Business Statist meets Political Statist – Trump and Clinton – Election 2016 Spoiler Conspiracy


Editorial Article by Jim Lantern

11:00 a.m. Pacific Time, Thursday, 6 August 2015

Business Statist meets Political Statist – Trump and Clinton – Election 2016 Spoiler Conspiracy

Related articles…

It’s possible. It’s not an unrealistic possibility. Especially if Trump gains enough supporters and then switches from Republican to Independent, in order to cause the Republican candidate to lose enough votes so that the Democratic candidate wins the election. It’s happened before with Ross Perot costing George H. W. Bush the 1992 election, resulting in Bill Clinton winning. That considered, is Hillary Clinton trying to set up a similar scenario? Could be.

Could history repeat itself in this way? Jeb Bush, Republican candidate. Hillary Clinton, Democratic candidate. Donald Trump, Independent Candidate.


Thanks for participating in the above poll.

To Trump or not to Trump? That is the question.

  • Donald Trump has stated that he would if necessary run as an Independent. It could happen.
  • Trump has been and still is on friendly terms with Bill and Hillary Clinton.
  • Trump has been a Democrat.
  • Trump has supported Liberal positions on issues.

Fact is, Trump has played both sides – Liberal Democrats and Conservative Republicans. As an Independent, unaffiliated voter, who averages out to be a Centrist, I should like that. I favor Liberal Democrats on most but not all personal and social issues, while favoring Conservative Republicans on most but not all economic and government issues – similar to Libertarians but not as extreme. Is Trump really a Centrist? By that I mean does he actually average out to be a Centrist? Perhaps. However, I think it more likely Trump is in it for the money – whichever position gains him the most money. In that way, if so, then Trump could be compared to an arms dealer who sells weapons to both sides of a conflict.

I believe Trump really isn’t Conservative or Liberal. I believe he is a Statist. Not a government or political Statist, but comparable to those as a business Statist – an aristocratic business Statist. I further perceive him to be an upper class blue book social snob with delusions of godhood, who could not possibly give a rats ass for the middle class, and could not care less for the lower class.

I believe Hillary Clinton is a government and political Statist, not a Liberal. I believe she has been an Orwellian kind of Statist at least since her college days. Like a wolf in sheep’s clothing, she is Statist in Liberal clothing. I believe Bill Clinton has been a common Liberal, until recently, and then he became a Statist. I believe Barack Obama has been and is a Statist in Centrist Democrat and Liberal Democrat clothing. Even so, I believe Hillary Clinton is a more extreme Statist than President Obama is.

A Statist in the aristocratic business world making a deal with a Statist in the political government world could become a nightmare on steroids.

Statists want government to have a great deal of control over individuals and society. They support centralized planning, and often doubt whether liberty and freedom of choice are practical options. At the very bottom of the chart, left-authoritarians are usually called socialists, while right-authoritarians are generally called fascists.

Left-Liberals, Democrats, generally embrace freedom of choice in personal matters, but support central decision-making in economics. They want the government to help the disadvantaged in the name of fairness. Leftists tolerate social diversity, but work for what they might describe as “economic equality.” Over the years, most of my friends, co-workers, and employers, have been Liberal Democrats.

Right-Conservatives, Republicans, favor freedom of choice on economic issues, but want official standards in personal matters. They tend to support the free market, but frequently want the government to defend the community from what they see as threats to morality or to the traditional family structure. I was born into a Conservative Republican family in the oil business with wells in Kansas and Oklahoma.

Libertarians support a great deal of liberty and freedom of choice in both personal and economic matters. They believe government’s only purpose is to protect people from coercion and violence. They value individual responsibility, and tolerate economic and social diversity. Some of my friends have been Libertarians.

Centrists favor selective government intervention and emphasize what they commonly describe as “practical solutions” to current problems. They tend to keep an open mind on political issues. Many centrists feel that government serves as a check on excessive liberty. I’m a Centrist. I’m similar to Libertarians, but not as far left as they are and not as far right as they are. I’m Conservative on most but not all economic and government issues. I’m Liberal on most but not all personal and social issues. People “average out” to be Centrists. There is no true third choice for most issues to define a Centrist, who basically must “Agree” or “Disagree” on each issue. “Maybe” is not an acceptable choice. “Maybe” is the usual choice of Moderates. Centrists are not Moderates. Centrists know where they stand on each issue. Many Centrists are registered as Independent voters, like I am, or otherwise are Unaffiliated – not members of any political parties.


The World’s Smallest Political Quiz

Please Take the World’s Smallest Political Quiz at:

Then answer the following poll by selecting your quiz result. The quiz has 5 areas on the political spectrum – Left Liberal, Right Conservative, Libertarian, Statist Big Government, and Centrist. In the poll, I’m also asking for where you placed within the Centrist square, if you scored as a Centrist, for Centrist Left, Centrist Center, or Centrist Right. It does not matter if you are above or below center within the Centrist square, just left or right of center within the Centrist square, or in the center of the Centrist square.

It is possible for a person to give answers opposite of another, and both end up in the Centrist square – one being left of center but still within the Centrist square, and the other being right of center but still within the Centrist square. So two different people can be in total disagreement with each other, but still be classified as Centrists.

Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones. Scene 5…
Anakin Skywalker: I don’t think the system works.
Padmé: How would you have it work?
Anakin Skywalker: We need a system where the politicians sit down
and discuss the problem… agree what’s in the best interest of all people… and then do it.
Padmé: That’s exactly what we do. The trouble is that people don’t always agree.
Anakin Skywalker: Well, then they should be made to.
Padmé: By whom? Who’s going to make them?
Anakin Skywalker: I don’t know. Someone.
Padmé: You?
Anakin Skywalker: Of course not me.
Padmé: But someone.
Anakin Skywalker: Someone wise.
Padmé: Sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me.
Anakin Skywalker: Well, if it works.

Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith…
Padmé: What if the democracy we thought we were serving no longer exists, and the Republic has become the very evil we have been fighting to destroy?

Obama stepping on Constitution

“Successful revolution is big business – make no mistake about that. In a modern, complex, and highly industrialized state, revolution is not accomplished by a handful of conspirators whispering around a guttering candle in a deserted ruin. It requires countless personnel, supplies, modern machinery and modern weapons. And to handle these factors successfully there must be loyalty, secrecy, and superlative organization.” – Excerpt from the story “If This Goes On—” in the novel REVOLT IN 2100 by Robert A. Heinlein.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke, Whig politician and statesman who is often regarded as the father of modern conservatism.


Excerpts from Wikipedia article…

  • “If This Goes On—” is a science fiction short novel by Robert A. Heinlein, first serialized in 1940 in Astounding Science-Fiction and revised and expanded for inclusion in the 1953 collection Revolt in 2100. The novel shows what might happen to Christianity in the United States given mass communications, applied psychology, and a hysterical populace. The novel is part of Heinlein’s Future History series.
  • The story is set in a future theocratic American society, ruled by the latest in a series of fundamentalist Christian “Prophets.” The First Prophet was Nehemiah Scudder, a backwoods preacher turned President (elected in 2012), then dictator (no elections were held in 2016 or later).


The following two paragraphs have been excerpted from the 1986 Baen Book printing of Robert A. Heinlein’s novel titled Revolt in 2100 –from the story titled If This Goes On—:

  • For the first time in my life I was reading things which had not been approved by the Prophet’s censors, and the impact on my mind was devastating. Sometimes I would glance over my shoulder to see who was watching me, frightened in spit of myself. I began to sense faintly that secrecy is the keystone of all tyranny. Not force, but secrecy . . . censorship. When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, “This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know,” the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives. Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything—you can’t conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him.
  • I had trouble at first in admitting the possibility of what I read; I think perhaps of all the things a police state can do to its citizens, distorting history is possibly the most pernicious. For example, I learned for the first time that the United States had not been ruled by a bloodthirsty emissary of Satan before the First Prophet arose in his wrath and cast him out — but had been a community of free men, deciding their own affairs by peaceful consent. I don’t mean that the first republic had been a scriptural paradise, but it hadn’t been anything like what I had learned in school.

“In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” – George Orwell.

“It’s no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense.” – Mark Twain.


As witnesses and reporters of various kinds of U.S. and world events, amateur independent journalists are a kind of modern-day “Watchmen” but without the superhero aspects. “Amateur” means we are not paid professionals. “Independent” means we are not associated with any news agencies.


The use of the term “Watchmen” does not exclude women…


The 2009 movie Watchmen involves alternate history. For example, President Richard Nixon gets elected to a Third Term!

[For any concerns about legal use of this material, read the Legal Notices Page.]

Watchmen Movie Poaster 1

The Times They Are A-Changin’
Bob Dylan lyrics

Come gather ’round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You’ll be drenched to the bone
If your time to you
Is worth savin’
Then you better start swimmin’
Or you’ll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin’.

Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won’t come again
And don’t speak too soon
For the wheel’s still in spin
And there’s no tellin’ who
That it’s namin’
For the loser now
Will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin’.

Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don’t stand in the doorway
Don’t block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There’s a battle outside
And it is ragin’
It’ll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin’.

Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don’t criticize
What you can’t understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is
Rapidly agin’
Please get out of the new one
If you can’t lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin’.

The line it is drawn
The curse it is cast
The slow one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is
Rapidly fadin’
And the first one now
Will later be last
For the times they are a-changin’.

It may be described that my liberal mind is anchored in science fiction and fantasy as a science fiction author, while my conservative mind is anchored in science and reality as a political journalist. I’m very interested in political ideas in science fiction and religious ideas in science fiction. I’m especially interested in alternate history, time paradoxes, and time travel. If we humans can’t learn to accept our differences, then what will happen when we finally do encounter people from another planet – whose differences will truly be alien? Go to war with them? Or accept our differences and engage in peaceful trade? It appears to me there’s more profit in mutual acceptance.

As a science fiction author, within a science fiction novel – Once Upon Another Timeline – I present an idea as part of the story background – not the main subject of the story, for what I refer to as a Merchant Government. It involves the Mercatorian Empire of the Interstar Trading Worlds – as an interstellar empire of merchants engaged in peaceful trade. At the smallest level it would be comparable to a Merchants Association, with small to large businesses having representatives in an organization instead of states having representatives in a normal kind of government. In that way it is a Democracy. Businesses rule the world instead of governments. Individual customers get to vote like the citizens of countries.

IF such a future were to ever be possible, then it would require someone like Donald Trump to set it in motion. It would take several billionaires and major companies to make it happen. It would be the end of government as we’ve known it throughout history.

At the lowest level, the focus is on the basic needs of individuals for day-to-day living. To get food to stay alive, you need a store – a business – to shop at, unless you are a hunter or a farmer. At that basic level, a “government” is not needed. “Government” involvement is not required. “Welfare” would be handled directly by businesses without “government” involvement, like it was with stores issuing credit in the days of the Old West (westward movement of settlers) here in the United States. Further, businesses would provide health care in order to keep customers in good health so they can work to make money to buy the products and services of the businesses.

+ + +

Categories: Business, Calendar Events, Capitalism, Conspiracies, Democracy, Editorial Articles, Entertainment, Federal Government, Food for Thought, Future, Government, Health care, History, News, Political Issues, Political Parties, Politics, Politics in Entertainment, Politics in Science Fiction, Poll, Presidential Candidates, Science Fiction, Social Issues, State Government, TV, U.S. Constitution, U.S. Government, U.S. Voters, United States of America | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Post navigation

Comments are closed.

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: