Submitted by dimitrios10 on Tue, 05/29/2018 - 17:10
I am curious if you guys like DonaldTrump, or do you hate him?
Maybe it is an offensive term. Especially when used like it is in this article, to describe how the once 'liberal' have becone the dogmatic crusading colonists they once despised
"My liberal friends and colleagues do not seem to understand that the advancing liberal construction is a form of imperialism. But to anyone already immersed in the new order, the resemblance is easy to see. Much like the pharaohs and the Babylonian kings, the Roman emperors and the Roman Catholic Church until well into the modern period, as well as the Marxists of the last century, liberals, too, have their grand theory about how they are going to bring peace and economic prosperity to the world by pulling down all the borders and uniting mankind under their own universal rule. Infatuated with the clarity and intellectual rigor of this vision, they disdain the laborious process of consulting with the multitude of nations they believe should embrace their view of what is right. And like other imperialists, they are quick to express disgust, contempt, and anger when their vision of peace and prosperity meets with opposition from those who they are sure would benefit immensely by simply submitting."
Yep, it's a right wing nutty site, but occassionally its good to listen to your detractors...get a bit of perspective...they tend to see stuff often overlooked if one is too close to the action. I think that's actual crux of post modernism described right there...in a nut shell....but just like liberalism, its merits have been long lost to the myopic dogmatic conveyance of belief over reality.
sypkan, compared to the others you mention liberalism, if that is what you want to call it, has done pretty well in bringing peace and prosperity to large parts of the world. Europe, one significant conflict in the 74 years since world war 2. SE Asia, no significant war since the Vietnam war. The Americas, no significant wars since the 19th century. You can assign the blame for the series of wars in the Middle East as you like but tome it is clear that the greatest responsibility rests with the members of the coalition that invaded Iraq with no reason, no plan and complete indifference to the stability of the entire region and the welfare of its people. That was done under a conservative Republican Presidency.
If we think in terms of prosperity, the last few decades have made unprecedented gains in lifting people in Asia out of poverty. The current disparities in wages and conditions are still inequitable but there is hope that will improve over the medium term. Until then people in those countries will probably still prefer a slave labour type job which provides them with their minimal needs to starvation.
If we look at the standard of living across the developed world it has also improved enormously. In some ways this comes down to what you actually mean by "democracy". One of the most disturbing trends is the way the term has been narrowed and corrupted to mean essentially government by opinion poll. This raises the question of why bother with a government at all, just take a poll on every decision! My understanding of democracy is that you elect the most capable people to make the decisions and that they should be courageous enough to go against popular opinion when it is not the best option for the nation.
If you believe in the narrower definition of democracy you automatically preference living generations over future generations. Good governance does not do that.
When people (and me) use terms like right or left its from a mythical "centre".
Centre left, centre right, far left, far right etc.
But where is that centre?
It's my view that this "centre" isn't fixed but it moves more to the left or right over years or decades depending on what side of politics is in government and for how long. Equally, long after a government loses power policies enacted during that time of government might influence where that centre is located.
How I personally see this applying to the real world is that the "market based" economic policies that originated in the centre right here and overseas over the last 3-4 decades (trickle down, small government, privatisation, globalisation) and adopted (plus/minus) by the centre left have pushed that "centre" too far to the right. Today this shift to the right distorts balanced political debate that could improve the lives of ordinary voters.
So where do I sit ? Based on what I write here I accept that some will see me from the far left but that would be wrong as, in historical terms, I see myself aligned with the policies of the centre left.
Well worth a listen - does democracy stand a chance against neoliberalism?
Bit of presumption here BB -
“If you believe in the narrower definition of democracy you automatically preference living generations over future generations “
Possibly Blowin, but it is beyond my power of optimism to believe that, no matter how much we might pretend otherwise, most of our decisions are not strongly influenced by short term self-interest. Climate change is a perfect example. The wise thing to have done, on the available evidence, was to to have funded a move to non-emitting g sources a decade or more ago by increasing energy prices. Instead our politicians bowed to popular resistance to that increase and left us facing what is an increasingly uncertain future.
Great podcast Andy. I will comment in more detail later.
Do you accept Obama removed children from their parents at the border?
I answered that before Blob. From memory the Vox link demonstrated that there was no meaningful comparison between Trump's policy and Obama's policy. I do not give yes or no answers to complex questions.
On the Left/Right spectrum
You think our politics has moved to the Right.
How do you work that out?
One thing is for sure
The Left are wrong on everything
Did your grandparents want Gay Marriage?
Did your great grandparents get the sort of welfare available today?.
Does the Labor party of today push the White Australia policy as in the past?.
We're men wearing women's clothes on Playschool 20 years ago?.
Did universities ban the teaching of the history of western civilisation 100 years ago?.
Do we still have a death penalty?
Could boys play with guns in your left wing past?.
The list is endless and it tells us that the Left in Australia has morphed from a socially conservative working class movement into a front for the butt end of shrinking Unions, academic charlatans and the political activist journalists they pop out, doctrinaire feminists, anti patriotic multi culturalists, the arts, comedians, the indigenous gravy train, LBGQTABCXYZ...and now CEOs and their boards.
When you throw out epithets like 'ultra right' you are only using the 'Left' of today's main argument...which is
'Shut up......you racist'
The photos of illegal aliens being warehoused were used by the media to condemn Trump.
Problem was the photos were taken when Obama was president.
Fake news sandwich.
How was Obama's policy not comparable to Trumps?
Did Obama separate families or not?.
@indo, you are being more than a little disingenuous on your statement about googling ultra right. I'm sure you found 100s of hits on the far-right and far-right popularism. Further, your reply also talks of current moderate right wing parties. My point was the centre has moved and parties like the Liberal Party which were once centre-right and mostly moderate are no longer so, more reactionary i.e. opposed to political, economic and social reform. There is nothing moderate about Hanson nor the prevailing right wing flank of the current day LNP. But you support Hanson I'm guessing.
Blob reread the Vox piece and if you point out exactly where you disagree I will look at it.
I'm of the opinion that polite, moderate naive progressives are more dangerous than zealots like Blindboy.
You wanted a source re. open border democrats.
You got some, but why would you even ask or think my claim unsubstantiated?.
The US. Mexico border is already open
There are millions of illegal immigrants in the US
They just walk in and stay forever.
Democrats want to give them free tertiary education, free health care, drivers licenses, the right to vote and protection from deportation....as in sanctuary cities.
....but ...you ...need ....proof?
You just proved you are wearing blinkers
Trump has promised to enforce the law as the voters demand.
What a dumb looney man child criminal huh?.
Europe has borders so open it has been swamped and will no longer be Europe in the near future.
No go zones, terrorism as a norm....already.
40% of Africans in one poll wanted to go to Europe.
What would Europe be like if 40% of Africa moved in?
Weve already had 100 Sudanese kids, some with weapons running amok in a shopping centre and a violent gang culture police have called unprecedented.
Thank you progressives.
What would our cities look like if we filled them with refugees from war torn African countries?.
And don't think the lefts refugee policy is all about compassion.
It's also about more left voters and about birth rates and propping up precarious economies that needs bums on seats.
We might be forgiven for thinking it was also about jettisoning western institutions like the Nation State for some socialist utopia.
I'm not against immigration but I'm not stupid either.
"Blob if you want to be taken seriously then provide a link to support your assertion that Obama removed children from their parents. At this stage I think that you are just some sort of troll. You never finish a discussion, just hop to some new topic from the right wing agenda. So provide the link if you want a response."
Are you serious?.
You told me to put up and when I do you tell me you will only respond to my response to someone else's post that you already trashed
You are a piece of work....seriously
You challenged my saying Obama separated families
Did Obama separate families or not?
@ Blob - by providing a link to an Ann Coulter blurb only confirms where your beliefs lie. Do you really think she has any credibility at all? She was quoted after 911 as saying " Lets invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to christianity". She is the epitome of hypocrisy"
I think Coulter is at 12 New York Times best sellers.
"A Connecticut native, Coulter graduated with honors from Cornell University School of Arts & Sciences, and received her J.D. from University of Michigan Law School, where she was an editor of The Michigan Law Review.
Coulter clerked for the Honorable Pasco Bowman II of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and was an attorney in the Department of Justice Honors Program for outstanding law school graduates.
After practicing law in private practice in New York City, Coulter worked for the Senate Judiciary Committee, where she handled crime and immigration issues for Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan. From there, she became a litigator with the Center For Individual Rights in Washington, DC, a public interest law firm dedicated to the defense of individual rights with particular emphasis on freedom of speech, civil rights, and the free exercise of religion."
I suppose you reckon that since her resume is so meagre compared to your attainments you shouldn't have to degrade yourself by making any attempt to addressing her super silly arguments.
What a loss...
But I see your point. How could removing the adulteress stoning, adolescent marrying, education banning, boy fiddling old mullahs who helped murder thousands of innocent Americans help Afghanistan?.
That's called sarcasm.
Blob, you may find that being unpleasant and insulting just results in you being ignored. You seemed to be a kind of black or white guy and the discussions here tend to be more shades of grey and while things can get a bit heated, we don't routinely insult each other ........ well except for Crypto but he's a special case and has been here a long time. Now ask me nicely and I will go and look for the Vox link I misattributed to you.
Yes plenty of hits if google "far right" i was more attacking the world "Ultra right" like i said it just sounds like you are wanting to make it sound more extreme than party are.
Ive never voted for Pauline Hanson or one nation, but i think they are unfairly represented in the media as more extreme than they are.(seems they have also mellowed a fair bit from early days)
Although I think they have themselves to blame for this in their early days and even now just being too unprofessional, and pauline is/was terrible in what she says and doesn't say, her worst enemy.
I actually don't even think they are far right these days, i think they are moderate right.
Check out their polices https://www.onenation.org.au/policies/
What here could you consider far right?
Maybe the last bit of the anti islamic policy, but most of which i agree with (banning of borqa and other face covering in public and government buildings, seems like common sense more than anything)
I mean they are into medical cannabis, still support a sustainable refugee resettlement program, they even say "We recognize the value of heritage languages and we encourage their preservation"
There is actually heaps of policy there that i know you agree with weather you like it or not, as I've read your views here.
Freezing politicians wages and a review of their perks, including pensions.
Fairer Tax Reform including multinationals to pay their fair share.
Jobs for Australians first.
Introduce an apprenticeships scheme to support businesses and create jobs.
For further reference and common sense.
General Social issues: Rita Panahi & Lauren Southern
Indigenous issues: Jacinta Price and Anthony Dillion
Gender: Debra Soh.
Islam: Armin Navabi & Brigitte Gabriel
Population: Dick Smith
Are you upset that the guy you called a troll keeps asking you to answer a question that you keep dodging?
Be wrong but don't be a hypocrite cause you are anything but polite.
Ignored?? Did that tactic work for you in pre school?
I called you a troll because that was how you were behaving, jumping from topic to topic. On the issue, my recollection is that I answered in another thread. If you think I am dodging it, let me recapitulate. During Obama's time some children were separated from their parents but if you read your own link it states clearly that this was on an insignificant scale compared to Trump. Further, in the cases in which children were removed, according to the Vox link, the cause was the criminal activity, usually drug smuggling, of their parents. Having said that, I don't have any particular reason to defend Obama other than as a point of reference to Trump. Obama continued most of the neoliberal agenda, expanded drone warfare and failed to bring about the deep changes to US culture necessary to avoid its descent to its present level.
Not to put fine a point on it @ Indo but if you specifically google 'ultra-right' you actually get 100s of hits for 'far-right'. So for accuracy sake, google sees little to no difference between the two terms.
On Hanson, nah, nothing moderate about her. Simplistic race based popularism which, by definition, makes her ultra/far right.
Unless you were being disingenuous your initial question on border separations would suggest you were unaware of the facts. Perhaps your extreme position on Trump reflects the bias of the information sources you go to.
I think you're correct on the issue of the classification of the right Indo. The shrill and hyper aggressive voice of extreme elements of the left has certainly changed the western world for ever in riding on what they will always call a 'progressive' agenda; some things for the better - some not. One Nation were predictably ridiculed by the genetically and morally superior pseudo-intellectual left hangers on and the leafy suburb all-knowing academic talking heads with cushy sinecures who took great delight in endlessly ridiculing Hanson's lack of education, lack of eloquence, limited vocabulary and modest business background. Let me be clear, her early comments on indigenous people and Asians were unequivocally highly offensive and rightly rigorously challenged. I've never countenanced supporting them but understand they provide a banal and largely benign vent for frustrated Australians who have found rapid demographic shifts, state altering globalisation, excessive political moral vanity and changing lifestyles confronting and pondering why the age of innocence - or perceived halcyon days are gone. On the face of things, some of their policies make good, pragmatic sense, but no-one from the left will ever concede the fact because that would be dreadfully uncool. All in all, in many respects, One Nation fundamentally embodies much of the spirit of protectionist old Labor which always maintained a strong bent for putting the welfare of the country and its workers first.
No, I didn't know that there had been separations under Obama. My position on Trump is not particularly extreme. I think it is typical of those of us with left wing beliefs. I try to look at opposing views. I find Politico does its best to take a middle path and I make a point of reading it's more positive reports on Trump.
In my understanding, which has evolved over the time he has been in office, I see him as an increasingly irrelevant symptom of a much deeper disease which sadly, regardless of what happens to Trump, looks to have some way to run. Trump was simply a convenient method for the established financial interests in the US to maintain and extend their wealth and power. Impeaching him would make no substantial difference, they would just find another way.
Ha ha you make me laugh with that post, Blindboy you are the biggest bias trump hater I've come across (worst than the ABC), i can't remember what number we are up to now but you have started up quite a decent number of anti trump threads.
Thanks for the Ann Coulter Wikipedia grab from above. Bravo, she must be a shining light in your eyes, with all those best selling books and political experience. Obviously I haven't reached such esteemed status and made such incredible achievements in my own life, but thanks for pointing me in the right direction....
However, to be fair, all things considered, she really is still a piece of shit....which really does go hand in hand with Trumps dog eat dog Twitter from the Shitter approach to politics.
indo you are judging from a narrow range. There is murderous rage against Trump out there and as I said in the post, at this stage he is not even really the main problem. It is the ferocious determination of those with wealth and power to get even more that is the real issue.
I've refrained from this thread as discussion should be about policy, not personality.
This is a very good link that shows the drift apart in distribution of ideology in the US since the 1990s. Look at the charts - very important in helping understand why centrists are getting btfo
Article explains the pure irrational hate for Trump, and those very much behind him. This will continue.
For my 2c, Caesar was a populist. I also get the feeling that like Caesar, there are powerful factions behind Trump. Who do we remember 2000 years later? (Please say Cicero someone, but no...)
Interesting vj. I want to see where he goes with it. My working assumption at the moment is that the increasing gap between Democrats and Republicans is the result of a catastrophic shift to the right by the Republicans and would suggest that if you look at changes in the actual policies of both parties over that time period, the gap would be even wider if the Democrats had not also drifted in that direction.
It is very interesting. Note the peak on the most recent chart - a very tall peak way left, and a more broad shift to a right peak that's lower and not as far to the extremity.
(Although, some smart cookie has published a chart that's both left and right, totalitarian and libertarian and tbh that's my favourite. For eg you can be left wing and anarchaic/freedom on that one, or many other flavours)
If this is occurring in all Western countries it would explain the hacked together coalitions of all sides, parliaments resembling what we've observed in Italy in the past and chuckled. Australia with 6 PM's in 10 years of economic growth... Getting harder for the centre to govern in Germany and most recently Sweden, etc.
Maybe it's not so much a catastrophic shift right or left, but a polarisation and the middle ground gets abandoned. Writer of article hopes for stasis as the best possible result in this situation.
vj, Very interesting: will read in detail later. Yeah, I reckon the end of consensus politics coincided with the introduction of the neo-liberal economic policies by political leaders like Reagan, Thatcher and Howard. Interesting that seismic shift to the right and the divergence from the centre occurred during the time neo-liberalism was all the rage. A time when the value of "community" and "society" was usurped the rights of the "aspirational individual". A time when globalised companies turned their backs on their social licence to trade and started to avoid tax liabilities on a massive scale. Voters have now realised those voodoo trickle down economic theories are lies and they are angry but in the US turning to Trump will prove to be a disaster.
Trump. I've penned here before my concerns about what will follow this imbecile and what damage he will do to American democracy in the process. I've also questioned how the Republicans can continue to support him and his excesses. But my view has evolved.
Trump is a fraud.
Trump will not drain the swamp nor will he make America great again.
Trump is not a new force in American politics, he is part of the establishment and he has the full backing of the Republican Party. Trump was their nomination for President.
The Republican Party that has given America and the world Reagan and the two Bushes with their unsustainable tax cuts and increased spending and resultant ballooning unsustainable deficit. The Republican Party of the Koch Brothers and their splitter ultra-right Tea Party.
How's the deficit going to end well for the "forgotten people" in the rust belt when it has to be repaid via a recession or worse?
Guy, as the article concluded the usual solution of power and wealth to a serious downturn is to boost the economy with a major war.
Trump is going after anyone who has a hand in committing an American serviceman to an international trial. Never mind the alleged offence being considered for trial happened outside of America.
Have I got that right?
Yeh it was John Bolton. They are doubling down on the International Criminal Court after Palestine tried to prosecute Israel in the court. The US never signed up but he is threatening the judges and anyone assisting it with criminal charges and immigration bans. Every day brings a new low!
Australia is a party to the ICC ... he means us.
I linked Coulter because she is good on law and being informed about the Supreme Court and how it is used politically is incredibly important. She gives her usual acid treatment but that is no reason to ignore the facts as she presents them.
If you can't be bothered even looking at an opposing view why imagine you can effectively argue against it?.
So you are saying you are not extremely anti Trump.....when you justified treason as a way of ousting him.
Delusional or dishonest?
You don't know what you are talking about.
Trump is an anti establishment populist put up by the base of the party against the wishes of the Bush/Koch crowd.
He has also attracted support from blue collar democrats because of policies that aim bring back working class jobs
And as I have already asked, how does your socialist analysis deal with the fact that workers and the poor have in fact gotten richer under Reagan, Bush Thatcher and Howard?.
A couple of things Blob. By comparison to the murderous rage directed against him, my position on Trump is, as I stated, relatively moderate nor is it clear that the actions of those mentioned in the NYT op ed were in fact treasonous. If you believe them then, more than anything else they are evidence of Trump's total incompetence. An important document is removed from his desk and he doesn't even notice. Someone changes the subject and he forgets all about the original topic. If it was treason, it was also evidence of early onset dementia!
No matter what you think of Trump IMHO i think the American people made the right decision.
Lets remember they had the decision of Hillary another Clinton versus Trump.
The cycle of electing dynasty politicians was broken with Obama, to go back to that horrible cycle of Clintons and Bush's etc would have been a disaster and something America should never allow to happen again.
The reality is the people of America through how their system works voted Trump in and it seems he is actually doing a pretty decent job based on economy etc and well the USA hasn't started anymore big wars which is a surprise, i mean didn't Trump even play a part in getting North and South Korea to talk to each other?
I get it
You are not extreme
......when compared to 'murderous'
That makes sense....not
Working secretly from within a government to overthrow a democratically elected President would be treason by my definition.
Condoning it, as you do, would be extreme by my definition also....because if it successful it could jeopardise democracy itself.
It could potentially lead to a police state or civil war ...what's extreme about that?
I suppose getting to the open borders, wealth redistributed .......non extreme utopia you dream of usually requires some sort of sidelining of democracy.
....but being extreme right wing myself my definitions would be suspect.
Your dementia excuse is interesting....Reagan was mercilessly mocked by the clever progressive media and comedians, but before succumbing to dementia the idiot managed to liberate a large part of the world by defeating a rival world power (the USSR would have appealed to you...no capitalists there) without shedding any blood.
And while his critics have aimed their mockery at new targets Reagan is now considered one of the great presidents.
The left are wrong about everything.
The notion that Reagan was responsible for the end of the USSR is laughable. You may have heard of a bloke called Gorbachev. I recommend William Taubman's biography for a full account. Oh and as far as I am aware there wasn't any suggestion of overthrowing Trump. In fact it seemed to be an effort to keep him in power as long as possible by preventing his grossest stupidities.
Yes the Supreme Court and how it is used politically is incredibly important. It is the only real check on Absolute Power of the government.
".....Reagan is now considered one of the great presidents." - big statement within a huge bubble of relativity, but I'm sure you've got a heap of bias neutral evidence to back up your assertion.
"The left are wrong about everything". - Seriously, you need to stop channelling your hero Ann Coulter.
". sypkan, compared to the others you mention liberalism, if that is what you want to call it, has done pretty well in bringing peace and prosperity to large parts of the world. Europe, one significant conflict in the 74 years since world war 2. SE Asia, no significant war since the Vietnam war. The Americas, no significant wars since the 19th century."
Blindboy, liberalism has had some wins, but I think you possibly totally overstate its achievements whilst ignoring its failures.
How's that European union project currently going for you? Or....more importantly, for europeans? Not much of a cohesion feeling going on I'm guessing
Vietnam wasn't just Vietnam. All that interventionism in the neighbouring counties is still unfolding today. Korea, still a bit of a fuck up. China, not looking real friendly. And, "The Americas", no significant wars, but a whole lot of US covert interventionism stirring shit up, left, right, and centre, for decades.
".... You can assign the blame for the series of wars in the Middle East as you like but tome it is clear that the greatest responsibility rests with the members of the coalition that invaded Iraq with no reason, no plan and complete indifference to the stability of the entire region and the welfare of its people. That was done under a conservative Republican Presidency...."
Once again you overlook the democrats supporting those wars whole heartedly in a unaminous run of bipartisan joy as the great internationalist of the left and right came together, again, to save the world...again.
"... If we think in terms of prosperity, the last few decades have made unprecedented gains in lifting people in Asia out of poverty. The current disparities in wages and conditions are still inequitable but there is hope that will improve over the medium term. Until then people in those countries will probably still prefer a slave labour type job which provides them with their minimal needs to starvation...."
Yep this is a tough one. And yes, many wins.
But, from the matilda article...
"....You may also ask what it was that “lifted” them. This makes it sound like some benevolent agency – such as capitalism, or western aid – swooped in and rescued them. But they’re the ones doing the work. It just makes us feel better to see the profits of the rich as reward for altruism....."
You've seriously got to ask yourself about the last 30 years of globalisation. How much of that imposed dickensian rite of passage was facilitated by shameless capitalism? And how much by good management and policies through aid and altruism, etc.
Looking at the results, sure looks like shameless capitalism has won out. You want more of the status quo? You want another 30 years of globalisation like the last 30 years? The best way to address inequality?
I'm not really seeing that, and the results across the world don't speak to me for more 'liberalism'
" ..If we look at the standard of living across the developed world it has also improved enormously. In some ways this comes down to what you actually mean by "democracy". One of the most disturbing trends is the way the term has been narrowed and corrupted to mean essentially government by opinion poll. This raises the question of why bother with a government at all, just take a poll on every decision! My understanding of democracy is that you elect the most capable people to make the decisions and that they should be courageous enough to go against popular opinion when it is not the best option for the nation."
An air of 'born to rule' there blindboy. Be careful what you say. People will start calling you elitist.
Also a whiff of anti democraticness there. Which is evident across the resistance folk. Blocking and attacking the process of democracy whenever it doesn't go their way. Childish.
For all the talk of the dangers of donald trump. I think the resistance folk having a prolonged two year tantrum, void of any rationality whatsoever, has legitimised all sorts of uncivil political discourse in a race to the bottom. The possible civil war, that not only blob is suggesting, will be the fault of both sides finding new levels of unreasonableness.
This is also on the back of the democrat's Russia debacle, where both sides are up to their necks in corruption. But one side has played a very dangerous game with the truth for domestic political gain. But trumpo is so dangerous?
The fact he"s got people to shuffle his papers is comforting. These are the checks and balances that mean the public can elect a fuckwit and the world won't fall apart.
Just more democrat bullshit frankly. Coincidentally, released the same time as a book, and an article of whisperings from the whitehouse of unrest.
Just like they did last year with the fire and fury book, and the accompanying articles. The author basically discredited himself in the first week of his own book tour. But I'm sure it was a NYT bestseller!
". .If you believe in the narrower definition of democracy you automatically preference living generations over future generations. Good governance does not do that."
Good governance doesn't stubbornly bury its head in the sand for decades, blinded by ideology, adverse to input of ideas, unwilling to adjust its settimgs, to a new reality that has been hastily brought to us by technology either.
@blob, I'm feeling mellow so I'll pen a brief reply to your claptrap.
Trump is not an anti establishment politician, not in the slightest. He is a Republican president through and through. A Republican Party (RP) that you get when its members do not stand up for the values and principles they historically held dear first against neo-liberalism and latterly against the Koch funded Tea Party insurgence that now dominates the RP. This is the new Republican Party reality, own it. Ultra right popularism while continuing the the small government / low/no tax agenda. For god's sake man look at the size if that deficit, look at how its projected to grow under Trump's tax cuts and then ask how will help the punter in the rust belt? Tax cuts to multi national companies ... the big trickle down lie.
You statement about that workers and the poor have gained under Reagan, the Bushes, Thatcher and Howard is 100% baloney. It ignores pretty much every piece of objective analysis of how neo-liberism and globalisation have left great swathes of working class people behind in western economies. It also ignores the growing gap between the lowest and highest paid workers across all western economies and the fact that wages in the US have stagnated for decades. Families that could comfortably live on one wage now require both parents to work multiple jobs. Gosh, you get paid a massive $11 a hour at Walmart these days.
It's not as simple as two terrible candidates being put up, the absurdity of the Trump election intersects with some bizarre online phenomenon extending well beyond mere fake news, it finds expression in random, never-before-seen ways, and no-one knows what it all means except that it's thrown everything off kilter.
The latest 'Tired Of Winning' dispatch is worth a read...
Notes on some artefacts: Political discourse in America is becoming a semiotic hot mess
sypkan, the European project faces a number of difficulties but overall continues to be beneficial to its members in numerous ways other than preventing them declaring g war on each other. You agree on Asia, I agree withe Matilda quote and that we need to do better in the future. I stand by my view of democracy. It is the way it works in reality and the way it needs to work. Following public opinion on every issue would be to surrender all power to Murdoch. I have no particular interest in defending the Democrats or Labor in Australia in terms of their support for the Iraq war. It was shameful. Trump is merely the end result of decades of appalling domestic social policy in the US that has created a situation in which wages are so low that there is an entire class of working poor. And yes the Democrats probably have to take an equal share in the blame.
"No, I didn't know that there had been separations under Obama. My position on Trump is not particularly extreme. I think it is typical of those of us with left wing beliefs. I try to look at opposing views. I find Politico does its best to take a middle path and I make a point of reading it's more positive reports on Trump."
How could you know? When articles like the vox talk about it for 20 paragraphs without actually saying it. Then they overlooked that the photos were from obama's time. Kind of overlooked the whole story really. So partisan its an embarrassment to 'journalism'.
sypkan, I think this is the third or fourth time, between you and Blob, that I have answered this. The removal of children under Trump was on a vastly greater scale than under Obama and those children who were removed were usually associated with criminal behaviour by their parents. Why you want to drag on about this is beyond me. Maybe because it is the only way you have of avoiding the self-evident truth. Trump is a barely literate fool whose only methods of communication are to lie, exaggerate and insult. His Presidency will go down in history as one long chronicle of disgrace. Over time he has degenerated into nothing much more than a figure head to be propped up and managed while the real business of governing goes on, without him even noticing, behind his back. That is a moderate view of Trump. A more extreme version, which I would not support, is that he has been deliberately planted and supported by a foreign power to undermine US strategic policy and that he is aware of this and so is guilty of high treason.
Well its kind of a point because the press made a point of it - locking up kids that is, then we're found out to be lying that obama never locked up kids. Then it was shown that his footage, of kids in cages, was shown to slur trump!
It's gotta be at least funny? Ironic? Dangerous manipulation of narrative? All of the above?
I wouldn't dispute either of those views blindboy. Both beg the question, how did shit get so bad that donald trump is the president?
And, why is US strategic policy so on the nose?
It seems the world appreciates donald trump's less interventionist stance...for the time being....