November 04, 2024
Nasser Kandil
• A strong likelihood exists that America’s deep state – dominated by a network of liberal cultural and political lobbies funded by massive financial corporations – could force a win for Democratic candidate Vice President Kamala Harris, regardless of the outcome at the polls. Such a move could provoke a major internal upheaval in the U.S, one – some say- may even spark an unavoidable civil war, given the intense polarisation surrounding the presidential election. Harris may win without electoral manipulation, yet the deep state might also seek a deal with dealmaker Donald Trump, or remain neutral due to its own internal divisions over the presidential choices. These scenarios are fueled by a turbulent political scene, erratic media predictions, and disillusionment among voters, 60% of whom, according to a recent Ipsos poll, are dissatisfied with their presidential choices, and 75% believe America is on the wrong path.
• This American public discontent is more than mere confusion over limited choices or disappointment in the two-party system; it signifies a deeper truth: The American empire is ageing and entering a stage of decline. Like past empires, after reaching the peak it eventually wanes, with internal disintegration and possibly implosion follows shortly. Not long ago, the Soviet Union experienced a similar collapse, fracturing just over three decades ago. Since then, America, as the world’s sole superpower, has driven globalisation, shifting from a fixed-asset economy to a virtual one. This era has also spawned the illusion of a global governance capable of erasing cultures, religions, and national identities, attempting to control the world through technology, manipulating minds and genetics, challenging natural norms, and challenging human nature by promoting practices like homosexuality and the choice of animalistic identities. Meanwhile, the traditional infrastructure supporting goods, construction, education, and healthcare has decayed under this agenda.
• Globalisation extended to the fields of war and military structures, with corporations leading conflicts, armies losing their spirit, and technology becoming a new deity. Armies turned into professional mercenaries, akin to hired hitmen, and the “zero-casualty” war model emerged, avoiding soldier deployment on the ground. This approach, marked by a reckless management of the world, emboldened states, nations, and peoples who unified around a common goal of protecting their sovereignty and preserving their cultural, national and religious distinctiveness, fighting back in an effort to weaken the project of U.S. hegemony. Russia asserted itself as a military rival to the U.S., China rose as an economic competitor, and Iran, alongside resistance forces, engaged in several wars of attrition against American hegemony. The U.S.’s war in Syria, where it mobilised all the ideologically-aligned forces it could muster, was the arena for the decisive confrontation between the two camps. The U.S, unable to bear the cost of war, mobilised the brutal forces of terrorism to fight in place of its own armies, only to suffer a defeat that foreshadowed the end of its occupation of Afghanistan. This military failure of the world’s most technologically advanced superpower against groups Washington labels as “primitive” signalled a turning point and was followed by wars in Ukraine, Gaza, and Lebanon, each exposing nuances of the limitations of American power. As a result, the alliances once unified around American supremacy are now distancing themselves from U.S. policies and seeking connections with emerging global powers.
• In the midst of America’s decline, Trumpism emerged – a movement represented by an unstable, impulsive figure who captured the frustrations of those disillusioned with the globalist establishment. Since his victory over Hillary Clinton in 2016, and now facing Kamala Harris, Trump’s support has crystallised a deep divide: on one side are elites in politics, finance, media, foreign policy, and intelligence, along with think tanks promoting globalisation and liberalism, which also finds support in major cities marked by consumer culture and among non-white minority groups backing causes like abortion rights and LGBTQ+ issues. On the other side is a growing populist base from small towns, rural areas, industrial sectors, and within real estate, white supremacist circles, and religious conservatives – a heterogeneous coalition united behind Trump’s vision of ‘America First’ over the notion of ‘America: the world hegemon’.
• This is a new America, no longer the post-WWII aspirant to world leadership, but a hybrid nationalism predominantly white and Protestant, rooted in traditional sectors damaged by globalism. Biden’s previous win over Trump is seen as an anomaly and an aberration, and a Harris victory would be another affront to what some view as the “natural order.” Trump, author of ‘The Art of the Deal’, seeks to reshape the deep state, realigning alliances through new deals to replace the old, similar to his claim during his first term to withdraw from foreign conflicts only to retract it regarding withdrawal from Syria.
• Parallel shifts are visible within the occupying entity. Over the past two decades, a “new Israel” has taken shape, moving away from its founders’ secular vision of a “Western outpost in the East” and driven instead by extremist settlers. Just as America’s new spirit is embodied by a power- and wealth-obsessed Trump, “Israel’s” new face is Benjamin Netanyahu, equally driven by ambition and delusions of grandeur. This “new Israel” seems willing to endure long conflicts over what Ben-Gurion once called “the Land of Israel,” spurred in part by the occupation army’s repeated military setbacks. Yet, as America faces internal unravelling, disintegration and the waning of its global influence, so too does “Israel” contend with its own existential dilemmas, haunted by an enduring belief in a “curse”. Thus, the rise of this new version signals impending decline, not revival.
• This “new Israel” no longer aligns with Biden’s vision of Zionism, rejecting globalism in favour of a religiously exclusive Jewish state. Similarly, “new America” finds no place for Kamala Harris and her globalist ideals, instead prioritising a distinctly American identity. Here, the traditional saying “better late than never” has no place; the fitting phrase now is “you’re too late – what’s done is done.”
