President Trump

MillionMilesAway said:
The 'answer' just after 1:45 of that video sounds like gibberish. I have no idea what it means - "abandonment of Aristotelian virtue politics"??

(at least I assume that's what he said)
Click to expand...

I think that’s what he said, though I think in the UK we would pronounce Aristotelian very different which is why it sounds weird.

Somebody has read Aristotle’s Politics, he did go to Yale I guess.

To oversimplify (as his views are more problematic to a modern reader) Aristotle felt the objective of a household should be the good virtues of the family and not the acquisition of property and possessions. At least I think that’s what he’s getting at.

Edit: I said above that some of Aristotle’s views are problematic to the modern reader, but I get the vibe JD would feel they are in no need of further development. Despite being… 2400 years old.
 
Last edited:
SkyBlueFlux said:
I think that’s what he said, though I think in the UK we would pronounce Aristotelian very different which is why it sounds weird.

Somebody has read Aristotle’s Politics, he did go to Yale I guess.

To oversimplify (as his views are more problematic to a modern reader) Aristotle felt the objective of a household should be the good virtues of the family and not the acquisition of property and possessions. At least I think that’s what he’s getting at.
Click to expand...
He could have said "greed is good" and left it at that instead of the pretentious bullshit.
 
SkyBlueFlux said:
I think that’s what he said, though I think in the UK we would pronounce Aristotelian very different which is why it sounds weird.

Somebody has read Aristotle’s Politics, he did go to Yale I guess.

To oversimplify (as his views are more problematic to a modern reader) Aristotle felt the objective of a household should be the good virtues of the family and not the acquisition of property and possessions. At least I think that’s what he’s getting at.

Edit: I said above that some of Aristotle’s views are problematic to the modern reader, but I get the vibe JD would feel they are in no need of further development. Despite being… 2400 years old.
Click to expand...

Thanks - I now feel my lack of Greek philosophy knowledge has been holding me back!

It seems a bit weird to me that Vance appears to be arguing that income/GDP is not the most important thing. It's in a sentence that has been tortured badly in its construction.
 
SkyBlueFlux said:
I think that’s what he said, though I think in the UK we would pronounce Aristotelian very different which is why it sounds weird.

Somebody has read Aristotle’s Politics, he did go to Yale I guess.

To oversimplify (as his views are more problematic to a modern reader) Aristotle felt the objective of a household should be the good virtues of the family and not the acquisition of property and possessions. At least I think that’s what he’s getting at.

Edit: I said above that some of Aristotle’s views are problematic to the modern reader, but I get the vibe JD would feel they are in no need of further development. Despite being… 2400 years old.
Click to expand...
So, in terms of placing family before 'the acquisition of property and possessions', Trump's VC pick is advocating a societal system that is somewhat at odds with the unfettered free market economic model so favoured by this lunatic's acolytes whereby the pursuit of material wealth appears to be an aim in itself. Just remind me, what exactly does Vance stand for?
 
BayernMan said:


I see why Trump picked him…
Click to expand...


That’s obviously a sexist view, there’s no denying that.

But maybe we can give him a sliver of understanding in that he was raised by his grandmother as his own mother was an abusive violent drug addict.

I said earlier in this thread I’m reading his book. There’s some waffle and generalisations in it but the personal accounts of growing up are interesting.

One of the main threads is how much he loved his grandparents and how his grandmother was more of a mum to him than his actual mum.

Maybe his comments here stem from that personal experience, I dunno.

He is still a very strange guy though, I struggle to square how someone who’s clearly well read, intelligent and articulate can come out with some of the mental stuff he has in recent years with a straight face.
 
Kippaxpete said:
So, in terms of placing family before 'the acquisition of property and possessions', Trump's VC pick is advocating a societal system that is completely at odds with the unfettered free market economic model so favoured by this lunatic's acolytes whereby the pursuit of material wealth appears to be an aim in itself.
Click to expand...

I disagree.

The old Friedman / Reganomics free market capitalist model went out of the window years ago. This is a new social conservatism that’s built on inward facing dogmatic protectionism rather than liberal economics.

In a weird way Trump’s economic policy has got more in common with the old Soviet state capitalism model than it does with the traditional American free market, free trade globalisation model.

Whacking 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs is a great example.
 
MillionMilesAway said:
Thanks - I now feel my lack of Greek philosophy knowledge has been holding me back!

It seems a bit weird to me that Vance appears to be arguing that income/GDP is not the most important thing. It's in a sentence that has been tortured badly in its construction.
Click to expand...


My best attempt to translate from Vance’s warped mind palace is that you should take his statements about what he prioritises with a huge pinch of salt.

What he is trying to project here is that modern America is losing its grip on the “traditional family household”. That being man in charge. Wife and child may have a very different sense of “virtue” but they are ultimately subordinate to the virtuous man who heads the household. That structure is engrained within the virtue of the household. We’ll ignore the bit where Aristotle talks about how you should treat slaves.

What he’s saying is acquiring assets is still important - but this structure is more important and underpins everything.

He has a way of looking at the world which wouldn’t look out of place in Victorian Britain.
 
Last edited:
Kippaxpete said:
So, in terms of placing family before 'the acquisition of property and possessions', Trump's VC pick is advocating a societal system that is somewhat at odds with the unfettered free market economic model so favoured by this lunatic's acolytes whereby the pursuit of material wealth appears to be an aim in itself. Just remind me, what exactly does Vance stand for?
Click to expand...
But that was four years ago.

He’s obviously changed his tune now, so that his views are compatible with the orange, racist idiot, which enabled him to become the prospective VP.
 
SkyBlueFlux said:
My best attempt to translate from Vance’s warped mind palace is that you should take his statements about what he prioritises with a huge pinch of salt.

What he is trying to project here is that modern America is losing its grip on the “traditional family household”. That being man in charge. Wife and child may have a very different sense of “virtue” but they are ultimately subordinate to the virtuous man who heads the household. That structure is engrained within the virtue of the household. We’ll ignore the bit where Aristotle talks about how you should treat slaves.

What he’s saying is acquiring assets is still important - but this structure is more important and underpins everything.

He has a way of looking at the world which wouldn’t look out of place in Victorian Britain.
Click to expand...

I got some of that. As @Vienna_70 says it was 4 years ago and the family--oriented idea with grandparents stopping work to help out seemed at odds with Trump.

Either way, as you said at the start, who talks like that?!
 
I see the idiot now claims that Harris is the worst VPIn history.

Between her and "the worst president in history," it’s remarkable that they’ve managed to cut border crossings and improve the economy.
 
Johnny Mars Bar said:
I disagree.

The old Friedman / Reganomics free market capitalist model went out of the window years ago. This is a new social conservatism that’s built on inward facing dogmatic protectionism rather than liberal economics.

In a weird way Trump’s economic policy has got more in common with the old Soviet state capitalism model than it does with the traditional American free market, free trade globalisation model.

Whacking 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs is a great example.
Click to expand...
You make a fair point Johnny. I worded my comment clumsily. Regardless of the model of capitalism, I feel there's a fundamental contradiction at the heart of Vance's argument as he seems to want to have his cake and eat it. I'm no expert on economics or philosophy but what I do know is that Aristotle espoused that economics should be a moral science that didn't seek unlimited wealth but provided for the common good. That would appear to be at odds with a warped political ideology which appears to favour almost complete self-reliance over even limited government intervention to assist those in need.
 
Kippaxpete said:
You make a fair point Johnny. I worded my comment clumsily. Regardless of the model of capitalism, I feel there's a fundamental contradiction at the heart of Vance's argument as he seems to want to have his cake and eat it. I'm no expert on economics or philosophy but what I do know is that Aristotle espoused that economics should be a moral science that didn't seek unlimited wealth but provided for the common good. That would appear to be at odds with a warped political ideology which appears to favour almost complete self-reliance over even limited government intervention to assist those in need.
Click to expand...
This is a good discussion, but I really think you’re over-analyzing. The whole Trump/ MAGA thing is tantamount to new religion being born right in front of our eyes. How is it really any different to Joseph Smith? Some scurrilous bloke, steeped in self-interest, but who has some ability to sell himself, comes out with a ‘vision’ and idiots flock to him.
Just like any religion, it’s full of mad contradictions and things made up on the spot to benefit their temporary needs. There’s no point looking for any internal cohesiveness and consistency.
 
roman totale said:
This is a good discussion, but I really think you’re over-analyzing. The whole Trump/ MAGA thing is tantamount to new religion being born right in front of our eyes. How is it really any different to Joseph Smith? Some scurrilous bloke, steeped in self-interest, but who has some ability to sell himself, comes out with a ‘vision’ and idiots flock to him.
Just like any religion, it’s full of mad contradictions and things made up on the spot to benefit their temporary needs. There’s no point looking for any internal cohesiveness and consistency.
Click to expand...
Agree, there's pretty solid signs we are over peak Trump.

When he was campaigning (grifting) over the last year or so it was preaching to the choir every time. Not much press coverage and he was ahead in polls where most people were in truth undecided and a bit down on old man Biden.

There was always a good chance that under the scrutiny of an election campaign his bat shit crazy speeches would not come over well. Add the energy of Kamala and its really starting to fall apart. He could get back on track, plenty of time to go. But equally he could go totally off the rails. He's desperate for attention but there's not much left he hasn't said or done. He's already played the racist bullying card.
 
Vienna_70 said:
Will it be the biggest press conference ever, with the most journalists ever in one place?
Click to expand...
Holding it at his golf club in an attempt to re-enact George W "Look at this drive" moment. Which will inevitably end in him slicing the ball straight into a journalists bollocks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top