Logic and anti-logic are like matter and antimatter, contrary to each other. A man cannot be born with logic or anti-logic or acquire it at any time in life. The two are immutable and represent unchangeable differences.

On 20 January 2017, Donald Trump was inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States. During his presidential campaign, Trump made campaign promises that included introducing changes to immigration, trade, taxes, and foreign policy. Trump claimed that his campaign promises will “Make America Great Again.”

No one can determine whether America is currently great, has lost its greatness, lacks it, or needs to become more powerful, among other possibilities. No matter what Donald Trump’s standards of idealism are for America, throughout history, humanity has been striving to become more effective. If Donald Trump’s aim is to make America more effective, then he deserves all the support possible.

Eight months have passed since Trump’s election, but many of the headline pledges he made before being elected president are not being fulfilled quickly enough.

Let us take this campaign promise that Donald Trump made to build a wall between Mexico and the United States if elected president.

A border barrier is a separation barrier that runs along an international border. Humans have been constructing walls for defensive reasons for thousands of years. Such barriers are typically constructed for border controls as well as curbing illegal immigration, human trafficking, and drug and contraband smuggling.

Drugs are chemicals that affect the brain by tapping into its communication system and interfering with the way neurons normally send, receive, and process information. It’s often harder for people who use drugs to think clearly and make wise decisions.

If Donald Trump (a person of logic) understands that building a wall between Mexico and the United States makes America great again (in other words, building the wall blocks drugs from entering the United States and prevents drug dealers and illegal immigrants from crossing the border = “good,” while not building the wall = “bad”). Currently, those who oppose Donald Trump’s plan to build the wall (referred to as anti-logic) are presenting interpretations that suggest not building the wall is beneficial for America (“good”), while building the wall hinders America’s greatness (“bad”).

It appears as if delaying the construction of the wall does delay America or any country from becoming great, whether this country was great before, lost its greatness, or would like to simply become greater.

If the preservation of human security is the sum of preserving the human body plus the natural world. We suppose man would gain nothing from preserving the natural world unless the preservation of the human body is made a precedence, even though humans depend on the natural world. The human reason is housed in the human body, and it is the human reason who commands the human body. Most people are willing to agree that drugs weaken a person’s ability to make right decisions, which makes any person become vulnerable. If certain nations consider that the human reason of their citizens would be doing wrong when this programmed aptitude pushes the human body to perceive that the benefits of using drugs seem to outweigh the costs, they would like to control it to minimize their vulnerability. The opposition voiced by a segment of the population against Donald Trump’s plan to build the wall demonstrates that democracy can lead to crises and conflicts, contrary to popular belief.

Moreover, if we incorporate into this perception how mankind wants fellowship to be principled like on the basis of winners and losers. It is difficult to understand why certain individuals are questioning the president’s intention to make his country great, which is the essence of Donald Trump’s pledge. Particularly, when one person’s security comes at the expense of another’s, it raises significant ethical concerns.

When George W. Bush proposed that the United States go to war to capture the perpetrator of the Sept. 11 attacks, many people opposed him, but public support remained high. Donald Trump is proposing to build a wall. Building the wall that Trump is proposing protects American children from harm, whereas going to war does not.

Those questioning Trump’s campaign promises can’t be motivated by logic, as we showed. Likewise, the argument attributing Trump’s delay to acts motivated by the Democrats’ election loss or bipartisan interests cannot be the real motive.

In any cost benefit analysis, efficient social choices involve the selection of those projects for which net social benefits are highest. The net social benefits from erecting the wall that Trump is suggesting are significant, considering the number of people who die each year in the US from overdose (we are analyzing the idea of curbing it from a social welfare perspective and are not concerned here with the method to transport the drugs to the US via underground tunnels under the wall or to drop the drugs over the wall).

I cannot determine why the American government has not yet approved the request made by this president to erect the wall. However, what we do know is that his suggestion to erect this wall generated an equal and an opposite reaction from people who oppose the wall. This standstill will eventually end with one group yielding to the other.

If one group refuses to concede voluntarily, one party will ultimately yield to the other, resolving all differences. However, what makes the circumstances of this particular case unique is that regardless of what arguments are presented by those who oppose the construction of this border wall, they remain unpersuasive. It would remain anti-logic for as long as drug production were not controlled.

A human being cannot be doing two things at the same time. If some people are against Donald Trump building a wall, then we are saying it would be anti-logic to be siding against it. Two factors explain why those who object to the president’s wall construction proceed with it. Those people may either be free and have nothing else to occupy their time, or they may be blocking Donald Trump’s decision because they do not want America to be great.

Either reason suggests that the physical body of those people who oppose the president’s wall construction is disengaged. Those who object to Trump due to their lack of preoccupation are physically idle. Those who oppose him because they don’t want America to be great don’t want to work.

Humans believe that ultimate wisdom comes from knowing oneself. The more a person knows, the greater their ability to reason, and the more they make the right choices.

This rise in the level of passing judgment on what Donald Trump needs to be doing or not doing since he was elected president could be a result of the citizens of this country managing to translate their politics into engagements that depict what the best form of government could look like, i.e., neither tyrannical nor democratic. However, as we said before, what Donald Trump is proposing is a measure that preserves human security, and for as long as drug distribution is not controlled, it would be illogical to sideline proceeding with erecting the wall.

Could this wave of increased public scrutiny regarding Trump’s actions be due to how much science is idling in the human body? The distancing of the human body from being preoccupied allows people to focus on seeking political and ethical truths, which can lead to making wrong choices instead of right ones.

The United States is leading the race to distance the human body of its citizens from creating unnatural change in the natural world using the programmed aptitude of the human body and to delegate this role to humanoids and technology. Could the people of the United States manage to reach and possess complete understanding of themselves to eventually then translate that gain into how to arrive at political and ethical truths and remain the guardians of the democratic institutions and traditions in the world when their citizens distance their human bodies from creating the natural change that their own body mass was created to exhibit in nature on its own?

I cannot answer the question posed above. However, it is reported in the Bible in the Old Testament that some people wanted to build themselves a city with a tower that reaches to the heavens so that they may make a name for themselves and avoid becoming scattered over the face of the whole earth. It appears that all of Donald Trump’s policies are precisely what can prevent the Americans from becoming scattered. We should not worry about God coming down and confusing Americans, but rather those who are preventing this president from doing his job.