|
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 |
On March 09 2024 05:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2024 04:19 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 04:15 JimmiC wrote:On March 09 2024 03:38 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 03:18 Liquid`Drone wrote:On March 09 2024 02:26 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 02:14 JimmiC wrote:On March 09 2024 02:08 sevencck wrote:On March 08 2024 15:05 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2024 10:55 sevencck wrote:
[quote]
Please ensure you do the same.
As I've explained, I'm pretty sure Trump does this on purpose. That's what you hear when he says "blood of the nation," I guess: concentration camps. Seems like bizarre shadow projection to me. Oh, this seems like a fun game. If he starts talking about Lebensraum for the american people, he clearly just means that people deserve a nice living room and wants to show off his German skills. And if he asks if you want the total war, he clearly just means the newest game by creative assembly. If you say Nazi shit, people start believing that you are a Nazi. It takes willing disbelief to not hear the Nazi shit Trump says. It's not Nazi shit, that's the point, that's really just more shadow projection. Trump is not a Nazi, he's not even Nazi adjacent. If you understood what you were talking about, you'd recognize that the Dems are more in line with actual fascism, namely public-private partnership and corporate state. It is not Trump pushing ESG programs for example. Trump put originalists on the court and rails against socialism. He's clearly not a Nazi. I bet there's a huge overlap between people who thought it was ok to coerce people to take a vaccine and those who recognize Trump as a Nazi. Like I said, shadow projection. All you're doing is showing who you are inside, so carry on. Trump derangement has helped Trump immensely. Do you think liberals foaming at the mouth and trying to remove him from the ballot hurts him? You do know that socialism and the nazi's are opposites right? Also those evil monsters trying to coerce people to be healthy, what is next are they going to recommend healthy eating! Thank you for proving my point. NSDAP = National Socialist German Workers Party. There were actually some socialists in the NSDAP early on, but hitler sure as fuck wasnt one, and they were largely murdered (on hitler's command) during the night of long knives in 1934. Hitler's rise should be understood in its historical context, namely that the market was increasingly considered an outdated model for economic coordination and the future would be about state coordination and control of the means of production. There was always going to be disagreement about how that control was meant to be instantiated. Yes, Hitler purged members of his party who had other ideas about how the means were to be controlled. So did Mussolini. So did Stalin. Trotsky was bumped off, along with millions of other Russians. This is all intra-left dispute, namely how best to control and manage the means of production, it is not an argument relevant to authentic right-wing politics, of which Mises, Hayek, Friedman, etc. were good examples. Classical liberalism does not occupy itself with how best to control the means of production (and therefore doesn't butcher each other over disagreements). That you include Hitler and Mussolini in as Left shows you don't remotely understand the term. Left just means evil to you the way capitalism means evil to GH. You don't understand what you're talking about, and I do not wish to explain it to you further. You need to read and study a subject before you profess your expertise to the world. Please pause and learn about this phenomenon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect
Please ensure you do the same.
|
Northern Ireland22945 Posts
On March 09 2024 04:38 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2024 04:20 WombaT wrote:On March 09 2024 03:41 BlackJack wrote:On March 09 2024 02:08 sevencck wrote:On March 08 2024 15:05 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2024 10:55 sevencck wrote:On March 08 2024 10:38 Sermokala wrote:On March 08 2024 04:37 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 08 2024 03:49 sevencck wrote:
This is going to be one of the most lopsided electoral landslides in American political history. What evidence do you have for this prediction? And what evidence would convince you that your prediction is unwarranted? He's said this before without any evidence but most of what maga people do are vibe based so don't expect any logic or reasoning with them. Just because a guy says that a group of people is poisoning the blood of the nation and be wants to round them up by the millions into concentration camps he gets accused of being Hitler. Like normal people are watching that. As I've explained, I'm pretty sure Trump does this on purpose. That's what you hear when he says "blood of the nation," I guess: concentration camps. Seems like bizarre shadow projection to me. Oh, this seems like a fun game. If he starts talking about Lebensraum for the american people, he clearly just means that people deserve a nice living room and wants to show off his German skills. And if he asks if you want the total war, he clearly just means the newest game by creative assembly. If you say Nazi shit, people start believing that you are a Nazi. It takes willing disbelief to not hear the Nazi shit Trump says. I bet there's a huge overlap between people who thought it was ok to coerce people to take a vaccine and those who recognize Trump as a Nazi. Like I said, shadow projection. There are people here that literally wanted to round people up and banish them from society either into camps or islands or whatever. You would think everyone would be outraged at such a suggestion but the pushback was mild at best. But it’s ok because they “just want you to be healthy.” I mean there was plenty of pushback and it’s a bloke on TL spitballing hypotheticals, hardly equivalent to a much larger direction of travel on a national level. It’s been a few years and folks from all across the aisles are still remarkably pious and cocksure on the topic. End of the day it was an emergent, ever-changing scenario and there legitimately were no guaranteed good solutions that wouldn’t have some negative consequences in some sphere. Not that I even think attitudes to personal liberty in the instance of a virus of this kind, or aliens turn up in their saucers to invade is all that comparable to some of the other issues being discussed here. Although most people were along the lines of “you should lose your job and not be allowed into businesses” levels of coercion there were also multiple people that believed in “mandatory” vaccines. I.e. no opt out permitted at all and presumably enforcer under threat of imprisonment or banishment. The whole “it was an emergent situation” is not a good excuse for me. That’s precisely the time when personal liberties get trampled on. Nobody is opening up the interment camps if WW2 didn’t happen.
A virus is not a Japanese American person, there’s no scenario where it’s going to differentiate between people and there is no way to isolate individual decisions from other people they may externally effect.
And the parameters were in flux, projections were wrong in both directions etc. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with:
1. We don’t actually know how everything will play out.
2. These are extremely difficult calls to make and ultimately involve sticking a value on lives versus other considerations.
From my position we can either be wise after the fact, and I think both ‘camps’ hugely cherry pick the times they were proved right versus otherwise, or we can consider it a very messy situation with no particularly good solution that we collectively flailed through.
Ultimately point 2 requires a ‘how many deaths are allowable without impinging on other freedoms’ calculus. Something I don’t think we’re fundamentally equipped to do all that well.
I mean to spitball arbitrary numbers if the death toll was x10 then Mohdoo IslandTM starts to look more sensible, if it’s /10 then the restrictions we did have start to look like overkill from a personal freedom versus collective good calculus.
It’s close to my least favourite political topic solely because there’s often a lack of acknowledgement that there are no good choices to be made, and the aforementioned tendency for folks to cherry pick.
But I also don’t think it’s all that extrapolatable to other topics and authoritarianism in general, or state control versus sociopolitical control versus personal autonomy. It’s just its own kind of deal with its own unique parameters
|
On March 09 2024 04:48 FlaShFTW wrote:
So when do we go back to talking about American politics instead of debating wtf a Nazi is? I want engagement on my electoral map god damn it.
Biden v Trump rematch with Trump having legitimate chances despite everything is too depressing. Let us enjoy the rage bait trolls.
|
On March 09 2024 04:48 FlaShFTW wrote:
So when do we go back to talking about American politics instead of debating wtf a Nazi is? I want engagement on my electoral map god damn it.
I appreciate your electoral map, but personally I can't make a projection this early. I can't see any traditionally-red or traditionally-blue states flipping, which leaves something like 10 or fewer states that are potentially interesting. And for those states, I'll probably wait until September or October before making a prediction, if I even make a prediction at all.
Sorry to be boring 
|
Northern Ireland22945 Posts
On March 09 2024 04:48 FlaShFTW wrote:
So when do we go back to talking about American politics instead of debating wtf a Nazi is? I want engagement on my electoral map god damn it.
The left hears ya sir
|
On March 09 2024 04:48 FlaShFTW wrote:
So when do we go back to talking about American politics instead of debating wtf a Nazi is? I want engagement on my electoral map god damn it. The notion that the election could be that close is certainly scary.
In a sane universe this should be the biggest stomp ever, not a coin toss.
Weirdly enough Trump managing to seize control of the RNC actually has me slightly more hopeful, the Republican coffers are going to be drained to pay for Trumps court cases and as donors realize they aren't buying policy but just funding Trumps lawyers they will hopefully stop contributing.
And an RNC without a war chest for the election should have real consequences for not just the Presidency but also Congress.
|
On March 09 2024 01:00 FlaShFTW wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Biden did extremely well and handled a lot of the big questions that were going to be thrown his way. Massive applause for him, though I hope he can have this sort of energy ready for a debate, as that's when a lot of voters get swung. The prepared, read off a teleprompter style of speeches really are great for Biden and he can even go off script a few times and still show some fire. As we now know the nominees and who's running this election, here's my way too damn early election prediction. Explanation: Rust belt states are very close, and I expect the undecided voters (about 10%) to split favorably for Biden at the moment. Whereas Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia are all around 48-49% Trump atm so Biden has too much ground to make up there at the moment. Obviously, this map is pretty worthless at this stage of the race but cheers to the first predictions of the year. Will update as time goes on.
The hardest part for that map is Michigan where Biden is currently losing to Trump and down ~8% compared to his 2020 polling at this point. Question is if Biden campaigning to the right (his use of "illegals" at the SOTU, and rallying Republicans to crackdown on the border is emblematic of that) will help him win Michigan. I'm not optimistic it will.
Also, did I miss another 9/11 type attack or...? This is the kinda stuff (cop cities are another) people are talking about when they say Democrats can't help themselves from laying the groundwork for Republican fascism.
|
I was pleasantly surprised with Biden’s 2024 State of the Union address (I just finished watching). I was merely hoping that he wouldn’t fumble and come across as incoherent, but he legitimately nailed it. Over an hour of passionate proclamations: strong words against Russia (wisely channeling Reagan’s “Mr. Gorbachev” line, which even got some Republicans clapping), calling out Trump’s insurrection and anti-abortion bragging, calling out Congressional Republicans for not securing our border when they voted against the recent bill for purely political reasons, and even being critical of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade. Biden didn’t pull any punches.
He also cited many of his amazing accomplishments that I had listed before: inflation back to normal, CHIPs and Science Act, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, working towards beating big pharma and making medicine more affordable (he cited all of the healthcare cost caps he was able to make for certain demographics during his first term, and then said his second term will be focused on capping those costs for *all Americans*), heavily supporting unions and the labor movement (“Wall Street didn’t build America; the middle class built America, and unions built the middle class!”), etc.
He had some new surprises too, such as expediting the affordability of housing (mortgage rates will naturally decrease over time, but he also wants to provide tax credits for mortgages and refinancing, and build more homes with reasonable rental costs). Pro-education elements too, such as pre-school for all 3 and 4 year olds, student loans, and enabling all post- high school options (including non-college options). “And I want to give public school teachers a raise” had me smiling, although he didn’t elaborate specifically on how he’d do that. He acknowledged the importance of treating women, people of color, the LGBTQ+ community, and other demographics equally and with respect.
Towards the end of his speech, he did comment on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I think his words came off as too pro-Israel / enabling Netanyahu, although it’s hard for any president to navigate the conflict without pissing off either side. Other than that, I was pretty much content with his address.
His words were so energizing that a chant of “Four More Years” literally broke out mid-speech... twice. Unsurprisingly, Biden was also interrupted by Marjorie Taylor Greene and other rude individuals trying to shout over him. Overall, I'd give his speech around a 7 or 8 out of 10.
|
|
|
United States9921 Posts
On March 09 2024 05:17 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2024 01:00 FlaShFTW wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Biden did extremely well and handled a lot of the big questions that were going to be thrown his way. Massive applause for him, though I hope he can have this sort of energy ready for a debate, as that's when a lot of voters get swung. The prepared, read off a teleprompter style of speeches really are great for Biden and he can even go off script a few times and still show some fire. As we now know the nominees and who's running this election, here's my way too damn early election prediction. Explanation: Rust belt states are very close, and I expect the undecided voters (about 10%) to split favorably for Biden at the moment. Whereas Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia are all around 48-49% Trump atm so Biden has too much ground to make up there at the moment. Obviously, this map is pretty worthless at this stage of the race but cheers to the first predictions of the year. Will update as time goes on. The hardest part for that map is Michigan where Biden is currently losing to Trump and down ~8% compared to his 2020 polling at this point. Question is if Biden campaigning to the right (his use of "illegals" at the SOTU, and rallying Republicans to crackdown on the border is emblematic of that) will help him win Michigan. I'm not optimistic it will.
Trump's best polls only have him around 45/46%, which means there's a lot of undecided voters still out there. I think the undecided is going to split favorably for Biden (hopefully).
Agree with others that this is a fucking travesty that the polls are even this close with how utterly messed up Trump has been. But as alluded to before, the Republican and Trump war chest is going to be tiny compared to the Democrats. This will play farther down the ticket. It's certainly going to be an interesting campaign season.
|
|
|
On March 09 2024 05:25 FlaShFTW wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2024 05:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 09 2024 01:00 FlaShFTW wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Biden did extremely well and handled a lot of the big questions that were going to be thrown his way. Massive applause for him, though I hope he can have this sort of energy ready for a debate, as that's when a lot of voters get swung. The prepared, read off a teleprompter style of speeches really are great for Biden and he can even go off script a few times and still show some fire. As we now know the nominees and who's running this election, here's my way too damn early election prediction. Explanation: Rust belt states are very close, and I expect the undecided voters (about 10%) to split favorably for Biden at the moment. Whereas Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia are all around 48-49% Trump atm so Biden has too much ground to make up there at the moment. Obviously, this map is pretty worthless at this stage of the race but cheers to the first predictions of the year. Will update as time goes on. The hardest part for that map is Michigan where Biden is currently losing to Trump and down ~8% compared to his 2020 polling at this point. Question is if Biden campaigning to the right (his use of "illegals" at the SOTU, and rallying Republicans to crackdown on the border is emblematic of that) will help him win Michigan. I'm not optimistic it will. Trump's best polls only have him around 45/46%, which means there's a lot of undecided voters still out there. I think the undecided is going to split favorably for Biden (hopefully). Agree with others that this is a fucking travesty that the polls are even this close with how utterly messed up Trump has been. But as alluded to before, the Republican and Trump war chest is going to be tiny compared to the Democrats. This will play farther down the ticket. It's certainly going to be an interesting campaign season.
One problem is whether Biden can court the people struggling to decide between him and Trump (nevermind the absurdity of this) by campaigning to the right without depressing the turnout of people to his left.
One way that manifests is Biden/Democrats tossing of undocumented immigrants to the wolves and Biden using an outdated slur to refer to them during the SOTU.
|
On March 09 2024 04:46 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2024 04:39 Broetchenholer wrote:On March 09 2024 04:19 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 04:15 JimmiC wrote:On March 09 2024 03:38 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 03:18 Liquid`Drone wrote:On March 09 2024 02:26 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 02:14 JimmiC wrote:On March 09 2024 02:08 sevencck wrote:On March 08 2024 15:05 Simberto wrote:
[quote]
Oh, this seems like a fun game. If he starts talking about Lebensraum for the american people, he clearly just means that people deserve a nice living room and wants to show off his German skills.
And if he asks if you want the total war, he clearly just means the newest game by creative assembly.
If you say Nazi shit, people start believing that you are a Nazi. It takes willing disbelief to not hear the Nazi shit Trump says. It's not Nazi shit, that's the point, that's really just more shadow projection. Trump is not a Nazi, he's not even Nazi adjacent. If you understood what you were talking about, you'd recognize that the Dems are more in line with actual fascism, namely public-private partnership and corporate state. It is not Trump pushing ESG programs for example. Trump put originalists on the court and rails against socialism. He's clearly not a Nazi. I bet there's a huge overlap between people who thought it was ok to coerce people to take a vaccine and those who recognize Trump as a Nazi. Like I said, shadow projection. All you're doing is showing who you are inside, so carry on. Trump derangement has helped Trump immensely. Do you think liberals foaming at the mouth and trying to remove him from the ballot hurts him? You do know that socialism and the nazi's are opposites right? Also those evil monsters trying to coerce people to be healthy, what is next are they going to recommend healthy eating! Thank you for proving my point. NSDAP = National Socialist German Workers Party. There were actually some socialists in the NSDAP early on, but hitler sure as fuck wasnt one, and they were largely murdered (on hitler's command) during the night of long knives in 1934. Hitler's rise should be understood in its historical context, namely that the market was increasingly considered an outdated model for economic coordination and the future would be about state coordination and control of the means of production. There was always going to be disagreement about how that control was meant to be instantiated. Yes, Hitler purged members of his party who had other ideas about how the means were to be controlled. So did Mussolini. So did Stalin. Trotsky was bumped off, along with millions of other Russians. This is all intra-left dispute, namely how best to control and manage the means of production, it is not an argument relevant to authentic right-wing politics, of which Mises, Hayek, Friedman, etc. were good examples. Classical liberalism does not occupy itself with how best to control the means of production (and therefore doesn't butcher each other over disagreements). That you include Hitler and Mussolini in as Left shows you don't remotely understand the term. Left just means evil to you the way capitalism means evil to GH. You don't understand what you're talking about, and I do not wish to explain it to you further. You need to read and study a subject before you profess your expertise to the world. Duuuude! You know who got rich in Nazi Germany? Nazi Germany industrials. Hitler started on a populist platform to give state money to war widows and wanted to have more control over industry, but not by socialist policies but instead by race ideology. His economic policies were more left wing then a economic libertarian, that does not make him left wing though. And acting as if comparisons to hitler are only about his economic policies as a statesman, makes it sound you believe the only thing bad about hitler was that he wasn't a libertarian, which is, to put it mildly the worst take ever. I'll be honest here. I have literally no idea how to deal with someone who legitimately claims that the Nazis, and Hitler specifically, were leftwing or socialists. Someone who puts Mussolini at the left end of the spectrum. I thought that to be a silly meme. Also, coming to the conclusion that WW2 was basically an intra-left conflict is kinda amazing. One would basically need to start right at the beginning at the most core definitions to be able to have any discussion here, because i am quite certain that basically none of the definitions of words that sevencck uses is even remotely related to those that other people use. That makes communication incredibly hard to do. I guess i would be kinda interested in how sevencck would define "socialist" or "left".
A liberal advocates liberty and believes society is capable of self organizing with sufficient (albeit imperfect) intelligence to generate sustainable habitation on this planet. A leftist advocates revolution, either economically or culturally, and believes that society needs to be organized in a more intelligent fashion by those with "greater" vision in service of sustainable habitation on this planet.
The people who believe the means of production are not distributed properly are advocating a revolution against that form of self organization in order to redistribute them. The people who believe gender relations have not self organized intelligently are advocating a revolution against that self organization to fix them, even over such things as pronouns. The people who believe the gaming culture is not sufficiently inclusive are advocating a revolution against the self organization therein to reconstruct it. The people who believe the society and economy has not self organized with sufficient intelligence to tackle environmental issues are advocating a revolution against that self organization. The list is endless.
I don't consider both equally valid or the truth to be in the middle. When everything is said and done, the liberal holds the flesh and blood human being and his independence of conscience as the object of value. The leftist holds an abstraction of society as the object of value. Yet it is the flesh and blood reality which is naturally higher in value than whatever social abstraction man can generate in his mind. Paving over the flesh and blood reality to prioritize the social abstraction will always yield the same result.
|
On March 09 2024 06:07 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2024 04:46 Simberto wrote:On March 09 2024 04:39 Broetchenholer wrote:On March 09 2024 04:19 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 04:15 JimmiC wrote:On March 09 2024 03:38 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 03:18 Liquid`Drone wrote:On March 09 2024 02:26 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 02:14 JimmiC wrote:On March 09 2024 02:08 sevencck wrote:
[quote]
It's not Nazi shit, that's the point, that's really just more shadow projection. Trump is not a Nazi, he's not even Nazi adjacent. If you understood what you were talking about, you'd recognize that the Dems are more in line with actual fascism, namely public-private partnership and corporate state. It is not Trump pushing ESG programs for example. Trump put originalists on the court and rails against socialism. He's clearly not a Nazi.
I bet there's a huge overlap between people who thought it was ok to coerce people to take a vaccine and those who recognize Trump as a Nazi. Like I said, shadow projection.
All you're doing is showing who you are inside, so carry on. Trump derangement has helped Trump immensely. Do you think liberals foaming at the mouth and trying to remove him from the ballot hurts him?
You do know that socialism and the nazi's are opposites right? Also those evil monsters trying to coerce people to be healthy, what is next are they going to recommend healthy eating! Thank you for proving my point. NSDAP = National Socialist German Workers Party. There were actually some socialists in the NSDAP early on, but hitler sure as fuck wasnt one, and they were largely murdered (on hitler's command) during the night of long knives in 1934. Hitler's rise should be understood in its historical context, namely that the market was increasingly considered an outdated model for economic coordination and the future would be about state coordination and control of the means of production. There was always going to be disagreement about how that control was meant to be instantiated. Yes, Hitler purged members of his party who had other ideas about how the means were to be controlled. So did Mussolini. So did Stalin. Trotsky was bumped off, along with millions of other Russians. This is all intra-left dispute, namely how best to control and manage the means of production, it is not an argument relevant to authentic right-wing politics, of which Mises, Hayek, Friedman, etc. were good examples. Classical liberalism does not occupy itself with how best to control the means of production (and therefore doesn't butcher each other over disagreements). That you include Hitler and Mussolini in as Left shows you don't remotely understand the term. Left just means evil to you the way capitalism means evil to GH. You don't understand what you're talking about, and I do not wish to explain it to you further. You need to read and study a subject before you profess your expertise to the world. Duuuude! You know who got rich in Nazi Germany? Nazi Germany industrials. Hitler started on a populist platform to give state money to war widows and wanted to have more control over industry, but not by socialist policies but instead by race ideology. His economic policies were more left wing then a economic libertarian, that does not make him left wing though. And acting as if comparisons to hitler are only about his economic policies as a statesman, makes it sound you believe the only thing bad about hitler was that he wasn't a libertarian, which is, to put it mildly the worst take ever. I'll be honest here. I have literally no idea how to deal with someone who legitimately claims that the Nazis, and Hitler specifically, were leftwing or socialists. Someone who puts Mussolini at the left end of the spectrum. I thought that to be a silly meme. Also, coming to the conclusion that WW2 was basically an intra-left conflict is kinda amazing. One would basically need to start right at the beginning at the most core definitions to be able to have any discussion here, because i am quite certain that basically none of the definitions of words that sevencck uses is even remotely related to those that other people use. That makes communication incredibly hard to do. I guess i would be kinda interested in how sevencck would define "socialist" or "left". A liberal advocates liberty and believes society is capable of self organizing with sufficient (albeit imperfect) intelligence to generate sustainable habitation on this planet. A leftist advocates revolution, either economically or culturally, and believes that society needs to be organized in a more intelligent fashion by those with "greater" vision in service of sustainable habitation on this planet.The people who believe the means of production are not distributed properly are advocating a revolution against that form of self organization in order to redistribute them. The people who believe gender relations have not self organized intelligently are advocating a revolution against that self organization to fix them, even over such things as pronouns. The people who believe the gaming culture is not sufficiently inclusive are advocating a revolution against the self organization therein to reconstruct it. The people who believe the society and economy has not self organized with sufficient intelligence to tackle environmental issues are advocating a revolution against that self organization. The list is endless. I don't consider both equally valid or the truth to be in the middle. When everything is said and done, the liberal holds the flesh and blood human being and his independence of conscience as the object of value. The leftist holds an abstraction of society as the object of value. Yet it is the flesh and blood reality which is naturally higher in value than whatever social abstraction man can generate in his mind. Paving over the flesh and blood reality to prioritize the social abstraction will always yield the same result.
I like this timeline where I've learned in the last few days that JimmiC is in fact a conservative and most certainly not a leftist.
Joking aside, I IMMEDIATELY take issue with a framing that has liberals and leftists being mutually exclusive. Additionally, I'd point out that such a definition makes the vast majority of the people here, excluding GH and a few other probable exceptions, decidedly not leftists.
|
Northern Ireland22945 Posts
On March 09 2024 06:07 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2024 04:46 Simberto wrote:On March 09 2024 04:39 Broetchenholer wrote:On March 09 2024 04:19 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 04:15 JimmiC wrote:On March 09 2024 03:38 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 03:18 Liquid`Drone wrote:On March 09 2024 02:26 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 02:14 JimmiC wrote:On March 09 2024 02:08 sevencck wrote:
[quote]
It's not Nazi shit, that's the point, that's really just more shadow projection. Trump is not a Nazi, he's not even Nazi adjacent. If you understood what you were talking about, you'd recognize that the Dems are more in line with actual fascism, namely public-private partnership and corporate state. It is not Trump pushing ESG programs for example. Trump put originalists on the court and rails against socialism. He's clearly not a Nazi.
I bet there's a huge overlap between people who thought it was ok to coerce people to take a vaccine and those who recognize Trump as a Nazi. Like I said, shadow projection.
All you're doing is showing who you are inside, so carry on. Trump derangement has helped Trump immensely. Do you think liberals foaming at the mouth and trying to remove him from the ballot hurts him?
You do know that socialism and the nazi's are opposites right? Also those evil monsters trying to coerce people to be healthy, what is next are they going to recommend healthy eating! Thank you for proving my point. NSDAP = National Socialist German Workers Party. There were actually some socialists in the NSDAP early on, but hitler sure as fuck wasnt one, and they were largely murdered (on hitler's command) during the night of long knives in 1934. Hitler's rise should be understood in its historical context, namely that the market was increasingly considered an outdated model for economic coordination and the future would be about state coordination and control of the means of production. There was always going to be disagreement about how that control was meant to be instantiated. Yes, Hitler purged members of his party who had other ideas about how the means were to be controlled. So did Mussolini. So did Stalin. Trotsky was bumped off, along with millions of other Russians. This is all intra-left dispute, namely how best to control and manage the means of production, it is not an argument relevant to authentic right-wing politics, of which Mises, Hayek, Friedman, etc. were good examples. Classical liberalism does not occupy itself with how best to control the means of production (and therefore doesn't butcher each other over disagreements). That you include Hitler and Mussolini in as Left shows you don't remotely understand the term. Left just means evil to you the way capitalism means evil to GH. You don't understand what you're talking about, and I do not wish to explain it to you further. You need to read and study a subject before you profess your expertise to the world. Duuuude! You know who got rich in Nazi Germany? Nazi Germany industrials. Hitler started on a populist platform to give state money to war widows and wanted to have more control over industry, but not by socialist policies but instead by race ideology. His economic policies were more left wing then a economic libertarian, that does not make him left wing though. And acting as if comparisons to hitler are only about his economic policies as a statesman, makes it sound you believe the only thing bad about hitler was that he wasn't a libertarian, which is, to put it mildly the worst take ever. I'll be honest here. I have literally no idea how to deal with someone who legitimately claims that the Nazis, and Hitler specifically, were leftwing or socialists. Someone who puts Mussolini at the left end of the spectrum. I thought that to be a silly meme. Also, coming to the conclusion that WW2 was basically an intra-left conflict is kinda amazing. One would basically need to start right at the beginning at the most core definitions to be able to have any discussion here, because i am quite certain that basically none of the definitions of words that sevencck uses is even remotely related to those that other people use. That makes communication incredibly hard to do. I guess i would be kinda interested in how sevencck would define "socialist" or "left". A liberal advocates liberty and believes society is capable of self organizing with sufficient (albeit imperfect) intelligence to generate sustainable habitation on this planet. A leftist advocates revolution, either economically or culturally, and believes that society needs to be organized in a more intelligent fashion by those with "greater" vision in service of sustainable habitation on this planet.The people who believe the means of production are not distributed properly are advocating a revolution against that form of self organization in order to redistribute them. The people who believe gender relations have not self organized intelligently are advocating a revolution against that self organization to fix them, even over such things as pronouns. The people who believe the gaming culture is not sufficiently inclusive are advocating a revolution against the self organization therein to reconstruct it. The people who believe the society and economy has not self organized with sufficient intelligence to tackle environmental issues are advocating a revolution against that self organization. The list is endless. I don't consider both equally valid or the truth to be in the middle. When everything is said and done, the liberal holds the flesh and blood human being and his independence of conscience as the object of value. The leftist holds an abstraction of society as the object of value. Yet it is the flesh and blood reality which is naturally higher in value than whatever social abstraction man can generate in his mind.Paving over the flesh and blood reality to prioritize the social abstraction will always yield the same result.
In order of bolded statements: - No, in the economic sphere at least, the leftist critique is more that those with economic power effectively already are the folks guiding things with ‘greater vision’ in a de facto sense.
- No, the general concept is that that system is not actually self-organised in any sense to begin with.
- This isn’t even a particularly left wing battlefield to begin with, and anyway in a more broad sense it’s one that is fought in the domain of capitalism and market forces and equilibrium anyway. If we’re talking self-organising, and supply and demand as a mechanism, there are many more women, gay folks and well, basically all sorts of non hetero white dudes playing games than before, and those changes will manifest in the kind of products people demand. If anything it’s stereotypical ‘gamer bros’ who are the ones trying to artificially ringfence the hobby against organic change, in this specific example.
- This is backwards. At the core left wing politics don’t deal in abstractions, but in conditions and reality and especially power in its various forms, but especially economically. In a crude sense abstract values, ideas or rights only matter insofar as you can actualise them. The distinction between so-called positive and negative liberty is absolutely core, even if the terminology was coined long after left wing politics had exerted huge influence.
You’re not going to have any joy debating politics with vaguely intelligent left wing people if you have such fundamental misunderstandings of what underpins the entire ideological tradition and what draws people to its ideas.
Which is an observation based on this post not an innate criticism of yourself in any wider sense. I used to have an appalling understanding of various right wing ideologies that was in effect ‘they are cartoonish evil arseholes’, which I’ve tried to, and hopefully corrected this over the years.
|
Northern Ireland22945 Posts
On March 09 2024 06:35 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2024 06:07 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 04:46 Simberto wrote:On March 09 2024 04:39 Broetchenholer wrote:On March 09 2024 04:19 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 04:15 JimmiC wrote:On March 09 2024 03:38 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 03:18 Liquid`Drone wrote:On March 09 2024 02:26 sevencck wrote:On March 09 2024 02:14 JimmiC wrote:
[quote]
You do know that socialism and the nazi's are opposites right?
Also those evil monsters trying to coerce people to be healthy, what is next are they going to recommend healthy eating! Thank you for proving my point. NSDAP = National Socialist German Workers Party. There were actually some socialists in the NSDAP early on, but hitler sure as fuck wasnt one, and they were largely murdered (on hitler's command) during the night of long knives in 1934. Hitler's rise should be understood in its historical context, namely that the market was increasingly considered an outdated model for economic coordination and the future would be about state coordination and control of the means of production. There was always going to be disagreement about how that control was meant to be instantiated. Yes, Hitler purged members of his party who had other ideas about how the means were to be controlled. So did Mussolini. So did Stalin. Trotsky was bumped off, along with millions of other Russians. This is all intra-left dispute, namely how best to control and manage the means of production, it is not an argument relevant to authentic right-wing politics, of which Mises, Hayek, Friedman, etc. were good examples. Classical liberalism does not occupy itself with how best to control the means of production (and therefore doesn't butcher each other over disagreements). That you include Hitler and Mussolini in as Left shows you don't remotely understand the term. Left just means evil to you the way capitalism means evil to GH. You don't understand what you're talking about, and I do not wish to explain it to you further. You need to read and study a subject before you profess your expertise to the world. Duuuude! You know who got rich in Nazi Germany? Nazi Germany industrials. Hitler started on a populist platform to give state money to war widows and wanted to have more control over industry, but not by socialist policies but instead by race ideology. His economic policies were more left wing then a economic libertarian, that does not make him left wing though. And acting as if comparisons to hitler are only about his economic policies as a statesman, makes it sound you believe the only thing bad about hitler was that he wasn't a libertarian, which is, to put it mildly the worst take ever. I'll be honest here. I have literally no idea how to deal with someone who legitimately claims that the Nazis, and Hitler specifically, were leftwing or socialists. Someone who puts Mussolini at the left end of the spectrum. I thought that to be a silly meme. Also, coming to the conclusion that WW2 was basically an intra-left conflict is kinda amazing. One would basically need to start right at the beginning at the most core definitions to be able to have any discussion here, because i am quite certain that basically none of the definitions of words that sevencck uses is even remotely related to those that other people use. That makes communication incredibly hard to do. I guess i would be kinda interested in how sevencck would define "socialist" or "left". A liberal advocates liberty and believes society is capable of self organizing with sufficient (albeit imperfect) intelligence to generate sustainable habitation on this planet. A leftist advocates revolution, either economically or culturally, and believes that society needs to be organized in a more intelligent fashion by those with "greater" vision in service of sustainable habitation on this planet.The people who believe the means of production are not distributed properly are advocating a revolution against that form of self organization in order to redistribute them. The people who believe gender relations have not self organized intelligently are advocating a revolution against that self organization to fix them, even over such things as pronouns. The people who believe the gaming culture is not sufficiently inclusive are advocating a revolution against the self organization therein to reconstruct it. The people who believe the society and economy has not self organized with sufficient intelligence to tackle environmental issues are advocating a revolution against that self organization. The list is endless. I don't consider both equally valid or the truth to be in the middle. When everything is said and done, the liberal holds the flesh and blood human being and his independence of conscience as the object of value. The leftist holds an abstraction of society as the object of value. Yet it is the flesh and blood reality which is naturally higher in value than whatever social abstraction man can generate in his mind. Paving over the flesh and blood reality to prioritize the social abstraction will always yield the same result. I like this timeline where I've learned in the last few days that JimmiC is in fact a conservative and most certainly not a leftist. Joking aside, I IMMEDIATELY take issue with a framing that has liberals and leftists being mutually exclusive. Additionally, I'd point out that such a definition makes the vast majority of the people here, excluding GH and a few other probable exceptions, decidedly not leftists.
Liberal sucks as a term, I believe he’s using it in more the traditional sense and closer to the origins of the term, in the sense that ‘libertarian’ maybe covers more elegantly nowadays although not fully.
Leftist is basically useless as a term if it covers say, the right wing of the Democratic Party thru to Communist too. No criticism of either party but GH and Jimmy could have an argument over what colour the sky is, but folks will categorise them as both leftists nonetheless, which makes boxing such a disparate group of ideas and value under such a ridiculously broad banner completely pointless IMO.
If people didn’t continually mangle terms we wouldn’t be in this unholy mess, but I digress!
|
United States9921 Posts
On March 09 2024 05:48 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2024 05:25 FlaShFTW wrote:On March 09 2024 05:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 09 2024 01:00 FlaShFTW wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Biden did extremely well and handled a lot of the big questions that were going to be thrown his way. Massive applause for him, though I hope he can have this sort of energy ready for a debate, as that's when a lot of voters get swung. The prepared, read off a teleprompter style of speeches really are great for Biden and he can even go off script a few times and still show some fire. As we now know the nominees and who's running this election, here's my way too damn early election prediction. Explanation: Rust belt states are very close, and I expect the undecided voters (about 10%) to split favorably for Biden at the moment. Whereas Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia are all around 48-49% Trump atm so Biden has too much ground to make up there at the moment. Obviously, this map is pretty worthless at this stage of the race but cheers to the first predictions of the year. Will update as time goes on. The hardest part for that map is Michigan where Biden is currently losing to Trump and down ~8% compared to his 2020 polling at this point. Question is if Biden campaigning to the right (his use of "illegals" at the SOTU, and rallying Republicans to crackdown on the border is emblematic of that) will help him win Michigan. I'm not optimistic it will. Trump's best polls only have him around 45/46%, which means there's a lot of undecided voters still out there. I think the undecided is going to split favorably for Biden (hopefully). Agree with others that this is a fucking travesty that the polls are even this close with how utterly messed up Trump has been. But as alluded to before, the Republican and Trump war chest is going to be tiny compared to the Democrats. This will play farther down the ticket. It's certainly going to be an interesting campaign season. One problem is whether Biden can court the people struggling to decide between him and Trump (nevermind the absurdity of this) by campaigning to the right without depressing the turnout of people to his left. One way that manifests is Biden/Democrats tossing of undocumented immigrants to the wolves and Biden using an outdated slur to refer to them during the SOTU.
The far left wing of the party and the voter block were never going to be enthusiastic about voting for him regardless. And they will refuse to even want to vote for him unless he literally gives them 100% of what they want, which is impossible. Doesn't matter how much good or catering he does to them (opening a temp port to Gaza is already a fucking huge step and a hot mic catching him saying he's going to have a "come to jesus" talk with Bibi soon have not budged pro-Palestine voters an inch). Further, I don't think he's necessarily campaigning TO the right, but creating a message that moderate conservatives can still get behind when they're so disgusted with Trump.
|
On March 09 2024 07:06 FlaShFTW wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2024 05:48 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 09 2024 05:25 FlaShFTW wrote:On March 09 2024 05:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 09 2024 01:00 FlaShFTW wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Biden did extremely well and handled a lot of the big questions that were going to be thrown his way. Massive applause for him, though I hope he can have this sort of energy ready for a debate, as that's when a lot of voters get swung. The prepared, read off a teleprompter style of speeches really are great for Biden and he can even go off script a few times and still show some fire. As we now know the nominees and who's running this election, here's my way too damn early election prediction. Explanation: Rust belt states are very close, and I expect the undecided voters (about 10%) to split favorably for Biden at the moment. Whereas Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia are all around 48-49% Trump atm so Biden has too much ground to make up there at the moment. Obviously, this map is pretty worthless at this stage of the race but cheers to the first predictions of the year. Will update as time goes on. The hardest part for that map is Michigan where Biden is currently losing to Trump and down ~8% compared to his 2020 polling at this point. Question is if Biden campaigning to the right (his use of "illegals" at the SOTU, and rallying Republicans to crackdown on the border is emblematic of that) will help him win Michigan. I'm not optimistic it will. Trump's best polls only have him around 45/46%, which means there's a lot of undecided voters still out there. I think the undecided is going to split favorably for Biden (hopefully). Agree with others that this is a fucking travesty that the polls are even this close with how utterly messed up Trump has been. But as alluded to before, the Republican and Trump war chest is going to be tiny compared to the Democrats. This will play farther down the ticket. It's certainly going to be an interesting campaign season. One problem is whether Biden can court the people struggling to decide between him and Trump (nevermind the absurdity of this) by campaigning to the right without depressing the turnout of people to his left. One way that manifests is Biden/Democrats tossing of undocumented immigrants to the wolves and Biden using an outdated slur to refer to them during the SOTU. The far left wing of the party and the voter block were never going to be enthusiastic about voting for him regardless. And they will refuse to even want to vote for him unless he literally gives them 100% of what they want, which is impossible. Doesn't matter how much good or catering he does to them (opening a temp port to Gaza is already a fucking huge step and a hot mic catching him saying he's going to have a "come to jesus" talk with Bibi soon have not budged pro-Palestine voters an inch). Further, I don't think he's necessarily campaigning TO the right, but creating a message that moderate conservatives can still get behind when they're so disgusted with Trump.
I think you're mistakenly conflating "the far left of the party" with "people far to the left of the party".
It's not about folks like myself that aren't voting for Biden. It's about people that voted for Biden and more or less planned to in 2024 but are being turned off by Biden supporting what ~half of his voters identify as a genocide and "creating a message that moderate conservatives can get behind" (a euphemism for stuff like dog whistles, the crackdown on the border, cop cities, mobilizing the national guard to "fight crime", and so on from my perspective).
|
Northern Ireland22945 Posts
On March 09 2024 07:06 FlaShFTW wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2024 05:48 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 09 2024 05:25 FlaShFTW wrote:On March 09 2024 05:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 09 2024 01:00 FlaShFTW wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Biden did extremely well and handled a lot of the big questions that were going to be thrown his way. Massive applause for him, though I hope he can have this sort of energy ready for a debate, as that's when a lot of voters get swung. The prepared, read off a teleprompter style of speeches really are great for Biden and he can even go off script a few times and still show some fire. As we now know the nominees and who's running this election, here's my way too damn early election prediction. Explanation: Rust belt states are very close, and I expect the undecided voters (about 10%) to split favorably for Biden at the moment. Whereas Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia are all around 48-49% Trump atm so Biden has too much ground to make up there at the moment. Obviously, this map is pretty worthless at this stage of the race but cheers to the first predictions of the year. Will update as time goes on. The hardest part for that map is Michigan where Biden is currently losing to Trump and down ~8% compared to his 2020 polling at this point. Question is if Biden campaigning to the right (his use of "illegals" at the SOTU, and rallying Republicans to crackdown on the border is emblematic of that) will help him win Michigan. I'm not optimistic it will. Trump's best polls only have him around 45/46%, which means there's a lot of undecided voters still out there. I think the undecided is going to split favorably for Biden (hopefully). Agree with others that this is a fucking travesty that the polls are even this close with how utterly messed up Trump has been. But as alluded to before, the Republican and Trump war chest is going to be tiny compared to the Democrats. This will play farther down the ticket. It's certainly going to be an interesting campaign season. One problem is whether Biden can court the people struggling to decide between him and Trump (nevermind the absurdity of this) by campaigning to the right without depressing the turnout of people to his left. One way that manifests is Biden/Democrats tossing of undocumented immigrants to the wolves and Biden using an outdated slur to refer to them during the SOTU. The far left wing of the party and the voter block were never going to be enthusiastic about voting for him regardless. And they will refuse to even want to vote for him unless he literally gives them 100% of what they want, which is impossible. Doesn't matter how much good or catering he does to them (opening a temp port to Gaza is already a fucking huge step and a hot mic catching him saying he's going to have a "come to jesus" talk with Bibi soon have not budged pro-Palestine voters an inch). Further, I don't think he's necessarily campaigning TO the right, but creating a message that moderate conservatives can still get behind when they're so disgusted with Trump.
I mean why would they? It’s politics 101 that you get folks to vote for you by giving them things they want and value.
If you want the left’s vote well, you have to give them some said things or you don’t really have much call to complain. But there’s this kind of assignation of duty that the left have to suck it up and vote regardless that isn’t say, generally levied against independents/undecideds in nearly the same degree.
As it were a combination of Biden doing some decent policies as DPB summated very well previously, and Trump being quite so egregiously awful + the kind of general trend he’s dragged the GOP to would still be sufficient for me personally to hold my nose and vote somewhat unenthusiastically
|
Northern Ireland22945 Posts
On March 09 2024 07:30 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2024 07:06 FlaShFTW wrote:On March 09 2024 05:48 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 09 2024 05:25 FlaShFTW wrote:On March 09 2024 05:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 09 2024 01:00 FlaShFTW wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Biden did extremely well and handled a lot of the big questions that were going to be thrown his way. Massive applause for him, though I hope he can have this sort of energy ready for a debate, as that's when a lot of voters get swung. The prepared, read off a teleprompter style of speeches really are great for Biden and he can even go off script a few times and still show some fire. As we now know the nominees and who's running this election, here's my way too damn early election prediction. Explanation: Rust belt states are very close, and I expect the undecided voters (about 10%) to split favorably for Biden at the moment. Whereas Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia are all around 48-49% Trump atm so Biden has too much ground to make up there at the moment. Obviously, this map is pretty worthless at this stage of the race but cheers to the first predictions of the year. Will update as time goes on. The hardest part for that map is Michigan where Biden is currently losing to Trump and down ~8% compared to his 2020 polling at this point. Question is if Biden campaigning to the right (his use of "illegals" at the SOTU, and rallying Republicans to crackdown on the border is emblematic of that) will help him win Michigan. I'm not optimistic it will. Trump's best polls only have him around 45/46%, which means there's a lot of undecided voters still out there. I think the undecided is going to split favorably for Biden (hopefully). Agree with others that this is a fucking travesty that the polls are even this close with how utterly messed up Trump has been. But as alluded to before, the Republican and Trump war chest is going to be tiny compared to the Democrats. This will play farther down the ticket. It's certainly going to be an interesting campaign season. One problem is whether Biden can court the people struggling to decide between him and Trump (nevermind the absurdity of this) by campaigning to the right without depressing the turnout of people to his left. One way that manifests is Biden/Democrats tossing of undocumented immigrants to the wolves and Biden using an outdated slur to refer to them during the SOTU. The far left wing of the party and the voter block were never going to be enthusiastic about voting for him regardless. And they will refuse to even want to vote for him unless he literally gives them 100% of what they want, which is impossible. Doesn't matter how much good or catering he does to them (opening a temp port to Gaza is already a fucking huge step and a hot mic catching him saying he's going to have a "come to jesus" talk with Bibi soon have not budged pro-Palestine voters an inch). Further, I don't think he's necessarily campaigning TO the right, but creating a message that moderate conservatives can still get behind when they're so disgusted with Trump. I think you're mistakenly conflating "the far left of the party" with "people far to the left of the party". It's not about folks like myself that aren't voting for Biden. It's about people that voted for Biden and more or less planned to in 2024 but are being turned off by Biden supporting what ~half of his voters identify as a genocide and "creating a message that moderate conservatives can get behind" (a euphemism for stuff like dog whistles, the crackdown on the border, cop cities, mobilizing the national guard to "fight crime", and so on from my perspective).
I’m not sure how impactful the former can be if his direct opponent for the office is hardly going to be better in that particular domain, if not worse. It may impact turnout and enthusiasm which could prove crucial nonetheless, but won’t see folks cross the aisle as it were.
Personally I don’t feel the latter necessarily means embracing the worst of conservative policy sentiment. I think it’s more cultural and in messaging, in a crude sense it’s ’hey we may have disagreements on the how, but we all love the country and its people and let’s work across aisles, our opponents aren’t inhuman monsters’.
If nothing else amongst his flaws as a politician Biden’s got a good record in this particular domain.
The problem with this is well firstly I’m not sure how many folks are even on the fence to begin with. Secondly you’re adopting this tact when the other party have essentially completely abandoned it wholesale. Obama tried it as well and IMO it didn’t bear much fruit for him either.
Appealing to some kind of communal idea of what everyone wants and values, with divergence on the ‘how’ only works if there’s significant shared commonality and your political opponents adopt a somewhat similar approach.
That just isn’t the case, and whatever voting bloc that responds really well to that messaging is likely dwarfed by partisans. Sure Obama could play nice in public proclamations about working with the GOP, but the GOP would simultaneously say the rather moderate changes proposed by Obamacare equalled him wanting to institute death panels who’d dictate who lived or died.
Biden has the exact same problem, just worse. You can’t pull the ‘Republicans are also chest-beating Americans like us Dems, we just disagree on the details’ in the context of well, everything the GOP have done in the Trump era
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/c4I1xI1.png)
