Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
From the right-wing editorial page of the Wall Street Journal:
A dozen Mexican states held elections on Sunday, and—ho-hum—the center-right National Action Party, or PAN, appears to have won seven of the races. The Journal reports that voters in the world’s 15th-largest economy were turned off by the ruling party’s failure to cut debt and tackle crime, and by a boy-wonder president, Enrique Peña Nieto, whom they now regard as more boy than wonder.
I mention this to illustrate that Mexico is a functioning democracy whose voters tend to favor pro-business conservatives, not a North American version of Libya, exporting jihad and boat people to its neighbors. Somebody ought to explain this to Republican voters, whose brains, like pickles in brine, have marinated too long in anti-Mexican nonsense.
Elements of that nonsense:
• Mexico is a failed state. Mexico’s struggles with drug cartels—whose existence is almost entirely a function of America’s appetite for dope—are serious and well known. So are its deep-seated institutional weaknesses, especially the police forces that collude with the cartels and terrorize rural areas.
Then again, Mexico’s 2014 homicide rate of about 16 murders per 100,000 means that it is about as dangerous as Philadelphia (15.9) and considerably safer than Miami (19.2) or Atlanta (20.5). Are these “failed cities” that you don’t dare visit and that should be walled off from the rest of America?
• Mexico is a threat to U.S. security. The most serious terrorist attempt to enter the U.S. across a land border occurred in December 1999, when Ahmed Ressam tried to smuggle a bomb into the U.S. from. . . Canada. All 19 of the 9/11 hijackers entered the U.S. with legal visas on scheduled flights. The bride of the San Bernardino attacker came here the same way. No significant act of political violence against the U.S. has been staged from Mexico since Pancho Villa’s raid on Columbus, N.M., in March 1916.
Could terrorists infiltrate the U.S. by crossing the border? Sure, if they wanted to risk being asphyxiated in the back of a crowded migrant truck somewhere in Sinaloa.
As for ordinary criminals, my colleague Jason Riley has noted that the rate of incarceration in California for foreign-born residents is less than half of the U.S.-born rate. Violent crime in the U.S. fell dramatically during the same two decades, 1990-2010, of an “invasion” of illegal immigrants.
• Mexico steals U.S. jobs. Donald Trump recently resurrected this chestnut by inveighing against Nabisco and Ford for shifting production to Mexico from high-cost Illinois and Michigan. Never mind that one reason Ford made the move was to take advantage of Mexico’s free-trade agreements with the European Union and other countries, meaning that opposition to free trade is the very thing that drives business abroad.
Then again, Mexico is the second-largest purchaser of U.S. products; the Wilson Center’s Christopher Wilson has estimated that “six million U.S. jobs depend on trade with Mexico.” That is especially true for border states. “Mexico is the top export destination for five states: California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and New Hampshire, and is the second most important market for another 17 states across the country.”
• Illegal immigrants are a drain on the system. This whopper should be sold at Burger King, since illegal immigrants pay billions in state and local taxes, along with about $15 billion a year to Social Security—the benefits of which they are unlikely ever to get back. Entire U.S. industries, agriculture above all, depend on illegal migrants, without whom fruits and vegetables would simply rot in the field.
If there is a drain, it’s Mexicans going home—roughly one million returnees between 2009 and 2014, according to the Pew Research Center, outpacing the number of Mexicans moving north by about 140,000. That owes something to growth and stability in the Mexican economy, which is largely a function of the North American Free Trade Agreement.
This makes Mr. Trump’s opposition to Nafta all the more misjudged. Without it, Mexico could easily have become Venezuela, run by an Hugo Chávez-like strongman, that would have posed a real threat to U.S. security, as opposed to the one in Mr. Trump’s imagination.
***
This is a foul electoral season, one conservative voters (or their children) will look back on with political regret and personal remorse. Mr. Trump’s “Mexican” slur about federal judge Gonzalo Curiel is the most shameful word uttered by a major presidential candidate since Dixiecrat Strom Thurmond thundered in 1948 against the “Nigra race.” As in 1948, Mr. Trump is appealing to constituents who have stuffed themselves on a diet of bad statistics and misleading anecdotes—people who fancy themselves victims but behave like bigots. Republican leaders who think they can co-opt or tame Mr. Trump will instead find themselves stained by him.
Meanwhile, let’s state clearly what shouldn’t need saying but does: Americans are blessed to have Mexico as our neighbor and Hispanics as our citizens. On this point, disagreement is indecency.
http://www.wsj.com/article_email/the-gop...NzUwNjc1Wj
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: 604
Threads: 68
Joined: May 2016
Trump is clearly a national liberal. He supports policies that will raise the wages and cut the taxes of the working poor - and in 21st Century (but not 20th Century) terms he is a cultural conservative: He believes in a majoritarian, Anglo-American culture to which everyone should subscribe (I'm waiting for him to openly support an "English only" bill. I don't believe that I will have to wait very long).
"These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation" - Justice David Brewer, Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, 1892
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
National liberal?
I expect Donald Trump to accede to the desire of Corporate America to impose a national Right-to-Work-for-starvation-pay law that guts collective bargaining so that employers can exploit the bargaining weaknesses of employers. I have heard bosses tell them that they prefer to negotiate individually with workers on the workers' merits. The pay offered is invariably the lowers that the employer can get away with. I would not be surprised if he advocated at the behest of Big Business that the minimum wage law be scrapped so that wages can fall to Third World levels while the welfare system is abolished. There's nothing liberal about that, except that it might be the outmoded "classical liberalism", basically "He who has the gold makes the rules" -- the late oil tycoon H.L. Hunt.
Majoritarian culture? Is "majoritarian, Anglo-American culture" perfect?
I have done some substitute school teaching, and I have heard some black kids fault me for asking that they act white. Act white? Hardly. There are just too many white loser subcultures in America for me to endorse "acting white". I retorted that "I prefer that you act like Chinese-Americans"!
(I am not of Asian origin).
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: 1,216
Threads: 29
Joined: May 2016
06-08-2016, 04:31 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-08-2016, 04:31 PM by Odin.)
(06-08-2016, 08:04 AM)Anthony Wrote: Trump is clearly a national liberal. He supports policies that will raise the wages and cut the taxes of the working poor - and in 21st Century (but not 20th Century) terms he is a cultural conservative: He believes in a majoritarian, Anglo-American culture to which everyone should subscribe (I'm waiting for him to openly support an "English only" bill. I don't believe that I will have to wait very long).
Trump is a Fascist who thinks Blacks and Latinos are not "real" Americans'.
Posts: 333
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(06-08-2016, 04:40 PM)taramarie Wrote: (06-08-2016, 04:31 PM)Odin Wrote: (06-08-2016, 08:04 AM)Anthony Wrote: Trump is clearly a national liberal. He supports policies that will raise the wages and cut the taxes of the working poor - and in 21st Century (but not 20th Century) terms he is a cultural conservative: He believes in a majoritarian, Anglo-American culture to which everyone should subscribe (I'm waiting for him to openly support an "English only" bill. I don't believe that I will have to wait very long).
Trump is a Fascist who thinks Blacks and Latinos are not "real" Americans'.
Lets hear out what makes him fascist so it is clear. There seems to be many variations on what fascism really is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Definitions
In my opinion labels such as fascist are much too freely used. The effect is to shut down communication.
Quote:http://www.theatlantic.com/international...st/424449/
I Know Fascists; Donald Trump Is No Fascist
… "Trump will never master the techniques laid out in 1931 by the then-fascist journalist Curzio Malaparte in his Coup D’etat: The Technique of Revolution, which detailed the clear requirements of the fascist manifesto: Seize and hold state power with a sudden attack, coordinated with cunning and force. There is no fascism without this rational, violent plan to obliterate democracy. From Hitler’s Mein Kampf to Mussolini’s speeches on the Palazzo Venezia balcony, fascists told the crowd openly what their goals were and kept a nefarious, disciplined pace to realize them. Mussolini boasted about reducing Italy’s Parliament “to a fascist barrack,” “stopping any antifascist brain from thinking,” and “creating a new Roman Empire.””…
… whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. Phil 4:8 (ESV)
Posts: 1,216
Threads: 29
Joined: May 2016
(06-08-2016, 05:04 PM)radind Wrote: (06-08-2016, 04:40 PM)taramarie Wrote: (06-08-2016, 04:31 PM)Odin Wrote: (06-08-2016, 08:04 AM)Anthony Wrote: Trump is clearly a national liberal. He supports policies that will raise the wages and cut the taxes of the working poor - and in 21st Century (but not 20th Century) terms he is a cultural conservative: He believes in a majoritarian, Anglo-American culture to which everyone should subscribe (I'm waiting for him to openly support an "English only" bill. I don't believe that I will have to wait very long).
Trump is a Fascist who thinks Blacks and Latinos are not "real" Americans'.
Lets hear out what makes him fascist so it is clear. There seems to be many variations on what fascism really is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Definitions
In my opinion labels such as fascist are much too freely used. The effect is to shut down communication.
Quote:http://www.theatlantic.com/international...st/424449/
I Know Fascists; Donald Trump Is No Fascist
… "Trump will never master the techniques laid out in 1931 by the then-fascist journalist Curzio Malaparte in his Coup D’etat: The Technique of Revolution, which detailed the clear requirements of the fascist manifesto: Seize and hold state power with a sudden attack, coordinated with cunning and force. There is no fascism without this rational, violent plan to obliterate democracy. From Hitler’s Mein Kampf to Mussolini’s speeches on the Palazzo Venezia balcony, fascists told the crowd openly what their goals were and kept a nefarious, disciplined pace to realize them. Mussolini boasted about reducing Italy’s Parliament “to a fascist barrack,” “stopping any antifascist brain from thinking,” and “creating a new Roman Empire.””…
IMO what makes him explicitly a Fascist rather than just a garden-variety RW Authoritarian is the "Make America Great Again" rhetoric, creating an atmosphere of scapegoating against every demographic group real and imagined seen as "bringing down America". Trump generally doesn't say such things in public, but a lot of his vocal supporters want violent suppression of Blacks, Latinos, "Femi-Nazis", "Social Justice Warriors", "Cultural Marxists" and other perceived enemies of "White Christian Culture".
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
Donald Trump is a nasty person and a horrible right-wing politician, but that is not enough to make him a fascist. he has yet to show contempt for the elected legislature; he does not promise a grand new order. Will he offend liberal sensibilities if elected? Sure -- and I think as badly as Maine Governor Paul LePage.
He has yet to establish paramilitary militias whose blind obedience will allow them to do any act of violence.
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
(06-08-2016, 06:29 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Donald Trump is a nasty person and a horrible right-wing politician, but that is not enough to make him a fascist. he has yet to show contempt for the elected legislature; he does not promise a grand new order. Will he offend liberal sensibilities if elected? Sure -- and I think as badly as Maine Governor Paul LePage.
He has yet to establish paramilitary militias whose blind obedience will allow them to do any act of violence.
He does seem to be in the process of recruiting them, or at least inviting or suggesting them to establish such a militia.
On the whole he does seem to promise a "flexible" approach to working with congress now. If he wins, though, he won't have to be too flexible. We can assume he'll have a congress that is right wing in that event; even perhaps a Republican Senate that will abolish the filibuster and go for the "nuclear option." Whatever the dear leader wants.
Posts: 333
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(06-09-2016, 10:16 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: (06-08-2016, 06:29 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Donald Trump is a nasty person and a horrible right-wing politician, but that is not enough to make him a fascist. he has yet to show contempt for the elected legislature; he does not promise a grand new order. Will he offend liberal sensibilities if elected? Sure -- and I think as badly as Maine Governor Paul LePage.
He has yet to establish paramilitary militias whose blind obedience will allow them to do any act of violence.
He does seem to be in the process of recruiting them, or at least inviting or suggesting them to establish such a militia.
On the whole he does seem to promise a "flexible" approach to working with congress now. If he wins, though, he won't have to be too flexible. We can assume he'll have a congress that is right wing in that event; even perhaps a Republican Senate that will abolish the filibuster and go for the "nuclear option." Whatever the dear leader wants.
I expect Clinton to win. However, it appears to me that most of the violence has been against Trump supporters.
… whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. Phil 4:8 (ESV)
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
(06-09-2016, 11:16 AM)radind Wrote: (06-09-2016, 10:16 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: (06-08-2016, 06:29 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Donald Trump is a nasty person and a horrible right-wing politician, but that is not enough to make him a fascist. he has yet to show contempt for the elected legislature; he does not promise a grand new order. Will he offend liberal sensibilities if elected? Sure -- and I think as badly as Maine Governor Paul LePage.
He has yet to establish paramilitary militias whose blind obedience will allow them to do any act of violence.
He does seem to be in the process of recruiting them, or at least inviting or suggesting them to establish such a militia.
On the whole he does seem to promise a "flexible" approach to working with congress now. If he wins, though, he won't have to be too flexible. We can assume he'll have a congress that is right wing in that event; even perhaps a Republican Senate that will abolish the filibuster and go for the "nuclear option." Whatever the dear leader wants.
I expect Clinton to win. However, it appears to me that most of the violence has been against Trump supporters.
Such violence is wrong and counter-productive, unless (God forbid!) it is staged by Trump supporters.
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
(06-09-2016, 11:16 AM)radind Wrote: (06-09-2016, 10:16 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: (06-08-2016, 06:29 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Donald Trump is a nasty person and a horrible right-wing politician, but that is not enough to make him a fascist. he has yet to show contempt for the elected legislature; he does not promise a grand new order. Will he offend liberal sensibilities if elected? Sure -- and I think as badly as Maine Governor Paul LePage.
He has yet to establish paramilitary militias whose blind obedience will allow them to do any act of violence.
He does seem to be in the process of recruiting them, or at least inviting or suggesting them to establish such a militia.
On the whole he does seem to promise a "flexible" approach to working with congress now. If he wins, though, he won't have to be too flexible. We can assume he'll have a congress that is right wing in that event; even perhaps a Republican Senate that will abolish the filibuster and go for the "nuclear option." Whatever the dear leader wants.
I expect Clinton to win. However, it appears to me that most of the violence has been against Trump supporters.
No, it's been on both sides. But Trump stirs it up; Sanders and Clinton do not.
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
(06-09-2016, 10:16 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: (06-08-2016, 06:29 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Donald Trump is a nasty person and a horrible right-wing politician, but that is not enough to make him a fascist. he has yet to show contempt for the elected legislature; he does not promise a grand new order. Will he offend liberal sensibilities if elected? Sure -- and I think as badly as Maine Governor Paul LePage.
He has yet to establish paramilitary militias whose blind obedience will allow them to do any act of violence.
He does seem to be in the process of recruiting them, or at least inviting or suggesting them to establish such a militia.
On the whole he does seem to promise a "flexible" approach to working with congress now. If he wins, though, he won't have to be too flexible. We can assume he'll have a congress that is right wing in that event; even perhaps a Republican Senate that will abolish the filibuster and go for the "nuclear option." Whatever the dear leader wants.
The polarization in American political life allows winners by even a bare majority to completely neglect the sensibilities of the Other Side. People get 90% of what they want or they get nothing.
So suppose that the GOP gets its trifecta of both Houses of Congress and a President who must then acquiesce to the will of the Republican Establishment because such still controls Congress and the President is with it 90% of the time. Shift tax burdens to the non-rich? Check! Eviscerate unions? Check! Give the rich breaks for hiring domestic servants? Check! Gut all laws involving the environment and workplace safety? Check! Abolish the minimum wage! Check! Privatize the Interstate Highway System? Check! Re-establish debtors' prisons? Check! Could an opposition stop it? Not once employers get the right to control the votes of their employees!
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: 69
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
Team Taramarie, et al on the fascism discussion upthread. The more obvious comparison is the array of nativist parties worldwide, like the UKIP, Front National, AfD, etc. About the only truly fascist current movement I can think of is Golden Dawn in Greece.
Posts: 449
Threads: 2
Joined: May 2016
06-09-2016, 12:37 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-09-2016, 12:38 PM by playwrite.)
(06-09-2016, 11:35 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: (06-09-2016, 11:16 AM)radind Wrote: (06-09-2016, 10:16 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: (06-08-2016, 06:29 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Donald Trump is a nasty person and a horrible right-wing politician, but that is not enough to make him a fascist. he has yet to show contempt for the elected legislature; he does not promise a grand new order. Will he offend liberal sensibilities if elected? Sure -- and I think as badly as Maine Governor Paul LePage.
He has yet to establish paramilitary militias whose blind obedience will allow them to do any act of violence.
He does seem to be in the process of recruiting them, or at least inviting or suggesting them to establish such a militia.
On the whole he does seem to promise a "flexible" approach to working with congress now. If he wins, though, he won't have to be too flexible. We can assume he'll have a congress that is right wing in that event; even perhaps a Republican Senate that will abolish the filibuster and go for the "nuclear option." Whatever the dear leader wants.
I expect Clinton to win. However, it appears to me that most of the violence has been against Trump supporters.
No, it's been on both sides. But Trump stirs it up; Sanders and Clinton do not.
I think the "both sides" coupled with "Sanders and Clinton" represents a big misunderstanding about the recent protests we have seen such as in San Diego, San Jose, Albuquerque.
These really didn't get going until the primaries moved out to the Southwest with very prominent and vocal Hispanic populations. It is a reaction to Trump's racism. I'm sure there are more than a few (hopefully, former) Republicans in those protests that are particularly pissed off that a racist has hijacked their party.
If Trump had come to NYC and said that the Irish are murderers and rapists, and said that anyone of Irish heritage could not judge fairly from the bench due to that heritage, we would have put his head on a spike (preferable an Orange one, wink-wink). The Irish know not to give any quarter to such an a-hole.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
06-09-2016, 12:56 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-09-2016, 01:15 PM by Eric the Green.)
What is masculine about Trump? Standing up to reverse sexism.... Bill Maher has got Trump by the hair!
Meathead and Bill team up against a Cruzbot lady.
Some new rules, and finally some advice for Trump and the others who knock immigrants!
https://youtu.be/ENTrCSOI1SI
Posts: 333
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(06-09-2016, 11:35 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: (06-09-2016, 11:16 AM)radind Wrote: (06-09-2016, 10:16 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: (06-08-2016, 06:29 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Donald Trump is a nasty person and a horrible right-wing politician, but that is not enough to make him a fascist. he has yet to show contempt for the elected legislature; he does not promise a grand new order. Will he offend liberal sensibilities if elected? Sure -- and I think as badly as Maine Governor Paul LePage.
He has yet to establish paramilitary militias whose blind obedience will allow them to do any act of violence.
He does seem to be in the process of recruiting them, or at least inviting or suggesting them to establish such a militia.
On the whole he does seem to promise a "flexible" approach to working with congress now. If he wins, though, he won't have to be too flexible. We can assume he'll have a congress that is right wing in that event; even perhaps a Republican Senate that will abolish the filibuster and go for the "nuclear option." Whatever the dear leader wants.
I expect Clinton to win. However, it appears to me that most of the violence has been against Trump supporters.
No, it's been on both sides. But Trump stirs it up; Sanders and Clinton do not.
Ideas and labels can have consequences. We could use more restraint and fewer labels in our attempt to dialogue.
We have a different perspective on the events.
Quote:http://www.nationalreview.com/article/43...nsequences
The Consequences of Calling Trump a Fascist Become Clear in San Jose
… "Political violence has arisen not from the right, but from the left. Progressives are already predisposed to violence against Trump supporters as a consequence of the mindset wherein political rights are only accorded to those who ascribe to a slate of largely liberal viewpoints. Add to that the belief that your opponent is a fascist intent only on the usurpation of personal power and the destruction of the democratic system, and you get a toxic mix, one that makes the leap to justifying violence a short one indeed. As the socialist provocateur Fredrik deBoer, no friend of liberal pundits, wrote on Twitter: “Journalists with big platforms called Trump a literal fascist on the rise for months. How did you expect people to react to that?””…
… "The term “fascist” is a very, very powerful thing. Its powers extend far beyond those exerted by the words “racist” or “misogynist” or “xenophobic,” for fascists threaten not merely a specific race or sex but rather the entire polity. If pundits are to use it to describe Trump and his movement, they must be prepared to live with the consequences.”
… whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. Phil 4:8 (ESV)
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
You make some good points, Radind. But just saying "we have a different perspective" does not change the facts; in this case for example, about which candidate is stirring up violence.
Posts: 1,216
Threads: 29
Joined: May 2016
06-09-2016, 07:09 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-09-2016, 07:10 PM by Odin.)
Posts: 69
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 333
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(06-09-2016, 07:08 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: You make some good points, Radind. But just saying "we have a different perspective" does not change the facts; in this case for example, about which candidate is stirring up violence.
But, the issue for me is who is actually conducting the violence. It still appears to me that most of the actual violence is coming from some opposed to Trump.
… whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. Phil 4:8 (ESV)
|
![[Image: A3WXlrl.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/A3WXlrl.jpg)