The results
and the first statements of the arch-reactionary Donald Trump, candidate of the
Republican Party mafia against the candidate Harris of the Democratic Party
mafia, were announced by almost all the media following a similar pattern:
Donald
Trump is the winner of the elections in the United States. He will be president
of the United States for the second time. His victory has been confirmed. He
obtains 312 delegates (the majority is at 270) against Kamala Harris's 226,
with a resounding victory. Trump celebrated his victory with a party in West
Palm Beach, Florida, where he appeared three hours before the final result.
There, he proclaimed: “We are going to fix everything that is wrong in this
country.” “It is time to leave behind the divisions of the last four years.”
(06 NOV 2024).
Speaking of
the most general and common political consequences for reactionary governments
of cyclical capitalist crises, most media agree that “Trump has benefited from
the frustration of citizens after the sharp price increases of the last four
years and the increase in illegal immigration.”
The part
referring to the economic crisis-fall and change of government, we underline
it, because since the 20th century and more pronounced in these two decades of
the present, we observe this trend of replacement of reactionary governments
swept away by the crisis by other reactionary governments. What does deserve to
be complemented when referring to the “increase in illegal immigration”, saying
that Trump has benefited from having awakened the lowest xenophobic passions
among voters, using it openly as one of the axes of his electoral campaign,
while Kamala Harris has used a shameful xenophobic speech. African Americans,
Latinos and other immigrants do not forget that Hamala Harris, as Attorney
General, was especially harsh against them with her “law and order” policy.
Trump has
reached approximately 74,500,000 votes, a figure very similar to the one that
led him to defeat against Biden in 2020 with 74,225,000. On the contrary, the
Democratic fall goes from the historical record of votes for a presidential
candidate in the history of the United States with 81,300,000 votes for Biden
in 2020, to 70,800,000 for Harris, with a loss of 10 million votes in 4 years
and which places them in the most crushing defeat since 1988 (losing in the
popular vote, in the Electoral College, in the Senate and in the House of
Representatives). Ten million voters who were key to expelling Trump from the
presidency and who on this occasion, even aware of the possibility of his
re-election, abstained from voting.“
„As of
November 6, with the recount process not yet fully completed, the votes counted
represented 65% of the voting-age population in the US. This figure represents
only a one-point decrease from the record high turnout in 2020, which saw the
highest level of participation in 50 years.“ (Statista)
„Trump won
the 2024 election with 312 electoral votes, over Harris's 226, and obtained
50.4% of the popular vote, or 74,532,699 votes, according to CNN's latest
count. Final data will not be available until December.“ (CNN).
If one
takes into account that 45% of eligible voters did not exercise their right to
vote, then Trump won not with 50.4% of 100% but only with 50.4% of those who
voted. The absolute figures will not be known for sure because the count is
state-run.
ON THE
WORSENING OF COLLUSION AND STRUGGLE BETWEEN THE TWO FACTIONS OF YANKEE
IMPERIALISM
It is true,
as has been said since the beginning of this century, that the depth of the
“division of American society” has been expressed in the growing disputes
between the Executive and the Legislative, aggravated with each change of
authorities, especially in the middle of each legislative period. This is how
the development of the contradiction is expressed, in the midst of collusion
and struggle, between both factions of the American big bourgeoisie on the
political level. This has been seen, for example, in the last presidential
periods, as for example, in the problems for the approval of the budget, where
only after difficult and long compromises (negotiations), between both mafias,
was an agreement reached to end the forced suspension of the administration's
activities or to approve an “aid package,” etc.
For this
reason, both factions of Yankee imperialism fought to resolve this
contradiction in their favor, through a greater centralization of power in the
Executive, applying a presidential absolutism. This centralization develops in
hard collusion and struggle in the elections for the replacement of authorities
such as those that have just passed, in the dispute and collusion between
Republicans and Democrats for the appointment of judges and prosecutors in
charge of applying the laws at the federal and state level, as well as for the
appointment of positions in the bureaucracy, one of the pillars of the
bourgeois State, the other and main one being the armed forces.
As for the
control of the judicial apparatus, during the previous Trump administration,
the Democratic control over the Supreme Court was reversed through the
appointment of “conservative” judges linked to the PR; now, at the last moment,
before the transfer of powers to the new administration, the Democrats intend
to reverse it by using their meager majority in the Senate to appoint judges
who respond to the orientation of the PD. In the high bureaucracy, the PD has
maintained greater control.
So, in
these elections, the problem has been at stake, under what sign this greater
centralization of Power in the Executive was going to occur as part of the
process of reactionarization of the imperialist bourgeois State. It has not
been, therefore, between reactionary democracy or fascism.
As a consequence,
with Trump's victory in the presidential elections and with the Republican
majority achieved by his party in both chambers, we will see an absolute
centralization of Power under the sign of the imperialist faction that this
party represents, ganged up by Donald Trump as president, who will subject the
judiciary and the bureaucracy, the intelligence apparatus and the armed forces
to greater control. The president centralizes the Executive, Legislative and
Judicial branches in his hands. Which means one more step in the reactionary
nature of the Yankee imperialist State, a bourgeois dictatorship led by the
financial oligarchy, a reactionary democracy with increasing suppression and
restriction of rights and freedoms.
On the
further decomposition of imperialism on all levels:
In American
society, in these reactionary elections, ideologically, it has been reflected,
on the one hand, in a rotten imperialist, reactionary, post-modernist and
social-chauvinist thought represented by the "democratic" mafia,
which focuses on the "identity discourse" to mobilize, in search of
social and partisan support, the academic and technocratic petite bourgeoisie
plus representatives of the upper cream of the minorities to seek on that basis
to manipulate the broad masses of the population in the service of the old
order and the imperialist war and, on the other hand, in a racist, chauvinist
"identity" discourse, of "original American values", of
"Christian values of service of the woman to the man", of the woman
as a child-bearing machine for wage slavery and cannon fodder for imperialist
wars, anti-abortion, that is, ultra-reactionary represented by the
"Republican" mafiosi appealing to the lowest instincts of the masses
degraded to electoral cattle, with a pro-re-industrialization discourse that
clashes violently with the most parasitic and most decomposing character of
imperialism. Both the rotten post-modernist thought of one imperialist faction,
and the equally rotten "conservative" ultra-reactionary thought of the
other imperialist faction, correspond to the rotten ideology of imperialism in
its most advanced phase of decomposition and general and final crisis and
sweeping away by the world revolution through people's war.
THE US
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS BEAR THE INDELIBLE MARK OF SLAVERY
Or why is
the president not elected directly?
The answer
lies in the origins of this bourgeois dictatorial state, as can be read in the
following quote:
“Kings are
born kings; presidents are elected. But how? James Wilson clarified that the
delegates are in Philadelphia “by no other part of this plan are they more
confused than by the form of the election for the office of president.” Wilson
had proposed at the Convention that the president be elected directly. But
James Madison had introduced that, “Because the right to vote is greater in the
northern states than in the southern states, (…) the latter, on the basis of
the negroes, cannot have any influence in the election.” In plain text: In a
direct election, the northern states, where there are more qualified voters,
would also have more votes. Wilson’s proposal was rejected by a majority of 12
states to one. Some delegates at the Convention were of the idea that Congress
should elect the president. This method, known as indirect election,
facilitates the participation of the people in the election and keeps at bay
“the excesses of democracy”; it filters the will of the many through the
judgment of the few. The senate is elected indirectly, for example: senators
are not elected by the people, but by the parliaments of the states (direct
election was introduced in 1913…). But the indirect election of the president
poses a problem: the election of the president through Congress collides with
the principle of the separation of powers.
Wilson put
forward another idea. If the people cannot directly elect the president and
neither can Congress, perhaps another body can fill the void. Wilson's second
proposal was that the people should delegate to an electoral college of elected
delegates, an assembly of honourable men with the corresponding wealth and
reputation, who should properly take over the election process. This compromise
was approved. But this compromise was made on the basis of another compromise:
on the basis of the proportion of slaves. The number of delegates to the male
electoral guild was not to be represented by the number of eligible voters in
each state, but by the number of its representatives to the House of
Representatives. The representation of a state to the male electoral guild was
determined by the standard for parliamentary representation—one congressional
representative for every 40,000 people, of which enslaved people counted as
three-fifths. The male electoral guild was a concession to the slaveholders,
which was as much imbued with mathematical calculation as with political
calculation.” (Jill Lepore, The TRUE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES)
The
manipulation of American voters by the two mafias that take turns in the
American government
Here is a
historical testimony by HENRY KISSINGER in his text World Order, Reflections on
the Character of Nations and the Course of History, Digital edition: January
2016, original 2014, who here acts as a prophet of the past, but which has the
value of a confession of part and of a fulfilled “prophecy”:
“Until now,
Western history and psychology have treated truth as something independent of
personality and prior to the experience of the observer. But our era is on the
verge of a change in the conception of the nature of truth. Almost all websites
contain some kind of personalization function based on a tracking of Internet
codes intended to establish the user's background and preferences. These
methods want to stimulate users to “consume more content” [18] and, in doing
so, be exposed to more advertising, which is what ultimately sustains the
Internet economy. These subtle orientations
are in
keeping with a broader tendency to manipulate the traditional understanding of
human choice. Products are ranked and prioritized to offer those that one would
“like” and online news is presented as “the news that might interest you the
most.” [19] Two different people who turn to the same search engine with the
same question do not necessarily receive the same answer. The concept of truth
is relativized and individualized: it loses its universal character.
Information is presented as if it were free. In effect, the recipient pays for
it by providing data that will be exploited by people he does not know, in ways
that will then shape the information offered to him.
Whatever
the utility of this approach in the realm of consumption, its effect on policy
decisions can be transformative. Difficult choices in political decisions are
always lonely. Where, in a world of ubiquitous social media, does the individual
find room to develop the strength to make decisions that, by definition, cannot
be based on consensus? The saying that prophets are not recognized in their own
time is true insofar as they operate beyond conventional conception: that is
what makes them prophets. In our era, the technical time of prophets might have
disappeared. The search for transparency and connectivity in all aspects of
existence, by destroying privacy, inhibits the development of personalities
with the power to make solitary decisions.
The
American elections, especially the presidential elections, represent another
aspect of this evolution. It has been argued that in 2012 the electoral
campaigns had files on tens of millions of potentially independent voters.
Extracted from social networks, from open archives and from medical records,
these files offered a profile probably more precise than the person involved
could have made from memory. This allowed the campaigners to choose the most
appropriate technology in each case: a personal visit from friends already
affiliated (also found via the Internet), personalized letters (extracted from
social networks) or group meetings.
Presidential
campaigns are about to transform into media competitions between internet
operators. What were once substantive debates over the content of government activity
will be reduced to candidates becoming mouthpieces for a marketing effort
pursued by media whose intrusiveness would have been considered the stuff of
science fiction just a generation ago. The primary role of candidates may
become fundraising rather than program-making.
Is the
marketing effort intended to express the candidate’s convictions, or are the
convictions expressed by the candidate a reflection of big data research into
individuals’ likely preferences and biases? Can democracy avoid evolving into a
demagogic outcome based on an emotional appeal to the masses, rather than the
reasoned process envisioned by the Founding Fathers? If the gap between the
qualities required for election and the qualities essential to holding office
becomes too wide, that conceptual knowledge and historical sense that should be
part of foreign policy could be lost, or the cultivation of these qualities
could take up so much time in a president's first term as to prevent him from
fulfilling his role as leader of the United States.
Whoever
wins the electoral farce, always with fraud on one side or the other, will
apply in essence the same strategic guidelines and objectives of Yankee
imperialism to maintain its status as the sole hegemonic imperialist superpower
and world counterrevolutionary gendarme, just as it has been with all the
presidents of the United States to date, as one witness testifies thus:
“The twelve
postwar presidents have passionately claimed the exceptional role of the United
States in the world. They have all postulated, as an axiom, that the country is
engaged in a selfless struggle for the resolution of conflicts and the equality
of all nations, whose ultimate measure of success will be world peace and
universal harmony. [1]
All the
presidents of both political parties have proclaimed the applicability of
American principles to the entire world (...) What for other countries would
have been a mere rhetorical flourish has been presented, in the American
debate, as a specific model for global action”.
We
translate all the Yankee demagogy with a single phrase: “la pax americana.”
This imperialist objective is a historical and political impossibility because
we are on the offensive of the world proletarian revolution that will sweep
away imperialism and world reaction from the face of the Earth with a people's
war.
.jpg){kind=logo}
.png)
