ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

A Divided Nation---The American Dream Turning a Nightmare

Updated on March 24, 2017
ValKaras profile image

Val is a life-long student of the psycho-philosophy of living, and a devoted practitioner of many techniques enhancing personal evolution.

Freedom from Conflicts Starts with Those Within
Freedom from Conflicts Starts with Those Within

With No Political Orientation

The following is a strictly logical, at places also psychological assessment of the current political divide in the United States of America---so, to anyone expecting a literary support to their party this article may be a sheer waste of time.

I am a Canadian living in Canada, and like every neighbor I can't help witnessing a presence of some excessive commotion going on behind that low, almost symbolic fence between us. However, first allow me to identify myself politically. Yes, I do live in a currently "liberal" society, but that doesn't automatically make me a liberal.

As a matter of fact, I am a first class political cynic, meaning that: 1) I don't trust any politicians; 2) I don't think that my political opinion would really make any difference; and 3) I have no damn clue how a country is run, while having no qualifications of a lawyer, diplomat, economist, or a crooked careerist---therefore I can't criticize something that I know nothing about.

If you happen to be one of those folks whose opinion has affected some concrete changes in the political arena---now you know that I am not one of you. So you know where I am coming from, and that should make it so much easier not to "recognize" some political orientation in this article where there is none.

You may also notice another difference between us, as you go from one paragraph to another---I don't claim to "know" what others don't; and it has nothing to do with an "intellectual modesty", but with the fact that my only source of information would be the media, which I don't trust, along with politicians who are either paying them or owning them.

Nevertheless, let's get to some of my observations, if you don't mind.

The "Universal" Language of Elections
The "Universal" Language of Elections

Name Calling---Just a Part of the Game

As I just confessed my distrust for the media, I was wondering about your criterion of determining which news are true, and which ones are false---I mean, other than by your political preference, which might be helping you to decide every time.

Really, of all that gamut of information flowing daily out of the big mouth of the Mainstream Media, how do you tell what is a political fabrication and what is truth? I can't. Some of those broadcasters look quite cute, and others keep that all-knowing expression---but that doesn't help me much to make up my mind whom to trust.

Let's rewind the tape to the times of the election for a moment. If we put on the scale all the crap that was said either against Hillary or Donald, one would hardly outweigh the other. So much was said about Hillary's murky dealings abroad, her e-mails "suggesting a treason", the role of George Soros and Michael Moore in organized protests, some turning violent.

Then it was not enough, and somehow Bill cast a long shadow over her resume with his amorous nature, with even words like "perversion" and "rape" coming handy .

Donald didn't get any luckier, with names like "liar", "racist", "women-hater", "insane megalomaniac", "fascist", "Hitler", "big mouth offender"...stuff like that. And, of course, since families also had to be dragged through mud, his 10-year old son got to have some "mental issues", his wife's English was bad, and his daughter was a convenient target for harassment on that plane.

Indeed, it could have been a good comedy if everybody was not taking it so seriously. What particularly impressed me was exactly that "character study", as suddenly the whole nation turned into qualified psychiatrists, generously throwing out diagnoses. Everybody wanted to be damn Sigmund Freud. Well, in that business only a mirror was missing.

Sometimes Violence Looks Like an Effective Surrogate for Justice
Sometimes Violence Looks Like an Effective Surrogate for Justice

Too Many Shrinks for Just Couple of "Patients"

Let me put it this way: I wouldn't blink if Donald got impeached tomorrow, and neither would I be disappointed if he happened to be re-elected in four years---but let's face it, folks, all that stuff about his "stealing the presidency from Hillary" was nothing but a joke.

How do I "know", after admitting that I don't know anything? Simple logic. The electoral college had the last word, and even if "Russians had been messing with the voting technology in his favor", how did they convince those electors to elect him? Quite the opposite seems to have been the case, as I was watching a couple of those electors revealing how they were threatened with death should they dare to elect Donald.

However, the biggest beef everyone seemed to have was about both candidates' lying. I was watching a little compilation of Hillary's pearls of self-contradictions, as she was expressing some totally opposite positions in important issues over different times of her career. It was presented live, not as someone's narration, so I just got to hear it all from her own mouth.

Then, her camp got even with their own little string of Donald's self-contradictions. O.K. they were not called that, but "psychotic, insane lies from a deranged personality". I mentioned a moment ago how everyone suddenly became a great psychiatrist, so, if you don't mind, I am going to join you in that capacity, by contributing with my own diagnosis.

Well, sorry guys, but neither of them is "insane", "psychotic", "megalomaniac", "pervert", or anything. In a second I will say why Donald simply can't play a "Hitler", but let's stay for another moment with all these mentioned "diagnoses".

You see, it doesn't take someone "insane" to be a liar. If you are as much of a human being as I believe you are, then both you and I would qualify for an "insane" person, as our lying would be enough to make us "insane". Besides, in their case so much more was at stake than when we said how we "never touched that cookie jar".

And, as for a "Hitler", come on, you know it better than I that your president could never, and I mean never be allowed to act like one. He would either be impeached or shot--- judging by the history.

All in all, it was not exactly a "classy" election; but who said anything about classy anyway, because it would quickly be called "mousy", "gutless", one of those labels. The only true definition of freedom seems to be the ability to publicly burp, spit, fart, swear, and call your president an idiot.

Since "classy" doesn't fit in that definition, it must be something for those "spineless", "tail-between-legs", "yes" - nations. After all, hey, you are people with guns in those drawers where other, meek peoples keep their spoons, forks, and knives. That alone surely must give a great sense of security to everybody.

Things Won't Get into a Logical Order by Themselves---We Have to Make It Happen
Things Won't Get into a Logical Order by Themselves---We Have to Make It Happen

Both Guilty---So Neither Qualified

Whether you can see it or not, but you had absolutely no objective material helping you in assessment of your candidates' readiness for presidency---you did it all out of your own political preference. With MSM throwing in so much contradictory stuff about both of them, no one could be smart enough to make heads or tails out of it.

In the late hours of the election night, Hillary allegedly went emotionally ballistic over Donald's victory---screaming, hitting someone there, hysterically accusing Barrack for not having done more, and FBI for hinting about her "treason" with those e-mails. The conclusion was that she was "obviously emotionally unfit" for presidency with all those tantrums displayed. The media asked: "Would you want a hysterical woman with a finger over your nukes?"

The opposition media camp just continued---to the present day---trumpeting about Donald's being "illegitimate president", bound to ruin this country's economy, start the WW3, abuse his position for his family's business gains, make friends with the communist Putin, and show more and more evidence about his insane politics. Of course, with a similar phrase involving that "finger over the Armageddon button".

I just can't resist but ask my previous question again: how the hell could anyone know whom to believe in all that? And could the word "brainwashing" find a proper place in all this---along with the old familiar strategy "divide, then rule"? Is this divide in someone's interest to make America weak? I don't know, and I won't pretend to know either.

In my very first sentence I said this article was going to be about some "logic" to be possibly found in this huge and unexplainable national divide. So I have to say that there is no damn logic at all, because people have no reason at all to be divided over a game that was never meant to be logical from the very start.

And allow me to say it, with all friendliness of a neighbor who truly loves America---your biggest enemy is your believing that you "know" something there. I keep reading this incredibly eloquent, educated, and so "highly informed" commentaries by the people, and in disbelief I see how no one will step back to see something very ordinary repeating itself in your political reality.

I mean, there is nothing to be "smart" about---you already had so many presidents before who were liked by some--- and disliked by some. All of them used political lies to get to the top---just like every of our prime ministers did.

Indeed, folks, your thinking that there is something to "know" there---what others don't see--- is the thing that keeps you divided. Your smartness keeps you divided, because each side wants to outsmart the other---while there is nothing to be smart about. It's business as usual in the White House---whether you are ready to see it or not.

Nothing is happening in there that hasn't already happened a number of times.

National Identity May Appear to Be a Tricky Thing.
National Identity May Appear to Be a Tricky Thing.

Anyone Thinking Beyond the Conflict?

To be honest with you, sometimes I wonder why people get so passionately engaged in this game of political outsmarting. What's the payoff? Suppose Donald gets enough of all this sabotaging at each and every step of his presidency---and quits. Then what? Do you really believe that the next dude or dudesse will make everyone happy?

I understand the role of the opposition to keep the political game in balance---but, while it used to be that in the past---don't you think it has turned into a major exaggeration this time around? Back there I was poking fun at everyone trying to be a qualified psychiatrist. I wish people would stay with that imaginary qualification, but they also pretended---and still are pretending---to be psychics.

I mean, somehow they can see into the future---predicting all kinds of things that Donald is "bound to do". So, right from the start their role of the opposition was to oppose to something that he "might do", and he got hated even more for that. How is that rational?

Imagine a cop stopping you and asking you if you've got a knife at home; and when you say "yes", he arrests you under suspicion that you "might" use it some day soon to kill someone. Maybe just because you look like a macho-type rough around the edges---maybe a librarian in real life. But your looks, your tone of voice is "indicative" of your "criminal insanity". You got my point?

Well, what can I say, every nation has their own favorite pastime, but maybe widening this gap is not the most beneficial one. The wider it gets, the harder it will be at the next election to get people to agree over anything. Don't you think so?

I'd like to hear your opinion. But, please, try to be logical and objective, don't give me any of those used, overused and abused slogans that parties are parroting around with. People have to start thinking for themselves, otherwise their individual identity will be drowned in their political one, and that leads to de-personalization.

In my days of army service---which was mandatory where I came from---I couldn't stand that uniformity of my life, with everybody looking and doing like everybody else. Then I turned into an out-of-box thinker, and that intellectual freedom turned out to be the only real freedom there was.

America was not built on thinking that was duplicating someone else's---but on one that dared to be different. So, when I ask you about your opinion, be a true American, let it be your voice---not an echo.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • MizBejabbers profile image

      MizBejabbers 3 months ago

      You're correct about some things, Vlad. Being an outsider, you can see some things in a neutral zone that we can't or don't want to see. But having not lived under our government, you haven't experienced some things that we have, and therefore, you wouldn't understand until you experience them. The whole matter is too complicated for a short answer to any logic so I'll try to keep it reasonable.

      The crux behind this whole brouhaha is a class war between the rich and the middle class. The poor will always be with us, but unfortunately, their numbers are increasing because of unemployment in the middle class. The Party of Trump has always claimed to want to downsize government and return the power to the states, but with that return of "power" comes financial responsibility of state taxpayers. Any federal income tax cuts come at increased state taxes, which are insufficient to cover all this "power" that has been returned to the states because federal funds will be cut from state budgets for services like medical and social programs and infrastructure.

      Unfortunately after four to eight years of cuts in services like police and fire protection, food stamps for the poor, and medical services for the uninsured, the people rise up and vote the opposition party back in to get these services returned. The federal budget skyrockets along with federal income taxes. Meanwhile jobs have been sent overseas and foreigners have been hired for technical jobs in this country because people on visas will work cheaper, and sometimes with no benefits.

      Let me give you an example of what’s at stake over the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). A simple visit to a primary care doctor today costs $150 just for a 5-10 minute conversation and quickie exam, and by the time any blood or urine tests are added, the visit will easily run $300 or more. We have always envied Canada’s socialized medicine, but live here and picture yourself without it. Also look at our Flint, Michigan, and its broken water system.

      This is truly what the educated people are arguing over. The atmosphere of “Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire” that has gained this country so much notoriety outside of the U.S. is just a smokescreen to get the vote of the uneducated, those folks who are either unwilling or incapable of looking at real facts. Those facts are available when one knows where to look. We don’t have to get our political educations from “fake” news media catering to either party.

      This has been going on since the inception of this country, but the “instant news” and the internet has exacerbated its availability.

    • ValKaras profile image
      Author

      Vladimir Karas 3 months ago from Canada

      MizBejabbers---The aim of my hub was not to ignore the complexity of the problems that you keep facing as a nation, but rather it was about the divide, which points at lack of unity in recognizing those problems and dealing with them in a unified fashion.

      I am totally blank when economic issues are in question, and it would be very naïve of me to even try explaining what's going on in your country in that respect. What's against every logic, however, is the people being more concerned about "who is crazy", and "whose husband was fooling around", and all other crap which reminds of those teenage gossips.

      With so many serious issues, some of them crying to be brought back from the back burner, people should be more unified than ever. So, my whole point was this wrong focus, and this incessant outsmarting going on, instead of some logical steps to be taken.

      This name calling, sterile slogans and phraseology that everyone is parroting with according to their political preference---can't produce results. People need to cool it and focus on things that can be accomplished together, not against each other.

      That was all I wanted to say in my hub, and I just said it in so many more words.

    • Dana Tate profile image

      Dana Tate 3 months ago from LOS ANGELES

      I can only be honest and say I never had faith in any political party. Although I vote Democrat, I don't see much of a change regardless who is in office, mainly because I fall in the "middle Class to Poor" area. People get too caught up in the personal lives of the running candidates and I know people personally who did not choose a certain candidate based on that person's scandal instead of focusing on if this candidate would serve their best interest.

      I'll give you an example: When Bush was running for office in 200, against Al Gore, I heard my co-worker's saying they would not vote for Democrat based on the scandal of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. I don't see what that had do with Al Gore, but that was their opinion. I wouldn't say that the votes are rigged because I am not there when the votes are counted. I will say that it's my opinion that the people don't have as much power as they think. I say that by what I see, which is, little to no change regardless who is in office. In fact I think I'll be bold enough to say that things appear to me to be getting worse not better. I would like to reiterate though that's only my opinion of the situation.

    • MizBejabbers profile image

      MizBejabbers 3 months ago

      Sorry, Vlad, but I thought you wanted someone to make some sense out of the situation. Because of the phraseology you used, I couldn't tell that you were just venting.

    • ValKaras profile image
      Author

      Vladimir Karas 3 months ago from Canada

      Dana---I am glad you share my opinion that hardly anything changes with a different person being in the office---at least for us "ordinary" folks. That's in the bigger part of why I became a chronic political cynic.

      Leadership is a pathetic story of a lack of: care/knowledge/humanness/logic of the governments who collect an incredible revenue and distribute it in such a way that there is no money for those basic needs of people---like medical care, education, and cost of living. I can't see why pensioners have to pay taxes on that little that they get, and all in all---they can lie all they want about "caring for the people", I am just having a good laugh at times of election.

      Thank you for commenting.

    • ValKaras profile image
      Author

      Vladimir Karas 3 months ago from Canada

      MizBejabbers----There is no need to be sorry. I was certainly not "just venting", because I don't go emotional about politics either way. Lack of unity among American people is a different topic from the economic issues. My hub was about the former, your comment was about the latter---but I didn't mind your clarifying things in that area.

      Maybe you could also make it more clear to me why people engage in "right-wrong" games so much rather than try to find a common language. That would be closer to my theme.

      You see, I am not blind to the need of two parties to always find something wrong in the reasoning of each other. It has always been like that---but this time we are talking about an excessive use of crude tactics that go beyond the objectives of a sensible running the business of government.

      So, my hub was about that excess--- meaning lies, name calling, exaggerated predictions, insults, crazy "diagnosing", inclusions of family members in low blows...that stuff.

      In other words, nothing about the economy itself; so, while your comment did make sense of the "objective" situation in the country, I was talking about the subjective treatment of it going on---about the divide, and even the title was announcing it that way.

      But, please, don't take me wrong, I am most certainly grateful for your smart explanation of the situation.

    Click to Rate This Article