The Trump Presidency

If this is a leftover from communism, when was the left wing in the US a non-communist communist party?

I guess Trump being buddy with Putin is good free market capitalism?

Do you believe monopolies are a good thing?

Ever heard of the Halliburton Loophole?
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/opinion/03tue3.html

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So you stand corrected, above.
Meanwhile Republican officials and voters are of course the worst offenders in that regard, the most rigid and officious forbidders of speech content they don't like, the most effective and diligent enforcers of censorship in public discussion. Look at the censorship the Trump administration imposed on the Federal agency publications and websites, for example - (as did W's administration, btw).

So objecting to the racism inherent in blackface is not an invention of PC sensibility - calling "PC" is just an excuse from racist Trump voters who don't like being called racist.

The reason you "see" such idiotic delusions is that you are ignorant of the physical facts. And you aren't paying attention to the content of my posts, of course (in which no definition of fascism appears - merely a basic checklist of characteristics, a minimum set of criteria).

And you - ignorantly falling for the frame - not only accepted Goldberg's category of "liberal", but immediately made the jump to "left", as Goldberg's paymasters expected. That's called getting played, sucker.

Time to start. That ignorance is crippling you.

Now you have abandoned the original categories, "left" or "liberal" or whatever you pulled out of the fog, and invoked "SJWs" - just like a Fox News pundit -
while inventing an oppression and censorship that does not exist - just like a Fox News pundit. (The third rate fuckwits who propound these bogus correlations are all over the internet, all over the TV, all over the radio, making good livings as public "intellectuals" and bestselling authors).
You are playing wingnut bingo - hitting all the boxes. That's not a coincidence.

I don't. Why are you trying to imply that I do?

That's not true. That's not how you have been using the term here, for example - and guys like you (victims of wingnut propaganda) are the main users of the term.
Meanwhile, the people getting fired by the language police are these folks: https://www.rawstory.com/2019/02/ne...cizing-the-schools-maga-hate-wearing-culture/

And another cat emerges from the bag.
Based in ignorance, of course. For people who have lived lifetimes and generations in a democracy without being "ruled" at all, and mostly without being governed by stupid criminals, the only question would be where you got that idea.
But it does explain your tolerance of the Trumps and Putins of this world - they are what you expect. You can't tell the difference.
And it does explain the massive US propaganda campaign to present all politicians and media in the US as stupid criminals - that's how one creates people who, like you, can't see fascism coming.
Trump voters.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Who did you vote for?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don't vote. I don't vote even in Germany, where I would have the right to vote. Anyway, I'm not living in a place where I have a right to vote.

Was there any relevant communist party in the US?

It is essentially irrelevant for free market capitalism.

Don't cry. Why should I care? I'm in favor of a free market, not of monopolies. Monopolies exist mainly because of government regulations favoring them. Without copyright and patents - artificial government monopolies - there would be much fewer monopolies. Regulations, which require a lot of paperwork for every firm, favor big firms, even if they are not written by the lobbyists themselves. And so on. Without the state behind them, the few natural monopolies would remain quite weak.

????????????? Please quote what you think has been "corrected".

As usual, I see no big difference. My impression is that there was some time in the past when the right was in favor of censorship, and the left favored free speech. Today, the more serious attack against free speech comes from the left. And the only ones who are in favor of free speech are irrelevant libertarians.

Being called a racist was quite irrelevant in the past. Today you risk getting fired for such a namecalling. So, it is quite natural that people don't like this.

BTW, it is quite interesting to observe the civilized behavior of all those PC defenders.

The problem being? We are discussing here quite different things. SJWs are clear enough from the left, not?

I have been name-called by you a lot of time, always without any base in reality, I have seen you discussing the race-IQ relations, they were full of similar namecalling attacks. But, of course, your namecalling is always simply stating the facts, LOL.

Maybe they were clever criminals. but all those guys who started wars killing millions are certainly criminals. Namely war criminals. If they have not "ruled" you by starting such wars with your taxes, you may be, of course, an accomplice. Why not, murdering foreigners and receiving control over oil and other resources may be a reasonable (even if criminal) choice for most of the US population.

I can tell some differences, but, indeed, the base is that essentially all politicians are criminals. There has to be evidence that a particular politician is not to modify this basic assumption. But fine that you have, at least, understood the base of my "tolerance" for Trump (in comparison with the war criminal Hillary).

ROTFL. YMMD.

 

Plenty of base in reality. You are ignorant of it, of course. You can't even distinguish namecalling - which I do very little of - from observation.

And you are interchanging quite different terms - exactly, as I pointed out, according to Goldberg's agenda. You are now incapable of posting - or, probably, thinking - outside Goldberg's frame.

The folks who use that silly term seem to have defined it that way, sure.
That wouldn't make them "the left", and it certainly does not make them "liberal".
So your habit of interchanging such terms - or using them at all, really - reveals the source of your "thinking".

To be clear: that they are equivalently criminal. That the differences between them are minor.
That's the Republican Party line, yep. You don't have to keep repeating it - any American is familiar with it, from Fox News and talk radio and the corporate media. It's how the Republicans have escaped responsibility for the past consequences of what they did and said, and how they are attempting to avoid blame for the incoming consequences now.
- - -

Without governmental curbs on their power, industrial corporations would enslave you as they have others.

Silly assertion made in ignorance of US political history, as always. Fantasy bubble paranoia from the US wingnut propaganda feed, as always.
Trump voters are at no risk of being fired because people call them "racist". That's not why they don't like it.

In modern times most of those would be corporate capitalists, not politicians. Look at the Iraq War.
Many politicians - including mine - tried to prevent W's Iraq War. Corporate capitalists started it.

I have always understood it - you presented it clearly. Your base is not in reality, is your problem. You fell for wingnut propaganda regarding Hillary, and you are so far in thrall to US media and marketing pros that you are unable to even recognize fascism in Trump - much less acknowledge its implications.

And you are far from alone. Something like a third of the US voting population is in the same bubble, under the same media influence. That's how fascism took over a major Party, and took power in the US.

 

https://www.bundeswahlleiter.de/en/...nformationen-waehler/deutsche-im-ausland.html

 

RainbowSingularity, of course, I could apply if I would like to vote. But I favor the position that already the participation in democratic elections means some acceptance of democratic rule, so I would not even vote if I would live in Germany.

iceaura, given that the whole post contains only the usual "you are stupid" variations without any arguments, the only points worth to answer are:

No. They would have to become states or state-like organizations to do this. There is, of course, the thesis that without a state there will appear automatically new players who try to become the new state. Nice excuse, of the type it is better if the father rapes the daughter first than somebody else.

Or, in other words, even if it would be true that humanity will be necessarily ruled by antisocial psychopaths, I don't support those antisocial psychopaths who rule today. What they do is amoral, even if morality has no chance to win.

W started it. With the support of corporate capitalists, of course. But it was, nonetheless, a politician. Then, those who have opposed it have continued to stay there when they get power. A little bit withdrawing, then coming back. Same today with Trump. Some claims of withdrawing, but in fact an increase. All the same. It's not elected politicians who rule the game, its somebody else, usually named deep state. The wars continue, independent of any elections. Faked democracy.

 

You're full of BS!

I told you before to look up the Halliburtom loophole (exemption from clean air and water regulation), which is the result of unrestricted Capitalism being able to write environmental laws which affect the health of everyone!!!

Ever heard of Love Canal!!!??? If not, I dare you to check out the moral tragedy that was visited on innocent pre-schoolers by unrestricted Capitalists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Canal

That is Big Capitalist Daddy raping an entire school!!!! (more like murder)!!!

Ever heard of radio-active waste dumping in drainage ditches along highways? You need to do some serious research before you start accusing social progressives of endangering your health and welfare, which are regulated by Social programs.
The cheating is done by Big Pharma, which are capitalist monopolies, not by
government which is a not-for-profit organization!

How is it possible that a person as cynical as you, can be so naive? I am cynical also, but that is because I don't trust Capitalists, who are obliged to make as much money as they possibly can at my cost.

What you don't seem to understand is that social programs are Not-for-Profit enterprises. Nobody makes a profit, but social programs do benefit ALL people.

I would rather pay some extra tax to enjoy the social benefits than paying outrageous prices for drugs which only results in bonuses for CEOs.

Wake up man, regulation of our greed is essential for a sustained economy.

Unrestricted use of natural resources is against Natural Law! You are allowed only that which is sufficient, not what is in excess.

 

We should buy Trump an enormous Lego set. Boy can build a Big Lego Wall.... goody....goody.....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

You are so hopelessly naive, or intentionally duplicitous, it is actually a little scary.
You seem to know nothing of history and just regurgitate what the ultra-right-wing idiots are spouting.

You know what you get when you remove all "checks and balances"? You get Trump...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Just like here in the US. What's the problem? No automatic enrollment...?...... for shame!

 

You are welcome to call them "state-like organizations", if you insist, or even "banana republics" ( "banana" refers to a corporation). Their enslavement of you would not be affected by your label.

You do. You support Trump over Clinton, for example.

The Iraq War was a direct consequence of electing W - a Republican administration - instead of Gore.

It wasn't his idea, and he was incapable of launching it himself (lacked the executive ability). He was a figurehead.
He was also - btw - an oil company executive.

That is not true. For example, Obama withdrew - substantially, not just a little bit - from Iraq. And he had to work against opposition, to do it.

You are going to have to make up your mind, some day. You can blame "politicians", or you can blame the "deep state" you have no idea of (hint: corporate capitalism).

 

George Carlin agrees with you.

@ Schmelzer,
watch this.

 

Jesus, no more of that guy please. So overrated.

 

But ever relevant. Seems Capitalism is also overrated.......

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

It has nothing to do with unrestricted capitalism, it is about state-regulated capitalism, corporatism, where the lobbies of the big business write the regulations in their own favor.

Don't cry. In a libertarian society, if some chemical firm harms people, they have to pay compensation. That you have a problem understanding that big firms can in a corporate capitalist society use the government power to reach much more than they would be able to reach without a state is your problem.

Nice to hear that you hope to benefit from social programs, but in the average, social programs are a loss, so you will pay more taxes than gaining from social programs.

If your greed is so great that it needs to be restricted by Big Government, you have a serious problem.

And another guy disqualifies himself with personal attacks. Iceaura seems quite successful to teach people to stop arguments and start personal attacks.

Whatever, there was at least something of an argument, namely about "checks and balances". But in a libertarian society there will be a much greater distribution of power than in the actual Big State with its few balances, which do not really count because anyway, the deep state controls all these checks. Yes, without you checks and balances there would be much better relations with Russia, no US troops in Syria and Afghanistan, and some other things which the "checks and balances" have prevented from happening.

Whatever, it looks like after Trump comes AOC, and the US will learn the beauty of socialism. This would be, of course, also a nice solution of the problem with the US - if it starts full scale socialism, its economy will go down, and then they simply can no longer pay for all the military bases and wars around the world. So, I wish socialism in the US full success.

Neither by your naming them "corporations". States are quite well-defined entities, namely, they are organizations which have the monopoly of power in a certain territory. Once some "company" has this power, it is a de facto state.

We are again back to counting wars?

Substantially or not, the US occupants are yet there.

The idea to blame the evil capitalists for everything is old left crap, not even worth to be considered. Corporatism and deep state rule is a combination of big firms and all the various parts of the state.

 

Don't change the subject. We are pointing out that when you - like a typical Republican media victim - claimed it doesn't matter who gets elected, you were badly and obviously mistaken. It has, it does, and it will.
Trump's and Putin's expansions of nuclear arsenals and withdrawals from nuclear disarmament treaties, for example, are particular to Trump's election. So is Trump's gathering assault on Venezuela, with the standard Republican Party agenda and personnel (going back to Reagan) restored to the roles they had been dismissed from. So is Trump's expansion of the drone wars and restoration of CIA control over them.

Most of them are gone. W brought them. Obama withdrew them. Trump is restocking them. Elections matter.

Nobody is doing that - so you don't have to, either.

Just face it: you have no idea who or what the US "deep state" is. It's just a term you throw in to explain Trump's administration without acknowledging you got played for a fool.
- - - -

They are corporations. Capitalist corporations. What am I supposed to name them?

So? It's still a capitalist corporation, behaving exactly as predicted.
Are you trying to argue that corporations can't enslave you by definition?
Now that would be funny.
In case you missed the joke: You would be defining an unregulated capitalist corporation - a capitalist corporation not curbed by a government, as above, and therefore capable of enslavement etc - to be a "state". And you are the guy who can't see fascism coming.

Dude: They won't care what you call them. It will be too late.

 

Indeed, given that the loser is, in this case, only Europe. To support Europe was a serious point of the globalists, thus, of the deep state of the past. It is no longer important for the nationalist faction of the deep state.

I have some sufficiently well idea of what I mean with deep state, and explained that many times. It remains sufficiently vague, but that's a consequence of its nature (the deep state does not act openly) as well as of my own approach to this (I do not follow various conspiracy theories about who is who in the deep state - there are many of them, with a lot of details, but I have no way to check them, and therefore remain neutral about these details). The main point of the deep state is that the really important things remain constant, election-independent.

This has worked a lot of time nicely. Now it no longer works, there is a split somewhere in the deep state, and the confrontation inside the US is quite serious now.

Feel free to name them blablabla or corporations, your choice. If they have the monopoly of power over some territory, I name them states. That's my choice, and a quite reasonable one because there is a danger (especially in left anarchism) that the result of some anarchist revolution will be some de facto state named differently.

You cant enslave without having the power of a state on the territory where you hold your slaves. A usual corporation in a usual state does not have such a power. It is not about definitions, it is about real power. If the state supports slavery, like today in the US, private companies can have slaves (like private prison companies). If not, they can do this only in the underground, and then it is a mafia gang, and not a corporation (even if they may use corporations as covers).

Except that in an anarcho-capitalist society there are other ways to restrict the powers of corporations. Remember the reputational system? Ok, you think they will not work, but I'm sure they will work. If I would think, like you, that they don't work, I would not be an anarcho-capitalist but would reject it as utopian. In this sense, the joke is a very old one and not relevant to me.

Also, don't forget that I'm not in favor of simply destroying the state and to hope that after this somehow the anarcho-capitalist system creates a garden of Eden. My proposal is to construct, first, all that is necessary for a functioning anarcho-capitalist society, and, only after particular functions of the state are no longer necessary to destroy them, and so reducing the state step by step. With such an approach, nothing catastrophic will happen, simply one system is replaced, step by step, by an already working better one.

 

And that privilege does not rest with Big Business?
The point here is that Oil drillers were exempt from regulation, so they could make more money.

 

The potential loser in a nuclear treaty breakdown and nuclear arms buildup involving Russia and the US is not just Europe.
Remember when nuclear war was a concern of yours?

So?

You are on record supporting the breakdown of the American and Eurasian democracies, and welcoming their replacement by fascist governance.

A capitalist corporation uncurbed by government easily acquires such power - almost by default. That is historical record, observation - it's where the "banana" in "banana republic" came from.

And when you rename them, they stop being capitalist corporations? Cool. I have no such magical powers, myself.

In your recent post, it had expanded to include not only the entire government but all the major corporations involved.
Before that, you had separated out the "politicians", political appointees, etc. Before that, you had excluded capitalist corporations except possibly government contractors. At various times you have both excluded and included the intelligence agencies, the Justice Department, all the branches of the FBI, the Pentagon and military generally, the bureaucracies of the political Parties, the Federal Bank, and every Democratic Party affiliated head of a Federal Department including State.

If you do have some idea of what you mean by the US "deep state", you are the only one.

Of course not. People usually arrange their governments to prevent that, if they can. Fascist takeovers are disasters.

Trump, the Republican, is an incoming disaster.