Jump to content
downzy

US Politics/Elections Thread

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

Are you saying people in capitalistic countries don't take days off?  :lol:

I said precisely the opposite. If your POV was rooted in historical reality that wouldnt be confusing you right now.

29 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

Days off didn't exist before Marxism? :facepalm:

Go read the Bible and see what God says about the Sabbath thousands of years before your hero Marx was born.

Just stop already.

And I've already explained why they're hypocrites.  I'm not going in circles with you on this.  There is no debate.

If you want to say that capitalism with social safety nets is way to go, then we can start there.  I tend to agree with that.

Study US labor history. Pre-Industrial, Pre Modern State ways of living have no relevancy in this conversation.

Marx isn't my hero. I just have a basic grasp on his and Engels criticism of Capital and the many ways that Marxist analysis has been incorporated into the capitalism of today. Like days off for instance. :facepalm: 

A Catholic telling an Anabaptist to read scripture?!?! Now Ive heard it all! Loaves and Fishes was the worst thing Jesus ever did, the dirty commie... besides turing the table of the money changers... and refusing to follow the States command to be dead. Oh and this is really rich: Jesus refused to rest on the Sabbath! 

No, you havent explained anything that I asked you. :lol: You havent even tried as far as I can tell? You talked about the rate of productivity in capitalist markets (dumpsters full of perfectly good food and unsold chia pets!) and how capitalism inspires "excellence" (smushed Big Macs and Trump!). None of that comes close to speaking to my question, though.

r8zQUBEh.png

:lol::lol:

Edited by soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, soon said:

I said precisely the opposite. If your POV was rooted in historical reality that wouldnt be confusing you right now.

Study US labor history. Pre-Industrial, Pre Modern State ways of living have no relevancy in this conversation.

Marx isn't my hero. I just have a basic grasp on his and Engels criticism of Capital and the many ways that Marxist analysis has been incorporated into the capitalism of today. Like days off for instance. :facepalm: 

A Catholic telling an Anabaptist to read scripture?!?! Now Ive heard it all! Loaves and Fishes was the worst thing Jesus ever did, the dirty commie... besides turing the table of the money changers... and refusing to follow the States command to be dead. Oh and this is really rich: Jesus refused to rest on the Sabbath! 

No, you havent explained anything that I asked you. :lol: You havent even tried as far as I can tell? You talked about the rate of productivity in capitalist markets (dumpsters full of perfectly good food and unsold chia pets!) and how capitalism inspires "excellence" (smushed Big Macs and Trump!). None of that comes close to speaking to my question, though.

r8zQUBEh.png

:lol::lol:

Apparently I struck a nerve.

The conversation (my point) was based off of Socialist Authoritarian Nations, current and throughout history ..which have all failed....that's not debatable.

 

You talk about Marxist theory and parts of it that have been implemented successfully within Capitalistic societies.  Apples & Oranges 

That doesn't change the fact that authoritarian socialist countries are all utter failures.  So Marxism as a whole, when put in practice as an entire government has failed over and over again and has lead to the deaths of more people than any other forms government.  Those are non debateable facts.

But you can keep on talking in circles and posting memes....and talking down on other Christian religions....I must have missed the part where Jesus said Anabaptists are more knowledgeable of his teachings than Catholics are. :facepalm:

 

How many more people must die from Socialist Authoritarian regimes for you to admit that they don't work?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

Apparently I struck a nerve.

The conversation (my point) was based off of Socialist Authoritarian Nations, current and throughout history ..which have all failed....that's not debatable.

 

You talk about Marxist theory and parts of it that have been implemented successfully within Capitalistic societies.  Apples & Oranges 

That doesn't change the fact that authoritarian socialist countries are all utter failures.  So Marxism as a whole, when put in practice as an entire government has failed over and over again and has lead to the deaths of more people than any other forms government.  Those are non debateable facts.

But you can keep on talking in circles and posting memes....and talking down on other Christian religions....I must have missed the part where Jesus said Anabaptists are more knowledgeable of his teachings than Catholics are. :facepalm:

 

How many more people must die from Socialist Authoritarian regimes for you to admit that they don't work?

 

 

 

I asked you about Petersons claim that the use of cellphones and aeroplanes by anti capitalist is hypocritical? I dont understand how by not speaking to that you have come to any of these conclusions?

PS I believe you have misunderstood the meme. I thought it was funny because when I wrote 'smushed Big Mac' it reminded me of the film. And the film is critiquing consumerism and capitalism. Thats all. :shrugs::) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, soon said:

I asked you about Petersons claim that the use of cellphones and aeroplanes by anti capitalist is hypocritical? I dont understand how by not speaking to that you have come to any of these conclusions?

PS I believe you have misunderstood the meme. I thought it was funny because when I wrote 'smushed Big Mac' it reminded me of the film. And the film is critiquing consumerism and capitalism. Thats all. :shrugs::) 

The Peterson quote was a quick, tongue in cheek remark he made during one of his podcasts with Joe Rogan.  He was basically just saying that it is a performative contradiction if you use iPhones and fly on airplanes if you are truly anti-capitalist.  

Both airplanes and iPhones are results of capitalist societies.  So when you use an iPhone or fly on a plane, that is a type of performative contradiction by definition.  The iPhone itself and the network it's on is part of a capitalist world, etc etc

That's all that was.  Not sure why that bothers you so much.

A performative contradiction (German: performativer Widerspruch) arises when the propositional content of a statement contradicts the presuppositions of asserting it. An example of a performative contradiction is the statement "I am dead" because the very act of proposing it presupposes the actor is alive.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

The Peterson quote was a quick, tongue in cheek remark he made during one of his podcasts with Joe Rogan.  He was basically just saying that it is a performative contradiction if you use iPhones and fly on airplanes if you are truly anti-capitalist.  

Both airplanes and iPhones are results of capitalist societies.  So when you use an iPhone or fly on a plane, that is a type of performative contradiction by definition.  The iPhone itself and the network it's on is part of a capitalist world, etc etc

That's all that was.  Not sure why that bothers you so much.

A performative contradiction (German: performativer Widerspruch) arises when the propositional content of a statement contradicts the presuppositions of asserting it. An example of a performative contradiction is the statement "I am dead" because the very act of proposing it presupposes the actor is alive.

 

 

 

 

Again, theres no contradiction between A State manifestation of Marxism and industrial technology. Experiments with Marxist Statism have primarily been based on Industrialism. I gave the example of Sputnik which is imo very fitting given that it involves both flight and satellites. Satellites which support smart phone use.

But the strange thing about how you've approached this conversation is that, I dont believe in that form of governance. What use is it to steer the conversations towards me speaking as an advocate for that system of governances?

So, given that anti capitalist thought is not inherently opposed to industry and technology. And given that anti capitalist economies have engaged in industry and produced high technology. And given that anti-capitalists living in capitalist economies obviously need to engage in the material world and public sphere while maintaining a right to move freely, within the established order. How is it a perforative contradiction?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kasanova King said:

If you want to say that capitalism with social safety nets is way to go, then we can start there.  I tend to agree with that.

So like Norway then? :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Dazey said:

So like Norway then? :) 

I was actually thinking about the Nordic system and although not perfect, it seems to work.

I'm not sure it would work everywhere in the world though.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, soon said:

Again, theres no contradiction between A State manifestation of Marxism and industrial technology. Experiments with Marxist Statism have primarily been based on Industrialism. I gave the example of Sputnik which is imo very fitting given that it involves both flight and satellites. Satellites which support smart phone use.

But the strange thing about how you've approached this conversation is that, I dont believe in that form of governance. What use is it to steer the conversations towards me speaking as an advocate for that system of governances?

So, given that anti capitalist thought is not inherently opposed to industry and technology. And given that anti capitalist economies have engaged in industry and produced high technology. And given that anti-capitalists living in capitalist economies obviously need to engage in the material world and public sphere while maintaining a right to move freely, within the established order. How is it a perforative contradiction?

 

I think I finally understand what you're saying.

Yes, Socialist economies are not against industry and technology.  Well, they can't be really.

And yes, they use it etc.

But it sucks...and the bulk of what they produce/invent etc in terms of technological advancements, etc has been years, if not decades, behind the West.

And don't get me started with the medicine, etc.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2019 at 6:13 AM, -W.A.R- said:

 

I bet no one would give a shit about her tweet if she were a white Christian woman. What about the President's far more offensive tweet about Wounded Knee? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Georgy Zhukov said:

I bet no one would give a shit about her tweet if she were a white Christian woman. What about the President's far more offensive tweet about Wounded Knee? 

The whole thing is ridiculous - criticizing AIPAC or even Israel itself is not antisemitic. I'm saddened noone came to her defense and she felt pressured into apologizing.

Now i see some saying her challenging Elliott Abrams was because hes Jewish and not because hes a war criminal that shouldn't have a job picking up trash, more less a job in the state department.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Kasanova King said:

I think I finally understand what you're saying.

Yes, Socialist economies are not against industry and technology.  Well, they can't be really.

And yes, they use it etc.

But it sucks...and the bulk of what they produce/invent etc in terms of technological advancements, etc has been years, if not decades, behind the West.

And don't get me started with the medicine, etc.

 

Right on, so neither of us are in favour of that style of governance, and you seem to be in agreement with me about anti-capitalists who live in capitalist economies... so its not a performative contradiction. Its not hypocritical.

Looking forward to your new sig! :P

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, -W.A.R- said:

The whole thing is ridiculous - criticizing AIPAC or even Israel itself is not antisemitic. I'm saddened noone came to her defense and she felt pressured into apologizing.

Now i see some saying her challenging Elliott Abrams was because hes Jewish and not because hes a war criminal that shouldn't have a job picking up trash, more less a job in the state department.

It is sad that politicians are willing to throw a fellow American under the bus in defense of a foreign power. 

What the fuck ever happened to "America First"? We are still bitches to Israel and Saudi Arabia. Another Trump lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Georgy Zhukov said:

It is sad that politicians are willing to throw a fellow American under the bus in defense of a foreign power. 

What the fuck ever happened to "America First"? We are still bitches to Israel and Saudi Arabia. Another Trump lie.

My understanding is the animosity expressed toward Omar was due to some lyrics she tweeted, in conjunction with the AIPAC accusation. The lyrics said something about "benjamins" and "money going round" or something like that. The issue was the seemingly prejudicial language that some people interpreted as her forwarding the narrative of Jewish economic domination via politics and banking, not the accusation that AIPAC pretty much controls Israel policy. Although, had she tweeted the AIPAC note alone, I wouldn't be surprised if she still received flak. Critics of AIPAC are often seen as automatically antisemitic, and then there's the added layer of her being Muslim, which many Americans still have great difficulty dealing with.

Regarding her assertion, she's pretty much correct. I worked in IR politics for a bit, specifically on ME issues. AIPAC's grip on our government is strong. And don't let anyone tell you "they don't send money to candidates, so they are nonpartisan and/or reflective of greater Jewish-American sentiment" (spoiler: polling says they're not, not even a plurality of Israeli's are behind all of AIPAC's positions), because they manage and collude with a plethora of smaller local political action committees who do the donating for them. Not just to federal officials, but down to state and sometimes county and city levels as well. Opposition lobbying to AIPAC's position has really only started in the last 10-15 years or so. Unsurprisingly, this happened as AIPAC began drifting from non-partisanship in its views toward the conservative bias it has been growing into over the past couple of decades.

The conservative Jewish lobby is a powerful lobby (though, the Iran Deal was a big loss for them and a turning point), but the Jewishness of it is not what makes it so strong. There are plenty of lobbies that exercise significant pressure on our government and elected officials.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After he signs the bill, he will threaten to declare a national emergency. He knows getting the wall started is his best shot at re-election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose Trump no longer agree with his previous assessment:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Georgy Zhukov said:

What the fuck ever happened to "America First"? We are still bitches to Israel and Saudi Arabia. Another Trump lie.

I could be wrong. But I always understood his "America First" meant made in the USA instead of made in China, Canada or Mexico. I didn't think Trump meant changes in foreign policy and U.S. relationship with Israel and Saudi Arabia.

But it is true there is no real "America First" except for the tariffs maybe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

National emergency called - build the wall 

 

The above post has been made purely to make @soon Rage please don't hate it's all love lol 

Edited by lukepowell1988

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lukepowell1988 said:

National emergency called - build the wall 

 

The above post has been made purely to make @soon Rage please don't hate it's all love lol 

lol!  If somehow it does get built, its only value will be as a monument to hysteria ;) :P

Rage?! 99% of the time Im belly laughing as I playfully interact with MAGAs. Canadian "chirping" culture plus my love for roast comedy mixed with the the need to correct 1000 facts for each of their sentences must come off a lot more severe then it actually is. Im especially into chirping and absurdism when its with non-MAGA people that I respect and enjoy, like recently in this thread with KK. :) 

Edited by soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, lukepowell1988 said:

National emergency called - build the wall 

 

The above post has been made purely to make @soon Rage please don't hate it's all love lol 

Except it's not even for a wall.  From what I've read most of it is to repair existing barriers and fencing.  Plus it's limited to around 234 miles in Texas.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, downzy said:

Except it's not even for a wall.  From what I've read most of it is to repair existing barriers and fencing.  Plus it's limited to around 234 miles in Texas.   

Can’t they just build a wall around Texas? :lol:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to laugh how Trump, during his press conference today, said he didn't need to issue the emergency declaration.

I believe this was his lawyers reaction:

 

giphy-3.gif

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He also basically called for the death penalty for opioid dealers (or even users? was typically incoherent). This was in relation to talks with China but he's also praised Duterte who is very clear about murdering users.

Just what the opioid pandemic needs, more death. I dont think he was envisioning Pharma execs and MDs as dealers when he rambled about that either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a total crush on Ann Coulter. 

She gives me a major hate boner! 

There I said it! :lol: 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×