I meant Milo Yiannopoulos, not Trump. Though i do still find Trump funny, though more in a having a mental nextdoor neighbour who might burn your house down kind of way.
Donald Trump
- Thread starter RichardDunneOwnGoal
- Start date
- Status
I meant Milo Yiannopoulos, not Trump. Though i do still find Trump funny, though more in a having a mental nextdoor neighbour who might burn your house down kind of way.
Uncle Wally One Ball
Well-Known Member
You cant be serious, commentators in the press and on the news have been doing nothing but examining both why he was elected and why Brexit happened, as well as discussing and identifying the similarities in both and why
The insinuation presumably is that those on the left or liberals are easily offended?
Yet the Daily Mail, threads on 4chan and Reddit and Milo's own Breitbart exist to serve the needs of the whinging right, who are equally constantly outraged about something.
Was hoping after appealing to the crazy far right that he'd bring his presidency back to the centre.
However so far, Trump's picks:
1.Bannon (runs site appealing to white nationalists. Appointment celebrated by white nationalists, neo nazis and former leader of KKK )
2. Flynn (Islamophobe. Frequently said crazy stuff about Muslims. Want's to create a national registry of Muslims)
3. Sessions (rejected for judgeship by Senate in the 1980's for blatant racism)
However so far, Trump's picks:
1.Bannon (runs site appealing to white nationalists. Appointment celebrated by white nationalists, neo nazis and former leader of KKK )
2. Flynn (Islamophobe. Frequently said crazy stuff about Muslims. Want's to create a national registry of Muslims)
3. Sessions (rejected for judgeship by Senate in the 1980's for blatant racism)
@BluePhil8
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 13,425
Please happen.
Uncle Wally One Ball
Well-Known Member
He was interviewed on channel 4 news last night. First time I have ever known of him, but first impression was far from good for me. In fact, he seemed pretty obnoxious
kaz7
Well-Known Member
The Americans are in for a shock,only 4 yrs and 2 months to go
Indeed. It's impossible to move for the commentary. I love political analysis though, so I'm gonna add my own. I'd personally boil it down to three interrelated themes:
1. Increased social isolation of certain minority communities in Western states, particularly Muslim communities, caused by fear and/or suspicion of terrorism. This is apparently inextricably linked to patterns of migration, and thus a consensus emerges to increase controls to cater to this suspicion. It's a much clearer link as a phenomenon in the US with the infamous great wall of Mexico. The thing is, migration in the Brexit sense isn't really applicable to the Anti-Islam or anti-refugee phenomena, in the sense that there is very little that can be done about those particular situations by leaving the EU. It's fairly ironic in fact, given the dominant stereotypical images you have of 'immigrants' are those at the camps in Northern France trying to jump on lorries - it's not going to prevent people who wish to claim asylum from doing so. Which means people are going to see it happening even after Brexit happens and we'll likely have a sort of vicious circle effect as ever-tighter controls are demanded by the population at large and they shift ever rightward. However, media organisations and prominent politicians and political commentators have managed to link it, and as the saying goes, throw enough shit and some of it sticks.
2. This idea of 'post-truth' politics. I hate the phrase because it seems as if the concept is legitimated. I prefer to refer to it as industrial-scale lying, but the snappier nature of the former kind of illustrates the point I'm about to make. Now, the accusation of politicians being prone to bending the truth has been around since the stone age. But it's become apparent that a purely fact-driven campaign doesn't, for want of a better phrase, get out the vote. In fact, it can push them in the opposite direction, because to some the conclusions bombardments of facts portray are completely alien to their situation, to the point where it's easier for them to be called out for not listening to 'legitimate' concerns of ordinary voters, no matter how anomalous those concerns may be when compared with general trends. This brought about another fairly major comparison between the Referendum and Trump's victory is that I'd say Hillary lost the US election rather than Trump winning it, in much a similar way as the Remain campaign lost the Referendum off the back of being an utterly awful campaign. Where campaigns such as these lag behind is in charismatic or identity-based arguments that really hit home with people. "Take back control" and "Make America great again" are two prime examples of this.
What increased reliance on charismatic positioning has done is allow campaigns such as Leave to garner votes from sweeping generalisations that they have absolutely no ability to link together or fully explain, and indeed with very little scrutiny. Instead, they can pretty much put two and two together to equal £350 million for the NHS. It's no use the Remain campaign or Clinton in that situation trying to correct the record, because the ordinary voter doesn't want to listen to long-winded economic arguments about how the amount we spend on the EU every week we get back, or how we get more out of trade deals because of it, etc. Leave were just allowed say something along the lines of the following:
"How much do we give the EU"
"Could we spend that on the NHS?"
And that, in essence, is case closed as far as they're concerned. It's a pretty dangerous phenomenon because it allows parties to pretty much say anything they wish that might rouse the rabble, with absolutely zero recourse for
3. The establishment, and how to stick it up 'em. Remain was seen as an establishment campaign, and so came its downfall. Clinton was about as establishment as a Presidential candidate gets. First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State. It goes back to the out of touch nature I was talking about in the ideas of 'post-truth' politics. Remain and Clinton ran on a continuity ticket. "This is great isn't it? Let's pick up where we left off!" People don't like the status quo and never have, but this is especially so in a world that is still recovering from the 2008 meltdown. They're told it's recovering but it's a top-down recovery by and large. And when people don't feel the status quo is working for them, they innately want to change it. The exception to this was the Tory election victory last year, but that was as much down to a weak Labour Party as much as it was their own campaigning.
Politics has changed beyond all recognition in this last year or so, and it's very much worth paying attention to the elections in Germany, and particularly France, over the next year or so. It's looking like we could have a very strong far right in Europe indeed, which is extremely worrying in many, many aspects. If I haven't sufficiently bored you after reading this, there's a great interview with the German philosopher Jurgen Habermas that discusses the rise of right populism here: https://www.socialeurope.eu/2016/11/democratic-polarisation-pull-ground-right-wing-populism/
Here's former KKK leader David Duke very happy about Trumps White House picks.
David Duke@DrDavidDuke
Bannon, Flynn, Sessions -- Great! Senate must demand that Sessions as Attorney General stop the massive institutional race discrimination against whites!
David Duke@DrDavidDukeBannon, Flynn, Sessions -- Great! Senate must demand that Sessions as Attorney General stop the massive institutional race discrimination against whites!
@BluePhil8
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 13,425
I'm looking forward to him winning a second term as well Karen but let's not get carried away, we should enjoy the here and now!
- Status