After observing the presidential election, it’s safe to say the political lines are being redrawn across America. The results have been a lot to digest for many Americans. Mostly, they came as a shock to Starbucks patrons, people with two advanced degrees from an elite east coast school and to the people that read the Huffington Post (not us).
The west coast is a different bird all together. Folks who were so shocked and mortified when Donald Trump insinuated that maybe the jury was out as to whether he would accept the results if Hillary Clinton won, lost their minds for a few weeks. The aftermath of the Trump victory only made things worse. Campus “cry-in’s, people running out in front of traffic, etc. Now, these people are hoping on a recount, as if it would make any difference to the foregone result.
Trump’s comments about possibly not a accepting a loss started a firestorm of deep concern that he wasn’t going to respect the pretty settled tradition of the peaceful transition of power. People were real high and mighty about respect for civil institutions and discouraging civil unrest, as if somehow Trump would risk plunging all of his business interests into free fall, not thinking he wouldn’t himself benefit from market stability. Regardless, the improbable happened. Trump won. All the lofty calls for civility and continuity gave way to calls of “SECEDE!!!” coming from the west coast. As a naturalized Texan, I have to admit, I was impressed. Texas went nuts after the Brexit vote and immediately seized upon the moment to openly speak about the “Texit” so many have wanted for a long time. It just gave us a new hashtag to rally around. There is however, one glaring difference.
California is crippled by debt and unemployment. They need the federal government. Arguably, Texas has the opposite situation. A state surplus, low unemployment, and an economic juggernaut that allows it to take in many thousands of people a year from states whose economies are more stagnant, most notably, California. Ironically, they need the Fed, but because an election didn’t go their way, they want out. That’s a real thing. #Calexit. What are they fighting for? Their perceived moral authority for being supposedly less racist, sexist, and altogether more superior than the provincial Mountain West, the corn-fed Midwest, the redneck religious South, and other deplorable places in their eyes. These are the voters who many in coastal elite have now branded “alt-right” for having voted Trump. After carefully looking into who these folks are, one can only assume that Democrats feel the nation has been taken over by Facebook trolls, college meme makers, fedora wearing gamers, and a few neo-Nazis who muse about the benefits of white racial collectivism.
Okay, so that covers a few thousand people. But, what about the millions of people who once called themselves labor Democrats? Well, Clinton lost them by the millions, dwarfing the number of “alt-right” people that Trump energized. So, there is no excuse. In short, Clinton lost it, more than Trump won it. She sealed the deal by insulting Coal Country, the Rust Belt, and the marginally educated. Basically, Clinton alienated people who made up the Democratic base for a half century. Not to mention, the on-going revelations of Wikileaks and the consequences to those involved at the DNC, which may pick up pace again, if they insist on doing these pointless recounts. Here you can buy yourself a fun adult colouring book, instead of complaining about the electoral count.
But, so who benefits? Well, it’s very ironic that the protectionist interests in the electorate chose Trump as their vehicle for change. He talked a big game about rethinking international trade deals like NAFTA and the proposed TPP. But, tell me would someone whose benefited so much from these deals, decide to change gears overnight? The smart money says Trump’s factories in Mexico and China will stay open. Interesting hero for the emerging anti-global movement, right? His name is splattered across the giant hotels of Dubai, Kuala Lumpur, and many other world capitals. In this election, the United States, like so many other countries of late, have turned their suspicious eye towards the otherwise unfettered march towards globalism. The question however remains, does anyone have a better idea?
Nationalism is on the march in Europe, the Philippines, and beyond. Just in the last month, three African nations left the International Criminal Court, citing the court’s bias against African leaders and concerns over national sovereignty. A similar situation continues in Latin America. Despite the recent deaths of Hugo Chavez, and now Fidel Castro, people overwhelmingly still support a regional development alternative that doesn’t leave them beholden to the loan sharks of World Bank and IMF. Confounding liberals and lovers of hyper-national institutions, the main streets, high streets, barrios, and bazaars of the world envision a future determined by the competing national interests, regional loyalties, and majority will. The technocratic elite call it chaos. Others call it progress. Of course, the odds against such a trend continuing seem slim given the powers wielded by it’s architects. But, after the election of Donald Trump and the UK’s Brexit, all bets are off or have at least been slashed in half.
“The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.” -David Rockefeller