Deception, manipulation, and the manufacturing of hysteria around anti-Trump protests

There have been demonstrations across the United States since the day after the November 8th election protesting an impending Trump presidency. I hadn’t initially noticed the ruckus until my daughter, who is a college student at NYU, told me that a glass bottle had been thrown at a group she was marching with from (apparently) a Trump supporter. As any parent can imagine, that definitely caught my attention. I then started looking into the fact that these protests seemed a little too well coordinated and outsized given the surprise upset over Clinton.

A few questions immediately sprung to mind, such as why are these (mainly) young people becoming absolutely hysterical when Trump hasn’t even begun his term and why do they seem genuinely terrified for their lives…having gone from “disappointment” to hysteria literally overnight, particularly given the extremely moderate tone taken by Donald Trump during and after his acceptance speech?

I began wondering who could possibly have something to gain by kicking a cloud of disappointment and frustration into a beehive of chaos and violence. I also started to think about how little it would actually take to reinforce and amplify the narrative that Trump is going to make America some sort of fascist, inbred, Swastika-wearing, confederate-flag waving, 21st century blend of Nazi Germany and the Wild West. It doesn’t appear to be  Hillary Clinton or her campaign involving themselves in such protests, although we now know what they’re capable of (thanks to Wikileaks). This past October, Project Veritas posted an undercover video of DNC/Clinton operatives discussing how to make Trump rallies turn violent and ugly (using, for example, mentally ill “protesters”) and how to commit voter fraud. You can read about it here on CNN’s website, and see the actual video here on YouTube.

So, what on Earth is going on?
I strongly suspect that the recent and increasingly violent protests against a Donald Trump presidency did not start out organic and that they were deliberately orchestrated by billionaire philanthropist George Soros. I am NOT saying that the conviction, fortitude, and integrity of the vast majority of those protesting Trump’s presidency is not genuine.

For the sole purposes of laying out my argument (and evidence), I’ve structured this article along the lines of someone trying to prove that a crime has been committed, which may or may not be the case. Before you read any further, a few things that must be known (because you’re going to try to figure out which “side” I’m on…and who’s paying me to say this). I’m a registered Democrat, and always have been. I was a Bernie Sanders supporter. I don’t like Hillary Clinton and I didn’t vote for her. I also didn’t vote for Donald Trump. I voted for Jill Stein because I felt I had no other choice. No one is paying me to write anything. I do this on my own. Now that we’ve got this out of the way, here’s what I (strongly) think is going on.

If I were prosecuting a case in court, I’d think about means (did the person have the ability to commit the crime), motive (did the person have a reason to commit the crime), opportunity (did the person have a chance to commit the crime), and the record, or past, of the person who potentially committed the crime.

BACKGROUND
Up until this point (because I can’t predict the future), neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton have said a word to quell the violent protests. That’s odd, right, because their silence allows the “thing” to swell and continue to grow and even gives it legitimacy to exist, except that this really shouldn’t be a surprise because both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are so completely beholden to billionaire philanthropist George Soros for his gigantic contributions to them and their party that, I suspect, they will do their best not to dampen what they may think is his rightful “prize” (the anti-Trump protests) given the fact that Clinton didn’t win the presidency. After all, if you dump countless millions into an election, and all you get is a lousy T-shirt, well…

605787_1

Hillary Clinton’s largest long-time backer is George Soros. He’s 86 years old. No one has invested more time and money into the Democratic party and, in particular, a Hillary Clinton presidency than Soros. As much as George Soros has managed to have some modicum of influence and control over world governments, social and economic movements, and public policy (which is a LOT, by any standards), his decades-long cultivation and investment in Hillary Clinton’s political career would have netted him the most power ever. Through Clinton’s campaign manager, John Podesta (who Soros installed as the head of the Center for American Progress) and in an envisioned Hillary Clinton presidency, George Soros would have attained the purest unfettered access and control to a superpower that he has ever, and will ever, have. And I can’t honestly think of anyone who has worked harder and longer for it.

Remember, George Soros is 86 years old. He has spent decades of his life, and billions of his own dollars to remake the world in his own vision. A few things to know here: I actually largely agree with that “vision,” and with his priorities. His methods are less to my liking, but you have to give him credit for out-Machiavelli-ing even Machiavelli.

MEANS, or the ability to carry out the action
The four biggest, earliest, and most impactful organizations behind post election anti-Trump protests are funded, partially or fully, by George Soros. They are:

Organization #1: MoveOn.org – A little useful backstory from FactCheck.org:

MoveOn.org formed in 1998 to oppose the impeachment of President Bill Clinton; it circulated an online petition “Censure President Clinton and Move On to Pressing Issues Facing the Nation.” It was co-founded by Joan Blades and Wes Boyd, a married couple from California. Blades, who later also founded the group Moms Rising, writes a blog for the liberal Huffington Post. Boyd sits on the board of directors for Progressive States Network, a liberal advocacy group on issues including health care, immigration and energy.

MoveOn.org has grown into a major political force — both at the grassroots and national level. It was a 527 committee that took unlimited contributions from major Democratic donors. During the 2004 presidential campaign, MoveOn.org was the seventh-largest 527 committee and spent $21 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Initial donors included billionaire George Soros, a major donor to liberal causes, who spent millions in 2004 trying unsuccessfully to defeat President Bush.

MoveOn.org closed its 527 committee in 2008. It now operates a federal political action committee, which must disclose its donors and cannot accept more than $5,000 from any single source. MoveOn.org PAC raised and spent $38 million in 2008. It had spent $21 million during the 2010 campaign cycle, as of August. The PAC funds Internet and TV ads, raises money for liberal candidates and causes, and finances grassroots campaigns.

The group also created a 501(c)(4) called MoveOn.org Civic Action in 2001 for its advocacy work, including online petitions and e-mail campaigns. In fiscal year 2007, the most recent available, MoveOn.org Civic Action reported spending nearly $700,000.

MoveOn.orgwhich also “started” Avaaz (global non profit) is key in the anti-Trump protests. They issued a press release the day after the presidential election (I’ve highlighted the part meant to terrify recipients):

moveon-press-release-highlighted


In a 2007 essay (which I will include later in this post) titled, “What I Didn’t Know: Open Society Reconsidered,” George Soros wrote:

“What can a responsible media and a committed educated elite do to protect the public from deliberate deception? The public needs to be inoculated against the various techniques of deception by being made aware of them. The most effective techniques operate at the subconscious level. When emotions can be aroused by methods that bypass consciousness, the public is left largely defenseless.’

In that same essay, Soros outlines seven deceptive rhetorical techniques which had been used against him by the American far right. I’m now left to think that he’s decided to employ those very same tactics via MoveOn.org, etc., deliberately widening the rift between liberals and conservatives, inciting protesters to violence in some sort of outsized hysterical response to Trump’s election victory. Those 7 strategies, as outlined by Soros, involved:

  1. Conflating facts and opinions
  2. Using guilt by association
  3. Insinuating conspiracy theories
  4. Mixing sources
  5. Transference of motives and techniques
  6. False labeling
  7. False patriotism

All 7 tactics have been employed by Soros’ MoveOn.org (it should have said “Reflections on the 2016 Election,” by the way, and they corrected it on their website as of today) in this web page, which I had to acquire through an archiving website:

november-10th-post-%22reflections-%22_page_1


Here’s a similar call to action on their website (again, it had been archived):

nov-9-from-archive-is-moveon-org-democracy-in-action_page_1


Organization #2: Answer Coalition  is much, much more difficult to draw a straight line (from them to George Soros), but that’s the way these things are structured, and why they “work,” unfortunately. For the Answer Coalition, I’d direct readers to a PowerPoint description here, an article in the Daily Caller about them here, and an article on a website called MAGAfeed, which can be read here.

There is no easy way to lay this out for readers. I found a connection by really digging around different websites. If you want to see how I did it, you can follow in my footsteps by:

a) going to the Answer Coalition website, and then to a tab on their website to Make a Donation (people always provide a “tell” when it comes to money);
b) this sent me to the Progress Unity Fund, and then I searched thru their Privacy Policy;
c) donations get routed through Democracy Engine, LLC. See who is advocating Democracy Engine? People for the American Way and others connected to Soros and the Open Society:

pfwa-screenshot

If you go to the Wikipedia page for People for the American Way and scroll down to funding, BOOM – Soros and the Open Society Foundation.

Organization #3: Democracy Spring, which you can read about here (and be sure to watch the video at the end of this article) began protests against Trump in April 2016, is funded by Soros (via Avaaz, Open Society, Demos, Energy Action Coalition, Institute for Policy Studies, and MoveOn.org with a partial list of their support accessible here).

Organization #4: Black Lives Matter, who, I don’t believe, sent out the early calls-to-action to protest, however, they’ve been significantly present, active, and enjoined with most, if not all, anti-Trump demonstrations.

blm-tweet

Black Lives Matter is an organization I really like, by the way. But I have to say that the group is “popping up” alongside virtually every anti-Trump rally across America.

One thing I do know is that Black Lives Matter is either largely, or fully-funded by George Soros. How do we know that? From Soros’ own documents. There are thousands of them which have appeared on DCLeaks, but the primary document pertaining to Black Lives Matter can be read here and is also in the iFrame (which I’ve marked up) below:

..
There are several other dodgy elements to the protests which may or may not be verifiable. For example, there are many reports of people being recruited and paid to protest and agitate, as seen in the Craigslist ad below. In fact, there have been consistent, and persistent, reports that paid protestors and agitators are present in the anti-Trump demonstrations. This does NOT mean that, as someone claimed I was implying, that all the protestors were paid/bused in. Of course not. That would be both a ridiculous statement and a careless assumption.

craigslist-screenshot-magafeed


MOTIVE: Why would George Soros want to incite riots and protests?
People have to appreciate the fact that George Soros threw everything he had at getting Hillary Clinton elected president. By virtually every indicator, it should have worked, but didn’t. As an incredibly flawed candidate who was deemed dishonest and untrustworthy by most voters, she failed, bringing George Soros’ well-laid plans down with her. I don’t mean this in a diabolical way. As you can imagine, a lot of hopes and dreams presumably crashed and burned when Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, etc., flamed out early in the presidential election.

But for George Soros, there probably isn’t going to be another clear path or candidate the next time around. There’s no one in the shadows, waiting for 2020 to run for president who could, or would, give Soros the type of control and power he’d have had with another Clinton in the White House. In 2020, Soros would be 90 years old, so there’s that, too. By the way, this is why Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump were deemed Public Enemy Numbers 1 & 2 by the establishment. They weren’t bought and paid for, thus, under the control, of seemingly any one or any special interest. Time will tell how things go down for Donald Trump over the next four years.

Soros views America as the problem in the world which is also something I don’t entirely disagree with him about; however, if we have to be torn down completely in order to be fixed, I’d prefer that those doing the “barn burning” knew who was pulling their strings. In other words, this, for me, presents a fork in the road where I diverge from Soros. I don’t appreciate being lied to, or deceived.

OPPORTUNITY, or why George Soros has to up his game, now or never
With the unexpected loss by Hillary Clinton in this year’s presidential race, and in keeping with his life’s work, my thinking is that Soros had the opportunity to ramp up and accelerate efforts at changing America’s (flawed) political, social, and economic landscape. Keep in mind that he’s run out of time to affect future US presidential elections.

Here we meld “opportunity” with (acknowledged) past activities to see a clearcut path to attempting to “shock” America into violent and abrupt paradigm shifts. In looking at the hacked Open Society Foundation document (in the iFrame above related to Black Lives Matter), unvarnished linkage between Freddie Gray’s violent death in Baltimore and the far too tempting opportunity to amplify and accelerate civil unrest couldn’t be more clearly laid out (to read this directly from the source, click this link and go to page 17):

“The killing of Freddie Gray in April helped spawn weeks of peaceful protests by Baltimore residents and allies from the #BlackLivesMatter movement that were temporarily interrupted by a period of unrest that lasted less than 48 hours and resulted in some injuries and millions of dollars in property damage to neighborhood businesses. While many lamented the damage done, the overwhelming sentiment is that the uprising has catalyzed a paradigm shift in Baltimore that offers opportunities for major justice reforms.

In particular, recent events offer a unique opportunity to accelerate the dismantling of structural inequality generated and maintained by local law enforcement and to engage residents who have historically been disenfranchised in Baltimore City in shaping and monitoring reform. Building on our existing networks and programs, OSI-Baltimore will focus investments on: 1) creating a culture of accountability for policing in Baltimore, recognizing the pervasive racism, disrespect and lawlessness that gave rise to recent events; and 2) building the capacity of activists in Baltimore to demand and achieve immediate and long-term reforms.”

By directing a common message and sense of panic and then amplifying that same message from a vast expanse of similarly funded and yet dissimilarly sounding organizations and groups, the appearance of a mass movement is achieved, and takes off from there with little (necessary) guidance.

In the 2016 hack of Soros’ Open Society Foundation documents by DCLeaks, and, in particular a 2011 internal Open Society Foundation memo concerning islamophobia and extreme polarization in the United States (which can be accessed directly here), which I have highlighted and marked up in the iFrame below, we can see amazingly accurate and prescient assessments of America which now seem to have been acted upon. In fact, you will see that I’ve put a red H where, in my opinion, there are particularly hypocritical passages.

Included within that hacked internal Open Society Foundation memo (above) is an Epilogue to a conference paper written by George Soros himself (it’s 3 pages into the memo in the iFrame above). I highly, highly recommend reading through, or at least skimming, his essay, which is (for me) inspired and brilliant. If it’s too small to read, click on the “expand” symbol on the bottom right of its border.

It may surprise readers to hear that I have incredible respect for Soros, for what he’s been through, for his intellect, and for many, if not all, of the issues he stands for; however, given the facts, as we now know them (thanks in particular to Wikileaks), we see that Hillary Clinton, the horribly and fatally flawed presidential candidate, and her team, led by Soros’ own John Podesta, are what have led us to the Trump presidency. It’s not so much that Trump won, as Hillary Clinton LOST, even after Podesta et al, with the DNC’s help, went to insane lengths to destroy Bernie Sanders’ campaign.

George Soros clearly understands how to take a brief event in time, and make an actual movement out of it.  He is an incredibly complex and, good or bad, an utterly ruthless man when it comes to his goals. I could write a book about this (but I won’t). If I had to summarize “him” briefly, I would say that he has his eye on a very big, entirely “macro” target and will use, trample, cultivate, and/or destroy, anyone and anything in pursuit of that end.  A good example of Soros’ character and perseverance can be seen here, on MakaAngola’s website in an article called “Isabel dos Santos Campaign, her father, George Soros and Me” written by Rafael Marques de Morais. And if you want a real example of just how far George Soros will go, how much he’ll put at stake (in this case, it’s more what he may have lost in reputation because of media misrepresentation of his actions) for results, look into Cobalt International Energy and Soros. No matter what you think he was doing, or why he’d just lose money like that, you’ll probably be wrong. For me, Cobalt and all the twists and turns involved there summarize how indefatigable Soros is.

If Soros can’t do some thing himself, he will identify an opportunity to make it happen and when he sees that opportunity, he’s going to leverage and and support it (financially), which is admirable, but the question of outright media manipulation, high levels of lying and deceit, and an utter lack of transparency discussed and criticized throughout the Open Society Foundation memo (and in Soros’ own Epilogue) are now feeling more like a “game plan.” Surely the irony cannot be lost on George Soros

PAST activities which might portend the future
Here I will paste in a lengthy summary of suspected past political interventions, dubbed “Colour Revolutions,” listed on a website called Discover the Networks. You can (and I suggest you do) read their summary of Soros’ life here. I wouldn’t assume that it’s entirely correct, but it provides some context for where he’s coming from and why he is passionate about the problems and injustices he sees in the world:

“By no means was this the first time that Soros had aimed to engineer the fall of a government which he deemed oppressive. On several previous occasions, he had used his extraordinary wealth to bankroll popular movements seeking to undermine communist and authoritarian regimes in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Specifically, Soros had funded the training, organization and mobilization of many millions of demonstrators who took part in a series of bloodless political revolutions—commonly known as “velvet revolutions” or “color revolutions”—that ultimately brought down governments in those regions. Typically, these mobilizations consisted of massive street rallies (sometimes with hundreds of thousands of participants) and carefully coordinated acts of civil disobedience such as sit-ins and general strikes. In several instances, such Soros-funded protesters challenged the results of popular elections and accused incumbent leaders of election fraud—charges which were then echoed by Soros-funded exit pollsters and Soros-funded media outlets, thereby greatly amplifying the effect of the accusations. A brief survey of Soros’s most noteworthy foreign interventions will be useful at this point.

Soros helped bankroll “Charter 77,” a 1976 document demanding that the Czech government recognize some basic human rights—most notably the freedom to express religious beliefs or political opinions without fear of retributive discrimination—that were already guaranteed by the nation’s constitution. This Charter and the political movement that grew from it ultimately culminated in the velvet revolution that brought down Czechoslovakia’s Communist regime in late 1989.

Soros funding played a critical role in promoting other upheavals in the former Soviet bloc as well. “My foundations,” boasts Soros, “contributed to Democratic regime change in Slovakia in 1998, Croatia in 1999, and Yugoslavia in 2000, mobilizing civil society to get rid of Vladimir Meciar, Franjo Tudjman, and Slobodan Milosevic, respectively.”

Meciar, for his part, was a hardline nationalist whose authoritarian government—characterized by demagoguery, corruption, and hostility toward the Hungarian minority—brought instability and isolation to Slovakia in the mid-1990s. Croatian president Tudjman was likewise an autocrat infamous for his brutality, extreme nationalism, indifference to civil rights, and manipulation of electoral processes. And Milosevic, who served as president of Serbia and Yugoslavia in the 1990s, was an infamous architect of military aggression, war crimes, and ethnic cleansing. British journalist Neil Clark reports that from 1991 to 2000, Soros and his Open Society Foundations methodically laid the groundwork for the movement that ultimately led to Milosevic’s resignation, “channel[ing] more than $100m to the coffers of the anti-Milosevic opposition, funding political parties, publishing houses and ‘independent’ media…” In a 1996 speech, Croatian President Franjo Tudjman offered a profound insight into how Soros typically injected his influence into the political workings of a given nation by patiently and systematically infiltrating strategic organizations and governmental agencies:

“[Soros and his allies] have spread their tentacles throughout the whole of our society. Soros … had approval to … gather and distribute humanitarian aid.… However, we … allowed them to do almost whatever they wanted.… They have involved in their network … people of all ages and classes … trying to win them over by financial aid.… [Their aim is] control of all spheres of life … setting up a state within a state.…”

Soros also funded Soviet Georgia’s “Rose Revolution,” a popular movement that forced Georgian president Eduard Shevardnadze to resign in November 2003. According to Canada’s Globe and Mail, in February of that year Soros “began laying the brick work for the toppling” of Shevardnadze. “That month, funds from his Open Society Foundations sent a … [Georgian] activist … to Serbia to meet with members of the [resistance] movement and learn how they used street demonstrations to topple dictator Slobodan Milosevic.” That summer, Soros brought some of those Serbian activists to Georgia to train student activists there. Meanwhile, a Soros-funded television station aired weekly broadcasts of the documentary Bringing Down a Dictator, which presented a step-by-step account of the overthrow of Milosevic and played a crucial role in training Georgian insurgents. In the autumn months, Soros spent some $42 million preparing the overthrow movement to mobilize. Then, in mid-November, large-scale anti-government demonstrations spread like wildfire in most of Georgia’s major cities. Shevardnadze, able to read the proverbial writing on the wall, resigned within a matter of days. Soros later told the Los Angeles Times, “I’m delighted by what happened in Georgia, and I take great pride in having contributed to it.” In November 2003, the editor of an English-language daily based in Georgia said, “It’s generally accepted public opinion here that Mr. Soros is the person who planned Shevardnadze’s overthrow.” Notably, some people who worked for Soros’ organizations—including two of the Open Society Georgia Foundation’s former executive directors—later assumed influential positions in the new Georgian government.

Soros thereafter would go on to fund the “Orange Revolution,” a series of protests and political events that took place in Ukraine from late November 2004 to January 2005, ultimately forcing Moscow’s favored candidate, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, to lose a controversial and hotly contested presidential election. Also in early 2005, Soros helped finance the “Tulip Revolution”—a massive protest movement that led to the overthrow of President Askar Akayev and his government in the Central Asian republic of Kyrgyzstan.”

IN CONCLUSION
As of this writing, despite an escalation in the acts of violence, fear-mongering, and extreme polarization caused almost entirely by the anti-Trump protests, neither Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton have made any attempt to quell the momentum of events (both Obama and Clinton were heavily funded by George Soros).

I want readers to know that I don’t dislike George Soros or the Open Society Foundation. I, for one, am mostly glad they’re “there.” And by “there,” I mean funding virtually every left-leaning organization in America because without that effort at opposing Koch brothers and other right-wing funding sources, things would probably be a lot worse for the vast majority of people. I applied for a grant with the Open Society Foundation at the end of 2014. Little did I know that my advocacy of a Bernie Sanders presidential bid probably threw me out of the running; however, I am very grateful that during that same time, I began to learn about the situation in Angola (because of the work of the Open Society Foundation). Before then, I knew literally nothing about Angola or the efforts by OSF to reveal secret payments by extractive industries (such as the fossil fuel industry) to corrupt governments. Since then, I’ve been able to connect and work with some wonderful people in Angola, and for that, I will be eternally grateful.

Additionally, the fact that Black Lives Matter and so many other groups receive funding from Soros doesn’t, and shouldn’t, take anything away from their good work. I suspect that more will be coming out about a connection between George Soros and BLM in coming months because of a lawsuit filed trying to link the two to a policeman’s death in Dallas.

People are being seriously traumatized and whipped into paralyzing fear because of these protests. This is not making anything better, and I strongly believe that the public deserves to know more about what’s going on behind the scenes, and then make decisions about how to proceed based on that knowledge. People have been, and will be, hurt by actions which I think were deliberately set into motion to inflame racism, xenophobia, and other societal ills to take advantage of a crisis in American politics and uncertainty in order to “break down the system.” I don’t entirely disagree with dismantling what’s left of the corporatocracy that the United States has become; however, those left to do the actual “breaking” should be properly informed. I find the Open Society Foundation’s concerns about extreme polarization in America keenly ironic given the fact that they may very well be exploiting, and potentially causing harm, to the very people they advocate for.

I wasn’t sure how, or even what, to write regarding the anti-Trump protests. Surely, by criticizing the primary funding arm of liberal think tanks and organizations in America I am sealing my fate to not ever receive funding for my writing, but I couldn’t shake that icky feeling that by NOT saying anything, I was complicit with deception.

A few days ago, I shared my uncertainty about whether or not I should write about suspicions regarding the anti-Trump protests with one of my readers, whose opinion I highly respect. His observations led me to believe that I had no choice but to speak up and at least get more information “out.”

With his permission, I’ve excerpted some of his message to me:

“The idea of co-opting public sentiment, especially on an issue such as this…is very distasteful to me. It also delegitimizes any current and future protests since the establishment can easily dismiss them as, “just another Soros funded protest.”

Overall this just increases the polarization of this country – if that’s even possible and distracts from the real issues at hand – DAPL, drone murders, the continued release of emails from Wikileaks, etc.

It also provides cover for President-elect Trump as he continues to make epically atrocious appointments to his transition team and recommendations for positions in his Administration.

Unfortunately, when someone tries to “engineer” a movement – even with the best of intentions without a mandate from the masses and without transparency, it is disingenuous at best, and dangerous at worst. Leaders are [then] appointed, rather than rising up – demands are static and preordained and are less likely to change and evolve as needed…”

I’ve written, re-written, started over from scratch, and torn apart this post too many times to count. At this point, if I don’t publish it, it will be too late. If I’ve been unclear, or my argument has been uncompelling in any way, I hope (and expect) that you, the reader, will let me know if I’ve left any key information out. The maze and web of connections involved here is absolutely impossible to “boil down” into an easy narrative. I tried very hard to be balanced and I also tried to cite original (or as close as I could get) sources so that readers can draw their own conclusions. Oddly enough, a reader recently sent me a Glenn Beck documentary (several episodes of his old show on Fox) that spent nearly two hours going through the labyrinth of networks and organizations funded by George Soros. The documentary is maybe 6 or 7 years old, which is a good thing, because it offers invaluable perspective and allows us to view what may be a grand plan within the context of the current moment. It can be viewed here, and I have to admit, it’s pretty good. I’ve never watched or listened to Glenn Beck, so it was interesting.

There’s a big difference between fear and anxiety. Anxiety is a vague apprehension, not really directed at one single “thing.” It’s a normal part of being human. Fear is entirely different. Fear has “teeth,” and a name, and a face. People might be anxious about driving in a snow storm because of a myriad of things that might go wrong. If they’re driving in that same bad weather and they see a gauge on their car dashboard saying their tire is  going flat, fear of a flat tire (and being stuck in the cold) is real, and palpable. It’s entirely normal to feel anxiety about a potentially big change in American politics. To have that anxiety funneled into very specific and concrete fears, and then, like a record that keeps skipping, to have them repeated and amplified into a mass hysteria serves NO REAL PURPOSE. It only makes things worse.

In the end, people should absolutely protest against Donald Trump if they wish to do so. It is a constitutional right and is protected by the law. I’d just ask people to think about who, or what, is trying to form their understanding and grasp of the situation. If they are led to a place of irrational fear and/or hatred, turn away from it. If what they’re feeling is absolutely appropriate apprehension about a potentially big change in America, then, by all means, lean into it, and learn a little more about yourself in the process.

One of my favorite books is (don’t laugh!) “Existentialism for Dummies.” I’ll conclude with a paragraph in that book related to fear vs. anxiety:

“Remember: As an existential mood, anxiety reveals and discloses insights about what you are as an existing entity. So anxiety reveals insights into what it means to be the kind of being who must, to exist, be connected to a world in a participatory way. As a result, because anxiety is focused at your existence on this very deep level, it reveals fundamental insights about the way in which you and the world are related. So anxiety is aimed at the big picture, and fear is focused on smaller things within the picture.”

 

 

Further Reading
“Imperialist pimps of militarism, protectors of the oligarchy, trusted facilitators of war, Part II,” (about Soros’ Avaaz non-profit, which was “started” by MoveOn.org, The Art of Annihilation website, September 24, 2012;
“Introducing George Soros,” Discover the Networks;
Soros funding protests via Moveon.org;
Center for American Progress Wikipedia page;
MoveOn.org Wikipedia page;
“Center for American Progress,” Left Exposed website, July 2015.