Nearly two months ago, the United States of America held its 58th quadrennial presidential election. It would be the election of a new president, as according to the 22nd Amendment passed in 1947 and ratified in 1951, an elected president is limited to serve up to two terms.
Presidents come and presidents go, they achieve then they pass the baton, that’s how it’s been since George Washington passed the baton to John Adams in 1797. However, the 2016 presidential election will absolutely go down in infamy: with the rise of populist anti-establishment candidates, and the two most disliked nominees in recent history; the elected president defying all the major polls and news media, yet still losing the popular vote by nearly 3 million (which all came from California); and to top it all off, the so-called epidemic of “fake news”.
In the beginning of the 2016 presidential campaign, the two most favored candidates, from both major parties, were Hillary Clinton for the Democrats and Jeb Bush for the Republicans. Both these candidates came from America’s two best known political dynasties, and both supported a neoconservative pro-establishment platform. Neither of these two candidates were perceived well by the public, but the big advantages Hillary had over Jeb was that she was able to hide her neoconservative views behind the Democratic label. She flip flopped on her views to appeal to the same crowd of progressive millennials that had previously turned out for Barack Obama; and, because Obama’s election as the first African American president gave Democrats the bright idea of progressive politics, Hillary was also able to play the woman card on top of that.
But then came the rise of two populist, anti-establishment candidates: Democratic socialist Bernie Sanders, and paleoconservative Donald Trump. Both candidates ran aggressive campaigns, and both surged in popularity growing hugely loyal fan bases. In the primaries, Trump not only beat the status quo Jeb Bush – he swatted down his campaign with ease. Trump remained supreme over other popular Republican candidates, such as Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, to eventually win the GOP nomination; despite having a huge amount of opposition from many neoconservative establishment Republicans (as well as having a bad image from the left due to an aggressive stance on immigration and a bad record with women). Bernie won the first instance vote in 23 states and gathered what appeared to be more vocal support than Hillary did.  Although Hillary did win the nomination in the end, there has been some evidence that the DNC may have rigged the primary in Hillary’s favor; whether it’s true or not is unjustified, but possible, we’ll get to that later.
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were the two most disliked candidates in recent history. However, the election was expected to be an easy win for Hillary due to support from the media, celebrities, and incumbent President Barack Obama. Then election night came, and Donald Trump won the biggest political upset and caused the biggest political earthquake in recent history. After that, Hillary gave a concession speech, and Obama started working with Trump to ensure a smooth transition of power. Everything was supposed to be smooth and dandy… until the issue regarding fake news and Russian involvement came into play.
After a conspiracy theory (regarding Hillary’s campaign chairman John Podesta holding a child sex ring at the pizza joint he owned) prompted one man to shoot up Podesta’s pizza joint, Hillary  began addressing the dangers of fake news conspiracy theories.
In late November, the CIA, a few members of Congress from both parties, and President Barack Obama started calling for a probe into Russia’s cyber involvement in the 2016 presidential election. While there may be some evidence that Russian hackers – may have -published stolen emails to WikiLeaks, there’s no evidence that they actually interfered with the election; most Republican voters also disagree with the notion that Russian hackers tried to help Trump win.
Obama recently signed the “Countering Disinformation and Propaganda Act”, in an effort to combat “fake news.” However, many Trump supporters believe the real fake news is coming from the mainstream media: Donald Trump himself has publicly attacked NBC News, CNN, New York Times, and The Washington Post – so what are we to believe anymore?
If the American government truly wants to combat fake news, they need to first do what they can to defend the credibility of the mainstream media; they also need to address the fears that many in the American public have about their government.
In the autumn of 2016, before the election, there were a swarm of news stories from low budget news sites stating that if Hillary Clinton were to be elected, the United States and Russia would enter World War III. This was started by conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and Russian ultranationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky, both of whom have made outrageous statements before – making these ones best left ignored.
That being said, Hillary’s support for a No-Fly Zone in Syria prompted Jill Stein, Donald Trump, and even some generals to claim that this would create an air war with Russia; one which could escalate into full-blown World War III. The fact that nuclear drills were held in Moscow in October also heavily promoted fears.
When asked in the debates about the No-Fly Zone, and the potential danger of conflict with Russia, Hillary did not address how she planned to keep the US out of a conflict with Russia – with the No-Fly Zone in place. Does this necessarily mean that World War III would have happened if Hillary were to be elected? No.
Implementing a No-Fly Zone is easier said than done: it would be very costly, would be met with tons of opposition, and would’ve been brought to the UN to be vetoed by Russia and China; but Hillary should have still addressed these fears when this was all occurring. If many Democratic voters turning to Trump out of fear of conflict with Russia handed him the election, then that’s on Hillary for not debunking these war myths.
Most American , of all political parties, no longer want the United States to be the world’s policeman. They don’t want American involvement in the Middle East: especially involvement like the overthrowing of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, and what seems like attempted overthrowing of Bashar al-Assad in Syria.
Some conspiracy theorists say the US is doing this as part of a New World Order, working with Israel, and eventually planning to invade Iran. Others say they are doing this to take control of Middle Eastern oil. Whether or not these accusations are true needs to be addressed and explained by the American government to the citizens.
There are too many Americans that don’t trust their own government, and too many Republican voters that approve of Vladimir Putin over Barack Obama.
These suspected corrupt, greedy, neocons in government need to come clean about this issue, because if they don’t, then Washington D.C. will be risking a revolution.
Now, let’s keep in mind that neoconservatism is heavily despised by the American public, which is why the two frontrunners for the GOP nomination, Donald Trump, and Ted Cruz, were both paleo conservative candidates. One of the biggest failures in the Republican race was neocon Lindsey Graham, who is often regarded as one of the biggest foreign policy hawks in government. Nobody wanted him, that’s why his candidacy ended before the primaries even began.
The Republican Party needs to move away from neoconservatism and towards paleoconservatism, and libertarianism, if they want to survive in the 21st century. They need less candidates like Lindsey Graham, Jeb Bush, and Marco Rubio; and more candidates like Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and Donald Trump.
The same goes for the Democrats on becoming more progressive; a neocon candidate like Hillary Clinton does not belong in the 21stcentury’s Democratic Party. This is the first time in over 100 years that the Democratic candidate had a more hawkish war policy than the Republican candidate, which is embarrassing for a party that claims to be progressive.
Donald Trump ran on a platform of paleoconservatism and a mostly isolationist foreign policy – he needs to keep that promise. Picking Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State over Mitt Romney or John Bolton was a smart move, however picking generals as the secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security have raised some eyebrows.
Rand Paul stated that he would cooperate with the Trump Administration, and Rand took action to keep Trump from picking John Bolton as Secretary of State; stating that it would be a betrayal to his voters if he did. Hopefully Rand’s words will encourage Trump to keep his promises to satisfy his voters. However, Congress is filled with many neoconservatives including Lindsey Graham, and John McCain, that may try to manipulate Trump.
Trump’s VP, Mike Pence, is a neo-con himself, and Trump runs a big risk of being impeached in office; unless Pence adopts Trump’s paleoconservative ideology (and if the fears many American citizens have about the government aren’t addressed) there could be an uprising in Washington D.C. composed of both Trump supporters and liberal progressives.
Many Trump supporters were planning a violent revolution in Washington DC before the election if Hillary had been elected: and many liberal progressives are planning a march in Washington DC to protest Trump’s presidency. If the movement against President Trump is big, the movement against a President Pence, and a neoconservative Congress, could trigger a violent revolution to overthrow the US government. Yes, police will do what they can to shut down the rebellion, but this could cause civil disorder to turn into full bloodshed.
The United States of America was founded, in part, on the enlightenment thinking of John Locke. Locke was an English philosopher and physician from the 17th Century who wrote “The Two Treatises of Government” – which states that if the government ever abuses its power, the people have a right to overthrow it.
I’m not one to advocate violence, but if this uprising does occur, due to the government’s neglect of the people, it’ll be one that the Founding Fathers (if they were brought back to life) would’ve commended. The US government needs to reclaim its credibility with the American people, or  the words of John Locke (which the Founding Fathers used in their case against the British monarchy) could become the words the American people use in their case against the American government.
Latest posts by Being Libertarian (see all)
- Ron Paul Revolution Takes Over The Libertarian Party - May 30, 2022
- Secession: The Lost Aspect of Federalism - April 16, 2022
- Democracy & Freedom: A Contradiction in Terms - February 15, 2022
