He was certainly being humorous, but I don't agree the article is some left-wing screed. All it is saying is we shouldn't seek to deify our political figures by erecting monuments of them. That they were, just like us, only flesh and blood, destined to die like anyone else.
This tweet is an out and out, 1000% lie. Straight-up grade-A horseshit. The incident he is referring to DID NOT take place. Not only is he disgracing the memory of a dead General who can't defend himself, but he seems to be suggesting that the way we deal with suspected terrorists is to dip bullets in pig's blood and summarily execute them (which is what the folk-tale he is referring to says happened, which it DIDN'T). THIS is his response to what happened in Barcelona today. Spreading a total, unequivocal LIE:
As to the video, not bad. I know that the right has inspired more terrorists by far ( I guess many don't, and many more don't study it in detail). I myself studied and was asked to both recruit for and infiltrate them at different times (I will not name them, but an eye opener and learning experience I can assure one, but lawd, soooo darn easy to do both). Do people feel better for knowing this? "Our side is better than your side, my side's better than your side" Lawd, why am I hearing young kids on the school playground now? "You ppl killed 30". "Oh yeah, well you ppl killed 30,000" "Yeah? Shut up or I'll kill you</!". "Oh yeah?!, Well stitch <i class="Italic">this righty". "Why you lil..., I knew I was right, you, you, you lefty". Isn't vindication just a wonderful thing?
Well, the video is a fairly good at showing how propaganda can used. My mind IS made up. Too bad I'm just a bigoted ol white male southerner with a terrible ol culture though, that could never ever possibly hope to understand that and keep part of his culture as well. Might be nice thinking people's minds were more often than not, NOT made up about 'me' and where I grew up. All I had to do was spend time in NY to find out a while back. Now, after the internet, I only have to go online.
Easy how things can be viewed in a different light by different people, isn't it?. Infuriating at times as well.
@DreadKhan In regards to Vice and click baiting, interesting. It 'might' be just another tool in the media's toolbox. Certainly has been used often enough by many people and organizations. As to here, can't say, the 'climate' is all screwed up right now and accepted 'rules' are being shed like skin.
Even if the story were true, do most people feel that using terrorist tactics against terrorists is the answer? Leaving aside the morality of this (which I struggle to do), I find it hard to imagine something less likely to work. Mass killings of population by police states in countries where they control the organs of government can suppress unrest - at least in the short to medium term. Can anyone quote a single example though of where mass extra-judicial killings by a democracy have done that successfully?
Edit: I'm not sure there's been any discussion in this thread about the Philippines, but that would seem like the sort of place Trump would like to operate. The country is notionally a democracy, but currently headed by a president who has openly and regularly called for extra-judicial killings. In his first year in office there were around 5,000 of those (the majority by police) and he's promised many more. Given there's no real investigation of these killings it's hard to know whether all the political opponents that have been killed were actually drug lords, but I imagine the temptation to clean up all 'undesirables' would be extremely strong to someone willing to resort to these types of killings in the first place.
Given his other statements it's unsurprising that during his campaign Trump supported Duterte's approach to the war on drugs as done "the right way" and if you think about the number of police shootings that already take place in the US there's perhaps already more similarity of approach between the countries than many people would find comfortable.
Even if the story were true, do most people feel that using terrorist tactics against terrorists is the answer? Leaving aside the morality of this (which I struggle to do), I find it hard to imagine something less likely to work. Mass killings of population by police states in countries where they control the organs of government can suppress unrest - at least in the short to medium term. Can anyone quote a single example though of where mass extra-judicial killings by a democracy have done that successfully?
Edit: I'm not sure there's been any discussion in this thread about the Philippines, but that would seem like the sort of place Trump would like to operate. The country is notionally a democracy, but currently headed by a president who has openly and regularly called for extra-judicial killings. In his first year in office there were around 5,000 of those (the majority by police) and he's promised many more. Given there's no real investigation of these killings it's hard to know whether all the political opponents that have been killed were actually drug lords, but I imagine the temptation to clean up all 'undesirables' would be extremely strong to someone willing to resort to these types of killings in the first place.
Given his other statements it's unsurprising that during his campaign Trump supported Duterte's approach to the war on drugs as done "the right way" and if you think about the number of police shootings that already take place in the US there's perhaps already more similarity of approach between the countries than many people would find comfortable.
I have mentioned both Duterte's extra-judicial killings before, as well as Trump's VERY transparent admiration for leaders like him, Erdogan, and Putin and his disdain for leaders of democracies like Merkel and Macron.
Terrorism against terrorists. Tough question sometimes depending on one's place and outlook. Well, states use terrorism against other states. Much lauded Freedom Fighters are terrorists, another type but still terrorists. Does terrorism work, citizens against the state itself? In about all cases one just seems to embolden the other, but sometimes get results as related to the number of dead folks. Sometimes it's effective but doesn't always win the war. But being nice and using reason doesn't always work either, so a backup plan is needed. The powerless UN thinks it can go in and say 'stop it now' and thinks everybody thinks as they do. Then go back again and say 'Ok , you really better stop it or I'll come back again" So on and so forth, over and over, no results.
One thing I think interesting with ISIS is there fear of being killed by women. Being killed with no 72 virgins as a reward in heaven. A fear tactic? Yeah, maybe. Effective? Seems like it at times. The whole kill nice and by the rules thing in war. I don't see it, and would not do so myself if I wanted maximum effect. Easy to get carried away with it though, and then other things get changed as well.
I also see it from a criminal perspective which may be of insight here. When all you know is going to happen is a prison cot and three squares a day, risks are worth it more. But if it involves a first offense meaning an instant and horrible death, maybe a little more thought is put into it. At the same time though, after a while, even that loses hold over ones inhibitions. Back to the beginning again. ISIS beheading vs. tough talk. Doesn't seem quite enough at times I must admit. Whatever, terrorism is not going away, and most likely never will, so many views in the world.
As to the police, I don't see the same situation with the Philippines. There we have a place that is directly ordering something to be done, and here it is a product of not having the proper conflict negotiation training given combined with ol school police methods being held onto in places by some. Well, that, hiring, and racism at times (several issues to contend with). It is changing though, and many police realize the benefit of that change. I will say though that the pres is getting in on that right now, but also that many police were disgusted with his attitude and words.
The flag of our nation's mortal enemy, responsible for the death of as many Americans as all other wars we've ever been in COMBINED. Let that one sink in. And the flag of that enemy is often found flying next to the star-spangled banner on US property.
The people defending confederate symbolism under the guise of a "neutral recognition" of history are refusing to recognize an obvious truth: there hasn't been a single statue erected nor a single flag hoisted under any such context. No, they were put there for one reason and one reason only: total glorification. And they know this.
To hell with southern culture and symbolism - they represent the very social apparatus used to delude those boys into throwing their lives away for the cause of human bondage.
But what about the American social apparatus? From the history of the world, the rich have deluded the poor into doing their bidding and sending their sons off to die. Sadly, this is true for our country as well, both historically and even in the present day. Things like race, ethnicity, culture, religion, and other various abstractions are used to exploit people. The truth is that we are living in a society where the productive members of society, the working class, are the victims of social engineering by the bourgeoisie.
Democrats and republicans, entrenched bureaucrats and MSM, all work together to keep us divided and at each other's throats. The left hand poisons minorities with identity politics, while the right hand fills the white majority with reactionism. Trump is polarizing us further...the ruling class is winning.
We need a mass-movement, people. A united, multi-racial movement that can appeal to the commonality in all of us. A coast to coast political movement...a revolution. To create our own history as it happens, with a new heritage, new culture, new symbolism...for all of us. No more should those who grow fat on the toil of others be tolerated. Social injustice must be rectified, and the people themselves must lead it.
Still? Lawd, nice...I guess if it makes one feel better, but I'll just point out again: gas on the fire. They huh? Thanks, and I mean that (in a way). I can feel the attacks and the hate directed in blanket fashion. While I get it I can also feel the first gut reaction after reading that. I have a better understanding now I think, of why at least some people here in the south fought, some against the north, some against their own family and neighbors. Yeah, I know we are still vilified, no matter our affiliations, morals, or way of life. Part of that same southern culture, at least where I grew up, and how I was raised, also included being polite to others. All those living under that flag were not this nation's mortal enemy. Is that forgotten? ------ ***Just a note though, attacking first and then trying to add a commonality (against the rich for ex.) will close some ears and minds and inflame before it even does what it might be intended to do. I'm glad I have had the learning and training I have had, as I can take this and learn not only about myself but about others as well. Some won't though, be sure, as they already have torches in their hands and a despicable slogan spewing forth from their mouths. I grew up with them, it doesn't take that much to go over the edge.
Too bad I'm just a bigoted ol white male southerner with a terrible ol culture though, that could never ever possibly hope to understand that and keep part of his culture as well. Might be nice thinking people's minds were more often than not, NOT made up about 'me' and where I grew up. All I had to do was spend time in NY to find out a while back. Now, after the internet, I only have to go online.
Easy how things can be viewed in a different light by different people, isn't it?. Infuriating at times as well.
Some cultures really are better than others, though. The value of a culture directly correlates to the degree in which tolerance and human rights are espoused by said culture. I grew up in Texas and, believe me, the culture sucks. Rather than defending such cultures, I would recommend embracing a new one.
As for the "white male southerner" thing, and being told you can't "ever possibly hope to understand" , try and understand that this kind of ID politics, SJW* stuff isn't tied to leftism...it's tied to liberalism. Only liberals (and lefties who embrace/co-opt liberalism) spread that tripe. They are actually, in effect, working in conjunction with the right-wing to further divide the proletariat. True leftist politics are about defeating capitalism by promoting class-consciousness leading to mass-action through agitation efforts and the unification of the oppressed classes (transcending race altogether).
* I hate to use right-wing snarl words but if the shoe fits...
Is nobody talking about the multiple terrorists atracks in Europe right now? Nearly hundreds wounded and many dead...
I actually stopped talking about this for awhile because they became so common as to no longer be newsworthy events. While we talk about left and right violence, jihadi terrorists, often let in by awful open borders policy with very few support, kill more than both sides here in the U.S and in Europe. This endless stream of preventable violence surely played into immigration being a huge factor in Brexit and we'll see where else it leads. All I know is that it's truly horrible to hear about these major massacres nearly every month. Id be nervous being at a public center at any major event in some of these countries right now.
You know what would stop these terrorist attacks with vechiles? Concrete blocks as tall as a car's wheel spaced evenly between the road and the pedestrian path.
It is that simple. No need to "close borders" because 1 out of every 16 000 desides to be an anger filled prick.
He was certainly being humorous, but I don't agree the article is some left-wing screed. All it is saying is we shouldn't seek to deify our political figures by erecting monuments of them. That they were, just like us, only flesh and blood, destined to die like anyone else.
Surely hyperbole, but with a grain of truth. I truly think the impulse to destroy historical stuff comes from the same source- an offense to a rigidly held ideology that it offends so greatly it must come down for the sake of moral purity. That ideology in this case being social justice, which in no way is comparable to radical islam other than being, in my view, a quasi religion with a pretty clear series of moral precepts and complex heiarchies of value according to them.
Ordinary people just don't care. Even an NPR poll with a democrat-leaning sample size found a sizable majority believe confederate statues should remain.
So Bannon's out and that's my line in the sand. I definitely can not be considered a Pro Trump guy any longer. I'm glad he beat Clinton and have no regrets.
So Bannon's out and that's my line in the sand. I definitely can not be considered a Pro Trump guy any longer. I'm glad he beat Clinton and have no regrets.
Cheers! Welcome to the unrepresented minority. Or is it majority? Who the Hell cares...
I grew up in Texas and, believe me, the culture sucks.
As for the "white male southerner" thing, and being told you can't "ever possibly hope to understand" , try and understand that this kind of ID politics, SJW* stuff isn't tied to leftism...it's tied to liberalism. Only liberals (and lefties who embrace/co-opt liberalism) spread that tripe. They are actually, in effect, working in conjunction with the right-wing to further divide the proletariat. True leftist politics are about defeating capitalism by promoting class-consciousness leading to mass-action through agitation efforts and the unification of the oppressed classes (transcending race altogether).
I don't use snarl words, either.
Unfortunately, then, you were not living in the same State in which I do...but you are entitled to your opinion.
The phrase "defeating capitalism by promoting class-consciousness leading to mass-action through agitation efforts and the unification of the oppressed classes" doesn't actually *mean* anything. How, exactly, do you propose to defeat capitalism? What about the people who *want* capitalism? Are they not allowed to pursue the life that they feel makes them happy? Are they not free to choose for themselves what kind of system they want? What, exactly, is an agitation effort? How will we know it when we see it? Once all the formerly oppressed classes are unified, what will they do, form a new government the way they want it? What happens when that government begins oppressing a class of people?
For the sake of discussion, let us presume that capitalism has been defeated. What sort of system do we have now? What is my incentive for getting out of bed in the morning (presuming that I still own a house, which technically I cannot do given that capitalism no longer exists)? If I want food do I have to grow it in my own back yard (again, presuming that I am allowed to own property..but that is capitalism) or do I have to trade goods and services with someone else in exchange for the food they have? Clearly that is a barter economy...but barter is just capitalism without a centralized currency. If capitalism no longer exists, does private property still exist? If private property doesn't exist, then nothing belongs to anyone and we are allowed to take whatever we want when we see it...but isn't that just "anarchy lite"?
Your ideas here are not without merit. There is a passage in the wonderful Illuminatus! trilogy of books written Robert Shea and Robert Anton Wilson--if you haven't read them then drop whatever you are doing, go get them, and read them--where a Native American chief is describing magic to a court. To him, "magic" is when his grandfathers taught him that the land was available for everyone to use until a white man showed up with a piece of paper that says that he owns that land. It isn't capitalism, itself, that is the problem; rather, the problem is when people and/or corporations distort what was supposed to be a good thing--having a centralized and unified medium of exchange (money) to make the whole barter system easier for everyone--and skew the playing field in their favor. This is like playing Monopoly against someone who sets themselves up as the banker then subtly changes the rules so that you wind up paying more money to them than they do to you--that is a game you cannot win.
So Bannon's out and that's my line in the sand. I definitely can not be considered a Pro Trump guy any longer. I'm glad he beat Clinton and have no regrets.
Well, I can now officially be knocked over with a feather. The question now is if Bannon uses Breitbart to advocate for Trump, or to go to war with him. I am feverishly hoping for the later. Breitbart and the young, white males of the Alt-right online account for WAY more than his margin of victory in WI, MI and PA. If 100,000 of them abandon him, it's lights out.
This forum is going to get boring without you and @WarChiefZeke sparring with each other. Maybe we should open up another thread with new stuff to argue about. How about religion?
This forum is going to get boring without you and @WarChiefZeke sparring with each other. Maybe we should open up another thread with new stuff to argue about. How about religion?
No, no. Not that. There is still plenty to argue about. I often wish I still was religious (grew up Catholic) but my brain just won't allow it.
President Bannon was fired for among other things the interview he gave where it sounded like he was calling the shots, hiring this guy or that and contradicted Trump's Korea strategy for not being feasible.
He was not fired for being a racist nationalist, that wasn't the problem. Being a grandstander and a leaker and taking a tiny bit of Trump's "glory" is what got him fired.
Nothing to do with doing the right thing or influence of the left. Its all about stealing Trump's spotlight or contradicting the infallible legend of Trump.
Trump took office on January 20th. It only took until August 18th for almost this ENTIRE thread to turn against him. Most Presidents are still sitting at a 55-60% approval at this point. Trump is somewhere around 35%.
Well I'll play devil's advocate right now and say he now has hit rock bottom and will slowly trend upwards (or be replaced).
He is going to have Kelly to thank for that as well as an smooth NAFTA renegotiation. If he can deliver on that and distance himself from the alt-right further (kicking bannon to the curb is a start) his numbers will tick up.
Although he can break through the rocks at the bottom and start a nuclear war where it won't matter what his approval rating is as the world itself will be in ruin.
I give it even odds: 33% chance he is replaced 33% chance he rebounds in numbers 33% chance he destroys the world.
Well I'll play devil's advocate right now and say he now has hit rock bottom and will slowly trend upwards (or be replaced).
He is going to have Kelly to thank for that as well as an smooth NAFTA renegotiation. If he can deliver on that and distance himself from the alt-right further (kicking bannon to the curb is a start) his numbers will tick up.
Although he can break through the rocks at the bottom and start a nuclear war where it won't matter what his approval rating is as the world itself will be in ruin.
I give it even odds: 33% chance he is replaced 33% chance he rebounds in numbers 33% chance he destroys the world.
Where's my D6?
He didn't fire Bannon to distance himself from the alt-right.
He and Bannon still believe the same stuff.
He fired him because Bannon publicly claimed to be calling the shots and Bannon publicly contradicted Trump on Korea. Bannon in the interview he gave stated how he is replacing people in the administraton like he's in charge. And Bannon also said there is no military solution to korea: contradicting "fire and fury".
Those are unforgivable sins to Trump.
No one is allowed to outshine Trump or contradict him or his ego in the administraton.
I can't go there yet. Mostly because, WHOEVER the Democrats nominate (no matter how far to the center or how far to the left they are) will be turned into the next Hillary Clinton. People think Hillary was uniquely hated. Right-wing media will create a new Hillary, a new Obama, at the drop of a hat. The moment a single Democrat declares sometime in 2019, you will never hear about Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama again. Until then, they will serve as the boogeymen of the right. But they are very adept at creating new ones. And IF the Democrats were to run someone like Kamala Harris (who is my #1 choice at the moment, though there is no way to know if she is interested in taking on this challenge), imagine what the right-wing echo chamber will do to not only a woman, but a black woman. It will be like a mixture of the two straw-men they use currently (Hillary and Obama). Elizabeth Warren has already been put through Trump's gutter with his "Pocahontas" comments, and Bernie is dealing with this investigation into his wife's loan when she was head of a college, nevermind the fact that he is Jewish, and god knows there will be endless dog whistles about that if he ever were to win the nomination. Point being, the same people who hate Hillary today (well, 90% of them anyway) will also almost certainly hate the Democratic nominee in 2020 just as much once FOX News and AM radio has had 2-3 weeks to construct their narrative. It is going to have to be someone with a hell of a thick skin, an iron jaw, and a keen ability to counter-punch.
This is absolute nonsense. Do conservative Google engineers have their secret social hangouts raided by police, where they are subsequently beaten and thrown in jail?? Were conservative Google engineers denied the right to marry who they choose until a few years ago?? No?? Then this guy should really shut the hell up about a comparison he clearly knows nothing about. Matthew Shepard was killed SPECIFICALLY for being gay, and that was in 1998. When a Google engineer gets tortured and killed strictly BECAUSE they are a conservative, this guy can start talking. But I expect we'll be waiting awhile on that front.
Again, what we are seeing here is the equation of personal aggrievement with actual oppression committed by agents of the State, in some cases systematically.
Comments
They are parroting the same talking points. 2:40 - 4:20
This tweet is an out and out, 1000% lie. Straight-up grade-A horseshit. The incident he is referring to DID NOT take place. Not only is he disgracing the memory of a dead General who can't defend himself, but he seems to be suggesting that the way we deal with suspected terrorists is to dip bullets in pig's blood and summarily execute them (which is what the folk-tale he is referring to says happened, which it DIDN'T). THIS is his response to what happened in Barcelona today. Spreading a total, unequivocal LIE:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/aug/17/donald-trump/donald-trump-retells-pants-fire-claim-about-gen-pe/
Do people feel better for knowing this? "Our side is better than your side, my side's better than your side"
Lawd, why am I hearing young kids on the school playground now?
"You ppl killed 30".
"Oh yeah, well you ppl killed 30,000"
"Yeah? Shut up or I'll kill you</!".
"Oh yeah?!, Well stitch <i class="Italic">this righty".
"Why you lil..., I knew I was right, you, you, you lefty".
Isn't vindication just a wonderful thing?
Well, the video is a fairly good at showing how propaganda can used.
My mind IS made up. Too bad I'm just a bigoted ol white male southerner with a terrible ol culture though, that could never ever possibly hope to understand that and keep part of his culture as well. Might be nice thinking people's minds were more often than not, NOT made up about 'me' and where I grew up.
Easy how things can be viewed in a different light by different people, isn't it?. Infuriating at times as well.
As to here, can't say, the 'climate' is all screwed up right now and accepted 'rules' are being shed like skin.
Edit: I'm not sure there's been any discussion in this thread about the Philippines, but that would seem like the sort of place Trump would like to operate. The country is notionally a democracy, but currently headed by a president who has openly and regularly called for extra-judicial killings. In his first year in office there were around 5,000 of those (the majority by police) and he's promised many more. Given there's no real investigation of these killings it's hard to know whether all the political opponents that have been killed were actually drug lords, but I imagine the temptation to clean up all 'undesirables' would be extremely strong to someone willing to resort to these types of killings in the first place.
Given his other statements it's unsurprising that during his campaign Trump supported Duterte's approach to the war on drugs as done "the right way" and if you think about the number of police shootings that already take place in the US there's perhaps already more similarity of approach between the countries than many people would find comfortable.
Well, states use terrorism against other states. Much lauded Freedom Fighters are terrorists, another type but still terrorists.
Does terrorism work, citizens against the state itself?
In about all cases one just seems to embolden the other, but sometimes get results as related to the number of dead folks. Sometimes it's effective but doesn't always win the war.
But being nice and using reason doesn't always work either, so a backup plan is needed.
The powerless UN thinks it can go in and say 'stop it now' and thinks everybody thinks as they do.
Then go back again and say 'Ok , you really better stop it or I'll come back again"
So on and so forth, over and over, no results.
One thing I think interesting with ISIS is there fear of being killed by women. Being killed with no 72 virgins as a reward in heaven. A fear tactic? Yeah, maybe. Effective? Seems like it at times.
The whole kill nice and by the rules thing in war. I don't see it, and would not do so myself if I wanted maximum effect. Easy to get carried away with it though, and then other things get changed as well.
I also see it from a criminal perspective which may be of insight here. When all you know is going to happen is a prison cot and three squares a day, risks are worth it more. But if it involves a first offense meaning an instant and horrible death, maybe a little more thought is put into it. At the same time though, after a while, even that loses hold over ones inhibitions. Back to the beginning again.
ISIS beheading vs. tough talk. Doesn't seem quite enough at times I must admit.
Whatever, terrorism is not going away, and most likely never will, so many views in the world.
As to the police, I don't see the same situation with the Philippines. There we have a place that is directly ordering something to be done, and here it is a product of not having the proper conflict negotiation training given combined with ol school police methods being held onto in places by some. Well, that, hiring, and racism at times (several issues to contend with). It is changing though, and many police realize the benefit of that change.
I will say though that the pres is getting in on that right now, but also that many police were disgusted with his attitude and words.
They huh?
Thanks, and I mean that (in a way). I can feel the attacks and the hate directed in blanket fashion. While I get it I can also feel the first gut reaction after reading that.
I have a better understanding now I think, of why at least some people here in the south fought, some against the north, some against their own family and neighbors.
Yeah, I know we are still vilified, no matter our affiliations, morals, or way of life. Part of that same southern culture, at least where I grew up, and how I was raised, also included being polite to others.
All those living under that flag were not this nation's mortal enemy. Is that forgotten?
------
***Just a note though, attacking first and then trying to add a commonality (against the rich for ex.) will close some ears and minds and inflame before it even does what it might be intended to do. I'm glad I have had the learning and training I have had, as I can take this and learn not only about myself but about others as well.
Some won't though, be sure, as they already have torches in their hands and a despicable slogan spewing forth from their mouths. I grew up with them, it doesn't take that much to go over the edge.
As for the "white male southerner" thing, and being told you can't "ever possibly hope to understand" , try and understand that this kind of ID politics, SJW* stuff isn't tied to leftism...it's tied to liberalism. Only liberals (and lefties who embrace/co-opt liberalism) spread that tripe. They are actually, in effect, working in conjunction with the right-wing to further divide the proletariat. True leftist politics are about defeating capitalism by promoting class-consciousness leading to mass-action through agitation efforts and the unification of the oppressed classes (transcending race altogether).
* I hate to use right-wing snarl words but if the shoe fits...
I actually stopped talking about this for awhile because they became so common as to no longer be newsworthy events. While we talk about left and right violence, jihadi terrorists, often let in by awful open borders policy with very few support, kill more than both sides here in the U.S and in Europe. This endless stream of preventable violence surely played into immigration being a huge factor in Brexit and we'll see where else it leads. All I know is that it's truly horrible to hear about these major massacres nearly every month. Id be nervous being at a public center at any major event in some of these countries right now.
It is that simple. No need to "close borders" because 1 out of every 16 000 desides to be an anger filled prick.
Ordinary people just don't care. Even an NPR poll with a democrat-leaning sample size found a sizable majority believe confederate statues should remain.
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=3933461-NPR-PBS-NewsHour-Marist-Poll-Aug-17-2017
Make no mistake...this was a yuge win for the left. Bannon was the alt-right's white house representative. Thank you Mr. Kelly.
Unfortunately, then, you were not living in the same State in which I do...but you are entitled to your opinion.
The phrase "defeating capitalism by promoting class-consciousness leading to mass-action through agitation efforts and the unification of the oppressed classes" doesn't actually *mean* anything. How, exactly, do you propose to defeat capitalism? What about the people who *want* capitalism? Are they not allowed to pursue the life that they feel makes them happy? Are they not free to choose for themselves what kind of system they want? What, exactly, is an agitation effort? How will we know it when we see it? Once all the formerly oppressed classes are unified, what will they do, form a new government the way they want it? What happens when that government begins oppressing a class of people?
For the sake of discussion, let us presume that capitalism has been defeated. What sort of system do we have now? What is my incentive for getting out of bed in the morning (presuming that I still own a house, which technically I cannot do given that capitalism no longer exists)? If I want food do I have to grow it in my own back yard (again, presuming that I am allowed to own property..but that is capitalism) or do I have to trade goods and services with someone else in exchange for the food they have? Clearly that is a barter economy...but barter is just capitalism without a centralized currency. If capitalism no longer exists, does private property still exist? If private property doesn't exist, then nothing belongs to anyone and we are allowed to take whatever we want when we see it...but isn't that just "anarchy lite"?
Your ideas here are not without merit. There is a passage in the wonderful Illuminatus! trilogy of books written Robert Shea and Robert Anton Wilson--if you haven't read them then drop whatever you are doing, go get them, and read them--where a Native American chief is describing magic to a court. To him, "magic" is when his grandfathers taught him that the land was available for everyone to use until a white man showed up with a piece of paper that says that he owns that land. It isn't capitalism, itself, that is the problem; rather, the problem is when people and/or corporations distort what was supposed to be a good thing--having a centralized and unified medium of exchange (money) to make the whole barter system easier for everyone--and skew the playing field in their favor. This is like playing Monopoly against someone who sets themselves up as the banker then subtly changes the rules so that you wind up paying more money to them than they do to you--that is a game you cannot win.
This forum is going to get boring without you and @WarChiefZeke sparring with each other. Maybe we should open up another thread with new stuff to argue about. How about religion?
He was not fired for being a racist nationalist, that wasn't the problem. Being a grandstander and a leaker and taking a tiny bit of Trump's "glory" is what got him fired.
Nothing to do with doing the right thing or influence of the left. Its all about stealing Trump's spotlight or contradicting the infallible legend of Trump.
"HE'S NAKED AS A JAYBIRD EVERYBODY!!"
He is going to have Kelly to thank for that as well as an smooth NAFTA renegotiation. If he can deliver on that and distance himself from the alt-right further (kicking bannon to the curb is a start) his numbers will tick up.
Although he can break through the rocks at the bottom and start a nuclear war where it won't matter what his approval rating is as the world itself will be in ruin.
I give it even odds:
33% chance he is replaced
33% chance he rebounds in numbers
33% chance he destroys the world.
Where's my D6?
He and Bannon still believe the same stuff.
He fired him because Bannon publicly claimed to be calling the shots and Bannon publicly contradicted Trump on Korea. Bannon in the interview he gave stated how he is replacing people in the administraton like he's in charge. And Bannon also said there is no military solution to korea: contradicting "fire and fury".
Those are unforgivable sins to Trump.
No one is allowed to outshine Trump or contradict him or his ego in the administraton.
This is absolute nonsense. Do conservative Google engineers have their secret social hangouts raided by police, where they are subsequently beaten and thrown in jail?? Were conservative Google engineers denied the right to marry who they choose until a few years ago?? No?? Then this guy should really shut the hell up about a comparison he clearly knows nothing about. Matthew Shepard was killed SPECIFICALLY for being gay, and that was in 1998. When a Google engineer gets tortured and killed strictly BECAUSE they are a conservative, this guy can start talking. But I expect we'll be waiting awhile on that front.
Again, what we are seeing here is the equation of personal aggrievement with actual oppression committed by agents of the State, in some cases systematically.