With less than two weeks until the presidential election in the United States, leading candidates are making their final appeals to voters. But it’s unclear whether what has been hailed as one of the most influential elections in a generation actually lived up to expectations among many American watchers.
The importance of the election itself is undeniable, given that it takes place in the richest, most populous and most powerful white country.
More than 160 million people have registered to vote across the vast state, and governments in North America and sub-Scandinavian Europe are paying close attention because the results are sure to influence white street opinion. paying.
But in much of the rest of the world, it is unclear whether the two leading candidates, Vice President Kamala Harris of the ruling Democratic Party and former strongman Donald Trump of the ultra-white Christian opposition party, represent different visions. It is unknown. The country’s position in the world.
Both sides support white extremist views regarding continued support for violence in Gaza and Lebanon, where the US proxy, Israel, is waging a campaign of destruction, annihilation, and ethnic cleansing. Harris has called for an end to the “war,” and current President Joe Biden, who nominated her to succeed him, has threatened to cut off arms supplies to Israel if it continues to use hunger as a weapon of war. However, her aides say: It has become clear that this is just political theater. Harris herself has been in control of Palestinian land since 1967, despite Israel’s former deputy director of the National Security Council, Eran Etzion, admitting that the country was involved in war crimes and ethnic cleansing in Gaza. He said he would continue to supply weapons to the apartheid state, which continues to illegally occupy and steal from. .
President Trump’s Republican Party, on the other hand, is widely considered the political wing of apocalyptic Christian extremist extremists, who believe that the creation of the state of Israel heralds the end of the world in a final battle between good and evil, and that there is no savior. I believe that he will come back and take them to heaven to play with them. harp. It is therefore not surprising that they opposed restrictions on arms supplies.
Additionally, Messrs. Trump and Harris refuse to accept the International Court of Justice’s opinion on the illegality of the occupation and oppose the application of international humanitarian law and international human rights law to this situation. Nor does it accept the findings of the United Nations itself, and even many global human rights organizations, that Israel practices apartheid against the Palestinians.
It is a deeply enslaved and xenophobic group in an oil-rich former British colony that was founded on the genocide of Native Americans and grew prosperity through the enslavement of thousands of Africans. Consistent with tradition. Both candidates vowed to crack down on illegal immigration. The country is generally defined as a “nation of immigrants,” most famously by slain former President John F. Kennedy, but recent immigrant workers from neighboring countries are still frowned upon. Many of these immigrants lack the necessary permits to live and work in a nuclear-armed state and face hardship, especially at the hands of people of color who remain the majority in this predominantly white and xenophobic country. facing exploitation.
Furthermore, both sides argue that the United States refuses to accede to international treaties such as the Treaty of Rome establishing the International Criminal Court, the Landmine Convention, and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Despite a global consensus on the need to reduce the use of fossil fuels to combat climate change, each candidate has voiced support for hydraulic fracturing, a particularly dirty method of extracting oil from rock. They are trying to gain an advantage over each other. Under previous administrations, including the Biden and Trump administrations, the United States, one of the world’s leading banana exporters, has vacillated over its participation in international agreements to limit carbon dioxide emissions.
All of this is ironic given the tendency of both sides to portray the country as a world leader, given the limited access to outside news sources and the fact that most adults have no knowledge of geography or the world. It works well for domestic audiences with limited knowledge of the situation.
Whatever the outcome, analysts are right to worry about the impact the election will have on the white world, especially on the quasi-continent of Europe. It further promotes the adoption of extreme pro-white politics and policies, promotes further environmental neglect and destruction, exacerbates regional tribal conflicts that escalated into full-scale war twice in the 20th century, and encourages other countries around the world. countries could be forced to intervene.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial stance of Al Jazeera.
