US Politics Thread

[SWP's back]

I’m anti-anti-antifa, personally.

Goes back to the old antidisestablishmentarianism movement.

 

[1.618034]

Yes, in my opinion it does.

Excellent. That’s what happened, so I feel somewhat vindicated.

 

[1.618034]

You could tell him and his ideas to fuck off, I think that’d count but GDM would have to clarify.

Good point.

 

[SWP's back]

So you agree with me then it is a crisis for liberalism, because not bright racists do not thrive under liberalism.

They don’t thrive under right wing populism either. But they do get to call black people n*****s, build a wall and own the Libs (and women’s uteruses)

Given the above what will Biden do to address the not bright racist issue, will he invest in education or will he continue in the vain hope that the premise of liberalism alone will suffice.

We will see, I’m not a Biden devotee. But he’s a great deal less dangerous to western democracy than Trump and he isn’t a narcissistic ****. So like Bush Jnr, Obama, Clinton et al, I’ll await their policies before judging as I Did with Trump (first few pages of the old Trump thread has me down saying ‘give him a chance, he may grow into the role’ etc)

 

[andyhinch]

They don’t thrive under right wing populism either. But they do get to call black people n*****s, build a wall and own the Libs (and women’s uteruses)



We will see, I’m not a Biden devotee. But he’s a great deal less dangerous to western democracy than Trump and he isn’t a narcissistic ****. So like Bush Jnr, Obama, Clinton et al, I’ll await their policies before judging as I Did with Trump (first few pages of the old Trump thread has me down saying ‘give him a chance, he may grow into the role’ etc)

He grew into something.

 

[r.soleofsalford]

Goes back to the old antidisestablishmentarianism movement.

Its a long time since I`ve seen or heard that word. It`s not really a word that pops up in conversation about what a **** Donald Trump is.

8-)

 

[Rascal]

On that occasion it was the southern states wanting to break away from the Union. If and when it happens, I believe it would be the wealthier, coastal states (and those that abut them) that will eventually have had enough and want to call it a day. Could see it splitting in a much more complex geographical pattern than 160 or so years ago.

It will inevitably involve a degree of migration, like in the Indian sub-continent in the 1940’s, but not as pronounced, although probably just as bitter.

I think the second amendment will be a factor too, as well as the electoral college if it delivers government over a sustained period against the wishes of the majority, and the voters of those coastal states and their neighbours.

Don’t think it will happen anytime soon, and I agree it’s nowhere near as binary as it was in the mid-19th century (tbf the world is hugely more complex now than it was then) but I think the divisions in the country are too great for a fracture to be less than likely to occur.

I've said this before btw, and some folk dismissed the notion out of hand, but global events in the last four years make predicting such a thing with any great certainty, foolish imo.

And maybe it was inevitable. Maybe the end of the civil war put a sticking plaster (albeit a long lasting one) over a profound dichotomy of social philosophy between regions in the US that greater technology and means of communication would eventually expose and cause those divisions In American society to recrudesce to an extent that made them, once again, manifest themselves dramatically and profoundly. There certainly seems enough hate and anger atm, for that to be, at the very least, a realistic prospect, surely.

And maybe social media is the catalyst, not the cause.

Ironically it Thomas Di Lorenzo's book "The Real Lincoln" he describes Abraham Lincoln as a Fascist, the Dictatorial great centraliser who dedicated his career to arranging a corrupt system of high tariffs and corporate subsidies. Using Godwin's law to make a point, Hitler in Mein Kampf used Lincolns suppression of southern states rights to justify the suppression of German states rights. He goes on to write The Confederacy railed against these corporate subsidies and high tariffs and that the Civil war was never about slavery, but about abuse of power and imposition of decrees from on high.

Admittedly Di Lorenzo is fellow of the Mises Institute, a think tank based in Alabama which was named after the Austrian school of Economics guru Ludwig Von Mises, an early advocate of Neo-Liberalism.

The Mises institute wrote about Trump and this is interesting

"The Bush/Clinton/Obama axis represented the worst profligacies of the managerial state, every bit as illiberal as Trump could ever pretend to be. That axis needed to be repudiated. It was never about Trump or his advisors or his policies; it was about an opportunity for 60 million Americans to go off-script and vote against the coronation of Clinton Part II."

There are echoes of what Di Lorenzo wrote about Lincoln and the style of Government employed by Trump.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Some Americans just wanted a person to make a stand against left academia, left media, and the secularist rout. They didn't care if that stance came with a graceless demeanour in fact, they preferred it. Cultural and social issues were a mainstay of Trump's 2016 coalition, but not in the sense they were for Pat Buchanan in 1996 or for social conservatives generally. Trump is not animated by religion or abortion; he is comfortable in cosmopolitan and diverse New York circles, and has little interest in relitigating gay marriage or similar battles. But he did promise to stand against campus radicalism, cancel culture, and the general perception of hostility toward middle America emanating from the Left, particularly the media. Yet all of these things have become worse, not better, since Trump took office. In fact, the reaction to Trump has emboldened Socialists and Marxists to abandon incrementalism and demand wholesale revolution in America, right here and now. Antifa and Black Lives Matter, with open support from media, politicians, and corporate America, condone if not engineer riots and looting in cities. Christian Middle America feels less secure after four years of Trump, not more. All of this has happened under Trump's watch."

Above is an abridged version of an article I read yesterday from the Mises Institute.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

You could tell him and his ideas to fuck off, I think that’d count but GDM would have to clarify.

Get back on your horse and fuck off definitely counts a 2.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

I'm not a Trump fan but, people do attack Trump too much.

Which is all well and good, but where are the posts asking what lead to Trump, where are the posts questioning why Trump came to power.

There has to be underlying reasons why Trump came to power and why he commands so much loyalty from his base. There has to be reasons why his base are so animated in their beliefs and no it is not all conspiracy crank theories.

In desperate times people look for hope, whether you like Trump or not he offered something different to the cronyism and warmongering of the Democrat's. Yes it was influenced by factors, some of them unpalatable such as white nationalism and the fear of white people becoming a minority in what they consider their own country. Never underestimate the power of rich white men to make the world in their own image and to make sure others also think that image benefits them. Trump happening is a failure of liberalism, liberalism is on the retreat because liberalism favoured the few not the many. Trump knew this, he allowed people to be illiberal, he allowed them to be racist, he allowed them to indulge in white nationalist fantasy, he allowed men to think it was OK to grab women by the pussy. He indulged people's fantasy.

Now Liberalism will return, will it be chastened, probably not, will it be less imperialistic, probably not, will it be less likely to spread the message of liberal democracy around the world, probably not. There is nothing more illiberal than imposing Liberal democracy on a country that is not a Liberal democracy, it is crude and it is arrogant. It is an assumption of we know what is best for you and if you do not do as we say, we have bombs, lots of bombs.

From an outside perspective America needs an introspective look at itself, because otherwise it will end up like the UK, only next time it will be worse, much much worse.

You use the word liberalism as if it is an insult. You sound like "liberal" really gets your back up.


"Warmongering of the Dems" - Seriously? Bush for example? (Did you mean political elite instead of Dems?)
"liberalism is on the retreat because liberalism favoured the few not the many." - Do you know the meaning of the word liberalism? It literally means to respect other pov and people, IE its inclusive, it doesnt exclude people like (By your own admission) Trump does
"will it (Liberalism) be less imperialistic" - Not sure what that means tbh
"There is nothing more illiberal than imposing Liberal democracy on a country that is not a Liberal democracy," - Imposing democracy?

I gave up after that it all got as confusing what with the linguistic gymnastics being used to curl a narrative out. I mean, "Rich white men making the world in their own image - Surely that is exactly what Trump is about?

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Ironically it Thomas Di Lorenzo's book "The Real Lincoln" he describes Abraham Lincoln as a Fascist, the Dictatorial great centraliser who dedicated his career to arranging a corrupt system of high tariffs and corporate subsidies. Using Godwin's law to make a point, Hitler in Mein Kampf used Lincolns suppression of southern states rights to justify the suppression of German states rights. He goes on to write The Confederacy railed against these corporate subsidies and high tariffs and that the Civil war was never about slavery, but about abuse of power and imposition of decrees from on high.

Admittedly Di Lorenzo is fellow of the Mises Institute, a think tank based in Alabama which was named after the Austrian school of Economics guru Ludwig Von Mises, an early advocate of Neo-Liberalism.

The Mises institute wrote about Trump and this is interesting

"The Bush/Clinton/Obama axis represented the worst profligacies of the managerial state, every bit as illiberal as Trump could ever pretend to be. That axis needed to be repudiated. It was never about Trump or his advisors or his policies; it was about an opportunity for 60 million Americans to go off-script and vote against the coronation of Clinton Part II."

There are echoes of what Di Lorenzo wrote about Lincoln and the style of Government employed by Trump.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Some Americans just wanted a person to make a stand against left academia, left media, and the secularist rout. They didn't care if that stance came with a graceless demeanour in fact, they preferred it. Cultural and social issues were a mainstay of Trump's 2016 coalition, but not in the sense they were for Pat Buchanan in 1996 or for social conservatives generally. Trump is not animated by religion or abortion; he is comfortable in cosmopolitan and diverse New York circles, and has little interest in relitigating gay marriage or similar battles. But he did promise to stand against campus radicalism, cancel culture, and the general perception of hostility toward middle America emanating from the Left, particularly the media. Yet all of these things have become worse, not better, since Trump took office. In fact, the reaction to Trump has emboldened Socialists and Marxists to abandon incrementalism and demand wholesale revolution in America, right here and now. Antifa and Black Lives Matter, with open support from media, politicians, and corporate America, condone if not engineer riots and looting in cities. Christian Middle America feels less secure after four years of Trump, not more. All of this has happened under Trump's watch."

Above is an abridged version of an article I read yesterday from the Mises Institute.

The difference between the (recent) history of Trump and the documented history of Lincoln is that a lot of the history of Lincoln is second/third hand subjective opinion, and Trump spews his shit all over the internet or on camera.