2020 election – Thoughts on Trails

In wilderness again…

…Drift Creek is where I ended up a couple of weeks ago, after looking at the real-time wildfire map and air quality forecast, and road conditions. Not all that far from the coast. Near the trailhead there was a glimpse of the river meeting the ocean.

After gaining that elevation on the drive to the trailhead, the hike was all descent to the creek-side campsites. Listening to birdsong much of the way:

I ran into what I thought was a family (I later learned it was a boy scout group). Right/conservative-looking folks. But really, they were just more army surplus than rei aesthetically. Nice folks. A really nice kid in the group pointed me toward some great campsites along the creek when I asked if they knew of more downstream. My glance at his sheathed hunting knife might have looked like I was concerned, but in fact it was just that it was the same one I almost bought.

Kind of related, it’s odd how people on the left and right seem to fall in line and have hostility toward each other. The Right and Republicans should instead be grateful right now to the Democratic Party/DNC: in effort to protect its (Democrats’) wealthy donor-investors from its strong candidate (Sanders), who probably would have beat the Republican in 2016 and 2020, the Democrats/DNC instead knowingly ran its weak candidate — which handed victory to the Republican in 2016. This Democratic Party/DNC incompetence also paved the way for three conservative supreme court justice appointments (two were confirmed a while ago, one soon to be), plus many, many lower federal court conservative judge appointments already in place now. The Right should be delighted with the Democrats/DNC for bringing the USA a far-right White House and a now-heavily conservative supreme court — and for now re-gifting the Right in 2020 by again removing its strong candidate (Sanders) and instead running its weakling. This weakling candidate pick is also a gift to the Right because even if the president loses this November, it may make the loss so narrow that it bolsters his justification to doubt and contest the results with the help of his new, heavily conservative supreme court that the Democrats/DNC precipitated/paved the way for.

And the Left should not be hostile toward the Right/Republicans, but should instead be furious with the Democrats/DNC, who achieved exactly the opposite of what its supporters (the Left) wanted. Even if their weak-pick candidate were to win this time, the damage is done: we’ve already had about 4 years of a White House opposing the Democrats’/DNC’s supporters’ wishes in terms of domestic and foreign policy, and the supreme court has already been transformed into a service provider of conservative and extremist Republicans. (Out of respect for conservatives, it should be acknowledged that the Republican Party/RNC is currently extremist rather than conservative). The Left who voted Democrat in 2016 is still about to vote Democrat in 2020 even though the Dems/DNC are recycling their 2016 failed strategy of running their weak candidate. Anyway, the Left/centrist liberals/further left should be hostile toward the Democrats/DNC, not toward the Right/Republicans.

I don’t think the Democrats/DNC delivered the 2016 Republican victory and three conservative supreme court justice appointments intentionally; it’s just that they have a business to run — the Democratic Party/DNC, which, with intention, secures its wealth largely by legislating its donor-investors’ wealth. S0 the Democrats/DNC must protect their donor-investors from the likes of strong Democratic candidates like Sanders, and won’t have such a candidate interfering with its enterprise. Protecting donor-investors takes priority. The Dems/DNC did all this damage in the name of protecting its donor-investors from its strong candidate. Again, the left should be hostile toward the Democrats/DNC, not the Right and Republicans.

What a bunch of misplaced hostility there is.

A nice overnight backpack…

…for me in national forest. I was near water on some stretches of the trail.

It was nice to sleep in the deep woods again.

I awoke to temperatures in the high 30s F on this August morning at about 4500 ft., then warmed myself with a hot brew.

But the ongoing political unrest. I guess it’s just one part of the perfect storm underscoring the inevitability of universal basic income (UBI). The storm being the lack of jobs increased by the pandemic, swift rise in unemployment, and political unrest in which years of insufficient income and unaffordable housing and health care factor in. Many of the jobs existing pre-pandemic won’t return. Judging from my town, many people have recently joined the ranks of the homeless. Cars are now parked at homeless encampments, and I think some may have been parked in their lots and driveways not long ago. Blocks where there were sporadic tents near businesses now have shuttered storefronts with side walks lined with tents, in some parts of town. It’s not as hidden as it was, either because the pandemic is causing municipalities to stop scattering and pushing around the homeless, or shelters more easily reach capacity due to social distancing requirements. Many homeless are not what I call needy. I can’t call anyone needy who simply has the same needs as I have: access to food, water, shelter and a toilet and shower. To me a needy person is someone who’s after the unnecessary; like a bullying or controlling individual addicted to the control, an addict needing unnecessary chemicals, other excesses, etc.

But back to the political unrest, on the electoral level. It doesn’t take a lot of imagination to envision the worst case November scenario. We’ve got a president with a real estate development and entertainment background who wants a show, be it his reelection inauguration or a dramatic rejection of defeat. If he can’t have an inauguration, he’ll have a bigger show. Worst case, I’m imagining. If he holes up in the white house after his defeat, I can see white supremacist and other right wing militia trying to guard the white house. But retired military brass oppose his reelection. Powell has said the president’s “drifted from the constitution” (and Powell said he’s voting for the Democrat instead). Mattis is not voting Republican in November and has said the president is actively dividing the country, which smells slightly of succession. These are politically heavy endorsements of the Democrat. Retired military brass are likely in touch with current military brass. If the defeated president holes up in the white house guarded by right wing militia after the Democratic win, the USA military may very well shew away the militias and evict the squatting president to vacate the building for the president elect.

The president could lose in November. Prominent Republicans including the agriculture-tied Lincoln Project, and the retired military brass, have abandoned him and endorsed the Democrat. Libertarian-Republican Weld is now endorsing the Democrat. Evangelicals haven’t abandoned the president, yet. If the president loses the evangelicals, all he’ll have left is the white supremacists, which are too small a voting block for success. I’m sure I’m leaving out some voters.

The current chaos threatens domestic and world markets. The market will be protected, maintained, propped back up. UBI may play a role in the USA.

I admittedly think about in-town life when I’m in the deep woods.

It occurred to me on the trail…

…last weekend that the reason progressives are going to cast the fear vote in November (vote for the “lesser of two evils”) is that they are trained to think just in four-year spans or less. And by thinking ahead by only four years at most, they’ve maintained decades of Democrat-Republican office holders taking us to where we are. That is, we’ve had decades of the DRIT (Democrat-Republican Investment Tool) taking turns serving its investors (high-dollar campaign donors). I think progressives need to vote based on candidates’ platforms. Some mislabel this “voting with your heart” instead of your mind. But I think it would be voting with your mind; casting the fear vote is “voting with your heart”. But that labeling is nonsensical party PR to an extent anyway. Voting based on platform would mean progressives vote for Hawkins (or another progressive who is actually running) in November now that the Democrat wing of DRIT spit out Sanders again (i.e., the Democrat wing is knowingly running its weaker, investor-friendly candidate again, just like the last time they spit out Sanders). An effect of progressives voting based on platform could be the collapse of the Democratic wing (“party”). Yes, they’d have another four years of the current Republican presumably, but collapse of the Democratic wing would leave the Republican wing with no un/intentional partner in crime with which to continue more decades of investor rule (return on investment). The Democrat wing is the more insidious of the two; they actually entice progressives with a progressive candidate, withdraw the progressive (DNC tricks just spit out Sanders for the second time in a row), then scare a Democrat vote out of the progressives. We’re seeing it repeated, and even with the same progressive candidate-lure, Sanders. Progressives will cast this fear vote (vote again for the Democrat wing’s weaker candidate), to avoid four years of the darker shade of darkness from the Republican wing (but may fail to again) but maintain decades more of darkness from the DRIT. The Democrats accidentally protected the Republican last time by running their weaker candidate, and they’re protecting him again by running their weaker candidate now. And progressives again go along with this out of fear (instead of switching to a candidate whose platform they agree with/support). The Democrat wing in effect tries (and failed last time) to protect itself with [the fear of] the Republican wing candidate, but ironically instead protects him by running their weaker candidate.

Progressives’ goal in voting right now should be to collapse the Democrat wing (“party”). Progress they want won’t occur until this happens and opens up room for a viable progressive party or candidate. There won’t be a viable progressive party until the Republican wing’s better half (Democrat wing) collapses. This collapse can be initiated by progressives simply voting based on candidate platform rather than on fear. Some darkness (relative to the Democrat lighter shade of darkness) would continue for another four years at least, but progress usually takes sacrifice. Besides, we’ve already had decades of the DRIT tag team serving their donor-investors (the alternating shades of darkness). And decades more of lighter-alternating-with-darker darkness will continue if a short-term darker darkness isn’t tolerated/endured first for another four years. Again, this takes thinking in terms of decades, not in terms of four-year election cycles.

That’s my email signature anyway. I could be wrong.

Anyways, the hike was really nice last weekend. Again, we went to the east side of that mountain in the background: