Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On June 15 2021 08:35 maybenexttime wrote: But American politics does produce some gems. xD
Is that... Is that real? Or is it like the Onion or some other satire about libertarians?
Not only is this real, one of the candidates at that same convention did in fact get some boos for saying that you shouldn't be allowed to sell heroin to a five year-old
I live libertarians. Nothing reminds me that absolute garbage exists masquerading as people more than a libertarian
They're the best (worst). I get the argument of wanting third parties, but when the third parties have people like this guy, it makes me wary (although I would still want more than two viable options)
The good part is when they have their own party the main parties don't try to woo that voter.
That is definitely a wrong conclusion, in Germany the left is collectively fighting for the same goals, just with different priorities. And the loss of identity from the former largest one led to them adopting more of the other ones, so now the former middle left worker party headed by a millionaire from the conservative wing has announced to make green goals their top priority (because the greens passed them in votes). In part because the conservatives have more or less successfully fished for the middle left for the last two decades, which caused estrangement from the outer right and right libertarian.
That being said it's easier to draw lines when the extreme parties show how badly damaged their voters are and they fish for smaller margins, i.e. if the GOP would have to fight for their middle right more with other middle right parties they would be less tempted to try to get the batshit QAnon people as well because these groups don't think highly of each other.
To be fair the middle is the part that historically the GOP and democrats fight over and Trump was the exception likely caused by the increasing extremity caused by the fall of the classical media.
The GOP leaving the middle ground pre-dates Trump. Don't forget about the tea party.
The Tea Party was practically a hostile takeover tho. The GoP wanted to be more moderate but their voters decided to sprint further to the right.
Now obviously they cultivated and purposefully grow this base over the years and bear responsibility for it, but I think you can certainly make the argument that it was Trump who really exposed that the crazies are how you win within the Republican party these days. And as a result this crazy side has been more openly embraced.
Is that... Is that real? Or is it like the Onion or some other satire about libertarians?
Not only is this real, one of the candidates at that same convention did in fact get some boos for saying that you shouldn't be allowed to sell heroin to a five year-old
I live libertarians. Nothing reminds me that absolute garbage exists masquerading as people more than a libertarian
They're the best (worst). I get the argument of wanting third parties, but when the third parties have people like this guy, it makes me wary (although I would still want more than two viable options)
The good part is when they have their own party the main parties don't try to woo that voter.
That is definitely a wrong conclusion, in Germany the left is collectively fighting for the same goals, just with different priorities. And the loss of identity from the former largest one led to them adopting more of the other ones, so now the former middle left worker party headed by a millionaire from the conservative wing has announced to make green goals their top priority (because the greens passed them in votes). In part because the conservatives have more or less successfully fished for the middle left for the last two decades, which caused estrangement from the outer right and right libertarian.
That being said it's easier to draw lines when the extreme parties show how badly damaged their voters are and they fish for smaller margins, i.e. if the GOP would have to fight for their middle right more with other middle right parties they would be less tempted to try to get the batshit QAnon people as well because these groups don't think highly of each other.
To be fair the middle is the part that historically the GOP and democrats fight over and Trump was the exception likely caused by the increasing extremity caused by the fall of the classical media.
The GOP leaving the middle ground pre-dates Trump. Don't forget about the tea party.
The Tea Party was practically a hostile takeover tho. The GoP wanted to be more moderate but their voters decided to sprint further to the right.
Now obviously they cultivated and purposefully grow this base over the years and bear responsibility for it, but I think you can certainly make the argument that it was Trump who really exposed that the crazies are how you win within the Republican party these days. And as a result this crazy side has been more openly embraced.
I don't disagree with this, but I'd argue that Trump is a symptom, not a cause; i.e. the GOP left the middle ground earlier, and as a result catering to the crazies became a winning strategy. To me, it seems like the election of Obama is what really triggered this process.
Is that... Is that real? Or is it like the Onion or some other satire about libertarians?
Not only is this real, one of the candidates at that same convention did in fact get some boos for saying that you shouldn't be allowed to sell heroin to a five year-old
I live libertarians. Nothing reminds me that absolute garbage exists masquerading as people more than a libertarian
They're the best (worst). I get the argument of wanting third parties, but when the third parties have people like this guy, it makes me wary (although I would still want more than two viable options)
In a way I do prefer the absolutely whacky genuine libertarian types than the ‘I’m a libertarian but actually a conservative who just doesn’t like government when it’s enforcing things I don’t like’ type.
Is that... Is that real? Or is it like the Onion or some other satire about libertarians?
Not only is this real, one of the candidates at that same convention did in fact get some boos for saying that you shouldn't be allowed to sell heroin to a five year-old
I live libertarians. Nothing reminds me that absolute garbage exists masquerading as people more than a libertarian
They're the best (worst). I get the argument of wanting third parties, but when the third parties have people like this guy, it makes me wary (although I would still want more than two viable options)
The good part is when they have their own party the main parties don't try to woo that voter.
That is definitely a wrong conclusion, in Germany the left is collectively fighting for the same goals, just with different priorities. And the loss of identity from the former largest one led to them adopting more of the other ones, so now the former middle left worker party headed by a millionaire from the conservative wing has announced to make green goals their top priority (because the greens passed them in votes). In part because the conservatives have more or less successfully fished for the middle left for the last two decades, which caused estrangement from the outer right and right libertarian.
That being said it's easier to draw lines when the extreme parties show how badly damaged their voters are and they fish for smaller margins, i.e. if the GOP would have to fight for their middle right more with other middle right parties they would be less tempted to try to get the batshit QAnon people as well because these groups don't think highly of each other.
To be fair the middle is the part that historically the GOP and democrats fight over and Trump was the exception likely caused by the increasing extremity caused by the fall of the classical media.
The GOP leaving the middle ground pre-dates Trump. Don't forget about the tea party.
The Tea Party was practically a hostile takeover tho. The GoP wanted to be more moderate but their voters decided to sprint further to the right.
Now obviously they cultivated and purposefully grow this base over the years and bear responsibility for it, but I think you can certainly make the argument that it was Trump who really exposed that the crazies are how you win within the Republican party these days. And as a result this crazy side has been more openly embraced.
I don't disagree with this, but I'd argue that Trump is a symptom, not a cause; i.e. the GOP left the middle ground earlier, and as a result catering to the crazies became a winning strategy. To me, it seems like the election of Obama is what really triggered this process.
Yeah I don't mean to paint Trump as the cause, he is very much a symptom.
The origins go back way further then Obama, to the Southern Strategy which is the 70's I believe. I see Obama as a big catalyst that send what was already below the surface into overdrive. A black man became President, there really could not have been a more clear sign to the racist parts of the GoP base that they were losing the war and had to take action. Which resulted in the Tea party and eventually Trump.
Is that... Is that real? Or is it like the Onion or some other satire about libertarians?
Not only is this real, one of the candidates at that same convention did in fact get some boos for saying that you shouldn't be allowed to sell heroin to a five year-old
I live libertarians. Nothing reminds me that absolute garbage exists masquerading as people more than a libertarian
They're the best (worst). I get the argument of wanting third parties, but when the third parties have people like this guy, it makes me wary (although I would still want more than two viable options)
The good part is when they have their own party the main parties don't try to woo that voter.
That is definitely a wrong conclusion, in Germany the left is collectively fighting for the same goals, just with different priorities. And the loss of identity from the former largest one led to them adopting more of the other ones, so now the former middle left worker party headed by a millionaire from the conservative wing has announced to make green goals their top priority (because the greens passed them in votes). In part because the conservatives have more or less successfully fished for the middle left for the last two decades, which caused estrangement from the outer right and right libertarian.
That being said it's easier to draw lines when the extreme parties show how badly damaged their voters are and they fish for smaller margins, i.e. if the GOP would have to fight for their middle right more with other middle right parties they would be less tempted to try to get the batshit QAnon people as well because these groups don't think highly of each other.
To be fair the middle is the part that historically the GOP and democrats fight over and Trump was the exception likely caused by the increasing extremity caused by the fall of the classical media.
The GOP leaving the middle ground pre-dates Trump. Don't forget about the tea party.
Newt Gingrich is the start of this strategy. It way pre-dates even the Tea Party, let alone Trump.
The party did tried to move away from the strategy with their presidential candidates in 08 + 12 but their down ballot success has been due to pandering to crazy town since 1996.
So, how will Biden deal with Putin and Russia at their upcoming meeting? Biden certainly has my respect if he can make any kind of progress, but it will be difficult! At least he can't be toyed with like Trump was.
Parallels to the fall of the Western Roman Empire;
Currency Inflation, Inability to defend foreign incursions, Diminishing relevancy on world stage, Inability to effectively police neighbors, Diminishing military/technological superiority, Splintered unity due to infighting, Religious upheaval, Drastic wealth disparity,
On June 17 2021 01:53 Arghmyliver wrote: Parallels to the fall of the Western Roman Empire;
Currency Inflation, Inability to defend foreign incursions, Diminishing relevancy on world stage, Inability to effectively police neighbors, Diminishing military/technological superiority, Splintered unity due to infighting, Religious upheaval, Drastic wealth disparity,
RIP Pax Americana?
Tell us you’re ignorant of classical history without telling us.
On June 17 2021 01:53 Arghmyliver wrote: Parallels to the fall of the Western Roman Empire;
Currency Inflation, Inability to defend foreign incursions, Diminishing relevancy on world stage, Inability to effectively police neighbors, Diminishing military/technological superiority, Splintered unity due to infighting, Religious upheaval, Drastic wealth disparity,
RIP Pax Americana?
Tell us you’re ignorant of classical history without telling us.
That or just ignorant of how history works in general will do in a pinch as well. Boiling things down into oversimple generalizations ain't the stuff of adequate historical comparison, for those interested.
On June 16 2021 20:13 Slydie wrote: So, how will Biden deal with Putin and Russia at their upcoming meeting? Biden certainly has my respect if he can make any kind of progress, but it will be difficult! At least he can't be toyed with like Trump was.
He will strike the perfect balance of not starting a war with Russia while also asserting the moral and strategic superiority of the land of the free. Like every president before, with the exception of that one president that did a bad job.
On June 17 2021 01:53 Arghmyliver wrote: Parallels to the fall of the Western Roman Empire;
Currency Inflation, Inability to defend foreign incursions, Diminishing relevancy on world stage, Inability to effectively police neighbors, Diminishing military/technological superiority, Splintered unity due to infighting, Religious upheaval, Drastic wealth disparity,
RIP Pax Americana?
Tell us you’re ignorant of classical history without telling us.
I mean yes, but it's hard to deny that the USA are in a less comfortable position than when the UDSSR collapsed and that internal turmoil has been increasing in the last decade, to the point where people started to see civil war when right protesters stormed the capitol.
Naturally this is lacking in nuance, but I always thought too that Rome had a bunch of amusing parallels to the USA considering that they are 600 years apart. Including the strong militarization, the inclusion of faith into politics, the "wealth makes right" mentality, the strong nationalism with the underlying racism and the way they project their power through ally/vassal states. Like the USA Rome was for a long time the technological and culturally dominant nation and naturally both lost that eventually, although Western Rome fell from power long before these factors became relevant.
I don't think the USA is anywhere near as weak as Western Rome was at the time of it's fall, but the Migration Period is fairly unique and vastly accelerated Rome's downfall. That being said the USA has repetitively proven to be ineffective at projecting their power in the middle east and northern Africa, has been slowly loosing their grip over Europe and has with China a rising contestant in Africa and eastern Asia. Their economy and military are still the strongest of the world, but the US position is becoming more of a first among equals and less one of total domination and IF internal turmoil escalates they could quickly fall from grace.
On June 17 2021 01:53 Arghmyliver wrote: Parallels to the fall of the Western Roman Empire;
Currency Inflation, Inability to defend foreign incursions, Diminishing relevancy on world stage, Inability to effectively police neighbors, Diminishing military/technological superiority, Splintered unity due to infighting, Religious upheaval, Drastic wealth disparity,
RIP Pax Americana?
Tell us you’re ignorant of classical history without telling us.
I mean yes, but it's hard to deny that the USA are in a less comfortable position than when the UDSSR collapsed and that internal turmoil has been increasing in the last decade, to the point where people started to see civil war when right protesters stormed the capitol.
Naturally this is lacking in nuance, but I always thought too that Rome had a bunch of amusing parallels to the USA considering that they are 600 years apart. Including the strong militarization, the inclusion of faith into politics, the "wealth makes right" mentality, the strong nationalism with the underlying racism and the way they project their power through ally/vassal states. Like the USA Rome was for a long time the technological and culturally dominant nation and naturally both lost that eventually, although Western Rome fell from power long before these factors became relevant.
I don't think the USA is anywhere near as weak as Western Rome was at the time of it's fall, but the Migration Period is fairly unique and vastly accelerated Rome's downfall. That being said the USA has repetitively proven to be ineffective at projecting their power in the middle east and northern Africa, has been slowly loosing their grip over Europe and has with China a rising contestant in Africa and eastern Asia. Their economy and military are still the strongest of the world, but the US position is becoming more of a first among equals and less one of total domination and IF internal turmoil escalates they could quickly fall from grace.
There are a few big differences, the ones I think matter the most follows. The rich/powerful in the US are less powerful than they were in Rome (getting there though). There are no external pressures apart from risk of reduction of trade for the US. If the US military was disbanded today the nation would still be there in 10 years.
On June 17 2021 01:53 Arghmyliver wrote: Parallels to the fall of the Western Roman Empire;
Currency Inflation, Inability to defend foreign incursions, Diminishing relevancy on world stage, Inability to effectively police neighbors, Diminishing military/technological superiority, Splintered unity due to infighting, Religious upheaval, Drastic wealth disparity,
RIP Pax Americana?
Tell us you’re ignorant of classical history without telling us.
That or just ignorant of how history works in general will do in a pinch as well. Boiling things down into oversimple generalizations ain't the stuff of adequate historical comparison, for those interested.
Let me be more clear -
US Dollar 1837 $20.67/t oz Au 2021 $1900/t oz Au, Buying Power 2012 compared to 1776 3% RE Denarius Purity AD 271 5% (from 95-98% at start of RE), buying power .05%
US cybersercurity has proven ineffectual at deflecting even relatively amateur attempts to disrupt systems. Compare to barbarian raiding in the extremes of the WRE. Britain, Withdrawal from Dacia, the general state of continental Gaul.
The balance of power has been steadily shifting away from the US role of world police. Compare to increasing dismissal of Roman authority by barbarian foederatii.
Infighting, populist leaders holding sway over large areas and vying for power. Compare to personality cults in the present US, splintering of political parties, escalated rhetoric.
Religious upheaval, supplantation of indigineous religions with Christianity, increased influence of the church. Compare to diminishing influence of the church, supplantation of religion with skepticism.
Since the heyday of American militarism, the technological gap between US military complex and those of other rising powers (spec CN) has closed dramatically. Compare to rising powers in continental Europe.
I see you tend to disagree. I would never claim my knowledge of Ancient History to be exhaustive or infallible. Would you care to enlighten us with your superiority, or have you gratified yourself sufficiently with your flippant dismissal?
On June 17 2021 01:53 Arghmyliver wrote: Parallels to the fall of the Western Roman Empire;
Currency Inflation, Inability to defend foreign incursions, Diminishing relevancy on world stage, Inability to effectively police neighbors, Diminishing military/technological superiority, Splintered unity due to infighting, Religious upheaval, Drastic wealth disparity,
RIP Pax Americana?
Tell us you’re ignorant of classical history without telling us.
That or just ignorant of how history works in general will do in a pinch as well. Boiling things down into oversimple generalizations ain't the stuff of adequate historical comparison, for those interested.
Let me be more clear -
US Dollar 1837 $20.67/t oz Au 2021 $1900/t oz Au, Buying Power 2012 compared to 1776 3% RE Denarius Purity AD 271 5% (from 95-98% at start of RE), buying power .05%
US cybersercurity has proven ineffectual at deflecting even relatively amateur attempts to disrupt systems. Compare to barbarian raiding in the extremes of the WRE. Britain, Withdrawal from Dacia, the general state of continental Gaul.
The balance of power has been steadily shifting away from the US role of world police. Compare to increasing dismissal of Roman authority by barbarian foederatii.
Infighting, populist leaders holding sway over large areas and vying for power. Compare to personality cults in the present US, splintering of political parties, escalated rhetoric.
Religious upheaval, supplantation of indigineous religions with Christianity, increased influence of the church. Compare to diminishing influence of the church, supplantation of religion with skepticism.
Since the heyday of American militarism, the technological gap between US military complex and those of other rising powers (spec CN) has closed dramatically. Compare to rising powers in continental Europe.
I see you tend to disagree. I would never claim my knowledge of Ancient History to be exhaustive or infallible. Would you care to enlighten us with your superiority, or have you gratified yourself sufficiently with your flippant dismissal?
I think you are looking for elegance where it doesn't exist. This is common for people. People want to see patterns and rhythm where it doesn't exist. At the end of the day, you're making a false equivalence. We can point to similarities. We can also point to differences, like the existence of electricity. The differences are so staggering it feels silly.
You listed a lot of ways you see the US as similar. How long do you think the list would be of things that are different? 40% of my proteins are the same as a banana, but I am not a banana. Similarity isn't always useful to measure.
On June 17 2021 01:53 Arghmyliver wrote: Parallels to the fall of the Western Roman Empire;
Currency Inflation, Inability to defend foreign incursions, Diminishing relevancy on world stage, Inability to effectively police neighbors, Diminishing military/technological superiority, Splintered unity due to infighting, Religious upheaval, Drastic wealth disparity,
RIP Pax Americana?
Tell us you’re ignorant of classical history without telling us.
That or just ignorant of how history works in general will do in a pinch as well. Boiling things down into oversimple generalizations ain't the stuff of adequate historical comparison, for those interested.
Let me be more clear -
US Dollar 1837 $20.67/t oz Au 2021 $1900/t oz Au, Buying Power 2012 compared to 1776 3% RE Denarius Purity AD 271 5% (from 95-98% at start of RE), buying power .05%
US cybersercurity has proven ineffectual at deflecting even relatively amateur attempts to disrupt systems. Compare to barbarian raiding in the extremes of the WRE. Britain, Withdrawal from Dacia, the general state of continental Gaul.
The balance of power has been steadily shifting away from the US role of world police. Compare to increasing dismissal of Roman authority by barbarian foederatii.
Infighting, populist leaders holding sway over large areas and vying for power. Compare to personality cults in the present US, splintering of political parties, escalated rhetoric.
Religious upheaval, supplantation of indigineous religions with Christianity, increased influence of the church. Compare to diminishing influence of the church, supplantation of religion with skepticism.
Since the heyday of American militarism, the technological gap between US military complex and those of other rising powers (spec CN) has closed dramatically. Compare to rising powers in continental Europe.
I see you tend to disagree. I would never claim my knowledge of Ancient History to be exhaustive or infallible. Would you care to enlighten us with your superiority, or have you gratified yourself sufficiently with your flippant dismissal?
I think you are looking for elegance where it doesn't exist. This is common for people. People want to see patterns and rhythm where it doesn't exist. At the end of the day, you're making a false equivalence. We can point to similarities. We can also point to differences, like the existence of electricity. The differences are so staggering it feels silly.
You listed a lot of ways you see the US as similar. How long do you think the list would be of things that are different? 40% of my proteins are the same as a banana, but I am not a banana. Similarity isn't always useful to measure.
I think you might be reading too much into what I'm saying. I'm saying it's an interesting comparison. I'm not suggesting that the US is the Roman Empire, just that the parallels between the collapses of hegemony are interesting. Tbh, I expected more arguments along the lines of "US hegemony isn't collapsing and here's why."
Well, couldn't be more black and white why the filibuster is still in place now. Because rich people want it in place. Manchin apparently is a little more willing to alter the filibuster in the call than he's said publicly, but it still stonewalls all democratic legislation and priorities.
The call included several billionaire investors and corporate executives, among them Louis Bacon, chief executive of Moore Capital Management; Kenneth D. Tuchman, founder of global outsourcing company TeleTech; and Howard Marks, the head of Oaktree Capital, one of the largest private equity firms in the country. .... The filibuster is a critical priority for the donors on the call, as it bottles up progressive legislation that would hit their bottom lines.
On June 17 2021 01:53 Arghmyliver wrote: Parallels to the fall of the Western Roman Empire;
Currency Inflation, Inability to defend foreign incursions, Diminishing relevancy on world stage, Inability to effectively police neighbors, Diminishing military/technological superiority, Splintered unity due to infighting, Religious upheaval, Drastic wealth disparity,
RIP Pax Americana?
Tell us you’re ignorant of classical history without telling us.
I mean yes, but it's hard to deny that the USA are in a less comfortable position than when the UDSSR collapsed and that internal turmoil has been increasing in the last decade, to the point where people started to see civil war when right protesters stormed the capitol.
Naturally this is lacking in nuance, but I always thought too that Rome had a bunch of amusing parallels to the USA considering that they are 600 years apart. Including the strong militarization, the inclusion of faith into politics, the "wealth makes right" mentality, the strong nationalism with the underlying racism and the way they project their power through ally/vassal states. Like the USA Rome was for a long time the technological and culturally dominant nation and naturally both lost that eventually, although Western Rome fell from power long before these factors became relevant.
I don't think the USA is anywhere near as weak as Western Rome was at the time of it's fall, but the Migration Period is fairly unique and vastly accelerated Rome's downfall. That being said the USA has repetitively proven to be ineffective at projecting their power in the middle east and northern Africa, has been slowly loosing their grip over Europe and has with China a rising contestant in Africa and eastern Asia. Their economy and military are still the strongest of the world, but the US position is becoming more of a first among equals and less one of total domination and IF internal turmoil escalates they could quickly fall from grace.
There are a few big differences, the ones I think matter the most follows. The rich/powerful in the US are less powerful than they were in Rome (getting there though). There are no external pressures apart from risk of reduction of trade for the US. If the US military was disbanded today the nation would still be there in 10 years.
I don't know tbh. If I look at the money people like Bezos or Gates have, even if tied in their shares, I'm not entirely convinced that they couldn't establish a similar grip over politics if they wanted to. Money plays a huge role in the US for campaigning and even the cost of the presidential campaigns are peanuts for the ten richest people of the USA.
And if we look at Disney pushing copyright expiration back every few years to save their now almost a hundred year old mouse from becoming CC (originally it was max 28 years), the US meat industry being a huge health hazard for their employees or Amazon supressing unions I'm not sure that the super corporations don't have similar influence if not more than the Patricians on laws. Might be my outsider perspective though, which is skewed by media and outcry, but all recent presidents were multi-millionaires and the corps just pay both sides instead of running themselves like Crassus f.e. did.
And while I deem it somewhat likely that the USA would survive the disbandal of it's military, Japan and SK certainly wouldn't be so lucky. And I'm not 100% convinced that Russia isn't still too tied in the geopolitical annexation game from a hundred years ago and that China and Kuba wouldn't use the chance to showcase their supposed superiority. Not that they'd have a realistic shot at holding that land, but they still might try.
Naturally the US-military is bloated as hell, but in the abstract case of NO military the USA isn't lacking enemies.
EPT
