The Election: Strategy 0, Logistics 1

The Election: Strategy 0, Logistics 1

It is said, regarding war, that amateurs study strategy and professionals study logistics.  Strategy vs. logistics is one way of assessing the recent election. ( Logistics-”the detailed coordination of a complex operation.” Strategy- “a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim.”) Much has been said about the “peaceful transfer of power.” To quote the Spaniard in The Princess Bride “You keep using that word but I don’t think it means what you think it means.” For the last 50+years “the peaceful transfer of power” meant a 4-8 year re-branding of the ruling paradigm designed to preserve the policy, law and legislative advantages of the governing class. The 2016 Presidential Election was something different.  The opposing constituencies embodied either strategy or logistics. The populace can be generally divided into two groups; those with the skills that maintain the modern infrastructure and those that lack the skills to maintain the modern infrastructure. For example; a person might be the most brilliant, accomplished brain surgeon in the world but he/she is dependent on someone understanding, building and maintaining electrical power generation/transmission or have the skills to design and build emergency power generators. A more down to earth example what would happen to the business you work for if the power went out for a day? Would the business function? There are countless people whose skills and detailed coordination of complex systems enable modernity. Somewhere along the line, those that benefit from modern infrastructure but lack the contributing skills decided to bite the hand that sustains them literally and figuratively. The disdain and contempt of the media, academics, students, comics, MSM, progressives, etc. for those that engineer, build, maintain and repair modern life became particularly virulent in the last eight years. Not surprisingly, the beneficiaries in the recent election went for strategy on steroids (i.e. a bottomless pit of money, step-lock ideological unity, a tsunami of negative media, fear mongering, etc.) This methodology had worked so well for decades to ensure ideological and political dominance. So why did it fail? My guess is that the logistical community, being broad and diverse grew tired of being vilified 7x24x365. They put aside their differences and voted their interests. Official deep thinkers in politics, media and academia see only populism, racism and bigotry. The smartest woman in America went so far to call them deplorable (i.e. shameful, disgraceful, unworthy, dishonorable, wretched, lamentable.) on video!!! One would think that, given her liabilities regarding communication security, she’d have learned something but I digress. The emergence of unification among this scorned, belittled constituency was not anticipated. I say it portends a shift in governance that transcends Trump and the GOP. Is evidence that supports this contention? I think it too early to say with certainty. Trump/GOP garnering 28% of the Latin vote, 22% of the millennial vote and 8% of the Black vote may be an indication. The worse of all possible outcomes for the strategy community is that Trump achieves some measure of success regarding the issues important to these constituencies and the states formerly known as Democratic strongholds. In any case, the strategy community is doubling down on their failed electoral tactic seasoned with violence, intimidation and assassination threats. What the future holds is anybody’s guess especially since the collective wisdom of the non-deplorable community proved to be clueless.