Side note: it would be foolish to think that these two things are not related. The motivations for removing our civil rights dovetail with the goals for keeping us under control.
Even if the theory is that the two parties act as a duopoly and protect their shared interests, which seems unlikely given they barely contain their mutual hatred in public–wouldn't they have used such subversion to avoid the current president?
Have you heard the name J. Edgar Hoover[1]? Have you read about the FBI's, ah, interactions, with MLK[2]?
If so, on what grounds do you believe that such things don't happen today? With more subtlety, of course; things change, and the FBI has had a long time to refine technique.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King_Jr.#FBI_and...
It's pretty ridiculous that America's idea of an anti-establishment candidate is pro-foreign intervention, pro-big business, anti-drugs and favours mass incarceration. I mean, seriously, how is this different from Bill Clinton's policies.
TL;DR; Whilst there are genuine and important differences between the two parties and specific candidates, American policy in general is pretty damn stable.