'The Kraut' wakes up and smells, er, the toilet, actually

My 'go to' observer of the American body-politic is Charles Krauthammer and once again he summarises the ominous cracks appearing in the ice across the entire American political lake.  Well, you would have to be deaf, dumb, blind and lack a sense of smell not to recognise Donald Trump for what he is - a menace!  Commenting on one of his supporters who threatened next time to kill a Left-wing agitator who tried - and succeeded - to close down Trump's meeting, 'The Donald' remarked, "I love the old days. You know what they used to do to guys like that . . . ? They’d be carried out on a stretcher, folks.”

The language used by Trump is, at its very best, rudimentary!  He does not explain to a voting public a coherent, worked-out series of strategies he will institute if, God help us all, he wins the presidency.  Instead we have appeals to the very basest of gut instincts designed to inflame passion rather than to invite careful thought.

However, Trump constitutes just one man on the Right of American politics but facing him are tens of thousands of equally violent and inherently unstable Left-wing agitators.  As 'The Kraut' puts it in describing the tactics used by the Left in closing down Trump's meeting in Chicago:

This was an act of deliberate sabotage created by a totalitarian Left that specializes in the intimidation and silencing of political opponents. Its pedigree goes back to early-20th-century Fascism and Communism. Its more recent incarnation has been developed on college campuses, where for years leftists have been taunting, disrupting, and ultimately shutting down and shutting out conservative speakers of every stripe — long before Donald Trump.

Of course, as 'The Kraut' advises, we should beware of becoming hysterical:

By international and historical standards, political violence is exceedingly rare in the United States. The last serious outburst was 1968 with its bloody Democratic-convention riots. By that standard, 2016 is, as yet, tame. It may not remain so. The political thuggery that shut down a Donald Trump rally in Chicago last week may just be a harbinger. It would be nice, therefore, if we could think straight about cause and effect.

Because I am, by and large, a lover of most things American, I hope he's right!

Comments

[john malpas]

Lasst time you elected Obama twice and look what he done.
And if you try and be impartial - a foot in each camp they will build a highway right through you.

[Whyaxye]

I would go so far as to say that Trump is a repellent maniac who is totally unsuited to public office. But he might just be what America needs now. Given that the left are so unprincipled and so deeply entrenched, rationality, moderation, and statesmanlike demeanour would do no good against them. Right-wing Americans have, in effect, no other effective choice. Things have got so bad that they need a populist brawler to mount a plausible challenge.

I'm just very glad that we are watching from a distance. Of course, without the Pax Americana, there is no such thing as a safe distance. But we haven't had that for some years now.

[Michael Adams]

Science fiction shows us things that we would not see, if they were told in an ordinary setting. By changing time and place, more basic truths can be told more clearly. So it is with politics. Our recovery from so-called Liberalism began when we saw British Socialism at work. The complete styfling of individual initiative was something we found appalling. People told us, more or less constantly, about the government benefits available to Britons. Of course, since we worked in public service here, we knew in great detail that Americans had most of the same benefits. The frequent repetition, plus what we saw on British media, made it pretty clear how "public opinion" was shaped in Britain. THAT helped us see how our media shaped what we "thought."

Yes, Trump is appalling and an embarrassment. What can be of use to our cousins is to see his parallel in your own political life. I do not know who they are, and would be reticent to name them if I did know, but I can hope that our poor example can be useful to y'all.

[Dom]

Michael, Trump has nothing to say about socialism. He is not libertarian or conservative. He clearly opposes free trade, he clearly encourages government handouts to selected industries, and he wants to deny basic rights to long time citizens who have not broken any laws. The only thing he has going for him is a big mouth that people always mistake for a rebellious libertarian ideology. No one should vote for him. I find Clinton appalling, but if she is the only non-trump, I'll vote for her.

[JK]

http://www.thediplomad.com/2016/03/thinking-aloud-about-conservatism.html

[JK]

http://www.vdare.com/articles/ann-coulter-gop-voters-deliver-subtle-message-die-donor-scum

[Dom]

JK, the diplomat article is interesting, and I recognize many of those who commented on it. He nailed me, and others like me, for saying that I would vote for Clinton over Trump. But here is my point.

First, I was responding to Michael who, I think, believes that Trump will reverse the tide of socialism. He won't. He will further it. His views on trade are reactionary and they indicate a person who does not understand how trade is supposed to work. His views on citizens WHO HAVE NOT COMMITTED ANY CRIMES are also reactionary and dangerous. If you care about free trade and the marketplace and the liberties that come with it, then vote for the lesser of two evils. I wish the political process gave us better choices than the two ignoramuses that are coming our way, but in the event that this is the only choice we get, I know what my choice will be.

[Antisthenes]

What a bleak future we have ahead of us. In fact it could be downright dangerous. Trump or Clinton will ensure that.

Trump's popularity with a large segment of the population is only part of a trend. Disillusionment with politics and politicians has always been there because we see them for what they are. A bunch of incompetent, corrupt self servers. The people have had enough as technological advances has enable a greater degree of exposure of their malpractices so has the peoples tolerance of them dwindled. So the trend now is to turn to those who offer a new honest people based type of politics and those who do that and mean it tend to be the clueless nut jobs. Who wont change anything except for the worse and who will just become another corrupt incompetent establishment embracer just like the last one.

[Cuffleyburgers]

Dom. I think you're wrong to vote for clinton against trump. A vote for clinton is a vote for more of the same old shit that has been destrying amercia for two decades. She will be obama on steroids.

Profound political change of the sort the usa (and over here) requires, comes from crisis. No one except trump knows what he thinks. - you'd be a fool to pay too much credence to anything he says. I don't like him, but I'd vote for him any day against Clinton because he will shake up that which needs shaking. Of course he's not a libertarian. Libertarians don't reach high office. He's populist? Of course he is he's trying to be popular.

A Trump victory will be a bombshell which will reverberate around the world through the political jetset which is ruining the West.

Bring it on.

[Antisthenes]

Michael. British socialism is not one anyone else should try to emulate. What Atlee and the rest did was take socialism or at least achieving it's aims that was already present in the market place and transfer it to government. Free market capitalism does not set out to achieve socialist aims but a by product of it does just that albeit very slowly and irregularly. They took it away because they were impatient and wanted to speed up the process.

However they were right to want to achieve socialist aims more quickly but the way they went about that achieved very little at great cost for which we are paying the price today.They should have set up a system that facilitated capitalism to do what they wished not taken the job away from it. So socialism no many of it's aims not all yes as who does not want them.

[JK]

Dom, to be very clear, my placing the two links immediately below yours was purely coincidental and I further assure My Friend, had nothing in mind (or, as our host David would say, "What passes for my mind") to do with your immediately preceding thoughts.

See these for JK's thinking:

http://duffandnonsense.typepad.com/duff_nonsense/2015/07/when-the-wilfully-clever-stoopids-destroy-the-innocent.html

http://duffandnonsense.typepad.com/duff_nonsense/2015/07/the-kraut-squidges-the-donald.html

***

I can't find it at the moment Dom but if its really needed I can dig a little further into the archives. But I paraphrased (& yes, here on D&N) by saying

[To David] "Can no one rid [us] of this Trump?"

[Michael Adams]

Dom, no, I am NOT a Trump supporter. I told Ted Cruz seven years ago that we'd make him President, one day, if we still a had a country left by then. Like the Diplomad, I would hold my nose and vote for Trump over Shrillary, but I have no illusions that he is a Conservative, who even knows what the Constitution says, much less supports the idea of a Constitutional Republic.

I can't find in "appalling" even the faintest endorsement of that buffoon. His attraction is mainly among the products of our gutted American education system. That gutting process has run for at least a hundred years, as educrats have staged successive Chinese fire drills to "improve education". They never ever intended to do that. They just wanted more play money for the educrats. Kids in University today have no inkling of things that I learned in eighth grade. So, as was always feared, they are easy pickings for Shrillary, Bernie, and Trump.

[Whitewall]

Meantime the FBI is digging into a gold mine of Clinton misdeeds through their Foundation. I have read of one correspondence she and Sid Blumenthal had where NSA text was used verbatim. NSA, FBI and CIA are seriously after her. If there is still justice and law in America, these agencies will take care of Hillary. Trump will be a side show. If she skates by, then it all really doesn't matter any more. I am leaning very heavily to the "burn it all down" side. It is only a matter of who will be the "destructor".

[backofanenvelope]

If the Republican Party establishment deny Trump his shot at the presidency - he will destroy them. If he is their candidate, he will destroy Clinton. How will he do that? By not being a gentleman he'll tell the truth about her.

[JK]

You've seen this BOE?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypUNffX_1YY

[Whitewall]

JK, that link to vdare about Coulter's column was a good one. The piece by Pat Buchannon above her's was good too.

[JK]

Thanks WW, failed to notice Pat's.

[JK]

"Who has asked for your insights?

"Five candidates—I have personally met with them and offered my judgments and professional insights on U.S. Foreign Policy and overall National Security, as well as held discussions with the growing challenges facing the United States in the years ahead. Two of the five candidates remain in the race. No candidate from the Democratic side has asked me for any help."

http://observer.com/2016/03/lt-general-ret-mike-flynn-why-hillary-clinton-should-suspend-her-presidential-bid/