25-01-2017, 06:05 PM
Oh, I think the day of the Neocons has passed. I feel sure this is due to the fact that the world changed and their strategy was found to be unable to adjust and accommodate that, and so the more powerful elite faction decided a change had to be made.
This can be seen in a number of past discussions by people like Kissinger and Brzezinski.
I think we also see evidence of it in the ferocious battle they had with Trump publicly before he actually took office. For me it revealed a really quite unusual public disagreement between various elite factions on how to secure America's future. Trump's faction won the argument. For now anyway.
However, I agree with you that Trump is a very, very unpleasant individual who is certainly going to line his own pockets and those of his backers, and his past association with mafia types suggests this quite strongly.
But for me the key to the future was the recent groundwork done by Poppy Bush, Clinton, Dubya Bush and Obama - that saw the Constitution and other vital democratic safeguards dismantled (to very little protest as far as I was able to see) --- not to mention the vile use of torture - which Trump wishes now to implement too.
These four presidents paved the way for Trump. But they weren't entirely alone in that either.
The fact is that the US has always flirted with and fondled fascism. Think Nixon. Think HUAC. Think JFK's daddy. Think the Bush family and their Nazi past. Think Ford and other US industrialists who were in love with Adolf. Think how Wall Street and almost the entire American establishment financed and backed Hitler's rise to power and then financed his war machine with the intention of turning his mind to invade Russia to defeat the Bolsheviks (which they also financed and backed as you know).
History shows us that "wealth" absolutely loves a "strong" manager (to use Noam Chomsky's terminology for presidents and prime ministers), because their bottom line is that no one should be allowed to interfere with their... bottom line; which to a not insignificant extent derives from having easy access to the bottomless national purse funded by those of us who must be "managed".
In the last analysis, the elite used democracy to achieve their goals, but happily dumped that the minute it no longer suited their needs. They'll replace it with whatever system works for them. And when it no longer works, they'll dump that too.
So, to this extent focusing attention on the flawed personality of their current chosen "manager" deflects from the bigger picture.
It's the ruling elite who rule...
This can be seen in a number of past discussions by people like Kissinger and Brzezinski.
I think we also see evidence of it in the ferocious battle they had with Trump publicly before he actually took office. For me it revealed a really quite unusual public disagreement between various elite factions on how to secure America's future. Trump's faction won the argument. For now anyway.
However, I agree with you that Trump is a very, very unpleasant individual who is certainly going to line his own pockets and those of his backers, and his past association with mafia types suggests this quite strongly.
But for me the key to the future was the recent groundwork done by Poppy Bush, Clinton, Dubya Bush and Obama - that saw the Constitution and other vital democratic safeguards dismantled (to very little protest as far as I was able to see) --- not to mention the vile use of torture - which Trump wishes now to implement too.
These four presidents paved the way for Trump. But they weren't entirely alone in that either.
The fact is that the US has always flirted with and fondled fascism. Think Nixon. Think HUAC. Think JFK's daddy. Think the Bush family and their Nazi past. Think Ford and other US industrialists who were in love with Adolf. Think how Wall Street and almost the entire American establishment financed and backed Hitler's rise to power and then financed his war machine with the intention of turning his mind to invade Russia to defeat the Bolsheviks (which they also financed and backed as you know).
History shows us that "wealth" absolutely loves a "strong" manager (to use Noam Chomsky's terminology for presidents and prime ministers), because their bottom line is that no one should be allowed to interfere with their... bottom line; which to a not insignificant extent derives from having easy access to the bottomless national purse funded by those of us who must be "managed".
In the last analysis, the elite used democracy to achieve their goals, but happily dumped that the minute it no longer suited their needs. They'll replace it with whatever system works for them. And when it no longer works, they'll dump that too.
So, to this extent focusing attention on the flawed personality of their current chosen "manager" deflects from the bigger picture.
It's the ruling elite who rule...
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14