ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • United States Politics

National Sovereignty and Donald Trump: A Short Essay

Updated on February 6, 2017

To say that this last election was heated is an understatement - this last election has been off the wall bonkers, a kind of parody of itself. But the interesting thing was that a new issue came up that was not talked about in debates in 2012, 2008, 2004, or even further back, really. In the last two elections that elected Barack Obama, the main issues discussed were healthcare, terrorism, foreign policy, and the economy/jobs. Green energy was given token approval by the democrats so that environmentalists would go blue instead of Green.

But what wasn't on the table, which became a major reason the US elected Donald Trump, was national sovereignty. Hillary Clinton had carefully-manufactured Democrat party answers for all of the issues, or so she thought. But she could in no way challenge accusations of globalism, or not putting the rights of the American citizens first. She wasn't prepared to deal with that. All she could do is cry-bully, shrieking about how supposedly racist, sexist, homophobic, and xenophobic Trump supporters are to try to shut them up. And it didn't work out for her.

The main reason is, Trump had ideas for defending our rights as a nation, to uphold rule of law instead of having laws that are more full of holes than Swiss cheese. It's not about xenophobia. It's not about being racist against Muslims (who are not a race), or Mexicans. It's about one thing and one thing only, national sovereignty. Trump supporters are asserting simply that nations are free and independent, and that individuals don't have the right to travel and move to and from whatever country they please, unless they are granted that right by that country. No international corporation, cabal, NGO, or political body can force independent nation-states to accept unwanted, unneeded, welfare-draining, or potentially threatening migrants. Walls work. A wall keeps Israel safer from terrorism. A wall once kept China safe from Mongols, and another was used to keep Romans safe from barbarians. Sure, walls can be used for evil or oppression, such as the Berlin Wall. But walls are simple, effective ways of not only defending a country from dangerous or potentially dangerous people, but as sending a message that "this nation has borders it will defend with force if necessary". And as has often been said, a country that does not defend its borders is not really a country.

There is a definite struggle going on between globalists and nationalists around the world, and the Trump election indicates that more nations will soon follow suit in electing nationalistic leaders who value national pride and identity. The nationalists are the ordinary people, and globalists are elites who treat the world like their chessboard. Therefore, no political party in a fair, democratic society can win fair and square as globalists. The people don't want their culture to vanish or for hordes of migrants to displace them. It's globalists who want that, to profit off of the underpaid labor migrants can bring, and profit politically off of the fact that migrants are easier to control and manipulate.

So globalists masked their agenda with humanitarian words, to trick the gullible and stupid into voting against themselves. It's not in your best interest to invite millions of men of fighting age into your country who are all part of a violent, crazy, west-hating, anti-democratic, misogynistic, militaristic religion. So what do they do to convince us that it is best? Portray them as weak and needy, as women and children. Oh, look at these poor children. All three of them for every 2 million or so men, is what they won't tell you. That is an army of invaders, not a mass of fleeing civilians. Don't let yourself be tricked.

So now, every move is being made to try to obstruct or get rid of Donald Trump, because his nationalist agenda flies in the face of the control the globalist elites have enjoyed for too long. They don't care about protecting America from gangsters and terrorists, or about keeping American jobs in America, or about making it so that American workers can be maids, babysitters, farm workers, mechanics, contractors, etc. without having to compete with the basement prices charged by undocumented immigrants. They want their labor cheap and their workforce cowed and submissive, not active and demanding fair compensation and labor standards. The media drones on with lie after lie about our President, even though most of them are proven untrue very quickly. Stop believing them. The lies and twisted truths are not there to serve the American people, but to serve the global elite agenda.

And if the Democrat party wants to get elected in the future, they need to show us how they will put Americans first. Your destructive protests against a fairly-elected President of the United States, a title worthy of respect whether you like the man or not, aren't exactly helping to show us that.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      dgfs 12 months ago

      I strongly disagree with your math and your assessment of migrants.

      However, I do agree that Clinton had no real arguments for her globalist agenda, simply calling TPP the gold standard and shrieking insults at her opponents (who I do think were mostly racists, but not solely.. whether Islam itself is a race or not is pedantry imho)