Hillary Clinton has had extraordinarily bad luck in her opponents.
She was beaten to the Democrat nomination by a Black man. Given her status as presumptive first woman president, his demographic was the only one that could have defeated her for the nomination.
And now Trump. Another surprising candidate. In a normal year, her opponent would have been a bland white male like Jeb. But he met with a political accident.
Even in Australia, we are exposed to this spectacle. I remember watching some of the debate between McCain and Obama and having the feeling that McCain was pulling his punches. Or senile. And Romney seemed to be holding something back.
The sudden unexpected appearance of “wild” candidates like Obama and Trump makes one feel that there is something to be said for the crucial importance of individual personalities in history. Trump at least could hardly have been predicted.
However I suppose one could argue that Trump is simply the figurehead for a groundswell of resentment and concern. It is strange that when America got its populist revolution, it has come from the Right. It also bears out one of my predictions, that the Internet and the new media would ultimately benefit conservatives.
To return to my original point, Hillary has had bad luck in her opponents. Trump dresses like a gentleman but he isn’t one. He is a nightmare for her.
People will say that he doesn’t respect women. I would disagree and say that he does. In some ways he is a product of feminism. He will treat Hillary as ruthlessly as he would treat a man.
Jeb would have known to let the lady win.
The atheist philosopher David Hume on common people:
But is it not possible that there may be a future state, where we shall all account for our sins?
`Tis possible that a piece of coal, put upon the fire, will not burn, but to suppose so is not at all reasonable. It is a most unreasonable fancy that we should exist forever. If it were at all, immortality must be general; the infant who dies before being possessed of reason; the half-wit; the Porter drunk with gin by ten o’clock – all must be preserved and new Universes must be created to contain such vast numbers. ”
The atheist philosopher Nietzsche on common people:
“— Ah! Ever are there but few of those whose hearts have persistent courage and exuberance; and in such remaineth also the spirit patient. The rest, however, are cowardly.
The rest: these are always the great majority, the common-place, the superfluous, the far-too many—those all are cowardly! —”
I have noticed the similarity in the ideas of these two philosophers about how there are too many people and many are not worthy of consideration. Some of this thinking seems to resemble the attitudes of some of the deep environmentalists of our times, with their anti-natalist views and misanthropy. Of course, Thomas Malthus had a hand in this too, but although a lady once reported that he didn’t like to see babies because they represented population growth outstripping available resources, I suspect this was a joke.
Three of my haiku made it into the last paper issue of “paper wasp: a journal of haiku” (Australia):
steady rain …
around my shoulders
the bee moves
into the next
Sunshine Thiry gives voice to some thoughts I have had for a while. This is in relation to the recent honour killing of a female social media identity in Pakistan.
Western feminists have a habit of interfering in a rather ineffectual, largely symbolic way in foreign countries. Typically they will adopt the case of one or a few women, and in doing so, they frequently make things worse.
For example I have written about the case of Pussy Riot in Russia before.
There was another example a few years ago of a woman who had been mutilated by her husband (in Pakistan perhaps). Which was horrible. But it was probably not a good idea to come home from cuckolding him and mock him. In America that might be safe enough; but it was not a smart move in a very conservative Muslim country. In any case, Western feminists adopted her and arranged some care for her.
However, as Sunshine Thiry suggests, encouraging foolish behaviour in traditionalist societies will not ultimately help most individual women.
One does not have to support the mores of some of these extremely socially conservative nations to recognise that folly is still folly. And that following the social customs of one’s own country is usually a good idea. In some parts of the world, the patriarchy still exists and has real teeth.