Thursday, August 1, 2024

CURRENT SITUATION: NOTES ON THE GLOBAL CRISIS (21. THE ELECTORAL FARCE IN THE UNITED STATES)

 

THE ELECTION FARCE IN THE UNITED STATES

 

THE MANIPULATION OF VOTERS BY INTERNET OPERATORS

 

-           Candidates turned into spokespeople for a marketing attempt:

 

        -  The convictions expressed by the candidate are a reflection of big data research into probable preferences and prejudices of individuals.

 

        -  The decisive vote is of the undecided:

 

Electoral campaigns have files on tens of millions of potentially independent voters. Extracted from social networks, from publicly available files and from medical records, these files offered a profile probably more precise than the one that the person involved could have made from memory.

The above is from Henry Kissinger, as will be seen below, but where it is expressed as a possibility, because these reactionaries present themselves as prophets of the past, we have given it its true meaning, which is that it is already underway.

 

-                 -   The main role of the candidates is to raise funds rather than to develop programs.

 

We ask: In the face of the power of the monopolies engendered by financial capital, what is left of the freedom and privacy of individuals to choose? That is their freedom, that is their “free elections,” that is the exercise of the “right to choose and be chosen,” that is their electoral farce, as established by Lenin, in the quote that we record at the end of this post.

 

In the elections of November 4 of this year, the candidates for the presidency and vice presidency will compete as always for the two political mafias that take turns in the government of the United States, plus candidates for the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as for governors of the federated states.

 

At all levels of the elections, as an expression of the increasingly advanced process of decomposition of Yankee imperialism, in this electoral campaign even more than in previous ones, the candidates will not position themselves by their political programs or by “the content of the government's activity,” but as “spokesmen for a marketing attempt pursued by media whose intrusiveness would have been considered science fiction just a generation ago.”

 

What is happening in the current electoral process in the United States shows what Henry Kissinger himself had already suggested, World Order, Reflections on the Character of Nations and the Course of History, 2014, where referring to the effects of the “computer revolution” he says:

 

“The corporations that aggregate and monitor the data exchanged by these individuals have a power of influence and surveillance that exceeds that of many contemporary states and even that of more traditional powers.”

 

That is the power that the big internet monopolies have, and among others, the so-called “Magnificent 7” are located there. One of the disastrous effects of which we have experienced a few days ago, when an error in the update of a program of a monopolistic security company linked to Microsoft paralyzed airports, hospitals, different service companies, etc. throughout the world.

 

The manipulation of elections is not new in the USA or other imperialist countries, nor is it new in backward countries or in the Third World. What has changed is the form and technological means to manipulate citizens as laboratory guinea pigs.

 

Market techniques to manipulate citizens as consumers have been used since the appearance of capitalism and much more so with imperialism, marketing techniques to induce consumerism using what was called “rat psychology,” because they conditioned the responses of consumers. Market or marketing techniques, which were later transferred to electoral campaigns.

 

Today, what is new is that they are based on a greater manipulation of individual preferences and reactions to the stimuli provoked by the great campaigns of manipulation of public opinion, which the genocidal Henry Kissinger does not speak of. The following can be extracted from the quoted part of H. Kissinger:

The main role of candidates could become fundraising instead of developing programs.

 

H. Kissinger says:

 

To a certain extent, the computer has solved the problem of acquiring, preserving and retrieving information. Information can indeed be stored in unlimited quantities and in a manageable form. (…)

But it also impoverishes perspective. Since information is so accessible and communication is instantaneous, it diminishes the focus on its importance, or even on the definition of what is important (…) the manipulation of information replaces reflection as the main political tool.

(…) Information so close at hand stimulates the researcher's mind, but it can diminish the reader's mind.

(...) our era is on the verge of a shift in the conception of the nature of truth. Almost every website contains some kind of personalization function based on a scanning of internet codes intended to establish the user's background and preferences. These methods want to encourage users to "consume more content" and, in doing so, become exposed to more advertising, which is what ultimately sustains the internet economy. These subtle orientations fit with a broader tendency to manipulate the traditional understanding of human choice. Products are ranked and prioritized to offer those that one "would like" and online news is presented as "the news that may interest you the most." Two different people who turn to the same search engine with the same question do not necessarily receive the same answer. The concept of truth is relatized and individualized: it loses its universal character. Information is presented as if it were free. In fact, the recipient pays for it by providing data that will be exploited by people he does not know, in ways that will then shape the information offered to him.

 

Whatever the utility of this approach in the consumer realm, its effect on policymaking may be transformative. Difficult choices in political decision-making are always lonely. (…)

 

The US election, especially the presidential election, represents another aspect of this evolution. It has been argued that in 2012, election campaigns had files on tens of millions of potentially independent voters. Drawn from social media, public archives, and medical records, these files offered a profile that was probably more accurate than the individual involved could have compiled from memory. This allowed campaigners to choose the most appropriate technology in each case: a personal visit from friends already affiliated (also found via the Internet), personalized letters (drawn from social media), or group meetings.

 

Presidential campaigns are about to transform into media competitions between internet operators. What were once substantive debates over the content of government activity will be reduced to candidates becoming mouthpieces for a marketing effort pursued by media whose intrusiveness would have been considered the stuff of science fiction just a generation ago. The primary role of candidates may become fundraising rather than program-building. Is the marketing effort intended to express the candidate’s convictions, or are the convictions expressed by the candidate a reflection of big data research into individuals’ likely preferences and biases? Can democracy avoid evolving into a demagogic outcome based on an emotional appeal to the masses, rather than the reasoned process envisioned by the Founding Fathers? If the gap between the qualities required for election and the qualities essential to holding office becomes too wide, that conceptual knowledge and historical sense that should be part of foreign policy could be lost, or the cultivation of these qualities could take up so much of a president's first term as to prevent him from fulfilling his role in leading America” (World Order, Reflections on the Character of Nations and the Course of History HENRY KISSINGER, 2014)

 

NEWS ABOUT THE REAL TASK OF THE CANDIDATES:

FUNDRAISING

 

Kamala Harris smashes fundraising record with stunning $81 million haul over 24 hours

 

BY  STEVE PEOPLES

Updated 10:23 PM MESZ, July 22, 2024

Share

NEW YORK (AP) — Kamala Harris is smashing fundraising records as the Democratic Party’s donors — big and small — open their wallets for the vice president in the immediate aftermath of President Joe Biden’s stunning decision to step aside.

 

In total, Harris’ team raised more than $81 million in the 24-hour period since Biden’s announcement, campaign spokesperson Kevin Munoz said Monday.

 

The massive haul, which includes money raised across the campaign, the Democratic National Committee and joint fundraising committees, represents the largest 24-hour sum reported by either side in the 2024 campaign. Harris’ campaign said it was the largest single-day total in U.S. history.

 

The historic outpouring of support for Vice President Harris represents exactly the kind of grassroots energy and enthusiasm that wins elections,” Munoz said.

 

Hours earlier, Future Forward, the largest super PAC in Democratic politics, announced it had secured $150 million in commitments over the same period from donors who were “previously stalled, uncertain or uncommitted,” a senior adviser said.

 

Taken together, the fundraising explosion puts Harris in a dominant position to secure the Democratic Party’s formal presidential nomination at next month’s national convention — if not sooner. The donor class’s embrace comes as she locks up endorsements from the vast majority of Democratic governors and members of Congress.

 

 

Trump had finally closed the fundraising gap in the election—then came a $100 million blue tsunami

BYSEAMUS WEBSTER

July 22, 2024 Fortune

 

Last month, Donald Trump and the Republican National Committee seemed to have gained a firm financial advantage over Democrats after trailing earlier this year. Following Trump’s felony conviction on May 30 and President Joe Biden’s rocky debate performance on June 27, money came pouring into his and the R.N.C.’s war chests while Democrats burned through cash. As of the end of June, the Trump campaign had nearly $45 million more cash on hand than the Biden campaign did, according to filings with the Federal Election Committee.

 

But following Biden’s announcement on Sunday that he was backing out of the race and endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris, a historic wave of fundraising may have tipped the scales back in Democrats’ favor.

 

As of Monday afternoon, the Democratic fundraising website ActBlue reported it processed more than $100 million in donations online since the president made his announcement, according to the site. Harris’ campaign alone announced that less than 24 hours after launching, it had raised nearly $50 million for the new candidate. On Sunday night, ActBlue posted on social media that it was the biggest fundraising day of the 2024 cycle.

 

UPDATE: As of 9pm ET, grassroots supporters have raised $46.7 million through ActBlue following Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign launch. This has been the biggest fundraising day of the 2024 cycle. Small-dollar donors are fired up and ready to take on this election 🔥

 

— ActBlue (@actblue) July 22, 2024

To be sure, the July 13 assassination attempt on Trump also likely sparked a surge in fundraising for the Republicans, although numbers for July won’t be available until next month.

 

The flood of donations following Biden’s endorsement of Harris throws another wrench in the fundraising landscape of the 2024 election just as Trump was beginning to gain momentum. The Trump campaign announced it raised over $52 million in the wake of his guilty verdict in the hush-money trial, breaking a Republican record for single-day fundraising. In the second quarter of 2024, Trump and the R.N.C. outraised Biden and the Democrats $331 million to $264 million.

 

Although Democrats outraised Trump and the R.N.C. in June, they also spent heavily on advertising in a month that unraveled their presumed nominee. The Biden campaign burned through 93% of the cash it raised in June, compared to just 46% for the Trump campaign. As of the most recent FEC filing, the Trump campaign had $128 million in available cash, while Biden had just under $96 million.

 

It isn’t just the former president’s campaign that’s seen a donation dump in recent weeks. The R.N.C has gotten a major boost since Trump became the party’s presumed nominee leading up to last week’s convention. Between the end of May and the end of June, the committee nearly doubled its cash on hand to $102 million.

 

All told, between the Trump campaign, its fundraising affiliates, and the R.N.C., Republicans had $281 million available at the end of June, while Biden and the Democrats had about $237 million.

 

The big question now will be whether Harris—or some other candidate the Democrats tap to be the nominee at next month’s convention—will have access to the $96 million available for Biden.

 

If Harris is the nominee, the answer appears to be a fairly straightforward “yes.” Because she was the president’s running mate, Harris and Biden already share a campaign committee, meaning she has access to the existing funds if she’s on the November ticket as either candidate for president or vice president, according to a note from former FEC Chairman Trevor Potter.

 

“It’s very clear,” Dara Lindenbaum, a current FEC commissioner, told the New York Times. “If Kamala Harris is the Democratic presidential nominee, she gets to use all the money in the account.”

 

If Harris isn’t the nominee, the fate of Biden’s war chest is less clear. The FEC limits candidate-to-candidate contributions to $2,000 per election, Potter explained in the note. The Biden—or rather, Harris—campaign could issue a refund to donors, or potentially transfer the funds to the Democratic party.

 

Trump, for his part, suggested on Truth Social following Biden’s announcement that Republicans should get reimbursed for the money they’ve already spent campaigning against Biden as the presumed nominee.

 

(…)

 

Lenin on the farce of universal suffrage “in the present state”

 

In The State and Revolution, Lenin states:

 

“At present, imperialism and the domination of the banks have “developed” into an extraordinary art these two methods of weighing and making effective the omnipotence of wealth in democratic republics, whatever they may be. (…)

The omnipotence of “wealth” is more secure in democratic republics also because it does not depend on one or another defect of the political mechanism or on the bad political envelope of capitalism. The democratic republic is the best possible political envelope for capitalism; and therefore, by seizing (through the Palchinskis, the Chemovs, the Tseretelis and Co.) this best of all envelope, capital establishes its power so securely and firmly that it is not shaken by any change of persons or institutions. 'nor of parties within the bourgeois democratic republic.

It must also be noted that Engels also most accurately calls universal suffrage an instrument of the domination of the bourgeoisie. Universal suffrage, he says, evidently basing himself on the long experience of German Social-Democracy, is "the index of the maturity of the working class. It cannot and will never go any further in the present state."16

The petty-bourgeois democrats, like our Social-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks, and their blood brothers, all the social-chauvinists and opportunists of Western Europe, do indeed expect "more" from universal suffrage. They themselves support and inculcate in the people the false idea that universal suffrage is, "in the present state," a means capable of really revealing the will of the majority of the working people and ensuring its fulfillment.”