EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 3988
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7886 Posts
On June 08 2016 07:23 GGTeMpLaR wrote: What evidence is there? Whenever I see someone say that I know the person saying it is incompetent or a troll. I don't know if you talk about my statement that the Republican party is racist or that they are is disarray. In case we talk about the later, here are the reactions from senior Republican. It's wonderful: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/could-be-end-trump As for the GOP being fundamentally racist, well, why don't you open a history book and look at their positions on racial equality the last fifty years? Or you could just look at their policies and how they impact very specifically minorities. Or to listen to their rhetoric and look at how they exploit racial resentment to convince poor disfranchised white people to vote against their most basic interest. The basic reasoning is that, for example, the welfare state that would benefit so much low middle class white men is in fact designed to help "those people" to not work. Or you could simply ask yourself why afro americans simply never vote for the GOP. If you need more arguments, I can keep typing. My point is not that GOP leaders are all racist, but rather that they exploit the racism and the resentment of a big part of the white America to promote an agenda that could never win an election otherwise: their sole goal is the financial benefit of a class of donors. I think Republican ideology is simply a con job. Now, Trump is a real embarrassment: he is not pulling a con job, he says aloud what the GOP leaders are implying. He shows openly the monster that the GOP leaders have been manipulating for years. And for the Republican establishment, it is the ultimate disaster. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12164 Posts
On June 08 2016 23:46 Gorsameth wrote: I mean it has no plan to change the system. No leader who directs the efforts towards effecting actual change and a roadmap of how to accomplish it. I know that's what you meant. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On June 08 2016 20:28 oneofthem wrote: assange the Kremlin troll lol cold war has devolved into google vs russian mobsters | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On June 08 2016 23:54 IgnE wrote: lol cold war has devolved into google vs russian mobsters Everyone with sufficient resources spams the internet airwaves with favorable coverage and flak against enemies. That includes Russian govt, US govt, and corporations too. Turns out that an effective form of propaganda is to pollute the well of knowledge so that people can't really tell the difference between truth and lies. It doesn't help that unreliable sources (e.g. Zero Hedge, RT, Fox, Twitter speculation, insert-other-shady-source-here) are occasionally spot on in a way no one else is. Ironically I find that it's usually pro-US trolls that play the "Russian troll" card more than anyone else. They certainly exist but they're not alone. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7886 Posts
On June 09 2016 00:24 oneofthem wrote: of course google is 'working' with the u.s. government. why is this problematic? google is a responsible corporation. Not quite sure what that means. The only responsibility of any corporation is to give a positive return on its shareholder investment. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
youtube and picasa provide communication and digital presence for dissidents, seems fine right? no no, the russian spin is that google is encouraging civil war in syria. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On June 09 2016 00:30 Biff The Understudy wrote: Not quite sure what that means. The only responsibility of any corporation is to give a positive return on its shareholder investment. On paper, sure. But they also need to function within the government they exist. The government is the entity that could give google the most problems and there is zero reason to piss them off. And google has always been a company that thinks longer term than the next quarter. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
http://www.cfr.org/projects/world/conflict-in-a-connected-world-roundtable-series/pr1649 their wikipedia page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jigsaw_(company) basically the state department has a long history of developing encryption and digital protection for dissidents, in cooperation with tech industry. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21661 Posts
On June 09 2016 00:30 Biff The Understudy wrote: Not quite sure what that means. The only responsibility of any corporation is to give a positive return on its shareholder investment. The corporate entity yes, but that only exists in legal terms. Those in charge of the corporation may want more then "generate positive returns". They may want to use their resources and influence to change the world. Some may wish to create a legacy that goes beyond a dollar number on a record sheet. | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On June 08 2016 23:18 Nebuchad wrote: Directionless anger at the system isn't directionless. It's directed at the system, and consequentially is aimed at how to change it. Oftentimes not in the most realistic ways, perhaps, but you'll be amazed how little realism matters when change is perceived to be needed, or in your case, is actually needed. I wouldnt say it was directionless, but it certainly lost direction. The problem is the thinking goes from using your popularity and influence to affecting reform through those in power to "I cant change anything unless I have power" And then the goal just becomes power. It happens all the time in popular revolutionary movements and its kinda sad to see. He still has alot of chips to actually get some things he wants done (not all, not most, but some) but he needs to start playing nice and stop pretending that fairy dust and magic beans are the solution to Americas problems. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On June 09 2016 00:35 oneofthem wrote: the legal structure of a corporation is as you describe. but people have different hats. google's executives may also see themselves as influencing events and affecting history in some way. google's information infrastructure can be useful and they may choose to cooperate with the government in a variety of ways. it is not necessarily nefarious stuff. youtube and picasa provide communication and digital presence for dissidents, seems fine right? no no, the russian spin is that google is encouraging civil war in syria. google's "dont be evil" might end up looking like stalinist era soviet self-parody in a decade | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On June 09 2016 01:21 Barrin wrote: It is against the law for a CEO to do anything in the company that wouldn't maximize profits (except break other laws). Having a positive influence often overlaps with this. A positive image is good for business. I am pretty sure the law is a little more complex and nuanced than that, since Tim Cook told share holders if they only wanted to invest in a company that was going to maximize profits above all else, don’t invest in Apple. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
and depends what timeframes you're looking at | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12164 Posts
Anyway this thread has taught me that getting the democrats to agree with what Bernie wants done isn't much of a problem: they all share the same goals, but some are more pragmatic and realistic in their approach than others, you know. As such, Bernie's attitude shouldn't change much, cause everything he wants that they don't is an unrealistic policy that cannot be applied, and that can't change based on Bernie's attitude. Or, you know, so I was told the circumstances are. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On June 09 2016 01:39 IgnE wrote: google's "dont be evil" might end up looking like stalinist era soviet self-parody in a decade yea they should instead be trying to overthrow the world order because there is no justice outside of communism | ||
| ||
