+- Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory (http://generational-theory.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Fourth Turning Forums (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Current Events (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-34.html)
+---- Forum: General Political Discussion (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-15.html)
+---- Thread: The Partisan Divide on Issues (/thread-3410.html)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - pbrower2a - 12-13-2019
I do not accuse President Trump of fomenting antisemitic violence directly.He is creating a climate of hate by stoking resentments that can go violent. He has done little to make America a better place for people not already filthy rich.
Economic resentments often lead to religious and ethnic bigotry, and bigotry erodes the civility that makes domestic tranquility possible. Face it -- under-educated white people are being left behind, and some of them shout "Jews will not replace us!" (presumably with non-white people).
I recognize an ironic affinity to Jews through the German part of my heritage. When Germany was a leader in cultural creativity (that ended in 1933, and if you want some idea of how great Germany could have been in cultural creativity, then just look at German cinema around 1930. That talent did not fade away; the Jewish part found its way to Hollywood. Jewish actors, writers, and directors endowed America with cinematic masterpieces still eminently watchable to this day. Germany became for all practical purposes a cultural fossil.
But it goes beyond that. Even with the crony capitalism that we now endure as neoliberalism we still have some room for spectacular achievement. People not at the top of the game will get the dubious privilege of survival at the terms of an economic and administrative elites who recognize no right for the person of ordinary talent to do anything other than to suffer for the gain, indulgence, and power of those elites. Those elites seek monopoly control over everything.They want a few giant corporations to control everything. So if you want to start a small business -- you can no longer operate a store, restaurant, or bank as a cottage industry. Even the tax laws strongly favor the dinosaurs of our time... and don't let me get into the power of advertising. So if you want to be an independent professional you will have to start with gigantic student loans.
The bad parts of our heritage bite us back when the economic elites go from being innovators who make improvements the quality of life for most people (what Arnold Toynbee called a creative elite) into one adept at commanding its subjects into making great sacrifices just for the questionable survival (which is what Toynbee's dominant elite does).
Maybe we cannot quite return to chattel slavery, but much of America can revert to the debt-bondage of sharecropping. Thoroughly-rotten social orders have a missionary zeal to spread the nastiness where such is unwelcome --which means that Manifest Destiny might get a sick revival.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - Classic-Xer - 12-14-2019
(12-13-2019, 12:32 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: I do not accuse President Trump of fomenting antisemitic violence directly.He is creating a climate of hate by stoking resentments that can go violent. He has done little to make America a better place for people not already filthy rich.Who is creating the bulk of the resentment these days? Think about it. Trump says something true/real to a group of Americans relating to illegal immigration and the liberal media portrays it as meaning something else and immediately calls him a racist for doing it and associates him with supremacist groups and then associates all of us with them too. I wonder how many acts of violence are somehow or another related to liberal media these days? In case you don't know, the liberal media of today is much more irresponsible in nature and much more incompetent than the liberal media of the Walter Cronkite era. Think about it. The Republican side, or American side as I view it these days, won't be returning to being ruled by Monarchs/foreign powers or slavery or indentured servitude or powerless peasants or socialism/Communism or Fascism either. However, I wouldn't rule out it's use of good old fashioned American Imperialism from time to time.
Economic resentments often lead to religious and ethnic bigotry, and bigotry erodes the civility that makes domestic tranquility possible. Face it -- under-educated white people are being left behind, and some of them shout "Jews will not replace us!" (presumably with non-white people).
I recognize an ironic affinity to Jews through the German part of my heritage. When Germany was a leader in cultural creativity (that ended in 1933, and if you want some idea of how great Germany could have been in cultural creativity, then just look at German cinema around 1930. That talent did not fade away; the Jewish part found its way to Hollywood. Jewish actors, writers, and directors endowed America with cinematic masterpieces still eminently watchable to this day. Germany became for all practical purposes a cultural fossil.
But it goes beyond that. Even with the crony capitalism that we now endure as neoliberalism we still have some room for spectacular achievement. People not at the top of the game will get the dubious privilege of survival at the terms of an economic and administrative elites who recognize no right for the person of ordinary talent to do anything other than to suffer for the gain, indulgence, and power of those elites. Those elites seek monopoly control over everything.They want a few giant corporations to control everything. So if you want to start a small business -- you can no longer operate a store, restaurant, or bank as a cottage industry. Even the tax laws strongly favor the dinosaurs of our time... and don't let me get into the power of advertising. So if you want to be an independent professional you will have to start with gigantic student loans.
The bad parts of our heritage bite us back when the economic elites go from being innovators who make improvements the quality of life for most people (what Arnold Toynbee called a creative elite) into one adept at commanding its subjects into making great sacrifices just for the questionable survival (which is what Toynbee's dominant elite does).
Maybe we cannot quite return to chattel slavery, but much of America can revert to the debt-bondage of sharecropping. Thoroughly-rotten social orders have a missionary zeal to spread the nastiness where such is unwelcome --which means that Manifest Destiny might get a sick revival.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - Classic-Xer - 12-14-2019
(12-12-2019, 02:20 PM)David Horn Wrote: At this moment in time, both parties are largely "owned" by the wealthy elites, but it's the GOP that is doing it's level best to make that even worse. Citizens United is the product of a conservative court, bent on protecting the rights of wealthy. The Dems are the second raters here. So wanting to escape the control of the overlords by supporting the GOP is the world's greatest exercise in futility.I happen to believe in the notion that action speaks louder than words. So, I tend to focus/ judge more on actions than words. How many brushes with poverty have you experienced in life? I've experienced three during my life so far. The first was the worst because I was pretty powerless at the time. The last one was the worst as far as overall financial losses. Right now, I'm actually more than a couple steps away from poverty. I'm pretty familiar with ex urban areas and ex urban people. Honestly, I don't know of many or have met many ex urban folks who seem to be financially hurting these days. So, I doubt that you're a couple of steps away from poverty either unless you're completely dependent on your wife or something. Yes, it's easy to control people who are at risk. I'd say that Liberals know/ understand that better than anyone else right now.
Be aware of the actions not the words. The GOP cuts taxes on the rich and removes restrictions on how they can use their wealth. That enables the virtually unlimited right to use wealth to undermine democracy and we're already pretty far along on that journey. Next up: anarchy, because only the rich and powerful have control in a wide open game. Everyone else is one or two steps away from poverty -- you and me included. It's easy to control people who are at risk.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - pbrower2a - 12-15-2019
(12-14-2019, 02:45 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(12-13-2019, 12:32 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: I do not accuse President Trump of fomenting antisemitic violence directly.He is creating a climate of hate by stoking resentments that can go violent. He has done little to make America a better place for people not already filthy rich.
Economic resentments often lead to religious and ethnic bigotry, and bigotry erodes the civility that makes domestic tranquility possible. Face it -- under-educated white people are being left behind, and some of them shout "Jews will not replace us!" (presumably with non-white people).
I recognize an ironic affinity to Jews through the German part of my heritage. When Germany was a leader in cultural creativity (that ended in 1933, and if you want some idea of how great Germany could have been in cultural creativity, then just look at German cinema around 1930. That talent did not fade away; the Jewish part found its way to Hollywood. Jewish actors, writers, and directors endowed America with cinematic masterpieces still eminently watchable to this day. Germany became for all practical purposes a cultural fossil.
But it goes beyond that. Even with the crony capitalism that we now endure as neoliberalism we still have some room for spectacular achievement. People not at the top of the game will get the dubious privilege of survival at the terms of an economic and administrative elites who recognize no right for the person of ordinary talent to do anything other than to suffer for the gain, indulgence, and power of those elites. Those elites seek monopoly control over everything.They want a few giant corporations to control everything. So if you want to start a small business -- you can no longer operate a store, restaurant, or bank as a cottage industry. Even the tax laws strongly favor the dinosaurs of our time... and don't let me get into the power of advertising. So if you want to be an independent professional you will have to start with gigantic student loans.
The bad parts of our heritage bite us back when the economic elites go from being innovators who make improvements the quality of life for most people (what Arnold Toynbee called a creative elite) into one adept at commanding its subjects into making great sacrifices just for the questionable survival (which is what Toynbee's dominant elite does).
Maybe we cannot quite return to chattel slavery, but much of America can revert to the debt-bondage of sharecropping. Thoroughly-rotten social orders have a missionary zeal to spread the nastiness where such is unwelcome --which means that Manifest Destiny might get a sick revival.
Who is creating the bulk of the resentment these days? Think about it. Trump says something true/real to a group of Americans relating to illegal immigration and the liberal media portrays it as meaning something else and immediately calls him a racist for doing it and associates him with supremacist groups and then associates all of us with them too. I wonder how many acts of violence are somehow or another related to liberal media these days? In case you don't know, the liberal media of today is much more irresponsible in nature and much more incompetent than the liberal media of the Walter Cronkite era. Think about it. The Republican side, or American side as I view it these days, won't be returning to being ruled by Monarchs/foreign powers or slavery or indentured servitude or powerless peasants or socialism/Communism or Fascism either. However, I wouldn't rule out it's use of good old fashioned American Imperialism from time to time.
Donald Trump habitually tells half-truths to people that he knows will accept what he says. The illegal immigrant is in America most likely to escape an economic catastrophe or violence in the home country. There are some genuine hell-holes in some Central American countries in which drug lords (who exploit the literal blood money that American addicts supply by buying illegal drugs) create climates of violence. So suppose that you are from such a place and you can get a job as a domestic servant or farm laborer in America to support yourself and your kids (who will assimilate into the well-established Hispanic population) well away from a war zone... you might do it too. Remember: Hispanics on the whole cherish their children.
I would blame America's addicts -- wouldn't you?
Trump gets people angry... and angry people look for objects of hatred. People who don't look like them or who have a different religion? I contrast Ronald Reagan, who officially excoriated religious and ethnic bigotry as much as a typical liberal of the time would. Trump goes quiet, and his silence makes all sorts of mischief possible. The man who shot up the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh had as his apparent motivation that its members were aiding 'foreigners', typically Hispanic.
Media are not what they were in the era of Walter Cronkite, Howard K. Smith, Chet Huntley, and David Brinkley. Those people knew that the 30-minute newscast was at most a digest of daily news collected as the most important news happened -- during the working day. I imagine myself as a journalist of the Edgar R. Murrow type... and if I were I would expose Donald Trump for his amorality and suspect loyalty. I can imagine the final monologue relating to the intimidation of the new President of Ukraine...
"Congress recognized the plight of Ukraine, and apportioned funds to help Ukraine defend itself from Russian efforts to slice pieces of it way and weaken it enough so that Ukraine can be a puppet state. Our President made receipt of such funds as Congress, in one of its few bipartisan efforts, has allocated contingent upon the President of Ukraine starting an investigation of the son of one of his opponents in the next election. This is not how Congress does foreign policy; it does not authorize the President to blackmail a foreign leader to aid in his partisan agenda. What President Trump has done requires a cool, calculated response of impeachment. We need resolve more than we need passion".
OK, so we have 24-hour news, and plenty of time to fill. So we have fluff such as stories on entertainment, fashion, and sports. So we have Maybe the 'conservative' outlets such as FoX "News" fill the time with crime stories that get people angry before the political news reaches the viewers. Analysis can be useful... but it can also be consummately manipulative. Beyond any question, FoX "News" is far better at getting its point across because its producers know how to turn the knobs on its habitual viewers.
There's nothing wrong with watching much news... but considering that the usual purpose of news is to be better informed than those who do not watch so much news, FoX News has been less effective at informing people. So a few years ago a study was made on the usual news sources that people had and whether they got the basic facts right. On the Second Gulf War, people were asked whether they accepted these things as true
1. Saddam Hussein had an ongoing program of weapons of mass destruction
2. Saddam Hussein was a supporter of terrorism
3. Saddam Hussein was involved somehow in the 9/11 attack.
All three statements were false. People who relied upon print newspapers or upon news magazines (Time, Newsweek, US News and World Report), people who relied upon CNN or MSNBC, people who relied heavily upon foreign news sources, people who got their news from PBS or NPR, and (surprisingly) people who got their analysis from Comedy Central's The Daily Show were much more likely to get the story right. People who relied upon the thirty-minute nightly news of ABC, CBS, and NBC were more likely to get it wrong (thirty-minute newscasts are superficial, and even Cronkite told people to read a newspaper to get more data). Local broadcast news is even more superficial, and those who relied upon local newscasts tended to get the story wrong. But people in those two categories were getting little news of any kind. People relying upon FoX News were watching much news -- and they were likely to get those statements wrong.
OK, Saddam Hussein was a genocidal tyrant and a pathological liar, and if the world quit watching him he might try to develop, buy, or steal weapons of mass destruction. The Soviet Union and Russia were similarly fussy as we were about missile programs... and for good reason. The range of Iraqi missiles at one time went deep into the USSR. I am glad that he is gone... Still, watching news programming implies a sacrifice, and one had better be better informed. There more that people watch FoX News Channel, the more likely they are to be wrong. That is tragic.
FoX News Channel is not a reliable source!
...I am not concerned about the difference between a constitutional monarchy and a republic. "Republic" all too often means that the system does not have a crowned head. The Queen of England does not scare me, but the President of Syria does. The heated debate in American politics today is whether the President has dictatorial powers as the current President wishes.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - Eric the Green - 12-15-2019
(12-10-2019, 08:19 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(12-09-2019, 08:50 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Tulsi does have those appealing qualities, which is reflected in her above average horoscope score and an even higher score for advantage in the party. However, her deceptions and failures have discredited her, and so her stock is falling. She made an unjustified slap at Buttigieg at the last debate, which revealed these tendencies again. She may hang on for a while in the current race because of her media appeal and borderline charisma, and so forth, but I don't see her anymore as a potential party leader, at least not for a long while. She has sabotaged herself badly.What deceptions and personal failures of hers are you speaking of? I don't know her personally and I'm not all that familiar with her politically either.
Americans approaching retirement are not going to favor messing with social security and medicare, as Mitch, Donald and the other Republicans you vote for want to do. We all know how you, Mr. Classic, are a typical representative of those Americans whose priorities are keeping their guns, keeping immigrants out, keeping their taxes from going for welfare, as well as upholding outdated and phony Christian values. I am glad you are here to represent these views, but being a clear example of these distorted and deceptive priorities and values is also valuable as exhibiting how narrowly-focused on the wrong things your "red" Republican side is. And falling for Trump's ploy that immigrants are "militarized" or "terrorists" etc. just shows how easily duped you can be, sorry to say.
Time to go the quote route on this, dear Classic!
I don't know much about Tulsi's "personal" failures; I speak of her announced policies and prejudices. She approved openly of Putin's war crime of bombing of innocent people in northern Syria to support the tyrant Assad, and does not recognize that the Syria civil war is an Arab Spring uprising of the people of Syria for freedom against their brutal dictator. Assad answered them by mowing them down with gas, tanks and barrel bombs, just because they wanted action on their drought and the resulting needs of the people. And they wanted more freedom like the other young people rising up in 2011. Assad has now killed over 400,000 of these people, and tortured and exiled most of the rest. Tulsi's background is that of a warrior against Islam and a Hindu nationalist. Her professions of opposition to regime change wars may be relevant, but they are entirely dishonest.
Quote: What is the small time mayor of South Bend, Indiana doing running for President of the United States? No offense but that seems like a major leap to me. Is he viewed by the liberal establishment as someone extra special and therefore politically untouchable or something. What, can't a more independent Democratic woman like her take a swipe at a fellow Democratic gay guy who probably shouldn't be there in the first place? Did she or did she not deliver the blows that eliminated a US Senator? I'm sure if she's capable of doing that, she's capable of doing it to a city mayor. I'm also sure that blue beta women with power given to them by fake liberal alpha women/men who inherited their power are either directly threatened or extremely jealous of a more natural alpha type woman who looks better them without as much make up or high priced work done to their faces.
I agree about Buttigieg. I don't think he should be running, and I don't think he can win. He's declining in the polls now. I think that started recently, rather than because of Tulsi's jabs at him, which did more harm to herself because it was more of her dishonest rhetoric about her supposed opposition to wars. The polls and the pundits all agreed she lost this debate. But Tulsi, being an attractive and skilled candidate, is recovering from this. I think Tulsi was more effective taking down Kamala Harris, who had no chance to win to begin with.
Quote:I don't think the Republicans are going to touch social security or medicare. I think they're more likely to strengthen it by accepting minor increases to the percentages and by eliminating all kinds of wasteful and needless spending at home and abroad to shore up their funding. Personally, I don't care if California and other blue states accept the full burden and the full responsibility for supporting its low end legal and low end illegal populations and forces every American Democratic voter and every Republican voter who live there to pay much higher taxes to completely pay for them all.We in CA probably will do that. But Mitch has already stated his intention to reduce social security. Cutting waste by Republicans usually translates to cutting help for people who need it. As a liberal, I have an awareness that having a system to protect others who may be left out in the cold by ruthless businessmen and rampant speculation/recessions protects me and my friends as well. None of us is self-reliant or immune to such events. The wasteful spending is mostly on the military side, as I see it. Right now, politicians of both sides are kicking the can of our horrendous debt down the road rather than seeking to eliminate actual waste or raise taxes to pay for what we spend tax money for instead of borrowing like there's no tomorrow.
Quote:Dude, who do I have a problem with these days. The welfare recipient who has been taught to take advantage and accept whatever is available to them exclusively for basically nothing or the Quasi socialists promoting it as being best for America and the Quasi socialist system in charge of diving it up and redistributing the bulk of the wealth to themselves and then distributing the morsel of what's left to those that liberals claim to need it the most to live. You, you view it more as an insurance that prevents you from being killed, robbed or beaten by the worst minority or white groups of the lot so to speak. Guess what, the Quasi Socialists ain't dumb people either.
Yes. Right now, welfare has already been cut to the bone and Clinton/Gingrich reduced it so that people can't take advantage of it, but many fall through the cracks. I was in favor of moderate reform back then, which might have reduced welfare for people who never wanted to contribute even though they could. But now I am more liberal about it, because I see that our economy is being reduced to robots and being sent overseas, and our workers have no unions or any bargaining power. The value of work is being destroyed, so on what basis can trickle-down libertarian economics schemes base their denunciations of welfare? Who is going to buy what the owners make with their machines? Other machines? Meanwhile the owners get 300 times more in salaries than workers, and Trump and the Republicans are making this inequality worse. The economy is recovering OK right now, but most of the benefits still go to the top while most still struggle to barely make it. This unequal and poor economy is what Republicans have created, and what people who vote Republican, vote for.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - Eric the Green - 12-15-2019
(12-11-2019, 06:13 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(12-10-2019, 08:04 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:Well, all that I can try to tell you is that if you and others continue to vote to give the rich and your liberal representatives more power over you and your decisions and the power to wittle down and take away American choices and American rights. You may end up powerless and unable to vote to change anything or stop anything and end being rounded up like cattle and exterminated like those in Nazi Germany/Europe and else where beyond our American borders.(12-10-2019, 11:50 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(12-09-2019, 09:00 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: No-one wants a civil war, but if states seceded, which side would fight to keep all the states in the union? My guess is that the blue side would say fine, good riddance, go try it your way, while the red side would fight and invade and try to keep blue seceding states in the union. Unconsciously, the red states know they could not go on without the blue states, who supply the financial support disproportionately to them. The red side is also the one that values American empire, and so a smaller USA does not appeal to them. It is clearly the blue side that values the constitution, whereas the red side only values its cult leader who violates it.If the Quasi Socialists valued the US Constitution as they often claim, the Quasi Socialists/Liberals/Progressives and their global citizens wouldn't always be talking about changing it in ways that either suit or serve their own interests. I hope this is written well enough for everyone to read and understand clearly because it's the truth.
Republicans do not want to address any issues. They only want to stoke resentment and fear with the false slogans of keeping immigrants out, keeping citizens armed with military weapons, making abortion illegal and keeping tax money from going to welfare. Your side does not want to address the real issues of poverty and inequality, discrimination and police shootings, gun violence, sky-high national debt caused by war/defense spending, pollution and climate change, and erosion of democracy and human rights. You guys don't care about these issues. You only care about keeping America white, armed, neo-liberal and Christian. It's a losing battle even if you fight it.
Valuing the Constitution does not mean that one has a certain view on social or cultural issues. Process and the relations between different branches of government or between state and federal governments, and the validity of decisions of the US Supreme Court are different matters.
The Constitution does not preclude a socialist economic structure (whether such is wise is a matter for elections to resolve, and such is clear from the absence of a Socialist party reminiscent of Labour in Britain or Social Democrats in Germany. The Constitution was once compatible with chattel slavery. It is a living document in the sense that it can adapt to economic and technological change.
Quote:I don't know about democracy eroding like you claim is happening but I do know that America will be voting again in 2020. I love the way that you and every other Quasi Socialist acts as if they have some sort of right to tell me what I care about and what I think/believe and what/who I am and so forth. Hint, don't ever do that in real life with anyone other than one of your own because they're about the only ones that people like you are free to do so with these days. Republicans don't need to address those issues that you need/want them to address because those issues aren't viewed as important or as prevalent by their base these day. Reds are pretty much content with whatever they've got, their lifestyle and so forth. I'd say the so called American Empire would be content with keeping what it already has right now. How much of your state is currently American owned vs globally/ foreign owned these days?
Donald Trump stands for socialism for the rich -- crony capitalism. Just like everyone else, you have your concern, and those may be as legitimate as mine. The Constitution grants us no inherent right to choose our economic condition, let alone the "lifestyles" . Many of us have found life an utter disappointment because of character traits not of our choosing. American capitalism seems now to operate on the assumption that it needs severe poverty as a cudgel to get people to make great sacrifices on behalf of an economic elite whose gain, indulgence, and power is the rightful purpose in all 'patriotic' American lives even if such means otherwise-pointless death, as from wars for profit.
But doesn't your reference to "American rights" refer mostly to the "right" to own and use semi-automatic guns? Whose only purpose is not to make you powerful, which they cannot do, but to enable nuts to gun down dozens or hundreds of people they mostly don't even know in public places?
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - David Horn - 12-16-2019
(12-14-2019, 03:48 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(12-12-2019, 02:20 PM)David Horn Wrote: At this moment in time, both parties are largely "owned" by the wealthy elites, but it's the GOP that is doing it's level best to make that even worse. Citizens United is the product of a conservative court, bent on protecting the rights of wealthy. The Dems are the second raters here. So wanting to escape the control of the overlords by supporting the GOP is the world's greatest exercise in futility.
Be aware of the actions not the words. The GOP cuts taxes on the rich and removes restrictions on how they can use their wealth. That enables the virtually unlimited right to use wealth to undermine democracy and we're already pretty far along on that journey. Next up: anarchy, because only the rich and powerful have control in a wide open game. Everyone else is one or two steps away from poverty -- you and me included. It's easy to control people who are at risk.
I happen to believe in the notion that action speaks louder than words. So, I tend to focus/ judge more on actions than words. How many brushes with poverty have you experienced in life? I've experienced three during my life so far. The first was the worst because I was pretty powerless at the time. The last one was the worst as far as overall financial losses. Right now, I'm actually more than a couple steps away from poverty. I'm pretty familiar with ex urban areas and ex urban people. Honestly, I don't know of many or have met many ex urban folks who seem to be financially hurting these days. So, I doubt that you're a couple of steps away from poverty either unless you're completely dependent on your wife or something. Yes, it's easy to control people who are at risk. I'd say that Liberals know/ understand that better than anyone else right now.
My journey has been far from linear. I left upstate New York, because the place was in rapid decline, and I wasn't about to join the fray. That was 1972, and it's only worse today. I've had other struggles along the way too, but I'm beyond that now. I'm not atypical in this exurban enclave, because it's a resort area, with plenty of well-to-do retirees. The locals who hail from here, on the other hand, are not so secure. Still, there is an actual economy here. No, the real exurban and rural economy lies to the west of me, in Western Virginia and other coal-belt areas. Poverty is high, education levels are low, and mobility is near zero. Among these folks there is a general belief that they pay the bills for their urban cousins, and they resent it. Of course, the exact opposite is the case, but that truth is not enough to change opinions. The area is solidly pro-Trump by upwards of 80%. They believe he wants to help, but the nasty Democrats are stopping him. Never mind that the state hasn't had a solid Democrat-lead government since 1983.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - pbrower2a - 12-16-2019
(12-16-2019, 01:45 PM)David Horn Wrote:(12-14-2019, 03:48 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(12-12-2019, 02:20 PM)David Horn Wrote: At this moment in time, both parties are largely "owned" by the wealthy elites, but it's the GOP that is doing it's level best to make that even worse. Citizens United is the product of a conservative court, bent on protecting the rights of wealthy. The Dems are the second raters here. So wanting to escape the control of the overlords by supporting the GOP is the world's greatest exercise in futility.
Be aware of the actions not the words. The GOP cuts taxes on the rich and removes restrictions on how they can use their wealth. That enables the virtually unlimited right to use wealth to undermine democracy and we're already pretty far along on that journey. Next up: anarchy, because only the rich and powerful have control in a wide open game. Everyone else is one or two steps away from poverty -- you and me included. It's easy to control people who are at risk.
I happen to believe in the notion that action speaks louder than words. So, I tend to focus/ judge more on actions than words. How many brushes with poverty have you experienced in life? I've experienced three during my life so far. The first was the worst because I was pretty powerless at the time. The last one was the worst as far as overall financial losses. Right now, I'm actually more than a couple steps away from poverty. I'm pretty familiar with ex urban areas and ex urban people. Honestly, I don't know of many or have met many ex urban folks who seem to be financially hurting these days. So, I doubt that you're a couple of steps away from poverty either unless you're completely dependent on your wife or something. Yes, it's easy to control people who are at risk. I'd say that Liberals know/ understand that better than anyone else right now.
My journey has been far from linear. I left upstate New York, because the place was in rapid decline, and I wasn't about to join the fray. That was 1972, and it's only worse today. I've had other struggles along the way too, but I'm beyond that now. I'm not atypical in this exurban enclave, because it's a resort area, with plenty of well-to-do retirees. The locals who hail from here, on the other hand, are not so secure. Still, there is an actual economy here. No, the real exurban and rural economy lies to the west of me, in Western Virginia and other coal-belt areas. Poverty is high, education levels are low, and mobility is near zero. Among these folks there is a general belief that they pay the bills for their urban cousins, and they resent it. Of course, the exact opposite is the case, but that truth is not enough to change opinions. The area is solidly pro-Trump by upwards of 80%. They believe he wants to help, but the nasty Democrats are stopping him. Never mind that the state hasn't had a solid Democrat-lead government since 1983.
Basically the Democratic party has gone conservative while the Republican party has gone reactionary, if not fascist. The GOP stands for an ethos among most the reactionary ever known: the concept that the common man has great responsibilities toward the economic elites and that those elites owe the common man nothing. In essence it is the lord telling the servant "Suffer for me, and make sure to show your recognition that you are so much a loser that you need to be exploited to keep you from going in some dissolute and destructive manner, and eventually you will get pie in the sky when you die". That is not capitalist; that is feudal!
Elites of all kinds have typically devolved into such an attitude that recognizes their own sybaritic excesses as the sole rightful object of all. So it has been with the Pharaohs, and so it is for some pampered pricks who sailed through life on the enterprise, toil, investment, and innovation of others yet are blind to the contributions of others. It is not a matter of ownership; so it was with shamans in primitive societies and so it has been with the administrative elite of "socialist" states. (One of the biggest blind spots of Karl Marx was his inability to recognize bureaucrats as potential exploiters, as capitalism and Marxism-Leninism have both shown likely.
In the end those elites preclude anyone having a chance to challenge their power even as a competitor. Those elites entrench power and ensure that they co-opt any bounties of innovation, that they alone make the decisions on investment. Toil of course is demanded, and under increasingly-onerous terms. Crony capitalism becomes a modern version of feudalism, and the rentier is king.
In case anyone thinks that I see Donald Trump as a prime example of this depravity -- he is right. When we go in a bad direction we must typically return to where things last seemed to be going right, at least according to the wisdom of the time. I think of a community in America which is undeniably capitalist, honors work and enterprise, and has its head on straight about investment. It does not produce sybaritic opulence for any elite. You probably wouldn't like it: it is the Old Order Amish. On the other hand, people are valued at all stages of life from early childhood to senescence. There is no bureaucracy, so there are few white-collar occupations. In their world only capitalists get rich... but if you truly believe in capitalism, shouldn't genuine capitalists be the only ones to get rich? The Old Order Amish are decidedly primitive in their technology, especially if such technology devolves into entertainment. Television and radio, along with the potential for intellectual gain and exchange of ideas (never mind that most people who are addicted to television and radio in all their manifestations aren't using electronic devices for intellectual gain -- and they don't share ideas if they really have none!) That Amish kids stop formal education at age sixteen appalls me as a prospect. Still, theirs is a sane society, however limited it may be.
There's obviously a huge difference between using a television and video to see this:
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/group/birds/parrot/
...or pornography.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - Classic-Xer - 12-16-2019
(12-16-2019, 01:45 PM)David Horn Wrote:Well, I think it's very obvious to most everyone these days that the nasty Democrats aren't helping him, aren't going to help him and aren't really into the idea of helping out the American country either at this point. Well, there isn't much that Americans can do about them at this point. Lets face it, the bulk of Americans don't live in their areas these days for obvious reasons. The group of nasty Democrats has already gone to far over the edge and is now already on the path towards whatever fate has in store for them down the road. AOC comes from a nasty Democratic district and represents a nasty Democratic district. So, what happens to her? What happens to her voters and her financial supporters? Does America care? What happens to Obama's old mentor/ preacher? What happens to Al Sharpton and all his inner city supporters? Does America care?(12-14-2019, 03:48 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(12-12-2019, 02:20 PM)David Horn Wrote: At this moment in time, both parties are largely "owned" by the wealthy elites, but it's the GOP that is doing it's level best to make that even worse. Citizens United is the product of a conservative court, bent on protecting the rights of wealthy. The Dems are the second raters here. So wanting to escape the control of the overlords by supporting the GOP is the world's greatest exercise in futility.
Be aware of the actions not the words. The GOP cuts taxes on the rich and removes restrictions on how they can use their wealth. That enables the virtually unlimited right to use wealth to undermine democracy and we're already pretty far along on that journey. Next up: anarchy, because only the rich and powerful have control in a wide open game. Everyone else is one or two steps away from poverty -- you and me included. It's easy to control people who are at risk.
I happen to believe in the notion that action speaks louder than words. So, I tend to focus/ judge more on actions than words. How many brushes with poverty have you experienced in life? I've experienced three during my life so far. The first was the worst because I was pretty powerless at the time. The last one was the worst as far as overall financial losses. Right now, I'm actually more than a couple steps away from poverty. I'm pretty familiar with ex urban areas and ex urban people. Honestly, I don't know of many or have met many ex urban folks who seem to be financially hurting these days. So, I doubt that you're a couple of steps away from poverty either unless you're completely dependent on your wife or something. Yes, it's easy to control people who are at risk. I'd say that Liberals know/ understand that better than anyone else right now.
My journey has been far from linear. I left upstate New York, because the place was in rapid decline, and I wasn't about to join the fray. That was 1972, and it's only worse today. I've had other struggles along the way too, but I'm beyond that now. I'm not atypical in this exurban enclave, because it's a resort area, with plenty of well-to-do retirees. The locals who hail from here, on the other hand, are not so secure. Still, there is an actual economy here. No, the real exurban and rural economy lies to the west of me, in Western Virginia and other coal-belt areas. Poverty is high, education levels are low, and mobility is near zero. Among these folks there is a general belief that they pay the bills for their urban cousins, and they resent it. Of course, the exact opposite is the case, but that truth is not enough to change opinions. The area is solidly pro-Trump by upwards of 80%. They believe he wants to help, but the nasty Democrats are stopping him. Never mind that the state hasn't had a solid Democrat-lead government since 1983.
Hmmm...Poverty is high, education levels are low and mobility is near zero in that economic region for what reason these days? Could draconian liberal policies and liberal resentment of them for not voting the way they should for many years be the reason? What's your view of the so called smelly Walmart people/ icky rural voters or poorer working class people doing whatever it takes as far as working remedial jobs for a living and making enough of a living to support meager lifestyles/ existence in order to remain financially independent and remain off welfare programs these days?
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - pbrower2a - 12-16-2019
(12-16-2019, 07:06 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(12-16-2019, 01:45 PM)David Horn Wrote:(12-14-2019, 03:48 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(12-12-2019, 02:20 PM)David Horn Wrote: At this moment in time, both parties are largely "owned" by the wealthy elites, but it's the GOP that is doing it's level best to make that even worse. Citizens United is the product of a conservative court, bent on protecting the rights of wealthy. The Dems are the second raters here. So wanting to escape the control of the overlords by supporting the GOP is the world's greatest exercise in futility.
Be aware of the actions not the words. The GOP cuts taxes on the rich and removes restrictions on how they can use their wealth. That enables the virtually unlimited right to use wealth to undermine democracy and we're already pretty far along on that journey. Next up: anarchy, because only the rich and powerful have control in a wide open game. Everyone else is one or two steps away from poverty -- you and me included. It's easy to control people who are at risk.
I happen to believe in the notion that action speaks louder than words. So, I tend to focus/ judge more on actions than words. How many brushes with poverty have you experienced in life? I've experienced three during my life so far. The first was the worst because I was pretty powerless at the time. The last one was the worst as far as overall financial losses. Right now, I'm actually more than a couple steps away from poverty. I'm pretty familiar with ex urban areas and ex urban people. Honestly, I don't know of many or have met many ex urban folks who seem to be financially hurting these days. So, I doubt that you're a couple of steps away from poverty either unless you're completely dependent on your wife or something. Yes, it's easy to control people who are at risk. I'd say that Liberals know/ understand that better than anyone else right now.
My journey has been far from linear. I left upstate New York, because the place was in rapid decline, and I wasn't about to join the fray. That was 1972, and it's only worse today. I've had other struggles along the way too, but I'm beyond that now. I'm not atypical in this exurban enclave, because it's a resort area, with plenty of well-to-do retirees. The locals who hail from here, on the other hand, are not so secure. Still, there is an actual economy here. No, the real exurban and rural economy lies to the west of me, in Western Virginia and other coal-belt areas. Poverty is high, education levels are low, and mobility is near zero. Among these folks there is a general belief that they pay the bills for their urban cousins, and they resent it. Of course, the exact opposite is the case, but that truth is not enough to change opinions. The area is solidly pro-Trump by upwards of 80%. They believe he wants to help, but the nasty Democrats are stopping him. Never mind that the state hasn't had a solid Democrat-lead government since 1983.
Well, I think it's very obvious to most everyone these days that the nasty Democrats aren't helping him, aren't going to help him and aren't into the idea of helping the the American country either at this point. Well, there isn't much that Americans can do about them at this point. Lets face it, the bulk of Americans don't live in the areas these days for obvious reasons. The group of nasty Democrats has already gone to far over the edge and is now on the path towards whatever fate has in store for them down the road. AOC comes from a nasty Democratic district. So, what happens to her? What happens to her voters and financial supporters? Does America care? What happens to Obama's old mentor/ preacher? What happens to Al Sharpton? Does America care? Hmmm...Poverty is high, education levels are low and mobility is near zero in that economic region for what reason? Could draconian liberal policies and liberal resentment of them be the reason? What's your view of the so called smelly Walmart people or poorer working class people doing whatever it takes as far as working, voting and making enough of a living goes in order to remain independent and stay off welfare programs these days?
A New Deal-style coalition has yet to be built this time. I had thought that Obama would do so because the time was tight and he had the right message -- except that this time, unlike the case in the 1930's, the questionable principle that he who owns the gold makes the rules had not yet broken. Could the difference be that Obama rescued the economic elites so that America could avoid a meltdown as severe as the Great Depression, only for those elites to buy the political process with right-wing propaganda? Maybe as in the 1930's we needed a full-blown Great Depression to create a climate of political civility.
We are on the brink of a new era, one in which scarcity is no longer the dominant reality in American political life. Producing, buying, and hoarding more stuff is no longer a reliable means of creating a sense of prosperity. I forget what science fiction writer suggested that in an age of real prosperity, status would come largely by rejecting Kitsch and clutter. The electronic gadgetry that cost a pretty penny back in the 1980's is mostly junk now even if it is still serviceable.... and due in part to the extinction of patents stuff similarly useful is available to Wal*Mart shoppers.
The workers who used to make solid incomes making stuff are now out of work. Maybe we could still make televisions and radios to sell for current prices -- if industrial workers would go back to making $4 an hour or so. One can't live on $4 an hour unless one resides in a sheltered workshop, and the $4 an hour goes into such luxuries as ice-cream sundaes and trips to the movie theater. Even for the commodity that the economic elite offers as the opiate of the masses -- mass low culture -- can be incredibly cheap. With a cast-off CRT television, a used DVD player, and mass-market DVD's that may have been in the $5 bin at Wal*Mart at some time, you can watch a movie. Maybe even a great one! Do you realize how cheap the stuff is? If I had to move across country to get work I would not need to use a moving van; I could donate stuff at a Goodwill in Flint (a very unpromising place) and buy similar stuff at a Goodwill in Austin (a booming place). Replacing my old stuff with something that someone else cast off because it no longer fit their lives is cheaper than using a moving van. I will take my laptop computer, a stereo (the speakers are twenty-five years old but their sound quality remains excellent), my classical CD collection (irreplaceable), some books, movies, and about ten changes of clothes... and I won't have to spend a huge amount of money. Shipping the stuff would be more expensive!
Experiences will matter more than will stuff. I could put off buying a new car so that I could make a memorable trip, let us say to Italy. 2500 years of history, the ancient society most analogous to the modern world, and the beginning of the modern world in the Renaissance.
Economic reality has had the management of scarcity as its focus from antiquity to a few years ago. Now we will have to manage the glut. A time without scarcity may have been the dream of nearly farm laborer and sweatshop worker, and even such people as schoolteachers and accountants. Now we enter an era in which we can seemingly buy anything not monopolized cheaply -- and the dream can become a nightmare for multitudes.
The generational cycle suggests that the 2010's are analogous to the 1930's and maybe the 1950's, that the 2020's will be analogous to the 1940's and 1860's, and that the 2030's will be analogous to the 1950's and 1870's. The analogy might be better for the ten years surrounding a zero-year, as the late 1940's were very different from the early 1940's in much of the world... if I am to apply the 80-year rule rigidly, then the next five years will seem like apocalypse and the following five years will be recovery. If America bungles its way into an ill-managed war, then its suburban sprawl from the years following WWII could get the brunt of destruction, and something very new could be built upon the ruins... something that fits the rationality of the time. Farewell, schlock housing of Greater LA built cheaply in the 1950's and already decrepit, but turning huge rents for landlords today. People will be evacuating it -- not defending it.
By 2030 the current partisan divide on cultural and economic issues will be seen as the cause of trouble that brought the world (or at least America) to the brink of ruin. People will be more intent on getting the rewards for their toil than on making executives, big shareholders, and landlords rich. People will want something workable, pragmatic, and accessible. Americans will not want an order that resembles a society on the brink of a proletarian revolution; follow the lead of Donald Trump and the Tea Party (as if there is any difference), and America will be less likely to win any war for profit. Religious fundamentalism will be incompatible with the rationality that one associates with the Millennial Generation.
Things will not sort themselves easily; no Crisis Era has ever worked out that way.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - Classic-Xer - 12-16-2019
(12-16-2019, 05:36 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Basically the Democratic party has gone conservative while the Republican party has gone reactionary, if not fascist. The GOP stands for an ethos among most the reactionary ever known: the concept that the common man has great responsibilities toward the economic elites and that those elites owe the common man nothing. In essence it is the lord telling the servant "Suffer for me, and make sure to show your recognition that you are so much a loser that you need to be exploited to keep you from going in some dissolute and destructive manner, and eventually you will get pie in the sky when you die". That is not capitalist; that is feudal!Hint...A hardcore American reactionary like myself requires visual confirmation/ proof before we start getting directly involved in politics and begin disrupting and begin inflicting all kinds of pain/fear and begin the process of dismantling and destroying the entire liberal system of preference that is currently in place from the top on down. The Republican party is a center right party or America's party today. How many liberal Democrats volunteered to pack up stuff and head south to secure the American southern border because the federal government seemed to be reluctant, uninterested and unwilling to do so for whatever reason near the end of Bush's term as President? How many liberal Democrats labelled them fascists, racists and so forth?
Elites of all kinds have typically devolved into such an attitude that recognizes their own sybaritic excesses as the sole rightful object of all. So it has been with the Pharaohs, and so it is for some pampered pricks who sailed through life on the enterprise, toil, investment, and innovation of others yet are blind to the contributions of others. It is not a matter of ownership; so it was with shamans in primitive societies and so it has been with the administrative elite of "socialist" states. (One of the biggest blind spots of Karl Marx was his inability to recognize bureaucrats as potential exploiters, as capitalism and Marxism-Leninism have both shown likely.
In the end those elites preclude anyone having a chance to challenge their power even as a competitor. Those elites entrench power and ensure that they co-opt any bounties of innovation, that they alone make the decisions on investment. Toil of course is demanded, and under increasingly-onerous terms. Crony capitalism becomes a modern version of feudalism, and the rentier is king.
In case anyone thinks that I see Donald Trump as a prime example of this depravity -- he is right. When we go in a bad direction we must typically return to where things last seemed to be going right, at least according to the wisdom of the time. I think of a community in America which is undeniably capitalist, honors work and enterprise, and has its head on straight about investment. It does not produce sybaritic opulence for any elite. You probably wouldn't like it: it is the Old Order Amish. On the other hand, people are valued at all stages of life from early childhood to senescence. There is no bureaucracy, so there are few white-collar occupations. In their world only capitalists get rich... but if you truly believe in capitalism, shouldn't genuine capitalists be the only ones to get rich? The Old Order Amish are decidedly primitive in their technology, especially if such technology devolves into entertainment. Television and radio, along with the potential for intellectual gain and exchange of ideas (never mind that most people who are addicted to television and radio in all their manifestations aren't using electronic devices for intellectual gain -- and they don't share ideas if they really have none!) That Amish kids stop formal education at age sixteen appalls me as a prospect. Still, theirs is a sane society, however limited it may be.
There's obviously a huge difference between using a television and video to see this:
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/group/birds/parrot/
...or pornography.
Now, I may not write so well as you've seen here and have openly criticized me about many times. However, you shouldn't be judging me strictly based on my writing skills here. You should be judging me on my amount of people skills and my direct communicating skills with American adults and so forth and you should be reading as if you were directly communicating with me in person as well. According to you, you teach young school children because that's what you prefer to do now and what you only feel comfortable with doing now days. Me, I speak to/with adult people about all kinds of issues and things all the time. I answer their questions, address their concerns and do all kinds of other stuff with them as well. It goes with the territory in real life so to speak.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - Classic-Xer - 12-16-2019
(12-15-2019, 07:26 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: But doesn't your reference to "American rights" refer mostly to the "right" to own and use semi-automatic guns? Whose only purpose is not to make you powerful, which they cannot do, but to enable nuts to gun down dozens or hundreds of people they mostly don't even know in public places?The American rights referenced including the specific gun right that you mentioned in particular are commonly viewed by all Americans on the American Right (The Republican Side) as being equally important to them these days.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - Eric the Green - 12-17-2019
(12-16-2019, 10:36 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(12-15-2019, 07:26 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: But doesn't your reference to "American rights" refer mostly to the "right" to own and use semi-automatic guns? Whose only purpose is not to make you powerful, which they cannot do, but to enable nuts to gun down dozens or hundreds of people they mostly don't even know in public places?The American rights referenced including the specific gun right that you mentioned in particular are commonly viewed by all Americans on the American Right (The Republican Side) as being equally important to them these days.
Yes, and that's the problem with Americans on the Right speaking about "American rights." They are not speaking of a "right" to which anyone should give any respect.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - David Horn - 12-17-2019
(12-16-2019, 07:06 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Well, I think it's very obvious to most everyone these days that the nasty Democrats aren't helping him (Trump), aren't going to help him and aren't really into the idea of helping out the American country either at this point. Well, there isn't much that Americans can do about them at this point. Lets face it, the bulk of Americans don't live in their areas these days for obvious reasons. The group of nasty Democrats has already gone to far over the edge and is now already on the path towards whatever fate has in store for them down the road. AOC comes from a nasty Democratic district and represents a nasty Democratic district. So, what happens to her? What happens to her voters and her financial supporters? Does America care? What happens to Obama's old mentor/ preacher? What happens to Al Sharpton and all his inner city supporters? Does America care?
Well, you managed to write-off the majority of the country as not-America, so who exactly IS America? The only groups with majority support for Trumpism are Republicans (90%), the Silent and GI generations (~60%), men (~55%) and rural women (still less than 50%, but a lot more than the 20% among non-rural women). Adding them together as a voting block (which they typically can't be, but we're just talking here), Trump loses the popular vote -- more than last time. So it comes down to voter suppression and the Electoral College for Trump, and suppressing emerging demographics in the House. The Senate is still tilted toward the rural vote, so maybe that's a win for the GOP without cheating. In the end, though, none of the GOP power players gives a rat's ass about the little people they represent, as their actions of long standing show.
Classic-Xer Wrote:Hmmm...Poverty is high, education levels are low and mobility is near zero in that economic region for what reason these days? Could draconian liberal policies and liberal resentment of them for not voting the way they should for many years be the reason? What's your view of the so called smelly Walmart people/ icky rural voters or poorer working class people doing whatever it takes as far as working remedial jobs for a living and making enough of a living to support meager lifestyles/ existence in order to remain financially independent and remain off welfare programs these days?
No, the causes of rural collapse are de-industrialization (a GOP policy), decline in the use of fossil fuels (capitalism at work) and visceral dislike of the "snobby elites" (better know as the college educated). I see no liberal policies at work creating any of that. I do see a lot of anti-education rhetoric in the churches, and lock-step acceptance of the GOP as "their party". It's tribal … like football.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - pbrower2a - 12-17-2019
(12-16-2019, 09:23 PM)heClassic-Xer Wrote:(12-16-2019, 05:36 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Basically the Democratic party has gone conservative while the Republican party has gone reactionary, if not fascist. The GOP stands for an ethos among most the reactionary ever known: the concept that the common man has great responsibilities toward the economic elites and that those elites owe the common man nothing. In essence it is the lord telling the servant "Suffer for me, and make sure to show your recognition that you are so much a loser that you need to be exploited to keep you from going in some dissolute and destructive manner, and eventually you will get pie in the sky when you die". That is not capitalist; that is feudal!
Elites of all kinds have typically devolved into such an attitude that recognizes their own sybaritic excesses as the sole rightful object of all. So it has been with the Pharaohs, and so it is for some pampered pricks who sailed through life on the enterprise, toil, investment, and innovation of others yet are blind to the contributions of others. It is not a matter of ownership; so it was with shamans in primitive societies and so it has been with the administrative elite of "socialist" states. (One of the biggest blind spots of Karl Marx was his inability to recognize bureaucrats as potential exploiters, as capitalism and Marxism-Leninism have both shown likely.
In the end those elites preclude anyone having a chance to challenge their power even as a competitor. Those elites entrench power and ensure that they co-opt any bounties of innovation, that they alone make the decisions on investment. Toil of course is demanded, and under increasingly-onerous terms. Crony capitalism becomes a modern version of feudalism, and the rentier is king.
In case anyone thinks that I see Donald Trump as a prime example of this depravity -- he is right. When we go in a bad direction we must typically return to where things last seemed to be going right, at least according to the wisdom of the time. I think of a community in America which is undeniably capitalist, honors work and enterprise, and has its head on straight about investment. It does not produce sybaritic opulence for any elite. You probably wouldn't like it: it is the Old Order Amish. On the other hand, people are valued at all stages of life from early childhood to senescence. There is no bureaucracy, so there are few white-collar occupations. In their world only capitalists get rich... but if you truly believe in capitalism, shouldn't genuine capitalists be the only ones to get rich? The Old Order Amish are decidedly primitive in their technology, especially if such technology devolves into entertainment. Television and radio, along with the potential for intellectual gain and exchange of ideas (never mind that most people who are addicted to television and radio in all their manifestations aren't using electronic devices for intellectual gain -- and they don't share ideas if they really have none!) That Amish kids stop formal education at age sixteen appalls me as a prospect. Still, theirs is a sane society, however limited it may be.
There's obviously a huge difference between using a television and video to see this:
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/group/birds/parrot/
...or pornography.
Hint...A hardcore American reactionary like myself requires visual confirmation/ proof before we start getting directly involved in politics and begin disrupting and begin inflicting all kinds of pain/fear and begin the process of dismantling and destroying the entire liberal system of preference that is currently in place from the top on down. The Republican party is a center right party or America's party today. How many liberal Democrats volunteered to pack up stuff and head south to secure the American southern border because the federal government seemed to be reluctant, uninterested and unwilling to do so for whatever reason near the end of Bush's term as President? How many liberal Democrats labelled them fascists, racists and so forth?
Now, I may not write so well as you've seen here and have openly criticized me about many times. However, you shouldn't be judging me strictly based on my writing skills here. You should be judging me on my amount of people skills and my direct communicating skills with American adults and so forth and you should be reading as if you were directly communicating with me in person as well. According to you, you teach young school children because that's what you prefer to do now and what you only feel comfortable with doing now days. Me, I speak to/with adult people about all kinds of issues and things all the time. I answer their questions, address their concerns and do all kinds of other stuff with them as well. It goes with the territory in real life so to speak.
If you dislike minority preferences, then stick to small business and avoid the public sector and giant enterprises under pressure for a head count.
The Republican Party abandoned the center-Right when it morphed into the TEA Party.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - Classic-Xer - 12-18-2019
(12-17-2019, 12:28 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Yes, and that's the problem with Americans on the Right speaking about "American rights." They are not speaking of a "right" to which anyone should give any respect.Yes, that's a problem that Liberals have with every American on the Right these days. I think you should pay more attention to your crystal ball and even cling to your personal preference's as you often do even if it ends in your own demise. I mean, that is what left wing radicals have been taught to do right? Well, I'm cool with that.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - Classic-Xer - 12-18-2019
(12-17-2019, 06:43 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: If you dislike minority preferences, then stick to small business and avoid the public sector and giant enterprises under pressure for a head count.I dislike/despise most everything that the Democratic party represents and claims that it stands for today. Like I've said, I think your leaders will be content with living off the smaller portions of the country that they have damn near complete control over these days. I mean, they've got a pretty good gig going for themselves right now. So, which would you prefer, living out the rest of your life with people who are able recognize your rights whether you appreciate them all or not and recognize your right to exist whether you appreciate that or not and willing to defend you and all of your rights whether you appreciate them or not. The nasty Democrat's don't seem to care as much about the Democratic people who live else where these days. Hint, you don't know who the Republicans are in your area because you don't ever see the Republicans in your area because the Republicans live outside of your area and prefer to stay out of Democratic politics and the Democratic system of preference all together. It's going to be tough for the Democratic population who are still into them and still clinging to a system that allows preference. Right now, there is a Republican population that Democrats have always had issues with and a much larger and much more powerful American population that the Democrats are now having issues and finding itself at odds with too.
The Republican Party abandoned the center-Right when it morphed into the TEA Party.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - pbrower2a - 12-18-2019
Article I vote
■ Democrats: 229 yes, 2 no, 1 present
■ Republicans: 0 yes, 195 no
■ Independents: 1 yes
Article II vote
■ Democrats: 228 yes, 3 no, 1 present
■ Republicans: 0 yes, 195 no
■ Independents: 1 yes
Aside from telling you that the one Independent is a former Republican is libertarian Justin Amash... the numbers need no embellishment on my part. I shall spare you.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - David Horn - 12-19-2019
(12-18-2019, 09:57 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Article I vote
■ Democrats: 229 yes, 2 no, 1 present
■ Republicans: 0 yes, 195 no
■ Independents: 1 yes
Article II vote
■ Democrats: 228 yes, 3 no, 1 present
■ Republicans: 0 yes, 195 no
■ Independents: 1 yes
Aside from telling you that the one Independent is a former Republican is libertarian Justin Amash... the numbers need no embellishment on my part. I shall spare you.
Tulsi Gabbard as the sole Present vote is the really weird one. I read her excuse, and it made no sense at all.
RE: The Partisan Divide on Issues - Eric the Green - 12-19-2019
(12-18-2019, 01:50 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(12-17-2019, 12:28 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Yes, and that's the problem with Americans on the Right speaking about "American rights." They are not speaking of a "right" to which anyone should give any respect.Yes, that's a problem that Liberals have with every American on the Right these days. I think you should pay more attention to your crystal ball and even cling to your personal preference's as you often do even if it ends in your own demise. I mean, that is what left wing radicals have been taught to do right?
Well, I'm cool with that.
I don't think the Left reads crystal balls any more often than the Right does. But I stand on my statement that the Right's defense of the constitution consists of little more than the defense of the "right" of terrorists and nut cases to blow hundreds of innocent people away with semi-auto military weapons that have no place in a civilized civilian society. Anyone who defends this "right" is lost in barbarism, at least on this issue if not others.
And these days, those who oppose this "right" are not necessarily confined to those on the "Left." And indeed, support for our point of view is growing.
As for my crystal ball, it does imply the possibility that crazy portions of the Right (which may be sizable) may stage a rebellion if gun control is strengthened, in the mid 2020s probably. So, we'll watch some of you on the front lines get slaughtered by the state, probably. I don't ignore that you guys exist. Some of my fellow crystal and star readers and more sanguine and don't allow for this possibility.
But eventually, I don't know how far into the future exactly, I do predict civilization will prevail, and this meaningless scourge will end. I hope we can end the other scourges you guys inflict upon us, such as perennial virtual poverty and inequality, attacks on democracy, and destruction of our climate and environment. We might not have as long a time span available for those other issues to be resolved in our favor. If they are not, then America declines and fades away as a shadow of its former self, and the world suffers along with us.