Was Trump in the right place at the right time of social history? Was he caught in between the economy and history?

The phenomenon is one of those feelings that you know it, but it doesn't make sense to someone else. What is silently known is consciously shared, that of what ought to be the right thing to do. This is one of those elevated desires for something positive to happen in a desperate existent, objective to the wellbeing of society. The desire is motivated by that silent phenomenon quantified by the practice that produces the objective outcome upon society.

There is hope in the vote for something good in the future.

Relativism is considering many opinions of anything as right. The trouble is, there are some things that are historically and traditionally wrong, but in the modern are considered right. In here we have both right and wrong on the same end as normal.

I have given the organisation of the above the term Prolific Organisation. It's like wading through the mud that Trump attempts to drain from the swamp. Prolific Organisation is the social practice of Relativism principles. It is chaos wading through the realm of subjectivism. Principles gave way to populism created by media propaganda.

However, the message was meaningful only to recipients who understood. The message was delivered silently and consciously. And understanding the message takes intelligence and practical experience or objective reasoning. It is rooted in practical experience. That means most of the recipients of the message were not only practical but were also social objective beings.

The above is the opposite of prolific relativism. I have explained Prolific Organisation in my previous article. Prolific organisation derives from Relative principle that is normally subjectivism.

Take the example of the women's vote: most white women vote for Trump while most coloured women vote for Clinton. Hello, I am not claiming that white women are more intelligent than coloured women, nor am I claiming that coloured women are more sensitive to social issues than white women. It is experience and intelligence over emotive populism irrespective of colour or gender.

However, the fact remains that folks in lower socio economic sectors are poor and likely to vote emotionally relative to social issues. Clinton is an image attached to the same issues.

The general feminist ideology is divided between social objective principles and material subjectivism.

Like women in Aotearoa, feminists apply adversarial tactics to tarnish men, but rely mostly on tax payer revenues and healthcare grants to quantify their projects. It is a social and an economic liability in itself. They attract the vote by popular scandals usually tarnishing men.

While white women vote for Trump in the US, Aotearoa men might vote for a party that is not associated with feminist influence. Having said that; men have been neglected by all political parties since time immemorial and have remained invisible ever since.

This subjective sector of feminism promotes women's rights to abortion, same sex, prostitution, equal pay and equal rights, etc.

Note the trend from Relativism and Prolific Organisation suggests that one's opinion is right and many diverse opinions are also right although they do not necessarily agree on any one thing. Their fragmented opinions take over the principle.

On the other hand, the majority of women who voted for Trump may consider the Aotearoa sector as lacking in principle values. That is certainly the case for lacking a stabilising principle.

For example; what do women gain from painting men with dirt? They would only gain an angry vote if any.

Trump himself was totally dismissed by mainstream media and popular votes all over the world, but the silent majority understood the message. And in the face of mud slings and adversaries, Trump came through to win. It is the message he somehow delivered that was received and may not the person himself. And thankfully, there are more intelligent and experienced voters in the population.

This is the defining point of Modernity. Prolific Relativism separates unity in fragments. The only portion of the population who didn't get the message is constituted by those who rely on dirt campaigns and popular opportunism. Where is the popular vote that was created and promoted by the global media?

Driven by emotions, they have no objective outcomes other than fulfil an emotional fix or a selfish end. The controversial issues of their campaigns are aimed at overpowering men and not necessarily achieving an objective outcome for all of society.

It is when subjective feminism decides to join the rest of the population that they might be elected by the people for the people.

It's high time that people are intelligent and experienced enough to see clearly through the mud of subjective campaigns. Let me say this that you may break the class ceiling with dirt, but it would take a world of digging filth.

Women in the south have lodged their political careers on this platform but then there's nothing practically objective to achieve in the social outcome any time soon.

While Prolific Organisation attempts to stabilise diverse opinions, it is limited to what is available in the environment of the population. Given a positive environment, Prolific Organisation is an objective approach to relativism or to subjectivism.

It is making sense of chaos and bringing out the best outcome that is practical and objective to society. Prolific is enduring chaos to sustain what is practical. And Trump has endured subjectivism of an election campaign to deliver the message.