18:02 GMT +317 January 2017
Live
    The day breaks behind the White House in Washington,DC

    Lenin Comes to the White House

    © AFP 2016/ PAUL J. RICHARDS
    Columnists
    Get short URL
    Pepe Escobar
    2395314816

    Donald Trump, commenting on the passing of Fidel Castro, branded him a mere “dictator”. Whatever the long-lasting results (and mistakes) of the Cuban experiment, History has already de facto recognized Fidel as one of the great revolutionary leaders of the modern – and post-modern – era.

    Trump – historical irony obliges – also has all but christened the groundswell of anger that delivered him the White House as a “revolution” – led by, and in the name of, white, non-college educated, blue collar US masses.

    Yet old habits die hard. A self-appointed “leader of the free world”, true to conventional script, could never pay tribute in public to a “communist” who escaped over 600 CIA assassination cum regime change attempts – which is quite a heavy load to bear for so-called US “intel”. In the end, it was nature’s clock – not a magic bullet — that took Fidel away.

    With the Cuban revolution now history, the focus switches to the current American “revolution” – which might turn out to be quite the regime change special the CIA dreams of (for others). If Fidel was The Prince as well as Machiavelli rolled into one, in gringoland the storyline may be largely about Steve Bannon, the blue collar-meets-Goldman Sachs Machiavelli to Prince Trump.

    White House chief strategist Bannon has been vilified, over the top, all across the spectrum, as neo-fascist, white nationalist, racist, sexist and anti-Semite. So far, this has been the most detailed explanation of the Bannon agenda — in his own words. One underestimates him at one’s own peril. 

    State and revolution

    Bannon in the past billed himself as a Leninist. What a shame Fidel was not paying attention.

    In his highly complex and immensely engaging Apres Nous, Le Deluge (French translation recently published by Payot), master German philosopher Peter Sloterdijk explores how Lenin, in a few months in a cabin in Finland, laid out the theoretical premises of what should happen after the revolution; how the former State, under Marxist analysis, was just an instrument allowing economic exploitation and the misleading resolution of “irreconcilable” oppositions between classes (sounds quite like the current Washington set up).

    For the revolutionary apparatus, it was not enough to take over the apparatus of the Ancien Regime – as social democrats would have it. That would have to be totally smashed, the ruins reassembled in new combinations until the long-term communist goal – the agony of the State — would be achieved.

    Now imagine Leninist Bannon trying to package this agenda to viscerally indoctrinated “communists eat babies for breakfast” US public opinion. So he resorted to pop culture – stressing the inspirational models as Darth Vader, his incarnation Dick Cheney, and the dark side as a whole.

    Smashing the State (or the establishment) was rephrased as “drain the swamp”. And to polish it all up, when talking to the establishment, Bannon added the indispensable English credibility touch as his top role model; Thomas Cromwell, the dark side behind Henry VIII, instead of Lenin. No wonder the deep state is totally freaking out.

    Lenin, in trying to accomplish his revolution, as Sloterdijk observes, relied on “a double psycho-political strategy”; massive intimidation of the non-convinced (something Bannon obviously cannot deploy in contemporary America), as well as mobilization of the impoverished and enthusiastic masses attracted by the promises of the new power (Trump’s overwhelming twitter machine and Breitbart News will be in charge of this department).

    In Lenin’s revolution, the faculty of political judgment was exercised by an elite that Lenin conceived as the proletariat; they became the elite via the dictatorship of the Party. All other strata, especially the rural categories, were no more than a reactionary plebe – to become useful only long term via revolutionary education.

    One century after Lenin, Bannon’s proletariat “elite” will be supplied by blue collar alienation spread out across Virginia, Florida, Ohio, the Rust Belt. A special place is reserved for Reagan Democrats and Reagan Democrats 2.0 (working class minorities) as well as for all and sundry rejectionists of that good ol’ Marxist bogeyman — rigged-to-the-hilt “bourgeois democracy”.

    Bannon’s early incarnation of his ideal Leninist Prince was obnoxious Mamma Grizly Sarah Palin. She could see Russia from her house – but that was about it. Trump, on the other hand, is the perfect vessel; billionaire builder/doer; a product of reality TV; the “New York New York” factor; vetted by the Masters of the Universe; no need to court donors; and a natural foe of an uppity East Coast establishment which does despise his glitter and his brashness.  

    Fascism and global war

    To describe Trump’s “deplorables” (their definition by the establishment, via Hillary) as a fascist army, as US corporate media shills insist, totally misses the point. Marxist theory, during the 1920s and 1930s, turned fascism upside down, conceptualizing how fascism essentially crystallizes the power of finance capital (that’s something Bannon can easily sell at home). Fascism also terrorizes the working class as well as the revolutionary peasantry – thus the popular appeal of “drain the swamp”.  

    Mussolini defined fascism as “the horror inspired by a comfortable life”, thus leading Sloterdijk to characterize fascism as a militant-ism of street politics; total mobilization. Let’s rewind to a century ago; after 1917 and 1918, to the Left as well as to the Right, the zeitgeist dictated there was no “post-war”; in fact, the sentiment was that a global war was going on, and that had been so since times immemorial (today, under neoliberalism, global war is even more radicalized, pitting the 0.0001% against the rest.)

    Under Lenin in Russia a century ago, the conflict took the form of civil war of an active minority against an impotent majority. Under the Leninist White House, the conflict may take the form of war by a very active minority (those roughly 25% of the US electorate who voted Trump) against another, infinitesimal – but very powerful – minority (the East Coast establishment, the incarnation of the Ancien Regime), with the whole saga watched ringside by a transfixed, passive majority.

    “America First”; but for whom? The key question is who will end up defining America’s real national interest; true nationalists embedded in Team Trump, plus the proletariat “elite”, or the usual – globalist — suspects able to infect and corrupt any notion of nationalism.   

    Goodbye Fidel Castro, welcome Prince Trump (with Leninist Machiavelli attached). Brace for impact. Politics is war – what else? And “revolution” is still the biggest show in town.  

    The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik.

    Related:

    Fidel Castro 'Guaranteed Another 20 Years Of Revolution' With Careful Planning
    Sister of Fidel Castro Not to Visit Funeral of Late Cuban Revolutionary Leader
    Cuban Embassy in US Pays Tribute to Revolutionary Leader Fidel Castro
    Cuba After Fidel: How Castro's Brother Will Develop Relations With the World
    Tags:
    revolution, communism, death, White House, Donald Trump, Vladimir Lenin, Fidel Castro, USSR, United States, Cuba
    Community standardsDiscussion
    Comment via FacebookComment via Sputnik
    • Сomment

    All comments

    • rogertidy
      Pepe obviously knows a bit about Marxism, so I'll respond in a similar vein.

      Trump (if he is genuine) can be regarded as a representative of the US national bourgeoisie, who genuinely want to make America 'great again'. Clinton, by contrast, can be seen as a creature of the global financial and corporate elite, whose focus is international.

      In the contemporary world order, it is not nationalists but globalists who pose the greatest danger to peace. It is globalists who have started one war after another for the purpose of controlling the financial, economic and political systems of other countries; and it is nationalists, whether capitalist or socialist (as in Cuba or Venezuela) who are resisting their New World Order.

      If Trump is able to put the globalists back in their box (and there has to be a big question mark over that), the US could turn from being the main factor promoting aggression and war to a significant player against the sovereignty-destroying globalists.

      But I'm not holding my breath.
    • Dar...
      The venal strategies that control the USA derive nothing from political ideologies. Neither do they focus primarily on political objectives. Politics is a means to an ends not an end in itself. Market manipulation is their sole priority.

      In a bull market of unprecedented length stock valuation had bubbled to a peak that activities associated with globalist neo-liberalism could not surpass.

      Analysts were widely forecasting a ferocious bear reset. This could not be permitted, stocks had to continue to rise. So Clinton was ejected from the cockpit and neglected stocks with growth potential had to be brushed off and presented as the next gold rush.

      Trump is a multi-media creation designed to supply a plausible excuse for a return to economic and industrial nationalism.

      Neglected stocks in American manufacturing and construction would thrive under a nationalist President: and they have already before even the first brick has been laid.

      The markets have regained confidence. Stocks are rising and all is well again on 0.0001% Boulevard.

      Forget the smoke and mirrors of personality politics, social media and ideological theory. America runs on dollars, watch the green flow, not the orange glow, to see where you're being taken.
    • karlof1
      As Spock would say: Fascinating! Read the Bannon interview and would like to know where Pepe got his additional insights. Revolution might be the appropriate descriptive term since we can easily see the rising counter-revolution. I'll be closely observing!
    • riconyx
      I didn't finish to read the whole article , I found it insulting and misleading .
      we the people elect Donald Trump in a very democratic way did not matter what type of education or background we have, he was elected because we are tired to be lied by every president we had and we the people want a change and for better. this is not about racist, nor sexiest, nor communism or any other social nor antisocial type of government, we had to change the government or they will destroyed all of us including many other countries around the world.
      WE WANT PEACE AND PROSPERITY.
      It seems Mr pepe escobar had lose what other people in our government lose too... sense of humanity and when they reach certain level in society where they're moving around they also lose a common sense.
      Mr pepe get out of that cloud , your country Brazil is in worse shape than America and stop writing thing to please your encircled rich friends.
      Remember one thing .. THE MAJORITY ALWAYS WIN. AND SO WE WON
    • riconyx
      one more comment Mr escobar...
      since you're the type of journalist who tell everything like it is,, are you planning to um-masc or write an article of the pedophilia that goes around DC and around the world.. YOU KNOW PIZZAGATE or you got your hand tied too on the matter.
    • kemerd
      Yes, Trump is better than Hillary, at least for the next four years to ensure that a nuclear exchange can never take place until a sane US administration is in place.

      But, comparing Trump to Lenin is a step too far. For starters, Lenin was a fine intellectual, Trump glorifies ignorance. Trump is a rich thug, ..., goes on and on.
    • florsolitaria
      Oh, please..
      The same (((Western bankers))) backed Lenin. And Castro was a criminal communist who took himself too seriously.
      With Trump's election the American working poor have a chance to breathe a little. Hopefully.
    • terryjohnodgersin reply torogertidy(Show commentHide comment)
      Well put rogertidy! Going on some of the personalities entering and exiting Trump Tower one has to wonder who is 'advising' Trump for the positions he needs to fill in his administration.

      And the controlling forces that are now referred to as 'The Globalists' will not simply give up what they have gained, as their history shows.
    • terryjohnodgersin reply tokarlof1(Show commentHide comment)
      karlof1, and keep your powder dry!
    • terryjohnodgersin reply tokemerd(Show commentHide comment)
      kemerd, your view of history is tainted by your lack of education that if it had of been undertaken would have you denounce Lenin as a puppet of the Globalists!
    • double bonus
      [in gringoland the storyline may be largely about Steve Bannon]

      In GRINGOLAND? Is this wetback spic, serious? [Equivalent slurs, I believe!]
      Look what Sputnik published? Those damn Russkies calling US gringoland?

      [White House chief strategist Bannon has been vilified, over the top, all across
      the spectrum, as neo-fascist, white nationalist, racist, sexist and anti-Semite.]

      When the media calls a white male in a leadership position: neo-fascist, white nationalist, racist, sexist, anti-semite, xenophobe, misogynist, etc... it is code for: "He is a totally awesome guy, who will Make America Great Again!!!
    • kemerdin reply toterryjohnodgers(Show commentHide comment)
      terryjohnodgers, Lenin being puppet of globalists? well, I suppose I have a lot of reading to do. From where do you suggest me to start?
    • terryjohnodgersin reply tokemerd(Show commentHide comment)
      kemerd, you could start with learning about the Vatican's role in ALL world affairs through the Jesuits. Marx was known to be heavily influenced through Jesuit thinking. BTW, it was the Jesuits who perfected communism during the 17th Century in Paraguay.

      Marx is generally credited with writing the Communist Manifesto, but, did he really write it or was it written for him by others who had far more influence, both politically and economically, at the time?

      Eustace Mullins has much to offer on who really controls this planet as does David Icke, although some of what they offer sounds way too outlandish to be real, nevertheless much of what they put forward years ago has become proven fact today!
    • freeWill
      pepe is much more to the right of politics than even himself realizes, too much institutionalized education. there is no mention of people's collective struggle,

      people rejected Clinton, it has nothing to do with Trump
    Show new comments (0)