The real America can think. This is a discovery. This real America is against powerful and influential representatives of the globalist financial elite.

In the history of modern geopolitics there was a very short pause, when the situation developed in such a way that the relevance of the methods of this science had moved slightly into the background. The election of Trump was built on the return to classical realism in the spirit of E. Carr and H. Morgenthau. The realism is the approach that argues that National States should rationally calculate their national interests and act accordingly in the limits of the possible -- taking into consideration the its own resources and potential of other powers defending their own interests. In International Relations, in this case dominates the principle of chaos (the absolutization of sovereignty and the rejection of the superiority of international law over national law). Every country is sovereign and free to do whatever it wants. The only obstacle is  the fact that others will behave exactly in the same way reducing thus the field of the possible. If the country is great and powerful, it can build up its own politics paying little or no attention at all to the interests of others. If it is small, then is forced to seek alliance with the stronger ones. So Trumps program in IR was based on the presumable return to the Westphalian system -- with some post-modernist additions – like a Mexican great Wall.

If we project these theses of the Trump in the next future and assume that they would be implemented, the geopolitical agenda would change qualitatively. I call it a transition to “vertical geopolitics”, where supporters of globalism (World Swamp) opposed to the supporters of sovereignty, and opposition to Land – Sea, East – West fade away. Such program was welcomed by all Trump's supporters  – from  European eurosceptics to Putin, but first of all it was eagerly accepted by American voters. Trump was elected precisely for this very IR agenda -- either the electorate did understood it rationally or feel intuitively.

Everything went more or less smoothly. I could not believe that Trump would  win with such a program, knowing how much the Swamp hated it, but once he did the impossible, it was possible to expect precisely such a turn. This does not mean that Trump would have recognized immediately the Crimea as Russian or something of that kind. But he shouldn't just care whose is Crimea, because the fact is irrelevant to the national interests of the United States.

The attitude of Trump to the Shiites was more alarming. In the strict realist approach the United States theoretically should not be bothered by Iran and shih axis as well. But that moment (shiah-phobia) could  be attributed to his fierce controversy with Obama bet on the domestication of Iran through a network of representatives of the Iranian Swamp and to his individual sympathy for right-wing realists from Israel (Netanyahu). Moreover, once Trump would withdraw globalist network in Iran, that would benefit Iran and its more conservative camp. In such conditions such forces would bolster their influence. And Russia would gain a new role in relations with the United States, speaking on behalf of Iran – because Iran concerns us directly, this is the zone of our national interests. That it is difference with USA. Iran is Russian neighbor, as Mexica or Canada is neighbor of USA.

About Syria just the same: if Trump would wanted oppose Obama's and the CFR destroying the network of Islamic terrorism (Daesh), he should make alliance with Russia  and leave Assad to stay exactly where he is. That  one would normally expect from Trump, and he repeated that many times during his compaigne.

Finally, South-East Asia – China, North Korea and the issue of Taiwan. For the United States –this is a region where the State has concrete strategic interests. And for Russia, on the other hand, this region is of secondary importance. 

Thus  Trump had promised a return to realism in IR that would become the new model for interpreting the structure of world politics. Probably, geopolitics will continue to be relevant, but on the lesser scale. The main game would be based on realist approach and therefore the major powers would construct their strategies in the new (post)geopolitical contexts. Hence the new rapprochement between Moscow and Washington would become possible.

It is significant that in my conversation with Alex Jones the most passionate supporter of Trump, it turned out that he had no clear idea about geopolitics and he understood “Atlanticism” as something related to Francis Bacon’s book “New Atlantis”. The format of the TV interview did not allow to highlight this issue properly, but it is significant that Alex Jones is not particularly worried about that. Alex Jones is realist and antiglobalist. For him America is the highest point of sovereignty and nothing else matters. That is quiet right and we expected of Trump something of this sort.

Obviously Trump, if we consider his words and his books, is very far from geopolitics. He probably is unaware of its very existence. So for him Russia should be but one of the factors in the international balance of forces: you can work with Russians, you can use them, you can cheat them, you can have conflict or peace with them and so on, all depends on concrete circumstances  – there is nothing personal or ideological, pure business.

If we continue to imagine further, what actions of Trump would or should be, we could assume the consequent Trump's attack on the Swamp, globalism, liberals. And at the same time -- defense of sovereignty, of conservatism and tradition. In that way thought the intellectuals of Breitbart, and even big sponsors from among the American extreme-right-wing billionaires – the Mercers and Kochs. "America first" is a perfectly acceptable realistic slogan. It could be reflected in our case in the symmetric “Russia first!” Being realistic both, Washington and Moscow could strike at the European Swamp, supporting the realists and eurosceptics in EU and everywhere. Everything was very promising and tempting.

But this idyll of a multipolar world, I must say, didn’t last too long. On the historical scale – a single moment. When trump attacked Syrian base in response to fake news about the use by Assad of chemical weapons, the entire picture collapsed. Trump, who for years was himself a target of the avalanche of fake news, the subject of surveillance and provocation by the Deep State, how can he could believe such a globalist lie?

The story of Jared Kushner and Ivanka depicting him as a complete idiot, most likely intended for mass use. But the fact remains: Trump has rejected the realism as the new system of American international strategy and returned back to the usual Atlanticist way of thinking and doing. Trump, of course, has not read from book of Mackinder, Brzezinski or myself. he reads hardly such kind of geopolitical books -- not his style. He even reproached Bannon that he devotes too much time reading Charles Maurras. Which means he either does not read serious works of political philosophy or does it rarely. But his behavior now (unlike during the campaign) clearly presents all traces of Atlanticism – with some special typically neocons features. Syria is under the patronage of Russia. Assad could not commit a chemical attack, primarily because that would be suicide for him and he had simply no reason to do that. Who did it in the reality doesn't matter -- either the militants of ISIS or brave killers from White Helmets, or both with secret compliance of CIA (still working against Trump with the fakes of nonexisting Russian hackers). It was pure disinformation – the same as in the case of the chemical weapon of Saddam Hussein that caused the attack on Iraq and complete destruction of the country. In the case of Iraq the misinformation was prepared and promulgate by neocons. This time they are certainly the source of the new disinformation. When Trump accepted to be cheated the Swamp breathed with a sigh of relief: instead of war with it in all the spaces of the planet there begins again the new round of confrontation between civilizations of the Sea and the Land, Sea Power vs Land Power. So again --  no “vertical geopolitics”, just familiar and classic great war of continents.

That means classical geopolitics is back. It is obvious that Trump didn't study geopolitical laws in a meanwhile. From now on he will be simply used by other decision makers. Nothing but one puppet more. Behind the curtain are this time neocons once more. Neocons will set the tone in the White House. The only difference of their version of geopolitics is excessive care of State of Israel and radical Islamophobia. All the rest is a direct and explicit Atlanticism, unipolarity, imperialism and hegemony, including various forms of interventionism. And all these features were clearly seen during the time of escalation in Syria Tomahawk bombing Shayrat air base and North Korea clownish scandal.

There is no more Trump. It is over. Optical illusion of realism did not last long.

But it is impossible to enter the same river twice: every cycle brings something new. Therefore, we should carefully look at the factors that made the very victory of Trump possible. If we observe Trump's history of success closer we will find very important factor that was decisive. Trump was chosen not for neo-conservatism because he many times denied and criticized that. His program was radically different. It was based on classical -- old style -- conservatism of pre-Wilsonian era (paleo-conservatism) in domestic politics and on realism in IR. It was coherent conceptual set of doctrines and principles that clearly contradicted not only to globalism of Obama's democrats and CFR proponents of World Government, but to hegemonic colonialism and unipolarity of neocons with their perverted ultraliberal (post) Trotskyism. American establishment (CFR and neocons) didn't accept Trump as his own befor the elections. So there was only way to become President -- to challenge establishment as such and to try to gain the support of anti-establishment circles of American people. And that worked our well. Trump was the winner addressing the masses over the head of self declared masters.

So the question is: Trump has betrayed his own doctrine in the first three months of being in White House. How it was possible? Who was behind him from the very beginning?

Now we can answer that question easily. Trump's program was prepared and very skillfully brought to the masses through Breitbart, Steve Bannon network (including Alt-Right), Alex Jones from and pollster Kelly Conway. The role of pollster is important. Any sociological poll is biased by definition. P. Bourdiau has explained why and how. The public opinion is not something natural that sociologists should discover. The sociologists and above all pollsters create the public opinion, construct it. It is the game of domination by the discourse. The Swamp used its own pollsters that treated American citizen basing on their presumption of how they should be, not on how they are. So their polls were biased from the very beginning.  Kelly Conway applied other technology -- so called real polls accepting the society as it is not as it should be. It served to Trump a lot.

Behind this group stood the shadow figure of a billionaire family Mercers. The role of Rebeca Mercer in putting Bannon and Conway in the campaign headquarters Trump is revealed today.

A crucial role was played by another bigger billionaire Koch brothers, who have traditionally supported different networks of American paleo-conservatives. The Wall Street bankers sabotaged the lending of money for Trump during campaign being the part of establishment (working on the behalf of the globalists from CFR and  of the Atlanticists neocons). But Mercers and Kochs are independent enough and they have decided to bet on Trump. Precisely because they challenge the establishment too. Or rather that were they who really challenged the establishment -- not Trump.

All the key architects of Trump's triumph bet on Trump as the President of America first! -- that means on realist in IR and traditionalist and paleo-conservative in the domestic politics. They didn't need one neocons more in White House.

But there was another very important and, in fact, the main factor in Trump victory – the American people. This reality in the last decades almost completely disappeared from the political scene, being replaced by a simulacrum, a media caricature. Globalists have hijacked the very image of American people replacing it with artificially constructed chimera -- leftists, LGBT supporter, politically correct and conformist. The real people that didn't fit the accepted formula was qualified as "deplorables". 

When the Swamp confronted with the reality of American people electing Trump this perverted image cultivated during the decades collapsed. And there looked out the face of a real American that has nothing to do with the normative tolerant or transgender, immigrant-feminist figure which is depicted as typical  “Americans” by Systems' media. It is clear that silent, dispossessed American majority, deprived of all political representation still exists. And when the moment comes it appears on the scene supporting its President and communicating with him through the real channels of information - as for example of brave Alex Jones. During the campaign we saw this real America -- America as Resistance (You are the resistance! -- repeats Alex Jones). The Trump's victory was the victory of this same Resistance, of real American people. For this America it was a very important sign –the taste of strength and power, the taste of victory. 

Therefore, now we shouldn't abandon “vertical geopolitics” completely. Yes, we must recognize that we have lost Donald Trump he appeared to be but one more bluff, manipulated by usual CFR and neocons guys. But we have obtained much more powerful ally -- American People.

The struggle of the people against the globalist elite and against the Swamp with Trump as symbol didn't last long. But it is a symptom. Disappointment with Trump is a natural phenomenon, and traitors generally suffer a vile fate. But still we can not any more directly identify the Atlanticism and globalism with the United States of America. We saw in this election a different America, the America of the depth, worthy and courageous. And even if we are forced to engage in a global conflict against Sea Power (as Land Power we have no other choice), we will obliged to divide the American elite, who starts a war and who needs to get paid by the correspondent price for that, and the real America, American America. American elite is not American. They are usurpers of the real will of American people. So we need transform coming imperialistic war in the planetarian war between the peoples with their identities and cultures against globalist elites who exploit any people -- American, Russian, French, German -- but as well Arab, Iranian or Turk. So "vertical geopolitics" becomes thus the invitation to the global Conservative Revolution. And in this process we are allies with Americans, not foes.

Anti-Americanism is removed from the agenda, not only because of the Pro-Russian promises of Trump, and not at all because of him, but because the American people proved its dignity having voted for the right Idea. And it is not its fault that the carrier of this Idea has proved to be nullity. The Choice is important.

And in addition to that we have seen a new phenomenon — the American conservative intellectuals, and even traditionalists. This destroys the image of the typical American as a hard-core globalist moron and consumerist zombie. The real America can think. This is a discovery. And finally, this real America is against powerful and influential representatives of the globalist financial elite. The rich supporters of Trump have shown that there can be and still exists national capital. Against cultural Marxists not every kind capitalism is globalist and internationalist by definition. So we have real and powerful allies among serious people. They will make correct analysis of Trump history and will certainly draw conclusions.

So not is lost. Far from that. It’s only the beginning.