|
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 |
Northern Ireland24261 Posts
On April 23 2025 08:17 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2025 10:01 WombaT wrote:On April 21 2025 09:12 Razyda wrote:On April 20 2025 21:47 WombaT wrote:On April 20 2025 19:59 Razyda wrote:On April 20 2025 11:31 WombaT wrote:
I dunno maybe folks coulda just like, voted to keep Trump out? Hey I’m just some neophyte rube from across the Atlantic or whatever.
Not doing that and constantly advocating against such poxy things as voting and instead hoping for some genuinely revolutionary pushback down the line is turning down some decent looking lass in your local bar because you’re convinced Cindy Crawford will be expressive to one’s interest down the line bolded - Or realising that your voting decision is as impactful, as was for native Americans choosing side in civil war, or American revolution. It depends what you want in a vote. You’re very restricted if your politics align with what I’d like to see and your power to effect that change within the current frameworks. However if one of your goals is merely to at least delay handing the country to overt Fascists, that option was absolutely on the table. Myself I don’t have a huge amount of faith in the populace of the States, or indeed my own country jumping on things like a general strike to defang such a process, apathy is a thing, people being a pay check or two from being homeless is also a thing. That being the case IMO, winning the election is your best sluice valve, because there’s not a great plan B there. Bolded - no, not really. Pretty much every government is on the path to evolve into totalitarian one, all your vote changes is under which banner you get there. Italic - This is the thing, you got focused on fancy words like fascists, that you didnt realise that they eventually didnt matter once government established its power. There is no such thing as right authoritarian government, or left authoritarian government, there is only authoritarian government. Doesnt matter what you label it, end result is you dont have any rights, even if some are written down for funsies. So if your goal was to avoid totalitarian government then that option wasnt on the table, if your goal was to delay it, then it was on the table, but it wasnt Kamala. Bolded 2 - General strike wont work by itself, all it can do it may be a turning point, at worst it get stomped by government effectively speedrunning into totalitarianism, at best it evolve into only thing which may work. Out of curiosity: which condition you think give a general strike bigger chance to succeed, one where you have access to millions of cheap workers willing to do any job, or the one where you dont? Italic 2 - if that is from perspective of the voter, then I think you misunderstood word "winning". If you have 2 parties x and y, and you think they are both bad, however decided to vote for x which happens to win election, then you didnt "win" anything, party x won, you got nothing. It’s not a ‘fancy word’ it’s a well-defined descriptive one, and chosen deliberately. I have longed despised the British Conservative Party for example, but it’s never been a descriptor I’d employ there because the glove doesn’t fit.
Contextually, I’m not defending the system as it were, nor the particular ‘virtues’ of the Democratic Party, both things I’ve a long history of being critical of. My point was merely that voting was by far the easiest way to keep Trump out of power. Not doing so and relying on people doing things that are much harder to subsequently was my point. It’s certainly not a magic wand. As per your question, you don’t have millions of workers who can just do specialised technical work at the drop of a hat, so I don’t think that’s super relevant here. I don’t think there’s some magical formula for such things, but a country that’s ballpark split 50/50, without a huge recent history of such a thing wouldn’t be where I’d stick my money Bolded - I bet, if you used totalitarian government, you cant exactly make a case that voting makes a difference.
Italic - and yet you arguing that voting lets you "win"Bolded 2 - Yes you do. Who do you think general strike would involve? Wall street bankers? Silicon Valley programmers? Boeing engineers? NASA Scientists? Despite of what you got accustomed to those are barely relevant to functioning society. General strike you need to be concerned about would have: dock workers, farm workers, couriers, warehouse workers, construction workers and so on. While the first group strike would cause some inconvenience, the latter would be devastating.Italic 2 - because there isnt "magical formula". You see I fully agree with Jefferson on "tree of liberty", because everything else leads to eventual slavery (slightly disguised, but still slavery). Kwark explained, rather precisely, in Russo-Ukrainian War Thread. For some reason he thought it only applied to Russians, but everyone errs from time to time  .
On the bolded in combination. No, voting won’t do much if it’s Totalitarian Party A versus Totalitarian Party B.
My point was that voting to keep out a party with Fascist leanings, absolutely was on the table. Once they are in power, it’s often not going to remove them, but it can be a block to them getting there in the first place.
Like I said, I chose the word deliberately to refer specifically to aspects of Trump/MAGAism, as I think it’s an accurate descriptor. And it’s not one I throw out frivolously in a ‘anything that’s right wing that I don’t like’, hence my mention of the British Conservatives as an entity I dislike, but don’t consider Fascist.
You absolutely can get a ‘win’ on a specific objective. Brexit, or ratifying the Good Friday Agreement if we’re talking straight referenda. On voting for representatives, you can still ‘win’ on a limited objective even if your wider goals aren’t actualised. Keeping out the tendrils of Fascism for example, can perfectly co-exist as a win, even if the other option gives you plenty in the loss column in terms of what you’d personally want to see.
On the italicised, I’ve never argued against the potential effectiveness of a general strike, or even widespread limited strikes. Indeed I’ve long considered them close to the ultimate political weapon, and oft-mentioned them in such terms.
And by ‘specialised’ I mean take longer than a week or two to throw untrained replacements in, without experience around them, and have them able to do the job. I’m not talking especially about Wall Street Bankers or NASA engineers, although obviously they are highly, highly specialised workers.
Indeed I think the snobbery around ‘skilled’ and ‘unskilled’ jobs is often both inaccurate, and an excuse to underpay the latter.
Anyway, I digress. My point was not that it’s not a powerful weapon, I just have a lot of skepticism that you’ll see it employed wholesale in America of all places. Of comparable Western countries, it’d be quite low down on my general strike potential ranking. A France might be quite high.
In combination my points were merely, voting does jack shit in many domains, but it would have kept the wolves from the throne room at least. It may do jack shit if say, you want European-style health care, but it does do that. A Plan B of a general strike, or something would work, but I have my doubts there’ll be the momentum to get such a thing going.
Just to clarify. I think you make some good points but they’re not really responses to what I actually said, so I figured I would try to make things clearer if it’s a problem at my end.
On the underlined, what would be your conception of slavery here?
|
On April 23 2025 20:58 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2025 08:17 Razyda wrote:On April 21 2025 10:01 WombaT wrote:On April 21 2025 09:12 Razyda wrote:On April 20 2025 21:47 WombaT wrote:On April 20 2025 19:59 Razyda wrote:On April 20 2025 11:31 WombaT wrote:
I dunno maybe folks coulda just like, voted to keep Trump out? Hey I’m just some neophyte rube from across the Atlantic or whatever.
Not doing that and constantly advocating against such poxy things as voting and instead hoping for some genuinely revolutionary pushback down the line is turning down some decent looking lass in your local bar because you’re convinced Cindy Crawford will be expressive to one’s interest down the line bolded - Or realising that your voting decision is as impactful, as was for native Americans choosing side in civil war, or American revolution. It depends what you want in a vote. You’re very restricted if your politics align with what I’d like to see and your power to effect that change within the current frameworks. However if one of your goals is merely to at least delay handing the country to overt Fascists, that option was absolutely on the table. Myself I don’t have a huge amount of faith in the populace of the States, or indeed my own country jumping on things like a general strike to defang such a process, apathy is a thing, people being a pay check or two from being homeless is also a thing. That being the case IMO, winning the election is your best sluice valve, because there’s not a great plan B there. Bolded - no, not really. Pretty much every government is on the path to evolve into totalitarian one, all your vote changes is under which banner you get there. Italic - This is the thing, you got focused on fancy words like fascists, that you didnt realise that they eventually didnt matter once government established its power. There is no such thing as right authoritarian government, or left authoritarian government, there is only authoritarian government. Doesnt matter what you label it, end result is you dont have any rights, even if some are written down for funsies. So if your goal was to avoid totalitarian government then that option wasnt on the table, if your goal was to delay it, then it was on the table, but it wasnt Kamala. Bolded 2 - General strike wont work by itself, all it can do it may be a turning point, at worst it get stomped by government effectively speedrunning into totalitarianism, at best it evolve into only thing which may work. Out of curiosity: which condition you think give a general strike bigger chance to succeed, one where you have access to millions of cheap workers willing to do any job, or the one where you dont? Italic 2 - if that is from perspective of the voter, then I think you misunderstood word "winning". If you have 2 parties x and y, and you think they are both bad, however decided to vote for x which happens to win election, then you didnt "win" anything, party x won, you got nothing. It’s not a ‘fancy word’ it’s a well-defined descriptive one, and chosen deliberately. I have longed despised the British Conservative Party for example, but it’s never been a descriptor I’d employ there because the glove doesn’t fit.
Contextually, I’m not defending the system as it were, nor the particular ‘virtues’ of the Democratic Party, both things I’ve a long history of being critical of. My point was merely that voting was by far the easiest way to keep Trump out of power. Not doing so and relying on people doing things that are much harder to subsequently was my point. It’s certainly not a magic wand. As per your question, you don’t have millions of workers who can just do specialised technical work at the drop of a hat, so I don’t think that’s super relevant here. I don’t think there’s some magical formula for such things, but a country that’s ballpark split 50/50, without a huge recent history of such a thing wouldn’t be where I’d stick my money Bolded - I bet, if you used totalitarian government, you cant exactly make a case that voting makes a difference.
Italic - and yet you arguing that voting lets you "win"Bolded 2 - Yes you do. Who do you think general strike would involve? Wall street bankers? Silicon Valley programmers? Boeing engineers? NASA Scientists? Despite of what you got accustomed to those are barely relevant to functioning society. General strike you need to be concerned about would have: dock workers, farm workers, couriers, warehouse workers, construction workers and so on. While the first group strike would cause some inconvenience, the latter would be devastating.Italic 2 - because there isnt "magical formula". You see I fully agree with Jefferson on "tree of liberty", because everything else leads to eventual slavery (slightly disguised, but still slavery). Kwark explained, rather precisely, in Russo-Ukrainian War Thread. For some reason he thought it only applied to Russians, but everyone errs from time to time . + Show Spoiler +On the bolded in combination. No, voting won’t do much if it’s Totalitarian Party A versus Totalitarian Party B.
My point was that voting to keep out a party with Fascist leanings, absolutely was on the table. Once they are in power, it’s often not going to remove them, but it can be a block to them getting there in the first place.
Like I said, I chose the word deliberately to refer specifically to aspects of Trump/MAGAism, as I think it’s an accurate descriptor. And it’s not one I throw out frivolously in a ‘anything that’s right wing that I don’t like’, hence my mention of the British Conservatives as an entity I dislike, but don’t consider Fascist.
You absolutely can get a ‘win’ on a specific objective. Brexit, or ratifying the Good Friday Agreement if we’re talking straight referenda. On voting for representatives, you can still ‘win’ on a limited objective even if your wider goals aren’t actualised. Keeping out the tendrils of Fascism for example, can perfectly co-exist as a win, even if the other option gives you plenty in the loss column in terms of what you’d personally want to see.
On the italicised, I’ve never argued against the potential effectiveness of a general strike, or even widespread limited strikes. Indeed I’ve long considered them close to the ultimate political weapon, and oft-mentioned them in such terms.
And by ‘specialised’ I mean take longer than a week or two to throw untrained replacements in, without experience around them, and have them able to do the job. I’m not talking especially about Wall Street Bankers or NASA engineers, although obviously they are highly, highly specialised workers.
Indeed I think the snobbery around ‘skilled’ and ‘unskilled’ jobs is often both inaccurate, and an excuse to underpay the latter.
Anyway, I digress. My point was not that it’s not a powerful weapon, I just have a lot of skepticism that you’ll see it employed wholesale in America of all places. Of comparable Western countries, it’d be quite low down on my general strike potential ranking. A France might be quite high. In combination my points were merely, voting does jack shit in many domains, but it would have kept the wolves from the throne room at least. + Show Spoiler +It may do jack shit if say, you want European-style health care, but it does do that. A Plan B of a general strike, or something would work, but I have my doubts there’ll be the momentum to get such a thing going.
Just to clarify. I think you make some good points but they’re not really responses to what I actually said, so I figured I would try to make things clearer if it’s a problem at my end.
On the underlined, what would be your conception of slavery here?
That's part of the point I've been making for years and is what the Niemöller quote is warning us about. The wolves are already eating villagers. The royals, their court, and their useful idiots insist on feeding the wolves the villagers they want to keep themselves safe. Then they disregard any idea the villagers have of not being used as wolf food indefinitely as impractical. Only to eventually insist the only and best plan is to demand the villagers vote for themselves/their loved ones to be fed to the wolves to protect the 'throne room'.
It's basically the lib/Dem/ilk version of Republicans 'temporarily embarrassed millionaires'. Oppressed people are supposed to believe that one day they will be the people sacrificing villagers instead of the villagers being sacrificed. It's a fool's game where the only option is losing.
|
So, why didn't the villagers vote for one of their own?
How was their tactic of bitching, moaning and raving about the great revolution more succesfull?
|
On April 23 2025 22:28 Velr wrote:
So, why didn't the villagers vote for one of their own?
How was their tactic of bitching, moaning and raving about the great revolution more succesfull?
Don't forget their moral demand that the Ds not be genocide supporters. Also, don't forget their stance for not voting for Harris because reasons, which ultimately cost her the election. ALSO ALSO, don't forget that their tactics backfired and now we find ourselves Marcellus Wallace'd.
|
Trump caves at all fronts:
Tariff war with China.. or the World... 90 Day pause or slashed in half.. or gone.
Ukraine: Zelenskiy give Russia every part they already controll, demilitarize and never asscociate with the EU or NATO.. so Putin can try again 2027.
Gaza: Bomb Gaza more Bibi, You can do it! Also keep your intelligence services spying on political opponents!
What a strong and smart way to play all the cards in his tiny hands.
|
This tariff war gives me Liz Truss vibes.
Go in guns blazing, run head first into the wall that is reality, gets outlasted by a lettuce.
|
Lettuce can last quite a while to be fair
|
On April 24 2025 00:15 Uldridge wrote:
Lettuce can last quite a while to be fair
The penguins are going to force Trump to blink first too.
|
On April 24 2025 00:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2025 00:15 Uldridge wrote:
Lettuce can last quite a while to be fair The penguins are going to force Trump to blink first too.
Nictitating membranes are OP
|
On April 24 2025 00:43 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2025 00:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 24 2025 00:15 Uldridge wrote:
Lettuce can last quite a while to be fair The penguins are going to force Trump to blink first too. Nictitating membranes are OP
Agreed.
|
Immigration advocates and attorneys being sent emails from the Department of Homeland Security telling them to leave the country immediately.
https://www.latintimes.com/california-man-ordered-leave-us-immediately-despite-providing-birth-certificate-im-not-581422
An American citizen born and raised in California is unsettled after receiving an e-mail from the US Department of Homeland Security ordering him to leave the country "immediately."
Aldo Martinez-Gomez received the DHS notice on April 11, threatening "criminal prosecution" and fines if he does not depart within seven days.
...
Martinez-Gomez works full-time assisting immigrants in court for a non-profit and believes his advocacy work may have placed him on the government's radar.
https://www.latintimes.com/immigration-attorney-received-threatening-email-dhs-telling-her-self-deport-shes-us-citizen-580638
A Massachusetts-born immigration attorney was stunned after receiving an email from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ordering her to leave the country within seven days—even though she is a U.S. citizen.
Nicole Micheroni, a 40-year-old immigration lawyer from Newton, Massachusetts, has spent her career helping clients navigate deportation threats and immigration paperwork, as reported by NBC Boston. Due to her line of work, her name and contact information frequently appear on immigration forms.
The most generous interpretation is that these are data scraping mistakes.
|
On April 24 2025 01:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2025 00:43 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 24 2025 00:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 24 2025 00:15 Uldridge wrote:
Lettuce can last quite a while to be fair The penguins are going to force Trump to blink first too. Nictitating membranes are OP Agreed.
Hopefully this isn't how we find out Trump is actually a lizard person and it catapults Alex Jones/Joe Rogan to becoming the Alex Jones/Joe Rogan of the left. + Show Spoiler +
|
On April 24 2025 05:55 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2025 01:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 24 2025 00:43 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 24 2025 00:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 24 2025 00:15 Uldridge wrote:
Lettuce can last quite a while to be fair The penguins are going to force Trump to blink first too. Nictitating membranes are OP Agreed. Hopefully this isn't how we find out Trump is actually a lizard person and it catapults Alex Jones/Joe Rogan to becoming the Alex Jones/Joe Rogan of the left. + Show Spoiler +
Thank god it was satire I was worried for a second.
A komodo varan with a playstation controller would run the nation more humanly.
Edit: Obligatory 
I think Europe is going to be struggling with encapsulating itself from the bs going on with the sudden rain of whips the US has got going for itself.
That expression might stem from my darkest dungeon days.
|
On April 23 2025 20:58 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2025 08:17 Razyda wrote:On April 21 2025 10:01 WombaT wrote:On April 21 2025 09:12 Razyda wrote:On April 20 2025 21:47 WombaT wrote:On April 20 2025 19:59 Razyda wrote:On April 20 2025 11:31 WombaT wrote:
I dunno maybe folks coulda just like, voted to keep Trump out? Hey I’m just some neophyte rube from across the Atlantic or whatever.
Not doing that and constantly advocating against such poxy things as voting and instead hoping for some genuinely revolutionary pushback down the line is turning down some decent looking lass in your local bar because you’re convinced Cindy Crawford will be expressive to one’s interest down the line bolded - Or realising that your voting decision is as impactful, as was for native Americans choosing side in civil war, or American revolution. It depends what you want in a vote. You’re very restricted if your politics align with what I’d like to see and your power to effect that change within the current frameworks. However if one of your goals is merely to at least delay handing the country to overt Fascists, that option was absolutely on the table. Myself I don’t have a huge amount of faith in the populace of the States, or indeed my own country jumping on things like a general strike to defang such a process, apathy is a thing, people being a pay check or two from being homeless is also a thing. That being the case IMO, winning the election is your best sluice valve, because there’s not a great plan B there. Bolded - no, not really. Pretty much every government is on the path to evolve into totalitarian one, all your vote changes is under which banner you get there. Italic - This is the thing, you got focused on fancy words like fascists, that you didnt realise that they eventually didnt matter once government established its power. There is no such thing as right authoritarian government, or left authoritarian government, there is only authoritarian government. Doesnt matter what you label it, end result is you dont have any rights, even if some are written down for funsies. So if your goal was to avoid totalitarian government then that option wasnt on the table, if your goal was to delay it, then it was on the table, but it wasnt Kamala. Bolded 2 - General strike wont work by itself, all it can do it may be a turning point, at worst it get stomped by government effectively speedrunning into totalitarianism, at best it evolve into only thing which may work. Out of curiosity: which condition you think give a general strike bigger chance to succeed, one where you have access to millions of cheap workers willing to do any job, or the one where you dont? Italic 2 - if that is from perspective of the voter, then I think you misunderstood word "winning". If you have 2 parties x and y, and you think they are both bad, however decided to vote for x which happens to win election, then you didnt "win" anything, party x won, you got nothing. It’s not a ‘fancy word’ it’s a well-defined descriptive one, and chosen deliberately. I have longed despised the British Conservative Party for example, but it’s never been a descriptor I’d employ there because the glove doesn’t fit.
Contextually, I’m not defending the system as it were, nor the particular ‘virtues’ of the Democratic Party, both things I’ve a long history of being critical of. My point was merely that voting was by far the easiest way to keep Trump out of power. Not doing so and relying on people doing things that are much harder to subsequently was my point. It’s certainly not a magic wand. As per your question, you don’t have millions of workers who can just do specialised technical work at the drop of a hat, so I don’t think that’s super relevant here. I don’t think there’s some magical formula for such things, but a country that’s ballpark split 50/50, without a huge recent history of such a thing wouldn’t be where I’d stick my money Bolded - I bet, if you used totalitarian government, you cant exactly make a case that voting makes a difference.
Italic - and yet you arguing that voting lets you "win"Bolded 2 - Yes you do. Who do you think general strike would involve? Wall street bankers? Silicon Valley programmers? Boeing engineers? NASA Scientists? Despite of what you got accustomed to those are barely relevant to functioning society. General strike you need to be concerned about would have: dock workers, farm workers, couriers, warehouse workers, construction workers and so on. While the first group strike would cause some inconvenience, the latter would be devastating.Italic 2 - because there isnt "magical formula". You see I fully agree with Jefferson on "tree of liberty", because everything else leads to eventual slavery (slightly disguised, but still slavery). Kwark explained, rather precisely, in Russo-Ukrainian War Thread. For some reason he thought it only applied to Russians, but everyone errs from time to time . On the bolded in combination. No, voting won’t do much if it’s Totalitarian Party A versus Totalitarian Party B. My point was that voting to keep out a party with Fascist leanings, absolutely was on the table. Once they are in power, it’s often not going to remove them, but it can be a block to them getting there in the first place. Like I said, I chose the word deliberately to refer specifically to aspects of Trump/MAGAism, as I think it’s an accurate descriptor. And it’s not one I throw out frivolously in a ‘anything that’s right wing that I don’t like’, hence my mention of the British Conservatives as an entity I dislike, but don’t consider Fascist. You absolutely can get a ‘win’ on a specific objective. Brexit, or ratifying the Good Friday Agreement if we’re talking straight referenda. On voting for representatives, you can still ‘win’ on a limited objective even if your wider goals aren’t actualised. Keeping out the tendrils of Fascism for example, can perfectly co-exist as a win, even if the other option gives you plenty in the loss column in terms of what you’d personally want to see. On the italicised, I’ve never argued against the potential effectiveness of a general strike, or even widespread limited strikes. Indeed I’ve long considered them close to the ultimate political weapon, and oft-mentioned them in such terms. And by ‘specialised’ I mean take longer than a week or two to throw untrained replacements in, without experience around them, and have them able to do the job. I’m not talking especially about Wall Street Bankers or NASA engineers, although obviously they are highly, highly specialised workers. Indeed I think the snobbery around ‘skilled’ and ‘unskilled’ jobs is often both inaccurate, and an excuse to underpay the latter. Anyway, I digress. My point was not that it’s not a powerful weapon, I just have a lot of skepticism that you’ll see it employed wholesale in America of all places. Of comparable Western countries, it’d be quite low down on my general strike potential ranking. A France might be quite high. In combination my points were merely, voting does jack shit in many domains, but it would have kept the wolves from the throne room at least. It may do jack shit if say, you want European-style health care, but it does do that. A Plan B of a general strike, or something would work, but I have my doubts there’ll be the momentum to get such a thing going. Just to clarify. I think you make some good points but they’re not really responses to what I actually said, so I figured I would try to make things clearer if it’s a problem at my end. On the underlined, what would be your conception of slavery here?
"Just to clarify. I think you make some good points but they’re not really responses to what I actually said, so I figured I would try to make things clearer if it’s a problem at my end."
Discussion started when I disagreed with you in regards whether it was better to vote "to keep Trump out", or not vote at all. My position is that if voting doesnt matter then voting for something cant be better than not voting.
Now it seems we agree that voting doesnt matter. Seems to me that disagreement comes from this part of your post:
"In combination my points were merely, voting does jack shit in many domains, but it would have kept the wolves from the throne room at least."
My opinion is that it wouldnt, it would just put different pack of wolves in there. (seems logical conclusion?) Thats why I challenged you on using "fascists" rather than totalitarian government. Because that single word lets you take position "at least other guys arent fascists" which is rather irrelevant, as "other guys" are just going to take different route to the same goal. For example I think this is where GH errs (this and whole socialism thing). Once he calls Dems fascist enablers he makes them just tiny bit better than fascists, which provokes the responses that he should vote for them anyway, because they are not actual fascists. If he said that they are the same authoritarians then there wouldnt be a ground to criticize him for not voting on them.
On general strike:
My question:
"which condition you think give a general strike bigger chance to succeed, one where you have access to millions of cheap workers willing to do any job, or the one where you dont?"
You:
"As per your question, you don’t have millions of workers who can just do specialised technical work at the drop of a hat, so I don’t think that’s super relevant here."
My response:
"Yes you do. Who do you think general strike would involve? Wall street bankers? Silicon Valley programmers? Boeing engineers? NASA Scientists? Despite of what you got accustomed to those are barely relevant to functioning society. General strike you need to be concerned about would have: dock workers, farm workers, couriers, warehouse workers, construction workers and so on. While the first group strike would cause some inconvenience, the latter would be devastating."
You now:
"And by ‘specialised’ I mean take longer than a week or two to throw untrained replacements in, without experience around them, and have them able to do the job. I’m not talking especially about Wall Street Bankers or NASA engineers, although obviously they are highly, highly specialised workers."
Overall you seem to agree with me? Also there is couple more things. You assume that millions I referred to dont have any skills or experience - this is simply not true. Back when I came to UK (think it was 2004 or 2005) I worked in warehouse with actual professors. Because thats how immigration works. First thing you do is getting any job, to sustain yourself, then you look for job matching your skills/ get your skills confirmed (particularly sucked in cases like NHS, I know surgeon who had to do like 12 months of something like internship to be able to do a job he was doing for 20 years). Now if you are in the country illegally I dont think you have a way to even do it. The other thing is that jobs which are needed for society to run, are generally the ones you dont really need that much experience with. You seem to agree with me on that, so I am not really sure why you challenged me on "you don’t have millions of workers who can just do specialised technical work at the drop of a hat". (funny how it seems like the less specialised job you do, the more essential it is for society).
On slavery:
Kwark description I was referring to:
On July 28 2024 06:49 KwarK wrote:
They're stuck in a cycle of
1. spend a fortune on labour
2. run up massive budget deficit
3. fortune gets deposited in banks
4. buy the fortune back from the banks with a high interest loan
5. spend a fortune on labour + high interest loan payments
6. run up bigger budget deficit
7. fortune gets deposited in banks
8. higher interest loan
Incidentally, and in another interesting parallel, this is almost exactly what Hitler did in Germany. Profligate government spending couldn't be supported by the revenues and so they simply robbed all the German banks and started paying people with their own money from their savings accounts. As long as nobody actually tries to use their savings it can kind of work for a bit. The people deposit their newly earned income back into the banks and the perfect cycle continues with the workers not realizing that they're actually slaves because the imaginary number on the bank account asserts that they're being paid.
Bolded part is irrelevant.
As for me the slavery starts when your rights diminish, is finalized when they are gone. I am with Ben on that:
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Remember 9/11, Covid? For me it feels like scripted.
Edit: By scripted I mean like the exact situations he had in mind.
|
Gonna need a TL DR for that one
|
On April 24 2025 11:38 decafchicken wrote:
Gonna need a TL DR for that one
Skill issue.
|
Northern Ireland24261 Posts
On April 24 2025 11:11 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2025 20:58 WombaT wrote:On April 23 2025 08:17 Razyda wrote:On April 21 2025 10:01 WombaT wrote:On April 21 2025 09:12 Razyda wrote:On April 20 2025 21:47 WombaT wrote:On April 20 2025 19:59 Razyda wrote:On April 20 2025 11:31 WombaT wrote:
I dunno maybe folks coulda just like, voted to keep Trump out? Hey I’m just some neophyte rube from across the Atlantic or whatever.
Not doing that and constantly advocating against such poxy things as voting and instead hoping for some genuinely revolutionary pushback down the line is turning down some decent looking lass in your local bar because you’re convinced Cindy Crawford will be expressive to one’s interest down the line bolded - Or realising that your voting decision is as impactful, as was for native Americans choosing side in civil war, or American revolution. It depends what you want in a vote. You’re very restricted if your politics align with what I’d like to see and your power to effect that change within the current frameworks. However if one of your goals is merely to at least delay handing the country to overt Fascists, that option was absolutely on the table. Myself I don’t have a huge amount of faith in the populace of the States, or indeed my own country jumping on things like a general strike to defang such a process, apathy is a thing, people being a pay check or two from being homeless is also a thing. That being the case IMO, winning the election is your best sluice valve, because there’s not a great plan B there. Bolded - no, not really. Pretty much every government is on the path to evolve into totalitarian one, all your vote changes is under which banner you get there. Italic - This is the thing, you got focused on fancy words like fascists, that you didnt realise that they eventually didnt matter once government established its power. There is no such thing as right authoritarian government, or left authoritarian government, there is only authoritarian government. Doesnt matter what you label it, end result is you dont have any rights, even if some are written down for funsies. So if your goal was to avoid totalitarian government then that option wasnt on the table, if your goal was to delay it, then it was on the table, but it wasnt Kamala. Bolded 2 - General strike wont work by itself, all it can do it may be a turning point, at worst it get stomped by government effectively speedrunning into totalitarianism, at best it evolve into only thing which may work. Out of curiosity: which condition you think give a general strike bigger chance to succeed, one where you have access to millions of cheap workers willing to do any job, or the one where you dont? Italic 2 - if that is from perspective of the voter, then I think you misunderstood word "winning". If you have 2 parties x and y, and you think they are both bad, however decided to vote for x which happens to win election, then you didnt "win" anything, party x won, you got nothing. It’s not a ‘fancy word’ it’s a well-defined descriptive one, and chosen deliberately. I have longed despised the British Conservative Party for example, but it’s never been a descriptor I’d employ there because the glove doesn’t fit.
Contextually, I’m not defending the system as it were, nor the particular ‘virtues’ of the Democratic Party, both things I’ve a long history of being critical of. My point was merely that voting was by far the easiest way to keep Trump out of power. Not doing so and relying on people doing things that are much harder to subsequently was my point. It’s certainly not a magic wand. As per your question, you don’t have millions of workers who can just do specialised technical work at the drop of a hat, so I don’t think that’s super relevant here. I don’t think there’s some magical formula for such things, but a country that’s ballpark split 50/50, without a huge recent history of such a thing wouldn’t be where I’d stick my money Bolded - I bet, if you used totalitarian government, you cant exactly make a case that voting makes a difference.
Italic - and yet you arguing that voting lets you "win"Bolded 2 - Yes you do. Who do you think general strike would involve? Wall street bankers? Silicon Valley programmers? Boeing engineers? NASA Scientists? Despite of what you got accustomed to those are barely relevant to functioning society. General strike you need to be concerned about would have: dock workers, farm workers, couriers, warehouse workers, construction workers and so on. While the first group strike would cause some inconvenience, the latter would be devastating.Italic 2 - because there isnt "magical formula". You see I fully agree with Jefferson on "tree of liberty", because everything else leads to eventual slavery (slightly disguised, but still slavery). Kwark explained, rather precisely, in Russo-Ukrainian War Thread. For some reason he thought it only applied to Russians, but everyone errs from time to time . On the bolded in combination. No, voting won’t do much if it’s Totalitarian Party A versus Totalitarian Party B. My point was that voting to keep out a party with Fascist leanings, absolutely was on the table. Once they are in power, it’s often not going to remove them, but it can be a block to them getting there in the first place. Like I said, I chose the word deliberately to refer specifically to aspects of Trump/MAGAism, as I think it’s an accurate descriptor. And it’s not one I throw out frivolously in a ‘anything that’s right wing that I don’t like’, hence my mention of the British Conservatives as an entity I dislike, but don’t consider Fascist. You absolutely can get a ‘win’ on a specific objective. Brexit, or ratifying the Good Friday Agreement if we’re talking straight referenda. On voting for representatives, you can still ‘win’ on a limited objective even if your wider goals aren’t actualised. Keeping out the tendrils of Fascism for example, can perfectly co-exist as a win, even if the other option gives you plenty in the loss column in terms of what you’d personally want to see. On the italicised, I’ve never argued against the potential effectiveness of a general strike, or even widespread limited strikes. Indeed I’ve long considered them close to the ultimate political weapon, and oft-mentioned them in such terms. And by ‘specialised’ I mean take longer than a week or two to throw untrained replacements in, without experience around them, and have them able to do the job. I’m not talking especially about Wall Street Bankers or NASA engineers, although obviously they are highly, highly specialised workers. Indeed I think the snobbery around ‘skilled’ and ‘unskilled’ jobs is often both inaccurate, and an excuse to underpay the latter. Anyway, I digress. My point was not that it’s not a powerful weapon, I just have a lot of skepticism that you’ll see it employed wholesale in America of all places. Of comparable Western countries, it’d be quite low down on my general strike potential ranking. A France might be quite high. In combination my points were merely, voting does jack shit in many domains, but it would have kept the wolves from the throne room at least. It may do jack shit if say, you want European-style health care, but it does do that. A Plan B of a general strike, or something would work, but I have my doubts there’ll be the momentum to get such a thing going. Just to clarify. I think you make some good points but they’re not really responses to what I actually said, so I figured I would try to make things clearer if it’s a problem at my end. On the underlined, what would be your conception of slavery here? "Just to clarify. I think you make some good points but they’re not really responses to what I actually said, so I figured I would try to make things clearer if it’s a problem at my end." Discussion started when I disagreed with you in regards whether it was better to vote "to keep Trump out", or not vote at all. My position is that if voting doesnt matter then voting for something cant be better than not voting. Now it seems we agree that voting doesnt matter. Seems to me that disagreement comes from this part of your post: "In combination my points were merely, voting does jack shit in many domains, but it would have kept the wolves from the throne room at least." My opinion is that it wouldnt, it would just put different pack of wolves in there. (seems logical conclusion?) Thats why I challenged you on using "fascists" rather than totalitarian government. Because that single word lets you take position "at least other guys arent fascists" which is rather irrelevant, as "other guys" are just going to take different route to the same goal. For example I think this is where GH errs (this and whole socialism thing). Once he calls Dems fascist enablers he makes them just tiny bit better than fascists, which provokes the responses that he should vote for them anyway, because they are not actual fascists. If he said that they are the same authoritarians then there wouldnt be a ground to criticize him for not voting on them. On general strike: My question: "which condition you think give a general strike bigger chance to succeed, one where you have access to millions of cheap workers willing to do any job, or the one where you dont?" You: "As per your question, you don’t have millions of workers who can just do specialised technical work at the drop of a hat, so I don’t think that’s super relevant here." My response: "Yes you do. Who do you think general strike would involve? Wall street bankers? Silicon Valley programmers? Boeing engineers? NASA Scientists? Despite of what you got accustomed to those are barely relevant to functioning society. General strike you need to be concerned about would have: dock workers, farm workers, couriers, warehouse workers, construction workers and so on. While the first group strike would cause some inconvenience, the latter would be devastating." You now: "And by ‘specialised’ I mean take longer than a week or two to throw untrained replacements in, without experience around them, and have them able to do the job. I’m not talking especially about Wall Street Bankers or NASA engineers, although obviously they are highly, highly specialised workers." Overall you seem to agree with me? Also there is couple more things. You assume that millions I referred to dont have any skills or experience - this is simply not true. Back when I came to UK (think it was 2004 or 2005) I worked in warehouse with actual professors. Because thats how immigration works. First thing you do is getting any job, to sustain yourself, then you look for job matching your skills/ get your skills confirmed (particularly sucked in cases like NHS, I know surgeon who had to do like 12 months of something like internship to be able to do a job he was doing for 20 years). Now if you are in the country illegally I dont think you have a way to even do it. The other thing is that jobs which are needed for society to run, are generally the ones you dont really need that much experience with. You seem to agree with me on that, so I am not really sure why you challenged me on "you don’t have millions of workers who can just do specialised technical work at the drop of a hat". (funny how it seems like the less specialised job you do, the more essential it is for society). On slavery: Kwark description I was referring to: Show nested quote +On July 28 2024 06:49 KwarK wrote:
They're stuck in a cycle of
1. spend a fortune on labour
2. run up massive budget deficit
3. fortune gets deposited in banks
4. buy the fortune back from the banks with a high interest loan
5. spend a fortune on labour + high interest loan payments
6. run up bigger budget deficit
7. fortune gets deposited in banks
8. higher interest loan
Incidentally, and in another interesting parallel, this is almost exactly what Hitler did in Germany. Profligate government spending couldn't be supported by the revenues and so they simply robbed all the German banks and started paying people with their own money from their savings accounts. As long as nobody actually tries to use their savings it can kind of work for a bit. The people deposit their newly earned income back into the banks and the perfect cycle continues with the workers not realizing that they're actually slaves because the imaginary number on the bank account asserts that they're being paid.
Bolded part is irrelevant. As for me the slavery starts when your rights diminish, is finalized when they are gone. I am with Ben on that: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Remember 9/11, Covid? For me it feels like scripted. Edit: By scripted I mean like the exact situations he had in mind.
All Fascists are authoritarians, but not all authoritarians are Fascists. While not ‘literally Hitler’TM, MAGA/Trumpism is absolutely chock full of ticks in the auld Fashy checkboxes. I also don’t consider the Democratic Party to be a totalitarian one in all those various forms. Ineffectual and well, a bit shit? Yeah, to my tastes.
Thus my calculus is Fascist-leaning versus ineffectual and a bit shit, not totalitarian versus totalitarian, or whatever. Others will have different conceptions. I mentioned the British Conservatives and me not considering Fascism in that calculus to stress that I’m not personally the kind to consider right wing/conservative parties as necessarily Fascist.
I’m not saying voting doesn’t matter, I say it doesn’t solve a lot of issues due to various democratic deficits, but it solves some. For example, not having Donald Trump ensconced in the White House. Ticking the blue box does at least that,
Say I decided to get divorced because my wench was horrific to live with, frequently abused me for being bad at StarCraft and routinely threw rotten vegetables at me. I also hoped to find a new partner within a few years, ideally a supermodel, but I failed in my latter objective (for obvious reasons), it doesn’t mean me getting divorced was meaningless or didn’t solve at least one issue. I can suck at StarCraft in peace again, and rotten vegetables are now solely thrown at me by members of the public when I’m out and not within the comfort of my own home.
With a sufficiently large general strike, hypothetically, the timeframe of that biting is quite short.
Let’s take your warehouse example. I’ve worked my fair share of retail over the years as well. Can you replace warehouse pickers, or folks doing stock replenishment, manning checkouts etc in quite a short timeframe? Aye, they won’t be as good (I’ve seen the curve with short-term agency holefillers), but yeah. Delivery drivers? Aye. The logistics side of things sure? IT support, hey I’m sure that’s doable too.
If, however, every cog in that machine strikes, you have sweet Fanny Adam’s chance throwing inexperienced workers in and getting things up and running quickly. Indeed, even if existing staff in one specific area decided not to strike, they probably couldn’t either.
Be it technical specialised jobs, or just a lot of labour being very, very specific and compartmentalised, or simply different organisations having their own procedures, things can break very quickly if just a couple of cogs are removed.
Now, the flip side of that is that a lot of labour is quite specific, compartmentalised and in and of itself, not especially complicated and thus in and of itself quite easy to bus in people willing to break picket lines and keep things going. If that’s the only job or two you’re replacing.
Or for the TLDR, it doesn’t really matter how many workers you have waiting in the wings, if there’s a proper general/generalish strike. Things are too interconnected, there’s too many holes to plug in the dam. I am just skeptical that there will be a sufficient groundswell that we see such a thing in the States.
Fuel protests in the UK (esp. 2000) is quite instructive in how interconnected and thus vulnerable the overall edifice is to strikes and protest, and that example is way more limited than the kind GH is talking about.
Re slavery what are your rights? What are they predicated on and what is the threshold for erosion to occur?
|
Ben Shapiro is doing a competent job contributing to under cutting Trump's support base.
On April 24 2025 19:30 WombaT wrote:
With a sufficiently large general strike, hypothetically, the timeframe of that biting is quite short.
whoever organizes such a thing is "a man who said he would stop the motor of the world—and did."
what a romantic idea.
|
Canada11314 Posts
Every now and then Ben pops his head up, tests the water to see if it's safe to run out actual conservative ideas that counter whatever Trump is up to that day of the week. But if things get spicy, he quickly bunkers down again.
Just roll back the tape on when he thought Trump was out for good, he was more than happy to call January 6 an insurrection and that it was one of the worst days in American history. He changed his tune quick once it was clear that Trump would be back. So I don't know how good a job he's doing.
Doesn't matter if you are a boring, middle of the road Republican like Romney or a hard-core Tea Party libertarian like Joe Walsh, you are either with Trump or you are out altogether. MAGA is in all, through all, over all and above all.
In Trump We Trust.
|
https://newrepublic.com/post/194337/pete-hegseth-signal-computer-pentagon
Neo Hackgseth has piped his cellphone to this pentagon PC so he can keep using signal when he has to give it up at the entrance.
Something Something Security Risk
Something Something Evasion of Transparency
Good that he doesn't have a vagina and cheated on his wife, because if he had a vagina and was cheated on, like Hillary, this would be a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
