SUCH A NASTY WOMAN’ TAKES IT ALL

Mukesh Devrari

Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump is an unpredictable and unstable man. There is no doubt about it. It seems foolish for a Presidential candidate to declare that he will not accept election results if he loses it. Perhaps he has no idea it will lead to a civil war in the United States of America. In this highly polarized elections, entire mainstream media focused on finding loopholes in the Trump campaign. His words, gestures and performance are being scrutinized. He sparked major controversy by saying that he may or may not accept election results.  
America is not a democracy. It’s a two-party tyranny. In the third debate, Hillary Clinton repeated her allegations on Donald Trump again. She was more focused on why Trump is a terrible candidate, than what she offers as a candidate. In the second debate, Trump demolished all her accusations, but it did not stop Hillary to repeat her allegations again in the last debate. It is clear, Hillary Clinton does not represent any fresh policy outlook on any issue. If she becomes the President, the US will continue to destabilize the Middle East and demonize Russia. Perhaps the containment of China will gather pace. So the world will be as messy as it is today.

Donald Trump is not even republican. In case he becomes President, legal or illegal immigration to the US will stop. US-Russia relations may also improvise. The US may become more inward looking. It may not function as a world policeman. However, the process of clash of civilization may also gather pace within the USA. In Trump’s America, whites and their concerns will matter the most.  

The demographics in America automatically make Hillary much stronger candidate. If all African-Americans, Latinos and Asians voted for Democrats, then Trump has no chance. When Trump says I will do more for African Americans and Latinos then Hillary Clinton can do in ten lifetimes. There are no takers of his assurance. No mainstream outlet highlighted his words.

Perhaps Trump has everything one can hope for on this planet. He has a beautiful wife, a huge family, good health, thriving business empire and loads of money. He can have everything he can hope for. Unlike Clinton who prefers to meet those who donate to Clinton Foundation on priority and likes to say one thing within closed doors and something else on public forums.

It is difficult to choose a lesser evil among the two. Trump is unpredictable, but there is nothing to suggest that he is a fascist. A similar debate took place in India. Opposition parties declared Narendra Modi a Hindu fascist during the election campaign in 2014. They were not totally wrong, Modi was the chief minister when riots took place in Gujarat and hundreds of civilians died, mainly Muslims. But it did not dent the election results. He went on to become Prime Minister of India.

Trump is in a similar situation with two differences. First, there was a strong case against Narendra Modi. He is a radical Hindu leader and in his imagination minorities, particularly Muslims, has no place. There are hardly any serious charges against Trump except the ‘back room banters in makeup van’ and politically motivated charges by some woman which emerged after the tape.

Second, entire media under the control of corporate houses in India promoted Modi as super saviour and described the last term of UPA as an utter failure. In US situation is just the opposite. As media is openly supporting the Clinton campaign. It will be difficult for any candidate to even put up a respectable fight in the upcoming US elections against Clinton. Still, Trump can win, only if some kind of miracle happens, which is highly unlikely.  

‘Such a nasty woman’ is destined to become the president of the United States. After 9 November 2016 US citizens and the world will have no choice but to silently deal with the lesser evil.


end. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

TRANSNATIONAL MEDIA OWNERSHIP AND ISSUES OF SOVEREIGNTY AND SECURITY

Image
Mukesh Devrari  Transnational media ownership means ownership of media assets by global corporate houses around the world. The word 'transnational' can easily be easily replaced with the term multinational. In other words, when a multinational company owns media companies around the globe that company can be described as a transnational media organization. There are plenty of such organizations, but most vilified among all is owned by Rupert Murdoch.  The nature of media is very different. As you all know media is a plural form of the medium. Production of films, TV serials, drama, theatre and other wings of the cultural industry are also owned by western media companies. Here, the meaning of the word transnational can be extended. Not necessarily western media companies own assets in the third world countries. They create their work in the west and sell it around the world.   It has long been a complaint against western media companies that wherever they go, they dev
Read more

BANNING TIKTOK SENDS RIGHT MESSAGE TO CHINA

Image
Mukesh Devrari   Banning Tiktok in India is without a doubt a great decision by BJP government after the killing of 20 Indian soldiers at the Line of Actual Control at Union Territory of Ladakh. Globally the Tiktok has been downloaded by more than 2 billion smartphone users and 30 per cent of its customers are in India. If the Tiktok will be replaced by an Indian company, only then this ban is worth it, other it is immaterial from India’s point of view. Otherwise, it makes no difference to our national interest whether the parent company is from the United States or China or Congo. Indian companies must intervene and capture the vacated market. They must offer similar apps to users. The Communist Party of China’s (CPC) aggression at the border gave this once in a lifetime opportunity for India’s businesses to capture the vacated spaces. The CPC is responsible for the global downfall of Tiktok & Huawei. First of all, China should use the opportunity of BJP havin
Read more

­Dawn’s discourses on perpetual Indo-Pakistan enmity

Mukesh Devrari  Abstract   This study is a thematic analysis of columns and editorials published in the opinion pages of Dawn during India’s general elections 2019 to find out how Pakistan’s elite media represents India as a perpetual adversary. It finds out that Dawn’s op-ed pages characterize India as a permanent security threat, destabilizing force, propagandist state, and dominating power conspiring with the United States to harm the interests of Pakistan and China. It also reveals that news columns and editorials consistently claim that Indian media indulges in warmongering, rising Hindu nationalism, and non-state actors contribute to the hostility in both nations. Finally, it notes that Dawn’s Op-ed pages describe India with the state lens in geopolitics and global power structure, mostly magnifying the state’s perspective instituted mainly by the security establishment.   (Keywords –Indo-Pakistan enmity, Dawn , media representation, media & conflict, thematic analysis)   In
Read more