"As usurpation is the exercise of power which another hath a right to, so tyranny is the exercise of power beyond right, which nobody can have a right to; and this is making use of the power any one has in his hands, not for the good of those who are under it, but for his own private, separate advantage. When the governor, however, entitled, makes not the law, but his will, the rule, and his commands and actions are not directed to the preservation of the properties of his people, but the satisfaction of his own ambition, revenge, covetousness, or any other irregular passion."

- John Locke

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire

With the upcoming culmination of the-- at best-- farcical presidential election, I continue to find myself wondering: What would Henry David Thoreau say? I fear, if exposed to such a malicious modern era, he very well may have drowned himself in Walden pond. It would appear as though the intellectual elite of this nation has completely abandoned the notion of transcendentalism... what a pity. The populace has rejected communal living for materialistic endeavors. We have sidelined the significance of divinity, pervading nature, and humanity, for one's own hedonistic pursuits. Why has 'our' hunger not yet been satiated? As summarized by Charlie Chaplin in The Great Dictator (1940), "Greed has poisoned men's souls, has barricaded the world with hate, has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed. We have developed speed but we have shut ourselves in. Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge has made us cynical, our cleverness hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery, we need humanity. More than cleverness, we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost." Relevant as ever, this 76-year-old speech still raises the hairs on the backs of the arms of 'the millennial' generation.

Perhaps there is no 'good' solution for our current political situation-- perhaps fear, and corruption, have won (and molded) this nationalistic game of musical chairs. This two party system has done our nation a great disservice, I will admit. It's the exact disastrous end that George Washington warned us of, but with that being said, it is our current political system and it will not evaporate overnight-- at least not peacefully. With all of this, the American voting populace has a choice between two likely presidential candidates this election cycle: Hillary Clinton, or Donald Trump. You can vote third party, no malice in voting with one's conscious, but the most recent polls show such votes-- at this point-- to be virtually ineffective. Neither Gary Johnson, or Jill Stein, or even Vermin Supreme, have the numbers to qualify for the final debate. Sigh. I would love to witness a man with a boot on his head screaming at either Clinton or Trump, on stage for all the world to see... but maybe our situation has already become too reminiscent of Idiocracy (2006). Maybe choosing any mainstream candidate is fault worthy, but when examining this from a historically inclined perspective one can easily observe the 'more dangerous' of the two 'evils'.

How far has America fallen, that so many would entrust the country's nuclear arms with a reality TV star; a man who cannot even demonstrate cordiality during a presidential debate, let alone a Twitter post. Only one candidate relentlessly capitalizes on the fear associated with our current geopolitical climate. Only one candidate has adopted 'othering' as a platform. Only one candidate has used his platform to perpetuate propaganda-like, fact-less, notions which play upon the ignorance of an entire following. Only one candidate uses cronies to suggest that even fact checkers 'have an agenda'. Only one candidate has suggested repealing the freedom of the press. Only one candidate has spoken highly of totalitarian leaders while using the next breath to slander women, people of color, disabled individuals, immigrants, and members of our Armed Services. Only one candidate successfully dodged the draft using five separate deferments. Only one candidate decries failing infrastructure while simultaneously boastfully admitted to using loopholes to avoid paying the very taxes which would contribute to such projects. That candidate is none other than Republican nominee Donald J. Trump. In the following passages, I will attempt to explain why it would be so utterly disastrous to entrust this individual as the executive leader of 'the free world'.

(image: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-the...)

1. Racism and Xenophobia, Once Again, Have a Popular Platform.

Back in February, David Duke (white nationalist and former KKK grand wizard) proclaimed to his followers that voting against Donald Trump would be a "treason to your heritage”. In April, during an extensive interview, the "imperial wizard" of the Rebel Brigade Knights of the Ku Klux Klan told a reporter from WWBT-- a Richmond, Virginia-based news source-- that he, along with many other KKK members supported Trump's presidential endeavors. I think it may be fair to say that if you find yourself to be on the side of the KKK, you may be on the 'wrong' side.

According to the Washington Post, "In October 1973, the Justice Department filed a civil rights case that accused the Trump firm, whose complexes contained 14,000 apartments, of violating the Fair Housing Act of 1968". The Trump family chose defense attorney, and once top aide to Senator Joseph McCarthy-- during his notorious attempt at 'exposing,' and black-balling alleged Communists from positions of power-- Roy Cohn. The legal battle lasted about 20 months, and on June 10, 1975, the two parties signed an agreement forbidding the Trumps from "discriminating against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling”.

Trump has called Mexican immigrants criminals, and rapists, and has gone so far as to consider Judge Gonzalo Curiel's heritage-- he was born in Indiana to Mexican immigrants-- "a conflict of interest". Trump has proposed a ban on immigration from predominantly Islamic states and has completely neglected to address the humanitarian crisis in Syria. More recently, one of his sons referred to refugees as 'poisoned skittles'. This, ladies and gentlemen, is the embodiment of authoritarian populism-- taking the fear and frustration of a population and pointing one's finger at the perceived 'other'. This dehumanizing rhetoric and hate-mongering have, unfortunately, bred consequences within the 'real world'.

Inflammatory political rhetoric targeting a specific group can, most definitely, serve as a catalyst to violent action. Prior to the September 11, 2001, attacks, annual hate crimes recorded against Muslim Americans were between 20 and 30. By 2014 that number had increased to over 100 annual hate crimes. 2015, the year Trump entered the presidential race, showed a significant increase-- December alone hosted 53 separate instances of hate crimes against Muslim Americans. The Trump campaign has capitalized on the fear inspired by the attacks in Paris, and San Bernardino, in November and December of 2015; just following the California attack Trump proposed his ban on Muslim immigration. According to a Slate interview with Engy Abdelkader, a lawyer and author of the report outlining the increase of violence against Muslim Americans, "there were 174 reported incidents [of hate crimes against Muslim Americans] in 2015, including 12 murders". As previously stated, a significant platform within the Trump campaign has been one of 'othering'. For all of my fellow genocide/global conflict enthusiasts, the first step in the "Ten Stages of Genocide" (established by Gregory Stanton) is Classification. "All cultures have categories to distinguish people into 'us and them' by ethnicity, race, religion, or nationality...". But when nations become too divided, that is when that state is at notable risk of hosting some kind of atrocity, or genocide. Every modern global atrocity has started with something, as seemingly innocent as, inflammatory speech targeting a specific group. Hate speech is inherently dangerous, and when such speech is being endorsed by a person in a position of power-- such as the Republican presidential nominee-- it can be considered a very significant 'red flag'.

2. Trump's Embarrassing Lack of Foreign Policy Expertise.

From repeatedly misstating portions of the Iran Deal, to not fully understanding what it means to be a member of NATO, Trump never fails to show his lack of knowledge in the area of Foreign Policy. Trump has claimed he will 'bomb the hell out of' oil fields controlled by ISIS in Iraq, while ISIS controls the largest number of oil fields in Syria. He has also recently claimed that Assad, and Russia, are killing ISIS in Syria while these powers are more frequently targeting rebel-held or civilian-populated regions of Aleppo, Deir ez-Zor, and Raqqa. Trump loves to discuss the tragedy in Benghazi, but I would love to see him forced to point out Libya on a blank map. He has also perpetuated exaggerated information regarding the Egyptian population's desire to break their peace treaty with Israel.

With all of this taken into account, how can one expect such a man to be intelligent-- or realistic-- enough to deal with our current geopolitical situation? How can one expect such a man to be taken seriously by other world leaders, whether they be friends or foes? When Trump was questioned by Chuck Todd about who he would turn to for foreign policy advise he said, "Well I really watch the shows. You really see a lot of great, you know, when you watch your show and all of the other shows, and you have the generals and you have certain people that you like...". THIS IS NOT A DRILL PEOPLE, THIS IS IDIOCY INCARNATE. Trump then went on the claim advisers with whom he had never actually discussed military policy. This is not the individual you want in the Oval Office.

3. Business Expertise, or Master of the Con?

In a viral Facebook post authored by Robert Reich, the economist and political commentator explained that if Donald Trump had simply invested the $200 million he was worth-- mostly given to him by his father-- in 1976 "into an index fund and reinvested the dividends," he would be worth close to $12 billion today, as opposed to $4.5 billion he claims to be worth. He went on to point out that in New York state alone Donald Trump had received about $850 million in tax subsidies. At the end of his post-Reich explained that Trump was not some savvy business man, but really, a well-disguised con man. He worked the system to keep the fortune his family had secured, while he simultaneously refused to pay a significant number of the people who had done work for him or his business.

Andrew Tesoro, the owner of a small architecture firm, was cheated by Trump out of thousands of dollars in 2006 after the completion of a clubhouse located at the Trump National Golf Club in Briarcliff Manor, NY. In an interview with Forbes, Tesoro explains that he was not the only one 'shorted' following the finalization of the clubhouse. "At the time I could see that the carpenters, the tile guy, the landscape consultant, the mechanical engineering consultant, other vendors, and tradespeople were all subjected to an after-the-fact renegotiation challenge. I didn’t take it personally". Tesoro is not alone, according to USA Today, "...analysis found he [Trump] has been involved in more than 3,500 lawsuits over the past three decades — and a large number of those involve ordinary Americans... who say Trump or his companies have refused to pay them".

In fitting form, John Oliver explains that nobody really knows how much Donald Trump is worth.

In closing I will quote an excerpt from Robert Kagan's Washington Post article from May 18th:

"Republican politicians marvel at how he [Trump] has “tapped into” a hitherto unknown swath of the voting public. But what he has tapped into is what the founders most feared when they established the democratic republic: the popular passions unleashed, the “mobocracy.” Conservatives have been warning for decades about government suffocating liberty. But here is the other threat to liberty that Alexis de Tocqueville and the ancient philosophers warned about: that the people in a democracy, excited, angry and unconstrained, might run roughshod over even the institutions created to preserve their freedoms. As Alexander Hamilton watched the French Revolution unfold, he feared in America what he saw play out in France — that the unleashing of popular passions would lead not to greater democracy but to the arrival of a tyrant, riding to power on the shoulders of the people".

Sources:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-is-ho...

http://classicliberal.tripod.com/locke/2treat11.ht...

http://duluthreader.com/articles/2012/07/06/687_an...

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/MovieSpeeches/movi...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/02/us/politics/dona...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-the...

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/david-duke-t...

http://www.snopes.com/2016/05/02/klan-leader-endor...

http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-keeps-up-...

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/05/09/...

https://genocideeducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2...

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/donald-trump...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestreptalks/2016/0...

http://usuncut.com/politics/robert-reich-how-to-sc...