Protests in the streets of major cities are underway as the participants decry the election of Donald Trump as the next president of the United States. The grounds for these protests are claimed to be carried out on the basis that Trump, and his supporters, are racists, xenophobes, bigots, and homophobes.
The whole democratic process is undergoing scrutiny by the violent minority in protest because essentially their candidate did not win and a candidate that, they feel, represents the worst of America, has won.
We live in a country that is deeply divided. The raw numbers will not show this as most remain in the middle of this bell curve, but those on the fringes are much more vocal – and have always been. One need not dig very deeply to be reminded that the Bolsheviks, the group behind the radical Communist movement in Russia in 1917, referred to themselves as a “majority” in order to manufacture consent. Their true numbers, however, were much smaller than they would have liked to admit. Yet, this is the force of history – a small dedicated few who, through a cohesive message, turn the tide to affect their agenda.
This is, however, not the case with the election of Donald J. Trump as president of the United States. This was not a small fringe contingent that pushed their man into power. It was a groundswell that had to overcome large obstacles that have plagued this country’s politics for a long time now. John F. Kennedy and Dwight D. Eisenhower, both men from opposite parties, outlined this system and the obstacles they presented many years ago. Complicit in this system of control was the media, academia, and Hollywood – or the cultural industrial complex.
The latest Wikileaks have documented this. From Donna Brazile feeding questions to the Hillary campaign while working as a commentator for CNN. Speaking of, CNN has had a whole host of problems and has been caught several times manufacturing news as much as they like to report it.
Something Don Lemon has been accused of himself:
The truth? Most seek confirmation bias and do not seek objective truth. We don’t corroborate information before passing it along or forming judgement. Right now, the protestors’ uniform message is one that they feel denounces hate speech. In Trump, they see an individual who is filled with hate and who has leveraged that hate to win a national campaign. They are afraid; they fear for their lives. They believe the labeling that was bestowed upon Trump by the Hillary Clinton campaign – something that started even before he became the Republican nominee.
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) November 9, 2016
Hillary Clinton favored a candidate like Trump as she felt that she could knock him out at the national election. A great article articulating this is found here. The Clinton campaign had a machine that included support among all three major influences of our nation – the media, Hollywood, and academia. This shows the depth of the collusion regarding the media – the other two branches are known to favor her and her party.
What emerges is that most who are speaking out against Donald Trump are using the rhetoric they were supplied by these outlets. In fact, most of these young, millennial protestors are actually claiming to be Bernie Sanders supporters – who are not only irate at the corruption of their own party, but seem to believe that as a result of this Trump was elected and thereby we, as a nation, have elected a racist bigot to the executive branch.
This also demonstrates the lack of substance needed to make a claim stick whenever the message is rallied against an easy target. In other words, the narrative must be supported and such a narrative, that white men are racists, is an easy one to make. Trump becomes an easy target, regardless of any evidence. Hate groups like the KKK are shown supporting Trump and through association Trump is pronounced guilty of hate speech. Yet, these same individuals neglect the fact that Louis Farrakhan, a black supremacist, both supports Trump and is very critical of president Obama – even though Farrakhan was a supporter of Obama in 2008.
When challenged, the body of evidence is speculative and lacks substance when it is argued that Donald Trump is a racist. Proving a man’s heart is indeed difficult. Very few arguments are actually made regarding Trump’s policies by these same protestors, it also should be noted. Bernie Sanders’ supporters love to claim the moral high ground because their candidate, whom they never heard of until this election, was dedicated to the civil rights movement and has an impressive activist record as a result. He has the cred. Yet, when it comes to his economic policies, his socialism shines through. This would never win him a general election, despite what his supporters may think but the fact that the primary was rigged against him only means that those who supported Sanders, and not Clinton, can claim that a vote for Trump is a vote for hatred. Amnesia about Clinton and her record seems to get a free pass because their target remains Trump. The basis for their attacks, however, have been created by the Clinton campaign and now, financially backed and supported by George Soros.
So the attacks and protests will be carried out against Trump. There will be no return fire because Sanders was not a nominee, which removes him from the discussion, and Clinton would be deflected as not the candidate of choice – as measured by the corruption seen via Wikileaks. The selective use of evidence to support an argument is only part of the problem and why we have such a huge divide in this country. The past 8 years have been a ramping up of this division as groups and sides were each placed against one another. You see the symptoms of this today marching the streets in protest. They represent a narrative, nothing based on fact but based on a narrative put in place by the opposition to Trump in order to set him up for failure. CNN perpetuates this narrative and likewise, the divide in our society is leaned up for full effect.