Jump to content

US Politics: Loyalty Oaths for Everyone!


Mexal

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, IamMe90 said:

I didn't say anything about socialism. In fact, I didn't even make a positive assertion about capitalism.

All I did was point out that your rebuke against Crazy Cat Lady isn't convincing. An economic system can still produce political outcomes.  

Sure but it isn’t guaranteed outcome based upon the economic system.  

James,

What neighbor of China treated it as an existential threat that prompted Mao’s totalitarian state?  You do realize it was the Communist Government of Vietnam that pushed Pol Pot out of power, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Socialism has no totalitarian tendancies?  Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot might not agree.

That's not a tendency. It's only proof that socialism can be used by dictators as a cover for their tyranny.

Same could be said of "economic liberty" or even of "liberty" full stop - ironically.

At the very least I think the tendency of capitalism to veer towards oligarchy/plutocracy is far more pronounced than any supposed tendency of socialism to lead to authoritarianism or totalitarianism.

Your case would be far stronger if you'd written "communism" instead of socialism.

Like James, I also have the feeling we've had such an exchange before. An entire thread in fact.

That's disappointing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IamMe90 said:

It is true that semantically, neither capitalism nor socialism are political systems. However, that isn't mutually exclusive with the proposition that capitalism, if adopted as an economic system, naturally predisposes society toward authoritarian ends, politically. 

That's where I was going with that. Thanks for explaining it better than I did!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎2‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 0:45 PM, Durckad said:

You could literally only change a few names in this post and it perfectly apply to conservatives during the Obama years. Methinks the conservatives are not so clean of this radical, eliminationist rhetoric that you so dislike.

That's a gross exaggeration and assuredly too broad a brush.  I don't recall any of the conservatives here saying Malia and Sasha needed to be brought low.  Sure Obama needed to be opposed politically, but admit it, we'd all be happier right now if we were in Romney's second term.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Socialism has no totalitarian tendancies?  Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot might not agree.

Scot, those men were imperfect socialists with some character flaws.  Next time they implement socialism, it will be awesome, dontchaknow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

I guess a lot of this depends on how one wants to define “socialism”.

Me personally, I believe that decentralized markets, have some advantages.

You don't need private ownership of the means of production to have decentralised markets.

1 hour ago, IamMe90 said:

It is true that semantically, neither capitalism nor socialism are political systems. However, that isn't mutually exclusive with the proposition that capitalism, if adopted as an economic system, naturally predisposes society toward authoritarian ends, politically. 

I'd say pure capitalism doesn't actually have a political system, as suggested by the most pro-capitalist parties' calls for smaller government. Any political decision is about how to interfere in the free market, and to the extent such interference happens at all, the system isn't pure capitalism. Though as long as there is a government, I'd agree strong capitalism will tend towards authoritarianism as the wealthy and powerful seek to preserve and improve their own positions. The more the economic system moves towards socialism, the more important the government is, and that government can be anywhere on the democratic-authoritarian spectrum.

The big problem with "authoritarian" governments is when they interfere in people's non-economic lives, and the issue there isn't a lack of democracy - if minorities are legally persecuted, it doesn't make any difference whether that's imposed by a single absolute monarch or democratically approved by a bigoted majority. Which is another reason for more authoritarianism under extreme capitalism - the government doesn't have anything better to do if it's not allowed to interfere with the markets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

That's not a tendency. It's only proof that socialism can be used by dictators as a cover for their tyranny.

Same could be said of "economic liberty" or even of "liberty" full stop - ironically.

At the very least I think the tendency of capitalism to veer towards oligarchy/plutocracy is far more pronounced than any supposed tendency of socialism to lead to authoritarianism or totalitarianism.

Your case would be far stronger if you'd written "communism" instead of socialism.

Like James, I also have the feeling we've had such an exchange before. An entire thread in fact.

That's disappointing.

Fair enough. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

That's a gross exaggeration and assuredly too broad a brush.  I don't recall any of the conservatives here saying Malia and Sasha needed to be brought low.  Sure Obama needed to be opposed politically, but admit it, we'd all be happier right now if we were in Romney's second term.  ;)

There was some seriously nasty commentary about Pres. Obama’s children while he was in office:

http://www.diversityinc.com/news/malia-obama-fox-news/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/19703209

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thinkprogress.org/republican-congressman-attacks-sasha-and-malia-obama-d8ac7d24977c/amp/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

“You see the Democratic senators — ‘This is McCarthyism.’ I’m like, ‘what?’ Trump said. “You have a guy screaming, ‘Russia, Russia, Russia’ with no evidence. All this shade for 18 months, screaming about McCarthyism. I mean, the irony is ridiculous at this point.”

Trump, Jr. Compares Russia Investigation to McCarthyism

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/trump-jr-compares-russia-investigation-to-mccarthyism.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Martell Spy said:

I guess that the evidence in the indictments somehow doesn't count. Or the lying that he himself was caught doing doesn't count either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

That's a gross exaggeration and assuredly too broad a brush.  I don't recall any of the conservatives here saying Malia and Sasha needed to be brought low.  Sure Obama needed to be opposed politically, but admit it, we'd all be happier right now if we were in Romney's second term.  ;)

False equivalence. Racial animus was the primary source of opposition to Obama from the Right from before birtherism and up through the present-day work by the popular-vote loser in the WH. The current backlash against Trump is a rejection of said racism, misogyny, transphobia, and the other deplorables that have been the pillars upon which this administration has built itself.

That's not painting with a broad brush. That is a laser-focused response to the rhetoric of the DIP -- deplorable-in-chief. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, maarsen said:

I guess that the evidence in the indictments somehow doesn't count. Or the lying that he himself was caught doing doesn't count either.

Well, I think Jr. is the dumbest of the Trump clan, and that is quite a feat to achieve. The guy likes to talk like a pickup artist on TV and obviously thinks it makes him look cool. Also, McCarthy is one of the politicians that most closely represent Trump Sr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Well, I think Jr. is the dumbest of the Trump clan, and that is quite a feat to achieve. The guy likes to talk like a pickup artist on TV and obviously thinks it makes him look cool. Also, McCarthy is one of the politicians that most closely represent Trump Sr.

Has anyone seen the latest? He just called the memo "sweet revenge for the family".

http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/02/04/trump-jr-memo-little-bit-sweet-revenge-me-and-my-family

Now, I'm not a lawyer but it seems to me that he just sealed his own indictment. He's admitting the memo is revenge against the FBI for personal gain.

What a stupid twit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, mcbigski said:

That's a gross exaggeration and assuredly too broad a brush.  I don't recall any of the conservatives here saying Malia and Sasha needed to be brought low.  Sure Obama needed to be opposed politically, but admit it, we'd all be happier right now if we were in Romney's second term.  ;)

Romney was clown, just like most conservatives.

But, vote for Bush and Trump, and stroke your chin and say, Yes Obama....! And then expect to be taken seriously. Nope sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

Has anyone seen the latest? He just called the memo "sweet revenge for the family".

http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/02/04/trump-jr-memo-little-bit-sweet-revenge-me-and-my-family

Now, I'm not a lawyer but it seems to me that he just sealed his own indictment. He's admitting the memo is revenge against the FBI for personal gain.

What a stupid twit.

Yeah, I saw that.

Fredo has a good heart, but he is weak...and stupid, and stupid people are the most dangerous of all.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, mcbigski said:

  Next time they implement socialism, it will be awesome, dontchaknow.

Kind like when we finally find ourselves a true conservative.

Tell us about the Brownback boom one more time. Lets hear how awesome it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

But is it an admission of guilt?

I'm not sure, but he doesn't actually say who the revenge is on. He could easily say well it was revenge on Democrats. Although he does talk about the FBI right after. I'm not enough of a lawyer to know if it's anything that can be used against him or Trump.

Also, I don't think a crime was really committed. The President has the power to declassify things. Now, if there was corrupt intent involved, that might be a crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...