Thursday, 28 July 2016

Hillary Clinton versus Donald Trump: The Demonic candidate versus an Antichrist

People keep asking me what I think about the US Presidential election - it is not a topic I want to spend much time on; but to answer the question the title is a summary of my views.

Both sides of the 'race' are actively managed by the same establishment ultra-elite controlled by puposive supernatural evil; but the parties are different in the sense that Hillary Clinton is the preferred candidate because she is (overall) a candidate for explicit and direct evil, appealing to those who are most fully corrupted; while Donald Trump is an Antichrist candidate in the sense that his evil agenda is implicit, and his support substantially comes from less-corrupt people wanting to have the 'good' aspects of his platform.

(Note - Antichrist is not one person nor the oppsoite of Christ - but there have been and are many Antichrist figures - the idea is that they are welcomed and supported because they deceptively simulate Christ in some ways - but covertly pursue an Anti-Christian - nowadays a secular Leftist - agenda behind this facade.)

A Christian perspective sees Trump as an Antichrist figure in the sense that the forces of explicitly demonic evil (e.g. the mainstream mass media) differentially attack his 'good' policies - i.e. they attack him mostly on the basis of those true or virtuous aspects of his campaign. By contrast, they praise Clinton on her evil nature and policies.

The Global Conspiracy prefers Clinton, becuase their ultimate aim is to have humanity actively-want evil; they wish for humanity to become so deeply corrupted as to will our own damnation, by inversion of The Good - so that we ask-for and vote-for lies, ugliness and wickedness - by claiming these are 'higher forms' of real truth, beauty and virtue.

But the Global Conspiracy always tries to control both sides; so that whatever the result of any election, they get what they want eventually.

In this election, perhaps for the first time, they are running an overtly-evil candidate who would pursue the demonic agenda directly and rapidly - but as a back-up they have put-forward a candidate who will pursue the same agenda, but indirectly and therefore more slowly.

24 comments:

Misanthropist said...

The problem is also that Trump is obviously a Clinton plant who is there for no other purpose than to throw the election to Hillary Clinton and defeat other Republicans that would have had a better chance of winning. The more you look into his background including past leftist views and friendship with the Clintons this ought to be obvious. But alas, most people can't see past the latest headlines nowadays. It is unfortunate that he is leading a lot of people astray that foolishly think he is the real deal. But he is obviously controlled opposition.

It is obvious that the powers-that-be long ago anointed Hillary Clinton as their choice, and the elections are a charade put on for the entertainment of the masses. We already know the Democratic primary was rigged to ensure Clinton won, due to the number of unelected superdelegates that supported Clinton as well as the revelations of the DNC undermining Sanders and working for Clinton.

There has probably seldom been a time where it is so obvious that the system is rigged and elections are largely a charade, but also where people are being primed to accept such obvious and transparent evil in Hillary Clinton. It is as if we are perched on the precipice, where people either sleepwalk further into the abyss of darkness to the point of no return. Or we pull back from the edge.

JP said...

In this election, perhaps for the first time, they are running an overtly-evil candidate who would pursue the demonic agenda directly and rapidly

Clinton is not meaningfully different from Obama. I would argue that 2008 was the first time they ran an overtly evil candidate, and he did indeed pursue the demonic agenda directly and rapidly. Clinton is just "more of the same".

Andrew E. said...

Since you brought up the topic, the Conspiracy's business-as-usual or "Antichrist" candidate as you call it was very clearly Jeb Bush all along. And they had a dozen other Bush clones running just in case with their ultimate fallback being Cruz (talk about conservatives being suckered into a globalist!). Only one candidate was completely unanticipated by the cartel. Unprecedented levels of overt and covert subversion were unsuccessful and now they will attempt to infiltrate and cleverly sabotage.

Bruce Charlton said...

@M - Agreed, at least broadly. I prefer to think of it as less a predetermined result, and more a fail-safe demonic decision: two paths - one direct and the other one roundabout, but which aim at the same destination in the end.

Clearly the correct thing would be to transcend, bypass and refuse to validate the false-choice election in some way - but it does not look asif the US people are remotely prepared for such an 'extreme' step - they have been so thoroughly and widely corrupted (especially by the sexual revolution, but also by antiracism - on top of a cult of 'democracy' and the US constitution), and carefully painted into a corner where they will feel impelled to vote for (and therefore mentally-endorse) one or the other.

The proper time for remedial action was some time ago.

Spiritually (which is what matters) it is never too late to repent, and start moving in the right direction - but clearly the longer this is delayed, then the worse things would be before they (might) get better.

Bruce Charlton said...

@JP - I disagree. I regard BHO as essentially a front man - a charming, stylish and eloquent facade (back in 2008, anyway); but no worse than a superficial, lazy, conceited dupe. By contrast, the current candidate has been far more deeply corrupted over a much longer period, and is much closer to the purposive centre of the evil Global Conspiracy.

Luqman said...

Clinton is defintely different to Obama. Bill Clinton is a charming and cunning sociopath far beyond the likes of Obama and she seems to be his handler so it makes sense she is worse than him. This seems to bear itself out on appraisal of her positions and actions.

I dont see many people who support Trump supporting the man, but rather what he seems to stand for. Supporting his election does not in any way require assenting to any part of his nature, actions or beliefs that are/appear evil. I am unable to see how anyone could support Trump and fall. While a secular cult around such a personality would certainly model an Antichrist, this does not seem to be the nature of his support. At best there is admiration that he is able to stand up to consistent attempts to undermine him such that they lose their power.

Importantly, there does not seem to be anything personally nasty or mean-spirited about Trump (except powerful but not anywhere near exclusive self regard) despite his sins.

Samson J. said...

The problem is also that Trump is obviously a Clinton plant

This isn't true in any sense whatsoever, at all, and you really should stop repeating the word "obvious" for things that are manifestly non-obvious.

As for Trump, I'm in prayer for his victory every day, seeing it as possible (though by no means certain) that he may be a "John the Baptist" figure leading a new golde age. "Obviously" (heh) he is not as reactionary or Christian as we would like, but he may pave the way for someone who will be.

Bruce Charlton said...

@Andrew - My reading is that you are correct in terms of the low level pro-Democrat Establishment, but I am talking about the ultimate supernatural leaders. I don't think they will be at all worried by Trump, although clearly they would prefer Clinton.

I would add the qualification that if Trump is subjectively-regarded as in essence a negative and anti-Establishment vote - a vote of common sense and decency against the current general trend and its destination, somewhat like Brexit - then this may strengthen the morale and determination of the forces of Good.

But if so, then the good consequences would not come from electing Trump, but in terms of the repentance and new resolution of large numbers of people becoming more self-aware in their understanding and allegiance. And any socio-political good would have to emerge from some currently unknown direction.

(The good of Brexit so far is invisible - a new hope in the hearts of the English eventuating in fewer self-damned souls. If Brexit is to be of obervable socio-political value, this would need to come from a new 'party' composed of new people, +/- repentant established figures.)

Bruce Charlton said...

@SJ - I think it would be spiritually dangerous to pray FOR a Trump victory - but quite reasonable to pray AGAINST a Clinton victory - these being quite distinct at the spiritual level.

knifecatcher said...

Trump is a step in the right direction. It is naive to think we could go from 0 to 100 instantly. He is doing what is now possible, paving the way for others when more will be possible.
Trump deserves a lot of credit for his courage for holding his ground against political correctness.

Ingemar said...

Support for Trump evidently boils down to "We know he's a terrible person but he tells us the lies we want to hear." To my mind's eye, at least. Which only cements my idea of the alt-right as posturing manbabies.

This election is a turning point for several reasons. First, it is the first time in a long while that ~Democrats~ have had to feel the sting of "voting for the lesser of two evils" (from their point of view; obviously, leftists do not believe in right or wrong). Second, because both candidates are so obviously terrible, it will perhaps finally put to death the lie that "to not vote for A is to vote for B."

Samson J. said...

I don't agree, naturally. I take care to pray that Trump will be what I hope - or even better, as doubtless God knows better than I do.

By the way, I'm sure you realize that, as per the discussion the other week, this thread is destined to earn a slew of comments!

Bruce Charlton said...

@SJ - "this thread is destined to earn a slew of comments"

Not likely - I still moderate ruthlessley...

Brandon said...

Could you explain what exactly makes Trump an Antichrist? His family is not exactly a bunch of degenerates and despite his personal shortcomings (of which we all have), he exudes a kind of radical honesty. Is it his lack of humility?

Bruce Charlton said...

@Brandon - An Antichrist figure in this context is one who promotes the besetting sin leading us to doom - which is secular Leftism. Trump is both secualr and extremely Leftist (by world historical standards). (Remember, the main domai of self-damning sin in our era is the sexual revolution.)

pyrrhus said...

Trump is a nationalist, not a globalist, and wants to dismantle important parts of the warfare State that we now have, and which Hillary/Obama is steering toward WW3...he is also a private citizen and successful businessman, unlike any candidate for President in 200 years. Hillary has perpetrated the greatest corruption of US justice in history, and is nothing but a criminal.
Most important,as an American I am most concerned with Obama's attempts to create a race war and dismantle the Constitution, which Hillary promises to accelerate. Believe me when I tell you that many parts of the country will not tolerate that, and we are facing a de facto civil war....

Bruce Charlton said...

@P - I don't disagree at the level of politics - but that level (nationalism etc) is pathetically inadequate for our spiritual situation - or down-slope of self-hatred and suicide and despair: the positive desire for damnation. We must have a spiritual rebirth or be doomed - not merely culturally, but existentially. A genuine spiritual leader would be of great help - but I don't think there are any in mainstream politics in The West.

Wm Jas Tychonievich said...

I pretty much agree with you, but this post does raise one obvious question: Given your complete distrust of the media, on what do you base your opinions about politicians in distant lands?

Bruce Charlton said...

@WmJas - The usual sources - intuition and people whose judgment I trust.

Leo said...

I am inclined here to reverse the dictum about preferring the devil you know. Mr. Trump showed an interesting flash of humility in his acceptance speech that gives me some hope for him.

"At this moment, I would like to thank the evangelical community, because I will tell you what, the support they have given — and I'm not sure I totally deserve it — has been so amazing, and has had such a big reason for me being here tonight."

As you often point out, repentance is always possible.

As for advancing agendas, if Trump is elected the media will hound him continually, and the courts will inhibit some of his potential actions. If Clinton is elected and if her party controls Congress, there will be no stopping, checking, or balancing her.

With a history as a builder, developer, and deal maker, I think and hope Trump will be less inclined to blow countries up than his rival, who has a history of being quite hawkish.

We should not expect a spiritual revival from this election or from partisan politics in general, though one can hope for an unanticipated miracle. Spiritual revivals are more likely to come one soul at a time based on small events by small means.

Bruce Charlton said...

@Leo - Yes, Trump is probably the normal kind of Antichrist-type Presidential candidate - serving evil but mostly-indirectedly and with some good attributes. Continuing, of course, the spiritual (and cultural) decline of the US, and typically without any positive legacy. That has been the usual situation since Reagan, who achieved a few positive things and a brief stasis in decline - but was probably harmful overall. What is new is that Trump is up against a very obviously Demonic candidate. It seems as if the evil international ultra-elite believe that they can now drop the pretense and go for the jugular - OR they are in a hurry and taking a big risk by coming into the open, because their position is not as secure as it may superficially seem - this is what I suspect, that now is a time of late-opportunity.

Jason Steiner said...

I disagree with your last paragraph. Specifically "perhaps, for the first time". They always hedge their bets. This election is different because "they" didn't want Trump and did everything they could to destroy him. They are obviously afraid that some of his ideas deviate too radically from their globalist agenda. It wouldn't shock me if he would fall into line after being elected but they would strongly prefer not to take any chances. They are all in for Hillary and most likely will get what they want

Bruce Charlton said...

@Jason - " "they" didn't want Trump and did everything they could to destroy him."

I'm afraid they have barely lifted a finger to destroy him. They have done just enough to mislead decent people into being dazzled by him, as if he was something new, different, a change of direction. Even if every good thing Trump said was honest and sincere in intent, it is still a mainstream secular Left program of the type familar from the past many decades- its goal is utilitarian, hedonic, and it is ultimately nihilistic.

Anonymous said...

"In this election, perhaps for the first time, they are running an overtly-evil candidate who would pursue the demonic agenda directly and rapidly".

I think there has been a sort of 'crescendo of overtness' in some ways over the past, say, 44 years (notably, in US Presidential-Election politics), but if one focuses on the first 'legally' successful aspects of what John Paul II identified as 'the culture of death' there has been a lot - a sort of 'basal constant' at least - of emphatic 'overtness' for most of that 44 years.

For instance, Mr. Obama's effective public promotion of the infanticide of abortion survivors as a state legislator, for anyone who took the trouble to look - or to listen when critics or his political opponent in the 2004 US Senate race, sometime Ambassador Alan Keyes, pointed it out.

Concerning other aspects of that 'overtness' and still-maintained 'covertness', it is interesting to (re)read Michael Isikoff's Uncovering Clinton: A Reporter's Story (1999) with its attention to how all the Party prominent insiders who were 'in the know' about, e.g., Bill Clinton's already long history (variously) blatant and extensive sexual abuses were astonished that he'd presume to run - and yet all pitched in, together with a largely exceedingly obliging media-world, to hide and ignore what was so 'overt' in their own experience.

Leo observed, "As you often point out, repentance is always possible." And genuine repentance can be sudden and through and surprising - and 'overt', as well as something like a seed growing in secret. Mrs. Clinton seems much more ideologized and hardened in her outspoken devotion to various aspects of the 'culture of death' than anything Mr. Trump exhibits, which would suggest (to my mind) prima facie that he is more susceptible to various specific repentances and changes for the better - and may indeed be undergoing some, as some folk have suggested - while not ignoring the possibility that a miracle of repentance might happen where Mrs. Clinton is concerned.

David Llewellyn Dodds