They failed to assassinate Trump, and he has since picked up critical endorsements from populist Democrats, Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who reflect the true diversity of ideas and interests behind the 45th President.
Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su
Vice President Kamala Harris has become the subject of an ongoing joke in political circles because her speech writers insist on burdening her with trite aphorisms aimed at highlighting her inspirational wisdom, but instead miss the mark so severely that the word ‘backfire’ is more appropriate.
In part one, we established that the coup against Biden did not establish the overthrow of his regime of war and dementia, because he was not the central character or mover of the plot which his administration had been (and still is) executing. But in the wake of the failed assassination of Trump – which the FBI has still been silent about (or not; the mach speed cremation of Thomas Crooks’ body speaks quite loudly) – provided the true predicate that led to Biden’s decision to step down. Had the assassination succeeded, it’s far more likely that Biden would have remained the candidate, and any transfer of nominal authority to Harris would have concluded sometime in 2025 after the presumed victory. But the notion that Harris provides a solution or even a bearable trade-off in the deep-state’s electoral ambitions is furthermore questionable.
This attempt has backfired, and it is hard not to connect the near-miracle which was Trump somehow turning his head at just the right time, to the panic which swept across the DNC in the aftermath. Initial MSM headlines initially sought to question whether an attempt was even made. The subsequent endorsements by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard have turned the panic into a hysteria.
Harris has a knack for mixing metaphors and results in some incomprehensible word salad which had been intended to inspire us. Unlike Trump, Bill Clinton, or Obama, all who could effortlessly speak in a conversational tone, Harris seems unable to communicate plainly. We should also add that even if these failed attempts at profundity had succeeded in the sense of basic syntax and normal human speech, they would still evoke a high degree of relative cosmological cringe equivalent to their vacuity.
We may arrive at the equation that cringe (C) is equal to the value of vacuity (vac) multiplied by the insincerity (i), squared. Or C = vac(i)2. And who said political science was a soft one?
But jokes aside, (or not) this has put her handlers in a difficult position. They must choose between two unappealing options: allowing her to struggle with reading the teleprompter or attempting to memorize lines with little success, or letting her ad-lib and risk a complete flop.
The coming debate between Harris and Trump – should there still be one coming – will no doubt highlight Harris’ inability across multiple vectors.
The Cackle that Sank a Thousand Ships: U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris at the Legacy Leadership Luncheon & Awards during National Urban League Conference 2022 – Walter E. Washington Convention Center on July 22, 2022 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Brian Stukes/Getty Images)
Now our point here isn’t as mundane and trivial as her public speaking disorder, but rather that the entire strategy in promoting Harris is to make her into something that she isn’t is in shambles. It is her lack of authenticity that seeps through it all. And this vacuity factor is augmented by the inauthenticity, no doubt.
You see, while expectation, and Hollywood tend to agree that being a strong public speaker is a feature of a strong president-to-be, that isn’t necessarily the case. Churchill, Eisenhower, and Lincoln all probably fit the bill here – these are men known much more for their actions than their ability to work a crowd.
There are other facets of the would-be leader’s character, experience, knowledge, or motivations which transcend the limitations of faulty public speaking. The sky-rocketing success of the Robert F. Kennedy Jr. campaign to beat all odds and DNC lawfare, and get onto the ballots in key swing states, like Arizona, highlight the importance of track record, authenticity, meaning, and message, over public speaking ability – as RFK Jr. suffers from spasmodic dysphonia.
Harris’ character flaws are not her only short-coming. The flaws of an approachable and effective leader will best a leader who is obviously neither in charge of themselves nor capable of independent thought and, as such, authenticity.
Trump is living proof that voters will accept what they themselves perceive as a flawed character, provided they view him as better than the alternative, or at least capable of getting the job done.
Yes, Hollywood has created for us a lot of what we believe makes a leader or hero. But Hollywood’s past successes are a reflection of the degree to which real human experiences and motivations are adequately expressed in the story-line. Historically, that means that the hero, or leader, is a reluctant protagonist. They may begin cynical, or incompetent – only find themselves adjacent to some other potentially heroic plot out of their own self-interest – think Han Solo. Then, something or someone reaches their heart, and we see the arc of transformation.
In that real sense, we can find an equivalence between the rapid decline of this approach in contemporary mainstream American film, and the apparent abandonment of this character. Now before aging hipsters hit this author over the head with ‘A24’, do note that the reference is obviously …
The Disneyfication of Democrat politics (or rather the ‘Democratization’ of Disney’s content), which led to the Mary Sue persona as somehow a relatable character, has already proven disastrous. Kamala Harris, they paint for us, breezes into every Senate session like it’s a casual coffee meetup, effortlessly solving complex legislative issues after a lighthearted and reassuring cackle. Her profundity of her gems so captivating that even the most cynical members of Congress can’t help but spontaneously applaud mid-sentence. She’s not just a problem-solver; she’s the only one who knows where the “easy” button is for international diplomacy, and she has an uncanny ability to invoke a chorus of ‘cum ba ya’, by merely walking into the room. Her only flaw, they want us to believe, is the envy that her perfection provokes in others.
Analysts have been smacking themselves silly, boom boom boom, but still can’t reconcile themselves to where or how the trade-off works. And this leads to further questions about the motives of the Democrat and deep state players behind the assassination attempt, who necessarily required the involvement of the Secret Service to make sure that Trump would be as vulnerable as possible. The notion, by the way, that the shooter’s perch was ‘too sloped’ of a roof to have under full control is insultingly ludicrous. It’s not for nothing that the SS director, Kimberly Cheatle, has since stepped down. That’s it? No more investigation? We all feel a little bit cheatled now. But back to Harris.
Harris is presented to us as one-dimensional, driven by a perpetual sense of ‘joy’, and dedicated to dropping gems of wisdom which turn out to be cheap costume jewelry. Her only tangible quality is her gender and her race, which is an insult not only to highly competent women of color, but to all Americans.
Democrats are Interchangeable but there is only One Trump
The dethroned emperor had no mind, finally the media admitted it. But only so that another mindless executor could more effectively take his place. And this describes the actual state of the match-up. The ‘Big Idea’ vs. ‘The Man with the Plan’.
The deep state offers many faces – whether Democrat or Republican – and they are largely interchangeable. The insurrection which Trump affected in the Republican Party at some strategic points, explains why the DNC and the Neocons have had an open and public love affair. The promotion of the Clinton-Bush dynasty as somehow a desirable and normal scenario has been one of their primary motifs. Pedophile protector Ellen DeGenerate, or is that DeGeneris, lovingly hugging George W. Bush on her show, is emblematic here.
The Globalist/Atlanticist blob that rules from Washington and Wall Street have pursued the politics of the ‘Big Idea’, and the different faces we see at the managerial – i.e. ‘executive and legislative’ levels are little more than competing ego-group juntas who propose that they themselves can deliver the goods most effectively (think Obama vs. Clinton vs. Pelosi/Newsom vs. Bush Sr., and so on).
To that end, republican politics post consolidation of the ‘third way’ (Clinton, Blair in the UK) have served as little more than a ‘social conservative’ pressure release valve. But more importantly a foil which is aimed at motivating ‘decent, educated, society’ towards a type of thematic or rhetorical social-democratic vibe, which is actually lacking in functioning social programs or democracy.
This vibe is appealing to the ivory tower ‘intellectual’ and institutional academic, in the image of the endemically out of touch (or corrupt) pseudo-figures like ‘political historian’ Heather Cox Richardson. This approach mainly finds support internally within her demographic, or those who are still students of professors (or authors) promoting this approach, but who haven’t really had to engage the hardships of the reality which these institutions and their minions ignore, minimize, project onto the other, or deflect.
Austerity and war, but with inclusivity and now ‘joy’, is the dominant western paradigm. Pink-washed human rights imperialism, and yes, we all “want to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony”. The problem, though, is that Coke kills. “Do what thou whilst shall be the whole of the law”, they reckon.
From observation and insight, we’d also be forced to conclude that Harris is not among the group of ego-junta leaders vying for power. She is a proxy for one of them, or a compromise/amalgam of several or all of them. The precise formula is (hopefully not) yet to be seen.
Irrespective of that nevertheless significant question, in any iteration it is clear that eliminating Trump eliminates their problem. It’s almost as if the only thing standing between their Big Idea and the scrapping of the last remains of America’s constitutional system, is Trump.
Despite the proven lie which was the ‘Russia collusion’ hoax, they continue to put the cart before the horse. They’d like to think, or rather insist that you too think, that the real ideas stemming from Main Street and the strike committee against Wall Street and Beltway Globalism, are coming from Russia.
For Trump, in turn, could not have found any success if he were not in turn supported by a massive segment of American voters. It is a question to what extent the public, through complacency or naivete, is collectively responsible for the failures of our political leaders to arrive at campaign finance reform and more.
Setting aside this question of agency, there is no doubt plenty of blame to be laid at the hands of these corrupted American institutions themselves, who are largely responsible for making sure that only a billionaire – a candidate beholden to that class – can run for high office.
‘The Big Idea’—‘Global warming’ to justify globalization, ‘public health’ to justify authoritarian measures, ‘inclusivity’ to justify austerity, and ‘human rights’ to justify war and empire—are losing their grip. The ruling class has struggled to convince even its own subjects that through owning nothing, they’ll be happy. And this is with a monopoly over the legacy means of communication as well as the necessary complicity of Meta and Google/Alphabet Inc.
Gas-lighting is difficult to pull off when people are underemployed renters living paycheck to paycheck, or small business owners who see clearly that rhetoric and legislation aimed at ostensibly curtailing ‘big business’ is only used against the little guy to the advantage of the same big business.
Trump brings together a whole basket of deplorables, les misérables, the unrefined, the Wretched of the Earth, Main Street, the strike committee, and more. His support among Hispanics and Blacks far surpasses what any non-Democrat has garnered in a two or three generations at least.
Each constituent group has their own ideas, their own agency. They know what’s in their best interest and what is not. There is no ‘Big Idea’ which is shared by all, but all of these have thrown their lot in with the ‘Man with the Plan’.
This real diversity stands in contrast with the ‘politics of diversity’ promoted by the ruling class. The politics of diversity – interchangeable managers – follows one model: diversity of appearance and biography, uniform submission to the ‘Big Idea’. It is an ipso facto racist and shallow conception of diversity, which requires no further elucidation.
Today, the establishment wants us only to judge on the appearance of diversity and not the (lack of any) content of their character.
But empty pockets and empty pantries do not lie.
Where We Stand
In the grand political theater, Candidate Harris emerges as a caricature, burdened by vacuous platitudes that only amplify her ineffectiveness: Her struggle with authenticity reveals a fundamental flaw in the deep-state’s attempt to foist her onto the public as a solution to their own self-created woes.
Harris’s failure to deliver underscores a broader public and historical disillusionment with the Globalist ‘Big Idea’—from ‘global warming’ as a pretext for globalization to ‘inclusivity’ as a justification for austerity. These issues, though still touted as mandatory, now falter under the weight of their own contradictions and the discontent of those they were meant not only to destroy, but also even to serve.
The ever-enduring Trump symbolizes a stark contrast to this tired and cynical, manufactured Debordian spectacle. As a figure not easily pigeonholed into the neat boxes of the ruling class’s narratives, Trump represents a genuine populist resistance to the hollow promises of the political elite.
His support across genuinely diverse demographic groups exposes the superficial nature of the establishment’s ‘politics of diversity,’ which prioritizes appearance over substance. The crumbling façade of the ‘Big Idea’ highlights the establishment’s struggle to maintain control amid widespread skepticism and the increasing public clarity of their self-serving agendas. They all tremble at the coming of the Man with the Plan.
They failed to assassinate Trump, and he has since picked up critical endorsements from populist Democrats, Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who reflect the true diversity of ideas and interests behind the 45th President. It would seem that only by hook or by crook – the cabal’s favourite safety measures – will Trump be defeated come November. The chances of a (second) ‘big event’ to attempt to change that direction – whether in Ukraine/Russia or Israel/Palestine, or within the U.S., are too high to ignore. The die is cast.
