A Perspective on Today’s American Politics
It’s been quite a while since I wrote something up-to-date about United States politics. I used to be on top of that all the time. If my writing has been correctly interpreted, though, my sudden silence about American political policy and foreign affairs (what I used to cover) should not have come as that much of a surprise.
“Suck it up”
I was on the side of the team that lost. I believe that even in July 2020, a couple of months into the Biden presidency, the controversy about whether the presidency was won fairly or not is still mentioned sometimes. Because it’s hard to accept the political consequences and not because of the principle of “free and fair elections”?
My perspective on the Biden presidency is quite timeless. So a super up-to-date analysis would have me writing about, ehm, the infrastructure bill and pet projects and stuff (I say based on gazing at the thumbnail of the most recent Fox News video). Speaking from my individual perspective, however, I have no patience for keeping up with what the public debate has become.
Policy wise, it is basically what I predicted it would be. Typical leftism, towards the way the Dutch socialist economy works. The government having an influence in one’s finances being favored over financial independency. The needs of the workig people ignored in favor of climate policy that has no influence on the climate at all with the fracking ban. The leftist attitude towards racism, gender and sexual relationships and such is propagated as the one and only normal interpretation, which to me in actuality is “illogical logic”. In contrast to the Trump presidency, loudly opposing voices to policies made and such are not heard by the mainstream. Paying immigrants to stay out? There is even inflation.
Every headline I see come across list another change made and political priority listed (pets, really…), I see as an opportunity lost. I do not see any good in basically any leftist political agenda item. I disagree with so much that not only even the headlines are frustrating to me to read: it is boring. I do not have the patience to listen to (the beginning of 4 long years of) endless discourse about the (predictably bad long-term) controversial effects of leftist policy. I can’t watch the news shows I used to watch for longer than a couple of minutes in because the mind-numbing tone-deaf political prioritization of leftism one can’t do anything against by the book, makes it nothing but this broken record-like amalgamation of sound of which the content is disturbing. So I’m “sucking it up” very well. I’ve sucked it up into complete silence.
As I used to say all the time: I agree a lot more with the Republican philosophy and prioritization of ensuring equal opportunity (including not financially depending on the government) in contrast to equity, that (regardless of race) national citizens are of higher political priority and so on. What makes devotion to Republicanism a deal-breaker to me is the same reason why everyone duped by leftism can’t do anything but sit by and watch: no bipartisan supreme leader with exceptional authority.
How Personal must a Government get?
Society (all of the country’s land together with the people thereon) is a public space. The main responsibility of the government is to, within the public space that its society is, ensure that every citizen has adequate means to provide for oneself. (And it makes ever-lasting coronavirus policy hahaha. =.=) That means, for example, providing good (healthy) infrastructure for the citizen to travel (over public roads) to his/her place of work to provide for oneself. How far the authority (influence/meddling in the public space and (directly/indirectly) one’s personal life) of the government must reach is what political parties contest each other over.
Should the reach of the government be only up and until things go from public to private? Should the government take more outspoken ideological stances? Should it decide what is good and what is bad? Should it make things forbidden and if yes, what?
What is considered right-wing (Republican in the American context) today is the government does not consider it a virtue to reach in one’s private life, ideological stances are for the citizen to decide, it could consider what is good or what is bad if there is well-documented scientific evidence to do so, and it strictly enforces repercussions against that which it considers bad.
In today’s leftism, the aspired reach of the government is in both public and private life, the government takes outspoken ideological stances and it decides what is good and what is bad, but it aspires to not forbid and to not surveillance that which is forbidden.
The Error in Democracy Itself
That the elections were won by a party with whose standpoints you disagree with does not mean that you must swallow your disagreement. Especially in a democracy, you (are by law, but with leftism) must be free to contest the policies (especially if they have a negative influence on your life) of the party in rule, if that is necessary.
With leftist progressivism, however, to politically strive against the far-reaching authority of a leftist government (the more the progressivist transition is completed), becomes more impossible every year. Because of changes made to the Law and because of changes to the way the trias politica functions in general (with its authority it can, for example, even choose to just ignore your Second Amendment instead of changing it or ending it).
Every citizen’s voice is unique. Leftist progressivism, however, ignores that by taking its own ideological stances and then saying that that is what everyone wants. (Who cares about transgenderism, for example. (Almost no one has their stakes there. Yet still it’s a very prevalent theme. As if it’s a societal priority, while it actually is not. (And then saying that transgenderism is bullshxt slowly becomes more and more of a “bad” thing.)))
I’d say leftist progressivism has derailed so far that the government has become way (like way way waaaayyy) too preoccupied with meddling in people’s private lives (a peanut butter and jelly sandwich is a greater threat to wiping out the human race than the coronavirus is) than it is focused on its basic responsibility, which is the public spaces of society (that is in severe decline).
In democracy, whoever wins, chooses. What happens when who has won (policy-wise more importantly, not socially haha) does more harm than good? Not what should happen. Best case scenario (and you know how I feel about this) people peacefully march together in protest. That a protest takes place does, however, not mean that bad policy will be fixed (as evidence shows). (Also, protesting over the negative economic effects of every single policy that is put out… (It all opposes, if not reverses the economic independency (free from governmental interference, that is) of the majority.))
What I believe the American democracy is missing, and that is in direct opposition to what makes a republic a republic, is someone with the authority of a regent (or regents: one for every state). Someone who can draw the attention back to things that need political attention, such as that the government should be putting more effort into taking away all coronavirus constraints, including putting a stop to vaccination programs and including telling the public how difficult it is for them to go from coronavirus policy to “back to normal”. (Like that they don’t go “back to normal” mostly because they don’t know in what way to accomplish that and that until then all talk about “going back to normal” is a bunch of fake promises. (Popcorn tasty.))
Someone who can, given the government is outspokenly ideological and simultaneously silences opposing voices, allow for controversiality to re-enter the public debate. Someone who can demand the government to meddle in one’s personal affairs less and (either constrain it to (my preference) or draw it more back to) forcing it to prioritize the public aspects of society.
If you are saying that the president is the one with that regent-like authority, you are wrong. Because the president is elected in partisan fasion. Therefore his actions may be and are more in line with political ideology than with what citizens want/need individually. No one can, in today’s democracy, hold him accountable for that with higher authority. And simultaneously, the president is not above the law. (The Supreme Court can deem something the president has done (such as ratifying bad policy) “wrong” but cannot change the content of that which is wrong to make it right.)
Do they know? The political partisanship he has been tied to from birth, the Democratic Party: do you think they know? They can censor or publicly correct for anything, but instead of saying that he is intelligent, they remain “impartial on whether he is a political criminal or not” and embrace the idea of him behaving recklessly under the influence of drugs. Do they know that their associate aspires to run for president in the future? “Totally unrelated question”: who maintains his narrative in the media in the first place? (My fxcking God he is blaming me for it. =.=)
These Elitarists =.=
Those who are born into elitarian status and/or those who are of elitarian descent are not as susceptible to governmental authority. That is born into an exceptionally rich family, having worked oneself up to exceptional richness or though having experienced elitarian benefits or having regal blood being susceptible to the government (as a result of (economic) decline). (Or being I…)
Some elitarists feel for the public, some do not. Some aspire to show themselves to the world, some do not. In the awareness of their exceptional wealth, sometimes not knowing how that is possible, some feel the need to make up for what the public lacks with charity or by becoming a politician, for example.
Telepathically, I have been disturbed by elitarists because of my expressions in favor of former president Donald Trump. They believe that I am the one who does not understand politics because I have expressed and indirectly am still expressing ideological support for someone who experienced 4 long years of media hate and then lost an election. Their binary understanding of politics is that they see me speak in favor of something that is impupular and they consider that basically like “toto betting” all-in for the same losing team every single time. They believe that I have rightfully been experiencing over 100 days of telepathic punishment because of that.
When elitarists “empathize” with the public, that it not more than some words they have been whispered in by their agents. They do not know what it is like to live a non-elitarian life. Therefore, they also do not know what it feels like to be susceptible to the rule of government. Because PR-wise political reality can be made whatever the highest bidder wants it to be, and currently that is…
There is absolutely not enough news available about the state of the economy and about the prospects thereof. There are ongoing false promises about the economy getting out of its coronavirus paralysis and along with that the revival of industries that are bleeding to death. There is nothing about the long-term economic consequences that are worsened every time a lockdown is prolonged. And how if there is no Summer holiday (and with that no Summer (seasonal) industry), society will end up in an economic depression so deep that it will become politically impossible to go back to normal.
The elitarists only know election politics, because that is from their side when they roll up their sleeves. (To win over some people and that’s about it. Afterwards they go back to sleep.) They are forgetting that for me it is not about which team: I am an unemployed drop-out student who, along with all the other unemployed drop-outs, does not have a good perspective for the future.
“So Politics has Nothing to do with Sucking Dick…”
All this nonsense about “She’s a toxic bitch,” and sex cults and stuff is along the lines of their idea of election politics. Just some sensationalist statements being thrown back and forth for the people then to have a conversation after. The striking impact of governmental authority is completely left out to them (because it is not of influence to them).
I need to, here, write down some examples of the standard “do’s and don’ts” for politically active elitarists and the propagandist workings thereof, to point out to them their ignorance when it comes to political priority.
Saying things like “I like hamburgers,” and “I have a dog,” and stuff when speaking to the public.
In actuality, the elitarist has no idea what he/she is talking about when they say “sentimental” things to the public that are relatable to the public. But this is one of the “standard positive” things the elitarist does to win the hearts of citizens, because it makes the susceptible citizen think: “Well if he/she can relate to that, then he/she will likely also understand what I need from the government and stand up for that,” because they are non-elitarists (or plebeian I say) things. They, however, cannot relate to what truly drives plebeians’ economic needs.
The new version is worse:
Advanced: “With starting a sex cult and cryptocurrency you can save the economy from a coronavirus depression, she is bad for not wanting to cooperate.”
This is some advanced bullshit because all most plebeians know about economics is: “More money is better.” (As if inflation does not exist. Inflation is also “more money”, but it is not good.) First, there are goods and services, then there is money. Money without goods and services is worthless. Doing sex cult as occupation, the more people do it the lower the chance of versatility in what to do in a day (the economy) ever returning. I refuse to go along with sex cult nonsense I disagree with regardless.
Sex scandals in the news related to having a bad influence on political careers.
All they understand is basically: “An elitarist is liked by the public, then there’s some sex scandal (thus someone either really for example cheating someone or someone being framed) and then the appreciation by the public is gone (along with the for the elitarist very relatable idea of a beloved legacy).”
What actually happens is that the elitarist represents, for example a political party or a business that is active on the stock market. Opponents who want to overtake the ideological advantage or height of stock market price (higher figures with a more shadow-like authority do this (the Dutch?)) sometimes do that by defaming the elitarist by spreading negative PR about him/her in the news media, and with that taking away the advantage he/she has over the public.
Sex scandals are considered bad in the eyes of the public because they think negatively about sex without marriage and/or because having a wildly sexual lifestyle they associate with being irresponsible.
Advanced: The sexual controversy that is LilFangs.com.
Are my websites there for sexual entertainment or to take down the shadow authorities who use the media to defame others and to take down the government and such? I definitely do not want to be shot or kidnapped. I have cameras in my house. 🙂
My God “Hunter Biden” is worried about me wanting to get him involved in my intentions of taking down the shadow authorities by leading me to them but disguising that as media attention for sex scandal (affair, sex cult, whatever it doesn’t even actually need to happen, as long as they say it) after which we could then expose them. But he is worried about his presidential career because I mentioned him in the context of sex (but he apparently doesn’t know what “sex” means (but I bet he has had the “Keep your hands above the sheets”-style upbringing)). I think he should be more worried about what is on the news about him already than the political intentions I had with him. Can those false telepathic accusations stop now?
Advocating in favor of rioting and in favor of kneeling for the national anthem and things like that.
This is considered one of the “more contemporary” ways to win the hearts of the public. This is considered one of the “more contemporary” ways to win the hearts of the public. Elitarists consider it the highest political virtue now to deem their country as “very flawed” because of its history and serve that to the public as one of the greatest topics of political importance. The public does not decide what gets media attention and what does not. From the perspective of a drop-out student who favors working for it over loan forgiveness, leftist priorities such as kneeling for national anthems and illegalizing The Cat in the Hat are not of importance to me at all. One risks getting “canceled” when one does not babble along with this credo. That everyone is babbling along with it does not mean that it is true. As a person of color, the things I experience as racism, for example, is when white people make telepathic monkey sounds at me and when they seek for ways to call me a stereotype based on the way they see me act at home (whilst not knowing anything about why I stay here), which is the direct opposite of the leftist credo that is “stereotyping is good anti-racist”… The amount of damage that is done in the name of anti-“BIPOC”-racism is done by the shadow-like elitarist who endorses it. It is not a community request.
So, to be clear to the elitarists who believe(d) that the essence of politics is the gossip drama in the media: no, what truly matters is governmental policy.
Camp Vlad International
You want the responsibility without the mainstream media breathing down your neck, don’t you? This can be accomplished (if cooperation will be established just from this article right here, along with the side effects of my final offer). You know better how this came to pass than I do: whatever repeatedly keeps in the public debate of something with waiting for me to start a sex cult which will never happen in the first place, must be ended. Using Клыки, the narrative about this can be centralized and brought to the forefront independently.
Then: the elitarists who have been (trying to) appealing to the public virtuously, are likely not aware of the impact it has on the way it makes the members of society view their own purpose. Like the effects is has on public opinion are problematic, from an economic (capitalist) and ideological perspective. This is an international problem. As the embodiment of confidence itself, a clear way of communicating both thought and vision and plenty of experience in the detailed workings of internatioinal politics, I can’t think of anyone else better fit for this responsibility.
Are you familiar with weeklong symposia or something like that? The goal is that afterwards they are prepared to carry similar responsibility. The name is satirical. The presentation is more for people to be in a comfortable men-only (well-filtered because no fuccing) environment to recover from (sexual) telepathic indoctrination and such, along with learning to understand where that all comes from. Learning from experience by flooding the Netherlands? (Limburg (which flooded recently) is not even the area about which I make alarming statements and that is already quite irrecoverable. Have that happen in Zuid-Holland and it is over for them.) We’ll talk at the afterparty? It starts with my upstairs neighbor taking down his curtains. =.=
An even more complicated perspective to make understand the role of government, as an attenuation of the rule of a despot, is my wild Czarrian (regal vampire, that is, of Jewish Russian descent) Technicus (with a pinch of autism). He has that shadow authority I aspire to have, and he has a good heart. We can learn a lot from each other.
Money is infinitely available to him and he does not need to hide his killings. He can also get the whole area, including my apartment itself, loaded with hidden cameras in between the time I preview visited this building for the first time and when I moved in. He is much involved with Alphabet and Tesla. He had a Belgian doppelgänger and he, the Czar himself, wearing the disguise of his doppelgänger, even managed to give a couple of lectures at the Erasmus University.
Why “Western” people routinously do the things they do and why that is logical/normal to them is already complicated to explain to someone of Russian descent. The Russian people do things more versatile, based on instantaneous logic rather than Western credo. To, then, explain that to a Jewish Russian Czar is even more complicated, because it is nearly 100% incomparable to his own ways of life. That this has been tried by Dutch women has had noticeable consequences.
I am his biggest fan and he is my biggest fan. The way he carries himself as if al the hardship he has been living through has had no emotional influence on him at all, in continuance (which is classical to someone of regal descent). And how he is (after me :p) the most intelligent person on the planet by far. He is a literal God. I believe he can teleport? His fangs are also retractable. I heard he loves to make death threats in Dutch. :p
“Fitzgerald/”Hunter Biden” has become plebeian because he does not try to look for work to then be able to improve his living circumstances. He is just in that apartment doing nothing but eating his own feces.” “Maybe the cause is her race. Regardless, psychiatry might be good for her because she does nothing other than stay in that apartment and have fits of anger.” “They may not meet, because they as well as the rest of the public may not find out that “the aliens live amongst us”. She must hide her sixth sense.” These are examples of the plebeian (Dutch) logic he has been taught. I want to unlearn him these things, but fail to do this using telepathy. We are not standard человекыs, or человекs as he says. The public knows that because they (because of Dutch piracy?) watch the same camera footage as he does, but as a reality TV show rather than security camera footage, and now that I am writing this, they understand it even better.
Is he, together with Vladimir, those who offered to buy the art of “Hunter Biden”? So that then maybe he will stop being my lifeless upstairs neighbor and start living again? How sweet. (Will the money actually reach him? Should be a question… 🙁 )
He perceives the lives of citizens/people/человекs (zijn ze lekker¿ :p <3) as categorizable algorithms (Google). The leftist idea of a unified public opinion makes more sense to him because as someone of regal descent and with a modernized form of regal authority, he can’t relate to it based on experience. (Perhaps when it sinks in the situation he has gotten himself into with the Dutch government, he will understand the suffocating idea of facing the government better.)
Intermezzo: Currently he is having a fit of autism over why I am eating this человекы cheese. I myself too see that it is mostly just fat and salt, and that I would enjoy it a lot more if it were a more premium quality cheese. I, however, am constrained by going to a supermarket (and okay yes haha there is also a cheese store, but that requires more exposure to человекыs to acquire it and the negligible difference in quality plus the difference in price for my budget constraints make this supermarket cheese the best cheese I can get). His senses are bothered by me knowing exactly when I would enjoy myself better and reiterating that to myself while I tell myself that I should be happy with what I do have. I bet he can get me way better cheese.
I often try to explain why he must stop siding with the telepathic leftists (Dutch), but at “going against the majority,” we already get into a rather heated disagreement in which he is supremely convinced that he is the one who is right. (Heated as in hurting each other with physical telepathy. =.= (Though most often when I direct mine at him Fitzgerald absorbs or deflects it.)) An elitarist can understand the idea of speaking to the needs of the public, and the importance of those needs for both the public and their popularity. To a or this Czar, however, the idea of citizens having political needs is more complicated, because to him they just exist. Like – especially for his exceptional intelligence – he perceives them like nothing but a bunch of NPCs (and to quite a large extent I agree with that), with hardly any self-awareness.
Because I have lived amongst them, I know what it is like to have specific, personal interest based expectations from the government. That I believe that leftism does not only not meet these expectations, but even is counter-effective to these expectations, he, because leftism is what most people have settled for, considers that like simply having filled out the wrong answer on a test. Then, my convincement that the expression of political controversy must not be censored/illegalized, is even more difficult to explain in milliseconds of non-verbal telepathy. He sees it as nothing more than people angrily screaming mean things at each other. He considers that just something that mortals do, like the way dogs bark and pant, mortals are susceptible to the bread and circuses of elections and sometimes scream at each other angrily for some reason. Screaming disagreements are odd to my Czar, because the point where discourse reaches that level of friction is when he simply kills the entity that is that annoying to him.
He has a tremendous impact on the way society functions. (Has had that for years.) Most people likely do not know him in that way. He exercises political influence from his own free will, and does not introduce himself with that. It is only for the true connaiseur, or someone who knows how to see through his regal disguise. (Is the moon a satellite he owns?) Camp Vlad is not for him, because staying in, for example, a luxury hotel, is too человекы for him. Also, from the unlimited power he has been exercising, having a conversation with me about it, including hearing about some suggestions I have for him from my own perspective, is more interesting to him than learning about the inner workings of international politics. Especially because his power is not susceptible to international constraints either. When I speak of leading the world from the shadows, thus having unconstrained political influence without being an elected official, I basically mean doing something similar to what he does. It would mean everything to me if I could get a chance to hear his perspective on getting things like that done.
Simultaneously, I know that he is of regal descent, but is unfamiliar with the philosophy behind the development of moral leadership from a regal perspective, because no one has ever taught him that. It is useful to his shadow leadership and makes him the utmost perfect Technicus for me. He has been putting effort in learning it from the people themselves, but no one has enlightened him on it. He has been homeschooled. I have attended public school in the Netherlands, where I learned plenty about the recurring patterns and adaptation of moral leadership (in history class mostly). And, though my patience with them is getting less by the day, I am also an expert in Человекы logic. I even have some experience in developing moral ideology myself. Ideological regal leadership is incentivized by the political dissatisfaction of the public (political tension in a democratic context and/or political uprising), in which I have been immersed. He desires for someone to explain to him, from an over-arching, regal perspective the parameters of moral leadership in such a way that he can apply it himself and that it is logical to him.
So simultaneously with the week of Camp Vlad there is Camp FangCatje. He can give me a tour through his family estate. We can get hella nerdy talking about (our) history and ideology and stuff. He can switch to a healthier diet than eating human flesh by cooking for me (I know he has that secret Michelin star chef expertise :p). We can make some new beatsss. And we can cuddle up and watch the Netherlands flood. I consider it the perfect way to bond with him, my biological father.
The political effects of Клыки, for which he, this liefje who moves hell and Earth to find his daughter, should write an introduction (similar to the way described in the hand-written zombie apocalypse story), will internationally shift us away from democracy.