Super Tuesday and Super Saturday came and went. As expected, Donald Trump dominated the competition.
While Trump did exceptionally well in states like New Hampshire, South Carolina and elsewhere in the South, The Donald has stumbled as of late, coming in second to Ted Cruz in a number of recent contests.
Trump will likely expand his delegate lead in the coming weeks. However, he won’t arrive at the Republican convention with enough of them to secure the nomination outright.
If that happens, the oligarchs in the Republican Party will do everything they can at the convention to deny Trump that which would rightfully be his.
It’s been rumored that Mitt Romney will be called upon by the establishment to save the Party of Lincoln from being “torn asunder.” Some Republicans say they simply won’t vote for Mr. Trump. Others suggest running a third party “conservative” candidate.
However it shakes out, if reaction to Romney’s anti-Trump press conference held earlier this month indicates anything, it’s that refusing the billionaire from New York the nomination if he has the majority of delegates would literally break the GOP in two.
Before discussing what a Trump victory would mean for the Republican Party, let’s backtrack a bit and try to put this man’s candidacy into context. If possible, a Catholic context.
Since the Second World War but most especially since the early 1990s, a cabal of intellectuals desirous of global empire have hubristically argued that it is America’s duty to advance “freedom” and “democracy” to “the people” of the world, all in the name of bringing about a lasting “peace.”
Of course, when these men speak of “freedom” what they really mean is massive economic inequality and social hedonism. And when these men speak of “democracy” what they truly mean is rigged elections with candidates that they and not “the people” get to pick. (See the U.S.-backed coup that took place in Ukraine in February 2014 for evidence of this.)
Despite the lofty language used to trick Americans into supporting this political pyramid scheme, the reality is that bringing about this so-called “peace” is a dirty business.
For one, the U.S. essentially bribes countries into joining NATO. Economically sanctioning those who refuse to do so.
Two, when leaders from sovereign Middle Eastern nations are no longer viewed as politically useful, they’re assassinated. Of course, the more diplomatic way to put it is “so and so has to go!”
And three, sustaining American imperialism oversees requires the funneling of billions of taxpayer dollars to Islamic states like Saudi Arabia and providing firearms to “moderate rebels” in countries most people can’t locate on a map.
As Bishop Athanasius Schneider recently opined in an interview, “the powerful of our world, the Western states” support groups like ISIS “indirectly.”
As a result, civilians get killed, and a prolonged bloodbath between warring religious factions ensues, thus ruining thousands, if not millions, of lives.
The end game, of course, is to pick off Eastern European countries one by one in order to expand NATO (something the U.S. promised decades ago they wouldn’t do) so that “liberal democracy” can be established not only there but also in North Africa and, most importantly, in Russia.
Persons who espouse this warped ideology are what political scientists refer to as neoconservatives.
To put it in Catholic terms, neoconservatives seek to once and for all obliterate the Social Kingship of Christ by constructing a world order rooted in the Freemasonic Social Kingship of Man.
For decades neocons have preyed on the patriotism of ordinary Americans to get them to fight unjust wars on behalf of Arab theocrats and Jewish Zionists, the real behind-the-scenes power brokers.
While paying lip service to social conservatism, limited government, constitutionalism and state’s rights these war hawks hijacked the Republican Party and surgically transformed it into a weak-kneed, open borders, bloodthirsty Frankenstein in the service of international elites.
Though insurgent candidates like Pat Buchanan in the 1990s reminded folks about the direction this clandestine group of war criminals was leading the country, the monied class acted quickly and decisively. Buchanan’s warnings about 1) the looming culture wars 2) the harm cheap labor abroad would have on the American middle class 3) the problems associated with not securing the border and 4) the debt and death required with being the policeman of the world were easily tamped down, thanks in no small part to the help of the corporate media.
Since that time Americans have had to choose between presidential candidates who, at the end of the day, were nothing more than cogs in the globalist’s wheel.
Donald J. Trump has the temperament of an eight year old child. He mocks. He condescends. He can’t give specifics to half the things he talks about. And I don’t trust him on social issues. Put another way, I have the same concerns about Mr. Trump as American Conservative contributor Rod Dreher does.
For good reason, these facts and many others, have a large number of folks, including many Catholics, deeply disturbed.
At the same time, much of his public image is an act, and he has turned out be a shrewder political operator than I expected. No one, and I mean no one, predicted he would have this much success.
People support Trump not necessarily because of his policies but because of what he represents. And what he represents is the frustration ordinary, mostly white, Americans have towards politics in general. More specifically, the antipathy they have towards the feckless politicians the Republican Party has nominated over the past thirty years who have largely failed to halt the social and economic decay of the United States.
Against the neocons
Despite his inconsistency, immaturity and, at times, imbecility, Trump has been clear on several important policies. Policies that can be appreciated from a Catholic viewpoint.
In an article for the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, Daniel Mcadams outlines where Trump differentiates himself from the war hawks in his party.
First, according to Mcadams Trump states “the obvious” when he says “the Iraq war was brought to us by the liars of the neoconservative movement” and that it was a “total disaster” for the rest of us who “are forced to pay for their fantasies of world domination.”
Second, Trump wants to “actually speak with Russian President Vladimir Putin to see if US/Russia differences can be worked out without a potentially world-ending nuclear war.”
Third, although Trump is “arguing that he is hugely pro-Israel” he is “nevertheless suggesting that if the US is to play a role in the Israel/Palestine issue…the US side should…take a neutral role in the process.”
Fourth, Trump is also calling out the “idiotic neocon advice” that resulted in the overthrowing of Gaddafi in Libya that has led to “the red carpet” being “laid down for ISIS” in that failed state.
And lastly, Trump is “suggesting that it may be a good thing that Russia be bombing ISIS into oblivion and that we might want to just sit back and let that happen for once.”
The ruling class disdains each and every one of these positions. And for good reason.
By talking about the Iraq War and claiming Bush lied about it, Trump reminds us about the back room dealings and costs, both human and monetary, spreading “freedom” and “democracy” necessarily entails. And by drawing attention to the disastrous situation in Libya, Trump shines light on the foolishness of nation building abroad and the need to nation build at home. Obviously, all of this causes voters to have a less favorable view of foreign intervention in the future.
By painting Putin as a potential ally instead of a “thug,” Trump de-programs Americans from thinking of the Russian President as Josef Stalin re-incarnated. It also disabuses ordinary citizens from seeing everything through an us-versus-them prism. Having a villain to point at evokes patriotism at home and affirms Americans in the moral right-ness of the pursuit of spreading “liberty.” Neocons have long understood this. And Trump could potentially reverse that paradigm.
Furthermore, by taking a “neutral” stance towards Israel, Trump is indicating that he may put American interests ahead of Zionist interests. In other words, Trump would likely approach the Middle East in a way that holds Israel to the same moral standards as others. Realizing that this may result in an American president who refuses to be silent about the terrorist attacks Israelis commit against Palestinians on an almost daily basis, the globalists and their cronies in the media have been quick to compare Trump with, you guessed it, Adolf Hitler.
Neoconservatives, in short, are apoplectic over a possible Trump presidency. His success could mean their demise, if only for a short while.
To be sure, it is difficult to know who Trump would surround himself with if he were to win the presidency. Would he call up Henry Kissinger? Would he seek the advice of the Council on Foreign Relations? I don’t know.
But what I do know is that as of right now Trump appears to have all the right enemies. Enemies that include the neo-Catholic neocon community. Read here.
Now, don’t expect the elites to go silently into the night. The attacks in the coming days and weeks will only get more vicious. We’ve already seen how quickly they brought up “the 1930s.” Additionally, more than 100 self-identified “members of the Republican national security community” have signed an open letter excoriating Trump for his foreign policy views, adding that they are “united in our opposition to a Donald Trump presidency.”
Unsurprisingly, some of them have said they would support Hillary Clinton, a Democratic neocon, instead of Trump in the general election.
So much for party loyalty.
In brief, a Trump nomination means the internationalists would no longer dictate the terms of America’s economic and foreign policy. Moreover, if Trump arrives at the Republican convention with the majority of delegates and is denied the nomination, it will be clear to all that we live in country that is anything but a democracy.
Indeed, far from being a “breaking” of the GOP in two, wouldn’t a Trump victory be nothing more than a re-calibration of the party to what it stood for historically? A party that serves the will of the American people instead of global elites?
Stephen Kokx is the host of “Church & State with Stephen Kokx” on Magnificat Media.com, which airs Fridays at 11am, 2pm, 6pm and 9pm and Saturdays at 10am EST. Follow him on twitter @StephenKokx and like him on Facebook
Follow us on: