The Trump Presidency

[Write4U]

First, democracy is not a socio-economic system.

I did not claim that . I claimed that a Socio-Economic Democracy is a good governing template.

That it is not beneficial to its citizenry can be seen if you compare the GDP development with the average income of the population which in PPP stagnates.

That is because we do not have a Socio-Economic system. By your own words, we have a Capitalist system.

BTW, it is the US where corporations are in power.

I agree. Unregulated Capitalism

In Russia the corporations have been removed from power.

And replace by an Autocratic government.

In China they were never in power, they always had to be submissive to the CCP.

And replaced by State Capitalism in competition with the world, i.e Globalization.

 

[Schmelzer]

AT least be aware that you are changing the context of your point.
Globalist is not the same as imperialist. You really need to define your terms or choose deliberately not to to allow wriggle room.
World rule and globalism are two very different things...

IMHO I use the term "globalist" as it is used by those who fight them. Of course, the globalists like to present themselves as innocent supporters of worldwide trade without barriers or so.

How a nation can rule by evangelizing democracy and policing human rights is a bit of a puzzle... one you may like to explain...

Ok, no problem. I think I have already done so several time, but let's repeat it.

First, every wannabe ruler of the world has to present himself as benevolent. They would have no chance if they would present themselves as simply those who are powerful enough to rob what they like to rob and by threatening everybody openly with war simply for refusing to submit. That's why I have, for example, liked it very much when Trump has openly declared that the US army is in Syria with the only aim to rob the oil. This destroys the power base of the US in an important and essential way.

Once the question who rules has always been important, the world ruler would have to hide the ruling. You can openly claim to rule some territory, if you succeed to fight those who have similar pretensions to that territory. Once you control it, they are out of the territory and find some other places to live. This does not work for the world ruler. Nobody likes to be ruled, so everybody would be your enemy if you would openly declare your ruling. Naming themselves the "indispensable nation" the US is already going very far from what would be the appropriate way to hide their rule. The reasonable way to rule the world is to rule it in a hidden way.

Democracy is a very nice and efficient way to rule a country in a hidden way. All you need is democracy and freedom of press. Freedom of press means you can buy the mass media. Once you don't buy them to make profit, but to rule, you don't have to make profit. Thus, you can outcompete everybody by selling the media much below the costs. You can leave those media complete freedom except that, if necessary, they have to start smear campaigns against any person the ruler want to get rid of. That's all. And then let the politicians in that country know what follows if they don't follow the ruler. Then, your rules will be followed. Starting mass media for private persons will be almost impossible because of the costs. Remember, the media owned or controlled by the ruler don't have to make profit.

The role of human rights is to have a justification for R2P, that means, the right (for the US only, of course) to invade any country if it makes serious human rights violations. Not yet really established in international law, the Russians and Chinese could veto any such attempts in the UNSC. But the US anyway attacks anybody, and then it can use R2P as a justification. That's the main point. Below that level, human rights are diffuse enough that you can start smear campaigns against any country you like for some human rights violations. Let some criminal behind the bars say something against the government, and he will become a political prisoner, and the real crime he is accused of is faked by that evil government.

 

[Schmelzer]

I did not claim that . I claimed that a Socio-Economic Democracy is a good governing template.
That is because we do not have a Socio-Economic system. By your own words, we have a Capitalist system.

Looks like you have confused "socialist economic system" with "socio-economic system". There is no system of government named "socio-economic democracy".

I agree. Unregulated Capitalism

There is no unregulated capitalism in this world. Corporatism is overregulated capitalism, regulated by the rules the big firms want to have to damage their competitors.

And replace by an Autocratic government.

In Western propaganda jargon. In reality Russia is a quite normal democracy.

And replaced by State Capitalism in competition with the world, i.e Globalization.

Not sure if state capitalism is a good name for the Chinese system, but the state plays indeed an important role in China.

You should not mingle globalization, a quite natural process which may be reversed in an economic crisis, with the political movement named globalism. So, the globalists fight against the Chinese Silk road projects, which are projects for globalization mainly in Eurasia.

 

[Write4U]

Looks like you have confused "socialist economic system" with "socio-economic system". There is no system of government named "socio-economic democracy".

The US is build on a Capitalist system and it is a democracy. Hence it is a capitalist democracy . And that's why a socio-economic democracy would be a better template.
C'mon man.

There is no unregulated capitalism in this world. Corporatism is overregulated capitalism, regulated by the rules the big firms want to have to damage their competitors.

You're not looking deep enough. Ever heard of the Halliburton loophole, which exempted big Oil drillers and Gas frackers from EPA regulations. Moreover there are no regulations (restrictions) on accumulation of wealth.

In Western propaganda jargon. In reality Russia is a quite normal democracy.

BS, Putin and and a handful of billionaires run the show with an iron hand, it's an autocracy.

Not sure if state capitalism is a good name for the Chinese system, but the state plays indeed an important role in China.

I read it and it sounds about right.

You should not mingle globalization, a quite natural process which may be reversed in an economic crisis, with the political movement named globalism. So, the globalists fight against the Chinese Silk road projects, which are projects for globalization mainly in Eurasia.

If Globalization is such a natural process, why cite it as an exceptional practice? I cited China as becoming a global trader and power, because it used to be isolationist.

 

[Schmelzer]

\The US is build on a Capitalist system and it is a democracy. Hence it is a capitalist democracy . And that's why a socio-economic democracy would be a better template.

Learn the meaning of socioeconomic: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socioeconomic And then find a better name for your template. Probably socialist economic system or so. Or simply socialism.

You're not looking deep enough. Ever heard of the Halliburton loophole, which exempted big Oil drillers and Gas frackers from EPA regulations. Moreover there are no regulations (restrictions) on accumulation of wealth.

No, I know the regulations are full of such loopholes. This is the point I tried to explain to you. Once Halliburton got their own guy into a political power position, he wrote the regulations in such a way that Halliburton wins, and the competitors of Halliburton will be heavily regulated. If there would be a free market, no EPA regulation, the loophole would be useless. But it is extremely useful for Halliburton, because the EPA regulation is a large burden - except for Halliburton, who has written the regulation.

Cheap propaganda disposed of.

If Globalization is such a natural process, why cite it as an exceptional practice?

??????????

 

[Write4U]

Learn the meaning of socioeconomic: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socioeconomic And then find a better name for your template. Probably socialist economic system or so. Or simply socialism.

Nooooo..., the term I used is perfect. The concept of Socialism is contrary to Capitalism. OTOH, a democracy based on a Socio-Economic system is a perfect balance between capitalism and socialism. It makes for a natural two party system, the best of both worlds

No, I know the regulations are full of such loopholes. This is the point I tried to explain to you. Once Halliburton got their own guy into a political power position, he wrote the regulations in such a way that Halliburton wins, and the competitors of Halliburton will be heavily regulated. If there would be a free market, no EPA regulation, the loophole would be useless. But it is extremely useful for Halliburton, because the EPA regulation is a large burden - except for Halliburton, who has written the regulation.

You can twist this all you want, the fact remains that BIG Business is unregulated on the whole. In fact many Large corporations are receiving corporate welfare. I would not call that regulation.

So, the globalists fight against the Chinese Silk road projects. I support what harms the US and the globalists most.

??????????

Indeed , Globalists are bad for globalization?????????

 

[river]

Nooooo..., the term I used is perfect. The concept of Socialism is contrary to Capitalism. OTOH, a democracy based on a Socio-Economic system is a perfect balance between capitalism and socialism. It makes for a natural two party system, the best of both worlds You can twist this all you want, the fact remains that BIG Business is unregulated on the whole. In fact many Large corporations are receiving corporate welfare. I would not call that regulation.
Indeed , Globalists are bad for globalization?????????

Globalists are bad for Democracy and the Republic .

 

[Write4U]

Globalists are bad for Democracy and the Republic .

I don't know what everybody is talking about.

Globalism,

Globalism refers to various systems with scope beyond the merely international. It is used by political scientists, such as Joseph Nye, to describe "attempts to understand all the interconnections of the modern world—and to highlight patterns that underlie (and explain) them."[1] While primarily associated with world-systems, it can be used to describe other global trends.

Bastardization;

The term is also frequently used as an anti-Semitic pejorative by far-right movements and conspiracy theorists

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

I don't go by bastardizations of terms, I go by their objective definitions.

 

[river]

I don't know what everybody is talking about.

Globalism,
Bastardization; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalism

I don't go by bastardizations of terms, I go by their objective definitions.

Globalism becomes the World Government .

 

[Write4U]

This assault on the Capitol Building reminds of the Beer Hall Putsch by Hitler's Nazi's for which Hitler was convicted of treason.

Beer Hall Putsch

From November 8 to November 9, 1923, Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) and his followers staged the Beer Hall Putsch in Munich, a failed takeover of the government in Bavaria, a state in southern Germany. Since 1921, Hitler had led the Nazi Party, a fledgling political group that promoted German pride and anti-Semitism and was unhappy with the terms of the Treaty of Versailles ]

In the aftermath of the failed “putsch,” or coup d’état, Hitler was convicted of treason and sentenced to five years in prison. He spent less than a year behind bars, during which time he dictated “Mein Kampf,” his political autobiography. The putsch and Hitler’s subsequent trial turned him into a national figure. After prison, he worked to rebuild the Nazi Party and gain power via legal political methods

https://www.history.com/topics/germany/beer-hall-putsch

We all know what happened after Hitler was released and elected chancellor of Germany!

I hope we have learned from history and will put this current madman away for life.

 

[Write4U]

Globalism becomes the World Government .

The definition doesn't doesn't say that at all. You can also say that the United Nations becomes World Government.

You can say anything, that doesn't make it so. There is always a conspiracy afoot.

 

[river]

river said: ↑
Globalism becomes the World Government .

The definition doesn't doesn't say that at all. You can also say that the United Nations becomes World Government.

You can say anything, that doesn't make it so.

True

Every Country , World Wide , needs to have spoken , Openly , its Identity .

 

[Quantum Quack]

The 25th calls for the removal of a President
It is important that this be seriously considered, not only for the immediate concerns but also to send a clear message to the community and the world that "crazy" will not be tolerated in such a serious office.
Responsibility rests on Congress for the consequences of any failure to act.

 

[Write4U]

The 25th calls for the removal of a President
It is important that this be seriously considered, not only for the immediate concerns but also to send a clear message to the community and the world that "crazy" will not be tolerated in such a serious office.
Responsibility rests on Congress for the consequences of any failure to act.

I agree, running a country of 300 million people during a pandemic is not a Reality TV show. This is serious business and real people are dying at a rate of 1 every 30 seconds.

What a shallow lot some people have become. Uneducated, Uninformed, Spoiled consumers of useless luxuries.

 

[river]

I agree, running a country of 300 million people during a pandemic is not a Reality TV show. This is serious business and real people are dying at a rate of 1 every 30 seconds.

What a shallow lot some people have become. Uneducated, Uninformed, Spoiled consumers of useless luxuries.

Just more Uneducated and therefore Uniformed .

 

[Schmelzer]

Nooooo..., the term I used is perfect. The concept of Socialism is contrary to Capitalism. OTOH, a democracy based on a Socio-Economic system is a perfect balance between capitalism and socialism. It makes for a natural two party system, the best of both worlds

Ok, uneducable. Feel free to talk about socio-economic socialism with others, I'm out.

You can twist this all you want, the fact remains that BIG Business is unregulated on the whole. In fact many Large corporations are receiving corporate welfare. I would not call that regulation.

LOL, who cares how you would name it? Yes, the Large corporations get "corporate welfare", the small ones are, instead, heavily regulated and have to spend a lot of money for bureaucracy. This is how "regulation" written by the lobbies of the Large corporations is supposed to work.

Indeed , Globalists are bad for globalization?????????

Yes. Sanctions are, for example, something globalists like a lot. Once their color revolution or terrorist regime change fails, they use sanctions to fight that state. The reaction to sanctions is that the states have to care about their economic ability to survive them, so that they have to produce, in particular, sufficient food themselves instead of importing all of it. Or to have at least close allies ready to provide it.

 

[Schmelzer]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalism
I don't go by bastardizations of terms, I go by their objective definitions.

Your quote from Wiki

The term is also frequently used as an anti-Semitic pejorative by far-right movements and conspiracy theorists.

shows only that those using that term are not liked by the Wiki writers. Which is natural, given that Wiki has become a globalist project. It has started nicely, and worked nicely where there is no political controversy involved, but the politically relevant things are today no longer in any way objective. In politics, it makes no sense to correct even blatant lies, you lose editorial wars against globalists in Wiki simply because you will be outnumbered.

Feel free to name those who use the term "globalists" "anti-Semitic far-right conspiracy theorists" or whatever, I don't care and will continue to use it to name that part of Western elites who want to establish their world rule, which is how it is used by all those named "anti-Semitic far-right conspiracy theorists" by the globalists.

 

[Schmelzer]

Inflammatory? Absolutely. Incitement to violence? Absolutely NOT.

The problem is here with Zinoviev's theorem about the incompatibility of censorship with rule of law.

If incitement to violence is banned by some censorship law, but you have rule of law, you can find out if what you write is forbidden or not. Say, in some future you could simply ask Alexa if that sentence is legal or not, and if you simply record that conversation with Alexa and Alexa says it is legal this would be sufficient to prove that you have not violated the law. What to do if you nonetheless want to incite violence? You find something close to it, vary it a little bit, until Alexa says that's legal. But everybody aware of the censorship law would understand the meaning of that sentence.

One standard way to do this would be, say, "Given that to say A is illegal, as a law-abiding citizen I will not say A". That would be saying A? Absolutely NOT. But everybody will understand that you mean A.

So, don't wonder that everybody interprets your text as an incitement to violence, even if it is absolutely NOT. This is an obvious side effect of censorship of incitements of violence. And you can do nothing against it.

And the side effect of this side effect is that censorship, once it exists and at least formally tries to mimic a rule of law, will extend. To reach its aim, it has to forbid more and more texts used by those who follow the natural technique described above. By the way, it will also persecute those who did not intend to say that criminal A, but really meant that replacement A'. Alternatively, you give up the rule of law and simply persecute those which you interpret as meaning some evil A. This is the actual way of development of PC. This leads to a totalitarian society where persecution can happen arbitrarily. As you today will be handled like a racist for saying "all lives matter".

 

[Quantum Quack]

parmalee

I'm just saying that I think it's well within yours, mine, anyone's rights to forcibly remove, 'take out' (again, Trump talks about 'taking out' U.S. citizens all the time, so...) or just plain put a bullet into the heads of Trump, de Santis, or any one of these mass murderous fucks.

While I appreciate the frustration you were and are demonstrating I am surprised that the secret service goons haven't arrested you for falsely claiming that every one has the right to assassinate the POTUS.
And that is exactly what you claimed. "A bullet in the head... blah blah blah"
There is no such right. By claiming this you are indicating your potential threat due to your expressed frustration, to act with in your falsely claimed rights.
Using sciforums to publish your false claim places a certain legal responsibility on the management of sciforums that has facilitated the publication of your false claims.
It is little wonder that JamesR or other moderator have got involved.

The anti terrorism laws in the USA I believe are pretty expansive and this forum like most on the net will no doubt be subject to routine monitoring.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Back on topic.
I think it is important that the 25th is applied before the 20th of Jan. because if it isn't then a precedent that allows an obviously crazy POTUS to remain at in his office is set.