The Canadian Red Ensign

The Canadian Red Ensign

Thursday, November 5, 2020

South of the Border

As you are aware, if you have been a reader for any period of time, I am not an American.   I was born a free subject of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II in the Dominion of Canada, have lived in said Commonwealth Realm all my life, and have no desire to change this.   Long time readers will also know that by political conviction I am a staunch, “Freedom Wears a Crown”, Tory, who believes firmly in the institution of hereditary, royal, monarchy and the Westminster Parliamentary constitution.   I have, in other words, no personal stake in this year’s American Presidential election any more than I had in that of 2016.     Indeed, I see both of these elections as demonstrations of the foolishness of having an elected head of state who is chosen in a popularity contest.    While factionalism is a problem in a parliamentary system as well as in a republican system, being an unavoidable element of an elected legislative assembly, it is much worse when the person who is supposed to represent the country as a whole – as a side note to all of my fellow Canucks out there this is not the role of the Prime Minister – is chosen by election.   Far better for the office to be above the process of partisan politics and grounded instead on hereditary right, tradition, prescription, and sacred oath.

 

None of this means, of course, that I have not been following the campaign, nor does it mean that I do not have a strong preference for one of the candidates.   The Second Greatest Commandment, Our Lord said, was “To love thy neighbour as thyself” and, for all of their misguided, small-r republicanism, the Americans are our southern neighbours, and it would be a major violation of the Second Greatest Commandment to wish Kamala Harris upon them as their president.   Let us not deceive ourselves as to who the true Democrat candidate has been this year.

 

When Donald Trump first sought the Republican nomination for the election of four years ago, like everyone else, I knew him mostly as a very rich real-estate developer who had been very famous simply for his wealth back in the 1980s, before becoming a television celebrity as the host of “The Apprentice” decades later.   I did not initially think his candidacy was a serious one but, as he sought the nomination, won the nomination, and then won the election, on a platform that read like it had been written by Pat Buchanan, I came to be impressed. It was about time, I thought, that, someone was taking such long verboten ideas as “a country needs to be able to control its borders”, “free trade is not all it is cracked up to be”, “the United States should not be the world’s police”, “governments should act in the best interests of their own countries instead of some global vision”, and “there are such things as too much immigration and the wrong kind of immigration” and bringing them back into the public debate from which they had been long excluded and desperately needed.   When Trump challenged the established leadership of his own party as well as the Democrats, the mainstream media, and all the other liberal, progressive, and left-wing forces arrayed against him, I developed a respect for him, which only kept growing as he won, and then, in office, set out to do the things he had said he would do in a way that no other elected leader in any country at any level of government that I can remember in my lifetime had ever done.

 

The progressive left in the United States and elsewhere were enraged by Trump’s election.   As anybody who remembers the 1990s and the 2000s knows, the venom directed against the two George Bushes and the unsuccessful Republican candidates who ran against Bill Clinton and Barack Obama did not come remotely close to the hatred unleashed against Trump and his supporters.   Even the anti-Reagan hysterics that progressive liberals liked to engage in when I was a kid was nothing like this.    Every presidential election for the last twenty-five years or so, has been followed by a “derangement syndrome” on the part of the losing side.   “Trump Derangement Syndrome” has dwarfed them all.

 

The organized, militant, extremists of the left, such as Antifa - the masked, blackshirted, thugs, who with no apparent consciousness of the irony proclaim themselves to be fighting “facism” – began a campaign of intimidation and violence, directed against Trump, his supporters, anybody who held views they disapproved of, or in many cases, anybody who just happened to be white or elderly.   They have not let up since, and, indeed, took the violence to a whole new level this year, along with their allies, the Black Lives Matter movement.   Throughout this entire period – I am talking the entire last four years, remember - they were aided and abetted by the vast majority of the mainstream media, that constantly talked about mostly non-existent “white supremacists” and “right-wing extremist” while pretending that groups like Antifa were a laudable and legitimate protest movement. In the United States, Democrat politicians almost never repudiated these violent extremists, nor were they called upon or pressed to do so to the extent and as repeatedly as Republican politicians, and especially Donald Trump, were called upon to repudiate the Bogeyman of white supremacism. 

 

At one point, just after Trump’s victory, there was a moment when it looked like the thinkers on the left were willing to take a hard look at themselves, and consider the possibility that Hilary Clinton’s “deplorables” rhetoric, and the entire Obama-Clinton strategy of demonizing middle and working class, white Americans, evangelicals and traditionalist Catholics, and males, was what cost them the election and ought to be abandoned.   That moment quickly passed, and instead, the left opted to double down on that strategy.    The message from the mainstream media, almost monolithically left-wing, became that Donald Trump was a crypto-Nazi and that anybody who supported him was likely the same.

 

They did not hesitate to tell the most outrageous lies to bolster this insane message.   How these companies have remained afloat without being deserted in droves by their viewers, readers, and advertisers, as their credibility sank below that of the supermarket tabloids that specialize in celebrity gossip and alien abduction stories is beyond me.  

 

First there was the entire “the Russians are responsible” nonsense, which was especially rich seeing that it came from the people who up until that point had been digging up the skeleton of Joseph McCarthy and rattling it around every time anyone said anything bad about Communists and Communism.  

 

Then, about seven months after Trump was sworn into office, somebody who had until shortly before been a Democratic Party organizer, put together a rally called “Unite the Right” in Charlottesville, Virginia to protest the scheduled removal of a statue of General Robert E. Lee.   Some of the protestors, most likely left-wing agents provocateurs, showed up in Klan robes and SS uniforms.   Although these hardly constituted the majority of the protesters, the left-wing media declared all of the protestors to be “white supremacists” and “neo-Nazis”.   When Antifa “counter protesters” stirred up violence – with the Charlottesville police, upon orders from the city’s mayor, refusing to do their job and keep the two sides separate – the media pinned the blame for all of this on the protestors.   When Donald Trump, the voice of reason at the time, addressed the matter, condemning the violence from the left that the progressives refused to condemn, he said, with regards to the rally and its opponents, that there are “very fine people on both sides.”   The media has persistently quoted these words ever since, applying them to the kind of people that those in the Klan robes and SS uniforms purported to be, without mentioning that Trump clarified his own remark later in the same interview, and said and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists – because they should be condemned totally.”    He should have refrained from giving them even that much, and said that he would condemn the people they want condemned, when and only when they are willing to condemn Antifa and other Marxist extremists.  

 

Since to relate the entire story of the media’s dishonest war against Trump would require an essay much longer than what I intend this one to be, I am going to skip ahead to the events of two nights ago.   It is now the morning of Guy Fawkes Day, which, contrary to the delusions of Alan Moore, does not commemorate some sort of libertarian hero but rather the defeat of the plot of a terrorist to blow up Parliament and King James I.   The Americans held their election on November the third, two days prior.  As of this moment, the outcome still hangs in the air.

 

On the evening of the third, as results of the election were counted, at first, Biden, the nominal Democratic candidate, gained a lead.  While some took this as an indication that the polls, which had been suggesting that Biden would win by a large margin, were accurate, I, in conversation with a couple of such people, said that this was merely the result of the early votes being tabulated first.   As the votes from Election Day itself, were added to the early votes, states that were showing blue on the map would start to turn red.   This prediction was soon borne out.   Amusingly, as this happened, the numbers on the top of the map, supposedly indicating electoral votes for Biden and Trump, became increasingly disconnected from the map itself.   It was apparent that the media had come up with a new form of mathematics for this election.   Biden’s total included both states where he was the declared winner and states where he was significantly ahead.   Trump’s only ever included the states where he had been declared the winner.   As states switched from blue to red, their numbers were not subtracted from Biden’s total.   States that Biden won were called as quickly as possible.   Other states, such as Florida, were not called for Trump until hours after it was obvious that he had won them.  By around 11 pm, the numbers from the states where Trump had won and was leading, if you manually added them up, showed a Trump total of close to 300 electoral votes, well over the 270 he needed.   The number on the top of the screen, however, still read just over 100.   

 

By some point around midnight – keep in mind, I am talking Central Standard Time here – the total electoral vote acknowledged for Trump had risen to 213.   Biden’s total had not been revised downward, in accordance with the red surge of the previous hours, but was sitting at 238 on the network news stations, 227 on Decision Desk.   The counts remained at those numbers until morning, although the map continued to show Trump with a sizable and winning lead over Harris and her stand-in Biden.

 

No, it is not standard procedure to put an election count on hold, send everyone home for the night, and start again in the morning.

 

By the time the morning came around, it was evident that the Democrats were returning to one of their older traditions.   Since they have been acting in recent years, as the devil possessed party of wokeness, Cultural Maoism, and Year Zero, it might be thought that for them to return to their party’s older traditions was a major improvement.  Sadly, however, I am not talking about Jeffersonian decentralized anti-federalism and agrarianism.   I refer to the tradition of Tammany Hall, Joseph P. Kennedy, and the long-standing Democrat lock on the cemetery vote.   The tradition, to put it plainly, of voter fraud.

 

The left had long signaled that they were planning this.   This is what all those fake polls – obvious to some of us at the time, to everybody now – and all of the talk about Trump refusing to concede was all about.   That is why the Democrats were so insistent upon a mail-in vote option, and, if it were not happening all around the world, I would have suggested that this is what was behind the whole “lets blow the latest strain of respiratory disease way out of proportion by giving it a scary new name and lying about it being an Apocalyptic superbug that will end all life on earth if drastic measures are not taken” all along.   Sure enough, overnight, under the cover of darkness, in districts locally controlled by Democrat bosses, some of which had been irregularly delaying reporting their returns, others of which “discovered” a whack load of ballots all marked for Biden at the last minute, tipped what had been a sizable lead for Trump in some key states into a lead for Biden.  

 

At the moment that I write this, the mainstream media are claiming that Biden is six electoral votes away from winning and fifty electoral votes ahead of Donald Trump.   Decision Desk has Biden leading, but at only 253 electoral votes.   They give the same 214 to Trump.

 

What is somewhat odd about all of this is that the Democrats seem to have put very little effort into disguising what they are doing.   With a paper trail a mile long, whistleblowers coming forward to testify to the cheating ordered by their higher ups, and the statistical impossibility of some of what we have seen, the likelihood that Donald Trump will win a legal challenge to all of this is incredibly high.   Is it possible that the left’s intention in all of this is not actually to steal an election, but to lay the foundation for a new set of charges against Trump – that he won by stacking the court – in order to justify a new wave of revolutionary violence?

 

In either situation, for the sake of our American neighbours, let us pray that the Donald is triumphant yet again.

 

God bless our American neighbours and God save the Queen!

6 comments:

  1. On the contrary, Trump has only made these ideas unpalatable to those who would otherwise sympathise with them. He ain't no Pat Buchanan, and that's the issue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that Trump is no Pat Buchanan. With regards to his having made these ideas unpalatable to those who might be won over to to them, while I have heard that viewpoint expressed many times, I question whether it is true. The popular vote, both from this election and that of four years ago, can be interpreted either way, depending upon how you think it would have turned out had it been somebody else running on that platform. Pat Buchanan himself, judging from his latest column "Trumpism lives On!" appears to be of the opinion that whoever is ultimately inaugurated, Trump has brought those ideas back into the public discourse for good. I'm inclined to think that his having scored roughly half of the popular vote in both elections, despite running against the media both times, and this time around, despite a four year campaign to outright demonize him on the part of over 90% of the media, strongly supports Buchanan's interpretation. There is also the point, made by James Kalb in Chronicles four years ago, that for somebody to bust his way into the public debate with these ideas, against their having been excluded by the establishments of both parties, basically required somebody like Donald Trump.

      Delete
    2. And what did Trump do for Buchanan's ideas? He associated them with the exploitative snake-oil salesman or the boisterous carnival barker. Moreover, he had important media supporters.

      Delete
  2. As an American, my main thought is that the Dems have worked us into a position where the valid and invalid can never be unmixed. Because of that, the only options will ultimately be: accept obvious fraud, or refuse to accept obvious fraud and unilaterally declare victory. I weep for my country either way, but nothing else can happen until we change our culture. The culture war is the only battlefield.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am certainly in agreement with regards to the culture war. This, I think, is where the left has had the advantage over us for decades. They have understood, since at least Gramsci and the original Frankfurt School, that the institutions of culture are where the real battles are won or lost. Our side has slowly been waking up to this, but there is still a tendency on the right to think that the culture war is won or lost in the political theatre. This is why so many have been lured by the siren song of "the culture war has been fought politically and lost, we must give it up and focus on other issues."

      Delete
    2. I have been toying with a conception that the modern era’s major failing is that of systemizing everything.

      When all important aspects of life, from the food you eat to the education your children receive, to your healthcare and your protection are all in the hands of a “system”, the fight for control of that system is going to be vicious and bitter.

      We have to figure out how to convince folks to become more self-sufficient. We have a boon in that the systems have been failing rapidly over the last few decades. The trick is not to take over these decrepit and corrupt systems of power politics, but to encourage independence from them. If a person and their household could become more self-sufficient and independent, we’d see renewed health in that person and their immediate environs. I hope to be an example of this for my church and community and be a shining light for those around me who are sickened by the syncretism of democracy and Christianity.

      Delete