You bring up some good things here. Although I like what Trump says far more than Clinton, and of those 2 "choices" I prefer Trump, I won't vote for either. I am of the opinion that despite the rhetoric, Trump has been "vetted" by the real movers and shakers of this world and has gotten approval. I don't trust him or his words any more than all the other politicians I've ever seen.
I've been waiting to see a really good investigation into Trump's connections to finance and powerful people, to really shine a light on him to get some insight on what his real, actual perspective is on how he plans to "Make America Great Again".
Very disappointed in Stephan Molyneux's lack of objectiveness in evaluating Trump. He has made a huge shift towards statism IMO with how he is tracking Trump and changed the topics he focuses on at FDR. I don't have nearly the confidence and respect for him I once did as a result of where he has taken FDR in the last year or 2.
Corbett has had a few good podcasts on the US elections this year, but mostly focused on Clinton. Given the choices, I believe Corbett's position is to discuss why statism is bad, that he endorses no candidates, but highlights the extreme corruption he sees in any candidate, which so far has been mostly Clinton.
Hmm....All the research I've done has brought me to the conclusion that Trump is not in with the Deep State - that's why mainstream media(owned by Deep State) is fighting him so hard, because he's going to screw up their global domination game. Just about every top economist, every president of Harvard/MIT/Yale hates Trump, because Trump's "America First" progam f's up their global income game.
Is nationalism truly antithetical to globalism, @micahspiller ? Weren't the last three periods of increased central control (the global gold standard of the mid-1800s, post-WWI, and post-WWII) preceded by periods of intense nationalism?
Looking back at the past 200 years of the Anglo-American Establishment, one is hard-pressed to find an example of nationalistic fervor that isn't eventually spun into greater centralized control...
I guess it all depends upon whether Trump is truly in it to make a positive change, or if he's just putting on a really good front. My gut feeling is that he wants to make that positive change because he's woke people up from the hypnosis that mainstream media had America under which threatens the very existence of the Rockefellers and Rothschilds in this world. Besides, with web3.0 coming into existence, it will be very difficult for anything to be centralized.
I have hard time keeping up on all of this
thx!
Very well written with a lot of backup data, albeit cynical. Good article.
Thanks for taking the time to read! At least it's admittedly cynical ;)
You bring up some good things here. Although I like what Trump says far more than Clinton, and of those 2 "choices" I prefer Trump, I won't vote for either. I am of the opinion that despite the rhetoric, Trump has been "vetted" by the real movers and shakers of this world and has gotten approval. I don't trust him or his words any more than all the other politicians I've ever seen.
I've been waiting to see a really good investigation into Trump's connections to finance and powerful people, to really shine a light on him to get some insight on what his real, actual perspective is on how he plans to "Make America Great Again".
Very disappointed in Stephan Molyneux's lack of objectiveness in evaluating Trump. He has made a huge shift towards statism IMO with how he is tracking Trump and changed the topics he focuses on at FDR. I don't have nearly the confidence and respect for him I once did as a result of where he has taken FDR in the last year or 2.
Corbett has had a few good podcasts on the US elections this year, but mostly focused on Clinton. Given the choices, I believe Corbett's position is to discuss why statism is bad, that he endorses no candidates, but highlights the extreme corruption he sees in any candidate, which so far has been mostly Clinton.
Thank you, and I Like saying it.
Hmm....All the research I've done has brought me to the conclusion that Trump is not in with the Deep State - that's why mainstream media(owned by Deep State) is fighting him so hard, because he's going to screw up their global domination game. Just about every top economist, every president of Harvard/MIT/Yale hates Trump, because Trump's "America First" progam f's up their global income game.
Is nationalism truly antithetical to globalism, @micahspiller ? Weren't the last three periods of increased central control (the global gold standard of the mid-1800s, post-WWI, and post-WWII) preceded by periods of intense nationalism?
Looking back at the past 200 years of the Anglo-American Establishment, one is hard-pressed to find an example of nationalistic fervor that isn't eventually spun into greater centralized control...
I guess it all depends upon whether Trump is truly in it to make a positive change, or if he's just putting on a really good front. My gut feeling is that he wants to make that positive change because he's woke people up from the hypnosis that mainstream media had America under which threatens the very existence of the Rockefellers and Rothschilds in this world. Besides, with web3.0 coming into existence, it will be very difficult for anything to be centralized.
Check this out bro, this is f'n DEEP.
https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=E3n9esOHOEQ
Followed... https://steemit.com/@jeffreyahann and https://steemit.com/@thegrimm
Congratulations @rusticus! You have received a personal award!
Click on the badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about this award, click here
Congratulations @rusticus! You received a personal award!
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!