Politics And News Media: The Take Away

Thomas Jefferson is credited with saying the best disinfectant is sunlight. What he meant of course is that transparency and bringing truth to light is the best form of fighting corruption and all other forms of what I shall deem political bacteria. This, in my opinion, has been the biggest victory of late, the dissemination of information and materials previously kept opaque from the society. But it is only a drop in the bucket, a good but very much unfinished exercise. There will be more to do and more challenges as well. The good news is however, I see this as a trend with legs and not just some temporary fad. Here is why I say this.

Over the past few months I have come to the conclusion that there is clearly a social protest underway in the western world (read Europe and North America) that initially manifested itself in the previous BREXIT vote and has crossed the Atlantic in American politics. In short, many people are angry at the current state of affairs and the so-called status quo, and they have a right to be. They have watched their local economies and communities destroyed by a number of things not of their own choosing. Job outsourcing, shenanigans in the banking and financial sectors followed by tax payer financed bailouts, attacks on civil liberties and national sovereignty (done under the guise of fighting foreign bogeymen we only lately come to find are the creation of entities closer to home, thanks to Wikileaks), abuses by some corporate entities when it comes to the tax code and even environmental issues, political malfeasance and the list goes on and on. But make no mistake about it, the status quo is not going to give up without a fight, and they will attempt to hold on by any means both legal and illegal. There is a lot of money at stake, and it is about both longer term political and economic control as well.

The BREXIT vote initially interested me as I delved into the demographics behind the support of different segments of society, and this pretty much mimics what has been going on with US politics as well recently. In terms of those in favor of the leave argument in the UK, just as with the supporters of Donald Trump in the US, you will find the demographics skewed towards the middle class, the working just surviving class (also coined the deplorable class in the US, although I have no idea what is deplorable about anyone trying to honestly work and earn a living), small business owners and pretty much older members of Generation X not to mention the Baby Boom generation. Who was in favor of the stay vote in the UK, and likewise supporters of Hillary Clinton in the US? Basically most of recently arrived immigrants (both legal and illegal, with the current sitting US President basically encouraging illegal immigrants to vote which is another mind boggling thing in and of itself), the younger Millennial generation and the financial – banking sectors in general (which was a sector that did initially benefit from previous government financial and or monetary policies only to find out they made a deal with the devil as they now go broke under zero and now negative interest rates).

But all this goes much deeper than merely one political party versus another or one theme or topic versus another. In terms of BREXIT, citizens from the UK do not all of a sudden dislike Europeans but rather it was an issue of dictates coming from a foreign and distant political seat they felt was unfair and disproportionate. Likewise the UK has a disgruntled Scotland that feels the same way about London as well, so there is a deeper underlying theme here which basically can be summed up in the term home rule (or at least the idea of locals making local political and economic decisions for themselves that they think or hope will benefit them more fairly, which also includes the spending of tax money as well). In summary, people want to control their own economies and their own destinies come what may, and this flies in direct contrast and opposition to Globalism.

At this point you might think all this does not apply to Americans spread across the vast country of 50 states that is the US, but it does. Americans are not necessarily clamoring for state separation from the national union, but they do feel that Washington D.C. has lost touch with the rest of the country and has made both political and economic decisions disastrous to the rest of the country as well. They have witnessed tax payer funded bail outs of the financial sector (which got into trouble because government regulators were not doing their job in the first place), foolish economic policies that have made matters worse, corruption of various kinds and the development of an almost corporatism or fascism whereby private sector interests prevail over the needs and desires of the general populace. To quote the popular phrase developed by the followers of Donald Trump, they want to drain the swamp. A swamp comprised of corruption, opacity, selfish interest and even treason in some cases. A difficult task to be sure, but one that resonates greatly with a general population that feels cheated, disenfranchised and sold out.

Who Is To Blame?

We have heard a number of terms being tossed around to describe what can be defined as some kind of hidden hydra attempting the hijacking of both politics and economic and or monetary policy. Terms such as the elite, cabal, the one percent, shadow government, deep state and of late the 7th floor group in the US (apparently because they meet once a week in a government office building on the a floor with that same number, thank goodness they did not choose to meet in the basement, which would unleash another implied meaning). We also hear the term globalists or globalism, new world order and some other words or terms to describe shadow groups or movements pushing an agenda. And then we have previously existing groups such as the Illuminati and the Masonic order thrown into the mix as well, supposedly involved in a conspiracy. On this topic, please allow me to opine on what I think are some basic truths.

There is and always have been special interest groups, businesses, commercial guilds and political organizations that do and will lobby government for laws and policies beneficial for themselves. The AARP (American Association of Retired People) want legislation and policy that is favorable to it's retired members. Labor unions want the same. Pharmaceutical companies, the petroleum industry, banking and financial sector and varied other groups want to influence government for things favorable to them specifically as well. All this is nothing new. However, special interests and especially those with deep pockets have co-opted the democratic process and have hijacked individual politicians for their own benefit in such an extreme and unprecedented way that is has caused anger among the electorate. This much is true enough, albeit not for every single politician to be sure, and has been revealed by some of the leaked emails as well.

In addition, whereas the so-called robber barons of the last century set up foundations and initiatives to directly help the poor, disenfranchised an uneducated (Andrew Carnegie's initiatives to set up a university and his support of what is now the public library system in the city of New York as just one or two examples), some of those same foundations of old (and some quite new) are now being used for another kind of social change, and what I would say is social malfeasance as well in some cases. The Ford Foundation and the Open Society Organization of George Soros for example financially supporting groups that want to effect change and bring their ideas to the forefront using civil disobedience, and in some cases other illegal behavior, as their modus operandi. This is not to suggest that such foundations are engaging in this behavior directly, but rather are seemingly funding groups that are, if some of the information revealed is true. In addition, the facilitation of mass migration and illegal migration via direct economic support and or political support favoring such agendas is yet another so-called social change being pushed albeit to the detriment of the existing populations at large.

Ladies and gentlemen, there is nothing wrong with any person, group of business advocating for their own ideas and agendas, regardless if you agree or disagree. There is nothing wrong with calling for social change, also regardless if you are on board or agree as well. This is all part and parcel to the democratic process, is it not? The real problem lies with the government and political leadership that makes decisions or sells out to one particular agenda, ideology or program to the detriment of the remaining population as a whole. Political leaders need to apply common sense, weighing the consequences, benefits and wisdom of what policies and agendas of whatever issue against the needs and benefits of the nation as a whole. This is what has been lacking and this is the real ire of the general populations at large.

There is also a common theme being echoed in Europe and the US and it is one of arrogance and condemnation by the so-called well educated professionals and members of academia. And it is these people many politicians have been clinging to as support for their policies. There are some intellectuals that recently opined that such anti status quo movements are supported and energized by the marginalized segment of society (and we can perhaps suggest the same is true for the leave movement in the UK) but they do not say it in an endearing or even neutral way. Such comments, in the vein they are made, demonstrates disdain and contempt for the greater segment of society that drives us to work, cares for our children, stocks our supermarket shelves with groceries, and so on infinitum. In other words and simply put, when you tell the population at large they are stupid and too ignorant to blindly go along with the intellectual brilliance of policies enacted, you are doing so at your own peril. Not everyone has a doctorate degree in physics or economics, but not everyone is an idiot either. And I will add, the average person clearly understands when certain things are not working or at least not to their own benefit. Remember, academia is enmeshed in theory, while the average citizen experiences the actual practice and reality every day. It is in reality where we live, and not in the world of theorem.

The Main Stream News Media As Complicit Co-Opted Partner

One of the major things to come out of all these recent political events has been the revelations regarding the mainstream news media in the United States. With the advent and activities of Wikileaks and the alternative news media (and I will include the term citizen journalist as well) we have had a number of revelations come to light. Namely, much of the main stream news media (but not all to be fair) has been bought off one way or another (not necessarily with cash) and has engaged in what basically has been propaganda for one one particular political party, candidate and ideology. This is not journalism but rather reporters acting as hacks.

There have been accusations that some entities such as CNN to be specific (called the Clinton News Network or the Comedy News Network by some), but not the only news entity charged, has deliberately rigged the previously poll reporting to show a false lead for one US presidential candidate versus the other. This charge of favoritism falls into a gray area in the sense that many news organizations use outside polling companies or resources which certainly can use an algorithm or polling process that is skewed. In other words, in defense of any news organization, they can claim innocence as to the polling methodology and results conducted by an outside contractor. However, if the varied Wikileaks and other information is to be believed, there is hard core proof of collusion and favoritism on the part of some individual reporters, which is literally in black and white.

In this regard we have reports that Mr. Wolf Blitzer of CNN contacted Ms. Lauren Dillon of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) via email back in April 2016 asking for questions the DNC would like to be used in an upcoming interview with Donald Trump. Mr. Ken Silverstein of WashingtonBabylon.com wrote an excellent article on November 2, 2016 highlighting some similar things. For example, we learn that Mr. Glenn Thrush, chief political correspondent for Politico, sent an email to Hillary Clinton communications director Jennifer Palmieri on April 17, 2015 asking for editorial review and approval for an article he wished to publish. And getting back to CNN, Mr. Jack Burns writes a detailed article here outlying some of the underlying connections for the comment that CNN has been referred to as the Clinton News Network: http://thefreethoughtproject.com/wikileaks-mainstream-media-clinton/

This is not to necessarily attack one particular reporter, journalist or network but simply call attention to the fact that many in the main stream news media has been playing favorites and in some cases repressing negative stories about one candidate in favor of the other. This is why, just as in the case of the political realm, the average citizen is rejecting the previous status quo (in this case the traditional and established main stream news media) and is instead embracing the alternative media, the anti establishment or anti status quo news sources if you prefer that term. People are indeed disgusted with what they see as a sort of nepotism and collusion between those in the private sector (business and media, specifically corporate media) and government.

In summary, my own take away from all this is that people overall want a return to transparency, decency, morality, ethics and just plain fair dealing in government and the private sector as well. They also want a separation of private and public or at least a scenario whereby there is a separation of the two. Instead, I think what we have seen in the past few decades has been a slow and steady creep towards a sort of soft fascism (maybe on purpose?). Meaning, an integration of the highly paid managerial, academic and media class to such an extent it reeks of self interested interconnectedness. And such a connectedness alienates the average citizen in a variety of ways.

Dr. Steve Pieczenik recently did a series of video blogs and one thing he said hit home for me. He said that throughout human history, in various forms of government, there has always been some element of corruption and malfeasance and I think he is correct. However, when it gets to the extreme or to a point where it dominates all else, you then have a serious problem. An example and metaphor would involve someone involved in a business or industry whereby the product is perishable, such as food. Some businesses, such as egg producers, have to account for a percentage of spoilage or the product going bad for whatever reason. The question is, what is a reasonable amount of spoilage to still make a profit, stay in business and make the business a ongoing enterprise? Two percent? Five percent? When you get to 50, 60, 70 percent spoilage you have a real serious problem. Same in government, finance and most other things in life as well. There indeed has been quite a bit of spoilage and people want the refrigerator cleaned out. That is the essence of it all.

About The Author: This article was written by John Schroder of Ascot Advisory Services. John's firm has been helping clients in the Dominican Republic for the last 17 years with residency application services, naturalized citizenship filing, banking assistance and legal services pertaining to real estate (title transfers, legal representation at closing, sales contract review). You can contact him by telephone at 809-756-1917 or click the about the author link above to reach a contact page to send an email directly.