Columnists

Last-Ditch Battles

T. SHER SINGH

Donald Trump heads no revolution. Nor does he represent or embody any lofty sentiment. Neither is he, in reality, leading a movement against politicians or the so-called Establishment.

The good Lord knows how badly we need to reform the politics and politicians of today, and how desperately we need to stem the wholesale plunder going on around the world in the guise of the most cynical tool ever created by Man: the Company/Corporation.

It would be wonderful if indeed there was a revolution against these ills that are plaguing society today.

But Trump’s and the Republican Party’s three-ring circus is no such grass-roots movement.

Nor is it, per se, a cry for jobs in the manner it is being described by the dime-a-dozen spin-doctors who occupy the air waves today.

Well, let me correct myself: it is, in a way, about jobs, but not in the way it is being painted by the pundits. What it is about is loss of privilege, and it is that sinking feeling that Trump is preying on.

There is an element of truth in the cri de coeur being heard from the 35% base that forms the bulwark of Trump’s support. They are indeed worried about jobs, but not because they’re not getting any. That segment of society -- in the US, in Canada and all over the West, actually -- still enjoys a disproportionately large and choicest chunk of jobs around. What it is whining about is that it no longer enjoys the exclusive guarantee that it’ll have ALL the jobs or, at the very least, have first dibs on all the jobs, and only those that they do not like should then be handed out to the rest of the world.

This segment, though shrinking from year to year, primarily consists of the white male -- hitherto, primarily Wasp but now manned by a wider European-origin base which, strangely, now also includes Jews who are, of course, of Middle-Eastern stock.

Don't get me wrong. My remarks today don't apply to the vast majority of 'white-males' who indeed meet the job requirements of the positions they've earned and now hold, or have held, through sheer strength of merit and arrived at them through fair and open competition. On the contrary, I am merely referring to the small percentage of those who expect and demand entitlement without having to show for it.

Blacks, for example, are still unemployed in far larger percentages than the white males of the species. So are Hispanics, to take just one more example. But you don’t find either Blacks or Hispanics or any of the other discriminated communities lining up behind Trump.

Because, as I've said, its not about jobs, per se.

Trump’s support comes mainly from the so-called white male, and his support systems, who cannot compete in a free job market for many, many reasons … be it lack of education, a dependence on a history and culture of undeserved privilege, an erosion of ambition and initiative, etc.

I am not making this up as I’m going along. I have carefully studied the sad shenanigans south of the border in this latest four-year election cycle that the US goes through, well, every four years.

I live in Canada. But it’s been no different here. I’ve been observing this phenomenon here for more than a few decades and have researched it in great detail as a result of the many hats (turbans, if you will) that I’ve worn during the course of my multiple careers, pre-occupations and interests.

It’s the same goings-on anywhere you go in the West -- US, Canada, UK, France, Germany, you name it! The only difference has been the timing. Some, like we in Canada, have been going through it for a few decades now, and are in the process of getting past it, though we’re not there yet.

The US is currently going through it in its full-blown ugliness.

European countries have started feeling the heat, but their time has yet to come. It’s coming for sure, though, trust me -- there are rumblings already on the horizon.

Here’s what irks these disgruntled souls.

Until a few decades ago, women were almost completely excluded from the top jobs, in terms of power, salaries, perks, etc. That meant that 50% of the population (males) was guaranteed 100% of all the good jobs.

Then, turning to the non-white sections of society -- Blacks; racial, religious and cultural minorities -- the same rule applied. As a result, depending on the demographics, an even smaller percentage of white-males was guaranteed first-dibs, and in most cases, total exclusivity to 100% of the jobs.

If the same trend had been allowed to continue, today we would find 20 - 30 % of the population would have guaranteed access to 100% of the jobs, the rest of the population could wait for the jobs not wanted by them.

It, of course, gave rise to a more serious problem which did not show its ugly head until recent decades.

All important jobs in every field were being increasingly occupied by persons who did not have the qualifications to meet the job requirements, and then progressively, even by social misfits and idiots. On the other hand, people who far exceed in all criteria of eligibility were refused those very same jobs which were as a result being filled with lesser men … only because the better qualified ones didn‘t match the ‘white-male’ template.

This phenomenon shows up in politics, in sports, in the military, in the arts, everywhere.

Do I need to give you examples? We have had a string of Presidents of very mediocre level of capability being elected in the US, over and over again. Reagan, Nixon, Johnson, Carter, the Bushes. Along comes Obama, who in comparison stood out like an intellectual giant, effused with integrity. The rest is history. Remember, despite his faults and failings, he stands head and shoulders over his peers and predecessors.

That explains why, at the very beginning of the current election season, Dr Ben Carson stood out as a star, before he was found lacking in mediocrity -- something the rest of the crowd had an abundance of.

Does it then surprise us that the same mediocre people then turn out to be racists, bullies and bigots … as well as liars and crooks?

Here in Canada, our experience has been identical.

I’ll first cite the example of the most racist of our Prime Ministers -- William Lyon Mackenzie King. He is the one who coined the phrase “White Man’s Country” to describe Canada - a land stolen from its First Nations who had thrived on this land for millennia.

Mackenzie King was certifiably crazy. He received his guidance for his daily political machinations from his dead mother. How, you ask? She communicated to him through his dog. How do we know this? The idiot kept a daily diary recording of all his ‘conversations‘ and how he then implemented them!

The Tories -- our version of the Republican syndrome -- will tell you unabashedly that he was one of our great prime ministers.

Fast forward to the modern era.

Here in Ontario, we had Mike Harris who pillaged the coffers of the province and left it in shambles, but through surrogates who, hiding behind corporations, committed the plunder.

On the other hand, Canada’s prime minister of recent memory, Brian Mulroney, was stupid enough to take cash bribes, not through intermediaries, but in person.

Prime Minister Joe Clark was known to have perfected the art of mediocrity, and that was the extent of his contribution to Canadian politics.

Prime Minister Harper of recent notoriety had cultivated an intellectual air about him. Surrounding himself with his clones -- Jason Kenny is the most shining example -- he led the most racist and bigoted government in the modern era while running the economy to the ground.

The fact that we have managed to get a handle on this type of divisive politics and have learnt to ultimately wrestle the scoundrels to the ground, only means that we have been at it a bit longer, and our country is much smaller and a bit more easily manageable.

But the dynamics is still the same.

The hitherto privileged segment of society deeply resents the loss of its free perks and the new demands that they be able to show more than that they are ‘white’ and ‘male’, and the new prerequisite that they compete with the rest of the population in proving merit and skill.

Who wouldn’t mourn such a loss!

Mercifully, their numbers are dwindling -- evolution and Darwinian law of the ’fittest’, sooner or later, come into play -- and therefore their whining and snivelling, their moans and groans, are now turning into existential wails and laments.

And they know that, given how things are continuing to slide, if they are to stop the decline in their fortunes, it is now or never. Which, given the desperation, is the perfect scenario for a last-ditch battle.

Last-ditch battles, by definition, are no-holds barred. They don’t run by the Marquis of Queensbury rules. They are ugly. They get bloody. They leave behind casualties.

They are marked with brilliant sparks of fire. But they burn out quickly because invariably the years of decline have taken their toll. There’s no principle left to fight for, no great cause, only selfishness. All the fuel needed in a prolonged battle, all supplies of oxygen, have long been depleted.

All that’s left is the intense desire for the ‘good ol’ days’.

That’s what you’re seeing in the US election these days. Such movements don’t spit out great leaders, only buffoons like Donald Trump, because, remember, they didn’t start with merit in the first place. Only bombast and a vague sense of meaningless and undeserved entitlement.

Watch the current last-ditch battle have its last big hurrah, its final flare-up before the fuel burns itself out.

It doesn’t mean that the war is over. There’ll be more last-ditch battles, here and there and everywhere. But they’ll go away eventually, and we’ll be able to turn to other, more important issues then.


March 8, 2016   
 

 
 
                    
 

read other articles in Columnists