The Oxford Society Press History of the World
“North America in nuclear ruin: an introduction”
Surprisingly, it wasn’t until the latter half of Trump’s second presidential term that the United States found itself engaged in an irredeemably devastating and entirely one sided thermo-nuclear altercation.
With the luxury of hindsight, and the clarifying detachment permitted by the passing of time, it is only now that we can truly appreciate how entertainingly the whole affair must have transpired. It would certainly have made quite a picture on the screen, performed as it was like the comedic theatre of antiquity.
In one of fate’s cruelest practical jokes, the first round of warheads were – as a wealth of recent study has verified – strategically and systematically targeted at all Trump branded properties across the United States, including Trump International Hotel Waikiki, Hawaii, and Trump Waste Disposals, Alaska. In a blink of fractionally greater than an instant, the entirety of the President’s real-estate portfolio was scaled down to scarcely more than a scattered mess of dust and rubble. Before domestic intelligence services, the global markets, or news media organizations could even register such a sharp and violent calamity, a second batch of drops devastated every major metropolitan area between and along America’s two great coastlines in addition to all state capitals and a meticulous selection of tactical military installations across the country.
Subsequent deposits thoroughly disabled the nation’s travel infrastructure; ports and harbors smashed and surrendered to the water; airports reduced to little more than fused glass and evaporated tar; charcoal and warped metal all that remains of the once envied trans-continental rail road. In all (though exact estimates of the total payload are a matter of the wildest speculation at best) it can be asserted with some confidence that widespread and significant deposits were delivered consistently over a 5 day period. The result, as has been documented at length, the absolute and total mutilation of the American nation.
Perhaps the most unfortunate detail in this whole catastrophe was the absolute lack of anticipation and forward planning on the part of United States as well the international community at large. They foresaw neither what had hit them nor how meticulously the game would be dominated from move one. The prospect of counter-strike was an impossibility; the origins of the attack having gone completely unnoticed by all of America’s most advanced object-detection technologies. Few senior defence officials at the time could have considered the very notion as even remotely plausible. Quite simply put, this was the greatest global security and intelligence failure witnessed in the modern era. That is not to suggest that the existence of any such foresight would have made much difference to how events transpired. Consider, for example, the assertions of Isaiah Berlin in his exploration of Machiavelli’s philosophy: “To know the worst is not always to be liberated from its consequences.” Berlin may have conceded that such knowledge may nevertheless be “preferable to ignorance,” but it cannot be said for sure that had any kind of last minute revelation been offered, it would have changed matters in any significant manner. Of course, we will never truly know the available options because on that fateful November evening, the United States became the first casualty in what many view to be the most uncertain and terrifying period of instability civilization has yet encountered. To quote the remarks of the French political theorist Jean-Luc Bagoulette, “Global warming suddenly became the least of our concerns.”
Without doubt, the November Rain1 represented the single most devastating nuclear unloading on a single nation in human history and the magnitude of such an event cannot be overstated. Through cross-disciplinary study and forensic data collection from a wide and varying spectrum of sources, the expert consensus has calculated the total loss of life at just short of genocide with close to a 75% fatality rate. A digestible statistic through the lens of historical recollection, but a truly cataclysmic happening at the time. Try to imagine the irreconcilable disfigurement of the entirety of human existence and that is barely half of the psychological journey one would need to traverse in trying to understand the magnitude of such a happening. For those caught in the event, this was the absolute armageddon.
For the survivors, to leave the country was an absolute necessity and thus began the largest migration of refugees since WWII. Some were fortunate and had resources to move North to whosoever could host them. However, for millions of impoverished, sick, starving and dying unfortunates, the only viable route of escape lay across the southern border and through the harsh terrain of Mexico.
Despite many sincere and concerted efforts to the contrary, no direct link has yet been established between Trump’s domestic and foreign policies and the motivations behind the disaster. However, these factors are of paramount importance when addressing the months that followed. Consider a proposition: could those people who championed and implemented Trump’s policies regarding Mexico, those workers who fixed steel and poured concrete into the wall, to the whole economy it supported, could they ever have anticipated that this unrelenting structure, built so enthusiastically to keep the internationals out on one side, would serve the dual purpose of more than adequately keeping their compatriots trapped in on the other? How ironic that the difference of opinions on Mexican immigration that contributed in no small part to the outcome of the 2016 election would so define the fate of so many desperate American refugees such a short time in the future. In fact, the topic of Mexican immigration was even a great cause for amusement and mockery for a not insignificant number of American voters in the run up to the 2016 election. With this in mind, the subsequent actions of the Mexican government, and their prohibitions on any and all southerly migration, are of little surprise.
While a remarkable volume of literature has laid great emphasis on the seemingly random and unprecedented nature of the Great American Disaster (and certainly its causes are a source of much dispute in academic and public debate), in the interest of forming a rounded viewpoint of the event, it is first necessary to firmly establish a clear grasp of context in any mind committed to such investigation. If one is to learn anything from human calamity, it is important to firstly understand and appreciate the social, economic and political circumstances that surround such events. To properly examine this particular episode in human folly, we must first establish a starting point back to which all subsequent events can be traced. For the Great American Disaster, there is no more fitting a place to begin than the 2016 presidential election and particularly the fundamental role played by Hillary Clinton in what would become the nuclear ruin of the United States.
(To be continued.)
1.↩ The origins of this term have been widely disputed almost as long as it has been in use. It is speculated to have been coined by an inhabitant of Los Angeles, California, who, returning to the city after a weekend in the Nevada desert, noted a “heavy downpour” on his journey back across state lines. Interestingly, meteorological reports strongly suggest that it was not raining in or around the Los Angeles area at the time of the attack.