US Elections: Apocalypse Now

[Castel]

2 minutes ago, Mr Fixit said:

Of course they should be worried. Republican trifecta with Donny at the helm *is* worrying. I'm just saying that the hysteria is... silly. Donald Trump worse then the guy who invented the Southern strategy? Worse then the guy who openly supported apartheid in South Africa and labeled Nelson Mandela a terrorist? Worse than the War Criminal Dubya whose policies killed hundreds of thousands and whose neocon buddies helped (intentionally or no) usher in the new uberpartisan inherently destructive policies that left DC in the worst gridlock in living memory? How is Donald Trump worse than those? Because he is a loud clown who likes grabbing sexy women by their, you know, pussies? He is a SYMPTOM of the cancer that is the US establishment politics. To pile all this anger and rage, sexism and racism onto him is pointless and serves only to exonerate the real architects. 

The point I'm making  is that Donald Trump has no record so comparing him to people (I was thinking of current Republicans) will always lead to a positive comparison...for now. But, given his disposition there's very little reason to be optimistic about him at all. 

People are not calling him a racist and sexist merely cause he grabbed women by their pussies (although note how that is somehow preceded by a 'merely') but because he hasn't shown much in his disposition to really make such views about him seem unfounded. Quite the opposite. The minute he got a shred of attention he seemed offended by "those people" voting against him and was egging on his crowd to go around policing them. 

This is not a case of someone watching Trump talk about "his" African-American and deciding that he's therefore as racist as anyone who ever did racist things. 

As for "symptoms"...I have news for you: Trump is the establishment. He's your president. He will determine policy and action. There's nothing pointless about focusing on him when he's the most powerful man around. 

[The Anti-Targ]

18 minutes ago, Altherion said:

This is an unfortunate consequence, but given that some of those views are indeed taboo, they're going to be silenced shortly just as they were when the view was made taboo in the first place. However, as the Reason article I linked earlier points out, the idea that not all politically incorrect views are or even should be taboo was an unofficial (but quite definite) part of Trump's platform and his victory means that this idea has prevailed. Not all taboo views will go back into the dark closet of private interactions.

That's like assuming the "system" is going to stop Trump from carrying out those harmful policies that people ignored when voting for him because Hillary might have done something illegal. It's a risky assumption.

[Altherion]

7 minutes ago, ummester said:

Shouldn't all views and speech be allowed in a free society and only actions be policed?

If absolute freedom was the goal, then yes. However, practically all societies I can think of have balanced freedom with other values. Despite the First Amendment, it was never acceptable to express arbitrary ideas in our society before and it is still not acceptable today. The government could not and cannot silence you, but plenty of other powerful entities could and can. Trump's strategy was based on the idea that the silencing had gone too far and breaking most (though not all: he did not want the grabbing comment!) taboos would help him rather than harm him.

[Mr Fixit]

5 minutes ago, Castel said:

As for "symptoms"...I have news for you: Trump is the establishment. He's your president. He will determine policy and action. There's nothing pointless about focusing on him when he's the most powerful man around. 

Eh... He got voted in because people (and Republican elites too!) at least partly thought of him as anti-establishment. That was a big part of his appeal. And word of caution: if you focus too much on him and not on what enabled his rise to power (aka broken DC politics) you'll find yourself in a situation where you're gonna be happy and relieved to find Ted Cruz or his ilk the Republican nominee sometime down the line. It's misdirection, man, I mean it.

[The Marquis de Leech]

16 minutes ago, Mr Fixit said:

Of course they should be worried. Republican trifecta with Donny at the helm *is* worrying. I'm just saying that the hysteria is... silly. Donald Trump worse than the guy who invented the Southern strategy? Worse than the guy who openly supported apartheid in South Africa and labeled Nelson Mandela a terrorist? Worse than the War Criminal Dubya whose policies killed hundreds of thousands and whose neocon buddies helped (intentionally or no) usher in the new uberpartisan inherently destructive policies that left DC in the worst gridlock in living memory? How is Donald Trump worse than those? Because he is a loud clown who likes grabbing sexy women by their, you know, pussies? He is a SYMPTOM of the cancer that is the US establishment politics. To pile all this anger and rage, sexism and racism onto him is pointless and serves only to exonerate the real architects. 

Yes, he is worse.

Richard Nixon had a brain. He eased tensions with the Soviets and China. He signed into being OSHA and Environmental protections. He wanted to set up a better public healthcare system. Yes, he was a slimeball, but he was a competent slimeball.

Ronald Reagan had a Democratic House (Congress overrode him on South Africa). He negotiated with Gorbachev, and called for the abolition of nuclear weapons. He raised taxes to pay for Social Security. For all his faults, he'd never for a moment fit into the current Republican Party, even if he was responsible for its creation.

George W. Bush was an incompetent twit, who deserves his status as one of America's worst Presidents. But he never showed the sheer contempt for human decency that Trump currently does. Given the choice, I would take four years of Dubya over Trump without a second thought.  

[OldGimletEye]

Just now, The Great Unwashed said:

I think the term "identity politics" has mostly been co-opted by conservatives in general and by the alt-right in particular to speak disparagingly about one of the pillars of the modern Democratic coalition, but my understanding of it is that it is a paradigm based on shared experiences as a member of any particular marginalized and/or oppressed group.

The irony of this whole situation is that people have gone to lengths to explain the grievances of rural whites.

Yet, somehow, that's not "identity politics".

[ummester]

19 minutes ago, Altherion said:

If absolute freedom was the goal, then yes. However, practically all societies I can think of have balanced freedom with other values. Despite the First Amendment, it was never acceptable to express arbitrary ideas in our society before and it is still not acceptable today. The government could not and cannot silence you, but plenty of other powerful entities could and can. Trump's strategy was based on the idea that the silencing had gone too far and breaking most (though not all: he did not want the grabbing comment!) taboos would help him rather than harm him.

 I think you are overrating the intelligence behind his 'strategy'. He's a classic populous demagogue - a narcissistic, egotistical, chauvinistic buffoon - but, he actually believes that he can help make America great again by beating down the neoliberal system with isolationism and protectionism. He doesn't have calculated speech, he is not measured enough. He's instinctual and the people responded to it.

And perhaps, just perhaps, the silencing of speech has gone too far in the US. What happened to Occupy Wall St? Wasn't the end result making it illegal to protest on Wall St after certain times?

[Mr Fixit]

1 minute ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

Ronald Reagan ... For all his faults, he'd never for a moment fit into the current Republican Party, even if he was responsible for its creation.

My point exactly!

Quote

George W. Bush was an incompetent twit, who deserves his status as one of America's worst Presidents. But he never showed the sheer contempt for human decency that Trump currently does. Given the choice, I would take four years of Dubya over Trump without a second thought.

Eh, now. The guy killed hundreds of thousands. He and his buddies are the architects of the current Middle East. His "enhanced interrogation techniques" and "indefinite detention" programs shat all over basic human rights and dignity. Let us not talk about Dubya being better than anyone. At least until we see what Trump does now that he's the head honcho.

[OldGimletEye]

Also, I'd say on the most basic level all politics is really "identity politics". That people with shared characteristics, whether they be demographic or otherwise, might have a perceived set of common interest ought not be surprising.

[Ariadne23]

8 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

The irony of this whole situation is that people have gone to lengths to explain the grievances of rural whites.

Yet, somehow, that's not "identity politics".

Isn't it? It seems like it would have to be to me, no? It's heavily based on the idea of being marginalized.

[ummester]

2 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Also, I'd say on the most basic level all politics is really "identity politics". That people with shared characteristics, whether they be demographic or otherwise, might have a perceived set of common interest ought not be surprising.

Yes indeed - everyone identifies with something. If a group finds progressive values annoying, then that is what they identify with. Identity is not exclusive to any group, be they minority or not.

[Wrl6199]

Just now, ummester said:

Yes indeed - everyone identifies with something. If a group finds progressive values annoying, then that is what they identify with. Identity is not exclusive to any group, be they minority or not.

That is undeniably true.

[The Marquis de Leech]

7 minutes ago, Mr Fixit said:

My point exactly!

Eh, now. The guy killed hundreds of thousands. He and his buddies are the architects of the current Middle East. His "enhanced interrogation techniques" and "indefinite detention" programs shat all over basic human rights and dignity. Let us not talk about Dubya being better than anyone. At least until we see what Trump does now that he's the head honcho.

Trump has been advocating war crimes on the campaign trail.

[Wrl6199]

1 minute ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

Trump has been advocating war crimes on the campaign trail.

Thebes so many terrible things trump has advocated for its hard to keep track of.

[Castel]

4 minutes ago, Ariadne23 said:

Isn't it? It seems like it would have to be to me, no? It's heavily based on the idea of being marginalized.

That's the joke?

[Wrl6199]

1 minute ago, Castel said:

That's the joke?

This entire election was a joke. it was like real life satire.

[Mr Fixit]

1 minute ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

Trump has been advocating war crimes on the campaign trail.

Advocating is not the same as perpetrating them. No one on Earth is gonna convince me that Trump is worse than Bush. At least he's not a murderer. Yet. We'll see how that one goes. And since I'm from Europe, I personally have other priorities as well. Trump at least proposed a new policy toward Russia. As opposed to extremely hawkish Clinton whose husband is also a war criminal. So yeah... I'm kinda set in my ways here.

[Wrl6199]

Just now, Mr Fixit said:

Advocating is not the same as perpetrating them. No one on Earth is gonna convince me that Trump is worse than Bush. At least he's not a murderer. Yet. We'll see how that one goes. And since I'm from Europe, I personally have other priorities as well. Trump at least proposed a new policy toward Russia. As opposed to extremely hawkish Clinton whose husband is also a war criminal. So yeah... I'm kinda set in my ways here.

maybe not yet.

[TheKitttenGuard]

2 minutes ago, Mr Fixit said:

Advocating is not the same as perpetrating them. No one on Earth is gonna convince me that Trump is worse than Bush. At least he's not a murderer. Yet. We'll see how that one goes. And since I'm from Europe, I personally have other priorities as well. Trump at least proposed a new policy toward Russia. As opposed to extremely hawkish Clinton whose husband is also a war criminal. So yeah... I'm kinda set in my ways here.

Chomsky once stated every President since W.W 2 have been a War Criminal.

I highly doubt Trump going to break that streak.

[ummester]

Trump is not Bush.

Bush is the closest modern president to a true fascist, riding in on 911 to remove as many freedoms, start as many wars and sell as many security contracts as he could.