WHAT OUTCOME?

[G]reat progress was evident in the last Congress of the American 'Labour Union' in that among other things, it treated working women with complete equality. While in this respect the English, and still more the gallant French, are burdened with a spirit of narrow-mindedness. Anybody who knows anything of history knows that great social changes are impossible without the feminine ferment. Social progress can be measured exactly by the social position of the fair sex....” 
― Karl Marx


This is the first time I have come across a non-sexist quotation from Marx. I wonder if Putin has read this. But then he must be very busy trying to pacify that area in Syria, after having led many military attacks within it.

Folks, you know, the contending candidates in the US elections, were mainly a man and a woman. Then the man won through the machinations of an outside power. Now that outside power denies the hacking to favor the so-called President-elect (PE) (mind you, elected by a handful of voters, only 304 electoral college members, but in terms of popularity vote, less than the 3M who voted for the woman.) 



However, the intelligence services of the US have declared that the hacking was concrete in order to favor the election of the current PE.

Different sectors are reacting to it: Pres. O has already expelled Russian diplomats. The alternative groups are creating a march to be held during and after the inaugural day. 

Question: how do we know if our movement is successful or not?
1. It is successful if it moves people to act to the right positive outcome that we want;

2. It is successful if it unearths the very causes for the creation of the movement; and 

3. It is successful if it overturns the results in favor of the one who should be the real beneficiary -- in this case, the fake beneficiary should step down in favor of the real one. 

I think it will be disastrous for the writing of the history of the United States if it only ends in unearthing the confusion brought about by the hacking, if it only pinpoints who the hackers have been, if it only peripherally attacks the problem by rounding up the perpetrators of the hacking. 

The outcome should be a vindication of the right of the 3 M people to be led by the candidate that they voted for.