Wednesday, 25 May 2016

SHOCK NEWS: MAN WHO IS MORE LIKABLE LIKED MORE THAN WOMAN WHO IS LESS LIKABLE


Those of us who were right about Trump are starting to become a new species of bore. Since last Summer, I have been confidently telling everyone around me that Trump would beat the rest of the Republican field and then move on to wipe the floor with whoever the Democratic Party threw up – "Horrible" Hillary or "Bonkers" Bernie (all the time being pretty confident that it would be Hillary). Now the latest polls are starting to show this pattern with Trump pulling ahead of Hillary in head-to-heads. Yes, people are starting to get sick of hearing how right I was.

The reasons for Trump's rise are complex, but they are also simple. As I pointed out previously, Trump is beating Hillary because he is the product of healthy (if not exactly fair) competition, while Hillary is the product of political nepotism and string pulling. In a Darwinian struggle between the winner of a highly competitive selection process and a political blob that has been sheltered under a stone, the blob will probably lose:
"The Dems...have sought to prevent anything as 'fascistic' as actual competition between candidates in their selection process. As that party has moved increasingly towards the 'identitarianism of the inferior' – resentful minorities and unbalanced gender groups – it has rejected any principle of true competitiveness, because such competitiveness inevitably favours straight White males. Instead, it prefers a socialistic system of doling out the presidential candidacy to members of the various "sacred" groups – Blacks, Hispanics, unhappy women, etc. – with a mere shadow play of a contest."
By the time they reach this stage, American political contests are usually not too hard to call as they boil down to a relatively simple battle between who is the more likable or less detestable.

Consider the evidence: Carter was more likable than Ford; Reagan more so than Carter and Mondale; Bush Senior more than Dukakis; Bill Clinton rather than Bush Senior and Dole; Bush Junior more than Gore and Kerry; and Obama more than McCain and the boring Romney. This is sometimes expressed as the "beer test." With Hillary you'd probably have to down a full bottle of vodka beforehand just to have that first beer with her.

Of course, this is also why such an unlikely (as opposed to unlikable) candidate as Bernie Sanders is still in the running on the Dem ticket – because of Hillary's toxic unlikability.

Bernie is an interesting political curve ball. As an elderly eccentric socialistic Jew, he managed to wrongfoot the Democratic Party's now entrenched anti-White-male-and-normie filter and get to the actual voters, who, starved of a real choice that looked like a patriach, reacted with exaggerated enthusiasm.

The best analogy is the relish with which rats and other incomestibles are eaten in a siege. But Bernie is not about to become the candidate, one reason being the fact that the Jews who overwhelmingly support the Democratic Party worry about having an actual Jew up front in the White House.

Trump, of course, has his unlikable aspects, but even on his negative side – the "philanderer" (who cares?) and debt-driven wheeler dealer gaming the system – he comes across as a charming rogue with a Machiavellian glint in his eye. Even his flagrant egoism is "cute" in a slightly-insecure-little-boy sort of way. This is why so many attacks on Trump don't work – or they actually make him stronger. There is teflon fiber woven into the threads of whatever it is that adorns his head. Hillary, by contrast, fits into the traditional hag role and meme zone with all the smoothness of Cinderella slipping into her glass slipper.

Despite all else that is going on, this election has now been reduced to a battle of personalties, and in that contest, Hillary has little going for her. Those of us on the Alt-Right can therefore now consider this battle over, and start viewing Trump with a more critical eye.

Of course, I welcome the healthy effect he has had on what was formerly a moribund political system and culture, but like many on the Alt-Right I have deep doubts first about what he will actually do once he becomes President, and secondly about whether the Trumpism sketched out so far in his speeches, statements, and tweets, would even be workable.

The only thing that is sure is that the present social and economic system is a disaster-in-waiting so that almost anything else is preferable, especially a political approach that at least aims at a more equitable balance of trade (and therefore more US-based manufacturing), limits on immigration, and the reeling in of America's imperialistic overreach, which has seen drastically diminishing returns in recent decades.

Trump represents a healthy but limited battle of ideas within the American polity, but one that will probably be watered down even more by the need to compromise with awkward realities.

For example, if imports from China are cut and domestic manufacturing boosted, how do you convert America's parasitic underclass back to productivity without the modern equivalent of the plantation system? Expect to see more automation of low-skilled jobs and the continued warehousing of the underclass, even with a manufacturing boom.

Without real radical change, there is also every sign that Trumpism, which is itself a reaction, will merely stoke up the forces of a counter reaction – a pattern of American politics – as America continues its zig-zagged march to the darker territory where the likability of leaders will be lot less of a factor than their ability to make hard and brutal decisions.


 

No comments:

Post a Comment