I predicted after the election was massively rigged that the deep state would cease to employ the outer party, that the Republicans would not win an election for dogcatcher. Instead they continued to employ the outer party, but massively rigged the primaries, with the Republicans running candidates that outraged, demoralized, dismayed, and horrified the base. With the collapse of the censorship regime, I hear congressmen talking about this dismay and demoralization, while being rather delicate about what is causing it.
I predicted that the halt of movement left to ever more radical leftism, would not be accomplished except by a Caesar taking power, and the halt was likely to be bloody
It is early days yet, but so far looks more like the French Thermidor, which had no clear leader, was severely incohesive, and was not bloody. And promptly came under high pressure from the radical left and the reactionary right. Which troubles in the end they had to resolve by calling in Caesar.
Simultaneously with massive election rigging setting in America, massive election rigging occurred throughout the Global American Empire. But in Argentina we just saw an election in which the election rigging, though large, was ineffectual against the landslide. Incohesion among the election riggers in Argentina set in simultaneously with incohesion among American censors.
As Vivek and Musk explain, the censorship apparatus is an arm of the deep state, with its personnel taking direction from the spy agencies, and many of its personnel having both spy agency hats and private sector hats, and changing hats frequently. So the incohesion we are seeing in the censorship apparatus indicates incohesion in the deep state. Presumably the same thing happened in the Argentinian elections. And is therefore likely to happen in future Republican primaries and in the coming elections.
Javier Milei, the Argentinian Trump, however does not look genuine grassroots. His foreign policy (pro US fiat, pro Israel, pro Jewish, pro Ukraine War, pro China war) looks strangely similar to that of the obvious Thermidorean glowies I am suppressing on this blog. But his libertarianism, populism, and capitalism looks very real.
Capitalism failed in Latin America because when socialism became discredited after the fall of the Soviet Union, they, like Yeltzin’s Russia, imported postmodern capitalism from Harvard and Washington — with a disproportionate number of the carryon baggers coming in to steal everything not nailed down coming from Tel Aviv. In Latin America, they called this “neoliberalism” This was disastrous for Latin America, as it was disastrous for Russia. Then they had another go at socialism, which was just as disastrous, or even more disastrous, but socialism has a more popular story.
Cohesion is the capacity of many to act as one, a corporation is many people acting as one person, and the modern joint-stock for-profit publicly traded corporation is many acting as one to make a living. The postmodern corporation, not so cohesive, and thus no so corporate.
Jason Milei is, in many ways, an Argentinian Trump. But Trumps policy on Empire was Gorbachev like, that the state of the US empire should be allowed to be culturally themselves, should be allowed more cultural and social independence. A president who is converting to Judaism and flying to Israel does not look like cultural independence or the Argentinian cultural and racial identity. If I was running for office in Argentina, would convert to Roman Catholicism and be seen attending the mass of a radical anti Vatican priest.
What remains to be seen is whether Milie will implement modern corporate capitalism in Argentina, the corporate capitalism of Charles the Second and the Dutch Republic, or merely have another go at postmodern capitalism, which will have the same outcome as it did last time in Latin America. Postmodern capitalism is not actually all corporate, because a multitude of stakeholders, all of carefully filtered for allegiance to the faith of Harvard, have power independent of the board and the CEO, and pull the company in different directions, which tends to devolve into looting the corporation and pissing all over customers, suppliers, and shareholders. It leads to the corporation having cohesion around sodomy, abortion, and transexuality, while losing cohesion around profit, buying, selling, manufacturing, and managing capital. It abandons the mechanisms established by Charles the second and the Dutch Republic to give the corporation to act as one in the economic interest of shareholders. That Vivek has not criticised SoX suggests that the Thermidoreans are unwilling to let go of postmodern capitalism – they are the guys looting empire, and looting the corporate form. On the other hand, Vivek has criticized stake holder capitalism and Milei knows enough economics to understand why it is a disaster, so, maybe.
