The 2016 election – ecstatic and wild. This particular election for America’s presidency might be the most stupendous of the West’s political elections. I believe we have seen two vast opposites attempt to strike each other down with successes, persuasion and satire. Donald Trump is an unusual character, but full of frankness and splendid bluntness. Hilary Clinton is, of course, a well-experienced character, but with a reckless history.
I was not surprised when I awoke on the Wednesday morning to find the title “Trump Declares Victory” displayed on the rather partisan BBC news network. Donald Trump can much effectively tackle collective psychology with his staunch views and policies, whilst too understanding the anger of people who get ludicrous accusations such as ‘racist’ thrown at them. Friends, who I’d understand as liberal, have shown a support for Trump to merely prevent the rise of radical leftist self-righteousness.
Nonetheless, we mustn’t let personal feelings and self-identified labels bombard sound judgement. We have seen a bout between the political sides; a brawl between radical righties (who want to vote Trump so Hilary can lose) and radical lefties (who want to vote Hilary so Trump can lose). As I have personally remarked on the UK election, the collective general public seem to disregard that other parties are on their ballot. What about Gary Johnson, whom was the only candidate of the four that I endorsed as a responsible character? Although I do not firmly advocate the economic principles of libertarianism – as I presently find the rudimentary ‘liberal socialist’ idea logically appealing – Gary Johnson’s pursuit for presidency carried more weight of reliability in comparison to Trump and Clinton, at least regarding his political history and character. The left were hopeful that the result would go their way and if it didn’t, they’d be prepared to throw a collective tantrum against the opposing result. Donald Trump won, and the tantrum proceeded. Trump may not have been the best candidate (clearly), but there is at least one good thing about this election: Hilary Clinton didn’t win. The one thing I admired about the Donald during this race was his adherence to abandon authoritarian political correctness which has been enforced by the radical left and the end result succeeded the demolition of the leftists expectations that if you call enough people racist, “then we might win”. Did democracy stab you in the back, my dear leftists? Nope. You stabbed yourselves in the back with your own knife of identity politics, partisanship and political correctness. Don’t protest just because you are a certain age, your friends do it or you just like the idea of being a rebel. Pick up some books, study politics, and protest by the means of writing and peaceful rallies or marches; not smashing windows, vandalising cars of your fellow residents, or assaulting those who disagree with you. Are these protestors worthy of support if they adhere to such insane activities? The left, who often succumb to the idea of pacifism, emphasise peace and anti-war, yet riot and assault people in the streets! They are not fighting for any noble cause when the motivation is to just shut down the winner of an election governed by principles of a democracy. The sore losers of the election were calling for the assassination of Trump; and now fabricated racism allegations have sufficed, thus making themselves just as morally evil as the racists – many of which are actually imaginary – they like to accuse. Calling for assassination, annihilation of someone or a certain ‘identity’ of people is disgusting and deserves contempt, but the hypocritical leftists seem to want a free pass on their vindictive actions. As aforesaid, I did not adore Donald Trump’s awful attempt of professionalism as a candidate or his policies, and I of course did not support the corruption of Clinton’s campaign. So, I will close by addressing to the radical leftists: they brought this on themselves! Trump’s win is a counteraction on the left’s forcefulness to defame the principles of liberalism. They annoyingly and subjectively hurled the ‘racist’ and ‘bigot’ blabber at as many people as imaginable, thus the worse it became and their biased preference of a woman becoming president, simply because she was a woman, failed.
For Your Interest
Do you have any thoughts or feedback to share? Use the comment section below to share your ideas. You can also follow me on social media, to stay informed!
|
Daniel C. MeesThe Blog of Sincerity, featuring contrarian, polemical and critical writings on politics, religion, social philosophy, left-right spectrum, books, sociopolitical concerns, secularism and such - by Daniel C. Mees.
Facebook FeedArchives
January 2017
Featured Posts |