1. #26221
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Thekri View Post
    So to be clear, I don't blame Trump for breaking it. That was the right thing to do.
    I am reminded of the words of an American icon:

    First you don't want me to get the pony, then you want me to take it back. Make up your mind!
    Trump shouldn't have canceled a meeting with the Taliban, in the sense that, there should never have been one in the first place.

    Also, we've seen recently why the meeting was secret. The President of Afghanistan didn't know Trump was meeting the Taliban, yes the same Taliban who spent the last week murdering Afghanis, and had to demand in public to see the deal Trump was working with them, a peace deal which basically gave them the same legitimacy that Trump gave North Korea. I also suspect the meeting was secret because Trump's afraid to announce ANYTHING so that, when it fails, nobody knows about it.

    "But Breccia! What evidence do you have of this? Just because there's no announced policy changes or proposed bills doesn't mean they're all being done in secret!"

    First of all, "most transparent administration ever".

    Second of all, they're either being hidden, or not being done. Pick one.

    And finally of all, look back at his record recently. Even someone with an IQ of six-point-spork will eventually get the message.

    I'll keep coming back to this phrasing until it stops being appropriate: Trump gets no credit for backing away from his own bad idea. If I go into a church and body check a nun and start kicking her over and over until someone in the crowd says "Stop!" and I say "Alright" I'm still guilty of a violent assault. The only benefit is I might be able to plead out of attempted murder.

  2. #26222
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    Skewing that way does not imply or require there not be boundaries. Nor does it imply that they are correct in what they want. This is why referendums are horrific ideas.

    The people selected representatives to act on their behalf and make decisions on their behalf combines both the legitimization that can only come from popular assent, along with the filter provided by having a far smaller, select group decide the optimum course of action and keep our system within certain defined boundaries.

    If universal suffrage was the end all, be all of democratic, why not put all major pieces of legislation up for a plebiscite every year? Because popular passions are dangerous things and the people are not, and not expected to be, fully informed of everything. It is simply not their job. It is their right and even responsibility, however, to choose representatives whose job it is.
    By and large, I like your vision. But the past three years have very much higlighted (with a black sharpie!) that if if the electorate is uninformed, we concede democracy to crooks. There will always be shady characters playing on people who cannot or will not bother to be aware of what's going on.

  3. #26223
    Quote Originally Posted by Flarelaine View Post
    By and large, I like your vision. But the past three years have very much higlighted (with a black sharpie!) that if if the electorate is uninformed, we concede democracy to crooks. There will always be shady characters playing on people who cannot or will not bother to be aware of what's going on.
    This is my entire point, if the public dooms the establishment to failure then it is up to that establishment to not allow things to get to that point where they feel the need to elect dangerous people to begin with. It comes down to some people wanting the general populace to abide by their " betters " which serves no one excluding a small minority. Fix the systemic problems and then we will have peace but until then we will have more and more populist chaos in a age where China is building a strong enough coalition to fight back against the west. No one wants to bring the corporations to heel for that, they are the ones that built up a totalitarian regime it should be in large part up to them to fix it.

    Trump is not the last either and i can say that with confidence given the elections of Modi, Bolsonaro, Duterte, Erdogan and Morales to name a few. Fix the reasons as to why they were elected in the first place and the entire problem goes away, try to continue on like the world worked before hand and it will cause more and more chaos only for the real enemy China to grow stronger and stronger.

  4. #26224
    Quote Originally Posted by jeezusisacasual View Post
    Trump is not the last either and i can say that with confidence given the elections of Modi, Bolsonaro, Duterte, Erdogan and Morales to name a few. Fix the reasons as to why they were elected in the first place and the entire problem goes away, try to continue on like the world worked before hand and it will cause more and more chaos only for the real enemy China to grow stronger and stronger.
    Implying that these fascists are not real enemies of society as a whole by themselves.
    "My successes are my own, but my failures are due to extremist leftist liberals" - Party of Personal Responsibility

    Prediction for the future

  5. #26225
    Quote Originally Posted by PosPosPos View Post
    Implying that these fascists are not real enemies of society as a whole by themselves.
    The fascists in America are a serious problem. But a limited one. If they have legs is something that remains to be seen.

    The greatest threat to American security is China. Or rather, the course China and the US are on. China does know know how to operate as a powerful country, and does not know, or it seems care to know, exactly what the US red lines are. It will continue in engage in ever more reckless behavior that creeps up to the US and its allies red lines and not even realize it. The US is caught in the awkward position of realizing the magnitude of the Chinese threat, but also somewhat unable to believe that it has to deal with this shit again (in so many words). You have progressives who are in denial because it means the end of the social spending revolution they dreamed of. You have the far right half ignoring it because they're still obsessed with ISIS and radical islam like it's still 2005. You have the 1990s relics who still want to believe that we can trade our way into making a China a responsible actor. And you have the country largely deleveraging from China, creating a real risk that we'll react too quickly or too assertively and cross China's red lines.

    The US-China New Cold War is going to be in its own way, more dangerous than the US-Soviet Cold War because unlike then, we don't have the unifiying experience of World War II that served to facilitate a level of commonality and understanding between countries' leadership, Generals, political leaders and so forth. That's why this world we're going into is so dangerous.

    And yes this supersedes Climate Change. Because without joint US-Chinese Climate change action, there is no meaningful Climate change response. The US-Chinese relationship is the crucible through which everything this century goes through. Nothing else approaches its importance.

  6. #26226
    Quote Originally Posted by Benggaul View Post
    Thank you. I knew he had said this but did not have the stomach to comb through his monumentally ignorant Twitter feed to find it.

    What are the odds Trump is actually a Time traveler and has actually been attacking himself via Twitter this whole time?
    You don't need to, tbh. There is a subreddit dedicated to digging up these kinds of tweets and they are pretty fast at it. No need to look at it yourself.

    And yeah, if Obama had even remotely considered inviting Taliban leaders just to any location in the US for negotiations, a lot of conservatives would have probably called him a traitor.

  7. #26227
    Quote Originally Posted by Shon237 View Post
    Did I ever mention this administration might be corrupt?



    https://twitter.com/politico/status/...806482432?s=19

    In short US military aircraft who flew supplies from US to Kuwait would make a stop over in Glasgow, Scotland.

    What happens to be in Glasgow, Scotland? A Trump business property which these crews apparently have been staying at.

    The Pentagon has yet to answer why.

    From the article.



    https://www.politico.com/amp/story/2...mpression=true

    Of course this does not mean the US taxpayer has made up the difference, but would be nice to see the expenses.

    I suppose this is where I should state the obvious, that if any Presidency had a government agency or yunno, the US military spend money at their business. I would think that might be corruption.

    Edit Alright I read this on twitter.

    Contract with DOD to begin refueling services at this airport near the Trump golf course in Scotland was signed in 2016, while Obama was still in office


    So idk if this reporter is saying they are not staying at Trump's hotel or not. But, it does look as though Trump did not make the order for the stopover, since it was under Obama.
    This administration never disappoints


    BREAK: THE AIR FORCE has just confirmed to us that seven C-17 crew members stayed at Turnberry in March. Air Force ops & spending in Scotland are still under investigation, a spokesman said, and a response to House Oversight is not immediately forthcoming. https://t.co/kJGD033rTS
    Democrats are the best! I will never ever question a Democrat again. I LOVE the Democrats!

  8. #26228
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    Still doesn’t piss me off as much as him inviting the Taliban to Camp David 3 days before 9/11. And assholes on the right are praising him for cancelling the meeting. Fucking clowns.
    It's always okay when their side does it.

    Dontrike/Shadow Priest/Black Cell Faction Friend Code - 5172-0967-3866

  9. #26229
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    The fascists in America are a serious problem. But a limited one. If they have legs is something that remains to be seen.
    I'm not dismissing China on the international level but it seems the United States weakness is always domestic.

    Maybe a reach or hyperbole, but a rise in facsim or more accurately white nationalism seems legitimate.

    I give a simple and broad brush here but simply will the white demographic turn to the fear of being the minority and thus losing power (economic, political, culture, etc.)

    To me this looks to be a perfect formula for rise of populism, white nationalism in this case and fascism.

  10. #26230
    Over 9000! ringpriest's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    The Silk Road
    Posts
    9,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    The fascists in America are a serious problem. But a limited one. If they have legs is something that remains to be seen.

    The greatest threat to American security is China. Or rather, the course China and the US are on. China does know know how to operate as a powerful country, and does not know, or it seems care to know, exactly what the US red lines are. It will continue in engage in ever more reckless behavior that creeps up to the US and its allies red lines and not even realize it. The US is caught in the awkward position of realizing the magnitude of the Chinese threat, but also somewhat unable to believe that it has to deal with this shit again (in so many words). You have progressives who are in denial because it means the end of the social spending revolution they dreamed of. You have the far right half ignoring it because they're still obsessed with ISIS and radical islam like it's still 2005. You have the 1990s relics who still want to believe that we can trade our way into making a China a responsible actor. And you have the country largely deleveraging from China, creating a real risk that we'll react too quickly or too assertively and cross China's red lines.

    The US-China New Cold War is going to be in its own way, more dangerous than the US-Soviet Cold War because unlike then, we don't have the unifiying experience of World War II that served to facilitate a level of commonality and understanding between countries' leadership, Generals, political leaders and so forth. That's why this world we're going into is so dangerous.

    And yes this supersedes Climate Change. Because without joint US-Chinese Climate change action, there is no meaningful Climate change response. The US-Chinese relationship is the crucible through which everything this century goes through. Nothing else approaches its importance.
    I agree with much of this, but a key I think you're missing is the dangers posed by American irrationality at the higher levels of decision-making (not that the PRC isn't moving in an unfortunate direction itself, with Xi auditioning for a revival of Mao-style governance instead of Deng's much saner approach) - and I'm not just talking about Trump, but systemic flaws in many aspects of American leadership.

    Si vis pacem, para bellum - as the very old (and culturally transcendent) saying goes, if you wish for peace, prepare for war, and, to use a different quote very appropriate to this particular forum, the US are not prepared!

    For decades, America, and the American military complex, have been coasting on the laurels of victory in the Cold War - and not just in what decisions are made, but the American decision-making process itself has become disconnected, corrupt and possibly delusional (this is, for the record, extremely bad news for the US - something similar is a major contributor to the Soviet Union's downfall). If the US is going to fight, much less win, a Cold (or heavens-forbid, hot) war with China, then it actually needs to be prepared to do so. Instead, you're looking at a nation that hasn't successful completed a major military or military-adjacent project in this century; even worse, the US military has become a force that is not capable and does not even truly think in terms of an all-up war with a near-peer, and yet simultaneously thinks it will win such a war easily; this is a recipe for disaster.

    If the United States as an entity seriously expects to compete with China for global supremacy (and for the record, I do not think it does - instead, I believe its kleptocrats will be perfectly happy to split the world with Chinese kleptocrats, even if they end up with the smaller slice of it) then it needs to institutionally make a number of changes within the next half-decade:

    -return the military to a serious near-peer combatant posture, ending the combination of a military focused on international thuggery and defense-industry looting. That includes: an air force capable of sustain operations, and that can take losses and keep going (less than a score of B-2s is not anywhere close to sufficient, for example); a 300+ ship navy capable at fleet operations, with extensive ASW and mine-sweeping capability, ready for an intense EW environment, with far more capable air wings, with more planes and more wings than it has carriers (not less); a marine corps that can actually do its job (port seizure and amphibious assault) instead of being an overgrown and glorified spec-ops service; an army that is ready to operate with and against armor, artillery, and enemy air support; and finally, it all needs to be able to work without the internet, and without space (because LEO and geosync will both be gone within a week of the balloon really going up).

    -return to a rational, merit-based and yes, technocratic, decision-making structure; this means abandoning the Republican-initiated (and Democrat-imitated) culture war in favor of a focus on results (although see my next point) - the United States cannot afford to enable corruption and coddle pet causes if it wishes to survive.

    -the above both demands and requires an end to institutionalized racism, privilidge, and financialized rent extraction. An America struggling for global supremacy cannot afford to toss its best and brightest aside because of the color of their skin or because they didn't go to the right school, neither can it have them seeking wealth through attracting eyeballs to advertising or figuring out clever hacks for the stock market - it needs them in the sciences, in engineering, in the military, and in civilian leadership positions.

    -And tied into this, the United States needs to figure out how to become one country again; a time of high-stress on the American socioeconomic fabric is coming, and to quote a great American, "a house divided against itself cannot stand". If the United States not address its internal stressors, social and economic, it will not be able to survive what is coming (and that's bad news for the American right, because their mix of wealthy inequality and reality rejection is going to have far more on the chopping block than the American left (although they are going to lose some, too)); America needs to be a place where everyone (elites, capital, labor, the poor, foreign allies) has a stake in the nation's success and victory, or its not going to be able to win.


    For the record, I do not think the above will happen - there won't be a new Cold War once Trump has finished discredting populism and associated ideas, and neither will the US come to its senses; oh, the Chinese Menace will get trotted out as an excuse for defense industry welfare (and the accompanying transfer of wealth from the public to the pockets of the "1%") but there will not be any US vs. Soviet style struggle. Instead, the elities in both nations (and elsewhere - the 1% are growing increasingly disconnected from national governments) will play a game of seeing how much they can loot without causing dangerous (to them) social and national disintigration while quietly sabotaging the others attempts to do the same. A likely outcome seems to be collapse and break-up of both the US and China within the next half-century, in the best case without any major wars (the worst case bottoms out at 'end of modern civilization').
    "In today’s America, conservatives who actually want to conserve are as rare as liberals who actually want to liberate. The once-significant language of an earlier era has had the meaning sucked right out of it, the better to serve as camouflage for a kleptocratic feeding frenzy in which both establishment parties participate with equal abandon" (Taking a break from the criminal, incompetent liars at the NSA, to bring you the above political observation, from The Archdruid Report.)

  11. #26231
    Quote Originally Posted by PosPosPos View Post
    Implying that these fascists are not real enemies of society as a whole by themselves.
    They are given the spotlight because of how they rally those around them to join a cause out of desperation. I am sure if the lower rungs of society had decent prospects to look forward to then Trump and his ilk would have never been elected. I know that my religious background will always be under attack by a specific segment but they are small and do not matter in the grand scheme.

  12. #26232
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,909
    Well, the NOAA unsigned memo 5 days too late is no longer the only evidence we have of Trump demanding facts be rewritten to fit his whim.

    Nearly a week before the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration publicly backed President Trump over its own scientists, a top NOAA official warned its staff against contradicting the president.

    In an agencywide directive sent Sept. 1 to National Weather Service personnel, hours after Trump asserted, with no evidence, that Alabama “would most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated,” staff was told to “only stick with official National Hurricane Center forecasts if questions arise from some national level social media posts which hit the news this afternoon.”

    They were also told not to “provide any opinion,” according to a copy of the email obtained by The Washington Post.
    Then they sent the memo. Whoops.

    A NOAA meteorologist who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution said the note, understood internally to be referring to Trump, came after the National Weather Service office in Birmingham contradicted Trump by tweeting Alabama would “NOT see any impacts from the hurricane.”

    The Birmingham office sent the tweet after receiving a flurry of phone calls from concerned residents following Trump’s message.
    Just a reminder: the time between Trump's tweet, and the NWS response, was about 20 minutes.

    Flurry. In 20 minutes. In case anyone out there is defending Trump with "it was only a tweet", he was causing a panic.

    The agency sent a similar message warning scientists and meteorologists not to speak out on Sept. 4, after Trump showed a hurricane map from Aug. 29 modified with a hand-drawn, half-circle in black Sharpie around Alabama.

    “This is the first time I’ve felt pressure from above to not say what truly is the forecast,” the meteorologist said. “It’s hard for me to wrap my head around. One of the things we train on is to dispel inaccurate rumors and ultimately that is what was occurring — ultimately what the Alabama office did is provide a forecast with their tweet, that is what they get paid to do.”

    An NWS spokesperson said, “NWS leadership sent this guidance to field staff so they (and the entire agency) could maintain operational focus on Dorian and other severe weather hazards without distraction.
    Hmm. Didn't work, did it?

    For the record, NOAA didn't respond for 5 days. Trump was the one tweeting nonstop, screaming into the wind that he was right no matter how much objective information proved otherwise.

    Late Friday afternoon, NOAA officials further angered scientists within and beyond the agency by releasing a statement, attributed to an unnamed agency spokesperson, supporting Trump’s claims on Alabama and chastising the agency’s Birmingham meteorologists for speaking in absolutes.

    That statement set off a firestorm among scientists, who attacked NOAA officials for bending to Trump’s will.

    “This looks like classic politically motivated obfuscation to justify inaccurate statements made by the boss. It is truly sad to see political appointees undermining the superb, lifesaving work of NOAA’s talented and dedicated career servant,” said Jane Lubchenco, who served as NOAA administrator under President Barack Obama.
    There's no defending Trump on this one. Well, not effectively, anyhow.

    "You sure don't want to let this go."

    Trump either lied about the location of a natural disaster, or spoke on the subject as if it was fact while objectively being wrong due to intentional incompetence. That's deplorable enough, let alone his other attacks on science because "I don't believe it." Frankly, everyone else should be upset about that, too. Directing a science agency to back his play, despite again being objectively wrong, isn't just dictatorial, it's Orwellian.

    "Ah, but surely you're writing about this over and over because nothing else is happening! Ahah! Trump must be doing alright, if the only thing he did in the span of 24 hours is lie about reality!"

    Okay, fine, here's another article titled

    White House announces Jared Kushner's former 'coffee boy' as new Middle East envoy
    "..."

    Yeah, be careful what you wish for.

    As I've posted recently, the lawyer most credited for writing Trump's Middle East Peace Plan, the one he promised he had while campaigning and whose rules and effects we still don't know (other than "take Jerusalem unilaterally from the Palestinians, then drop back 10 and punt") decided to spend more time with his family last week, before the Israeli election which in turn is before the grand reveal...maybe. Well, we have the Only The Best People @Edge- plug replacement: a covfefe boy.

    The new US-Middle East peace envoy will be a 30-year-old White House administrative assistant, President Donald Trump announced yesterday.

    Avi Berkowitz, an assistant to White House senior advisor and Mr Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, will inherit the role from Jason Greenblatt, formerly Mr Trump’s real estate lawyer, after Mr Greenblatt announced yesterday he would step down.

    Mr Berkowitz, who graduated from Harvard Law School in 2016
    Actually I need to interrupt right here. Remember when the GOP criticized intellectual elites? They just hired, in this role, someone right out of Harvard. It's been a while since I went to my own alma mater who had a law school frequently rated as good if not better, and even then I didn't memorize the course catalog, but I don't remember the law school offering Who Knew Middle East Peace Could Be So Easy 101. But beyond how, well, objectively unqualified this guy is, when Team Trump hires directly out of Harvard Law, based on no other qualifications in any way, that excuse is no longer valid. From now on, any defense of GOP and/or Trump decrying "intellectual elites" will be rendered not just null and void, but also hypocrisy.

    Sorry. I don't make the rules.

    has no foreign policy experience. He joined the Trump campaign in 2016 and has since served as Mr Kushner’s right-hand-man in the administration.

    A 2017 Business Insider profile of Mr Berkowitz quoted former White House spokeswoman Hope Hicks as saying his main duties were “daily logistics like getting coffee and coordinating meetings.”

    A former employer said on Twitter Mr Berkowitz was “not very impressive and needed significant hand-holding to handle even simple assignments. But Mideast peace? I’m sure he’s got this!” Another Arab states expert described him as “a glorified intern”.

    The appointment “demonstrates a lack of seriousness” in the administration’s approach to the peace plan and Mr Kushner’s complete dominance over the process, former Middle East advisor to the US defence department Jasmine El-Gamal told The Telegraph. “They are not even pretending otherwise by hiring a qualified person as an envoy.”

    Others have raised concerns that Mr Berkowitz, like Mr Greenblatt before him and Mr Kushner, is a Zionist Jew, which may lead to a perception of bias in any peace negotiations with Palestinian officials. Upon Mr Greenblatt’s announcement of his departure, Mr Trump thanked him for his “dedication to Israel.”

    Some analysts suspect the surprising appointment has been made so Mr Berkowitz can be easily disposed of if Mr Trump’s Middle East peace plan is not well received. The process has so far been widely criticised, in no small part because it is led by Mr Kushner, who, like his father-in-law, has a background in New York real estate rather than foreign policy.

    Mr Kushner’s first instalment, an economic peace plan dubbed “Peace to Prosperity” launched at a conference in Bahrain in June and boycotted by Palestinian officials, was lambasted by experts. “I would give this so-called plan a C- from an undergraduate student,” said Daniel Kurtzer, a former US ambassador to Israel, on Twitter. Israel analyst Michael Koplow called it “the Monthy Python sketch of Israeli-Palestinian peace initiatives.”
    Bolded for emphasis. Bolded and orange for fat obese fatty fat fat you're fired fatass game show President distancing himself from his own failures. If you appoint someone who can't do the job, that's your fault not theirs. Nobody in their right mind would make me a jet pilot, a heart surgeon, or a MMO-C Politics mod, because I'm objectively unqualified. If someone did, it's party my fault if I accept, but mostly their fault for asking.

    For added fun, source source and source that might be a bit more informed. Read all you want. There's not much in there that'll prevent the upcoming train wreck when not only do the Palestinians boycott and mock, but the remaining countries who do show up negotiate with someone who didn't write the plan they don't know what's in it anyhow.

    Or would you prefer Trump's tweet about the Taliban being responded to, by the Taliban, saying this move would cause people to die?

    Or how about a game of Guess the Speaker?

    Never should leaders of a terrorist organization that hasn’t renounced 9/11 and continues in evil be allowed in our great country. NEVER. Full stop.

    Camp David is where America’s leaders met to plan our response after al Qaeda, supported by the Taliban, killed 3000 Americans on 9/11.

    No member of the Taliban should set foot there. Ever.


    Or that South Carolina guy primarying Trump, challenging directly South Caroina's illegal decision to have no primaries?

    Would you like to talk about Trump's continued objective failure anything remotely resembling diplomacy, failures that are costing lives and his own party turning on him? Or how about we go back to the hurricane?

    "...how's the weather on your high horse?"

    Peachy.

  13. #26233
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...ers/ar-AAGV0kQ

    LOL I assume we will have a stand alone topic any day now in the politics forum from all those right wing trumpkins.....about how horrible it is to "fix" the primaries for a particular candidate!!!!

    I mean they carried on about Hillary and the primaries for what 2 years?

  14. #26234
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Zan15 View Post
    I mean they carried on about Hillary and the primaries for what 2 years?
    Agreed.

    The Democrats are accused of basically having a rigged race, and I can't exactly dispute that. But the Republicans are just canceling the race to hand Trump a gold medal and fireworks that spell #WINNING. Which is worse? Don't know. But you can't complain about one and endorse the other. Which Trump did in tweets as recently as last week.

  15. #26235
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Agreed.

    The Democrats are accused of basically having a rigged race, and I can't exactly dispute that. But the Republicans are just canceling the race to hand Trump a gold medal and fireworks that spell #WINNING. Which is worse? Don't know. But you can't complain about one and endorse the other. Which Trump did in tweets as recently as last week.
    Please, Trump supporters reconvene a dozen directly contradictory facts easily before breakfast. They can and will complain about one and endorse the other, as they have for multiple years now. The best we will get is hair splitting or semantics in an attempt to justify it.

  16. #26236
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiri View Post
    Please, Trump supporters reconvene a dozen directly contradictory facts easily before breakfast.
    Fine, you can't complain about one and endorse the other without being a blatant hypocrite. Better?

  17. #26237
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Fine, you can't complain about one and endorse the other without being a blatant hypocrite. Better?
    Much better~

    Or worse, depending on whether one considers the implications for human society or not-.-

  18. #26238
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,906
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    The fascists in America are a serious problem. But a limited one. If they have legs is something that remains to be seen.
    The problem with this kind of sentiment, frankly, is that in Germany in 1929, the national socialists were a serious, but limited problem.

    5 years later, they were in power.
    10 years later, invasions of foreign states had begun, and the Holocaust was kicking off.

    And this was in an era before the Internet, where communications were by landline telephone, regular mail, radio, and a growing access to television. So if anything, the capacity to organize is far greater, today.

    A lot of us don't want to wait until the gas chambers are built before saying "fuck you and fuck this, you fucking fucks".


  19. #26239
    Legendary! Thekri's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    6,167
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    The problem with this kind of sentiment, frankly, is that in Germany in 1929, the national socialists were a serious, but limited problem.

    5 years later, they were in power.
    10 years later, invasions of foreign states had begun, and the Holocaust was kicking off.

    And this was in an era before the Internet, where communications were by landline telephone, regular mail, radio, and a growing access to television. So if anything, the capacity to organize is far greater, today.

    A lot of us don't want to wait until the gas chambers are built before saying "fuck you and fuck this, you fucking fucks".
    2019 United States is not 1929 Germany. A common saying is "History doesn't repeat, but it does Rhyme", which is a good way of looking at it. The potential is possibly there, but the conditions are not. Unlike 1920s Germany, the US is fighting back against this facist movement very vigorously, and its base is not growing. They do not control the narratives of the nation, they do not control the government, and they aren't going too.

    They like to pretend like they are an actual contender for national political power, but they aren't. They are a violent bunch of disorganized neckbeards without the discipline or cunning that made the Nazis so dangerous.

    This doesn't mean we should be flippant about the dangers they could pose if they actually gained some sort of relevance, but lets not over emphasize what they are.

  20. #26240
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,906
    Quote Originally Posted by Thekri View Post
    2019 United States is not 1929 Germany. A common saying is "History doesn't repeat, but it does Rhyme", which is a good way of looking at it. The potential is possibly there, but the conditions are not. Unlike 1920s Germany, the US is fighting back against this facist movement very vigorously, and its base is not growing. They do not control the narratives of the nation, they do not control the government, and they aren't going too.
    Germany was doing the same, in the 1920s. The national socialist base was, similarly, not growing. They didn't have any control over any narratives, and no real political heft until the '30s. People seem to forget that Germany went from "democratic and liberal Weimar Republic" to "Third Reich with Holocaust in full swing" in less than a decade.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •