U.S. Politics: It's Torture

[Inigima]

So, where are we this morning? Did federal agents really refuse to comply with a court order? If so, are they still?

[denstorebog]

27 minutes ago, Inigima said:

So, where are we this morning? Did federal agents really refuse to comply with a court order? If so, are they still?

Well, sites like CNN, HuffPo and MSNBC are still going with headlines about the refusal, while Foxnews is now going with

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/29/dhs-will-continue-to-enforce-trumps-travel-ban.html

It's also interesting how Foxnews consistently describes the JFK protesters as being in the hundreds, and HuffPo says in the thousands. Not really sure who's right, but I did find it amusing that in the video embedded on the page in the link, the Foxnews reporter accidentally says 'thousands' and quickly corrects himself.

[Mindwalker]

1 hour ago, sToNED_CAT said:

The second one week be to apply ideological test on all other immigrants - ban sharia supporters, muslim brotherhood members, communists and violent anarchists and Chinese who are not dissidents, but are supporting PRC government.

LMAO! That'll totally work. Because especially ISIS people are just so honest. How about a standardized application question, like: "Do you or did you ever plan to overthrow the government/ establish sharia/ discriminate against minorities such as..." And the immigrant will go: "Well, now that you mention it..." All those law enforcement and legislative have been so stupid, how did they not come up with it?

[Ran]

Dulles airport's officials have apparently relented, at least according to some video and tweets from the last few hours showing people who were being detained finally making their way out to the cheers of demonstrators. Not sure about other airports.

[denstorebog]

4 minutes ago, Ran said:

Dulles airport's officials have apparently relented, at least according to some video and tweets from the last few hours. Not sure about other airports.

Relented to refuse the administration or refuse the court order´?

EDIT:  No, yeah, I see what you mean now. Twitter really is the only medium for developing stories like these, it seems. The implications of which are kinda scary.

[denstorebog]

Anyone else feel that after the confusion of today, we're quickly moving towards the real-world version of Varys' riddle where the soldier must decide for himself whether to do the bidding of the king, the priest or the rich man?

"In front of him stands a member of the joint chiefs of staff, a federal judge and an orange blowhard ..."

[Werthead]

Quote

I'm pretty sure no one signed as translator, because he was promised green card.

No, a lot of Iraqis and Afghans did it because they wanted to help their countries. But when that fucked up and translators started being assassinated, those green cards helped a lot.

Quote

 

Overall the bans are good first step... The second one week be to apply ideological test on all other immigrants - ban sharia supporters, muslim brotherhood members, communists and violent anarchists and Chinese who are not dissidents, but are supporting PRC government.

 

Ban almost all Chinese people from travelling to the United States? Sure. Then China can call in its debts and we can watch the impact of that on the United States in short order.

 

Quote

 

I think you need to study the history some more or perhaps filter the hysteria of the media. Thus far, Trump's actions are not anywhere close to what happened in Germany in the 1930s. The properties he shares with them are shared by a wide variety of societies. The dominant theme of his administration so far is nationalism ("America first!") which has existed in various forms and intensities in all nation states. The other themes (safety over diversity, nativism, etc.) are also common to many different countries throughout time.

Of course, it is possible for him to move towards fascism, but to claim that he is already there or even headed in that direction based on his actions up until now is completely absurd.

 

I agree, because Hitler's moves were pre-meditated, carefully considered - apart from when his opponents fucked up and gave him an opening he could use, like at Munich where he was in literal stupefied disbelief at Chamberlain's piece of paper when France, Britain and Russia could have torn through Germany like it was tissue paper at the time - and he was always in the driving seat.

Trump's moves are not very pre-meditated at all, no serious thought about the consequences of his decision have been made (he seems constantly caught off-guard and rattled when people disagree with his decisions and tell him so loudly: that's not how it works in the board room). He is also extremely easily manipulated. The problem is only partially Trump, but more serious are those circling around him who are using his susceptibility to flattery and what he sees on TV (opposed to the reality) to get their own way.

Comparing the Trump administration to the Nazis is actually slightly insulting to the Nazis. At least they had a plan and an ideology that was in the public domain (they even wrote a manual for it in 1924 and published it which even outlined the "evils" of the Jews and that Germany needs to invade and conquer Russia) and fairly consistent. Trump and his coterie are haphazardly stumbling from one half-baked, cretinous and unworkable notion to the next with no care for the consequences of their actions.

[Happy Ent]

Trump’s policies have a lot in common with the American “progressive movement” around the turn of the last century. See Illiberal Reformers: Race, Eugenics, and American Economics in the Progressive Era Thomas C. Leonard. I think that is a much better historical model for how Trump’s US sees itself. (In particular, fear of destruction of social cohesion and labour market policies because of non-European immigration.)

The Hitler comparisons are just bonkers. The only reason for comparing Trump to Hitler is if you know no other historical figure you dislike. It’s the historically illiterate person’s attempt at a smear.

[Ran]

On another topic from earlier in the thread, the "special relationship", General Hayden's memoir Playing to the Edge has a pretty remarkable incident. Charged with creating a backup facility for the NSA in case something should happen to make the Fort Meade headquarters inoperable, he created something that could handle about 80% of what the NSA could do, with 20% of the load -- basically just the most critical stuff.

But, he wondered, what happened if something happened to both Fort Meade and the backup facility?

So he called up his counterpart in the UK's GCHQ and informed him that should the NSA be completely out of commission, the entire U.S. signals intelligence apparatus would be handed over to GCHQ for them to run on our behalf.

So far as I know, that still stands, and it shows how closely intertwined the U.S. and U.K. have been at least in regards to intelligence collection.

[Happy Ent]

17 minutes ago, Werthead said:

(they even wrote a manual for it in 1924 and published it which even outlined the "evils" of the Jews and that Germany needs to invade and conquer Russia) 

I read (a good deal of) Mein Kampf a few years ago and found it very illuminating.

Good questions to win a beer: Which people are singled out by Hitler, page after vitriolic page, as the eternal enemy of the German people, filled with unrelenting evil, characterised by moral and cultural corruption? And, bonus question: which is the model nation that did everything right and which Germany ought to emulate?

[Einheri]

26 minutes ago, denstorebog said:

Anyone else feel that after the confusion of today, we're quickly moving towards the real-world version of Varys' riddle where the soldier must decide for himself whether to do the bidding of the king, the priest or the rich man?

"In front of him stands a member of the joint chiefs of staff, a federal judge and an orange blowhard ..."

If that’s the case, then it doesn’t bode very well for the Left as the military (and ex-military people) tend to be more conservative and nationalistic than the rest of the population, and it’s especially  true for professionalized militaries (like the US military).

[Werthead]

 

Quote

 

The Hitler comparisons are just bonkers. The only reason for comparing Trump to Hitler is if you know no other historical figure you dislike. It’s the historically illiterate person’s attempt at a smear.

 

Comparing Trump to Hitler on a personal level is indeed erroneous. A closer comparison would be Berlusconi. However, there are actual neo-Nazis supporting Trump and the supporting apparatus of propaganda is not a million miles away, although both the digital dimension and the awareness people have of it is different. There are relatively few direct points of comparison, but the overall direction of travel is not dissimilar, including demonisation of a handy "Other" and simply spouting lies which a lot of people will swallow up regardless.

 

Quote

 

Good questions to win a beer: Which people are singled out by Hitler, page after vitriolic page, as the eternal enemy of the German people, filled with unrelenting evil, characterised by moral and cultural corruption? And, bonus question: which is the model nation that did everything right and which Germany ought to emulate.

 

The Jews and Bolsheviks both get that treatment. And the nation that gets some credit I think is Britain. Hitler was very taken with the concentration camps we built during the Boer War and had some respect for the British Army, which he saw in action (sometimes rather closer than he wanted) in WWI, as he was stationed opposite the British lines. I don't think he thought Germany ought to emulate Britain in all things, though, he was extremely critical of Britain's WWI alliance with Japan (ha!) and its failure to keep the USA in check.

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 hour ago, sToNED_CAT said:

Such bills were long overdue - at least since 60ties. Direct action is not free speech. I'm actually hoping they pass similar federal laws that clearly state, that the forms of direct action like riots and blocking of infrastructure and various industrial projects are not free speech, and the organisers and protestors should be held financially liable for damage and economic losses.

There are other countries where they can go. USA is not the only place where you can ask for asylum, you know.

I'm pretty sure no one signed as translator, because he was promised green card.

Overall the bans are good first step... The second one week be to apply ideological test on all other immigrants - ban sharia supporters, muslim brotherhood members, communists and violent anarchists and Chinese who are not dissidents, but are supporting PRC government.

While "Direct Action" is not necessarily free speech it is in most cases "peaceful assembly" a right also expressly protected by the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution.

[sToNED_CAT]

45 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

LMAO! That'll totally work. Because especially ISIS people are just so honest. How about a standardized application question, like: "Do you or did you ever plan to overthrow the government/ establish sharia/ discriminate against minorities such as..." And the immigrant will go: "Well, now that you mention it..."

There are other ways to find out what person really thinks, especially in era of social networks.

55 minutes ago, Ran said:

Interesting time period you're complaining about, the era of the Civil Rights movement, the Anti-Vietnam movement, the Women's Rights Movement, the Gay Rights Movement...

Why do you care about who the U.S. permits into the country, exactly?

1. And era of political violence, chaos and riots. I have no problem with freedom of speech. I have problem with people who equate freedom of speech with destructive, often violent acts.

2. I care about whole western civilization. Europe is already overrun, US still has a chance.

33 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Ban almost all Chinese people from travelling to the United States? Sure. Then China can call in its debts and we can watch the impact of that on the United States in short order.

Comparing the Trump administration to the Nazis is actually slightly insulting to the Nazis. At least they had a plan and an ideology that was in the public domain (they even wrote a manual for it in 1924 and published it which even outlined the "evils" of the Jews and that Germany needs to invade and conquer Russia) and fairly consistent. Trump and his coterie are haphazardly stumbling from one half-baked, cretinous and unworkable notion to the next with no care for the consequences of their actions.

1. China cannot "call in their debt". They can stop buying new one, but they have been doing it for a while anyway.

2. No, MSM media would like you to believe Trump has no plan, but thats BS. In fact he planned some parts of his agenda decades ago (protectionism), and a lot if it are ideas proposed by conservatives for some time too.

[butterbumps!]

37 minutes ago, Happy Ent said:

The Hitler comparisons are just bonkers. The only reason for comparing Trump to Hitler is if you know no other historical figure you dislike. It’s the historically illiterate person’s attempt at a smear.

I do think there's an issue of historical illiteracy, and I think it's kind of systemic in the US.  Except for fairly cursory survey courses, we don't get into much modern world history over here in HS, and if things haven't changed too much since I went to college, 2 history courses are enough to satisfy the requirement at many schools.   And you can pass out of that with AP credits in many cases (AP Euro and US Gov would satisfy, neither of which covers modern world history really).   Combine that with English classes that go heavy on the dystopian Orwellian lit, and, well, I guess everything starts looking like a nail.

I think people are reaching for the Fascism/ Hitler comparisons because I think a lot of us just don't have the language or historical context to articulate something more precise.  And I don't think the comparison hinges on "dislike."   I think for many people, it's more about seeing Trump as a dangerous demagogue who exploits bigotry to scapegoat groups of people, and doesn't appear to care about democratic norms or liberal values, which, they fear, can lead to a truly oppressive state.  The "Hitler" comparisons become a (not so great) shorthand.

[denstorebog]

8 minutes ago, sToNED_CAT said:

2. I care about whole western civilization. Europe is already overrun, US still has a chance.

That's weird, because I've been hearing this for 15 years now. Sitting in my European apartment, looking out my European window and living my casual European life, it's like I just can't see the devastation of Europe that I've been promised for so long. Crime in Western Europe is low as ever, especially compared to the US. The endless waves of immigrants have failed to materialize. We hear a couple of of horror stories now and then, but statistically we should still be more worried about whales and pale-faced school shooters.

Still, I'd like to hear your story of living in Europe and how you experienced those dark days when Europe fell.

[sToNED_CAT]

Of course comparing Trump to Hitler is laughable. You know who would be the best person to compare him to? Theodore Roosevelt. Nationalism? Check. Protectionism, while having low taxes? Check. Demanding that immigrants conform to american values? Check. Ironically Obama once compared himself to Roosevelt too, although for different reasons.

[Einheri]

9 minutes ago, denstorebog said:

 We hear a couple of of horror stories now and then, but statistically we should still be more worried about whales and pale-faced school shooters.

While I can agree that the terror threat is often overstated, the above is simply not true.

[Werthead]

14 minutes ago, sToNED_CAT said:

2. I care about whole western civilization. Europe is already overrun, US still has a chance.

Europe is not "already overrun". This is the same type of erroneous reporting that led to Americans believing that Birmingham was a Muslim city under Sharia law, which was news to the hundreds of thousands of people living there.

Quote

 

1. China cannot "call in their debt". They can stop buying new one, but they have been doing it for a while anyway.

 

China absolutely can call in its debt, but doing so would damage the Chinese economy as well and potentially trigger a global financial crisis worse than the 2008 one.

However, in the case of a major confrontation with the United States, China could do it to throw the country's economy into chaos, as long as it was willing to take the hit on its own finances as well.
 

Quote

 

2. No, MSM media would like you to believe Trump has no plan, but thats BS. In fact he planned some parts of his agenda decades ago (protectionism), and a lot if it are ideas proposed by conservatives for some time too.

 

So Trump has a long-term masterplan, so he's more like Hitler after all? Interesting.

What is the underlying ideological basis and central tenets of Trumpism then?

[Tempra]

3 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Europe is not "already overrun". This is the same type of erroneous reporting that led to Americans believing that Birmingham was a Muslim city under Sharia law, which was news to the hundreds of thousands of people living there.

China absolutely can call in its debt, but doing so would damage the Chinese economy as well and potentially trigger a global financial crisis worse than the 2008 one.

However, in the case of a major confrontation with the United States, China could do it to throw the country's economy into chaos, as long as it was willing to take the hit on its own finances as well.
 

So Trump has a long-term masterplan, so he's more like Hitler after all? Interesting.

What is the underlying ideological basis and central tenets of Trumpism then?

China cannot call the debt because the bonds it holds are not put bonds.  They are payable upon maturation.