<<back to publications<< .....    . ......>> to Teach0logy.xyz>>

To Everyone Who Is Deeply Disappointed.

Why Did Hillary Clinton Lose The Race?

Or.

Conformism And Arrogance Of The Establishment.

And.

What To Do Now?

My first president was an idealist dreaming of a perfect society.

My second president was a power-grabbing irrationally acting drunk.

My third president was a former low level army spy.

In a case you did not recognize them, they were Mikhail Gorbachev, Boris Yeltsin, and Vladimir Putin.

When I realized that my third president was becoming my last president I moved in the U.S.

I never would have thought to have again “Boris Yeltsin” as my president (only speaking English and not drinking).

Of course, I am very disappointed with this. However, as a scientist I find a relief in knowing that social forces do obey social laws in a way very similar to physical forces obey physical laws.

Despite the popular belief, Trump’s victory WAS predictable (all pollsters – go back to school).

What happened on November 8, 2016 was a bloodless revolution of a certain type, called a mob revolution.

It was not the first mob revolution known in the history of mankind (but one of the few of bloodless, at least so far).

Two of the most well-known are: the French Revolution of 1789-1790 (http://www.history.com/topics/french-revolution), and the Russian Bolshevik coup of 1917 (http://www.history.com/topics/russian-revolution).

The designer of the Bolshevik coup Vladimir Lenin studied the French Revolution (among many other studies) and wrote books on the matter. Then he successfully used his theory to design and to organize the coup.

Those books have been available in many languages for about a century. In different countries many Marxists extremists used them successfully to take over a power. The theory works like a clock! But only under certain conditions (like any scientific theory). To win a power takeover organizers have to ride a wave of a deep populace disappointment and to direct it into actions (hopefully, just a massive voting turnout). That deep populace disappointment happens when the social establishment concentrates all energy on an internal power struggle and loses touch with the needs and feelings of common folks.

All mob revolutions had been based on a frustration masses felt due to economic downturns in the countries. People felt tricked, lied upon, neglected, exploited and powerless. As the result they embraced leaders with strong rhetoric and simple solutions. “The system is rigged, those … (rich, Jews, intelligent, foreign powers, immigrants, …) are our enemies, we have to destroy them, demolish the system, and start from scratch”. “The International” (the hymn of Socialists and later Communists of the 19th and 20th centuries) has these words: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Internationale):

Stand up, damned of the Earth

Stand up, prisoners of starvation

Reason thunders in its volcano

This is the eruption of the end.

Of the past let us make a clean slate”.

The latter line describes the typical emotion of people who have been feeling frustration for a long time. When negative emotions have been brewing for a long time, eventually logic just gets shut off. People just don’t care anymore about current social structures and want to crash them. It is like a movie detective who has to let go a criminal and in frustration brakes his beloved coffee mug against a wall.

If Clinton’s people read the books and knew the theory, they would be on guard and would be able to develop the right strategy to curb Trump’s enthusiasm.

But that exactly is the problem. Neither Clinton nor her team were able to step outside of a circle of traditional views on politics.

For the Democrats Clinton’s loss is the result of “a failure of imagination”. November 8 2016 is Democrats’ 9/11.

Number 1 reason for this loss is the arrogance of the Democratic establishment.

They saw how Trump just broke the establishment of the Republicans, but they didn’t believe that this could happen to them, they didn’t even consider this option (instead of thinking “I know I am right” they should have asked a question “What if I am wrong?”). That is why they didn’t try to listen to Trump supporters, didn’t really try to understand their motives, just dismissed them as “deplorables”. If they did, maybe they would see that in addition to “deplorables” there was – and still is – (a) a layer of people who felt tired of hard living and just wanted to feel for once as a winner (sport team psychology); (b) a layer of people who felt ignored and wanted to feel relevant (teenager psychology); (c) a layer of people who did not want to be pushed to vote for Hillary merely because “Trump is bad” (rebellious psychology: you want me to do this – here is the opposite!).

Arrogance results in rejecting any ideas which do not belong to an established set of views. That is why Hillary’s team has been using the same old playbook used by Obama. I do not watch news on a regular basis. Lately, when I did – randomly and sporadically – I saw Trump and crowds of people speaking out, or I saw Hillary on a stage with celebrities. If you see these images again and again you get an impression of who is with people and who is above. But Hillary’s team did not try to dig into a psychology of undecided voters. They just kept pushing the “bad Trump” agenda.

Arrogance results in surrounding yourself only with people with whom you feel yourself comfortable, which means, talking only to people who confirm your views. During my Russia days I watched Putin’s closest advisers expressing views almost opposite to the boss’s. Maybe it was just a play, but maybe it was a deliberate politics. What I see around me now is a strong motivation to avoid any disagreement. No one wants to have any discussion if there is a chance to be criticized. Everyone wants to talk only to people with whom one feels comfortable. Conformism within Democratic establishment is the real reason of “a failure of imagination”. But the same conformism has taken place in all social establishment strata, including government, science, education. People within the same circle do not argue with each other, do not criticize each other – that would mean for them that they do not belong to the same circle. The only arguing these days, or years, is happening between opposing camps.

Arrogance of Hillary Clinton pushed her to enter the race. Then her arrogance made her say: “We have seen that our nation is more deeply divided than we thought”. This is just silly (at the minimum). We all have clearly seen the big division in the country. Hillary did it, too. But she hoped that this division would be in her favor. That did not happen.

Arrogance of the Democratic establishment led to nominating the worst possible candidate.

Party culture led to that no other valid candidate, including Biden (!), risked to challenge Hillary’s party rank. Only one outsider stepped in, but due to arrogance of the party apparatus he was outmaneuvered. And even with all this arrogance Hillary still had a chance to win, if she and her team would be able to step outside of the playbook they used for the campaign. Instead they just have been running ahead like horses with blinders (in this case a narrow-sightedness is worse than a shortsightedness).

What do we do now?

Everyone who cares about the future has to become an active Democrat.

Has to participate in all local party events.

Has to vote out all recently selected party officials and replace them with new ones.

How is this related to education?

For an answer to this question, please, follow to the extended version of this piece available at https://teachologyforall.blogspot.com/


Who will be the REAL President of the United States?

Donald Trump is a fighter, there is no doubt about that. I bet, when he started his campaign, even he did not expect the victory (what a shock he must have had on November 8th!). After being featured in nine movies, running a popular TV show, a run for the Presidency of the United State seemed like a natural and final step in his career as an entertainer. That would bring to his huge ego a new wave of attraction he would get from people, which would peak all the attraction he had had during his whole life.

If Trump starts a journey, he goes all the way. His goal is to win. There are no rules.

Fight. Hit. Adrenalin.

It is not Trump’s fault that he became the President.

It is not even the fault of people who voted for him.

The blame must go to the establishment of the Democratic party.

I have a large post on this matter (https://teachologyforall.blogspot.com/) and the rest of this piece is not about it.

I want to address an issue which none of the news outlets addresses.

Donald Trump will NOT be our President.

Well, formally he will.

But in actuality he will NOT.

Have you seen pictures of Obama eight years ago and now?

Do you see what to be the President does to a person?

The President has to do a hard actual work, which requires 24/7 a huge amount of physical and intellectual power.

Anyone who thinks that Donald Trump is capable of reading (forget about writing) long and complicated documents is just delusional.

The best case scenario, he will become America’s “Quinn Elizabeth”. Which, as we all know, was the actual plan of his team. When Trump became the nominee the team was looking for people who would run internal and external political affairs, leaving Trump “making America Great Again”.

The worst case scenario, Trump will become America’s Leonid Brezhnev, or Boris Yeltsin. Both of them during last years of their reign did not do any actual governing. Trump is already out of the governing – he cannot govern any more even his own Twitter account.

Why do you think the FBI became a “Trumpland”? BFI detail has been watching 24/7 both – Hillary and Trump. They saw who was easy to be manipulated and who not. Hence, FBI was not rooting for “an iron lady”.

When a silent voter casted his (mostly) or her vote for Donald Trump, it was an act of “screaming”: “I exist, you mother f*&%^#@rs! I hate you and I want you to go!”. They saw Trump as a “King Kong” who will destroy “those f#$%&*ing corrupt establishment pigs”.

Firstly, I doubt that the same people would vote for Trump if they saw him as a puppet incapable of actual governing. This image could have brought a real opportunity for Democrats to beat Trump – if they were smart enough to see it.

Secondly, there is only one way to fight corruption – it is making a society as open and transparent as possible. This is just a historical fact: the more decisions are getting brokered within a narrow circle behind closed doors, the higher and wider the level of corruption. When a government starts cracking down on media outlets criticizing it – this is it; it is corrupt; and the more cracking down is happening, the more corrupt the government is. People who for four years have been sitting on a couch waiting for crumbs of prosperity would trickle down to them, and when it did not happen channeled their anger and frustration by electing a “Big Gorilla”, have to look in a mirror and ask: “Hey, why didn’t you vote in any local elections, or primaries, or didn’t participate in town halls? What have you done on an everyday basis to make America greater than it is now?”

Anyway, let’s go back to the original question: who will be the actual President of the United States?

Who, despite the fact that NO American voted for him (I am absolutely positive – it will be HIM), will de facto govern the country?

Who will be America’s “Grigori Rasputin”, or possible “Vladimir Putin”?

This is what I would like to hear from the people on a TV screen.

Because, it is very probable, that that person will indeed become America’s “Vladimir Putin”.

I will not be surprised at all if in a year or two Donald Trump gets ill (President’s work is hard, too hard!). For a while Mike Pence will take over the White House. But then the real puppet master will emerge.

Would be nice to get to know him as soon as possible.

P.S. I have been living in two countries, which allows me to see some differences and similarities between political and social systems of Russia and America.

What I see is that on 11/8/2016 American people elected their own “Boris Yeltsin”.

The next “historic” event would be an arrival of America's own “Vladimir Putin”.

I know that there are not many people who understand this analogy.

There is a long story behind it (it is on the Internet).

In short, Yeltsin was a fighter, unorthodox, criticized the establishment of the time, but also emotionally unstable, unpredictable, populist, a drunk (Trump replaces it with his enormous ego and with the Twitter), and in the end used social division in the country to get to the power, was not really smart, was manipulated by a close circle, made many irrational steps, led to economic chaos, was internally replaced (by Putin and his team).

I am very well aware of cultural differences between Russia and the U.S. (which become more and more narrower – I can say because I have seen the both), and I know that the arrival of America's own “Vladimir Putin” represents the worst case scenario. But I also know that the only way to avoid the worst case scenario is to be aware of it and to do something to prevent it from happening.

<<back to publications<< ..     ... ......>> to Teach0logy.xyz>>