Millennial Voters May Cost Hillary Clinton the Election - The Atlantic
Desire was actually the perfect, absolutely pitch perfect, song for this little number, Just priceless. (the lyrics. go figure) -it's about consummating and channeling desire into consumerism rather than becoming an act of love (armed to the teeth she is too, in her fevered consumerism). Desire, what an Object! Desire could have been written to hand HIllary this election when it was written. ('She's the promise, in the year of election'). Actually this song was always a feminine personification of the United States, which means the song is everything Clinton is offering you if she wins. -It says it all, really, addiction, addiction to money, arms, sold to you by the bombast version of a fake televangelist. The Mirror-ball man selling you consumerism emptiness. Selling you America, with neon crucifixes to provide a dash of cover via the sacrosanct. In Christianity, using Christ's image to illicit a sense of Deific qualities for another entity (a Deified feminine personification of the United States, in this instance) -is sacrilege. It's the sort of sacrilege that can only be missed in a culture inculcated and imbued with the notions of American 'exceptionalism' (a Clinton belief) and 'manifest destiny' (a Bush one). But it works on the subconscious anyway, whether you're an atheist, -or not. 'Desire' is not selling you the Christened verson of America. It is literally, as per the lyrics, selling you the Babylon Whore. 'Desire's America is what you're going to get whichever way you vote, but, U2 had to go and tell you who to vote for, out of fear. Because the policies you're going to get under Clinton are the neoliberal version of the Babylon Whore. (Ask Syria.)
Welcome to the moment U2 became Hillary's b**** (or otherwise read her perfectly even while doing it!!! Could be Sheer Genius...).
Hug A Millennial: Bono’s not after the Trump Voters. He's trying to serve the Millennials up to Killary on a silver platter by gulling them with identity politics. The only reason the Clintons hooked him is because they KNOW that George Bush's disparaging remarks about the band meeting with Clinton during ZOOTV actually threw the election for Bill Clinton in 1992. (Bill Clinton told the Taoiseach personally.) I have the link (from the Irish Times); it's in a footnote in my book. This is all very deliberate, probably way more than you know, as Bono's biggest donors for ONE/RED are, coincidentally, also the Democratic party's biggest billionaire donors. -I'm sure the Clinton Foundation will reward him handsomely. I’m sure his billionaire donors rewarded him very well already. In fact, the Clintons knew what demographic it threw, -the youth vote. What is set to make it or break it for Hillary in this election? That's Right! The Millennial Vote. (-Have a cookie.) She's not catering to them policy wise (bulling is more like it), so she intends to gull them with U2's identity politics to swing the vote. A little fear, then some sugar. -This performance art is identity politics. It is literally selling politics to you based on your self identity. Identity politics is vile and both candidates are fully engaged, Hillary thanks to Bono especially. Identity politics is the evacuation of policy. It is designed to make you emotionally invested. It is designed to internally divide your population against itself. It is literally selling politics to you based on your self identity as infinitely superior to your own compatriots. It is also selling you this while selling you you.
He did this in a mash-up of religious imagery too, hawking his Christianity in the same motion, laid to burn on Hillary's lil' altar of identity politicking, (both candidates are swirling the bowl employing this during this Reality TeeVee election.) -Talk about Church and State! (We used to call this sacrilegious.) U2 just used their faith as branding in the ultimate send up of identity politics. -For Hillary. -Yes, that Hillary, the one who, from an insider's view, Jeffrey Sachs dubbed 'a danger to world peace' because of her direct orchestration of the slaughter in Syria.
So Tell me, how does this work Again? Three days ago, Bono was Syria's bleeding heart, pleading with America to be America, and take the Syrian refugees in. -How can he claim to care at all for the fate of the Syrians if he's de facto instructed ya'll to vote for the architect of the policy that made them refugees and killed so many of them in the first place, sunk them into the execrable and forced the intractable war? Americans have everything to lose? The Syrians lost everything. Americans have everything to lose if this self-same policy continues under Hillary, which it guaranteed will, 'cause it's their best possible Presidential segueway into WWIII.
This made for this response three days ago:
"Really sad [Bono] you can't even say this much without offending your fanbase. -Just goes to show you're a little (I'd say far) too late. You cannot acknowledge Americans' basis for fear, nor even approach dealing with it. Since you can't address the roots of this conflict (as these commenters are likewise incapable, and you haven't jarred their sensibilities on the truth for at least fifteen years now) - you can't arrive at the repatriation of refugees, because you can't address OBomber being responsible for bombing seven Muslim countries in his tenure, and so on and so forth. You can't address the roots, neither can they, because no one can acknowledge American culpability for Libya [also Hillary], Syria, -or anything else that might cause a very slim minority of these refugees react in terms of the entity that was so utterly destructive to their lives, as they know the bitter truth. Ending these monstrosities at the roots means ending the creation of these refugees in the first place. When you're simply bailing against effect in total amnesia as to cause, you really aren't going to make any headway upriver, and sadly the deaftone of this response perhaps makes that point. The USA created the Afghan refugees, the Iraqi refugees, and so on. No one complains about that. Really they believe in being utterly immune to their own consequence. Now who let them see it that way? They're a million miles from recognizing that the ones most likely to get to immigrate are the direct descendants of mujahedin/Taliban extremists (US fostered Islamic extremists, though of course not many American realize that the US fostered the Taliban in the '90's). This appears to have been the case with BOTH the Orlando mass shooter and this most recent incident, -Ah, loverly. Can we ever even mention blowback? Oh never? I see.... Oh and, if those are your domestic terrorists (the descendants of those Islamic extremists rewarded for carrying out wars by proxy and becoming your regime preferences), they'd be getting in to the US on a preferential CIA's 'best buddies' list regardless of whether Americans choose to accept refugees, or not (they weren't refugees in the first place). Wow. How far off reality can we kilter? No, I'm sorry sir. Your appeal is emasculated. It's a terrible shame. But you abnegated the truth so very long ago for their sakes, following them down their amesiatic river, it's hard to say if you can ever even recover the rationality that could serve to recover compassion, allow them to repent their bloodshed and accept the risk of saving the refugees they helped to create. It is the fact that they made them that generates the risk to themselves. Since reality is unnacceptable, we can't arrive at forgiveness either way. (Welcome to the endless bonfire tunnel of unremitting self-interest.) Oh, and the reality is, if Americans really, really didn't want to be at risk of domestic Islamic terrorism, they'd oppose their own Government's wars, for starters, and DOUBLY OPPOSE them fostering Islamic extremists as proxies, which has taken place (again) in Libya, and (again) in Syria. It never bloody ends, -but, hell yes, let's vote for the warmonger prez (Clinton) who endorses and will keep promulgating these policies, the ones she's spear-fronted more than perhaps any actor in the US government as Secretary of State. OH, THAT'LL SOLVE IT!!!!! To vote for, or even endorse Clinton, is to support the protracted slaughter in Syria. -Since 2012. But you think 'Trump' is 'potentially' the worst idea to happen to America. -Try telling the Syrians that, when the worst has happened already. Your stance is so impossibly hypocritical it's not even shareable to my friends, because they all know it."
So to counter this, it's fair to say I'm not going to do what Bono just did and tell you who to vote for. I am going to say he's betrayed his very self and everything he's every stood for in three days, including his perennial, personal policy not to throw himself behind any US presidential candidate, (which it de facto is doing when it's down to a two way race), which is what he personally said to Bill Clinton when they first met in a hotel hallway in 1992. I can't even tell you How Absolutely PERFECT the song 'Desire' is in this crystalline moment (because he may have totally redeemed himself by this track choice in the same token). Here's what's already said about it in Pamela William's book, -largely dedicated to exposing the Divine Feminine within the Trinity inside U2 lyrics:
“It might serve, in this context, to do a little review of the lyrics to “Desire” at this moment and realize exactly what it’s saying, ample explanation for why, intuitively, it was a song she never liked. It really is about the sublimation of desire into money, which in effect was exactly where he went. In other words he was that self-aware of the slippery slope before it had begun. You can see it as the central core of the conflict he deliberately put in a state of frisson for ZOOTV, for he was harnessing this in the audience at large while playing the mega-pop star, further implying he was also doing so with religious overtones by his performance as the mirror-ball man/fake televangelist. As the mirror-ball man he’d close the set with “Desire” itself as the ultimate tome to consumerism, recognizing explicitly that isn’t this manner of harnessing (the calculated sublimation of desire) exactly what consumerism is all about? It was there he took the song to its ultimate falsified conclusion, what she’d intuitively recognized with great distaste. (You have to admire the acumen inside the breathless materialist healer delivery.)
So was it the ultimate cloaking device or the ultimate conscious conversion to the sell? (You wouldn’t accept complicit involvement in this now, would you? –No.) And there again, Bono had inserted the usual elements, including her orgasm, which that just made it that much worse. (And here lay the irony: the mirror-ball man’s ultimate answer of wherein lay salvation was 'television'/(we’d now say social media), the 'prime time' avenue via which a passive mass audience’s desires were harnessed through advertising. [...]
She considered it breathtakingly obtuse on his part if he’d existed in some sort of assumption this would have no ramification, but then this was probably just a guy who was hedging his bets, and on money and exposure, bet well indeed.
While this is delivered with the perspicuity of hindsight, an analysis of an emotional maelstrom caught in limbo that was felt for years, it was felt in the moment, with her her foresight being met with the future falling into place like dominoes. It was the closure, emotionally, in the moment, though it would take her time to rationalize why the shutdown felt so essentially betraying and so utterly complete even as he continued, it appeared, to sing on the exact same tact, never leaving off.”
Excerpt From: Pamela Williams. “The Raydiant Labyrinth”. iBooks. (It's free.)
Well now we know which way the wind blows. He actually sublimated his Divine feminine inspiration for the sake of the woman with the most potential power to kill people on the entire planet, with a nation obliterating track record, in the effort to give her the carte blanche to do so. What a Guy!!!!
-Charmed. Or otherwise (this is the double blind), do you really think that this is Bono's real object in his music, -his broader catalogue? I bet you Hillary Clinton herself is absolutely clueless of the meaning of the track he 'just happened' to pick for her to stump on her election as 'performance art'. Read between the lines, read the lines, and you realize what he's really saying in the song describes the above behavior of Clinton during her tenure as Secretary of State (especially foreign policy), and the neoliberal campaign to institute the false idol of the market for the entire world. The imagery onscreen is all about Trump. The words (the entire song) more subtly depicts Clinton, because the song has always depicted a feminine personfication of America, not a pretty one, and one you're going to get if you vote for Clinton. In that sense it could be a veiled rejection of the entire election. Remember, he is in no position to say 'No'. Ever before this, this song was always the supreme sleight of hand, the supreme deck.
