The all things Political Topic - For who in this dark, dream-haunted Land dares Resist the righteous flame of Wrath And Doom themselves to despair and death?

[Darkpriest]

16 hours ago, ComradeYellow said:

Eh. just more posturing, nothing new.

What is actually more significant is the recent G7 meeting.  Most countries aside from the U.S. want to avoid a Cold War 2.0 like the plague so Biden's plan is thus:

1) Distribute 500 million free vaccines to developing countries in order to prove the alleged superiorty of Western advances in medicine and the alleged shoddiness of Chinese vaccines.  If successful, it would not only paint the West as the savior of Covid 19 that China started but make China look like both the culprit and and inept.  Weakening China's position significantly in it's quest for economic partnerships.

2) Spend trillions of dollars in pensions and insurance funds on infrastructure and railways in same developing countries in an effort to block China's Belt and Road Initiative, again in an effort to demonstrate superiority in Western technology and more transparency in economic deals.

If these work then it would be a serious blow to Chinese influence, at least in the short term, and Biden has picked the perfect year to do this, as domestic issues have been relatively quiet and buried under the rug.

However, the recent inflation report was not good, and all this spending to block China will only add to the already steadfast increase of consumer goods and rent prices, which could more fuel to fire once culture wars flare up again, and they will!

Very interesting times ahead, stay tuned.

It will work the same way as all the plans EU had for surpassing economically and technologically US of A. 

[BruceVC]

1 minute ago, rjshae said:

The thing is, Trump didn't create this complaint. It has been around for a long time. Obama and Bush did the same thing. Trump was just more undiplomatic about it (diplomatic language for a lying jerk).

Yes, that is correct. Certain NATO members have never committed their 2% but Trump raised this vociferously, publicly and as you said undiplomatically. What I observed during Trumps presidency is certain NATO members and US politicians have since the end of the Cold War questioned why you even need NATO. It has some legitimacy that view because NATO was created specifically to counter the USSR 

But the outcome of a  lack of real unity between the US and NATO members have been an increase in Russian "soft " aggression like the numerous and consistent examples of cyber-warfare and the increased aggression of China in its own objectives around hegemony in the east and its own region 

So NATO is relevant again but not because their will be another war but its  a good symbol of the important alliance  of the US and its NATO allies. And this is clearly necessary to restrain China and Russia which can and should become normal members of the global community. But its also clear this can only be done from a position of strength and not the Trump approach where he basically admired various strongmen and autocratic rulers throughout the world 

[ComradeYellow]

35 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

It will work the same way as all the plans EU had for surpassing economically and technologically US of A. 

Not sure I getchoo, you mean Biden's (pretty good, admittedly) plan will fail or China's global economic and technological initiatives will fail?

[ComradeYellow]

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202106/1226246.shtml

The US has nothing to offer Russia, to let Moscow abandon all it got from relations with Beijing and take the risk of betraying China, while Russians have a very unfortunate and painful memory of being betrayed and fooled by the US, said experts.

[BruceVC]

3 hours ago, ComradeYellow said:

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202106/1226246.shtml

 

 

Seems very anti-Western and is focused on the false narrative or rather a misunderstanding about Bidens reasons for his visit to Russia

Biden isnt  reaching out to Russia because he fears the Russian\China friendship because its so powerful and the US is concerned it will dominate the world economically. Not at all. Now that the US has assumed its friendships with the likes of the EU and NATO and renewed these alliances this is about giving Russia a chance to change course and become more included in the global community. 

The economic might of the US and only 2-4 EU countries is greater than the combined economic might of both Russia and China so unequivocally a Russia\China alliance is not about a real threat to global economic  hegemony

But its better for everyone to include both Russia and China peacefully in the global community without trade wars and sanctions or any unnecessary tension. So Biden is doing the right thing, he is trying the path of diplomacy and inclusivity but its  not so much about "breaking the current Russia\China " relationship but rather giving Russia choices and a better  way forward 

I remember when Trump  won the election in 2016, I have never seen Russia and its citizens so happy in my life. I was watching parts of RT and they had people celebrating in the streets of Moscow and various Russian news rooms....but I mean really celebrating and if you know Russians they dont often celebrate. 

And do you know why they were celebrating? Because they believed a Trump victory would be better for Russia with its relationship with the US and would lead to sanctions being dropped and I understand this and dont blame them. Watch this video if their is any doubt that Russia would much rather have a good and productive relationship with the US 

 

[ComradeYellow]

^Yet I don't know a single Trump supporter that cares about Russia xD, so it appears some Russians were perhaps misled or put faith in the notion that single American President can change course in any meaningful way.

Oh well, we're two countries now:  Blue and Red, and it was old Abe who said "A House Divided cannot Stand on itself", so unless we get a unifying force soon, expect same old BS, but with enhanced graphical features like more mass shootings and riots.

[Gorth]

11 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

I remember when Trump  won the election in 2016, I have never seen Russia and its citizens so happy in my life. I was watching parts of RT and they had people celebrating in the streets of Moscow and various Russian news rooms....but I mean really celebrating and if you know Russians they dont often celebrate.

I wouldn't trust anything coming out of Russia Today any more than the official Chinese propaganda garbage coming out of the Global Times... Did they celebrate because they thought Trump would be anything other than a loose cannon, bringing down a long time rival? Putin putting Trump in the White House would be akin to the German strategy in 1917 when they put Lenin on a train and sent him to Russia. The destabilizing effect led to Germany winning the war on the Eastern Front and Russia imploding.

Besides, unless a tectonic plate suddenly and unexpectedly submerges and takes China with it, it's going to be the worlds largest economy and then some in about a decade. The one other countries better ally with rather than the US if they know what is good for them. China's military may use shoddy 'made in China' materiel, but the Russian stuff is of a different caliber altogether. An alliance between a military savvy country and financially savvy country is not something to just dismiss out of hand.

[BruceVC]

1 minute ago, ComradeYellow said:

^Yet I don't know a single Trump supporter that cares about Russia xD, so it appears some Russians were perhaps misled or put faith in the notion that single American President can change course in any meaningful way.

Oh well, we're two countries now:  Blue and Red, and it was old Abe who said "A House Divided cannot Stand on itself", so unless we get a unifying force soon, expect same old BS, but with enhanced graphical features like more mass shootings and riots.

 Thats not completely  accurate, Trump on numerous occasions said things like " why do we want to fight with Russia " during his rallies which were about much of his base just parroting and cheering anything he said.....yes the rallies were about theater and his base loved these opportunities for grandstanding. But  many of his supporters would agree that " the US doesnt want to fight with Russia " so you could argue there were many Americans who wanted a better  relationship with Russia under Trump 

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/blakemontgomery/trump-supporters-love-russia-and-think-cnn-and-the-new-york

[ComradeYellow]

13 minutes ago, Gorth said:

China's military may use shoddy 'made in China' materiel, 

I'd say the quality of the Chinese military is approaching parity with that of the U.S., just on a tighter budget, as they don't blow 700+ billion a year on military and focus their budget more on improving infrastructure and domestic needs. 

Russians yes, have surpassed the U.S. in military tech.

[BruceVC]

28 minutes ago, Gorth said:

I wouldn't trust anything coming out of Russia Today any more than the official Chinese propaganda garbage coming out of the Global Times... Did they celebrate because they thought Trump would be anything other than a loose cannon, bringing down a long time rival? Putin putting Trump in the White House would be akin to the German strategy in 1917 when they put Lenin on a train and sent him to Russia. The destabilizing effect led to Germany winning the war on the Eastern Front and Russia imploding.

Besides, unless a tectonic plate suddenly and unexpectedly submerges and takes China with it, it's going to be the worlds largest economy and then some in about a decade. The one other countries better ally with rather than the US if they know what is good for them. China's military may use shoddy 'made in China' materiel, but the Russian stuff is of a different caliber altogether. An alliance between a military savvy country and financially savvy country is not something to just dismiss out of hand.

Its not just RT that had videos of how happy Russia was with the Trump victory, you will find numerous links and videos of how many Russians hoped and believed this would lead to a better US relationship...the sanctions on Russia do matter and do hurt Russia particularly  the financial sanctions around certain investments 

I disagree China will become the strongest economy in the next 10 years, China has an export driven economy and is not consumer driven which is the primary strength of the US economy. So China would have to change its entire economic model to surpass the US but at the moment export driven means people need to buy your goods to be sustainable and sanctions or trade wars with countries that have the most wealth would automatically curtail this like we saw with the recent US\China trade wars and that was just the US using limited sanctions 

But we dont want a global trade war with China because it will hurt globalization and that will impact all of us and of course it will also hurt the economy of the US and the likes of the EU

And  please dont misunderstand me, I am not dismissing the strength of China or its global influence in some areas but they dont have the same influence or impact as the combined might of the likes of the US and NATO countries  and its unlikely they ever will unless we see a collapse of the economies of these other countries 

Edited June 16, 2021 by BruceVC

[BruceVC]

@Gorth

Here is a good link around the Chinese economy, it may be a bit technical but its a good view of how it is structured 

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/040115/reasons-why-china-buys-us-treasury-bonds.asp#:~:text=Chinese Economics China is primarily a manufacturing hub,the U.S. than the U.S. sells to China.

[BruceVC]

https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2021-06-14-mediclinic-says-it-did-not-treat-mom-of-thembisa-10-babies-despite-claim-in-text-message-to-childrens-dad/

This  fake news story was created in SA that went global and many international media repeated it, the SA news house responsible for this is linked to other fake news stories and so is the specific journalist a man called Piet Rampedi

I dont blame the whole media for this but the specific people involved. Their were some South Africans that assumed this was true and even donated money to help the mother .....they are nice people and thought they  were dong the right thing and I dislike people being manipulated like this 

[Gorth]

3 hours ago, BruceVC said:

@Gorth

Here is a good link around the Chinese economy, it may be a bit technical but its a good view of how it is structured 

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/040115/reasons-why-china-buys-us-treasury-bonds.asp#:~:text=Chinese Economics China is primarily a manufacturing hub,the U.S. than the U.S. sells to China.

All I see is that China owns a substantial amount of the US Debt (1 trillion) and about 4 trillion USD as currency reserve. They pretty much have the fingers on the trigger of the US economy too. If push comes to shove, they can make it crash and burn, because they might have more influence on the currency exchange rates of the USD than the US has... (yes, I did see the historical reasons for it, keeping the currency they get paid in high and the currency they pay workers domestically in at a lower rate to keep it cheap).

 

But, I was referring to China (unlike some oil states I could mention) has started a long and steady process of moving away from its over reliance on a one trick pony, in this case manufacturing export. It still pays well, but the last decade it has been gradually replaced by domestic consumerism instead of export. But maybe JP Morgan can explain that better than me

https://www.jpmorgan.com/insights/research/china-economy-2021-en

JP Morgan predicts China will overtake USA as worlds larges economy around 2030, give or take a few years.

 

Edit: First time I read about this change of Chinese economy was indeed in the aftermath of the GFC, don't remember which news channel it was, sorry. Was a long time ago.

Edit2: Yes, my prediction of 10 years might have been a few years off JP Morgan, but I'm no economist. I leave stuff like the you and @Darkpriest

[Guard Dog]

here is your daily dose of stupid

[Pidesco]

Perhaps there's a context to that statement? Like, say, there being a history of white people actively setting minorities up against each other?

https://news.yahoo.com/white-supremacy-root-race-related-120244625.html

 

[BruceVC]

39 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

here is your daily dose of stupid

Thats something I sometimes come across in South Africa, this absurd notion that only a white person can be racist. Its not widely repeated but I still hear it 

So in this  case the Professor is absolving black people of taking any responsibility for bigotry because " if black person attacks an Asian its a  white peoples fault " because black people cant be racist. But they can be sexist, homophobic but somehow not racist.

And I think the confusion stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of what racism is? Any human being of any race can demonstrate bigotry. So of course black people can be racist in the same way they can express any other emotion or prejudice. We all the same and suggesting its not true is unintentionally and ironically racist itself  

[Pidesco]

1 minute ago, BruceVC said:

Thats something I sometimes come across in South Africa, this absurd notion that only a white person can be racist. Its not widely repeated but I still hear it 

So in this  case the Professor is absolving black people of taking any responsibility for bigotry because " if black person attacks an Asian its a  white peoples fault " because black people cant be racist. But they can be sexist, homophobic but somehow not racist.

And I think the confusion stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of what racism is? Any human being of any race can demonstrate bigotry. So of course black people can be racist in the same way they can express any other emotion or prejudice. We all the same and suggesting its not true is unintentionally and ironically racist itself  

That's not what the article says.

[BruceVC]

2 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

That's not what the article says.

I didnt read your link when I made post but I will read it now 

But that wont change the point I am making , their are some people who do say " black people cant be racist " and that is based on a strange view that racism is about power and since, they claim, black people have no power they cant be racist. It  illogical and doesnt make sense based on what any bigotry is 

https://simonesamuels.medium.com/no-black-people-cant-be-racist-eb6fddd18603

[BruceVC]

23 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

Perhaps there's a context to that statement? Like, say, there being a history of white people actively setting minorities up against each other?

https://news.yahoo.com/white-supremacy-root-race-related-120244625.html

 

Thanks for the link, I am still not convinced in any way that attacks on Asian people by black people  is because of white supremacy. Its a choice made by an individual and often it will be directly because of racism, sometimes it may be criminal 

The link says  " So when a Black person attacks an Asian person, the encounter is fueled perhaps by racism, but very specifically by white supremacy. White supremacy does not require a white person to perpetuate it "

Thats inaccurate, white supremacy can only consist of white people and  not all white people will automatically be welcomed to a group of white supremacists  These groups have their own flawed codes based on pseudo-science and what defines a white person

But a non-white person who commits bigotry cannot be accused of doing it because of white supremacy  because they not white. So we would just call this racism or sexism or homophobia 

Maybe I am misunderstanding the article so if you can explain what point the professor is making that would be appreciated because I am always interested in these types of debates from people who want to debate the facts and correct definitions of what bigotry is 

 

[Pidesco]

3 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

I didnt read your link when I made post but I will read it now 

But that wont change the point I am making , their are some people who do say " black people cant be racist " and that is based on a strange view that racism is about power and since, they claim, black people have no power they cant be racist. It  illogical and doesnt make sense based on what any bigotry is 

https://simonesamuels.medium.com/no-black-people-cant-be-racist-eb6fddd18603

For some reason that article you posted is defining racism as institutional and as a power differential. Which is kind of a weird way of framing the problem and I don't think it helps anyone.

Better or worse (I don't think either of those articles are very good), what those two articles seem to be getting at (through a seriously meandering path) is that the true problem that needs to be addressed is systemic racism. And using "black people can be racist too" as a counter argument to "systemic racism is the problem" is either stupidly missing the point, or willingly trying to divert the attention from the actual issue.

[BruceVC]

2 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

For some reason that article you posted is defining racism as institutional and as a power differential. Which is kind of a weird way of framing the problem and I don't think it helps anyone.

Better or worse (I don't think either of those articles are very good), what those two articles seem to be getting at (through a seriously meandering path) is that the true problem that needs to be addressed is systemic racism. And using "black people can be racist too" as a counter argument to "systemic racism is the problem" is either stupidly missing the point, or willingly trying to divert the attention from the actual issue.

I agree with you that in the examples of structural racism anywhere in the world you cant dismiss the point by saying " black people can be racist to " 

These are 2 separate issues and shouldnt be compared 

[Pidesco]

11 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

I agree with you that in the examples of structural racism anywhere in the world you cant dismiss the point by saying " black people can be racist to " 

These are 2 separate issues and shouldnt be compared 

The thing is "individual people are often racist" is a problem that should be tackled individually, so it shouldn't even really have enter the public discourse, except as perhaps context. Systemic racist, however, is a sociopolitical issue that perpetuates and aggravates a bunch of different problems in people's lives, including "individual people are often racist."

So the problem with, say, the George Floyd case wasn't that that specific policeman was a ****bag and that he should be dealt with, but rather that institutions around George Floyd and the cop facilitate and support, deliberately or not, the cop's behavior.

[Guard Dog]

1 hour ago, Pidesco said:

Perhaps there's a context to that statement? Like, say, there being a history of white people actively setting minorities up against each other?

https://news.yahoo.com/white-supremacy-root-race-related-120244625.html

 

I read the article. The statement was stupid on his face. The premise that she’s trying to make is also stupid. It’s tantamount to saying “society” made me do it. That is a steaming pile of crap. With the exception of actual mental illness every single one of us is solely responsible for her own actions and attitudes. We all wake up and make a choice. Am I going to be a decent person today or am I going to be a f——-g a———e. Blaming the choices we all make on white supremacy, or racism, or society or whatever is as stupid as it is false.

[Pidesco]

25 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

I read the article. The statement was stupid on his face. The premise that she’s trying to make is also stupid. It’s tantamount to saying “society” made me do it. That is a steaming pile of crap. With the exception of actual mental illness every single one of us is solely responsible for her own actions and attitudes. We all wake up and make a choice. Am I going to be a decent person today or am I going to be a f——-g a———e. Blaming the choices we all make on white supremacy, or racism, or society or whatever is as stupid as it is false.

Responsibility for your own actions does not stand diametrically opposed to society and institutions having a detrimental effect on your actions and behaviors. Both can be true. The point isn't about individual people, it is that something should be done about negative systemic effects on people's decisions.

I recommend watching the fourth season of The Wire, to understand systemic racism. Also because it is really good.

[BruceVC]

8 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

Responsibility for your own actions does not stand diametrically opposed to society and institutions having a detrimental effect on your actions and behaviors. Both can be true. The point isn't about individual people, it is that something should be done about negative systemic effects on people's decisions.

I recommend watching the fourth season of The Wire, to understand systemic racism. Also because it is really good.

I loved the Wire, one of my best shows and I watched the whole series twice

But I dont remember the systemic  racist themes, I am not saying they werent their I just dont specifically  remember them but I do remember the violence committed by the gangs around the drugs and the " baddies " like Chris and Marlo...I loved those guys 

If you can summarize what are your examples of the systemic racism in season 4 so I understand the context ?

Edited June 16, 2021 by BruceVC