The Brett Kavanaugh SCOTUS Drama is a Pivotal Point in the War for Control of the State

What does the Kavanaugh SCOTUS circus tell us about the reality of power in the halls of DC?

The cultural, social, and force influence aspects of the whole Kavanaugh affair are myriad and complex.  So, for this analysis, I am going to stay narrowly focused on one aspect, force influence.

Breaking down the core aaspect of the reality of power in this affair, I have come to conclude that the overriding motivator for all of the major camps is the desire to control the levers of force influence through the coercive enterprise, the state, the United States of America.

I want to look specifically at the trends I have observed among the competing camps’ rank and file self-identifying ‘members.’

What I have seen are two prevailing narratives, both of which undermine the current illusion of “Rule of Law,” the Constitutional Republic.

These competing narratives reveal much about where the camps are as far as their willingness to potentially turn to force influence outside the “legitimate” parameters of the coercive enterprise.
Assumptions of guilt pervert the “legal” system into a political war machine. Well, it further weaponizes an already weaponized system.

Reaffirming and legitimizing this standard has already been used against the ones who are working to establish that standard, the Dem camp.  Still, the risks, it would seem, are worth the potential rewards here, of preventing Trump from getting another seat on SCOTUS before the midterms.
Assuming the accuser is a liar, applying character assassinations, deters ACTUAL victims from coming forward.

This standard of complete vilification of an accuser, while hardly new, is still antithetical to the professed standards of the current illusion of Rule of Law, that the accused get a “fair” trial, but also that the accuser get a “fair” chance to pursue “justice” where a violation actually took place.

This also tells me that, at least from within Dem leadership, that they believe they are going to have a strong showing in the midterms.  Given their track record of recent date (their confidence before the 2016 election was authentic, I believe), I would still place some credibility on their assumptions, but not strong credibility.
Still, the Dems have little chance of taking back the Senate.  Because of the particular seats up for re-election in the Senate (mostly Dem seats), the Dems have little chance of changing the Senate, so the confirmation of a Trump appointee to SCOTUS is still highly likely to happen.

So why, then, would they throw so much vitriol, why would they risk riling up the Trump base that otherwise might not so strongly show up for the midterms?  Stopping Kavanaugh will also whip up their base.  While that may not help them in the Senate, it will help them, in the margins, in close races in the House, where the Dems have a real chance of taking back the House.

If the Dems take back the House, all of the House Committees investigating things the Dems don’t like will disappear.  A whole myriad of committees and hearings will start, aimed at investigating Trump and the GOP.

The Dems aren’t fighting for SCOTUS right now.  That seat is already lost (with some scenarios possible that could see the seat not filled before 2021).  They are fighting for the power to end House investigations and start new House investigations, including impeachment hearings.

The Dems also put the GOP in a position where they have to fight to defend someone that, due to their advantages culturally and in the market, can easily become a de facto rapist in the public’s mind.  Because the GOP cannot afford to give in on standards of engagement that rely HEAVILY on the ability to sway public opinion, they cannot afford to yield to a standard that convicts and destroys their potential leaders and soldiers with sordid accusations alone.

The fact that the evidence is by its very nature unprovable, the fact that no evidence has been put forward that would “justify” a criminal investigation actually works in favor of the Dem camp.  The uncertainty of the matter continues to force the republicans to defend this guy.  If the evidence were clear, the republicans could easily save face, while at the same time not reinforcing a cultural standard of conviction and destruction of people who are merely accused of a crime with no actual provable-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence.

The rank and file Republicans understand how important it is to cut the Dems off, for a very, very long time, from seizing control of SCOTUS.  For them, even if they have a high probability of holding the Senate (which will enable them to get the seat filled after the election), they do not have certainty of the outcome of the midterm elections.

Besides, having to go through another round of hearings for another SCOTUS nominee, keeps the republicans in the defensive position, allowing the Dems to continue to define the narrative as the accuser forcing the accused to defend themselves.

I have little doubt that no matter who is selected next, the Dems will pull out at least as many stops as they have with Kavanaugh.  I have little doubt that their operatives in the media, their progressive-state-friendly corporations will do their part to help push the accuser (the dems) versus the accused (the republicans) narrative where the accused must prove its guilt or, better yet, the accused must simply come to terms with their guilt and pay the appropriate penalties.

A failure to confirm Kavanaugh could potentially affect the outcome among the MAGA crowd in areas in which a strong MAGA candidate is not involved in a close race.  I doubt the MAGA crowd will not show up for the MAGA candidates, but I also doubt they’ll show up to support the GOP-leader candidates that might be in tight races.

The overall numbers may show a strong MAGA presence, but the MAGA numbers may be thrown off by surges in competitive MAGA-involved races and drops in races involving GOP-leader candidates in close races.

For the republicans, whether or not their guy is guilty, they understand the ramifications of not cutting off the Dems from claiming SCOTUS could, in short order, put this camp in a position where they will be cut off from power in the cultural arena, the market arena, the education arena, the bureaucratic arena, the US House, the US Senate, the White House. Even if they can most likely fill this seat later, the strategic advantage of settling this issue before the midterms cannot be overlooked by the republicans.

A Kavanaugh confirmation will deflate the dem camp, leading, I believe, to lesser turnout for their camp in the midterms.  It would clear the table for a January offensive that will not be possible if the Senate has to invest more time and effort to attempt to fill that SCOTUS seat.

What matter is it if the Judge is not a rapist if that Judge helps the progressive state criminalize actions like “hate speech?”  In terms of how it affects the rank and file folks in the republican camp, it is far worse, at the living-on-the-ground-level, to have a non-raping Judge that rubber stamps the progressive state than it is to have a rapist Judge who stops that progressive state agenda.

The republicans cannot face that actualization from within, so they have to place the face of this “assault” with a dehumanizing caricature, one that demonstrates no decency, no morality.  Their proof of the inhumanity of the accuser is as solid as the evidence the accuser has against the Judge the republicans are protecting.

The reality is this- with the SCOTUS drama you are simply seeing the fruit of a less-and-less-hold-war-to-closer-and-closer-and-closer-fight-to-the-death.

On one side, you have the “Democrats,” who are “led” by people that have long decided to go as far towards a breakdown of the current illusion of Rule of Law as they think they can get away with (while constantly tiptoeing over lines, only to quickly retreat, only to quickly advance again, etc.)

On the other side, you have the “Republicans,” who are “led” by people who mostly have found a comfortable, secure existence within the new, emerging progressive state reality.

The rank and file of the Democrats are ready to go even further than the Dem “leaders” in pushing for a final breakaway from the current illusion of “Rule of Law.” They’ve even produced an actual attempted murder of Republican leaders.

The rank and file of the Republicans have now arrived at where the Dem leaders have, as far as their willingness to risk breaking the current illusion of Rule of Law (with many believing they can re-establish the illusion after they “drain the swamp”). They’re not so ready to kill or take violent action, but, like the Dems, some of their more fringe “members” have committed violent acts against Dems and their perceived allies.

As far as the willingness to commit violence, I still assess that the Dem camp is more prone to take violent action, unprovoked, on the main, than the republicans, but I believe they’re ‘catching up’ quickly.
Among the leadership, the Dems are telegraphing a level of either desperation or confidence that they are close to consolidating power.  Either the Dems have assessed that the window to consolidate power at the level they may have an opportunity to claim is rapidly closing, or they have assessed that the time is now to make a final, no-hold-barred push for the consolidation of power.

The willingness of the Dem leadership to use invalidating, non-redeemable classifications for people that comprise somewhere around 1/3 to ½  the county shows to me an understanding that, for now, the divide in the camps is pretty hard and immovable.  With that understanding, the general welcome sales pitch has been changed to focus on the young, the group that has yet to be ossified into one of the two major camps.
The dems have largely stopped recruiting republicans.  I believe this is largely true of the republicans as well.  Both camps recognize that, among the current population, and for the near-to-midterm-future, there is an implacable division between the two major camps, the dems and the republicans.

The opportunity for coexistence is near nil.  The only way that one or the other camp can truly consolidate power and end the existential threat of the competing camp is to go far beyond the current illusion of Rule of Law for an ostensible Constitutional Republic.

For both sides, preserving the current illusion of Rule of Law puts them in positions that disable them from vanquishing the other side with elections and control of government alone.  New standards of criminalization and ostracization must be established, by both sides, that will allow them to eventually “criminalize” the other.  This, I believe, is the road we are currently heading down, the criminalization, the overt criminalization of the competing camp.

An extraordinary event could potentially dramatically escalate this process or delay the process.  Unless and until, however, the coercive enterprise known as the United States of America, the Federal government, loses its hegemonic power in the land, I believe that the path to criminalization is near-inevitable, but no inevitable.

The 2020 Election, I believe, will be the last opportunity for the dems to consolidate power so completely for, perhaps, decades to come.  On the flip side, while a GOP win will enable some degree of criminalization of the dems, getting that to stick will be much more difficult given the republicans’ strong disadvantages in the cultural and market arenas.

Failure by the dems to consolidate power in 2020 will, I believe, trigger more aggressive, violent tactics by the dems, as well as more acts of defiance by Federal bureaucrats, as well as by dem-controlled states and cities.

Should the republicans hold on to at least the Senate and the White House, I will predict the republicans will begin to go after dem assets, using criminal courts to do so.  I also predict that the only way the republicans hold on to the Senate and the White House in 2020 is if MAGA candidates have won significant primaries, knocking off some of the key republican leadership that is not nearly as troubled by a progressive state as are the MAGA people.

Should the dems consolidate power in the House, the Senate, and the White House, with all of their other non-gov power advantages, I have little doubt that the escalation of the market allies of the dems will be dramatic and swift.  You will see a myriad of republican leaders (in far greater numbers than even now) who will become targets for market assassination.

I have little doubt that there will be a flurry of vaguely written bills that will attempt to establish some form of hate speech laws, there will be quick moves to pass gun control legislation, and the executive branch departments will become even more weaponized, targeting ALL political opponents (not just republicans, and not just people on the “right”).

There will be moves to essentially criminalize, or at least socially and economically assassinate all of the major positions of the republican party, being pro-gun, being anti-abortion, being pro-traditional-marriage, being skeptical of government, being anti-welfare-state.  To be sure, many people not even in the republican camp will get ‘assassinated’ for holding any of these positions.
The only way the GOP will continue to exist in this new reality will be to become the alternative progressive state party.

This scenario, I believe, will most likely produce a similar type backlash to dem power that I suggested the dems would react to republican power.  However, the republicans, with their lack of cultural and market power, will be limited in their ability to respond.  Their most effective resistance will simply be non-compliance, forcing the dems to apply wider-spread force influence, a sphere I believe heavily favors the republican camp (and, I believe, dem leaders are full aware of this reality).

The one hope for the dems is the tendency by republicans to ‘respect’ ‘authority.’  I believe, however, that this respect for authority, in this dem-dominated reality, will reverse itself, so that the republicans will now be the ones challenging “authority” (because they have significant disadvantages in that arena), while the dems will be questioning your loyalty and your sanity for questioning authority.

Those thin blue line flags might one day fly on dem porches, not republican ones.

At the end of the day, unless one or the other side is willing to take force action, using coercive enterprise “authority”, force action that falls outside the alleged standards of the current illusion of “Rule of Law” for this “Constitutional Republic,” the continued separation across all spheres of human living will only continue, as the people in the dem camp and the people in the republican camp find themselves supporting violence against the other side that is perceived, rightly or wrongly (I think more rightly) as an existential threat to their hopes for a nation-state that reflects their preferences.

Meanwhile, for perhaps the plurality of the land, advances in technology, the ever-increasing cost of supporting the coercive enterprise governance model, will quietly migrate more and more people out of the entanglement of the coercive enterprise, not for ideational reasons, but for practical, prosperity and security reasons as the effects of the war between the two major camps vying for control of force power, the dems and the republicans, create even greater disadvantages for systems operating within coercive enterprise parameters.

The best-case scenario for those who welcome the disentanglement of people from the coercive enterprise model is a failure by either side to achieve the next-level of power consolidation realistically available to them.

The types of restrictions on human interaction that might be placed by dems could potentially interfere with the current technological trajectory that favors the power of individuals and free associations.  However, the interference could ultimately lead to an acceleration of the disentanglement process by wider numbers looking to escape the new threats of these dem-desired limitations on human interaction and behavior.
The ability of the dems to get the bureaucracy to act in harmony is much higher than it is for the republicans, so, in terms of carrying out policy, the dems are more of a ‘threat’ to use the state effectively against their enemies than the republicans are (as can be seen currently with Trump’s administration).

Remember, if you’re outside of both of these camps, you are potentially a target of BOTH camps.  For some (though I will still argue that in the aggregate the republicans do not currently directly threaten the advance of technologies that tilt the balance of power toward individuals and free associations nearly as directly as the dems do) the threat to your person might very well come more directly from the republican, as opposed to the dem, camp, and vice versa.  But, in the end, no matter the camp, you will eventually find yourself on the wrong side an exchange with that camp, unless you choose to go silent, or go “underground.”

For me, within my preferential framework, the best-case scenario for the current SCOTUS Affair of Brett Kavanaugh is that he is confirmed, the republicans lose control of the House, and hold on the Senate.  In 2020, the GOP holds on to the White House, regains the House, but loses the Senate.  This scenario still leaves both sides with hope, and thus not so inclined to resort to more destabilizing actions.  Meanwhile, it leaves the vast indifferent, be they passionately or apathetically indifferent, with time to continue to build homesteads and networks that enable more individuals and free associations to disentangle from the coercive enterprise.

My hope would be that by the time the two camps get to that ultimate showdown point, few people will show up to fight, because most everyone else will be able to simply not comply as they are no longer dependent on the coercive enterprise’s ‘services.’

My prediction, however, is that Kavanaugh is not confirmed, the Dems will take back the House, the republicans will hold on to the Senate.  The House will impeach Trump.  2020 will make the 2016 Election look like a civil affair.  There will be protests, marches, riots, fights.  The media will become overt in its panicked calls to save America from the republican Nazis.

The growing alt social media of the right will begin to compete with the progressive-state controlled social media giants.
There will be limited shootings.  Perhaps one or more major candidates will be assassinated, or survive an assassination attempt.
Corporate America will more aggressively attempt to purge republican voices from any platform they control.
The fake newsery will only get worse.

In the end, I predict the Dems will win the White House, the Senate, and the House.  They will have consolidated power at a level not seen perhaps since FDR’s Democratic Party, but even deeper, for now they own the schools, the news, the stories, the regulators, and the policy makers.  The one saving grace is that SCOTUS will check SOME of the major progressive state attempts to change the illusion of “Rule of Law” to something that lets their dreams more fully come true.

The election will be incredibly close, but the dems will still move as if they have a national mandate.
After the election, the dems will push through gun control laws, hate speech laws, and social media laws.

At this point, we will find out how committed the republicans are to holding on to certain abilities to act in a ‘lawful’ manner.  I confess to not having an answer to that question.  I suspect there will be little more than sporadic acts of violent resistance on the part of the republicans, but I also suspect that many of them will be primed and ready to receive information on how to disentangle from the snares and traps of the coercive enterprise, now fully controlled by the progressive state party.

I suspect the ability of the dems to hold on to their prize will be short-lived, as more and more people find ways to avoid the ever-increasing prying fingers of the progressive state, a state that will require more and more controls to control what cannot be controlled, the emergence of the non-state.

About Paul Gordon 3009 Articles
Paul Gordon is the publisher and editor of iState.TV. He has published and edited newspapers, poetry magazines and online weekly magazines. He is the director of Social Cognito, an SEO/Web Marketing Company. You can reach Paul at