01-31-2021, 08:23 PM
(01-31-2021, 04:37 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Some people who have different opinions from me are evil. It depends. White supremacists and Nazis are evil. Totalitarian and gangster, genocidal rulers like Stalin, Assad and Putin are evil. Neo-liberals may not be evil, necessarily. It's just that their policies are wrong, and need to be defeated politically. But as I say, some level of compromise with them may be possible, at least once the 4T is over. 4Ts tend to be all-or-nothing, and that's just because of the nature of 4Ts. But something may come out of this 4T that works for enough of the majority that the Crisis lessens. That is what has always happened before.
I believe that very few people are actually evil. Even those who adhere to 'evil' ideologies may not, themselves, be evil. I prefer bad ideas and bad policies to be defeated through persuasion and strategic compromise. I am hoping something comes out of this 4T that is workable for the majority AND that the process of getting there does not involve silencing, oppression, and/or extermination. 4Ts are all-or-nothing, which is why there is always the danger of bloodshed and not just on the part of the 'rebellion.' Those responding to the so-called reactionaries have not, historically, been very good at drawing the line around who needs to be burned on the pyre of progress.
Quote:But this sentence of yours I don't understand, and might be a part of contemporary libertarian ideology, with which I often disagree: "I will also never cease to revile those that seek to use the private sphere to abrogate those ideals simply because they are not subject to the limitations we impose on our government." The problem we face is that the government is not placing sufficient limitations on the private sphere when it abrogates liberal ideals. You need to consider this if you are going to be part of any consensus.
I am referring to the phenomena of 'cancel culture' that allows a mob outraged over whatever narrative is being presented to use private levers of power to essentially silence, impoverish, and isolate random individuals declared 'guilty' of the crime du jour. It is life-devastating consequences enacted without warning on people whose only real fault is holding a different political opinion and is justified because the actual agents of persecution are private companies not government.
And if despising this means I don't end up being part of the consensus, I can live with myself. I may hate the society I'm part of, but at least I'd stay true to my ideals.
Quote:You seem unwilling to accept that the majority may decree laws and policies with which you disagree.
You seem unwilling to accept that our system is designed and intended for the minority to fight against laws and policies with which they disagree, forcing compromise that swings the pendulum two steps forward and one step back towards change. I expect the DNC to try and enact their agenda when they are in power and I expect the GOP to fight against it. I also expect the reverse to occur when the power balance changes.
If the party in power pushes forward their agenda by destroying the mechanisms built into the system to allow objection, then a resolution to the 4T that involves the majority coalescing into a new center is unlikely to occur without actions that also silence and oppress objectors. This is what I'm most concerned about, not whether the push-pull of American politics continues in it's usual 'nobody is completely happy' kind of way.
The parts of the population who are not fully onboard with the current agenda laid out by the DNC is still significant. I am waiting on actions and legislation that will indicate whether they are being taken into account or going to be trampled over in the quest towards utopia.
Quote:I have no idea what you mean by using un-elected billionaires as proxies. It is the Trump, Republican side that defends the pretensions and privileges of billionaires, and has installed Courts to defend them.
Pardon me while I dissolve into laughter.
Pretty much the entire technology sector is hand-in-glove with the DNC at this point and they get plenty of cover and benefits for actions that align with the establishment DNC's interests. They are just one example of billionaires who are on the democrat side of the aisle. As someone (don't know who) said - if your opinion is supported by media, corporations, and Hollywood then you aren't part of a resistance.
[quote pid='74208' dateline='1612129073']
Libertarian economics enables and defends billionaires like the Koch Brothers (Charles even ran for vice-president on the Libertarian ticket). It is today's genuine populists like Sanders, Warren and AOC, and Rachel Maddow, who challenge them. I don't understand how today's conservatives can so twist things into their opposite. But you manage.
[/quote]
That you insist on seeing the class divide as being Democrat/Republican and not breaking across both is mind boggling to me. Perhaps it is because you're mindset is stuck in an earlier political landscape.
If I don't only ascribe 'true' populism to the left, maybe it's because I'm not a conservative. On any political test I usually end up either moderate, libertarian, or left-leaning classical liberal. If I seem conservative, maybe consider that it is because the DNC of today has moved much further left while some of us are still standing where we were back in the 1980s and 90s.