|
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.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
I never realised before how much difference there was between voter power in each US state.
I've always (and apparently very wrongly) assumed that each state's electoral college representation was more or less even on a per capita basis.
I didn't realise the difference was a big as 1 electoral college vote per ~150k people in Wyoming and 1 electoral college vote per ~530k people Florida.
That's wild.
|
Cool image by wikipedia. can't say it transports information well, but at least shows the madness of this voting system..maybe trump will indeed earase it :/
|
On November 05 2024 20:45 MJG wrote: I never realised before how much difference there was between voter power in each US state.
I've always (and apparently very wrongly) assumed that each state's electoral college representation was more or less even on a per capita basis.
I didn't realise the difference was a big as 1 electoral college vote per ~150k people in Wyoming and 1 electoral college vote per ~530k people Florida.
That's wild. Because the electoral college is tried to the total number of members of Congress (house + senate) which is capped and itself also growing more and more skewed.
|
On November 05 2024 21:24 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2024 20:45 MJG wrote: I never realised before how much difference there was between voter power in each US state.
I've always (and apparently very wrongly) assumed that each state's electoral college representation was more or less even on a per capita basis.
I didn't realise the difference was a big as 1 electoral college vote per ~150k people in Wyoming and 1 electoral college vote per ~530k people Florida.
That's wild. Because the electoral college is tried to the total number of members of Congress (house + senate) which is capped and itself also growing more and more skewed.
I think "because it's the only way Republicans will ever get close to the presidency ever again" is a more accurate answer.
|
On November 05 2024 21:26 Mikau313 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2024 21:24 Gorsameth wrote:On November 05 2024 20:45 MJG wrote: I never realised before how much difference there was between voter power in each US state.
I've always (and apparently very wrongly) assumed that each state's electoral college representation was more or less even on a per capita basis.
I didn't realise the difference was a big as 1 electoral college vote per ~150k people in Wyoming and 1 electoral college vote per ~530k people Florida.
That's wild. Because the electoral college is tried to the total number of members of Congress (house + senate) which is capped and itself also growing more and more skewed. I think "because it's the only way Republicans will ever get close to the presidency ever again" is a more accurate answer. Yes without the electoral college Republicans are fucked but the size of the House has been capped since 1929 so I don't blame modern Republicans for that.
|
The electoral college is one thing but that the electors aren't given out proportionally in most states is downright madness.
|
|
On November 05 2024 14:31 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2024 14:02 Billyboy wrote:On November 05 2024 13:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 05 2024 13:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2024 13:23 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 05 2024 13:17 KwarK wrote:On November 05 2024 12:27 WombaT wrote:On November 05 2024 12:07 KwarK wrote:On November 05 2024 11:57 WombaT wrote:On November 05 2024 11:44 KwarK wrote: [quote] “My salary depends on this.” The sad part is it really doesn’t Rogan built his entire brand on being perceived (relatively) politically independent, having interesting guests from various spheres and having a ton of knowledge on MMA, that’s what folks tuned in for. Least among my circle, which maybe isn’t super representative to be fair Rogan’s empire is probably more overall lucrative if he doesn’t do things like, I dunno outright coming out as pro Trump. So if you’re going to do that I’d assume it comes from that understanding My understanding is that his fan base is composed entirely of perpetually online maladjusted dipshits who identify as politically independent as a way of virtue signaling. To them they don’t see a contradiction between endorsing Trump and being an outsider to politics because they’re fully buying into the narrative that voting Trump is in some way subversive. The calculus here is simple. Grifters gonna grift. He doesn’t make money from people who don’t buy into this alternative media with alternative facts shit. He never will. It costs him nothing to alienate them while he stands to benefit from aligning with them. They won’t even recognize a contradiction between endorsing a candidate and being independent. While I frequently accede to your wisdom Kwawk, Rogan’s numbers probably transcend mere maladjusted dipshits. They just do. Spotify didn’t pay the big bucks otherwise I don’t think this is entirely fair with his historic output, although a fair assessment of some recent pivots. He gave Bernie a platform, indeed I think he endorsed him one time He can just be wrong, that doesn’t make him a grifter. If he believes his shtick, hey. Dave Rubin or Candace Owens, now there’s some grifters. I think he’s just shifted from his previous politics to being an avowed supporter of right wing politics, but I see that as a genuine shift rather than jumping on a grift. ...And that's why we have people like GH insisting that voting for Harris is wrong, not because he's right wing but because he's firmly in the perpetually online maladjusted dipshit group. The reason voting for Harris is "wrong" is because supporting genocide is "wrong". That Dems and their supporters have already rationalized their support for genocide pretty much means fascism is winning regardless of the 2024 election outcome. It's obvious to me how Trump winning can lead to fascism, but how does Harris winning also lead to fascism? How is genocide not fascism to you? Genocide is completely separate from fascism, and not only because basically every political spectrum has done it including communist (even right now!) But because it existed long before fascism did. Next Russia is trying to speed run all the possible war crimes including genocide and Trump getting into power increases that one AS WELL AS what is going on in the middle east. And if you are one issue, anti fascism voter, then why would you be against the person "supporting fascism" compared to the actual fascist. And if you think Fascism and genocide are the same thing , then wouldn't you do everything in your power to stop the fascist from taking power of the worlds most powerful army? Red lines are red lines, despite what Barack Obama says Consider this hypothetical. You’ve dude A you really hate, dude B you really dislike but less Someone tells you you’re duty bound to have you wife or s/o banged by one of them. For the greater good. Hey B is slightly less shit Alternatively, you have the option of just leaving your wife or s/o to remain in glorious monogamy, untainted with such sordid machinations. I don’t see why this is so unfathomable to folks. GH considers it a non-negotiable issue, and provided neither party shifts to his position he’s not going to proffer his support to either. In a state where his vote is effectively meaningless anyway. Why is this so confusing? It is confusing because this has nothing to do with why fascism is genocide, which is just a completely wrong and nonsensical statement. There are so many bad statements made that people on the "left" feel obliged to defend. If it is bad or worse statement people need to start being against it whether or no matter what "side" they have branded themselves.
As to your completely unrelated analogy, if it means stopping a fascist from taking over and trying to swap from a democracy to theocracy with oligarchs they can both bang my wife at the same time.
When stakes are high enough you have to make hard choices, there is nothing moralistic about dodging hard questions so you can be condescending.
|
There's definitely some kind of connection between fascism and genocide. Can you commit genocide if you aren't fascist? I don't know that you can. The wiping out of an ethnic group could just happen due to political convenience I suppose but if there's any ideology behind the genocide you're pretty much looking at fascism.
So I'd say that genocide is (usually) fascism, but fascism is not genocide.
|
No... For fucks sake.
Facism is a political system. Genocide is an action taken by a state or group.
They describe totally diffrent things.
|
Northern Ireland22544 Posts
On November 05 2024 21:17 KT_Elwood wrote:Cool image by wikipedia. can't say it transports information well, but at least shows the madness of this voting system..maybe trump will indeed earase it :/ I don’t think it’s cool that Wikipedia used a graphic of my lungs in this way
|
On November 05 2024 21:55 Velr wrote: No... For fucks sake.
Facism is a political system. Genocide is an action taken by a state or group.
They describe totally diffrent things.
Agreed, but also if anyone else was in GH's shoes they'd also occasionally oversimplify a point and say incorrect things if they were up against this level of abuse he faces in this thread on the regular by the same tiny well-protected self-righteous group of bullies. It's unacceptable what people are doing to him here and I've been so fed up with it because the only option GH and others have is to ignore the bullies - which should not be necessary. The bullies should be kicked out.
|
Northern Ireland22544 Posts
Nah y’all need WombaT’s patented Weighted Positive/Negative Voting System. In conjunction with well, something that isn’t the Electoral College
I’ll find a better name for it.
You get allocated a certain amount of points, you can distribute them how you like. Plus points to a candidate, or minus points.
It’s kinda more designed for multi-party democracies, specifically to enable actual preference to be expressed over tactical voting to keep the party you hate out.
But hey, while not really suitable for the borderline binary US system, it would let GH vote as he could vote against both Harris and Trump!
|
On November 05 2024 21:49 Jockmcplop wrote: There's definitely some kind of connection between fascism and genocide. Can you commit genocide if you aren't fascist? I don't know that you can. The wiping out of an ethnic group could just happen due to political convenience I suppose but if there's any ideology behind the genocide you're pretty much looking at fascism.
So I'd say that genocide is (usually) fascism, but fascism is not genocide. No, Fascism does not just mean bad. Neither does capitalism. First genocide existed long before the 1920's. Next you can look at current China and the USSR and see that communism is completely capable of genocide.
Economic systems, political systems, hell religion (or not being religions) does not make evil/bad. That is simply human. This is why you get super evil far left and far right. The best systems require checks and balances so that the wrong person or small group can't seize the power and do evil things. Not to mention that the more power one has more evil they tend to get.
This whole "our side is good" thing leads to just a lot of justifying of terrible, awful, horrific behavior. Russia, China, Iran, NK all have very different political systems and different economic systems. What they have in common is brutal dictatorships that are hell bent on not just oppressing their own people but rather as many as possible.
On November 05 2024 22:04 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2024 21:55 Velr wrote: No... For fucks sake.
Facism is a political system. Genocide is an action taken by a state or group.
They describe totally diffrent things. Agreed, but also if anyone else was in GH's shoes they'd also occasionally oversimplify a point and say incorrect things if they were up against this level of abuse he faces in this thread on the regular by the same tiny well-protected self-righteous group of bullies. It's unacceptable what people are doing to him here and I've been so fed up with it because the only option GH and others have is to ignore the bullies - which should not be necessary. The bullies should be kicked out. If they actually kicked out all the bullies you would be gone too. What you want is the people who disagree with you to be kicked out, especially the ones who disagree with you the way you disagree with others.
|
On November 05 2024 22:18 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2024 21:49 Jockmcplop wrote: There's definitely some kind of connection between fascism and genocide. Can you commit genocide if you aren't fascist? I don't know that you can. The wiping out of an ethnic group could just happen due to political convenience I suppose but if there's any ideology behind the genocide you're pretty much looking at fascism.
So I'd say that genocide is (usually) fascism, but fascism is not genocide. No, Fascism does not just mean bad. Neither does capitalism. First genocide existed long before the 1920's. Next you can look at current China and the USSR and see that communism is completely capable of genocide. Economic systems, political systems, hell religion (or not being religions) does not make evil/bad. That is simply human. This is why you get super evil far left and far right. The best systems require checks and balances so that the wrong person or small group can't seize the power and do evil things. Not to mention that the more power one has more evil they tend to get. This whole "our side is good" thing leads to just a lot of justifying of terrible, awful, horrific behavior. Russia, China, Iran, NK all have very different political systems and different economic systems. What they have in common is brutal dictatorships that are hell bent on not just oppressing their own people but rather as many as possible. Show nested quote +On November 05 2024 22:04 Magic Powers wrote:On November 05 2024 21:55 Velr wrote: No... For fucks sake.
Facism is a political system. Genocide is an action taken by a state or group.
They describe totally diffrent things. Agreed, but also if anyone else was in GH's shoes they'd also occasionally oversimplify a point and say incorrect things if they were up against this level of abuse he faces in this thread on the regular by the same tiny well-protected self-righteous group of bullies. It's unacceptable what people are doing to him here and I've been so fed up with it because the only option GH and others have is to ignore the bullies - which should not be necessary. The bullies should be kicked out. If they actually kicked out all the bullies you would be gone too. What you want is the people who disagree with you to be kicked out, especially the ones who disagree with you the way you disagree with others.
In your mind anyone's a bully who has an opposite view to yours. No, there are very few bullies here. But they hold power, and they target the same people all the time. You can agree with me on that without letting your bias shine through.
|
Northern Ireland22544 Posts
On November 05 2024 21:45 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2024 14:31 WombaT wrote:On November 05 2024 14:02 Billyboy wrote:On November 05 2024 13:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 05 2024 13:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2024 13:23 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 05 2024 13:17 KwarK wrote:On November 05 2024 12:27 WombaT wrote:On November 05 2024 12:07 KwarK wrote:On November 05 2024 11:57 WombaT wrote: [quote] The sad part is it really doesn’t
Rogan built his entire brand on being perceived (relatively) politically independent, having interesting guests from various spheres and having a ton of knowledge on MMA, that’s what folks tuned in for. Least among my circle, which maybe isn’t super representative to be fair
Rogan’s empire is probably more overall lucrative if he doesn’t do things like, I dunno outright coming out as pro Trump. So if you’re going to do that I’d assume it comes from that understanding
My understanding is that his fan base is composed entirely of perpetually online maladjusted dipshits who identify as politically independent as a way of virtue signaling. To them they don’t see a contradiction between endorsing Trump and being an outsider to politics because they’re fully buying into the narrative that voting Trump is in some way subversive. The calculus here is simple. Grifters gonna grift. He doesn’t make money from people who don’t buy into this alternative media with alternative facts shit. He never will. It costs him nothing to alienate them while he stands to benefit from aligning with them. They won’t even recognize a contradiction between endorsing a candidate and being independent. While I frequently accede to your wisdom Kwawk, Rogan’s numbers probably transcend mere maladjusted dipshits. They just do. Spotify didn’t pay the big bucks otherwise I don’t think this is entirely fair with his historic output, although a fair assessment of some recent pivots. He gave Bernie a platform, indeed I think he endorsed him one time He can just be wrong, that doesn’t make him a grifter. If he believes his shtick, hey. Dave Rubin or Candace Owens, now there’s some grifters. I think he’s just shifted from his previous politics to being an avowed supporter of right wing politics, but I see that as a genuine shift rather than jumping on a grift. ...And that's why we have people like GH insisting that voting for Harris is wrong, not because he's right wing but because he's firmly in the perpetually online maladjusted dipshit group. The reason voting for Harris is "wrong" is because supporting genocide is "wrong". That Dems and their supporters have already rationalized their support for genocide pretty much means fascism is winning regardless of the 2024 election outcome. It's obvious to me how Trump winning can lead to fascism, but how does Harris winning also lead to fascism? How is genocide not fascism to you? Genocide is completely separate from fascism, and not only because basically every political spectrum has done it including communist (even right now!) But because it existed long before fascism did. Next Russia is trying to speed run all the possible war crimes including genocide and Trump getting into power increases that one AS WELL AS what is going on in the middle east. And if you are one issue, anti fascism voter, then why would you be against the person "supporting fascism" compared to the actual fascist. And if you think Fascism and genocide are the same thing , then wouldn't you do everything in your power to stop the fascist from taking power of the worlds most powerful army? Red lines are red lines, despite what Barack Obama says Consider this hypothetical. You’ve dude A you really hate, dude B you really dislike but less Someone tells you you’re duty bound to have you wife or s/o banged by one of them. For the greater good. Hey B is slightly less shit Alternatively, you have the option of just leaving your wife or s/o to remain in glorious monogamy, untainted with such sordid machinations. I don’t see why this is so unfathomable to folks. GH considers it a non-negotiable issue, and provided neither party shifts to his position he’s not going to proffer his support to either. In a state where his vote is effectively meaningless anyway. Why is this so confusing? It is confusing because this has nothing to do with why fascism is genocide, which is just a completely wrong and nonsensical statement. There are so many bad statements made that people on the "left" feel obliged to defend. If it is bad or worse statement people need to start being against it whether or no matter what "side" they have branded themselves. As to your completely unrelated analogy, if it means stopping a fascist from taking over and trying to swap from a democracy to theocracy with oligarchs they can both bang my wife at the same time. When stakes are high enough you have to make hard choices, there is nothing moralistic about dodging hard questions so you can be condescending. #Cucks4Harris
I kid. I did feel it was a rather apt, albeit somewhat crude analogy
Ultimately, I somewhat agree with GH’s rationale, some don’t. He’s at least somewhat politically engaged at least.
Depending on what form of election, 30-50+% of folks don’t vote amongst most Western democracies, so hes got plenty of company.
Hoping for a Harris/Waltz triumph over here anyway. That said if they don’t, my one and only election prediction is you will see a bucketload of moaning analysis and teeth gnashing blaming the left, or Arab Americans for not toeing the line. I can’t even find a bookmaker willing to take a bet on it!
|
On November 05 2024 22:25 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2024 22:18 Billyboy wrote:On November 05 2024 21:49 Jockmcplop wrote: There's definitely some kind of connection between fascism and genocide. Can you commit genocide if you aren't fascist? I don't know that you can. The wiping out of an ethnic group could just happen due to political convenience I suppose but if there's any ideology behind the genocide you're pretty much looking at fascism.
So I'd say that genocide is (usually) fascism, but fascism is not genocide. No, Fascism does not just mean bad. Neither does capitalism. First genocide existed long before the 1920's. Next you can look at current China and the USSR and see that communism is completely capable of genocide. Economic systems, political systems, hell religion (or not being religions) does not make evil/bad. That is simply human. This is why you get super evil far left and far right. The best systems require checks and balances so that the wrong person or small group can't seize the power and do evil things. Not to mention that the more power one has more evil they tend to get. This whole "our side is good" thing leads to just a lot of justifying of terrible, awful, horrific behavior. Russia, China, Iran, NK all have very different political systems and different economic systems. What they have in common is brutal dictatorships that are hell bent on not just oppressing their own people but rather as many as possible. On November 05 2024 22:04 Magic Powers wrote:On November 05 2024 21:55 Velr wrote: No... For fucks sake.
Facism is a political system. Genocide is an action taken by a state or group.
They describe totally diffrent things. Agreed, but also if anyone else was in GH's shoes they'd also occasionally oversimplify a point and say incorrect things if they were up against this level of abuse he faces in this thread on the regular by the same tiny well-protected self-righteous group of bullies. It's unacceptable what people are doing to him here and I've been so fed up with it because the only option GH and others have is to ignore the bullies - which should not be necessary. The bullies should be kicked out. If they actually kicked out all the bullies you would be gone too. What you want is the people who disagree with you to be kicked out, especially the ones who disagree with you the way you disagree with others. In your mind anyone's a bully who has an opposite view to yours. No, there are very few bullies here. But they hold power, and they target the same people all the time. You can agree with me on that without letting your bias shine through. Nope that is just you projecting. Bullies are people who respond with low or no content posts that are just insults or sarcasm. And I can find a ton of yours if you would really like.
On November 05 2024 22:28 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2024 21:45 Billyboy wrote:On November 05 2024 14:31 WombaT wrote:On November 05 2024 14:02 Billyboy wrote:On November 05 2024 13:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 05 2024 13:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2024 13:23 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 05 2024 13:17 KwarK wrote:On November 05 2024 12:27 WombaT wrote:On November 05 2024 12:07 KwarK wrote: [quote] My understanding is that his fan base is composed entirely of perpetually online maladjusted dipshits who identify as politically independent as a way of virtue signaling. To them they don’t see a contradiction between endorsing Trump and being an outsider to politics because they’re fully buying into the narrative that voting Trump is in some way subversive.
The calculus here is simple. Grifters gonna grift. He doesn’t make money from people who don’t buy into this alternative media with alternative facts shit. He never will. It costs him nothing to alienate them while he stands to benefit from aligning with them. They won’t even recognize a contradiction between endorsing a candidate and being independent. While I frequently accede to your wisdom Kwawk, Rogan’s numbers probably transcend mere maladjusted dipshits. They just do. Spotify didn’t pay the big bucks otherwise I don’t think this is entirely fair with his historic output, although a fair assessment of some recent pivots. He gave Bernie a platform, indeed I think he endorsed him one time He can just be wrong, that doesn’t make him a grifter. If he believes his shtick, hey. Dave Rubin or Candace Owens, now there’s some grifters. I think he’s just shifted from his previous politics to being an avowed supporter of right wing politics, but I see that as a genuine shift rather than jumping on a grift. ...And that's why we have people like GH insisting that voting for Harris is wrong, not because he's right wing but because he's firmly in the perpetually online maladjusted dipshit group. The reason voting for Harris is "wrong" is because supporting genocide is "wrong". That Dems and their supporters have already rationalized their support for genocide pretty much means fascism is winning regardless of the 2024 election outcome. It's obvious to me how Trump winning can lead to fascism, but how does Harris winning also lead to fascism? How is genocide not fascism to you? Genocide is completely separate from fascism, and not only because basically every political spectrum has done it including communist (even right now!) But because it existed long before fascism did. Next Russia is trying to speed run all the possible war crimes including genocide and Trump getting into power increases that one AS WELL AS what is going on in the middle east. And if you are one issue, anti fascism voter, then why would you be against the person "supporting fascism" compared to the actual fascist. And if you think Fascism and genocide are the same thing , then wouldn't you do everything in your power to stop the fascist from taking power of the worlds most powerful army? Red lines are red lines, despite what Barack Obama says Consider this hypothetical. You’ve dude A you really hate, dude B you really dislike but less Someone tells you you’re duty bound to have you wife or s/o banged by one of them. For the greater good. Hey B is slightly less shit Alternatively, you have the option of just leaving your wife or s/o to remain in glorious monogamy, untainted with such sordid machinations. I don’t see why this is so unfathomable to folks. GH considers it a non-negotiable issue, and provided neither party shifts to his position he’s not going to proffer his support to either. In a state where his vote is effectively meaningless anyway. Why is this so confusing? It is confusing because this has nothing to do with why fascism is genocide, which is just a completely wrong and nonsensical statement. There are so many bad statements made that people on the "left" feel obliged to defend. If it is bad or worse statement people need to start being against it whether or no matter what "side" they have branded themselves. As to your completely unrelated analogy, if it means stopping a fascist from taking over and trying to swap from a democracy to theocracy with oligarchs they can both bang my wife at the same time. When stakes are high enough you have to make hard choices, there is nothing moralistic about dodging hard questions so you can be condescending. #Cucks4Harris I kid. I did feel it was a rather apt, albeit somewhat crude analogy Ultimately, I somewhat agree with GH’s rationale, some don’t. He’s at least somewhat politically engaged at least. Depending on what form of election, 30-50+% of folks don’t vote amongst most Western democracies, so hes got plenty of company. Hoping for a Harris/Waltz triumph over here anyway. That said if they don’t, my one and only election prediction is you will see a bucketload of moaning analysis and teeth gnashing blaming the left, or Arab Americans for not toeing the line. I can’t even find a bookmaker willing to take a bet on it! I have no problem with people voting for who they think would be their best person, regardless if they have any chance. I do have a problem with those in democracies who don't vote at all. My frustration (and likely others) is the constant judgement and moralizing. Then it becomes worse when his answer is utopia that he only has a concept of a plan about and wants all the people he relentlessly insults to help him come up with the details. You also got to either hate genocide or not, you can't really really hate it but when your team does it start finding excuses or not even believe what's obviously true.
|
On November 05 2024 22:18 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2024 21:49 Jockmcplop wrote: There's definitely some kind of connection between fascism and genocide. Can you commit genocide if you aren't fascist? I don't know that you can. The wiping out of an ethnic group could just happen due to political convenience I suppose but if there's any ideology behind the genocide you're pretty much looking at fascism.
So I'd say that genocide is (usually) fascism, but fascism is not genocide. No, Fascism does not just mean bad. Neither does capitalism. First genocide existed long before the 1920's. Next you can look at current China and the USSR and see that communism is completely capable of genocide. Economic systems, political systems, hell religion (or not being religions) does not make evil/bad. That is simply human. This is why you get super evil far left and far right. The best systems require checks and balances so that the wrong person or small group can't seize the power and do evil things. Not to mention that the more power one has more evil they tend to get. This whole "our side is good" thing leads to just a lot of justifying of terrible, awful, horrific behavior. Russia, China, Iran, NK all have very different political systems and different economic systems. What they have in common is brutal dictatorships that are hell bent on not just oppressing their own people but rather as many as possible.
I have no idea why you are saying this to me, I didn't make the claim that fascism=bad. Did you accidentally quote my post, or did you just completely fail to understand it?
Fascism is often based on racial purity, and the designation of 'other' groups to blame for everything. This is what leads to genocide. Its almost a necessary step. The two are linked.
|
On November 05 2024 20:45 MJG wrote: I never realised before how much difference there was between voter power in each US state.
I've always (and apparently very wrongly) assumed that each state's electoral college representation was more or less even on a per capita basis.
I didn't realise the difference was a big as 1 electoral college vote per ~150k people in Wyoming and 1 electoral college vote per ~530k people Florida.
That's wild. We are witnessing the last couple of elections that US conservatives even have a chance to win in. Without the electoral college and intensive gerrymandering it would be pretty one sided. That's why they are going crazy and dabble in fascism for the last decade. It's their last chance.
|
On November 05 2024 22:40 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2024 22:18 Billyboy wrote:On November 05 2024 21:49 Jockmcplop wrote: There's definitely some kind of connection between fascism and genocide. Can you commit genocide if you aren't fascist? I don't know that you can. The wiping out of an ethnic group could just happen due to political convenience I suppose but if there's any ideology behind the genocide you're pretty much looking at fascism.
So I'd say that genocide is (usually) fascism, but fascism is not genocide. No, Fascism does not just mean bad. Neither does capitalism. First genocide existed long before the 1920's. Next you can look at current China and the USSR and see that communism is completely capable of genocide. Economic systems, political systems, hell religion (or not being religions) does not make evil/bad. That is simply human. This is why you get super evil far left and far right. The best systems require checks and balances so that the wrong person or small group can't seize the power and do evil things. Not to mention that the more power one has more evil they tend to get. This whole "our side is good" thing leads to just a lot of justifying of terrible, awful, horrific behavior. Russia, China, Iran, NK all have very different political systems and different economic systems. What they have in common is brutal dictatorships that are hell bent on not just oppressing their own people but rather as many as possible. I have no idea why you are saying this to me, I didn't make the claim that fascism=bad. Did you accidentally quote my post, or did you just completely fail to understand it? Fascism is often based on racial purity, and the designation of 'other' groups to blame for everything. This is what leads to genocide. Its almost a necessary step. The two are linked. Fascism is not the only ideology that others. A cow is an animal, but an animal is not (necessarily) a cow.
American Colonists genocided their way across two continents. Some of them were religious supremacists, some were racial supremacists and some were just greedy ducks. None of them were fascists, an ideology that only sprung into existence a few hundred years after their deaths.
E: if you want a more modern example, the Hutus were racial/tribal supremacists. They were not fascists. Their lack of fascism didn't stop them from genociding Tutsis.
|
|
|
|