Here are my thoughts. How can I make you understand Mr. Trump if you have not read any of my books and lack an understanding of life’s foundations? Read my books, especially The Sucker Punch of Sharing and you’ll quickly see that every society comes into existence from “shared capabilities” that produce goods and services for the needs of all. Do you know what I mean by “shared capabilities”? I doubt it, but I continue. The sharing of capabilities takes shape within a legal network. What is a “legal network?” It is a structure of societal agreements. These agreements, labeled “legal,” are so important to the societal existence and well-being that they are backed by society’s concentrated brute force. What is “societal concentrated brute force” and why do we have it. The police and armed forces are the society’s “concentrated brute force.” Why do we have it? Thousands of years ago each human acted as “applier of brute force.” Each carried a spear, sword, or club to amplify one’s brute force when dealing with other humans. Soon humans learned that if they go at each other with brute force, not only brute force harms, but most importantly, no one gets involved with producing goods and services for others. So, for thousands of years humans have sought ways of keeping themselves out of the brute force domain so they can share their capabilities in order to produce goods and services for one another. The prime purpose of the legal network is to distance the human individual from destructive brute force so everyone’s focus will remain on producing and distributing goods and services and not on fighting one another using brute force.
Now let me change the question. If the society is built on laws that keep everyone away from brute force, what is the first step one can take to destroy the society? To destroy a society, all one needs to do is to undermine its laws, its legal network. When the legal network is deemed dysfunctional, the society has to manage itself using “brute force” and that is the death knell for the societal sharing system that produces goods and services for all.
I have told you that law is nothing but a form of “societal agreement.” Every society gets created through development of societal agreements. Among all societal agreements, the laws are the only societal agreements that get backed by the societal concentrated brute force. All other societal agreements compete with one another for priority and for one day becoming law. Without societal agreements, the society ceases to exist and reverts to a collection of individuals dealing with one another through brute force. Every society that wants to prosper must manage the collective of societal agreements well and reach balance among all competing societal agreements. Given this foundational view of societal agreements, to destroy a society, the second step is to undermine its “management of societal agreements.” The management of societal agreements is directly linked to designing and managing the society’s laws within which the sharing of capabilities produce and distribute goods and services for all. When a society gives up on “management of societal agreements” and worse seeks to make one of the agreements the absolute master of all other agreements, it is a recipe for tearing the society apart.
Finally, to destroy a society, the third step is “to not pay attention to history.” History is a knowledge base that tells the story of how societies have fared in the past. As such, history is a tool of learning from the past. When societies do not learn from history, in ignorance they repeat and fall into the path of destruction that has been laid out in the historical accounts. Can today’s societies—today’s capability sharing systems—avoid these three pitfalls—avoid being destroyed? I don’t know. I don’t think so. Let us use the example of Mr. Trump and work together on my reasoning.
With the little I have told you about the foundations of human life, do you find it intriguing that Mr. Trump is doing everything he can to tear apart the society’s legal network, especially by undermining the institutions like FBI, CIA, and the Department of Justice that seek to maintain the legal network to prevent brute force from seeping into human interactions. At the same time Mr. Trump is emphasizing the value of “brute force,” first by abandoning the legal structures that connect the US society with friendly societies, and second, by admiring dictatorial societies founded on brute force. He moves in the direction of bringing more brute force into human life than distancing humans from brute force.
Now consider another intriguing twist. Mr. Trump shows no interest in managing and balancing the collective of societal agreements. Instead, as his “base” he has picked the single societal agreement that wants nothing to do with other societal agreements and in fact wants all other agreements dumped in the ocean and destroyed than maintained in balance with all societal agreements. This is a wall-building and boundary-drawing strategy that promotes a single societal agreement as absolute and in the long run would break apart the country’s societal sharing system as it pits one segment of society against others in a confrontation that eventually will usher in brute force and harm everyone.
Mr. Trump continually gives prominence to a specific form of societal agreement. For simplicity of analysis, for the moment let us define that societal agreement as white nationalism. It is one of the societal agreements competing for recognition. What do the white nationalists want? Let us listen to one of them:
“There are many examples of population movements that have not been consensual. I would be willing to do almost anything … I mean in the sense of … could pay people to return to their homeland, could we colonize places near the United States and create homelands or ethno-states for people? I am willing to do all these things in order to achieve the ultimate security and ultimate flourishing of the white race.”[1]
Assume this vision becomes a reality. All immigrants from non-European countries either return to the original country of immigration or settle in “homelands” and “ethno-states” set up outside the United States. Assume the whites that oppose this plan are also forced to do the same. Only the whites that agree with white nationalism remain in the United States. What is the outcome?
What has made the United States supreme in the world is the level and intensity of its “capability sharing.” Seventy-two percent of the United States is made of “white people.” Non-whites make up 28% of the nation. Loss of 28% of shared capabilities is huge even if all whites choose to remain. Only about half of the whites support Mr. Trump’s position. If the other half of the whites choose or are forced to leave, then the loss of capability sharing will be at the level that will turn whatever remains into a “poor country.” The prime outcome of the loss of shared capabilities is the destruction of a high-intensity-capability-sharing country that we know as the United States. Instead of the United States that we have today we will have a collection of countries made of one “poor” white nationalist country with a few other “poor” countries calling themselves homelands and ethno-states, each having adopted a strict position on a specific societal agreement. The United States that was previously built on a collection of societal agreements now exists no more. It is destroyed. Once destroyed, there is no way of putting it back together. A society in which many societal agreements strived to reach a collective balance in an environment of intense capability sharing has now been changed to a collection of low-capability-sharing countries, each with its own societal agreement turned into a single absolute. One of them is the poor country of the United States of White Race.
If destruction of the United States is not Mr. Trump’s target, how else can we explain his actions? Why would the US President, the supreme societal leader promote confrontation of societal agreements and higher exposure to brute force?
Let us now focus on the thirst step of societal destruction. Is there a history lesson that we have all missed? Here are my thoughts.
The history tells us that for thousands of years every country has thought about controlling other countries and the most effective mechanism they have found is to control that country’s leader. Appoint and control a country’s leader and you have a good chance of controlling that country. Do you see where I am going with this? I doubt it. I doubt you would remember that in the US history, the US has made many attempts at using this old-fashioned methodology in order to gain control of a country. For example, the Shah of Iran was a US plant and its history is well known. What you may find intriguing is that everyone in Iran knew that Shah was brought to power by the US and that he was a servant of the US. From my own experience about thirty percent of Iranians couldn’t care less about that fact because what Shah was doing gave them power and made them rich. As long as they made money and gained power, the Shah could have been the devil himself and it would not matter. Facing the Shah’s brute force, the remaining seventy percent simply told each other to shut up and never mention the planted societal leader publicly.
Here is the ironic historical twist. The historical knowledge tells us how a society gets controlled through the man placed at the top. For decades the United States has used this method to control other countries. Yet we have never considered the possibility that what we have done so regularly to others might be reversed and done to us. The American masses have failed to see the historical possibility that Mr. Trump might be another country’s plant. The history tells us that the US cannot assume that the reverse cannot happen. That in fact it is quite possible that an outsider plants its agent in the position of the US President and through him controls the US society.
Let us now consider that possibility. Assume for the moment that Mr. Trump is another country’s plant. What would that country want Mr. Trump to do? Would it want Mr. Trump to strengthen and spread the legal network and balance the societal agreements so the country would prosper? Or would it seek to destroy the US by undermining its legal network and throwing all its societal agreements into continual conflict? From what I have seen so far, Mr. Trump is intent on undermining the legal network of the United States. He is intent on valuing “brute force” in human life. He is intent on promoting a singular societal agreement that only builds walls around itself, excluding all other societal agreements.
Even if all these are true, how can I indisputably conclude that Mr. Trump is another country’s plant?
It is possible that Mr. Trump is not another country’s plant, nor any less incompetent than other US presidents, but simply an “ignorant human,” one that has little knowledge of the human, the society, and the world as a capability sharing system. From this perspective it is in ignorance that Mr. Trump becomes a destroyer of the societal sharing system. It is a fact of human existence that all ignorant humans turn out to be destroyers and inflictors of harm. Destruction and harm always accompany ignorance. The only counter to ignorance is the recipe that a divine being has taught humans and to learn it and use it you have to start by carefully reading The Choice Maker. I know for a fact that few will do so as almost everyone is already buried in ignorance amplified by Mr. Trump’s supreme skill of lying profusely.
Can Mr. Trump cease to be a destroyer? Can he walk out of ignorance and into knowledge? Can he read? Can he read my books and learn about the essence of human existence as a societal sharing system? I doubt it. He doesn’t read. Buried in ignorance and lies, he cannot read. He cannot learn. He is set as destroyer and sadly, he occupies the country’s most powerful position. His destroyer powers are amplified manifold. His lie-driven ignorance is going to get amplified manifold as is the harm he will inflict on others by promoting the use of brute force. Every ignorant human loves exposing others to brute force. I see Mr. Trump for what he is because his high level of ignorance makes him visible as destroyer.
Is it possible that I am wrong in my reasoning? It might be that Mr. Trump is just a bad, prejudiced and incompetent manager of society’s affairs. While one can argue for that possibility, I cannot. I remember my mother’s advice. She said if something quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it is most probably a duck and not a dog that is bad at barking but adept at walking on its hind legs.
You may shake your head and walk away, but I remind you, we’re talking about the fate of a nation that at present has little understanding of the foundations on which the human life is built.
[1] From dialogue in the documentary Trumpland: Kill All Normies, 2017