speech” as license to insult because it makes them feel powerful in a status quo that’s stripped them of it. They view brashness and Trump as their sledgehammer to the establishment. They aren’t thrilled at the insults as much as they are thrilled at the audacity of being able to throw a middle finger to a polished political class high on political correctness and cancel culture. A political class that barely considers them, and when they do it’s them being talked down to and spinning their concerns for political theatre. But this is corrosive and shouldn’t be normalised. Its not as degenerate as drag queens stripping in front of young kids, but is dangerous due to its polarizing effects.

Case in point. The type of attitude seen above is what imo fuels exactly what populists claim to despise. The mockery and dismissal of legitimate grievances. If we’re arguing that Trump single handedly turned millions of apolitical people into vocal critics of the system, we’re missing the larger picture. Trump didn’t create the grievances of his supporters - he tapped into frustrations that were already simmering beneath the surface. The idea that these folks “weren’t complaining before Trump” assumes that dissatisfaction only matters when it’s vocalized, ignoring the years of quiet resentment over policies that many felt betrayed their interests - though they may not have much understanding of them. And if Trump is the sole reason for this populist anger, how do we explain the rise of similar movements across Europe? Are we to believe that every working class voter in these countries is just “following vibes” and “ignorant of governance,” or is there a broader trend here - an expression of frustration with a political establishment that has increasingly catered to elites while leaving ordinary people behind. Populism doesn’t come with polished talking points or think tank approved narratives - doesn’t mean we dismiss these people because they aren’t into politics or have the base knowledge to discuss it. Progressives defend vulgarity and public debauchery as “human expression,” as if slapping the label of “freedom” on it suddenly makes it profound. Maybe not everyone sees it as some enlightened celebration of freedom. People are free to live their lives as they wish behind closed doors. The issue arises when this “expression” spills out into the public square, pushed onto communities that didn’t ask for it. For many who don’t live in cosmopolitan bubbles, it feels like yet another slap in the face from a society that once upheld certain standards and values. And this is the point - populists who don’t care for policy or government wanted to be left alone (as mentioned - they’re busy being apolitical watching sports, hunting and fishing) yet they now feel they can’t be. Populism’s rise stems from a feeling of being forced to accept cultural shifts they don’t want. Urban centres naturally become centres of media and export a culture that reverberates through the American heartland. Coastal liberal conciousness feels foreign to a more core conservative consciousness in middle America. When we say sexuality is just “Human nature” and that the indulgence of it can’t be blamed on Democrats? Firstly, progressives don’t even believe in human nature 🫃🏻 nor understand it (did Comrade Kamala speak of unrealised capital gains tax?) Secondly, as if human nature exists in a vacuum and can’t be nurtured towards the betterment of civilization - but that requires vision, something lacking atm amongst Democrats. Keep America Medicore And Lacking Ambition is the vision, I guess. The above will be the leftist meltdown if Republicans win. But don’t worry, it’s just a form of human expression. Beside the fun and games - we either face, acknowledge and rectify populist grievances which are the back bone of society ie the working class, or we await their come back like a rising populist Phoenix ready to burn our democratic asses.

For sure. Trump can definetely brings chaos which could be very bad. The question is whether people want to live through more of the status quo which is what KAMALA and co stand for - Keep America Mediocre And Lacking Ambition. We will collectively fail to understand Trumpism if we try to understand Trump. Because this transcends him - but people try to understand him, rather than what made him come about to begin with. And this isn’t isolated to America but to the West more broadly, except that Europes version isn’t as cartoonish and stark. Trump, Boris, Bolsonaro etc are simply derivatives - streams coming from a populist sea of resentment and rebellion against a betrayal of the social contract - that the ruling class has the best interest of those it rules over, and that life gets better for the next generation. Populists are simply willing to bet on change, even if it means chaos, because the current they’re currently swimming in is drowning their identity, dignity and dreams.

It’s not about standing by Trump as much as it is about standing with a movement against the excesses of progressivism, liberalism and globalism. Though MAGA have their own excesses which were evidently on display. But see what their complaints are - pushing LGBTQ and vulgarity via a cultural machine which lacks any grace or wholesomeness. Progressives in urban coastal echo chambers deviated so hard from the mass sentiments of the core heartland of America. That mass now wants to reign in this erosion of boundaries. Leftists may enjoy swimming in a sea of moral relativism and hedonistic indulgence but most don’t. Who wants to raise a family and kids in the above society? This is what most Americans fear being exported to their neck of the woods. The rights issue is they emphasise standards and merit to such a degree that it’s lacking any humanity and become elitist. But the lefts issue is the lack of standards and inclusiveness of anything at all which doesn’t even meet the bare minimum - or is made to meet it via moral relativity.

The Western mind gets too hung up on definitions, labels and ideologies to fit itself and others into. As a comment in that Richard Wolff video said- China follows whateverworksism lol. Both extremes can help in understanding the flaws in the other. Both systems (capitalist and communist) concentrate power - communism does so through the state, capitalism does so through private power. Both systems claim to undermine monopolies and the concentration of power that is abused - communism literally concentrates power via the state, capitalism claims market competition can challenge, disrupt and keep monopolies in check. Both systems under-appreciate half of human nature - communism dismisses that people need incentives to thrive, capitalism dismisses that unchecked power always tries to concentrate itself. They don’t deny the other side, just dismiss its importance. Communism fundamentally contradicts itself in its core tenent which is to have a classless and stateless society. In order to have a classless society, you need a state to enforce it via redistributing wealth from elite classes to the masses - but inequality is natural and inescapable, though we strive to shrink the gap, it can never truly be closed which is the naive aspiration of the Utopian minded. Communism believes that once the state creates a classless society, it will dissolves itself. But that's now how human nature works. How does a centralized power structure ie the state - relinquish its own power, power simply doesn't walk away. Communism also relies on central planning - which also requires a state. What plans the economy once the state no longer exists to centrally plan it…the market? But that’s bad old capitalism. Capitalism contradicts itself in that it thinks free market competition doesn't create monopolies and that wealth trickles down to the many. But just like communism overlooks one part of human nature, so does capitalism. Capitalism turns a market place into a chessboard where others get dominated and power concentrates itself, never wanting to let go. Capitalists love to view their society as a wild jungle, where the chaos thrives to create innovation and growth and where the invisible hand of the market regulates itself. But apex predators turn that jungle into a rigged game where the most powerful animals decide who gets fed and who doesn't. In a nutshell: Both systems produce outcomes that contradict the systems ideals. It's good to read capitalist theories to counter communism's flaws, as much as it is to read communist theories to counter capitalism flaws. ''The extent to which property rights are infringed determines the extent to which the incentive to earn and acquire it goes. If the incentive is gone they refrain from earning.'' - Ibn Khauldun (14th Century) centuries before Adam Smith The capitalist techno optimists like Marc Andreeson who are backing Trump view the economy like this: ''Willing buyer meets willing seller, a price is struck, both sides benefit from the exchange or it doesn’t happen. Profits are the incentive for producing supply that fulfills demand. Prices encode information about supply and demand. Markets cause entrepreneurs to seek out high prices as a signal of opportunity to create new wealth by driving those prices down. We believe the market economy is a discovery machine, a form of intelligence – an exploratory, evolutionary, adaptive system. We believe Hayek’s Knowledge Problem overwhelms any centralized economic system. All actual information is on the edges, in the hands of the people closest to the buyer. The center, abstracted away from both the buyer and the seller, knows nothing. Centralized planning is doomed to fail, the system of production and consumption is too complex. Decentralization harnesses complexity for the benefit of everyone; centralization will starve you to death.'' ''David Friedman points out that people only do things for other people for three reasons – love, money, or force. Love doesn’t scale, so the economy can only run on money or force. The force experiment has been run and found wanting. Let’s stick with money. We believe the ultimate moral defense of markets is that they divert people who otherwise would raise armies and start religions into peacefully productive pursuits. We believe markets, to quote Nicholas Stern, are how we take care of people we don’t know. We believe markets are the way to generate societal wealth for everything else we want to pay for, including basic research, social welfare programs, and national defense. We believe there is no conflict between capitalist profits and a social welfare system that protects the vulnerable. In fact, they are aligned – the production of markets creates the economic wealth that pays for everything else we want as a society. We believe central economic planning elevates the worst of us and drags everyone down; markets exploit the best of us to benefit all of us. We believe central planning is a doom loop; markets are an upward spiral.''

What if this phenomena isn’t just isolated to Trump and America but a common pattern across the West atm. Its populism. Understand populism and you’ll understand its derivative that is Trumpism. This “Trumpism” isn’t going away with Trump - as long as large cohorts of the populace aren’t respected, let alone catered to. If the Democrats and the left in general didn’t deride men as a category, especially the working man - we wouldn’t have this populist phoenix coming to set fire on our asses. The hope is that Trumps ill conduct and brashness doesn't brush off on and erode the political machine - but that the team who is much more competent than he is oils and makes the machine work - not for the entrenched establishment but for the people. Of course it will also serve a new faction of elite interests, but if it can work for the people in conjunction, that is more welcome than the current status quo which doesn't.