вторник, 16 августа 2016 г.

Donald or Hillary?

Donald or Hillary?
Igor Mel’čuk
Both are rather disgusting; both are unfit to be the President. Any dirty allegation applied to one can be counterbalanced by hundred even dirtier allegations about the other. However, they are not the problem: the problem is that the Great America has fallen so low that we have to face such a (I beg your pardon!) “choice”. Which is worse? More than 80 years ago, the Great Cory­phee of all times and all peoples, Comrade Stalin, answered a similar question about the left and the right deviations in the Russian Communist Party: “Both are worrse; but ourr parrty has cut both off!” (Un)fortunately, we do not have such a possibility—we have to make a choice… Therefore, I would like to share with my reader a few considerations about the choice in such a special case.
This country will soon be making an exceptionally important, really momentous decision: contrary to most preceding presidential elections, the election 2016 will impact the destiny of the US and, consequently, of the whole world in quite an essential way. When you make such a fateful decision you have to forget all small details—factors that might well be very significant by themselves, but are quite insignificant in the light of the problems that the US will confront im­me­diately after the November election.
The main life-threatening menace hanging over the civilized world is the Islamic invasion. Our political leaders desperately try to avoid mentioning the fact, yet a real, even unofficially declared war is on (and has been for a couple dozen years), a war aiming at a complete destruc­tion of our world, in their parlance—Dar al-Harb ‘world of war’: Qur’an prescribes the total annihilation of Dar al-Harb and its conversion into Dar al-Islam ‘world of submission’. On the one side of the frontline are we, on the other—the huge Islamic universe: Arab countries; Iran; Turkey, getting more and more Islamist with each day (a NATO member!); and should I mention Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia?.. Let me emphasize, though this is by no means a religious war. The fact is that Islam is not a religion, but a military-political doctrine. Islam is not battling another religion (we are not that religious!), but the Western civilization. Essentially, Islam is not different from Nazism or Communism, except for the word “Allah” so often repeated by Muslims (especially, during terror acts). But is just one word sufficient for the recognition of a doctrine as religion at our time?
War against Islam: speaking of it, we will not concentrate on Donald or Hillary, but on their party programs, since their personalities are less important. Who can be expected to fight off the Islamic hordes in a more determined way—Donald’s Republicans or Hillary’s Democrats (with admixture of moth-eaten Bernie’s partisans)? Who kissed the Saudi king hand and went out of his way speaking at the Al-Azhar university (Cairo) about questionable merits of Muslim world? Who delivered the American ambassador to Libya and the marines trying to defend him into the hands of Islamist beasts? Who infected with Muslim Brothers all upper layers of the American Government and Society? Who delivered Iraq to the Shia Iran? But, on the other hand, who  said “Ban Muslims from traveling to the USA”? Just for these words Trump is worth the presidency.
The war against Islam is inseparably linked to the defense and support of Israel, the bridge­head in our fight against Islam. But wasn’t it Hillary who for an hour bawled at Netanyahu for allowing to build a hundred apartments in Jerusalem? Whose program continues to harp on the tune “two states for two peoples”? And whose program explicitly rejects the absurd idea of creating still another powder keg of Muslim terror in the Middle East and no less explicitly protests against considering Israel as “occupier state”? The fact that Republicans have launched such a program—and Trump took an active part in pushing it through—is sufficient for an educated choice.
So much about external affairs; now a few remarks about America’s internal situation. Five central problems have to be singled out.
  • Illegal immigration, which is much more and much worse than a crushing burden on the US economy: it creates additional electorate for the Democrats, perpetuating their grip on power. Even more dangerously, it irreversibly modifies the genetic pool of the American nation. The USA ceased to be a melting pot, becoming, more and more, a refuge for castaways, losers, people unable to build their lives. And who declared that he would build a wall on the American–Mexican border? It does not really matter whether Trump will be able, in case he becomes the President, to build such a wall. Just these words, uttered in a strong voice amidst collective mad­ness, where you cannot call crap crap, contribute to changing the social atmosphere and tip the scales in his favor.
  • Increasing the number of people depending on welfare: more and more US citizens live on welfare and get accustomed to live on welfare. These people will always blindly vote for Democrats. Which is the typical scheme of destruction of all democracies in the past: too much caring for “helpless” minority automatically leads to unlimited growth of a parasite class, whose members quickly lose the last traces of working habits and skills. This class unavoidably becomes the majority and votes always for those who promise it more, and more, and more. This is exactly how fell the Democratic Athens in the Antiquity… Trump explicitly rejects the domin­ant policy of welfare. Could you imagine Hillary in a determined fight against social parasites?
  • Undermining USA military power: Eight years of Democrat reign produced a catastrophe in the projection of American power. What did Obama and Hillary do with Iraq? With Afgha­nistan? With Libya? And with Syria? Remember, it was the Democrat Roosevelt who made gift of Eastern Europe to the monster of Stalin; another Democrat, the small-minded Carter, greeted Khomeini in Iran and practically provoked the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan; the Democrat Clinton allowed for the rise of Al-Qaeda; Obama, together with Hillary, 1) masterminded «The Arab Spring» (and it was by pure miracle that Egypt was saved from the Muslim Brothers, while Libya, Yemen and Syria continue to be flooded in blood), 2) allowed Comrade Putin to grab Crimea, go on with his crimes in Ukraine, and then to squeeze himself into the Middle-East conflict, and 3) just before the fall of the curtain, managed to essentially contribute to the creation of Daesh, a.k.a. Isis, which, in plain English, should be called New Caliphate, if it weren’t for the Democrat media, who try, by all means, to avoid calling a spade a spade. And, already a lame duck, he gave first Iraq and then Syria to the Shia Iran. Brilliant! Do we want more of such “change” and more of the “Peace”, for which the Greatest Peace-Maker Obama got—in advance—a Nobel Prize? Should Hillary courageously carry further the torch of Hussein Obama?
  • Slow ruining of American economy: More taxes, more and even more federal regulations —and more and more production fleeing this country to China and Mexico. “Made in China” has completely replaced the once famous “Made in the USA”. Do we really need this?
  • The uncontained growth of Federal bureaucracy: An incredible multiplication of the Federal official machine, which started already under Roosevelt and has been flourishing, without any significant opposition, under several Democrat, as well Republican, presidents, threatens the foundations of American democracy. Executive orders and more executive orders… Obama-appointed “czars”… instead of glorious American constitution we obtain the lawlessness of non-elected officials. Now, who—at least in principle—is able to change this pernicious policy? Of course, not Hillary, a faithful henchwoman of Obama’s.
And to round up my text, a couple of remarks about the presumed weaknesses of Donald’s position.  Some people write that is flirting with Putin’s Russia; there are allegations of some financial interest—if not of Trump’s himself, then of his closer advisors. But: First, Russia is less dangerous than Islam, the more so, than Russia itself is the obvious target for Islamic onslaught. Second, unlike Hillary, Donald did not sell uranium mines to Russia (putting it into a dominant position on the uranium market)  and did not bare his teeth while smiling during the proposal about “the reset button.” And third, remember: the Soviet Communist-controlled press was overjoyed when Ronald Reagan had been elected. Yes, Donald is unpredictable, in­competent, rude, conceited, ignorant, unstable—and, in one word, a buffoon. He does not at all resemble a traditional American politician, who values more than anything else his political correctness—more than the interests of his country. True, such a president represents certain risks. However, Donald the Non-Standard may—in principle—liquidate once and for all the Democrats’ political machine; he also is hell-bent on shaking up the Republican party and putting it up for a good airing. A standard Democratic president, especially as competent in machinations and deceit (as Hillary is) and corrupted to boot (again, as Hillary), does not represent any risk: it is a catastrophe for the US and the civilized world, guaranteed 100% .
… Year 1986, New York City. For the last six years, from the window of his office, Donald Trump has been observing the renovation work on the Wollmann skating rink in the Central Park. The municipality had already exceeded the budget by 13 000 000$$ and the delay by four years; yet the renovation went nowhere. Now, Donald obtains from the municipality (the Mayor being Ed Koch) the permission to do everything himself, hires a specialized Canadian company, and fulfills the necessary renovations in three months for 2,5 000 000$$. (The sum that the City decided to pay him as compensation, Donald donated to the charities.) Doesn’t Donald know how to do things?
  1. PS. By the way, the name Donald means (in Old Gaelic) ‘Ruler of the World’.
Dear Igor,
(I choose to write my comments in English – not because I mastered it so brilliantly, but because it seems more adequate for discussing American issues.)
First of all, I am very pleased that you and I agree about the main problem we are facing today: namely, how to deal with Islam. Not with Islamism, or radical Islam, or Islamic terrorism, or jihad – with Islam, because all of the above follows from Islam, just as logically as Pythagorean Theorem follows from Euclidean axioms. You are absolutely right that Islam is not a religion – at least not a religion in the spirit of the First Amendment. And the biggest challenge we are facing (not just America, but the whole non-Islamic world) is inability to see what we are facing: the attack on our civilization, call it Western, or Judeo-Christian — or just civilization, as I would prefer.
Donald Trump was not my first choice; at the primaries, I voted for Ben Carson (even though it was clear that he had no chances to win), to a large extent because he, of all the candidates, seemed to best understand Islam: recall how he was ostracized for saying that he is against electing a (hypothetical) Muslim as American president. I think his endorsement of Trump is important. And when everybody was laughing at Trump when he, in his usual clumsy style, said that we should ban Muslims from entering the US ‘until we find out what’s going on’, in some peculiar way he was right: it’s time for us, the Westerners, to figure what’s ‘going on’ with Islam. It wasn’t a problem until about a century ago: Christian Europe didn’t have any trouble seeing it through. So, what happened since — was the loss of common sense a necessary byproduct of technological and societal progress?
To your five major challenges facing America I would add one more (and maybe rate it as second in importance): rolling back political correctness. The problem is actually much deeper then original political correctness, which began as almost funny game: don’t say those words, say these words instead. Now it’s far more serious, nowhere more than on college campuses. The uttered words became internalized, and as a result we have a generation that believes that the number of sexes is anywhere between three and six (we can laugh it off); that global warming is as established a fact as roundness of Earth (this is more serious); that any criticism of Islam is bigotry (and this one is really suicidal). And if anybody who can turn this idiocy around, it’s Donald Trump — which brings us to him once again.
In your opening paragraph you called our both candidates terrible — and then you made very convincing case for Donald Trump, who, as you argue, would do better job in six out of six of your most important issues. So, what else do you want from a political candidate? You would like him to be nice, intelligent and pleasant? I understand, I would prefer it too. But we are choosing not a guest at a dinner table, and not a partner for a hiking trip. We are electing the American president, and this election – as you correctly pointed out – is so important that maybe this one time we should ignore our like-don’t like emotions and concentrate on who can turn the country around.
And one final point. This election is not the usual fight between two political parties: it’s Trump and the American people against everybody else. Donald Trump is attacked not only by the usual leftist crowd, but by the Republican establishment, by the media — indeed, by almost all the established media, including the traditional Republican allies like WSJ, The Weekly Standard, National Review. Nothing unusual when the leftists label a Republican – any Republican — as racist, sexist, bigot, misogynist, homophobe, etc.; but I don’t remember when conservative commentators called the Republican candidate buffoon, showman, ignoramus, clown, con man, and even sociopath. And the fact that Trump, against all odds, not only secured the Republican nomination, but now has a very good chance to become President, is truly remarkable. It looks like the majority of American people still can see through the lies, propaganda and demagoguery. And I do believe that Donald Trump can make America great again — so let’s try to help him.

Комментариев нет:

Отправить комментарий

Красильщиков Аркадий - сын Льва. Родился в Ленинграде. 18 декабря 1945 г. За годы трудовой деятельности перевел на стружку центнеры железа,километры кинопленки, тонну бумаги, иссушил море чернил, убил четыре компьютера и продолжает заниматься этой разрушительной деятельностью.
Плюсы: построил три дома (один в Израиле), родил двоих детей, посадил целую рощу, собрал 597 кг.грибов и увидел четырех внучек..