What Are
We Smelling?
By Dmitry Orlov
February 16, 2016 - "ClubOrlov"
- So far I have mostly tried to ignore the US
presidential race. It's a distraction from doing
things that are either pleasant or useful—of which
it is neither. I haven't always tried to completely
ignore these torrents of nonsense that erupt every
four years like a gushing sewer, but, in general, I
was never interested in the outcome, because in all
but one case I genuinely disliked all of the
candidates. Jimmy Carter is the only one whose hand
I would shake. I wouldn't want to breathe the same
air with any of the others—all lizard-brained
miscreants who have left a slimy trail through the
White House.
As I understand it, the way this system is supposed
to work is as follows. There is just one good, solid
reason to vote for the Democratic candidate: to keep
out the Republicans, who are so much worse than the
Democrats. And there is just one good, solid reason
to vote for the Republican candidate: to keep out
the Democrats, who are so much worse than the
Republicans. Now, you may ask yourself, How is it
possible for both sides to be worse at the same
time? Well, you are right, that's not possible.
Obviously, they have to take turns at becoming the
worst. Whoever happens to be in office adds another
turn to the downward spiral.
This seems like a good, solid arrangement—if the
goal is to produce the most bloated, corrupt,
criminal, warmongering, terrorist-coddling, bankrupt
government the Earth has ever known—it is, indeed,
all of these things. But it has just one tiny flaw:
getting people to vote for you by teaching them to
hate the other side is effective, but it's purely
negative. To introduce a positive, aspirational
element, it is necessary to somehow make people feel
that it is possible to bring about political change
by voting for someone within the Democratic or the
Republican party. Of course, this is sheer nonsense,
because the only people pulling the strings are the
ones who write the checks, and you don't get to vote
for any of them. But people don't want to believe
that they are completely powerless, and the same
people who fell for it in thinking that they could
bring about change by voting for Obama are now
falling for it again, thinking that they can bring
about change by voting for Bernie. No, you can't
possibly ever change things by voting for the
Democratic/Republican duopoly. Oh, and you can't
possibly ever change things by voting against it
either. Sorry, Jill Stein.
So that's how it goes, generally, getting worse and
worse each time. But things can't just continue to
going from bad to worse forever; eventually,
something has to give. At some point there must come
a phase transition, or an inflection point, or some
sort of political collapse scenario. And this year
seems somewhat atypical because the quality of the
candidates is so poor.
On the Democratic side, we have Hillary the Giant
Flying Lizard, but she seems rather impaired by just
about everything she has ever done, some of which
was so illegal that it will be hard to keep her from
being indicted prior to the election. She seems only
popular in the sense that, if she were stuffed and
mounted and put on display, lots of folks would pay
good money to take turns throwing things at her. And
then we have Bernie, the pied piper for the “I can't
believe I can't change things by voting” crowd. He
seems to be doing a good job of it—as if that
mattered.
On the Republican side we have Donald and the Seven
Dwarfs. I
previously wrote that I consider Donald to be a
mannequin worthy of being installed as a figurehead
at the to-be-rebranded Trump White House and Casino
(it is beneath my dignity to mention any of the
Dwarfs by name) but Donald has a problem: he
sometime tells the truth. In the most recent debate
with the Dwarfs he said that Bush lied in order to
justify the invasion of Iraq. Candidates must
lie—lie like, you know, like they are running for
office. And the problem with telling the truth is
that it becomes hard to stop. What bit of truthiness
is he going to deliver next? That 9/11 was an inside
job? That Osama bin Laden worked for the CIA, and
that his death was faked? That the Boston Marathon
bombing was staged, and the two Chechen lads were
patsies? That the US military is a complete waste of
money and cannot win? That the financial and
economic collapse of the US is now unavoidable? Even
if he can stop himself from letting any more
truthiness leak out, the trust has been broken: now
that he's dropped the T-bomb, how can he be relied
upon to lie like he's supposed to?
And so we may be treated to quite a spectacle: the
Flying Lizard, slouching toward a federal
penitentiary, squaring off against the Donald the
T-bomber. That would be fun to watch. Or maybe the
Lizard will implode on impact with the voting booth
and then we'll have Bernie vs. the T-bomber. Being a
batty old bugger, and not wanting to be outdone, he
might drop some T-bombs of his own. That would be
fun to watch too.
Not that any of this matters, of course, because the
country's trajectory is all set. And no matter who
gets elected—Bernie or Donald—on their first day at
the White House they will be shown a short video
which will explain to them what exactly they need to
do to avoid being assassinated. But I won't be
around to see any of that. I've seen enough. This
summer I am sailing off: out Port Royal Sound, then
across the Gulf Stream and over to the Abacos, then
a series of pleasant day-sails down the Bahamas
chain with breaks for fishing, snorkeling and
partying with other sailors (I know, life is so
hard!), then through the Windward Passage, a stop at
Port Antonio in Jamaica, and then onward across the
Caribbean to an undisclosed location. Please let me
know if you want to crew. I guarantee that there
will be absolutely no election coverage aboard the
boat.
Dmitry
Orlov
was born in Leningrad and immigrated to the United
States in the 1970’s. He is the author of
Reinventing Collapse, Hold Your Applause! and
Absolutely Positive, and publishes weekly at the
phenomenally popular blog
www.ClubOrlov.com
. |