The All Things Political Topic - A conservative is someone who makes no changes and consults his grandmother when in doubt

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, Keyrock said:

Oligarchy. On the surface, the US is a federal republic and the elected politicians run the country. In reality, a large percentage of them are career politicians. Politicians should, if this were a truly democratic system, be beholden to their constituents and there are no doubt a few good men and women in Washington that are just that. The problem is that the career politicians aren't there to meet the needs of their constituents, they are there to do the bidding of the donor class since they are the primary funders of their reelection campaigns and the goal of a career politician is to keep getting reelected. The donor class are a group of ludicrously wealthy elites, these are your oligarchs. While they may not directly be running the country, they may as well be given that career politicians cater to them, not to peons like me.

Keyrock thats a very cynical and jaded view to have, are  you sure you believe that?  In the US you have  for months presidential candidate races that are normally influenced by public debates in open forums.  Then people  vote on the presidential candidate  and then the national presidential  election against the  opposition party 

Its not the elites or big business that decides this success,  its  the people who go out to vote that decide this. Didnt the Trump victory in  2016 teach us that? Trump won despite massive media,   most global public opinion  and big business negativity towards his campaign 

I understand your concern but it doesn't make real historical sense  or rather its not the main factor in deciding political leadership in the US?

 

 

 

 

[uuuhhii]

considering how cheap lobbying can be

reality often more cynical than words

[ShadySands]

7 hours ago, BruceVC said:

But based on what evidence?

I dunno, it's not my claim. I just remembered hearing a lot about that a while back. Unrelated to the Princeton study, I think Jimmy Carter also said we'd become an oligarchy with unlimited bribery after the Citizens United ruling. Just looking up US oligarchy is going to give you many arguments both for an against. 

https://youtu.be/e4Mw1Bspb2M?feature=shared

[Keyrock]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

Keyrock thats a very cynical and jaded view to have

It sure is. They say that ignorance is bliss, but I find it very hard not to notice the similarities of today's Murica and the Murica of roughly a century ago, when the robber barons and crony capitalism (the term didn't exist back then, but it applies nonetheless) were running amok. It took FDR to pull this country out of it. Unfortunately, over the past several decades, many of the measures taken to prevent that from happening again have been systematically stripped away. Wouldn't you know it, crony capitalism is back and better than ever, baby!

Didnt the Trump victory in  2016 teach us that? Trump won despite massive media,   most global public opinion  and big business negativity towards his campaign

2016 was a shock to the system to the establishment elites, which is at least partially why they have been attacking him as vociferously as they have ever since. I mean, there are STILL those today, in 2023, running with the Russia Gate narrative that has been THOROUGHLY debunked. The establishment elites will never admit this, not even to themselves, but it was their own hubris that was their undoing in 2016. The establishment elites, especially those on the left side of the aisle, welcomed Trump at first as he threw his hat in the race. They joked about how easy a victory it would be for them if Trump became the Republican nominee, which he did. People were popping the corks on their champagne bottles, even as poll numbers that should have been alarming to them came in, and were having President Hillary (turns my stomach to even type that) parties. Then the results came in. 

[Pidesco]

The notion that the US is an oligarchy, but Trump is not a part of it is hilariously dimwitted.

[Gromnir]

2 hours ago, ShadySands said:

I dunno, it's not my claim. I just remembered hearing a lot about that a while back. Unrelated to the Princeton study, I think Jimmy Carter also said we'd become an oligarchy with unlimited bribery after the Citizens United ruling. Just looking up US oligarchy is going to give you many arguments both for an against. 

https://youtu.be/e4Mw1Bspb2M?feature=shared

is arguments the US deserves to be considered as oligarchy, but you always gotta be wary o' sources. US as oligarchy is particular popular amongst the conspiracy minded-- the idea the illuminati, a cabal o' powerful corporations, billionaires and government entities is behind your troubles is appealing in its simplicity. 

The ‘black’ hole in Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s housing conspiracy theory

dude is nuttier than squirrel p00p, but you see once again his conspiracy driven outlook. for many conspiracy folks, covid were fake and driven by pharma and government self-interest.  likewise, the housing shortage is similar caused by a shadowy corporate entity with an ominous name, and government interests is aware o' the problem but ignore 'cause they is complicit... and facts be damned, right? is the narrative and not facts which is important. it all fits, yes? 

am ok with considering the US for inclusion as an oligarch, but you gotta be suspicious when such claims come from conspiracy folks, 'cause is part o' their cracked mindset.

most americans were raised in schools which taught that our republic with a representative democracy relying on checks and balances were the solution. we got a whole mythology built up around certain famous political figures and we construct great monuments in their honor. try and explain how liberty and democracy is creating opposing tensions does not compute no matter how much we explain. the laws created by the democratic process place limits on citizen actions. don't smoke in restaurants. don't drive your car w/o a seat belt. dumping toxic waste on your own land is verboten. etc.

athenian democracy were a mess and not just 'cause women couldn't vote... and their reliance on slavery. every choice o' the athenian body politic became a popularity contest. demagogues and petty self interest had a way o' undermining best intentions.

the US solution to the democracy problem were to make government inefficient and to limit its powers-- three separate branches, a divided legislature, a bill of rights which is a list o' stuff off limits to The People and the democratic process, etc. the founders baked gridlock into the US system purposeful and yet we all act surprised by how incompetent and inefficient it is at times. unfortunate, 'cause we is raised and taught the religion o' democracy from a young age...

US representative democracy is a good thing, but it ain't deserving the myth, and explanations for why people is hungry, homeless, out of work and a hundred other misfortunes is not depending on the cabal o' powerful people, companies and government forces.

US as oligarchy is a valid academic question, but beware conspiracy and whataboutism.

@Bartimaeus am thinking trump is a problem for many folks, even sooper smart people. perhaps is smart folks who is most baffled by trump. when trump first became President, many were unconcerned 'cause the US system doesn't give the President the power to do everything trump claimed he were gonna do. lotta hot air. trump went ahead and did anyways. after four years, people kept using same arguments. january 6 happens and we got people on this board and elsewhere suggesting the real problem were tds, 'cause is no way trump coulda' remained in power even if he delayed the electoral count. foolishness.

similar, smarty people seem incapable o' realizing that a violation o' law or morality does not exist which would move his base from their idolatry. trump has spent the last few years telling his people that the reason he is being prosecuted is 'cause they are coming after your freedoms and trump is standing in their way. to the trump base and most republicans, if 45 is convicted it will prove just how right trump were.

facts don't matter. smarty people such as tribe can't seem to process the fact that a large % o' americans has been radicalized or simply divorced from reality for too long. tribe lives in a logical and rational world o' newtonian physics where effects follow causes. 2023 US is so not tribe's world.

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

Edited December 3, 2023 by Gromnir

[Bartimaeus]

Trump was our great 'coming out of the closet' moment - for grievances, for retribution, for ignorance, fear, hate, and intolerance. That phenomenon isn't even strictly limited to him and his, as those on the opposite side of the aisle have obviously become more hardened themselves in response. But people don't easily give up on their icons and their heroes, those that made them who they are now, who finally represented them and who gave them a voice: we're in this for the long haul and it's bewildering that so many of these experts can't seem to realize that.

[Gorth]

6 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

But people don't easily give up on their icons and their heroes

Waiting for the mobs to start tearing down statues of notorious slave owners across the US... like George Washington

 

[Gromnir]

39 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Waiting for the mobs to start tearing down statues of notorious slave owners across the US... like George Washington

 

ignorance is never an excuse. even so, out o' all the founding fathers, am thinking washington might be least responsible for his acceptance o' slavery, 'cause he were a rube. is one o' those things not covered often in the myth surrounding the heroes o' the revolution, but washington were probable the least educated o' the founders. some grammar school and the books he read and observed as important to him were 'bout etiquette.  18th century versions o' miss manners advice. serious.

don't let southerners fool you, slavery, amongst educated men o' europe and the americas, were recognized as evil and ultimately self destructive even in 1776. yankee abolitionists were some o' the most vocal advocates o' revolution and they were the ones howling indignation at the eventual 3/5ths compromise. the founders knew slavery were wrong, but too many o' the rich and landed men who were part o' the revolution and then contributed to the Constitution depended on slavery... although is doubtful they could envision just how much more slavery would become ingrained in american economic fortunes over the next fifty years.  the benign and educated southerner thought slavery as an american institution would die natural sooner as 'posed to later, but they didn't have the courage to step forward and kill the beast themselves. no excuse for thomas jefferson and others. but washington? still not a good excuse, but serious, history books do not often dwell on the disdain many o' the founders felt for the bumpkin putting on airs who would become our first President.

regardless, washington weren't dumb, so he don't deserve excuses, but he were pretty darn ignorant even for a man o' his time... at least relative to the other founders. maybe that makes a difference? maybe not. am not judging but am filling in one o' those unfortunate blanks in the american myth.

...

converse, the notion women deserved equal rights and were at least as mental capable as men were an extreme fringe notion even amongst the educated men who authored the Constitution in 1787. the wollstonencraft movement were seen as somewhere between laughable and dangerous by the educated founders.

jeopardy worthy, mary wollstonecraft whose name became synonymous with early english/american feminism, were the mother o' mary shelly, the author o' frankenstein. 

HA! Good Fun!

[InsaneCommander]

On 12/1/2023 at 12:22 PM, Malcador said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/01/venezuela-oil-guyana-essequibo-vote-nicolas-maduro

Exceedingly dumb to do, given the US dislike for the Venezuelan government for so long.

Venezuelan Voters Back Maduro’s Claim to a Neighbor’s Territory

Supposedly he is just trying to affect the elections, but I wouldn't be surprised if he moves forward with this.

[BruceVC]

On 12/4/2023 at 2:47 AM, Gorth said:

Waiting for the mobs to start tearing down statues of notorious slave owners across the US... like George Washington

 

I expect that from radical  left  and  some BLM protestors, it will fail but people will still try   

Its  no different to demands  in the UK to take down Churchills statue because he was  racist. And its always motivated  by the same reason,  outrage about something they ostensibly  did in the past while ignoring or being unaware of their overall contribution towards  the country  but then judging them on today's values and morality 

There is even a word  for  it,  presentism

 

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/presentism

 

 

 

[uuuhhii]

overall contribution

that was always a ridiculous excuse for anything

does anyone get a free murder card for donate a few million to charity

[Malcador]

5 hours ago, uuuhhii said:

overall contribution

that was always a ridiculous excuse for anything

does anyone get a free murder card for donate a few million to charity

Depends on what country you're from.

The myth of Churchill is a strong one

[xzar_monty]

On 12/3/2023 at 5:24 PM, ShadySands said:

Unrelated to the Princeton study, I think Jimmy Carter also said we'd become an oligarchy with unlimited bribery after the Citizens United ruling.

Btw, I wonder whether Carter will turn out to be the last decent US president in a long, long, long, long etc. time. Opinions will vary, of course. (Anyone care to share theirs? Any Americans, especially; I'd be really interested.)

Also, extremely heavy facepalming every time @BruceVC types the words "radical left". Like, dude, man.

[BruceVC]

41 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Depends on what country you're from.

The myth of Churchill is a strong one

Well  his important stand he took against the Nazi is really what he is remembered for and thats no myth 

[BruceVC]

6 hours ago, uuuhhii said:

overall contribution

that was always a ridiculous excuse for anything

does anyone get a free murder card for donate a few million to charity

So the Nazi being defeated in WW2 is not a big deal to you?

Thats what I mean by overall  contribution and the UK and Churchill played  a part in the  Allies victory 

[Malcador]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

Well  his important stand he took against the Nazi is really what he is remembered for and thats no myth 

Sure, except its one where the war couldn't have been won without him.  The idea that there's some sort of morality ledger is interesting, though.

Edited December 5, 2023 by Malcador

[BruceVC]

3 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Sure, except its one where the war couldn't have been won with him.  The idea that there's some sort of morality ledger is interesting, though.

What does a morality ledger mean? I assume its where we judge people  on their lives and that includes the good and the bad?

[Malcador]

59 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

What does a morality ledger mean? I assume its where we judge people  on their lives and that includes the good and the bad?

Yes, but the interesting part is the weighting people apply.  Kissinger is an interesting exampe, see Ferguson's quote from earlier. Which is pretty bankrupt, but people run with it.

In any case, people get really upset about statues of dead people either way, which is funny at least for the people that love them so as no one really seems to pay them much attention

[Zoraptor]

I expect that from radical  right  and  some AWB protestors, it will fail but people will still try.

It's  no different to demands Gori, Georgia take down Stalin's statue because he was a commie. And it's always motivated  by the same reason,  outrage about something they ostensibly  did in the past while ignoring or being unaware of their overall contribution towards  the country  but then judging them on today's values and morality. His important stand he took against the Nazi is really what he is remembered for and that's no myth.

So the Nazi being defeated in WW2 is not a big deal to you? That's what I mean by overall  contribution and the USSR and Stalin played  a part in the  Allies' victory.

Yeah, he probably could have achieved the same result without being quite so much of a prick about things, but then so could Churchill...

[Gromnir]

speaker johnson explaining why the the january 6 tapes has not yet been released.

...

uhmm...

HA! Good Fun!

[Hurlshort]

Owning actual people is also a bit different than being racist. Not that it should be minimized. It's just good to keep it in perspective. Did his racism come across in any policy decisions? (In regards to Churchill.)

My opinion is that statues of people are stupid. The exception might be sports heroes outside of their stadiums. If we are going to immortalize someone, it should be for cool stuff and not politics or war.

Edited December 5, 2023 by Hurlshort

[uuuhhii]

29 minutes ago, Hurlshort said:

Owning actual people is also a bit different than being racist. Not that it should be minimized. It's just good to keep it in perspective. Did his racism come across in any policy decisions? (In regards to Churchill.)

My opinion is that statues of people are stupid. The exception might be sports heroes outside of their stadiums. If we are going to immortalize someone, it should be for cool stuff and not politics or war.

statue are political since ancient egypt days

idiot love seeing their big face on big rock

best part is the next idiot sometime replace the face of the last idiot with their own

save a lot of work

[Zoraptor]

1 hour ago, Hurlshort said:

Did his racism come across in any policy decisions? (In regards to Churchill).

There's actually an entire wikipedia article on his views which touches on their influence on policy.

[Hurlshort]

20 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

There's actually an entire wikipedia article on his views which touches on their influence on policy.

Pretty good mix of information, but it smacks as much of rampant nationalism and imperialism as it does white supremacy. Not that those things make it any better, but they definitely fit with the times. It's also a pretty mixed bag, with this quote: 

Quote

In 1906, Churchill stated that "We will endeavour ... to advance the principle of equal rights of civilised men irrespective of colour."

Contrasted by this: 

Quote

I do not admit ... for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place.

His comments on India are even more contradictory. So it's safe to say Churchill was a pretty complex case, rather than an outright bigot or racist. I'd also say it is safe to say that when it came to the politics of race, he tended to stick with what was politically expedient over any specific morality. He's not exactly a paragon of virtue, but I don't get the impression that he is seen that way by the British. 

That being said, I'll stick by my stance on politicians and statues.