Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
(09-09-2021, 12:12 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: (09-08-2021, 11:15 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: (09-08-2021, 09:46 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: (09-08-2021, 01:28 PM)David Horn Wrote: Let's assume that the Trumpster is actually behind the Patriot Party and not just a willing participant in someone else's fantasy. If so, then having this in his back pocket makes the GOP regulars less likely to buck him out right. It appears, to them, that he has less to lose than they do, when the opposite is closer to the mark. Without the GOP, Trump is just another blowhard without an audience.
What's the GOP without the 70 some million Trump supporters? I disagree, the GOP ain't shit without Trumps base.
Trump had no political base until he decided to run for President, largely due to spite against President Obama. (If you can think of a worse reason to seek the Presidency than to settle old scores or to get fantastically rich through corruption, then tell me).
The GOP used to be known as the Party of Lincoln; oh, how it has fallen!
It is safe to assume that about 70 million of Trump's voters would have voted for practically any Republican nominee. In view of his old age and suspect health at the least, Republicans are going to need someone else as their exponent rather soon.
Demographics do not favor the Trump base. It is already old, and for that reason it is shrinking every year. It has practically no youth appeal, and practically no appeal to young adults. Millennials and Boomers can get along so long as the Boomers don't exhibit extreme narcissism as does Trump. Millennial adults loathe his anti-labor, anti-environmentalist, and anti-education stances.
Boomers deserve some credit for shaping Millennial attitudes, and Trump does not fail the values that Millennials sought to impart upon Millennial children. Trump is a man of cruelty, greed, and bigotry. he is the most despotic person that we have ever had as President.
In my most cynical moment I expect the GOP and the Patriot Party to merge, if on the terms of the Patriot Party. I expect a disaster.
Yep, the GOP has been falling along with the Democratic party for a while now. It's just a matter of time before the American people begin to let go of them altogether. In case you're not up on current events, Trump didn't leave a bunch of Americans behind in Afghanistan. BTW, that's the primary difference between Democrats and Americans these days. You deserve what's coming dude. Biden did what an American would never do or accept as an outcome these days.
No, it is the neoliberal agenda into which the GOP bought in completely and tried to commit us all to that has failed. The economic doctrine of diminishing returns applies to public policies as well as to productive efforts and marketing. Democrats largely rejected neoliberalism because
(1) it offered them little
(2) it offended their sensibilities, and
(3) liberals, by 1980 mostly Democrats, could see through it.
As it was with the New Deal in the second-to-last completed era of the Skowronek cycle (the New Deal was highly effective early but by the end of the Carter Presidency it had spent itself and could solve no problems cheaply), so it is with the neoliberal era that begins with Reagan's "Morning in America", Trump was unable to make it work even though he had untried and untested ideas for his Presidency. Those ideas were untried and untested for very good reason... or rejected long ago.
Trump bungled the response to COVID-19 as badly as was possible. Just watch the demographics of those contracting COVID-19 and dying of it: it is heavily people on the Right side of the political spectrum.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 546
Threads: 59
Joined: Nov 2016
(09-09-2021, 06:14 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: (09-09-2021, 12:12 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: (09-08-2021, 11:15 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: (09-08-2021, 09:46 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: (09-08-2021, 01:28 PM)David Horn Wrote: Let's assume that the Trumpster is actually behind the Patriot Party and not just a willing participant in someone else's fantasy. If so, then having this in his back pocket makes the GOP regulars less likely to buck him out right. It appears, to them, that he has less to lose than they do, when the opposite is closer to the mark. Without the GOP, Trump is just another blowhard without an audience.
What's the GOP without the 70 some million Trump supporters? I disagree, the GOP ain't shit without Trumps base.
Trump had no political base until he decided to run for President, largely due to spite against President Obama. (If you can think of a worse reason to seek the Presidency than to settle old scores or to get fantastically rich through corruption, then tell me).
The GOP used to be known as the Party of Lincoln; oh, how it has fallen!
It is safe to assume that about 70 million of Trump's voters would have voted for practically any Republican nominee. In view of his old age and suspect health at the least, Republicans are going to need someone else as their exponent rather soon.
Demographics do not favor the Trump base. It is already old, and for that reason it is shrinking every year. It has practically no youth appeal, and practically no appeal to young adults. Millennials and Boomers can get along so long as the Boomers don't exhibit extreme narcissism as does Trump. Millennial adults loathe his anti-labor, anti-environmentalist, and anti-education stances.
Boomers deserve some credit for shaping Millennial attitudes, and Trump does not fail the values that Millennials sought to impart upon Millennial children. Trump is a man of cruelty, greed, and bigotry. he is the most despotic person that we have ever had as President.
In my most cynical moment I expect the GOP and the Patriot Party to merge, if on the terms of the Patriot Party. I expect a disaster.
Yep, the GOP has been falling along with the Democratic party for a while now. It's just a matter of time before the American people begin to let go of them altogether. In case you're not up on current events, Trump didn't leave a bunch of Americans behind in Afghanistan. BTW, that's the primary difference between Democrats and Americans these days. You deserve what's coming dude. Biden did what an American would never do or accept as an outcome these days.
No, it is the neoliberal agenda into which the GOP bought in completely and tried to commit us all to that has failed. The economic doctrine of diminishing returns applies to public policies as well as to productive efforts and marketing. Democrats largely rejected neoliberalism because
(1) it offered them little
(2) it offended their sensibilities, and
(3) liberals, by 1980 mostly Democrats, could see through it.
As it was with the New Deal in the second-to-last completed era of the Skowronek cycle (the New Deal was highly effective early but by the end of the Carter Presidency it had spent itself and could solve no problems cheaply), so it is with the neoliberal era that begins with Reagan's "Morning in America", Trump was unable to make it work even though he had untried and untested ideas for his Presidency. Those ideas were untried and untested for very good reason... or rejected long ago.
Trump bungled the response to COVID-19 as badly as was possible. Just watch the demographics of those contracting COVID-19 and dying of it: it is heavily people on the Right side of the political spectrum.
I don't know about that; I think a lot of Democrats are fine with neoliberalism, specifically the affluent ones who have thrived in the neoliberal regime. Consder this article which broke America down into four political factions:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc...as/619012/
These are the factions and my interpretation of them:
Smart America: left/Democrats who are happy with neoliberalism and want to stay 3T
Free America: right/Republicans who are happy with neoliberalism and want to stay 3T
Just America: left/Democrats who are unhappy with neoliberalism and want to go 4T
Real America: right/Republicans who are unhappy with neoliberalism and want to go 4T
I think the Patriot Party is Real America trying to break away from the GOP.
Steve Barrera
[A]lthough one would like to change today's world back to the spirit of one hundred years or more ago, it cannot be done. Thus it is important to make the best out of every generation. - Hagakure
Saecular Pages
Posts: 2,936
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2016
(09-09-2021, 06:14 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: (09-09-2021, 12:12 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: (09-08-2021, 11:15 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: (09-08-2021, 09:46 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: (09-08-2021, 01:28 PM)David Horn Wrote: Let's assume that the Trumpster is actually behind the Patriot Party and not just a willing participant in someone else's fantasy. If so, then having this in his back pocket makes the GOP regulars less likely to buck him out right. It appears, to them, that he has less to lose than they do, when the opposite is closer to the mark. Without the GOP, Trump is just another blowhard without an audience.
What's the GOP without the 70 some million Trump supporters? I disagree, the GOP ain't shit without Trumps base.
Trump had no political base until he decided to run for President, largely due to spite against President Obama. (If you can think of a worse reason to seek the Presidency than to settle old scores or to get fantastically rich through corruption, then tell me).
The GOP used to be known as the Party of Lincoln; oh, how it has fallen!
It is safe to assume that about 70 million of Trump's voters would have voted for practically any Republican nominee. In view of his old age and suspect health at the least, Republicans are going to need someone else as their exponent rather soon.
Demographics do not favor the Trump base. It is already old, and for that reason it is shrinking every year. It has practically no youth appeal, and practically no appeal to young adults. Millennials and Boomers can get along so long as the Boomers don't exhibit extreme narcissism as does Trump. Millennial adults loathe his anti-labor, anti-environmentalist, and anti-education stances.
Boomers deserve some credit for shaping Millennial attitudes, and Trump does not fail the values that Millennials sought to impart upon Millennial children. Trump is a man of cruelty, greed, and bigotry. he is the most despotic person that we have ever had as President.
In my most cynical moment I expect the GOP and the Patriot Party to merge, if on the terms of the Patriot Party. I expect a disaster.
Yep, the GOP has been falling along with the Democratic party for a while now. It's just a matter of time before the American people begin to let go of them altogether. In case you're not up on current events, Trump didn't leave a bunch of Americans behind in Afghanistan. BTW, that's the primary difference between Democrats and Americans these days. You deserve what's coming dude. Biden did what an American would never do or accept as an outcome these days.
No, it is the neoliberal agenda into which the GOP bought in completely and tried to commit us all to that has failed. The economic doctrine of diminishing returns applies to public policies as well as to productive efforts and marketing. Democrats largely rejected neoliberalism because
(1) it offered them little
(2) it offended their sensibilities, and
(3) liberals, by 1980 mostly Democrats, could see through it.
As it was with the New Deal in the second-to-last completed era of the Skowronek cycle (the New Deal was highly effective early but by the end of the Carter Presidency it had spent itself and could solve no problems cheaply), so it is with the neoliberal era that begins with Reagan's "Morning in America", Trump was unable to make it work even though he had untried and untested ideas for his Presidency. Those ideas were untried and untested for very good reason... or rejected long ago.
Trump bungled the response to COVID-19 as badly as was possible. Just watch the demographics of those contracting COVID-19 and dying of it: it is heavily people on the Right side of the political spectrum.
Dude, the folks who are contracting Covid and dying of COVID are mainly minorities these days. Personally speaking, I don't know anyone on the right side who has died from COVID. However, I know a lot of people on the right who have had Covid at one time or another over the last year and survived. You should pay less attention to the Democratic run media and start paying more attention to the overall statistics and the real experts. So, have you bought a tent to live in yet? Have you made any plans to move to New England or the west coast yet? We don't care who/what kills you anymore than the Biden Administration does these days.
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
Minorities in urban areas got hit hard and early. They live in more crowded conditions, and COVID-19 spread rapidly in such places.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 2,936
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2016
09-09-2021, 03:48 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-09-2021, 04:22 PM by Classic-Xer.)
(09-09-2021, 01:00 PM)sbarrera Wrote: (09-09-2021, 06:14 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: (09-09-2021, 12:12 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: (09-08-2021, 11:15 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: (09-08-2021, 09:46 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: What's the GOP without the 70 some million Trump supporters? I disagree, the GOP ain't shit without Trumps base.
Trump had no political base until he decided to run for President, largely due to spite against President Obama. (If you can think of a worse reason to seek the Presidency than to settle old scores or to get fantastically rich through corruption, then tell me).
The GOP used to be known as the Party of Lincoln; oh, how it has fallen!
It is safe to assume that about 70 million of Trump's voters would have voted for practically any Republican nominee. In view of his old age and suspect health at the least, Republicans are going to need someone else as their exponent rather soon.
Demographics do not favor the Trump base. It is already old, and for that reason it is shrinking every year. It has practically no youth appeal, and practically no appeal to young adults. Millennials and Boomers can get along so long as the Boomers don't exhibit extreme narcissism as does Trump. Millennial adults loathe his anti-labor, anti-environmentalist, and anti-education stances.
Boomers deserve some credit for shaping Millennial attitudes, and Trump does not fail the values that Millennials sought to impart upon Millennial children. Trump is a man of cruelty, greed, and bigotry. he is the most despotic person that we have ever had as President.
In my most cynical moment I expect the GOP and the Patriot Party to merge, if on the terms of the Patriot Party. I expect a disaster.
Yep, the GOP has been falling along with the Democratic party for a while now. It's just a matter of time before the American people begin to let go of them altogether. In case you're not up on current events, Trump didn't leave a bunch of Americans behind in Afghanistan. BTW, that's the primary difference between Democrats and Americans these days. You deserve what's coming dude. Biden did what an American would never do or accept as an outcome these days.
No, it is the neoliberal agenda into which the GOP bought in completely and tried to commit us all to that has failed. The economic doctrine of diminishing returns applies to public policies as well as to productive efforts and marketing. Democrats largely rejected neoliberalism because
(1) it offered them little
(2) it offended their sensibilities, and
(3) liberals, by 1980 mostly Democrats, could see through it.
As it was with the New Deal in the second-to-last completed era of the Skowronek cycle (the New Deal was highly effective early but by the end of the Carter Presidency it had spent itself and could solve no problems cheaply), so it is with the neoliberal era that begins with Reagan's "Morning in America", Trump was unable to make it work even though he had untried and untested ideas for his Presidency. Those ideas were untried and untested for very good reason... or rejected long ago.
Trump bungled the response to COVID-19 as badly as was possible. Just watch the demographics of those contracting COVID-19 and dying of it: it is heavily people on the Right side of the political spectrum.
I don't know about that; I think a lot of Democrats are fine with neoliberalism, specifically the affluent ones who have thrived in the neoliberal regime. Consder this article which broke America down into four political factions:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc...as/619012/
These are the factions and my interpretation of them:
Smart America: left/Democrats who are happy with neoliberalism and want to stay 3T
Free America: right/Republicans who are happy with neoliberalism and want to stay 3T
Just America: left/Democrats who are unhappy with neoliberalism and want to go 4T
Real America: right/Republicans who are unhappy with neoliberalism and want to go 4T
I think the Patriot Party is Real America trying to break away from the GOP.
The GOP is pretty much useless and it's directly tied to Biden these days.
Posts: 2,936
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2016
(09-09-2021, 03:24 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Minorities in urban areas got hit hard and early. They live in more crowded conditions, and COVID-19 spread rapidly in such places.
So, what should Biden do about them? I mean, they're the bulk of the Covid related problem now. So, how many illegals are vaccinated and how many of them are responsible for the current Covid crisis and how long do you think Gumby is going to get away with talking out his ass? To be honest, I don't care if Biden is removed by force or if he dies while in office or if America decides to cut bait and leave him stranded in DC with minimal at this point.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
09-09-2021, 05:26 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-09-2021, 05:27 PM by Eric the Green.)
(09-09-2021, 04:56 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: (09-09-2021, 03:24 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Minorities in urban areas got hit hard and early. They live in more crowded conditions, and COVID-19 spread rapidly in such places.
So, what should Biden do about them? I mean, they're the bulk of the Covid related problem now. So, how many illegals are vaccinated and how many of them are responsible for the current Covid crisis and how long do you think Gumby is going to get away with talking out his ass? To be honest, I don't care if Biden is removed by force or if he dies while in office or if America decides to cut bait and leave him stranded in DC with minimal at this point.
The bulk of infections now are unvaccinated, most unvaccinated folks are Trump supporters, and the most covid cases are now found in counties that voted for Trump by 40% margins. I don't know that Biden can do much about it. Unvaccinated Trump believers have deliberately made themslves vulnerable, sick or dead in order to discredit Biden because he has not controlled the virus. This is just like Romney's campaign in 2012 against Obama when the Republicans sabotaged the recovery with austerity and filibusters after 2010 so the economy would stall and Obama as president would be blamed. It is your only tactic and your only hope "at this point". Cheat, or create havoc, and hope that way to win.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
09-09-2021, 05:34 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-09-2021, 06:07 PM by Eric the Green.)
(09-09-2021, 01:00 PM)sbarrera Wrote: (09-09-2021, 06:14 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: (09-09-2021, 12:12 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: (09-08-2021, 11:15 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: (09-08-2021, 09:46 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: What's the GOP without the 70 some million Trump supporters? I disagree, the GOP ain't shit without Trumps base.
Trump had no political base until he decided to run for President, largely due to spite against President Obama. (If you can think of a worse reason to seek the Presidency than to settle old scores or to get fantastically rich through corruption, then tell me).
The GOP used to be known as the Party of Lincoln; oh, how it has fallen!
It is safe to assume that about 70 million of Trump's voters would have voted for practically any Republican nominee. In view of his old age and suspect health at the least, Republicans are going to need someone else as their exponent rather soon.
Demographics do not favor the Trump base. It is already old, and for that reason it is shrinking every year. It has practically no youth appeal, and practically no appeal to young adults. Millennials and Boomers can get along so long as the Boomers don't exhibit extreme narcissism as does Trump. Millennial adults loathe his anti-labor, anti-environmentalist, and anti-education stances.
Boomers deserve some credit for shaping Millennial attitudes, and Trump does not fail the values that Millennials sought to impart upon Millennial children. Trump is a man of cruelty, greed, and bigotry. he is the most despotic person that we have ever had as President.
In my most cynical moment I expect the GOP and the Patriot Party to merge, if on the terms of the Patriot Party. I expect a disaster.
Yep, the GOP has been falling along with the Democratic party for a while now. It's just a matter of time before the American people begin to let go of them altogether. In case you're not up on current events, Trump didn't leave a bunch of Americans behind in Afghanistan. BTW, that's the primary difference between Democrats and Americans these days. You deserve what's coming dude. Biden did what an American would never do or accept as an outcome these days.
No, it is the neoliberal agenda into which the GOP bought in completely and tried to commit us all to that has failed. The economic doctrine of diminishing returns applies to public policies as well as to productive efforts and marketing. Democrats largely rejected neoliberalism because
(1) it offered them little
(2) it offended their sensibilities, and
(3) liberals, by 1980 mostly Democrats, could see through it.
As it was with the New Deal in the second-to-last completed era of the Skowronek cycle (the New Deal was highly effective early but by the end of the Carter Presidency it had spent itself and could solve no problems cheaply), so it is with the neoliberal era that begins with Reagan's "Morning in America", Trump was unable to make it work even though he had untried and untested ideas for his Presidency. Those ideas were untried and untested for very good reason... or rejected long ago.
Trump bungled the response to COVID-19 as badly as was possible. Just watch the demographics of those contracting COVID-19 and dying of it: it is heavily people on the Right side of the political spectrum.
I don't know about that; I think a lot of Democrats are fine with neoliberalism, specifically the affluent ones who have thrived in the neoliberal regime. Consider this article which broke America down into four political factions:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc...as/619012/
These are the factions and my interpretation of them:
Smart America: left/Democrats who are happy with neoliberalism and want to stay 3T
Free America: right/Republicans who are happy with neoliberalism and want to stay 3T
Just America: left/Democrats who are unhappy with neoliberalism and want to go 4T
Real America: right/Republicans who are unhappy with neoliberalism and want to go 4T
I think the Patriot Party is Real America trying to break away from the GOP.
I agree with brower.
Smart America as you describe it does not exist. left/Democrats cannot be happy with neoliberalism, and are not. Neo-liberalism is exclusively a Republican program at this point. The Left is the opposite of laissez-faire, trickle-down economics. Affluent white Democrats are more radical at this point than Democrats of color. Real America does not exist as you describe it, either. Trump and his followers are as neo-liberal as could be; their policies are neo-liberalism on steroids. Read the 2016 Republican platform and see. The only difference from those merely deluded by neo-liberal Republican "freedom" slogans is that the Trump Republicans are also more-prejudiced. To tear down the administrative state as the Trumpists want-- and carried out in such places as the EPA and the Dept. of Education, is giving big business all the freedom it wants to exploit us and ruin our lives and our planet. And social conservatism/prejudice is at this point intimately connected with neo-liberalism, and has been all along. That is why the policy and slogan of cutting welfare and smaller government appeals to both of these supposedly-different factions. Opposition to welfare is the dog-whistle for prejudiced people to vote for less government, which is allowing business to have fewer taxes and regulations. That's also why Republicans rule the White South these days.
"Prejudice" is a convenient term I use which includes white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia, Christian Right, anti-immigrant and so on; and often this includes conspiracy theory and anti-vax these days. It's opposition to women's rights, ethnic rights, gay and transgender rights, rights for young people, immigrant rights, nationalist opposition to foreign trade, foreigners and alliances, support for Christian restrictions on other religions and on science, denial of climate change/rights of Nature, denial of science, etc. And since these groups they oppose get protection from the government, the prejudiced are neo-liberals who are against social government (and against democracy). A primary doctrine of neo-liberalism is self-reliance and the belief people should take care of themselves on their own and that only the strong survive (social Darwinism). This connects with neo-Nazis too, and with Christian emphasis on "building character."
The Left is social democracy and respect for diversity. The Right-wing is neo-liberalism and prejudice.
We are all 4T at this point. We can't go back.
Posts: 4,336
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2016
(09-09-2021, 05:34 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Smart America as you describe it does not exist. left/Democrats cannot be happy with neoliberalism, and are not. Neo-liberalism is exclusively a Republican program at this point. The Left is the opposite of laissez-faire, trickle-down economics. Affluent white Democrats are more radical at this point than Democrats of color. Real America does not exist as you describe it, either. Trump and his followers are as neo-liberal as could be; their policies are neo-liberalism on steroids. Read the 2016 Republican platform and see. The only difference from those merely deluded by neo-liberal Republican "freedom" slogans is that the Trump Republicans are also more-prejudiced. To tear down the administrative state as the Trumpists want-- and carried out in such places as the EPA and the Dept. of Education, is giving big business all the freedom it wants to exploit us and ruin our lives and our planet. And social conservatism/prejudice is at this point intimately connected with neo-liberalism, and has been all along. That is why the policy and slogan of cutting welfare and smaller government appeals to both of these supposedly-different factions. Opposition to welfare is the dog-whistle for prejudiced people to vote for less government, which is allowing business to have fewer taxes and regulations. That's also why Republicans rule the White South these days.
I'm going to disagree with you on this. Neoliberalism is a two-prong offensive:
- Total libertarianism for business, including low to nonexistent taxes and regulation, and
- Liberal social positions, iincluding high support to diversity and other non-economic agendas.
It's not realy a party-centric thing. It's more capitalism centric. The entire point is shielding weath and power from popular backlash that could, and should, upset their little apple cart. Republicans have moved on to autoritarianism as their "final solution". Democrats are just now pulling up their big boy and big girl pants. It's sad that it had to go this far.
... continuing, Eric wrote Wrote:Prejudice" is a convenient term I use which includes white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia, Christian Right, anti-immigrant and so on; and often this includes conspiracy theory and anti-vax these days. It's opposition to women's rights, ethnic rights, gay and transgender rights, rights for young people, immigrant rights, nationalist opposition to foreign trade, foreigners and alliances, support for Christian restrictions on other religions and on science, denial of climate change/rights of Nature, denial of science, etc. And since these groups they oppose get protection from the government, the prejudiced are neo-liberals who are against social government (and against democracy). A primary doctrine of neo-liberalism is self-reliance and the belief people should take care of themselves on their own and that only the strong survive (social Darwinism). This connects with neo-Nazis too, and with Christian emphasis on "building character."
The Left is social democracy and respect for diversity. The Right-wing is neo-liberalism and prejudice.
We are all 4T at this point. We can't go back.
I agree with all of this except the final thought. Yes, the left is for social democracy and diversity, but the RW (mostly Republicans) are really all-in on prejudice and power. Philosophy on that side be damned. They literally couldn't care less as long as they get to be in charge and be superior to "them". Of course, we're part of "them" so no quarter can be and certainly none given. Biden's decision to push the envolop on vaccination will be their new rallyiing cry, as they stand n the unemployment line. Question: will refusal o comply be considered a reason to receive benefits? I'll bet it will in places like Florida and Texas.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
(09-10-2021, 07:59 AM)David Horn Wrote: (09-09-2021, 05:34 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Smart America as you describe it does not exist. left/Democrats cannot be happy with neoliberalism, and are not. Neo-liberalism is exclusively a Republican program at this point. The Left is the opposite of laissez-faire, trickle-down economics. Affluent white Democrats are more radical at this point than Democrats of color. Real America does not exist as you describe it, either. Trump and his followers are as neo-liberal as could be; their policies are neo-liberalism on steroids. Read the 2016 Republican platform and see. The only difference from those merely deluded by neo-liberal Republican "freedom" slogans is that the Trump Republicans are also more-prejudiced. To tear down the administrative state as the Trumpists want-- and carried out in such places as the EPA and the Dept. of Education, is giving big business all the freedom it wants to exploit us and ruin our lives and our planet. And social conservatism/prejudice is at this point intimately connected with neo-liberalism, and has been all along. That is why the policy and slogan of cutting welfare and smaller government appeals to both of these supposedly-different factions. Opposition to welfare is the dog-whistle for prejudiced people to vote for less government, which is allowing business to have fewer taxes and regulations. That's also why Republicans rule the White South these days.
I'm going to disagree with you on this. Neoliberalism is a two-prong offensive:
- Total libertarianism for business, including low to nonexistent taxes and regulation, and
- Liberal social positions, iincluding high support to diversity and other non-economic agendas.
It's not realy a party-centric thing. It's more capitalism centric. The entire point is shielding weath and power from popular backlash that could, and should, upset their little apple cart. Republicans have moved on to autoritarianism as their "final solution". Democrats are just now pulling up their big boy and big girl pants. It's sad that it had to go this far.
... continuing, Eric wrote Wrote:Prejudice" is a convenient term I use which includes white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia, Christian Right, anti-immigrant and so on; and often this includes conspiracy theory and anti-vax these days. It's opposition to women's rights, ethnic rights, gay and transgender rights, rights for young people, immigrant rights, nationalist opposition to foreign trade, foreigners and alliances, support for Christian restrictions on other religions and on science, denial of climate change/rights of Nature, denial of science, etc. And since these groups they oppose get protection from the government, the prejudiced are neo-liberals who are against social government (and against democracy). A primary doctrine of neo-liberalism is self-reliance and the belief people should take care of themselves on their own and that only the strong survive (social Darwinism). This connects with neo-Nazis too, and with Christian emphasis on "building character."
The Left is social democracy and respect for diversity. The Right-wing is neo-liberalism and prejudice.
We are all 4T at this point. We can't go back.
I agree with all of this except the final thought. Yes, the left is for social democracy and diversity, but the RW (mostly Republicans) are really all-in on prejudice and power. Philosophy on that side be damned. They literally couldn't care less as long as they get to be in charge and be superior to "them". Of course, we're part of "them" so no quarter can be and certainly none given. Biden's decision to push the envolop on vaccination will be their new rallying cry, as they stand n the unemployment line. Question: will refusal to comply be considered a reason to receive benefits? I'll bet it will in places like Florida and Texas.
Regrettably you are right. People who see "their" world slipping away from them often resort to rearguard measures harsher than those of the past. Prejudice whose sole cause is primitive fear and power that one intends to apply without conscience make great evil possible. People with such power and privilege that no longer serves any viable purpose other than to confirm selfish desires can back the worst in reactionary causes and the severest brutality. In the 1930's that expressed itself as fascism and Nazism in Europe. Except that it never got quite the same crushing power to do horrible things on a large scale, that was the KKK in the 1920's... and 1960's.
Such people are not reliable allies of any other than their opportunistic flunkies who take things to extreme risks and extreme disgrace and ruin. Such people often end up hurting those that they intend to protect.
America has been freakishly lax in convincing many people, mostly on the Right, to perceive even the minimal duty to get inoculated so that they can protect everything that matters: their lives, their health, their family members, their co-workers and customers, and their pets -- let alone the ability of the American economy to operate as close to being a market economy as is morally acceptable and to keep budget deficits from spiraling out of control. The time for laxity in demanding that people get inoculated is over. Heck, if I had a pet dog I would get inoculated just to keep the pooch from getting sick and dying of COVID-19. That's before I even mention organ damage, diabetes, sexual dysfunction, cognitive loss, and -- who knows -- cancer and birth defects? (Not proven yet, but I wouldn't rule them out).
Only two imaginable excuses remain for not getting the inoculation: a medical condition or a religious objection (maybe someone can tell me what that is) to getting inoculated. COVID-19 absolutely, positively must die in America if we are to have real freedom.
Freedom has value only if it serves a desirable end. Getting to drive the wrong way on a freeway is not freedom.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
09-10-2021, 02:15 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-10-2021, 05:52 PM by Eric the Green.)
(09-10-2021, 07:59 AM)David Horn Wrote: (09-09-2021, 05:34 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Smart America as you describe it does not exist. left/Democrats cannot be happy with neoliberalism, and are not. Neo-liberalism is exclusively a Republican program at this point. The Left is the opposite of laissez-faire, trickle-down economics. Affluent white Democrats are more radical at this point than Democrats of color. Real America does not exist as you describe it, either. Trump and his followers are as neo-liberal as could be; their policies are neo-liberalism on steroids. Read the 2016 Republican platform and see. The only difference from those merely deluded by neo-liberal Republican "freedom" slogans is that the Trump Republicans are also more-prejudiced. To tear down the administrative state as the Trumpists want-- and carried out in such places as the EPA and the Dept. of Education, is giving big business all the freedom it wants to exploit us and ruin our lives and our planet. And social conservatism/prejudice is at this point intimately connected with neo-liberalism, and has been all along. That is why the policy and slogan of cutting welfare and smaller government appeals to both of these supposedly-different factions. Opposition to welfare is the dog-whistle for prejudiced people to vote for less government, which is allowing business to have fewer taxes and regulations. That's also why Republicans rule the White South these days.
I'm going to disagree with you on this. Neoliberalism is a two-prong offensive:
- Total libertarianism for business, including low to nonexistent taxes and regulation, and
- Liberal social positions, iincluding high support to diversity and other non-economic agendas.
It's not realy a party-centric thing. It's more capitalism centric. The entire point is shielding weath and power from popular backlash that could, and should, upset their little apple cart. Republicans have moved on to authoritarianism as their "final solution". Democrats are just now pulling up their big boy and big girl pants. It's sad that it had to go this far.
... continuing, Eric wrote Wrote:Prejudice" is a convenient term I use which includes white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia, Christian Right, anti-immigrant and so on; and often this includes conspiracy theory and anti-vax these days. It's opposition to women's rights, ethnic rights, gay and transgender rights, rights for young people, immigrant rights, nationalist opposition to foreign trade, foreigners and alliances, support for Christian restrictions on other religions and on science, denial of climate change/rights of Nature, denial of science, etc. And since these groups they oppose get protection from the government, the prejudiced are neo-liberals who are against social government (and against democracy). A primary doctrine of neo-liberalism is self-reliance and the belief people should take care of themselves on their own and that only the strong survive (social Darwinism). This connects with neo-Nazis too, and with Christian emphasis on "building character."
The Left is social democracy and respect for diversity. The Right-wing is neo-liberalism and prejudice.
We are all 4T at this point. We can't go back.
I agree with all of this except the final thought. Yes, the left is for social democracy and diversity, but the RW (mostly Republicans) are really all-in on prejudice and power. Philosophy on that side be damned. They literally couldn't care less as long as they get to be in charge and be superior to "them". Of course, we're part of "them" so no quarter can be and certainly none given. Biden's decision to push the envelope on vaccination will be their new rallyiing cry, as they stand n the unemployment line. Question: will refusal to comply be considered a reason to receive benefits? I'll bet it will in places like Florida and Texas.
Neo-liberalism is mostly an economics ideology only, and supports this goal politically. Synonymns are free-market ideology, libertarian economics, trickle-down economics, Reaganomics, laissez faire, supply-side economics, social darwinism, rugged individualism. It is even more aggressive in its approach than its classical liberal background. I would think everyone here would know this by now. Neo-liberalism has zero to do with:
"Liberal social positions, including high support to diversity and other non-economic agendas."
As I explained, it aligned with the opposite of this, because neo-liberalism is against welfare spending, and this is a tempting, key slogan to get support from many more-poor white people for their promises of lower taxes and less government.
Much is made of Trump's one anti-neoliberal policy: opposition to free trade. But in every other respect, Trump is a neo-liberal, and he accelerated its policies, especially in its attack on the living world in favor of extractive industries.
Classic Xer is a neo-liberal. So is Xenakis. It is a conservative ideology despite its name. It's name derives from the classical liberalism of Adam Smith.
Neo-liberalism is the primary ideology of the Republican Party today. It did get some support during its heyday of power in the 1980s and 1990s from moderate Democrats, who bowed to its power and compromised with it. To a somewhat-lesser degree, so did Obama. The most neo-liberal Democratic president was Bill Clinton, under the guise of "New Democrat." But Clinton still campaigned against "trickle-down economics" vigorously and mentioned in his famous statement that "the era of big government is over" that "we can't go back to the time when people were left to fend for themselves", and he raised the minimum wage and the earned income credit among other more-"liberal" Keynesian or New Deal approaches. But his neo-liberal policies included support for George Bush's NAFTA bill and repeal of Glass-Steagall.
Again, Monbiot explains neo-liberalism here:
My essay gives a lot of background too:
http://philosopherswheel.com/freemarket.html
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
The most obvious reality behind neoliberalism is that it is illiberal. Its claim to liberalism is to support an idea of classical liberalism that morphed into the support of monopoly and cartel capitalism. It is for Free Enterprise -- the freedom of Enterprise to do what it wants, which includes the abolition of labor unions that are the only meaningful protection of workers from employers who would otherwise treat workers as serfs. (Just look at Nazi Germany as an example of how bad working conditions can get in a political order in which Big Government destroys independent labor unions. Nazi Germany is infamous for far worse, but it is worth noting that the British, French, and American occupiers of Germany were swift to re-establish independent trade union. In the near-absence of German Jews, the people that the Western Allies most trusted were the working people that the Nazis exploited so severely... even more than those whose class identity was similar to American, British, and French senior officers.
The neoliberal ideal looks like Pinochet's Chile as economic practices -- dismantling of the welfare state and the complete entrenchment of economic elites -- if allegedly without the brutality. It believes in separating the economy completely from all political and religious purview. It is a statement in favor of pure plutocracy.
To dismantle a welfare state that forms under a democracy requires at the least the dissolution of democracy so that the ruthless and irresponsible elites can restore some Golden Age (really Gilded Age) in which those who own the gold make the rules, and everyone else is expected to go along even at the cost of all personal dignity. Such requires a "temporary" dictatorship (in the sense that Lenin and Stalin called their regimes "temporary" dictatorships which would somehow disappear when they had achieved their social and economic objectives while destroying domestic and foreign threats to the "potential" of "socialist" democracy. That dictatorship lasted nearly three-quarters of a century.
Neoliberalism is not democratic. Although it is liberal to have a Constitution with checks and balances and that establishes the Rule of Law as a norm, taking the overall management of the economy out of the purview of elective politics is not democratic. Economic stewardship is a legitimate and necessary role of elected officials, which explains why the overall consensus in American politics is that Calvin Coolidge was an awful President and FDR was great. FDR saved American capitalism by delivering American capitalism from behaviors that one can best describe as suicidal.
A government with no managerial control of the economy isn't much of a government. It is at most a cabal that serves the loudest special interest of the time. Warmongers who want a war for profit? Shyster financiers who want to expand the role of loan-sharking and to enforce raw deals? Financial bubbles that lead inevitably to severe panics as in 1894, 1907, 1929, and 2008? The last two of those panics were the consequence of governments that saw nothing wrong in a speculative boom that devoured capital without creating genuine growth.
Good government is a balancing act, and often a difficult one made no easier by partisan politics. Personal as well as corporate and governmental responsibility must overpower the lure of easy money. Government must be able to say no -- indeed
HELL NO!
to shysters. People must reject ethnic, regional, and religious bigotry. The neoliberal era in which neoliberal economics dominated the political debate culminated in the rise of Donald Trump, a classic demagogue who appealed to the basest tendencies in human nature while affirming the plutocratic bromide that says
He who owns the gold makes the rules -- oil billionaire H. L. Hunt.
Of course we need an economic order in which small business can flourish in the midst of giant entities that accrete bureaucratic flunkies who have a stake in near-monopoly because those flunkies are well-paid but would fail at anything else that they tried, or at least so perceive*. Of course we need the market part of a social-market economy. We also need a social order that prepares people to be entrepreneurs, professionals, and skilled workers irrespective of their backgrounds. Those who get the most preparation would of course pay the highest taxes... well, if as in Germany you get extensive, highly-subsidized medical training you ought to pay far higher taxes than someone who cleans hotel rooms.
Liberalism means spirited elections for responsible government and protection of us all against the worst. It does not mean serfdom, let alone chattel slavery.
*Are America's bureaucratized corporations that much different than the state apparatus of Oceania in which Winston Smith toils and from which he gets privilege but no happiness in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four? Bureaucratized corporations other than perhaps banks or insurance companies that operate on a cost-plus basis seem to be approaching the end of the line. The distinction between "Too Big to Fail" and "Too Corrupt or Incompetent to Survive" is almost void. I have a thread on the lifecycle of businesses.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 2,936
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2016
(09-10-2021, 02:15 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (09-10-2021, 07:59 AM)David Horn Wrote: (09-09-2021, 05:34 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Smart America as you describe it does not exist. left/Democrats cannot be happy with neoliberalism, and are not. Neo-liberalism is exclusively a Republican program at this point. The Left is the opposite of laissez-faire, trickle-down economics. Affluent white Democrats are more radical at this point than Democrats of color. Real America does not exist as you describe it, either. Trump and his followers are as neo-liberal as could be; their policies are neo-liberalism on steroids. Read the 2016 Republican platform and see. The only difference from those merely deluded by neo-liberal Republican "freedom" slogans is that the Trump Republicans are also more-prejudiced. To tear down the administrative state as the Trumpists want-- and carried out in such places as the EPA and the Dept. of Education, is giving big business all the freedom it wants to exploit us and ruin our lives and our planet. And social conservatism/prejudice is at this point intimately connected with neo-liberalism, and has been all along. That is why the policy and slogan of cutting welfare and smaller government appeals to both of these supposedly-different factions. Opposition to welfare is the dog-whistle for prejudiced people to vote for less government, which is allowing business to have fewer taxes and regulations. That's also why Republicans rule the White South these days.
I'm going to disagree with you on this. Neoliberalism is a two-prong offensive:
- Total libertarianism for business, including low to nonexistent taxes and regulation, and
- Liberal social positions, iincluding high support to diversity and other non-economic agendas.
It's not realy a party-centric thing. It's more capitalism centric. The entire point is shielding weath and power from popular backlash that could, and should, upset their little apple cart. Republicans have moved on to authoritarianism as their "final solution". Democrats are just now pulling up their big boy and big girl pants. It's sad that it had to go this far.
... continuing, Eric wrote Wrote:Prejudice" is a convenient term I use which includes white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia, Christian Right, anti-immigrant and so on; and often this includes conspiracy theory and anti-vax these days. It's opposition to women's rights, ethnic rights, gay and transgender rights, rights for young people, immigrant rights, nationalist opposition to foreign trade, foreigners and alliances, support for Christian restrictions on other religions and on science, denial of climate change/rights of Nature, denial of science, etc. And since these groups they oppose get protection from the government, the prejudiced are neo-liberals who are against social government (and against democracy). A primary doctrine of neo-liberalism is self-reliance and the belief people should take care of themselves on their own and that only the strong survive (social Darwinism). This connects with neo-Nazis too, and with Christian emphasis on "building character."
The Left is social democracy and respect for diversity. The Right-wing is neo-liberalism and prejudice.
We are all 4T at this point. We can't go back.
I agree with all of this except the final thought. Yes, the left is for social democracy and diversity, but the RW (mostly Republicans) are really all-in on prejudice and power. Philosophy on that side be damned. They literally couldn't care less as long as they get to be in charge and be superior to "them". Of course, we're part of "them" so no quarter can be and certainly none given. Biden's decision to push the envelope on vaccination will be their new rallyiing cry, as they stand n the unemployment line. Question: will refusal to comply be considered a reason to receive benefits? I'll bet it will in places like Florida and Texas.
Neo-liberalism is mostly an economics ideology only, and supports this goal politically. Synonymns are free-market ideology, libertarian economics, trickle-down economics, Reaganomics, laissez faire, supply-side economics, social darwinism, rugged individualism. It is even more aggressive in its approach than its classical liberal background. I would think everyone here would know this by now. Neo-liberalism has zero to do with:
"Liberal social positions, including high support to diversity and other non-economic agendas."
As I explained, it aligned with the opposite of this, because neo-liberalism is against welfare spending, and this is a tempting, key slogan to get support from many more-poor white people for their promises of lower taxes and less government.
Much is made of Trump's one anti-neoliberal policy: opposition to free trade. But in every other respect, Trump is a neo-liberal, and he accelerated its policies, especially in its attack on the living world in favor of extractive industries.
Classic Xer is a neo-liberal. So is Xenakis. It is a conservative ideology despite its name. It's name derives from the classical liberalism of Adam Smith.
Neo-liberalism is the primary ideology of the Republican Party today. It did get some support during its heyday of power in the 1980s and 1990s from moderate Democrats, who bowed to its power and compromised with it. To a somewhat-lesser degree, so did Obama. The most neo-liberal Democratic president was Bill Clinton, under the guise of "New Democrat." But Clinton still campaigned against "trickle-down economics" vigorously and mentioned in his famous statement that "the era of big government is over" that "we can't go back to the time when people were left to fend for themselves", and he raised the minimum wage and the earned income credit among other more-"liberal" Keynesian or New Deal approaches. But his neo-liberal policies included support for George Bush's NAFTA bill and repeal of Glass-Steagall.
Again, Monbiot explains neo-liberalism here:
My essay gives a lot of background too:
http://philosopherswheel.com/freemarket.html
I'm not a Neo Liberal. I'm a Classical Liberal.
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
Classical liberalism is dead. The technologies of our modern world and the much larger population make the norms of pre-industrial America (the time of the Founding Fathers) impractical.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 4,336
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2016
(09-11-2021, 04:38 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I'm not a Neo Liberal. I'm a Classical Liberal.
Yes, I agreee. You are an economic libertarian and a social conservative. That means that the ones with the gold make the rules, in your view at least. In my opinion you shouldn't cling too tight to that view. It may prove toxic.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
09-12-2021, 11:42 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-12-2021, 11:58 AM by Eric the Green.)
(09-12-2021, 09:09 AM)David Horn Wrote: (09-11-2021, 04:38 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I'm not a Neo Liberal. I'm a Classical Liberal.
Yes, I agreee. You are an economic libertarian and a social conservative. That means that the ones with the gold make the rules, in your view at least. In my opinion you shouldn't cling too tight to that view. It may prove toxic.
No, you are a neo-liberal, and a social conservative, which today blend together in most conservative opinion. Some neo-liberals can separate their economic libertarianism from prejudice (social conservatism); you and most others do not.
A neo-liberal IS an economic libertarian, and that is all that a neo-liberal is per se. The terms are synonymous, except that it is said that neo-liberals are more aggressive than classical economic libertarians, because they not only allow business to do what it wants, but insist on and develop policies to force everyone and many other nations and peoples to do so.
Classic Xer is an ultra-typical example of how someone's resentment against welfare spending that benefits ethnic groups and immigrants, boosts their desire to see "smaller government", less regulation, and above all, lower taxes, and lower spending for social programs. And since neo-liberals are ardent believers in the trickle-down theory, they don't care whose taxes are lowered. Reducing taxes on rich people equates for neo-liberals giving more prosperity to "job creaters".
And since poor and middle class, mostly-older-white neo-liberals are convinced that they are "self-reliant" and of "strong character," they also don't want taxes lowered on rich people because they really believe they may be rich themselves one day, and want to be because it's a dog eat dog, social-darwinist world. And of course these self-reliant, mostly-white, mostly-older folks are the true "Americans." Because that's the true original American way, before all these immigrants were allowed in, and before non-whites were given all their extra advantages thanks to critical race theory.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(09-11-2021, 07:23 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: The most obvious reality behind neoliberalism is that it is illiberal. Its claim to liberalism is to support an idea of classical liberalism that morphed into the support of monopoly and cartel capitalism. It is for Free Enterprise -- the freedom of Enterprise to do what it wants, which includes the abolition of labor unions that are the only meaningful protection of workers from employers who would otherwise treat workers as serfs. (Just look at Nazi Germany as an example of how bad working conditions can get in a political order in which Big Government destroys independent labor unions. Nazi Germany is infamous for far worse, but it is worth noting that the British, French, and American occupiers of Germany were swift to re-establish independent trade union. In the near-absence of German Jews, the people that the Western Allies most trusted were the working people that the Nazis exploited so severely... even more than those whose class identity was similar to American, British, and French senior officers.
The neoliberal ideal looks like Pinochet's Chile as economic practices -- dismantling of the welfare state and the complete entrenchment of economic elites -- if allegedly without the brutality. It believes in separating the economy completely from all political and religious purview. It is a statement in favor of pure plutocracy.
To dismantle a welfare state that forms under a democracy requires at the least the dissolution of democracy so that the ruthless and irresponsible elites can restore some Golden Age (really Gilded Age) in which those who own the gold make the rules, and everyone else is expected to go along even at the cost of all personal dignity. Such requires a "temporary" dictatorship (in the sense that Lenin and Stalin called their regimes "temporary" dictatorships which would somehow disappear when they had achieved their social and economic objectives while destroying domestic and foreign threats to the "potential" of "socialist" democracy. That dictatorship lasted nearly three-quarters of a century.
Neoliberalism is not democratic. Although it is liberal to have a Constitution with checks and balances and that establishes the Rule of Law as a norm, taking the overall management of the economy out of the purview of elective politics is not democratic. Economic stewardship is a legitimate and necessary role of elected officials, which explains why the overall consensus in American politics is that Calvin Coolidge was an awful President and FDR was great. FDR saved American capitalism by delivering American capitalism from behaviors that one can best describe as suicidal.
A government with no managerial control of the economy isn't much of a government. It is at most a cabal that serves the loudest special interest of the time. Warmongers who want a war for profit? Shyster financiers who want to expand the role of loan-sharking and to enforce raw deals? Financial bubbles that lead inevitably to severe panics as in 1894, 1907, 1929, and 2008? The last two of those panics were the consequence of governments that saw nothing wrong in a speculative boom that devoured capital without creating genuine growth.
Good government is a balancing act, and often a difficult one made no easier by partisan politics. Personal as well as corporate and governmental responsibility must overpower the lure of easy money. Government must be able to say no -- indeed
HELL NO!
to shysters. People must reject ethnic, regional, and religious bigotry. The neoliberal era in which neoliberal economics dominated the political debate culminated in the rise of Donald Trump, a classic demagogue who appealed to the basest tendencies in human nature while affirming the plutocratic bromide that says
He who owns the gold makes the rules -- oil billionaire H. L. Hunt.
Of course we need an economic order in which small business can flourish in the midst of giant entities that accrete bureaucratic flunkies who have a stake in near-monopoly because those flunkies are well-paid but would fail at anything else that they tried, or at least so perceive*. Of course we need the market part of a social-market economy. We also need a social order that prepares people to be entrepreneurs, professionals, and skilled workers irrespective of their backgrounds. Those who get the most preparation would of course pay the highest taxes... well, if as in Germany you get extensive, highly-subsidized medical training you ought to pay far higher taxes than someone who cleans hotel rooms.
Liberalism means spirited elections for responsible government and protection of us all against the worst. It does not mean serfdom, let alone chattel slavery.
*Are America's bureaucratized corporations that much different than the state apparatus of Oceania in which Winston Smith toils and from which he gets privilege but no happiness in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four? Bureaucratized corporations other than perhaps banks or insurance companies that operate on a cost-plus basis seem to be approaching the end of the line. The distinction between "Too Big to Fail" and "Too Corrupt or Incompetent to Survive" is almost void. I have a thread on the lifecycle of businesses.
Well said, and I'm glad to quote it.
Posts: 546
Threads: 59
Joined: Nov 2016
I'm more in agreement with David's perspective (neoliberalism is economically libertarian and socially liberal) than with Eric's (neoliberalism is the platform of Trump/GOP).
I see neoliberalism as supporting globalization, freedom of capital and labor movement, and multiculturalism - which Trump supporters oppose.
I will acknowledge that maybe the Patriot Party isn't "Real America," as described by George Packer in his article, but perhaps "Free America." Actually, I see both factions visible in the Trump voting bloc:
Free America: you can't tell me what to do! (Anti-maskers/anti-vaxxers/anti-lockdowners.)
Real America: we need to go back to when America was great! (White Christian nationalists.)
Surely the energy from both of these factions was present at the Jan 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Steve Barrera
[A]lthough one would like to change today's world back to the spirit of one hundred years or more ago, it cannot be done. Thus it is important to make the best out of every generation. - Hagakure
Saecular Pages
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(09-12-2021, 01:15 PM)sbarrera Wrote: I'm more in agreement with David's perspective (neoliberalism is economically libertarian and socially liberal) than with Eric's (neoliberalism is the platform of Trump/GOP).
I see neoliberalism as supporting globalization, freedom of capital and labor movement, and multiculturalism - which Trump supporters oppose.
I will acknowledge that maybe the Patriot Party isn't "Real America," as described by George Packer in his article, but perhaps "Free America." Actually, I see both factions visible in the Trump voting bloc:
Free America: you can't tell me what to do! (Anti-maskers/anti-vaxxers/anti-lockdowners.)
Real America: we need to go back to when America was great! (White Christian nationalists.)
Surely the energy from both of these factions was present at the Jan 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Again, far too much is made of Trump's views that are not neo-liberal on that one issue of trade. Trump is a nationalist, which is socially conservative. Neo-liberalism does not support multi-culturalism. Freedom of capital and labor movement, yes. Neo-liberals are aligned with social conservatives. There's just no way they can be called liberal on social issues. Maybe the Libertarian Party can be called that. But not neo-liberals, who are mostly Republicans. The Libertarian Party does not quite equal neo-liberalism. I can go with the idea that a relatively few neo-liberals are not passionately prejudiced or socially conservative. No political box can contain absolutely everyone. But the best we can say about them is that they are neutral, or don't care; not liberal. Given their strong agreement on welfare spending, neo-liberals and social conservatives are natural allies, and they vote the same way. I don't see how anyone can ignore that.
Calling the anti-vaxxers etc. "free America" is to buy into their tragically-false narrative. It is liberals and social liberals who uphold freedom, civil rights, voting rights, democracy, free speech and press. Trump anti-maskers do not support any of those things, and certainly their leader does not. And "real America" is far too complimentary a term for social conservatives. There is nothing real about superstition and prejudice.
There's just no way to cut through the polarization and divide by trying to assign some ideas that real liberals might sympathize with to the other side. No, one side is right, and the other side is wrong. One side needs to win, and the other side needs to lose. We are 4T and we can't go back. We have to fight it out the best way we can.
If people want to say "be civil," I understand. A few people from the wrong side can be peeled off, and not by me calling them wrong. I understand. But that does not mean we can weasel our way out of the divide and the real problems by glossing over them.
Posts: 2,936
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2016
(09-12-2021, 09:29 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (09-12-2021, 01:15 PM)sbarrera Wrote: I'm more in agreement with David's perspective (neoliberalism is economically libertarian and socially liberal) than with Eric's (neoliberalism is the platform of Trump/GOP).
I see neoliberalism as supporting globalization, freedom of capital and labor movement, and multiculturalism - which Trump supporters oppose.
I will acknowledge that maybe the Patriot Party isn't "Real America," as described by George Packer in his article, but perhaps "Free America." Actually, I see both factions visible in the Trump voting bloc:
Free America: you can't tell me what to do! (Anti-maskers/anti-vaxxers/anti-lockdowners.)
Real America: we need to go back to when America was great! (White Christian nationalists.)
Surely the energy from both of these factions was present at the Jan 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Again, far too much is made of Trump's views that are not neo-liberal on that one issue of trade. Trump is a nationalist, which is socially conservative. Neo-liberalism does not support multi-culturalism. Freedom of capital and labor movement, yes. Neo-liberals are aligned with social conservatives. There's just no way they can be called liberal on social issues. Maybe the Libertarian Party can be called that. But not neo-liberals, who are mostly Republicans. The Libertarian Party does not quite equal neo-liberalism. I can go with the idea that a relatively few neo-liberals are not passionately prejudiced or socially conservative. No political box can contain absolutely everyone. But the best we can say about them is that they are neutral, or don't care; not liberal. Given their strong agreement on welfare spending, neo-liberals and social conservatives are natural allies, and they vote the same way. I don't see how anyone can ignore that.
Calling the anti-vaxxers etc. "free America" is to buy into their tragically-false narrative. It is liberals and social liberals who uphold freedom, civil rights, voting rights, democracy, free speech and press. Trump anti-maskers do not support any of those things, and certainly their leader does not. And "real America" is far too complimentary a term for social conservatives. There is nothing real about superstition and prejudice.
There's just no way to cut through the polarization and divide by trying to assign some ideas that real liberals might sympathize with to the other side. No, one side is right, and the other side is wrong. One side needs to win, and the other side needs to lose. We are 4T and we can't go back. We have to fight it out the best way we can.
If people want to say "be civil," I understand. A few people from the wrong side can be peeled off, and not by me calling them wrong. I understand. But that does not mean we can weasel our way out of the divide and the real problems by glossing over them.
How many lower income voters (white, black, brown ect) do the Progressives have a financial/personal hold over these days? How many union workers (government employee's and other union related employees) does the Democratic party have a financial/ personal hold over these days? How many workers associated with non profit organizations/small businesses and other interest groups reliant upon grants and other forms of government spending does the party have a financial/financial hold over these days?
The Republicans don't have that luxury. The Republicans don't have a major hold over its based and they don't have the luxury of being able to continue fucking up and advancing/promoting morons either. You'll disagree as usual but social democracy or democratic socialism is weakening the integrity and destroying democracy as we speak. America isn't going to sit around and allow the Democratic gravy train/clown show to continue. You are going to start seeing obvious signs of a national split. Once it begins, there's nothing that you or the Democrats are going to be able to do to stop it. Since the Democratic side is mainly city related and heavily reliant open the rest of the country for food, supplies, tax revenues and so forth, the Democrats are going to find themselves being bent over a barrel pretty kick. You just witnessed another prelude of what's to come. Did the recent fall of Afghanistan look like fun? You just wait and see what happens in your neck of the when America withdraws from Acirema. It's going to be a shit show.
|
