Divided States of America. Divided States of America - about the results of the midterm elections in the USA

American Time magazine named Donald Trump Person of the Year 2016. Last year, Trump was shortlisted as the enfant terrible of the presidential race, but lost the title to German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Since then, the New York billionaire real estate developer has also won the presidential election, leaving no reasonable alternative to the magazine's editorial board, which chooses the Person of the Year.

"Time will never choose me even though I am the clear favorite," Trump tweeted last December. "Instead of me, they chose a man who is destroying Germany by letting hundreds of thousands of Arab refugees into the country." Trump got it wrong, but who can blame him? Neither the establishment, nor his entourage, nor, as it became known recently, even he himself believed in his victory in the Republican primaries, not to mention a duel with Hillary Clinton.

Time editor-in-chief Nancy Gibbs called Trump "the creator of a political revolution." “In the memory of living generations,” according to Gibbs, “there is no person who single-handedly refuted all the forecasts of experts and won, violating the seemingly unshakable rules of conducting an election campaign and simply basic standards of decency.” "Pacer" Trump has made the cover of Time six times in recent months and was named Person of the Year on Dec. 7.

Trump has offended both liberals and traditional conservatives with his politically incorrect statements

The president-elect likes to say he won on our own. New to big politics, he, however, did not ask for advice from recognized experts or money for the election campaign from financial donors; had no support political elite his party; he was opposed by the mainstream media and almost all of Hollywood. And in general, stars of the entertainment industry, for the most part, sympathize with Democrats. “At my rallies, the opening act was neither Beyoncé nor Bruce Springsteen,” the 45th President of America proudly states. Trump offended both liberals and traditional conservatives with his politically incorrect statements about women, Latinos, and Muslims. During the campaign, he openly quarreled with NATO allies, complimenting the Kremlin boss along the way, despite the fact that wide circles of Americans find him an extremely unattractive personality.

And after his victory, Trump shocked the diplomatic corps by symbolically retreating from the “one China” policy, agreeing to a telephone conversation with the president of Taiwan, which no American head of state had done since Jimmy Carter. Moreover, not a single president since the 20s of the last century has been, like Trump, such an ardent opponent of free trade. And no one threatened to punish corporations that move production abroad. In a word, Trump became the Person of the Year virtually out of competition, all his actions and declarations were so shocking, noted Radio Liberty’s interlocutor, a columnist for the socio-political weekly The Weekly Standard:

Time is not concerned about the potential influence of its laureate on history

“It couldn’t have been any other way, given the criteria Time uses when choosing its Person of the Year.” This is the one who had the greatest influence on the news flow during the period under review. Precisely news: Time is not concerned about the potential influence of its laureate on history. Who opposed the winner of this year's presidential election? Founder Facebook Mark Zuckerberg; singer Beyoncé; Vladimir Putin, for the umpteenth time; a group of activists in the town of Flint, Michigan, who exposed the criminal negligence of local and state authorities who turned a blind eye to the contamination of the domestic water supply; British nationalist Nigel Farage; Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi; scientists working on a cure hereditary diseases using the CRISPR system, targeted genome editing. All of them received no more than one percent of the votes in the Time reader survey. Only gymnast Simone Biles had seven percent.

On the other hand, the share of the presidential election in the news flow is so huge that if Hillary Clinton had won, I am sure she would have been named Person of the Year, not Trump, despite all the creativity he showed. They say that the first woman is the nominee of a leading party and the first female president. It should be remembered that the title of “Person of the Year” according to Time magazine is awarded by journalists, not political scientists or historians. All that matters is a person's status as a newsmaker. With all that it implies.

In the past, Time nominees included such odious figures as Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini

​– Time editor-in-chief Nancy Gibbs, presenting the winner, persistently repeated precisely this idea that when choosing a Person of the Year, only his status as a newsmaker matters. That the selection in no way reflects the magazine's opinion of the individual's personal qualities or the impact he has had on society, positive or negative. She seemed to apologize to the Americans for the decision made by her and her colleagues.

“I can guess why she repeated this thought.” The fact is that recently the audience has lost its understanding of the difference between assessing a person’s social significance and assessing his personal qualities. In the past, Time nominees included such odious figures as Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini. And no one thought that the editorial board admired them. About thirty years ago, however, the situation began to change, and as a commercial publication, Time does not want to risk losing readers who have not learned this difference and therefore react painfully to the choice of contradictory and ambiguous personalities. And therefore they bring down a barrage of criticism on the editors.

She may become hysterical. The editor-in-chief of Time has absolutely no need for this

This is where the phenomenon of appointing something “soft and fluffy”, non-conflicting and even inanimate, as the person of the year comes from, for example, a personal computer or a collective, say, community of content creators on Wikipedia. It's safer this way. I can easily imagine a scene in which, living in a hipster area of ​​Manhattan, a young person of progressive views and a very fine mental organization, who has not yet recovered from the shock experienced in connection with Hillary’s defeat, takes out mailbox the harmless, as she thought, December issue of Time magazine and sees Donald Trump, whom she hates, as Person of the Year on the cover. She may become hysterical. Time's editor-in-chief has absolutely no use for this. That's why she's playing it safe.

– Time played it safe even more demonstratively by printing the words “President of the United States of America” right on the cover under Trump’s photograph. Instead of United.

Before Trump, the polarization of a very heterogeneous American society was exacerbated by almost all of his predecessors

– This is a truly brilliant observation! It's as if we've never had a presidential election that split the nation before. You'd think Obama won in 2012 with 92 percent of the vote. I don’t remember that four years ago our leading left-liberal media complained about political split in the country. It just so happened that in their eyes, Democratic victories in the presidential elections invariably mark the triumph of our ideals and another breakthrough into a bright future, and Republican victories are a threat to civil liberties and the oblivion of the covenants of the founding fathers of the republic. Nancy Gibbs is probably right that a Trump presidency will further polarize America.

But she fails to say that before Trump, the polarization of the very heterogeneous American society was aggravated by almost all of his predecessors. Aggravated temporarily, until a strong political center. Such is the nature of the political process in a democracy! And I prefer the “Trump” polarization to the polarization when, say, all whites vote for one candidate, and all minorities vote for another. Or all women are for a candidate of their own gender, and all men are for theirs.

About a third of the Latinos whom Trump allegedly mortally offended gave him their votes

The mainstream media, as I already said, as well as university faculty, are not divided; they are against Trump. However, about a third of the Latinos whom Trump allegedly mortally offended gave him their votes. 42 percent of all women voted for him. And 53 percent of white American women. California is not split, and this is what largely provided Clinton with an advantage over Trump in the total number of votes received. But California, demographers say, is a statistical anomaly.

As far as I can tell from conversations with colleagues in Washington, “normal” polarization, or simply differences in assessments of Trump, exists both among senior generals and in the intelligence community. As for business, remember how on Election Day, when the scales began to tip in Trump’s favor, stock index futures went sharply down. Paul Krugman Nobel laureate and columnist New York The Times predicted that the American economy would not survive a Trump victory.

Business, if you will, is also polarized in its own way in the sense that it does not know how it should treat Trump

A huge drop in stock prices seemed inevitable, but the very next morning the quotes shot up and have been growing non-stop ever since. Wall Street thus embraced Trump's focus on cutting taxes and government regulation. At the same time, the president-elect is vilifying California's high-tech Silicon Valley for its embrace of globalization. Therefore, business, if you like, is also polarized in its own way in the sense that it does not know how it should relate to Trump.

00:12 14.11.2004

United States of America (RSA) ("La Vanguardia", Spain)
Everything you wanted to know about the United States, but didn't dare ask.

Directive N1033(b) of the Department of Homeland Security dated November 9, 2004

Following President George W. Bush's undeniable victory on November 2, with more popular votes than any other candidate in the history of the nation, based on his democratic credentials and to ensure national security Everyone entering the territory of the Divided States of America (D.S.A) will be required to pass an exam on “Americanism”, which is based on the dictionary given below. The “test” will be carried out by employees of the Emigration and Naturalization Service after those wishing to set foot on this chosen land of the Lord explain the reason for their appearance here, providing all the necessary documents (including a visa, fingerprints and biometric passport) and undergoing a thorough search by security officials of the opposite sex, which should not be perceived as a misunderstanding. Homosexuals, atheists, agnostics, single mothers and people with AIDS will be denied entry into the country in any case, so that they do not violate the spiritual purity of the Kansas plains. Knowledge of the political and social reality of the RSA, no matter how inconvenient it may seem, will contribute to debunking the common view among European intellectuals and progressives of our nation as a colonial empire, indifferent to the suffering of others, mercilessly killing Iraqi children and populated by red-shirted people. -a black cage of ignorant, oaky simpleton farmers who do nothing but watch baseball games, eat popcorn, drink thin beer, go to church, chew gum and spit tobacco.

Political Dictionary of the Disunited States of America from "A" to "Z"

Aborto: Supreme Court with new ultra-conservative members (awaiting appointment by the honorable President Bush) in soon will revoke the ruling known as "Roe versus Wade", according to which women living in the United States have the full right to dispose of their bodies as they see fit. Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn has put forward the wise decision to sentence abortion doctors to death.

Firearms (Armas de fuego): given that the presence of revolvers and firearms small caliber has led to the successful proliferation of serial killers and an increase in school massacres (see Bowling for Columbine by Michael Moore), and due to the large number of applications received, President Bush intends to authorize the sale of machine guns, grenades, semi-automatic rifles and missiles ground-to-air" in the supermarket chains "Safeway", "Giant" and "Wal-Mart". For customer convenience, the new items will be placed near freezers where customers can find meat products and Thanksgiving turkey. Payment for the above goods can be made in cash, coupons or credit cards; goods are not subject to VAT and will be supplied with a certificate of the right to reduce the amount of tax paid. When purchasing these products, it will be necessary to present a document certifying that the buyer is already 6 months old. In the event of the discovery of Saddam Hussein's "weapons of mass destruction" and the four hundred tons of explosives missing in Iraq, these products will also be offered for sale in the department of medicines and household chemicals (the administration regrets if the absence of these products causes inconvenience to our customers: all complaints should be directed to Hans Blix). Dining vouchers and The Washington Post discount coupons are accepted. The minimum age for purchasing enriched plutonium is 12 years (student ID will be required).

America: The Promised Land.

Anti-American: Anyone who did not vote for Bush and does not agree with him.

Alawi: friend (and also a truly democratic leader of Iraq).

Alaska: too much nature; It’s worth putting your hand into the forests on its territory.

Africa: of minimal strategic interest (with the exception of oil fields in Nigeria, Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe).

Aznar: old friend. Lectures at Georgetown University. He was not lucky.

Weapons of Mass Destruction (Armas de destruccion masiva): were given to Saddam to fight the war with Iran. Information can be found in the Pentagon inventory list (to access the hard drive, enter the password D-U-B-Y-A).

Isolationism (Aislacionismo): old political doctrine replaced by "interventionism".

Abstinence: The only acceptable form of contraception.

Bush: God's messenger (or, conversely, God is Bush's messenger).

Bible (Biblia): extra-official constitution of the United States.

Blair: Fellow Crusade. The next constitutional amendment will allow foreigners to stand as candidates for the post of President of the Russian Academy of Sciences (a primary between Blair and Schwarzenegger would be a spectacular spectacle).

Barcelona: falls into the same category as Sodom and Gomorrah (after all, millions of Barcelonans opposed the war in Iraq). Where is it? In Mexico, Argentina, the Caribbean, no. . . ?

Cheney: Shadow President of the United States.

North Korea (Corea del Norte): part of the "evil empire".

Cowboy: This is what Bush is called by those who want to insult him.

China: the next enemy (will be after terrorism is no longer a cash cow)

Colonialism (Colonialismo): a concept alien to the Bush administration, slandered by European and Latin American progressives.

Creation: God created man in his own image and likeness (no matter what Darwin said).

Communism (Comunismo): the loss of prestige of this movement is worthy of every regret, because it was a useful enemy.

Culture: "It's culture, stupid" (Republican slogan). See "Religion".

Congress (Congreso): entirely ours forever and ever, amen.

Science (Ciencia): should never be placed above religion.

"Country": our music.

Born-again Christians (Cristianos renacidos): Bush and the tens of millions of Americans who saw the light.

Chirac: a word removed from our dictionary on the direct orders of the illustrious President Bush (whose Christian morality does not allow us to include insults in our political dictionary).

Clinton, Bill (Bill Clinton): fooled Americans. See "Hillary" and "Monica".

Deficit: Bill Clinton did leave behind a surplus that later turned into a $400 billion deficit, but that doesn't matter. Moreover, this was done for the good cause of cutting taxes for the rich friends of the illustrious President Bush.

Dollar: Will be devalued to cover deficits, increase exports and reduce Europe's commercial competitiveness.

Democrats (Democratas): a critically endangered species.

Darwin: anathema (see "Creation").

Civil rights (Derechos civiles): their reduction and eventual abolition is the goal of the government.

Darfur: error, the requested word is unknown.

God (Dios): See "Bush".

Economics (Economia): a concept that has gone out of fashion. Its importance is too overestimated. The poorer Americans are, the more they vote for Bush.

Exceptionalidad: a concept applicable to the disunited States. As a power of good and God's chosen people, they should be subject to different standards than other countries.

Emigrantes: Good for getting taxes, doing jobs Americans don't like, and voting for Bush. According to the Arizona resolution, they may be denied the right to receive education and health care if they are not citizens of the United States.

Evil: vice, depravity, baseness. A key religious and political concept essential to understanding George W. Bush, the Republican Party, and the evangelical movement. Applicable to everyone who does not share their aspirations and beliefs.

Europe (Europa): a potential enemy, will become one after terrorism and China have exhausted themselves.

Extraterrestrials: Another potential enemy needed to justify increased military spending and start work on the program space defense, which could be called "great-grandchildren of star wars." (Uya-ooya!).

Spaniards (Espanoles): cowards who withdrew their troops from Iraq after being victims of terrorist attacks.

Evangelism: A fundamentalist branch of Protestantism whose beliefs are based on the interpretation of the Bible. Played a decisive role in Bush's fate.

Embryos: Protecting a few cells is more important than protecting the lives of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.

"Enron": object of slander by " The New York Times" and the liberal press.

Empiricism: An impractical concept based on the analysis of experience. (see "Faith").

Enemy: Fundamental to the identity of the United States as a country. See "Evil" and "Osama".

France: "Oh-la-la!" See "Spain".

Pharmaceutical companies (Farmaceuticas): Bush sponsors who did the right thing when they refused to allow the production of generic drugs that could save the lives of millions of Africans (the laws of the market are paramount).

Fallujah: After re-election, Bush intends to show his strength (the fact that bombs fall on the heads of civilians does not matter).

Fundamentalism: The so-called "Islamic fundamentalists" stole an idea from the true fundamentalism - the "evangelical fundamentalism" of the United States.

Faith (Fe): where there is faith, there is no place for reason.

Fidel: We are ready to attack him at any time (all for the votes of Cuban voters living in Florida).

Florida: part of the "axis of good". See Ohio.

Cookies (Galletas): Banned. Found guilty of attempting to assassinate President George W. Bush. Sentenced to death.

Gays: a mistake of nature. As South Carolina's new senator, Jim de Mint, rightly says, they should not teach in school (Cheney's daughter is an exception; she can do whatever she wants because her father serves our country).

War (Guerra): There are no bad wars.

Natural gas (Gas): control over gas pipelines laid in the territory of former Soviet republics- a secondary benefit of the war in Iraq, after the liberation of the Iraqi people.

Guantanamo: a rehabilitation camp that received a gold medal at the Geneva festival for the best conditions of detention.

Halliburton: What's wrong with a company profiting from Iraq reconstruction?

Hillary: Senator from New York (see also Clinton, Monica). Perhaps he will stand as a candidate in the 2008 elections (ha ha ha!).

Hollywood: Mostly anti-Bush and unpatriotic. Perhaps it would be worth going back to the purges of Senator McCarthy.

Hyperpower (Hiperpotencia): only one. We.

Iraq (Iraq): liberated country. Elections will take place in January. And it's not about oil at all.

Imperialism (Imperialismo): an unfounded accusation. The United States is not an empire by design. They are not interested in colonization. They just want to introduce democratic rule, appoint one of the president’s friends to the ruling position and return home with oil. See "Isolationism".

Church (Iglesia): one of the foundations republican government. Key to mobilizing conservative voters and getting them to vote.

Israel: pioneers of the theory of "preemptive attack" and the concept of eliminating terrorists on their own territory. Applies pressure to change the ruling regime in Syria and destroy nuclear facilities in Iran. Perhaps we will listen to them if money is found and we withdraw our guys from Iraq. . .

Taxes (Impuestos): The rich pay too much. It is worth abolishing income taxes and introducing a consumption tax instead.

Jeb: My beloved brother (thanks to him and his recount system, I became president; I owe you a favor).

Al Jazeera (Jezira, Al): a television channel that serves our interests much more than it might seem at first glance. Its headquarters are located in Qatar - it is our good ally in the Persian Gulf.

JFK: John Fitzgerald Kennedy and John Forbes Kerry (John Forbes Kerry). It seems like all the suckers have the same name.

Karl Rove: a true hero of our homeland. Specialist in destroying the image of our political rivals (see "Kerry"), especially if they: Democrats, fought in Vietnam, where they received awards for courage and self-sacrifice, and they like to have sex in the Oval Office (see "Monica") .

Karl Marx: Not to be confused with Karl Rove.

Ku Klux Klan: Their malice was exaggerated by the African-American community. Among them there are excellent voters - Republican supporters.

Kerry: a dreamer and a loser.

Law and order (Ley y orden): a key point of the Republican program. See Three Strikes (law).

Laura: Bush's wife and the saint who helped him stop drinking.

Monica (Monica Lewinsky): a weapon of mass destruction in the hands of Karl Rove.

Evil (Mal): See "Evil". The "Axis of Evil" consists of New York, San Francisco, Iran, Syria and North Korea (after Gaddafi became our buddy and Saddam Hussein is in prison). Can expand; The first candidates for entry are France and Spain.

Environment (Medio Ambiente): error. Doesn't appear in the dictionary.

Single mothers (Madres Solteras): a moral anomaly. They cannot work as teachers in schools. See "Gays".

Fear (Miedo): Has great value. The best of political instruments.

Michael Moore: public enemy number one. Manipulator, pamphleteer and opportunist. Everything he says is truly a colossal truth, and George’s friendship with the Saudis is a fact (shhh, so no one hears this).

Media (Medios de comunicacion): must be purchased at all costs, especially television. Controlling them plays an important role in advancing Republican policies.

Murdoch, Rupert (Rupert Murdoch): ally, see "Media".

McCarthy: a hero of our country, just like Cheney.

Massachusetts: The only thing left of communism other than North Korea.

Mayoria moral: a coalition of voters who support the Republican Party based on their spiritual and religious beliefs.

Wall (Muro): The Berlin wall was bad, the Israeli wall was good (building another one along the entire border with Mexico would be a great idea).

Neoconservatives (“Neocons”): creators of a political doctrine that is fashionable in our time. The destruction of the Twin Towers was the element that made it possible to implement such basic components of their philosophy as the war in Iraq and the preemptive strike. See "Faith" and "Fear".

Nationalism (Nacionalismo): The Republican Party is Nationalist Party United States.

Entrepreneurship (Negocios): As one entrepreneur says in Fahrenheit 9/11, "Bad for Iraq, good for business."

Noriega: Former CIA agent (see "Saddam", "Osama").

New York (Nueva York): part of the "axis of evil" (see "Syria", "San Francisco", "North Korea", etc.).

Osama bin Laden: Former CIA agent. If only everyone knew who he really is and where he is hiding. . . Very useful as an enemy emerging from a cave with a call to vote for Bush.

UN (ONU): has no political relevance (only interested in Blair).

Ohio: part of the "axis of good" (see "Florida").

Papa: plays a significant role in understanding George Walker's complexes.

Oil (Petroleo): energy resource. Has nothing to do with the Iraq War.

Puritanism (Puritanismo): a worldview that suits Republicans. It was inherited from Calvinist Protestants who arrived from Ireland and Scotland. See Faith, Evangelicalism, and Fundamentalism.

Poverty (Pobreza): condition suitable for supporting Bush. The poor of the United States - God bless them! - believe that health insurance and other attributes of the welfare state are tantamount to communism.

Death penalty (Pena de muerte): the more the better. It is worth exploring the possibility of its use in children under 10 years of age.

Pinochet: a worthy man who shared our values.

Unemployment (Paro): Doesn't matter. All that matters is the maximum possible increase in the profits of large corporations.

Sin (Pecado): promiscuity is a sin; drop bombs on Iraq that mutilate children and kill hundreds of thousands civilians, is not a sin (this is called “collateral damage,” although the Pentagon has stopped using such a definition as politically incorrect).

Powell, Colin Powel: soft-bodied.

Prophets (Profetas): Bush and Blair (Aznar was also a prophet until he lost his magical properties - see "Zapatero").

Al-Qaeda (Al): a definition that can be used to include any group that resorts to violent methods of struggle against the interests of the United States anywhere on the planet (it is extremely important to unify these groups so that people perceive them as a single enemy; similarly in At one time, the concept of “mafia” and “organized crime” was invented).

Qatar: Al Jazeera headquarters and Gulf ally.

Religion: new politics ("It's religion, stupid"). See "Bible" and "Culture".

Republicans: G.O.P. (Grand Old Party). The only party.

Racism (Racismo): Complaints about it are exaggerated by the African-American community (see "Ku Klux Klan").

Donald Rumsfeld: Hero of Abu Ghraib

Social Security (Seguridad Social): Bush is going to privatize it.

Health insurance (Seguro Medico): an impractical Marxist concept that goes against the interests of the medical industry.

Syria: member of the "axis of evil".

Sharon, Ariel (Ariel Sharon): angel.

Schwarzenegger: friend and future President of the United States.

AIDS (SIDA): a problem exaggerated by European and African progressives. Punishment for promiscuity.

Saddam: A former CIA agent (see "Osama" and "Weapons of Mass Destruction") who decided to cheat and think he was stronger than he actually was.

Second Coming (Segunda Venida): Many members of the Bush administration believe that Christ will return to earth, but first Israel must return to its original borders.

San Francisco: part of the "axis of evil" (see "New York").

Texas: heaven on earth, the city shining on a hill, the promised land, the state where the “idiot who defeated Kerry” became a millionaire.

Talibanes: a suitable enemy, suitably destroyed. (See "Communism", "Osama", "Saddam").

Supreme Court (Tribunal Supremo): a body theoretically independent of the judiciary that gave Bush victory in the 2000 election. Currently he has become too “leftist”, as evidenced by the verdict regarding the rights of Guantanamo Bay prisoners. The Honorable President Bush will make appointments that will bring the Supreme Court into harmony with religious, political and public values American people.

Terrorism (Terrorismo): see "Enemy", "Evil", "Aliens", etc.

"Think Tanks": the structure that develops the Republican philosophy essential to Bush's success.

"Three Strikes": A provision in the California criminal code that requires judges to sentence anyone who commits three crimes of any kind, including pizza theft, to life in prison. Too soft. Bush will explore the possibility of reducing the number of crimes to two.

USA (USA): former name of the United States of America.

UK: United Kingdom. Our best friend unquestioningly does everything we ask of him (see Blair, Chirac, Zapatero).

"V": Moral values ​​(Valores Morales): the key point of the republican strategy. The priority task is to export these values ​​to Europe (see “Faith”, “Evangelism”, “Puritanism”, “Bible”, etc.).

Washington (Washington): capital of the empire (typo: the divided States are not an empire).

Watergate: poor Richard, good guy, but he let the situation slip out of his hands. Bush learned his lesson, and today there would be no "Deep Throat", no Bob Woodward and no "The Washington Post" (see "Media").

Whiskey: George once loved this. And even now he loves it when Laura is not around. . .

Xenophobia: Hatred, hostility or antipathy towards foreigners. In the United States it does not exist (except in relation to the French), because here the blacks are not foreigners.

Xenocopia: Photocopy using xenophobia. Bush the father, Bush the son, Bush the brother, Bush the nephew. . .

Yale: prestigious university where George W. Bush received his impressive education (and so did Kerry).

Jihad (Yihad): crusade or holy war. Islamic jihad is bad, evangelical jihad is good.

Zapatero: King of a foreign country (or is he the president of the government?). In a shameful act of cowardice, he withdrew his troops from Iraq. Looks like a pebble caught in a shoe. Aznar was a friend.

P.D: Residents of California, Oregon, Washington, New York, Hawaii, Wisconsin, Michigan, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Vermont, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Minnesota, Illinois, Rhode Island, Maine and the District Colombians who do not receive political immunity (like those who voted for Kerry), do not have Canadian citizenship and wish to remain in the United States must, like any foreigner, have a visa and take an "Americanism" test every time they cross the state border.

The "test" will be checked and evaluated in accordance with the "vote vote" system. Each question will be worth points, the number of which will be determined by examiners depending on the importance of the issue to the Republican strategy. The tests will be scored automatically using voting machines retired from Florida polling places, considered high-tech and trustworthy equipment. The test will cost everyone entering the territory of the RSA $100, which will be transferred to the campaign account of the Republican candidate in the 2008 elections.

Tom Ridge, head of the National Security Agency.

The United States has been on a powder keg for the past few months. Donald Trump has literally split the nation in two. Americans are in panic from such a president; they are ready to flee the country, tear up their passports, and burn flags. And the most irreconcilable ones propose that regions secede from the United States. Just a year ago this would have been something to laugh at. But today the situation is almost out of control. What can you expect in a country where elementary presidential decrees are pointedly ignored by petty regional officials?

You won’t believe it, but on February 4, an ordinary federal judge from Seattle, James RobArt, blocked the Head of State’s decree on immigration for an indefinite period. Either Parliament or the Supreme Court can now overturn this decision. In general, against this background, today they began to talk with renewed vigor about the imminent collapse of the United States, as the whole country. And California was the first to announce this.

In fact, the campaign to secede California from the United States is already in full swing. On January 26, the state's interior minister officially authorized the start of federal divorce proceedings, also called "Calexit."

The election of Donald Trump as US President in California was perceived by millions as a personal tragedy. Riots began on the streets. People smashed and set fire to everything. The state's population, which mostly preaches liberal values, has always voted for Democrats. And unable to bear the slap in the face from the rich Republican, the local residents suddenly wanted to separate themselves from the “land of opportunity.”

To be fair, it should be noted that California did not want to separate from the rest of the states yesterday. Dissatisfaction with the election results only inflamed the electorate. In fact, people here have been cherishing the hope of gaining independence from the center for quite a long time. The state's population is almost 40 million and its size is quite comparable to, for example, Spain. Moreover, if California were its own country today, it would have the sixth largest economy in the world!

Californians say they don't want to feed any Oklahoma or Mississippi. Every year the state receives from federal center$16 billion less than it pays in taxes there.

Silicon or Silicon Valley is home to a large number of high-tech companies involved in biotechnology, computer development, software and mobile communications. They receive a third of all venture capital investments that are made in the United States. Highly qualified specialists from all over the world work in this industry. Therefore, they are not against separating not only from the United States, where the fight against immigrants began, but even from California itself.

If the separatists manage to achieve their goal and in a referendum in 2019 people vote for state independence, this is not all. According to American laws, in order to release California to all four sides, this decision must be supported by two-thirds of the members of the US Congress and the same number of senators. Even if we assume that this is possible, then after that 38 out of 50 states must ratify the agreement on California’s secession from the country. In general, the prospect is quite shaky and foggy.

Another thing is Texas! The state in the southern United States is also the engine of the American economy. And the Texas constitution already stipulates the right to self-determination, which local separatists have long been planning to take advantage of.

20 years ago, a separatist group called the Republic of Texas made a lot of noise. The movement's leaders declared themselves a local "provisional government" and began to terrorize the courts with numerous lawsuits against the state and individuals for compensation for undermining the state's welfare. They acquired their own police, court and currency. At first they did not pay attention. But in 1997, separatist security chief Robert Scheidt was arrested for weapons possession and allegedly taking hostages. And after long negotiations, the government of the “Republic of Texas”, whose territory was limited to one trailer and a small barn, surrendered to the authorities. Then Washington severely punished the troublemakers. The leader of the group, Richard McLaren, will be released in 2041, when he will be 87 years old.

Today Nationalist movement Texas is gaining momentum. It already has more than 250 thousand supporters. Polls show that at least 30% of state residents see this territory as a separate state from the United States.

Texas GDP exceeds $1 trillion! This is the second economic indicator among all American states. Local oil production and refineries bring federal budget colossal profit. The center of the region, the city of Houston, is generally called the energy capital of the world. And Dallas is the center of the agricultural industry, thanks to large harvests of rice, wheat, nuts, fruits, sugar cane and, of course, cotton.

In addition, key military installations are located here. For example, Fort Hood is one of the largest US Army bases. Air bases Sheppard, Laughlin and a number of others are of high importance. Texas defense industries provide the U.S. military with military transport aircraft, fighter aircraft, missiles, fire control systems, aviation, intelligence and communications software.

By the way, the Texas Silicon Hills region is no less famous throughout the world than the Californian Silicon Valley. The headquarters of the largest US manufacturers of computers and electronic devices are located there. The most important NASA facility, the Lyndon Johnson Center, is also located in Texas. There, manned space flights are controlled.

But despite all this, today this state is the poorest in the United States. Here is the cheapest work force. This is due to the large number of illegal migrants from Latin America who are ready to work for any money. This also explains the lack of benefits and overtime pay. Federal laws prohibit the introduction of local income tax. All citizens' money goes not to the needs of the state, but to the federal treasury. And although Texans, unlike California Democrats, mostly support Republicans, their desires to become independent from Washington completely coincide.

The fact that California and Texas are in the forefront of secession from the United States is not at all surprising. These major states with powerful economies feel like cash cows, forced to endlessly fund their poor relatives. But it’s absolutely incredible that now they are talking about independence almost all over America!

A march of thousands of people who disagreed with Donald Trump's policies regarding immigrants took place at the end of January in Minneapolis. In addition, one of the popular social platforms appeared

There is a petition and an interactive collection of signatures from Minnesota residents is underway to begin the procedure for this state to secede from the United States. Activists believe the state could easily join Canada as a separate province. The initiative is already supported by about 9 thousand people. Proponents of secession say they will do just fine without Trump and all the other forty-nine states.

But that's something else! You won’t believe it, but in 2014, the Washington administration received a petition signed by residents of 29 out of 50 states about their desire to become independent states! The list of those wishing to live independently included Louisiana, Florida, Montana, New York and many others. The largest state in terms of territory, Alaska, which, by the way, we sold to the Americans exactly 150 years ago, has been seeking independence for a long time. Why not?

Separatist sentiments in the United States are now being closely watched around the world, including in China. After all, America is home to a very impressive diaspora from the Middle Kingdom. And she also takes an active part in the events taking place there.

But in the history of the United States there have already been cases when territories subordinate to Washington gained independence. At the end of the last century, this, for example, happened with the Marshall Islands, PalAu and Micronesia, whose population voted for independence.

Norwegian professor Johan Galtung did not add optimism to the White House. It was he who previously predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union, the “uprising” in Tiananmen Square in China and the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York. Recently, this scientist said that the United States will fall apart into several parts by 2020. As experts joke, all that remains is to wait a little.

A deeply divided electorate delivered a “verdict of split” in the country in the November 6 elections.

In the United States, the results of the midterm elections are being summed up, during which the House of Representatives and a third of the Senate were completely re-elected. According to preliminary results, the Republican Party retained its majority in the Senate, but lost control in the lower house of parliament.

Pro-republican TV channel reported preliminary election data Fox News and TV channel CNN, supporting Democrats. According to information Fox News, Republicans strengthened their position in the Senate, securing 52 out of 100 seats. CNN predicts only 51 seats for the Republican Party in the Senate, stating that it has maintained its control there.

Donald Trump responded to the election results in his own spirit: quickly, decisively and optimistically. On Twitter, he called the elections a huge success and thanked voters. And he immediately accepted the resignation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, which he himself insisted on. The majority won by the Republicans in the Senate allows Trump, if necessary, to easily remove the new attorney general and his deputy Rod Rosenstein, who is overseeing the investigation of special counsel Mueller.

Jeff Sessions

CNN immediately responded to this with a small but bitter note, Trump fires Sessions, saying that with this resignation the president had “seized control of the Russia investigation.” Here, like a drop of water, the whole paradox of the midterm elections was reflected, during which intra-party discord and personal complexes often took precedence over national and, as they say, popular interests.

What Donald Trump feared most was that the Republicans' loss of control of the Senate would give Jeff Sessions and Robert Mueller a free hand, allowing them to pursue the investigation into mythical Russian interference in America's internal affairs to the result intended by the "deep state" - the impeachment of the US president and his criminal prosecution, - this is quite understandable. And the fact that as soon as news arrived about the Republican victory in the Senate, Trump eliminated the serious threat hanging over him is also understandable. It is more difficult to understand the disorganization in the ranks of the Republicans - outright sabotage election campaign a number of its prominent representatives.

On the morning of November 7, a Democratic sympathizerThe New York Times didn't deny myself I am pleased to state this in the article How the House Fell: Republican Chaos and Democratic Focus. The authors of the publication recalled that back in August, the leader of the Republican majority in the House of Representatives, Kevin McCarthy, warned his faction colleagues that if they did not intensify their election campaigns, the party would suffer heavy losses in November. However, instead of following the advice, Republican congressmen writeThe New York Times , trailed behind events and created a lot of new problems for themselves.

And, in the end, notes The New York Times, President Trump may have dealt his party the final blow when he "ditched a positive Republican message about economic prosperity in favor of stoking a racial scare" on illegal immigration - "with blatantly racist appeals that turned off moderate voters and further inflamed Democrats." . The authors of the article were referring to a resonant video published by Trump on Twitter on November 1, which said that Democrats allowed Mexican Luis Bracamontes, who was twice expelled from the United States, to remain in the country before he killed two police officers in California in 2014. Trump posted a video showing Bracamontes during his trial, laughing and declaring that he would "soon kill more cops."

“Illegal immigrant Luis Bracamontes killed our compatriots. The Democrats let him into our country... The Democrats allowed him to stay,” the 53-second video says. And then there is footage showing thousands of Mexicans storming the border between Mexico and the United States. “What the Democrats are doing to our country is outrageous. Vote Republican this time! President Donald Trump and the Republicans will make America safe again!” - the US President wrote on Twitter. After the tweet was viewed by approximately seven million Americans, it was blocked.

Meanwhile, columns of illegal migrants breaking into US territory are quite real, and the fact that there are many criminal characters among them is also an indisputable fact. However, America's liberal fundamentalists don't care much about this.

The failure of Republicans in the House of Representatives was initially determined by the agreement of Republican Party leaders with Trump's position, relying exclusively on the white population of the rural hinterland, and not on the more populous states of the country, where voters hold different views. This led to many veterans leaving the Republican Party. House Speaker Paul Ryan, a Republican who has repeatedly criticized Donald Trump, said in April that he would not seek re-election and withdrew from organizing campaign finance for the midterm elections.

Unlike the Republicans, the Democrats rallied ranks and attacked political rivals, putting forward slogans of total war against the “toxic” Trump, as wrote in Los Angeles Times gossip reporter Robin Abkarian, who previously advocated for the legalization of marijuana “for recreational purposes.” A cannabis aficionado gloats that House Democrat Adam Schiff, the front-runner to head the House Intelligence Committee, told his constituents that he would make Trump's life a living hell.

Adam Schiff

In the ranks American politicians By the way, there are quite a lot of not only supporters of drug legalization, but also representatives of professions that are considered criminal in most civilized countries. Thus, the owner of seven brothels in Nevada, Dennis Hof, a member of the Republican Party and a staunch libertarian, was elected on November 6 to the legislative chamber of his state, despite the fact that he died a month ago in one of his own brothels. He received 68.3% of the vote, although there was a notice of his death at the polling stations. His partner, Heidi Lynn Fleiss, owner of a chain of brothels and TV star, is very popular in the state. Dennis Hof advocated the popularization of the brothel industry, the expansion of the right to bear arms, and extremely strict immigration policies. By the way, voters in Michigan, Utah and Wisconsin supported the legalization of marijuana on November 6th.

Trump's harsh anti-immigration rhetoric was supported by blue collar workers in rural America and rejected by urban college graduates, writes The Associated Press. The Republican Party relied on older white men with little education, the newspaper writes, while the Democrats relied more on women, people of color and young people who graduated from urban colleges. For the first time, there will be two Muslim congresswomen.

A deeply divided electorate delivered a “verdict about the split” of the country in the November 6 elections, writes The Hill. Exit polls showed that three-quarters of voters believe Americans are becoming an increasingly divided people. The Hill concludes that this reflects "a growing chasm along geographical and ideological lines." On the one hand, the publication notes, urban voters issued a severe rebuke to the unpopular president. On the other hand, rural voters stormed the polls with unprecedented activity, once again supporting the president they voted for in 2016. “Rural America is much more Republican than ever before,” said Republican Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma in an interview with the publication. - Urban and suburban America is a rapidly growing part of the country. In terms of strengthening the Republican position, we need to figure out how to get back a lot of what we've lost. It depends not only on the president, but also on us.”

And this split will deepen as Democrats plan to begin their work in the new House of Representatives with harsh attacks on the “toxic” Trump. “The fight against Trumpism is just beginning,” writes in The Washington Post columnist Max Booth. According to him, during the elections he watched with horror how on the website of the famous sociologist Nate Silver FiveThirtyEight hour by hour the Democrats' chances of capturing the House were decreasing and the Republicans' chances of capturing the Senate were increasing, but he fell asleep like a righteous man when it became clear that the Democrats were in the House of Representatives won. Max Boot angrily denounces Trump for racism, persecution of immigrants, for instilling in voters "suspicion of rich Jews like Soros and an influential African-American politician" - Democrat Andrew Gillum, the mayor of Tallahassee, who failed to be elected governor of Florida on November 6. The Republican Party has evolved from conservative party Reagan-Ryan to Trump's White Nationalist Party, Says The Washington Post.

Max Boot predicts that “an expanded GOP Senate majority will help Trump get rid of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his deputy, Rod J. Rosenstein, and replace them with lickspittles seeking to obstruct justice in the name of the President. However, the Democratic majority in the House, the newspaper writes, will make it impossible for Trump's lackeys to bury the report of special counsel Robert S. Mueller.

It is already known that the Democrats will begin their attack on Trump by checking the US President’s tax returns. House Ways and Means Committee member Richard Neal, who is now set to become chairman of that committee, said he intends to formally request Donald Trump's tax returns, writes Washington Examiner. CNN reports that a number of other Democratic-controlled House committees will also look into the president's finances. “Trump will learn that he is not above the law,” threatened Democrat Jerry Nadler.

How will the confrontation between Democrats and Republicans end, followed by a deep split in American society? Currently, Democrats have failed to win the Senate for one reason: sparsely populated rural areas send as many representatives to the Senate as urban agglomerations. That is electoral system The US is skewed in favor of the Republicans.

When you factor in the Democrats' significant win in the lower house, coupled with some losses in the Senate, and the Republicans' loss of several governorships, the Democrats are poised to win this election cycle and are confident of winning outright in 2020.

What's the matter? After all, it would seem that the US economy is growing rapidly, stock indices are heading upward, gasoline prices were specially reduced for the elections, foreign policy Trump consistently demonstrates brutality and patriotism. What doesn't suit urban voters?

In the coming months, Democrats will try to decisively defeat Trump. It won't be that easy. After all, Donald Trump was brought to the White House by a powerful “gang of generals” led by the current US Secretary of Defense, a charismatic veteran Marine Corps General James Mattis, nicknamed Mad Dog. Trump's campaign was financed by the bosses of the American oil and gas industry, whose interests he so zealously defends.

Ahead is a brutal “battle on the road” between two groups of the American establishment.

For Trump, the Republican will most likely win. American political scientist Christopher Schaefer, especially for the samizdat “My Friend, You’re a Transformer,” explains why Donald Trump will become President of the United States and what this will lead to.

These were strange days. Here in Paris on Tuesday, around midnight, I turned on the election coverage on CNN. I placed the laptop on my lap, the iPhone was hanging somewhere nearby - so I sat in front of the screen for about ten hours. I did not sleep. (Okay, to be completely honest, I took a fifteen minute nap after the first wave of results). It wasn't until around 9 a.m. local time, after Trump had delivered his surprisingly diplomatic speech, that I fell into a well-deserved sleep.

I, like many, thought Clinton would win. Although her reputation was deeply damaged, she remained a competent woman with experience that her Republican opponent did not have - his knowledge, experience and character were clearly unsuited to the office of President of the United States. I knew that opposition to the establishment was gaining strength, but I still believed that Clinton would be able to slip through. I thought she would win - albeit by a small margin - but she would win.

I was wrong.

Of course, I wasn't the only one who made mistakes. We all live in soap bubbles. We believe that social media and news sites give us immediate access to the rest of the world. Pictures come to us from all over the world; Should we have at least a rough idea of ​​what's going on? During the campaign, I read dozens, if not hundreds, of stories about Trump that focused on his offensive and simply stupid comments. If we actually paid for online journalism, I would personally preserve the entire industrial complex of op-ed articles about Trump, since I not only read hundreds of them, but also wrote one of them. For months I looked at bookmarks of survey statistics that showed high probability Clinton victory. In my naivety, I accepted all this as truth.

The reality, as we should now understand, is always much more complex. A map is not a territory, a news report is not reality, and statistics are not elections.

In theory we know all this, in practice we forget.

What happened and why?

Political coalitions

The crux of the matter seems to be that Hillary Clinton has not mobilized her entire base, while Donald Trump has expanded his.

The Democratic coalition is a hodgepodge of labor unions, white professionals, academics, a significant number of celebrities and minorities. It's a diverse coalition: a white Silicon Valley executive has little in common with Latino hotel workers or African-American former sharecroppers from Mississippi - but for historical reasons they find themselves on the same political team. The Republican coalition is an equally strange mixture ( come to think of it): religious and cultural conservatives, businessmen, libertarians, and national security officials.

Voter turnout

On Tuesday, the Republican coalition showed a good turnout percentage, which cannot be said about significant groups of the Democratic coalition. Racial minorities, for example, did not support Clinton to the same extent as they did Obama in 2008 and 2012, and the white working class literally betrayed the Democrats and voted in the majority for Trump. For those who believe that only racists went to vote for Trump, it must be said that more than two hundred counties that supported Obama in 2008 and 2012 voted for Trump in 2016. This means that many voters who voted for Trump twice without any problems black, chose Trump over Clinton this year. Sexism cannot be eliminated. But one way or another, below I will try to show that throwing accusations of sexism left and right is too simple a way to explain what happened on Tuesday.

Voter turnout was lower than in previous years, and (as is typical in American elections) only half of those eligible to vote turned out to vote. If every voter left at home had gone out and voted for, say, Michael Jordan, even with all the votes received on Tuesday, it would have been the greatest basketball player of all time, not Trump, who would have met with Obama to discuss the presidential transition. Why didn't everyone vote? One can assume that they think that their vote does not decide anything. Or they don't care. Some are sick or disabled. Others have personal responsibilities they couldn't free themselves from and haven't bothered to take advantage of opportunities like early voting and mail-in ballots. Some Republican states have enacted significant restrictions on voting rights—complicating ID policies and reducing the number of polling places—measures designed to reduce minority voting. There are reports of targeted messages designed to dissuade minorities from the value of their votes. It is difficult to say how much all this reduced their turnout.

One obvious reason for the low turnout is distaste for both candidates. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have been the two least popular major party presidential contenders since these statistics began (for the scorekeepers, Trump was in first place, Clinton in second).

Candidates and parties

*"Student" is an American game show hosted by Trump for a long time.

How is this even possible?

Many of my progressive friends are heartbroken on social media. I share their rage and disappointment. I, too, am scared by the prospects of what Trump might do in presidential post. But some of the comments they made out of grief are simply absurd, to say the least. Because the media on which they rely has focused on the violent and offensive statements Trump made during the campaign, they assume that his main message was limited to racism and misogyny and that all of his voters elected the president on these grounds. They see what happened as a victory for hatred. This is not so - these people have become victims of a bubble that they themselves have created and which forces them to engage in unqualified criticism and generalized demonization - everything that they themselves condemn so much in other contexts. Yes, attacks on minorities are already starting to make their way. Without a doubt, the nastiest individuals felt empowered by Trump's victory. But the outrage generated by news like this seems to be directed more at Trump voters than at these people - the real villains. There is a connection here, but it is not as obvious as it seems. Those who voted for Trump did not vote for violence and swastikas; they voted for Trump. Insults directed at his constituents in no way help to establish a united front either against hatred and violence, or against Trump's own racism and misogyny; they only serve to further disconnect Trump voters from any potential united front against violence, thereby brutalizing our polarized society. And if you tell me, “But I know they voted for Trump because of his xenophobia, racism, misogyny, hatred,” I will have to ask you how you know that. How many actual Trump voters have you talked to in the past year?

The principle here is this: there is no place for shared guilt in a liberal society. Just as all blacks should not be blamed for the crimes of a few blacks, those who voted for Trump should not be blamed for the actions of a few. If American society is to remain liberal, we must judge people as individuals.

No broken hearts

More importantly, progressives make a very specific claim about their personal brand of progress: that progress is inevitable. They use phrases like “the right side of history” to make a point that has nothing to do with actually studying history. And history shows us unequivocally that moral progress does not march in one direction. They're waving the LoveTrumpsHate slogan * , as if Trump broke the universal rule they follow. However, as far as I can tell, their love is selective. Their love does not extend to the white working class; Certain categories of minorities have the right to it. I am unfamiliar with such love. My experience of living in progressive social terrain is that the white working class is more hated than loved - it represents racism, regression and the wrong side of history. He is worthy of disdain and ridicule.

*LoveTrumpsHate - one of Hillary Clinton's election campaign slogans. It is based on a play on words. Trumpcard- trump card in a card game, in verb form totrump can be translated as “beat, win”, therefore LoveTrumpsHate literally means “love conquers hate.”

And since such feelings are always mutual, it is not surprising that there are no broken hearts in the ranks of the white working class. He is united like never before. As I said political analyst Nate Cohn, “The white working class has chosen to vote the way every other minority votes; and in the end this minority constituted 40% of the electorate.” This is the constant danger of identity politics: designed to uplift minorities, instead of uplifting and uniting, it leads to division. The strategy, designed to smooth out the differences between materialized categories, only hardened their material, whereas it should have softened it. At the heart of the Democratic Party's call for social justice is the idea that a racist voice does not deserve to be called a voice. Unfortunately for them, racist and non-racist voices are counted equally (for technical reasons, the explanation of which would take too much space, it is virtually impossible to distinguish between racist and non-racist voices). And since, in this view, the spectrum of racism extends from the Ku Klux Klan to suburban whites making unfair generalizations about African Americans, there is a goldmine of votes for Republicans. Theologian Daniel Kirk sees a connection between the two identified failures. According to him, this election demonstrated a comprehensive failure to love in American society, which thereby violates one of the two fundamental Christian commandments (the first of which is to love the Lord with all your heart, and the second is to love your neighbor as yourself).

Moral theory

It is worth noting the seemingly obvious fact that not all people operate with the same moral system. You may believe that your system is the only correct one. However, this leads to a desire to impose this system on others - a desire that has a long and terrible history. Today's liberal system, in which we supposedly still live, was built to deflect such questions. The idea was that it would allow people with different views and different moral systems to live together without killing each other. Liberalism... freedom... our liberal system should allow everyone to follow their own ideas of freedom. However, in real politics, things work differently. We elevate our own moral system as the only true one and vilify those who disagree with it.

If I'm not convinced, pick up The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt, where he shows how different moral systems emphasize different values.

Progressives who post absurd generalizations on Facebook cannot seem to understand that their moral system is not the only one. It's one thing to grieve that your set of values ​​has been defeated; it is another thing to believe that other values ​​do not exist. This view, shared by a large portion of my friends, makes any explanation for Tuesday's events (or any other disturbing fact of reality) difficult. The people I know who voted for Trump are not the rage-spewing racists and misogynists that my progressive friends seem to think. I repeat, I completely disagree with my friends and family who chose Trump (for conservatives, the candidates included other conservatives nominated by a third party who were more experienced, honest and educated). But while I don't agree, I have to admit that they voted for a certain set of values. Every Trump voter I know elected him not because of his comments about Mexicans, Muslims, and women, but despite them. There is some hypocrisy in this, and this needs to be discussed. But first we need to understand how moral values ​​are distributed among the warring factions in our society.

According to Haidt, conservatives value things like loyalty and respect for established authority. They don't like it when you disrespect the American flag or soldiers or police officers.

Many people oppose immigration not because they hate foreigners, but because they are trying to adapt to an ever-changing society: they value stability.

Perhaps xenophobia is not a fundamental attribute of political rightness for them. They reflect on the long history of previous societies and say that the loss of these values ​​leads to the decline of civilization. They also believe that the decision to destroy the fetus is an arrogant moral protest against human civilization. The fact that an entire party sanctions this type of murder speaks volumes about the depravity of its members. You may disagree, but you have to admit that in their system, fetus killers and their defenders are as evil as Trump's xenophobia, racism, and misogyny are to progressives. I could go on. But the point is, if you're a social progressive and you can't understand why tens of millions of people are voting for Donald Trump, that means tens of millions of Americans can't understand why you're voting for someone as terrible as Hillary Clinton. Americans prioritize a different set of moral values.

There is a simple way to unite a society facing conflict. This method was used by the Spanish Inquisition (I know, I know, no one expected to hear about the Spanish Inquisition in this letter!) You eradicate any sign of divergence from the officially approved system of morality. You destroy disagreement from an approved position. This is the rhetoric of many Americans on both sides of the fence. This is the rhetoric of destructive unification - the crushing of the enemy. It is not that the enemy gives preference to other moral values; he is simply walking evil. The problem with this strategy, as demonstrated by the Albigensian Crusade, the Inquisition, the Red Scare and the Communist Purges, is that human lives are destroyed. Our liberal system is riddled with contradictions - in some ways it is inconsistent by its very nature - but it has the advantage that we do not try to destroy each other for our views. We learn to live with each other and work through our differences in rational discussion in the political arena.

There is one more obstacle. This is media. The various media ecosystems inhabiting our country create and support facts, some true, some not related to reality. President Obama was born in Hawaii. He is a liberal Christian, not a Muslim. The economy has more or less been doing its job since he's been in power (at least in terms of GDP and unemployment). Obama did not cut himself off from the world; on the contrary, he involved the American army in conflicts in the Middle East (in Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan). The real scandal about Hillary and Libya is that she convinced Obama to remove Gaddafi, not what she did or didn't do about Benghazi. The Palestinian people really exist. Global warming realistically, no matter what we say about the strategy of behavior in this regard. Widespread lies are not the province of one political camp or another, but American conservatives have become especially blatantly untruthful in the last two decades. Their media ecosystem has truly failed them as citizens by whispering sweet partisan lies to them. This further complicates any rational discussion, because in order to arrive at the real issues in a rational discussion, the untruths must first be weeded out or redirected into the zone of orientation in the fundamental differences in moral values ​​that I spoke about earlier.

Entrepreneur Peter Thiel, an influential Trump supporter, said perhaps one of the most enlightening things last week. He said the following:

“Trump should be taken literally, but not taken seriously.”

That's how it all turned out. The media took every lie, every exaggeration, every insult of Trump as examples for analysis and condemnation, but in their pursuit of likes and the affirmation of their own morality, they forgot to step aside and look at big picture what's happening. Despite significant differences, politicians from both Democrats and Republicans showed unity on some key points. In particular, since the end of World War II they managed to maintain equal positions. Trump represents a split in that bipartisan consensus. If you look at where Trump won over previous Republican candidates, it was the Rasta Belt states that were particularly hard hit by free trade policies. Trump represented something original and unprecedented for voters. He spoke to them simply. Sitting at home, he worked through the same points over and over again. He was slick and funny in a way that they understood and that the politically correct coastal elites ridiculed. It was neither bought nor controlled (for better or worse). He did not convince people who were witnessing the constant deterioration of living conditions that this best time to be alive (like Obama did). Trump tapped into nostalgia for past greatness, appealing to people who sensed decay everywhere. Yes, it was a whiter time, but the rise of minorities and the decline of the economy are inseparable for the white working class. This, of course, does not justify racism, but it should give political strategists food for thought. I say all this not to justify Trump’s populism, but only to indicate its fruits. Without such an analysis there can be no adequate response to this populism. Just a sluggish swarm of rage.

Political evangelicalism

About statistics

Criticism of this kind also turned out to be the target of opinion polls. Almost every one of these polls predicted Clinton would win by a landslide. There were polls that declared the probability of such an outcome to be 99%. One of the main lessons of this election is that Americans - and American journalists in particular - are statistically illiterate. Nate Silver's prediction was better than most. He put Trump's chances of winning at 30% (not 12% or 1%). Now political analysts tell us that Silver made a blunder. This simply shows that political analysts do not understand the meaning of numbers. 30% means that if you toss a coin ten times, it will land on heads three times. Of course, elections are a unique event. Therefore, only the first time counts, and you can't take nine more tries for the sake of scientific probability. If you listen to the betting market, the Cubs were less likely to win the National Championship after Game 4, and they still won it. No, apparently we cannot cope with uncertainty. The probability of your death or the death of your loved ones as a result of a terrorist attack, which we are all so terrified of, does not exceed a hundredth of a percent.

*Cubs- Chicago Cubs baseball club.

I'm not surprised that even the highly educated coastal elites are unable to grasp the probabilities. When I was in student government at the Ivy League University of Pennsylvania, in the entire government sector of the School of Arts and Sciences (which included about a dozen departments) there were only three people who understood how to interpret student surveys - a representative from the demography department, a representative from the mathematics department, and me . Even the elite cannot make their way to the knowledge that should be in the public domain - this is exactly what the past elections showed.

Since neither journalists nor political analysts seem to be able to cope with probability (or, in general, with the uncertainty of the future), they try to assign some degree of certainty to the larger of the two probabilities and consolidate it in their minds as the truth. That's just how probabilities don't work. They serve only as a means of assessing risk. These are not oracles speaking from the grave, and not future history books obtained by us with the help of a time machine.

Democracy has always been based on literacy, and we are becoming less and less literate as the Internet and television move us away from words to images. We read less. The quality of the prose has declined. We don't write letters to those we love and miss, we call them on Facetime or chat with them in snatches of sentences. This change fundamentally changed public communication and, as a result, politics.

Debate is no longer debate; they became television game shows. Trump simply pulled the tablecloth out from under this whole charade.

He captivated crowds by simply repeating the same things. He monopolized media attention with ridiculous statements and pointed insults. Our television and Internet habits have shaped us differently than previous generations of reading Americans. Trump realized this and monopolized our habits.

Leaving printed word- not the only reason for what is happening. Our universities and media have also failed us. A good history lesson would make every American schoolchild reflect on the rise of fascism and Nazism and examine the fragile foundations of any democracy. Such a lesson would provide schoolchildren with a new vocabulary - monarchy, democracy, tyranny, oligarchy and plutocracy - with analytical tools for defining the essence of our own system. A good education would allow one to learn how to use statistics. Education is not a guarantee of anything. But it is a starting point from which we can begin to discuss our actions as a group of people trying to live together.

We imprison more people than any other civilization in the history of the world, and there is still more violence on our streets than many other developed countries. Sometimes it seems like every week there is a mass murder of Americans by other Americans. Our health insurance costs twice as much as any other country, and its benefits are still not available to all Americans (and the situation will only get worse when the Republicans kill Obamacare). We prescribe too many medications to combat normal conditions human body, for life with which we do not have the patience. In our food - a key means of our existence - we care about price, size and efficiency, instead of its quality and our health. We work so much that we barely have time for friends and hobbies. We pay with money we don't have for things we don't need. Higher education requires loans that can take decades to pay off. We send our brave soldiers to die in conflicts in the Middle East for reasons that have nothing to do with “protecting our freedoms” (as our propaganda tells us).

America is no longer one nation. We are scattered and divided into a collection of groups within common boundaries.

The sense of community we had at the end of the Great Depression and World War II no longer exists. Vietnam, Watergate, abortion and other issues have finally divided us into two camps. Conservatives know that the mainstream media does not represent them and are unaware of their own bias. The result was an entire “conservative media” industry that was a business goldmine for a time, but ultimately proved completely incapable of adequately informing conservatives. For my part, I have completely broken with any American media, with the exception of some blogs and niche news sites. The point is that we cannot have a discussion because we live in different universes. I am not at all sure that the discussion we need is possible between us. Most people I know consider it their duty to denounce vice wherever they see it. Well, when xenophobia and racism are mixed with legitimate concerns about job losses and social decline, the debate becomes very difficult. It won't happen. True tolerance involves the ability to listen and discern. It implies that you look for humanity and rationality in people you find disgusting. This is not easy, but it is necessary.

t, principled conservatives will join them on this point and put our nation above political cooperation. The coming years will require a lot of work.

But to truly address the most urgent problems, we must address the sad state of our electoral system, our educational institutions, our media and our communities. Otherwise we will see someone worse than Trump.