The US presidential election

The horrendous events of 9/11 catalysed the ideas in Breaking the Code of History (BTCH) and the Five Stages of Empire Model interpreted 9/11 as the beginning of the decline of the American Empire.

Since then, we have seen the disasterous interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan that have sapped America's will to militarily intercede in the global affairs. We have seen the two-term office of Obama that, although welcomed with great expectations by the majority, has conformed perfectly to the Five stages of Empire Model; i.e. that during decline, due to a demographic reversal in relative size and influence, the pattern of leadership changes. The old underclass ascends to power, but inevitably, such leadership focuses on internal issues and neglects the foreign policy required to maintain the empire’s influence.

It is a sad reality that the only way a global empire enters into decline is through internal conflict that tears the empire apart, rather than through external challenge.

In Western democracies, whatever names we call the various political parties, there are the two distinct poles of wealth/power creation and wealth/power distribution. When a system is expanding the wealth creation pole dominates the process; at the top of the power curve, the process becomes more even in its election, whilst in decline the system shifts to wealth/power distribution politics.

One of our key observations about leadership and the cycle of Empires is that the system manifests certain types of leadership at certain points on its cycle. In ascension the relatively open political structure allows genuinely gifted leaders to rise to office. However in decline the rigid political systems filter out the very profile of leadership it needs to change its course for the better. The fact that America's two candidates are both so ill-suited to the office of President is a sad entitlement on the state of its political system. Hillary, for her historic ineffectiveness, dishonesty and criminal activity with respect to her emails. Trump, due to his random, ill-informed and myopic view of the world that is not only alarming but unfit for political office. The choice between two bad candidates and the minimalistic policy content of the public debates signify another confirmation of America's current and future decline in global power.

After two terms of Obama’s wealth/power distribution politics, our prediction was for the Republican candidate to become President in November 2016. However, Trump has managed to diminish what should have been a relatively certain outcome and, in the process, to destroy the image of the Republican Party and to some degree, the whole presidential image. By making the Republican Party so unelectable, Trump has removed the option of wealth creation policies for America. Although his slogan is "Make America great again", he has by his actions made it weaker by failing to offer a realistic alternative to both Clinton and political establishment.

Trump's last gambit is the people's card, played by separating himself from the Republican Party in the hope that he will benefit from the same people's revolution that generated the Brexit vote in the UK. However, in this case, America is in a different phase of the cycle and Trump has managed to alienate a large swath of the population with his extreme views, so he is now unlikely to win.

The consequential election of Clinton who to the majority will appear to be the least worse choice, will sadly only guarantee the decline of America  and enlarge the risk of the military challenges from Russia and China that carry a very high threat of future global conflict. What a sad day for the Western world November 8th will be and with no doubt the founding fathers are writhing in their graves.

Comments

Permalink

Hi David. I have been following you for quite some time and find your predictions very interesting. You were correct with Brexit when everybody thought we were going to remain. After your latest newsletter, I would like to ask you if there is a possibility that the people will elect Trump regardless of being aliened by his republican party. If you look at the football stadiums that are filled up in Donald trumps rallies and compare that with Hillary there is a big difference as i understand. Also When Donald says in his rallies that this is a 'movement' never seen before that may also indicate that the people do not care that he has alienated himself because his message is so strong. And did you not think that Donald exposed Hillary in the last debate? Thank you.