Colossal U.S. Election Fraud - When the Righteous and Virtuous are Absent the Evil Triumphs!

After four years of relentless attacks and a continuous campaign of lies and defamation against President Trump, unprecedented not only in this country but probably in all the history of democratic republics, the united left's coup attempt against Trump has culminated in an operation of colossal voter fraud. The Democrats stole an election President Trump had already won on the evening of November 3 from him.

 

At the present crossroads of political decay, the sinister forces are being encouraged by the swindled election success to install the usurper Biden in the White House. However, the question arises about how much further wickedness and mocking malice may transpire before everything must find its end in an apocalyptic discharge. The societal climate of utmost division and hatefulness in the U.S. has reached a regretful pinnacle of deterioration.

In the previous blog essay (https://www.edwinseditorial.com/2020/07/a-nation-threatened-by-ignorance.html), I tackled the issue of executive power and leadership in times of crises and distress for a nation. In anticipation of the chaos around the elections, I recommended early law enforcement and military measures to quell the unrest and the violence and looting by Black Lives Matter and Antifa thugs around the country. I highlighted the legal and philosophical challenges of a federally organized country where, by constitutional mandate, regional politicians are not only entitled to oppose the nation's leader but may openly work against him. Initially blaming the killing of George Floyd by a police officer, the organizations mentioned earlier became movements to prepare the ground for the government's overthrow and the removal of Mr. Trump from office. It is incomprehensible why certain governors and mayors were allowed to continue their destructive practices. Shirking their responsibilities as elected officials by giving stand-down orders to law enforcement and even encouraging civil unrest and looting, legal measures, including temporary removal from office, should have stopped their destructive practices. And while President Trump and a few cabinet members warned of widespread fraud and the impending chaos tens of millions of mail-in ballots will cause, authorities did not do enough to secure fair elections. 

The OSCE (the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe), the world's largest security-related intergovernmental organization that comprises some 57 nation-states in Europe, North America, and Asia, could have dispatched election monitoring personnel to the U.S. It sends its election observers all over Eastern- and Southeastern Europe and, upon invitation, could certainly have provided some measure of impartiality for the elections over here.

But the public discourse in the U.S. neither mentioned the option of election observers. Nor was the alternative of an election repeat discussed - at least in the Swing States where attorneys and control agents discovered a host of irregularities and found substantial evidence of fraud, corroborated by dozens of affidavits from election officials and observers. There is now an abundance of proof (of course denied by the Biden camp and the fake news media) that tens of thousands of illegal votes were cast and that the software used to evaluate ballots in many states was flawed or deliberately hacked. Conjectures about how many votes went to Biden that were initially given to Trump range from several hundred thousand to a few million. 

 

Although it appears that the multi-faceted magnitude of fraud and election rigging might render revision and a win for Mr. Trump impossible, under no circumstances must he concede and let the left get away with their con operation. The Trump administration must utilize all legal measures and efforts to prevent the travesty of a Biden-Harris ticket from taking over the White House. 

If we allow this election scam to go through, the incoming Democrat administration will set the nation on a path to Marxist-globalist destruction. Biden and his team will reverse and eradicate all the success Trump has achieved in his first term – to name a few: the restructuring of the Middle East; ending of endless wars and unjust overseas military engagements; realization of energy independence for the U.S.; tax reform for corporations and individuals; unprecedented economic upswing with record employment numbers for blacks, Hispanics, women; new and improved trade deals with Canada and Mexico in replacement of the ill-conceived NAFTA; trade agreement with China; revival and defense of Christian values and social ethics; and the list could go on.

The triumph of the vile and depraved Democratic party regarding the presidency is not assured yet. And never forget we must that the evil has no existence in and by itself. It just thrives on the temporary absence of the righteous and virtuous, which I predict are about to return and will eventually prevail - must prevail as the future of this nation and our entire Western civilization is at stake!

 

A Nation Threatened by Ignorance

The ancient adage of how easily the political system of Democracy can degenerate into its evil opposite, an Ochlocracy, a reign of the mob, materializes in the reality of our everyday lives. 

What we see unfolding before our own eyes in almost schoolbook-like perfection is something I've considered possible only as speculation of reason, something that could merely exist as an ideal representation in political philosophy. Yet, here it is. We witness in actuality what happens when a society no longer comes to terms with the crucial social ingredient of any democratically organized collectivity of people – human freedom and its complement, individual responsibility – and succumbs to an orgy of lawlessness and mayhem.

 

Mob Rule and the Plebeians of our Day

But the potential taking over of the country by the mob has not come about overnight, and if ever, will not vanish overnight. I have warned of the imminent 'mental dictatorship' and the looming 'ideological despotism' by the leftist mob in my post of January 31, 2017, entitled "The Tyranny of the Mob." https://www.edwinseditorial.com/2017/01/the-tyranny-of-left.html

In it, I also explained a phenomenon that has gained a prominent position in our time. The mob, the plebeians of our day, are no longer a class of citizens unable to read or write like in ancient times. Today the unruly crowd is built by all those ill-educated and ignorant, intellectually and morally wanting individuals that come from all strata of society – workers and teachers, journalists, academics, scientists, and politicians. Among that vast group of misguided people, I count many if not most of the Democrats in both Senate and Congress, but also neoconservatives among the Republicans and the neoliberal nomenclature in the State Department and other governmental bodies, not to speak of the vast majority of faculty at the institutions of higher learning. 

However, never before has the harm caused by political illiteracy and moral confusion been so immense that it pushes the country to the brink of destruction. The misconceptions regarding the ontology of political and social coexistence have reached alarming and fundamentally threatening heights. I tackled the beginnings of the mania that has brought the U.S. and, albeit to a lesser degree, Europe to the current state of affairs in my blog essay of November 2015, addressing the fallacies and educational delusions that have brought us to the present point of societal disintegration https://www.edwinseditorial.com/2015/11/immigration-us-and-europe-governed-by.html.

Consequently, I bet I would not find one single person among the peacefully protesting and the looting, plundering, and killing hordes of recent weeks, whose awareness would contain a sound political philosophy for human and social existence. And it wouldn't make any difference whether I chose somebody from the more erudite echelons of the protesters, such as college graduates and studied people, mayors and congressmen/women, senators, media people, or less educated participants.

They have all succumbed to the imposition of a 'Culture of Insanity' that has suffocated the minimal reasonableness required for stable social coexistence. By pretending to protest against alleged systemic anti-black racism in the police force in the wake of a black man's murderous killing by a white police officer, demonstrations and riots broke out all across the country. For the most part, law enforcement condemned to stand down by Democrat governors and mayors and let looting and plundering take place unobstructed had to look on as the breakdown of law and order unfolded on an astonishing scale.

Soon, it became clear that the mob, acting under the pretense of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement was out to accomplish something utterly different. As their indifference toward black-on-black violence and the untenable position of disadvantaged blacks in society demonstrates, they instrumentalize the issue of alleged anti-black systemic racism for an issue quite distinct.

The Aim and Purpose of the Radical Leftism

Once calls to defund the police had become ubiquitous in leftist circles, and the mob had begun to establish anarchistic self-government zones and purge the nation's history by destroying historical monuments, the real objective of their lawlessness became transparent. It is all about the profound disruption of national cohesion to overthrow the government, get rid of President Trump, transform the US-American political system into a secularist Marxist-Socialist collective, devoid of its Christian social ethics, and led and governed by a forever-majority of Democrats in the central institutions of political power. 

We are watching a mighty nation soon either descend into a new civil war or fall otherwise apart, a fate awaiting any country that renounces law and order and gives up its monopoly of power and force. Can the destruction of this nation be the objective aimed at by the broader circles of leftism and progressive political quarters in this nation?

No longer can there be any uncertainty about it. The proponents of this mob rule seem to think that abolishing law enforcement and engaging in social experiments on dealing with crime and transgressions would lead to new and possibly more humane ways of governance. 

In their ideological delusion, they think that the arrangement of peaceful social coexistence and the political structures and institutions it requires could be subject to trial and error. Can they possibly believe that attempts at self-organizing and self-governing will bring about improved ways of governance? The ugly leftism's propaganda heads already created a new catchphrase for their policing utopia: Reimagining public safety. They indeed appear to be utterly ignorant that breaking the monopolization of force by the State and dissolving the structures of law and order can only lead to chaos and the overall deterioration of life-quality and the destruction of social peace. A fact that was almost immediately proven by how the community experiment of CHOD in Seattle ended.

In combination with moral deficiencies, a dreadful blend of ignorance has taken hold in this country whose population is facing the results of decade-long indoctrination and an education devoid of classical erudition. Only thus can the disregard for the wisdom of the grand traditions of classical liberal arts and the unbending desire for the destruction of monuments as an attempt to eradicate objectionable history as judged from the angle of ideological prejudice be explained. 

What we witness happens when the common ground of foundational moral and civic values in society gets lost. The minimal common denominator for what is right and wrong, lawful and unlawful, good and bad, which is a prerequisite for any permanent structure of communal coexistence, has been terminated by the described culture of ill-education and indoctrination. I dedicated an entire blog post in March 2015, "The Crisis of Morality," to this ontological phenomenon and explained what happens when the crisis of morality manifests itself to such a profound degree as it does currently in the U.S. and many other western nations https://www.edwinseditorial.com/2015/03/the-crisis-of-morality.html.

What unites today's mob members up to the highest positions of political representation is their colossal ignorance regarding human nature. As logical inference, overcoming their lack of understanding regarding the social and political arrangements is indispensable for prosperous and potentially peaceful social coexistence. 

 

Commanding the State of National Emergency

The mayhem of the past few months laid open a severe weakness in the United States' constitutional legislation as well, an aspect nobody in the public realm has yet acknowledged or dared to mention.

This weakness pertains to the question of a functioning hierarchy in situations of national distress. The rift between federal (the President) and regional (the governors), as well as local (the mayors) authorities, demonstrated the lack of specific constitutional provisions for clear leadership responsibilities in situations of national distress. 

Already the back and forth between the President and local authorities during the COVID-Pandemic and the want for an explicit command hierarchy gave a taste of how bad the situation can be. The grave national security crisis unfolding in the wake of the killing of George Floyd by a police officer moved this issue even further to the forefront. 

The lawlessness of recent weeks ruthlessly reflected the deficiencies concerning emergency decision power. Several left-wing governors (i.e., California, Minnesota, Oregon) and mayors (i.e., Chicago, Denver, New York City, Portland, Seattle), acted at will in apparent contradiction to policy directives of the White House and nearly turned their areas of responsibility into war zones. With impunity, they did so for partisan expedience, out of ideological absurdity, or to spite the President. The President's occasional mobilization of national guard troops and the passing of executive orders to protect historical monuments might have prevented the worst from happening. However, the overall state of domestic political affairs of recent weeks with violence and mayhem still dominating many cities is unacceptable.

It seems no longer to be part of educated awareness that the longstanding wisdom of political philosophy and state theory has already resolved this issue profoundly. 

Every government that wants to be capable of decisive action in circumstances of utmost national distress and emergency must include a 'dictatorial element' in its constitution. Indeed, although it might hurt democratic prejudice, truly exceptional situations require the temporary negation of democratic principles and the independence of the supreme executive from legislative majority approval. If the bonum commune means something, even the most hard-core egalitarians in democratic societies must come to terms with this seemingly paradoxical assumption - which neither the founding fathers nor contemporary lawmakers seem to have acknowledged. But this condition might have to change now, where the nation's survival as a homogenous political body is at stake. 

In the U.S., while the constitution gives special powers to the executive in emergency times, Congress can terminate such emergency declaration by joint resolution. The National Emergency Act (of 1976) grants special powers to the President but ties the invocation of this crisis empowerment to certain procedural formalities. And as far as invoking martial law is concerned, both President and Congress can impose it. Besides, the Posse Comitatus legislation impairs the President's powers to use federal military forces for domestic security reasons. There is no clear preponderance on the part of the Head Executive of the Nation, in situations of national distress, to act unilaterally and decide independently of immediate legislative constraint. Lawmakers must not confuse or misinterpret the fact that the President's accountability as the Supreme Leader never ceases. The answerability for his actions in the exceptional cases of national distress has to come after resolving the crisis. Still, it must not hinder his immediate powers to act in difficult situations. 

An attentive observer of recent political developments in the U.S. cannot doubt the legitimacy of the claim to significantly strengthen and centralize the President's executive powers for situations of utter national distress. Yet, it is doubtful that politicians and governmental advisory bodies, in their usual erudite shortcomings, will enact the necessary legislation to give the President sufficient executive powers to override resistance from regional and local authorities in exceptional situations of national agony. 

Future Prospect and Solution

What went down in the past few months in this country leaves no doubt that the fact who commands the situation of national emergency is of paramount importance for the survival of a nation, democratically organized or not.

But what solution is there in the face of the violent attitude and doctrinaire aggressiveness of the left? Political discourse no longer seems to be an option, given that leftism suffocates even the slightest deviation from their notions, both by word and violent deed. It provides little consolation to know why the left has to be intolerant and autocratic – not one of their arguments and claims can withstand earnest critique and hold up to the scrutiny of social and political reality. It is one of the reasons why leftism always wants to eradicate history and focus on the future. Any historical experience available is evidence for the failure of socialism and the poor results of its reign. 

As far as Ochlocracy is concerned, the ancient philosophers already warned us that the only way out of the Mob Rule is the tyrannis. The strike of the iron fist is needed to defeat anarchy and restore law and order. It appears as if this role will inevitably fall to President Trump as the last hope for this nation to avoid outright civil war. And even more critical, to prevent the installation of a godless, collectivist, and culturally destructive communist-type despotism from taking place, which will be the inevitable consequence if the Democrats take over the White House and probably even the Senate in the fall. 

There are barely four months left till the presidential elections in November, and the ochlocratic state in many areas and institutions of the country has reached an appalling level. Civil unrest has continued for weeks and doesn't seem to lessen. Mostly Democrat governors and regional politicians are doubling down on their support for rioters and lawbreakers. Even certain Republican politicians and, of course, Never-Trumpers prop up the claims of the revolutionary inclined followers of Black Lives Matter and other radical formations.

In their hatred of President Trump, the radical left is bent on removing him from office at all costs, even at this nation's perishment. They have pushed this country almost to the point of no return. With every day going by that leaves the lawlessness and outright insurgent activity of the mob unanswered, it will become more challenging to return the entire country to stability. 

Restoring order might require extensive use of force, both law enforcement and military. Probably, even martial law and temporary military rule in certain areas are not out of the question.

However, although it is somewhat pathological, it is interesting to note that precisely the media proponents of the mob, in the concrete case, CNN, have already called for martial law. The usual strategy out of the leftist playbook is on full display – to project and reflect their guilt and wrongdoing on the opposition and forestall measures and actions predictably used against them.

The leftist mob and their enablers in the Democratic and Anti-Trump establishment are aware of the decisiveness of the hour. They will not come to their senses unless the mob ceases their lawless activities because of exhaustion and fatigue, or the iron fist will strike to save the nation from itself.

  

A grueling and costly path lies ahead if the country wants to return to its more traditional political order and its Christian roots. We will soon learn whether or not it is already too late.

Why My North Korea Resolve Could Have Made President Trump 'Famous' at the UN!

Had the advisors to President Trump read my blog essay on "How to Resolve the North Korea Crisis" of August 10, 2017 (https://www.edwinseditorial.com/2017/08/how-to-resolve-north-korea-crisis.html), could they have made him 'famous' at the United Nations? If Mr. Trump had presented my two-tier approach to resolving this crisis, which is not only politically sound but also morally legitimate, they would hail him as a statesman by now. Does this sound conceited or arrogant? It might seem at the beginning of this brief essay, but hopefully will no longer at the end.

 

Imagine Mr. Trump, heeding the advice I proposed in my blog essay, saying something like the following in his speech at the United Nations Assembly: "I assure the world public that the U.S. will never use nuclear force against North Korea first. I guarantee the North Korean regime that the U.S. and its allies will not forcefully implement regime change in North Korea. My political administration will pursue the establishment of a peace treaty to that effect. While this process is ongoing and until we achieve a satisfying result, the U.S. will observe the principle of 'deterrence by denial.' It will implement missile defense capabilities and civil defense measures to protect itself and its allies if North Korea decides to abandon this proposal for resolving the crisis between our nations peacefully. However, I assure the world community of nations that if North Korea should strike or attempt to hit the U.S. or its allies with weapons of mass destruction first, the United States will strike back with all its might at whatever cost this might entail for the North Korean people."

 

This statement would have not only been prudent to say in the sense of putting the U.S. on the moral high ground in this conflict. It would also acknowledge that the experts in Washington D. C. had finally understood what North Korea's aggressive posture and its constant missile and nuclear testing is all about: to generate some atomic capacity to deter the United States from regime-change intervention! As mentioned previously, only the nuclear capability can be the big "equalizer" and dissuade potential imperialist intentions even on a conventional military level.

 

Did the world not watch or forget about what happened not long ago, i.e., in Libya, in 2011, at the Obama/Clinton cabinet's hands, when U.S. and NATO forces launched an air campaign to support dubious insurgent groups against the Libyan military and government forces? Such was the reward Libya's leader Muammar Gadhafi, murdered in the streets, received for his retreat from pursuing nuclear weapons and his trust and handshake with Obama and incumbent European heads of state at the time. And have we not observed what the U.S. did to Syria in the misguided and failed regime-change attempt to oust President Assad, arming terrorists and insurgents, supporting al-Qaeda and ISIS and other groups in the region, causing unspeakable and unnecessary mayhem? Now the Russians had to restore stability and prop Assad, and at this point, it is not hard to predict that the Syrian intervention attempt will end up as a massive embarrassment for the United States. Aside from that: What about all the waste of human life and treasure on both sides? Were some military-industrial profit and the satisfaction of Mr. Obama's ideological arrogance indeed worth the chaos, the cost of lives, and the unleashing of refugees and displaced people onto the shores of Europe?

 

As unfortunate as the most likely acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by North Korea is, it comes for good reasons and a clear rationale that the North Korean regime hides behind its seemingly erratic behavior. The U.S.' policy failures nourished this rationale.

 

The U.S. and the international community should further pursue containment and denuclearization of the Korean peninsula; however, they should not make it a condition for peace. The probable possession of specific nuclear capabilities of North Korea does not and must not justify a preemptive strike.

 

Instead of further pursuing hypocritical foreign affairs policies that cause more trouble than resolving issues, it is high time to arrive at some collective realization of past follies in foreign affairs among Washington's elites and to change course.

 

This nation and its leader need to eliminate the war-mongering neoliberal and neoconservative nomenclature in the U.S. State Department and among the advisory bodies to the White House. Leaders of nations cannot know everything, but we expect them to have an excellent and pragmatic judgment that enables them to choose wisely among policy proposals. Without wise choice offered, they will most likely fail.

How to Resolve the North Korea Crisis!

When back in the days of President Jimmy Carter, the U.S. gave North Korea technology for nuclear reactors and a few billion bucks on top of it, only gullible liberals believed that the regime would use atomic capability only for peaceful purposes.

Every serious scholar and student of international relations, then as well as today, knows that nuclear armament – even when it’s only a few warheads – is the big equalizer in terms of national security. It balances out any inferiority in terms of conventional armed forces, size of the country, demographics, and economic capacity. During the roughly forty years of the Cold War, it was the paradox of nuclear deterrence and the so aptly abbreviated (MAD) Mutually Assured Destruction that prevented any severe conventional wars from breaking out. The likelihood of any conflict escalating to the level of nuclear warfare reduced the chances for a conventional war on a larger scale.

Given the historically burdened ideological antagonism toward the West, it was to expect that North Korea would strive to become a nuclear power at all cost – even at the expense of lying to treaty partners and the international community and making pledges it never intended to keep. After all the leniency and unsuccessful attempts at appeasement under Carter in the 1970ies, Clinton in the 1990ies, and the do-nothing strategy of so-called strategic patience under Obama, it is now too late to prevent North Korea from becoming a nuclear power, albeit it a minor one.

It appears that we have somehow returned to the conditions that dominated a particular dimension of international relations during the Cold War, which means the hysteria on the part of the Strategic Community in the U.S. is unwarranted – and so is President Trump’s martial rhetoric.

Against the backdrop of the U.S.’ unmatched military means in terms of global power projection and nuclear capabilities, I propose a two-tier solution to resolve the conflict with North Korea. These measures would allow avoiding further escalation and avert unnecessary distress for international relations and potentially affected populations:

1. The stratagem of ‘Deterrence by Denial’ has to be applied by implementing all capabilities for missile defense and interception on the Korean peninsula and all other potential target areas for North Korean ballistic missiles, be it the west coast of the U.S., Guam, or other regions and locales. These aggressive military steps have to join hands with civil defense measures for the protection of populations and vital military and civilian infrastructure that help minimize any damage in the unlikely event of being impacted by the use of weapons of mass destruction.

2. The promise of ‘Annihilation upon 1st Strike’ has to be plausibly and assuredly threatened to the regime in North Korea. The U.S. must unmistakably convey through diplomatic channels and public discourse that it does not intend to use nuclear weapons against North Korea first. However, it will annihilate North Korea if North Korea uses nuclear weapons against the U.S. or any of its allies. Despite its seemingly irrational rhetoric, the regime of Kim Jong Un will not invite destruction upon themselves and their country.

There is no need for preemptive strikes to take out North Korean weaponry or delivery systems. The cost in human lives would be too high, total success uncertain, and retaliation most probable. If it comes to this, the U.S. and the rest of the world would be able to live with the fact that North Korea and its autocratic regime avail over some nuclear armament and feel powerful and on level par with other nuclear-armed nations around the world. However, like all the others, it will be condemned never to use them unless they want to bring Armageddon over their people.

While implementing this strategy and defusing the danger of thermonuclear, all diplomatic and other means of conflict resolution and appeasement can and should be used to keep the radical North Korean regime in check and further neutralize the threat.

Dealing with North Korea in the proposed way should usher the United States into a long-overdue new era of measured foreign affairs and national security policy that relinquishes the overly self-centered geostrategic arrogance and hubris of the past two decades.

Russophobia - Achilles’ Heel of US-Russia Relations

The demonizing of Russia and specifically of Vladimir Putin has been profoundly regretful and damaging to global affairs in recent years. It appears the U.S. could not rise above the old animosity vis-à-vis the follower nation to the Soviet Union that dominated bi-polar relations during the Cold War. In the quarter-century since, the United States, in its leading role in NATO and cooperation with the European Union, has pursued interventionist policies. Those aimed at global predominance and strengthening its position as the sole remaining superpower.

The U.S. and its partners wasted the opportunities to establish a righteous new world order the post-Cold War security environment offered. As I've made clear in my blog entries over the past years, geopolitical misconceptions paired with strategic hubris and ideological delusions as rampant in the White House and the State Department regimes led to utterly folly in foreign affairs international relations. Besides the undermining and destruction of nation-state structures in the Middle East and the intentional armed support of extremists and insurgents, color revolutions have been backed by the U.S. and E.U., for example, in Georgia and Ukraine. Central to the failed policies was the stunning neglect of legitimate national and strategic interests of other players in international relations.

The latter fact became painfully visible in the wake of the regime change in Ukraine. Every reasonably informed scholar of strategic and security studies could have foreseen the control of Crimea and eastern Ukraine's support by Russia. The installation of a puppet regime in Kiev by Washington and Berlin was unacceptable to Russia after the U.S. had pushed toward her borders through aggressive NATO expansion. To drive Russia out of its Black Sea ports and potentially prepare full-fledged membership of Ukraine, as the geostrategic 'Near Abroad,' in NATO would be intolerable for Russia. The blatant disregard of legitimate Russian interests went along with the infamy of blaming Russia for imperialism that had been clearly and unashamedly pushed by the U.S. and the transatlantic alliance.

It is impossible to accurately verify the degree to which strategic ignorance, national hubris, indifferent imperialism, pseudo-democratic universalism, or apparent economic interest and pressure from the military-industrial complex have led to the failed policy design. Yet, the miserable Pax Americana attempted in the last quarter-century was certainly a conglomerate of all these and probably more factors. In conjunction with Putin's demonization and the artificial preservation of Russia as the primary geopolitical enemy, western powers set the course for missing out on establishing a functioning global post-Cold War world order, including meaningful collaboration for containment of radical Islam. The outrageous claim of the Democratic Party that Russian hacking and cyber intervention lost the election for Hillary Clinton –probably one of the biggest scams in politics ever suggested– further exacerbated the relations with Russia. Mr. Obama's decision to expatriate Russian diplomats and impose additional sanctions under the pretense of Russia's alleged interference in the U.S. presidential elections will rank prominently among the many political follies this man has perpetrated.

The new administration under President Donald Trump, which alone gave hope to conquer the old resentments toward Russia and alleviate the damage the previous administration had caused, appears to be succumbing to the Russophobe and Putin-hating pressure forces in the U.S. Senate, the U.S. Congress, and the media. The new U.S. Ambassador's aggressive speech to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, and the ousting of security advisor General Flynn based on informal conversations with the Russian ambassador provides sad testimony to that assessment.  

Overcoming the hysteria vis-à-vis Russia and its leader Vladimir Putin has to be considered the number one priority in U.S. foreign affairs. Maintaining Russia artificially as an enemy image for a new Cold War and conventional arms race must be ended. A mindful and critical, yet simultaneously constructive and respectful relationship with Russia from the part of the United States is long overdue, for whose materialization the numerous challenges to international relations and global security offer ample opportunity. Russia has to be part of fighting the Islamic State and radical Islamism worldwide and has to play a role in stabilizing the Middle East. While mutually respecting legitimate national interests, a balance of power should result in the pursuance of common objectives and joint ends in global affairs.

But this might require prominent representatives of society and state in the U.S. to stop calling Mr. Putin a murderer, abandoning the sanctions regime, and acknowledging Russia's legitimate strategic and economic interests concerning the Caucasus, Europe, the Mediterranean, and the Middle East. It will also necessitate the easing up of U.S. and NATO forces' aggressive posture in the Baltic States and Eastern Europe.

The new administration must not continue the insanity of the Obama years. The step from considering Russia as a geopolitical enemy toward Russia as a geostrategic counterpart and potential collaborator in global affairs must take place now. In light of Western Christian societies' Islamic subversion, this appears to be a strategic necessity and social obligation.

2016 U.S. Presidential Election - Political Intuition TRUMPS Propaganda

The United States, and with it the world, got a respite. The utter catastrophe, namely the prolongation of the past eight years' nightmare, so it seems, could be averted. A horrific and ultimately devastating third Obama-term was prevented by denying Hillary Clinton the presidency. Something already to be considered the political miracle of the century. 

Against almost all polls and the united predictions of media pundits and news outlets, Donald Trump got elected to become the 45th president of the United States. The good intuition of some 60 million Americans made them vote for Mr. Trump, despite unparalleled disinformation and defamation campaign against him, carried forth by the mainstream media and advanced on the school grounds and college campuses in the months leading up to the election. They voted for him despite the vitriol spewed at Trump not only from his Democrat opponent in the race but also from certain elements in his political party. But most importantly, they voted for him because their political instinct made them see through the concerted attempt of almost all forces of public information and discourse to cover up for the colossal failure of the first African-American president's presidency. 

Over the years, I have commented on the utter follies of Obama's policies in previous blog entries back to 2009, criticizing the pursuance of his Marxist-utopian notions of politics in domestic and international affairs. Imagine that after that sham of Obama's presidency, some people dare to consider anybody else unfit for that office! Mind-boggling political shortsightedness, cultural parochialism, and ideological prejudice of those who still approve of Obama's job performance. Yet, signs that he had turned the Democratic Party into an ailing enterprise and that he doomed Hillary Clinton's run were already tangible to all those who had kept an open mind, and heart for that matter. As the Daily Caller reported, under Obama, Democrats had lost more than 900 state legislature seats, 12 governors, 69 U.S. Congress, and 13 Senate seats.

On regional and local levels, significant numbers of American people had already rejected the advancement of Obama's delusional globalist policies. They neglected human coexistence's ontological necessities and were therefore highly damaging to our social and political coexistence. (for more on the 'Ontological Principles of the Political,' compare my blog essay of November 15, 2015, on "Immigration – U.S. and Europe Governed by Lunacy" https://www.edwinseditorial.com/2015/11/immigration-us-and-europe-governed-by.html). 

However, I emphasized that the lunacy of such policies not only occurs on the side of the progressive Left in this country—the neoconservative elements in the Republican Party also support these ideas. Domestically, out-of-their-mind proponents like Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan propped up Obama's policies of open borders and uncontrolled immigration. Internationally, prominent Republican politicians such as John McCain or Lindsay Graham went along with the Middle East's destruction by arming and supporting dubious insurgents and bringing down established nation-state structures. They also endorsed the U.S. government's idiotic stance toward Russia, most of all the aggressive posture and saber-rattling of the U.S. and NATO in Ukraine and the Baltic states. Quite clearly, neglecting other stakeholders' legitimate national interests in global affairs and negating the significant stakes of strategic thinking had turned the attempted imposition of this type of Pax Americana into an absurdity. 

As I made clear in a blog back in April of 2016, after the dropping out of Rand Paul of the Republican presidential preliminaries, only the election of Donald Trump could raise hope for an urgently needed turnaround to bring U.S. policies to its senses. Alas, the overdue reversal of U.S. foreign affairs policies is not a given now where Mr. Trump got elected. It will all depend on whether or not he will prevent the influence of neoconservatives from altering his policy promises. Of paramount importance will be the person the President-elect is going to assign as his secretary of state. Politicians of statesmanlike stature have always acknowledged the supreme significance of foreign affairs in governance and thus dedicated their prime effort and attention to it. 

The radical policies of ignorant and deluded people, who happened to reign over global affairs in the quarter-century gone by since the collapse of the Soviet Union, drove the United States and Western civilization in its entirety to a crossroads. They wasted the chances the post-Cold War order offered by a reckless U.S. strategy aiming at singular global dominance. At the bottom of this move toward a centralized world stood the weakening and indeed dissolution of the nation-state concept, combined with a pseudo-messianic democratic universalism, manifesting itself in attempts and support for interventionist regime-change for instance in Libya, Syria, in Ukraine and the Caucasus, as well as in imposing nation-building in the Middle East and Asia, most foolishly in Afghanistan. This strategic design for a new world order presented us with a new face of contemporary warfare, featuring the advancement of militant progressive secularism and the ethnic and cultural subversion of western societies by pushing and facilitating disproportional immigration from non-western nations and regions. Such strategies aimed to synchronize the masses and prepare the ground for continuous governance by liberal and progressive regimes.

 

In the face of all this, Mr. Trump's victory came at the eleventh hour. His empowerment by way of sufficient Electoral College votes was a clear rejection of globalist policies and politicians, against which Mr. Trump waged his presidential campaign in the first place. His victory also delivered a devastating blow to the hubris of those liberal and progressive elites who thought they had already won the struggle for the political future of the lead nation of the free world. 

 

It remains to be seen if Mr. Trump and his incoming administration will be able to redress, neutralize, and reverse the policy failures of recent years. The scope of what he needs to accomplish is vast. Above all, it ranges from foreign affairs, the pacification of the Middle East, the resetting of relations with the Kremlin, and preventing the U.S.'s political culture from further decline by overcoming the cultural and moral nihilism that has taken hold in significant segments of society and state. Additionally, an important task will be the narrowing of the ethnic and ideological division within the country. 

While the task is not an easy one, all good-willing people should dearly hope for Mr. Trump to succeed. The hour of decision for the survival of this republic as well as our whole civilization has arrived!

2016 U.S. Presidential Election and the Future of the West

The future of the United States and the future of the entire Western world are at stake with the U.S. presidential election outcome. The presidency of the incumbent B. Obama has been a sham throughout. A notorious liar (you can keep your doctor; Syrian red line; Russia's aggressions), political dilettante (caused unparalleled domestic and international damage), and incorrigible partisan politician (intolerant left-wing ideologue), he divided the country culturally as it has probably never been the case since the Vietnam War.

Although being a Democrat, he has persecuted a neo-conservative foreign policy of interventionism, supported by Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and quite a few out-of-their-minds Republican senators and congress members, like John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Marco Rubio. He urged interventions where none were necessary or legitimate, which caused chaos in Libya, Syria, and Iraq, fostered the emergence of ISIS, and further deteriorated relations with Russia and Europe.

At this juncture, toward the end of Obama's tenure, one can predict that Hillary Clinton as president would continue the pernicious path of US-American politics, both domestically and internationally. Her Supreme Court judges' appointments would push American society's cultural decline and moral nihilism further. Indifferent immigration and open borders will advance the dissolution of the proper structure of a healthy nation-state as the only guarantor for sound legal and social policies.  Europe will be brought closer to a military conflict with Russia by advancing the destructive policies of NATO in Eastern Europe and the Baltic States and American power projection into the South China Sea. It is to expect that the overstretch of U.S. foreign policy and the American military forces will continue and drive Russia, China, and Iran closer together to ally against what they rightfully may consider excessive imperialism.

As the White House run unfolded, there was one candidate who gave hope that if he got elected, we could expect an overdue turn-around of U.S. policies; Rand Paul. With his dropping out, only one candidate remains, who, despite his deficits, could ensure us of policies that might save the U.S. and the West if it is not already much too late. This candidate is Donald Trump.

Yet, the moral nihilism that has taken hold in American politics might make his success impossible. The way his opponents and even members of his party treated him was so shameful that one has to ask if the U.S. has already degenerated into a banana republic. The dumbing down of the U.S. and its citizens has dwindled to an alarming low. Driven to accept the ideology of affirmative action and political correctness, neither reality nor truth matter anymore. Despite his first term's dismal record, the American people reelected a half-black guy because of the color of his skin and the fact that he carried a "D" in front of his name. The next president might be elected because of her gender and having a "D" in front of her name.

If that happens, the U.S., as well as the West, will be finished.

Though this be madness, yet there is method in it!

Shakespeare's aphorism from Hamlet comes to mind when one looks into the state of affairs in global relations. With every day, the evidence becomes overwhelming that what I considered to be the political blunder of a U.S. administration run by a presidential dilettante of hitherto unknown proportions is part of a grand, albeit pathological, globalist strategic design.

The plan appears to aim at a New World Order under the exclusive leadership of the United States. Going back to the Project for the New American Century (P.N.A.C.), a neoconservative think-tank of the late 1990ies, this foreign policy approach has guided U.S. foreign policy in principle ever since. Despite its roots in the Republican party, the Imperialist idea of establishing a Pax Americana, a New World Order enforced and controlled by the U.S., was willfully extended by the governing regime of the Democratic Party under Barack Obama. While slamming the Bush-Cheney administration for the Iraq War and attempting to take military control over the Gulf region, he aggressively continued shaping foreign affairs policies and implementing an international security order according to American interests. Since Obama took office, we could witness the instigation of the Arab Spring by the support of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt against President Mubarak, the backing of insurgents in Libya and Syria, and the turning of both nations into failed states. Furthermore, the Obama administration enabled the formation of ISIS and caused the death of tens of thousands of people and the displacement and flight of hundreds of thousands. Those policies drove the world into chaos, thus far unparalleled in our lifetime.
 
However, American imperialism, hiding behind alleged democratic principles and presumed policy necessities, landed one of its probably most sanctimonious achievements in Ukraine by orchestrating a coup d'état against the democratically-elected, albeit allegedly corrupt, government of then-president Yanukovich. By establishing the Washington and Berlin-backed Poroshenko administration in Kyiv, the U.S. and the E.U. drove Ukraine into a fratricidal civil war and severely damaged Ukraine's and Russia's economy. In the usual reversal of cause-effect realities, the mainstream media and the U.S. State Department blamed Russia's aggression and Mr. Putin's expansionism. Since then, the military build-up on the Russian and NATO side has drastically increased, laying the seed for what quite a few commentators consider to be the initial charge for World War III.

From a western and transatlantic alliance perspective, though, a most disturbing development has to be seen in the unleashing of a wave of mass migration from the Middle East's conflict regions toward Central Europe, particularly toward the more developed and geographically conveniently located nations within the European Union. While many speculate where tens of thousands of destitute refugees get the money from to pay people smugglers and traffickers, the suspicion arises that the leading proponents and do-gooders launched a grand strategic design for a New World Order against their allies on the European continent. Ethnic and cultural subversion shall help synchronize and conform to the masses and thereby facilitate (world) governance under U.S. preeminence.

We are confronting new faces of contemporary warfare - mass immigration of people from Muslim parts of the world into countries of Christian provenance; de(con)struction of the cultural and moral fabric of western societies; the advancement of progressive secularism; obliteration of traditional family structures; legalization of drugs.

The quarter-century of post-Cold War (world) order did not see the emergence of a definite geostrategic posture based on traditional territorial scenarios and clear front-lines. Instead, an ever-increasing (world) disorder materialized, pushed by global players' reckless policies that side with the U.S. government and its international dominance goal, unchallenged by other nations or regional powers.

The path to this centralized and quite totalitarian World Order is paved, at the bottom, by the weakening, and, in the long run, dissolution of the nation-state concept. A subject matter that will warrant a comprehensive analysis on its own; one that I will provide in a forthcoming essay.

If there is truth to this rough outline of global affairs, then indeed, the madness does have a method!