Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon

[Seanjd]

No shock factors?
This is lifted from FB
Heather Richardson
21 hrs ·


I don't like to talk about politics on Facebook-- political history is my job, after all, and you are my friends-- but there is an important non-partisan point to make today.

What Bannon is doing, most dramatically with last night's ban on immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries-- is creating what is known as a "shock event." Such an event is unexpected and confusing and throws a society into chaos. People scramble to react to the event, usually along some fault line that those responsible for the event can widen by claiming that they alone know how to restore order. When opponents speak out, the authors of the shock event call them enemies. As society reels and tempers run high, those responsible for the shock event perform a sleight of hand to achieve their real goal, a goal they know to be hugely unpopular, but from which everyone has been distracted as they fight over the initial event. There is no longer concerted opposition to the real goal; opposition divides along the partisan lines established by the shock event.

Last night's Executive Order has all the hallmarks of a shock event. It was not reviewed by any governmental agencies or lawyers before it was released, and counterterrorism experts insist they did not ask for it. People charged with enforcing it got no instructions about how to do so. Courts immediately have declared parts of it unconstitutional, but border police in some airports are refusing to stop enforcing it.

Predictably, chaos has followed and tempers are hot.

My point today is this: unless you are the person setting it up, it is in no one's interest to play the shock event game. It is designed explicitly to divide people who might otherwise come together so they cannot stand against something its authors think they won't like. I don't know what Bannon is up to-- although I have some guesses-- but because I know Bannon's ideas well, I am positive that there is not a single person whom I consider a friend on either side of the aisle-- and my friends range pretty widely-- who will benefit from whatever it is. If the shock event strategy works, though, many of you will blame each other, rather than Bannon, for the fallout. And the country will have been tricked into accepting their real goal.

But because shock events destabilize a society, they can also be used positively. We do not have to respond along old fault lines. We could just as easily reorganize into a different pattern that threatens the people who sparked the event. A successful shock event depends on speed and chaos because it requires knee-jerk reactions so that people divide along established lines. This, for example, is how Confederate leaders railroaded the initial southern states out of the Union. If people realize they are being played, though, they can reach across old lines and reorganize to challenge the leaders who are pulling the strings. This was Lincoln's strategy when he joined together Whigs, Democrats, Free-Soilers, anti-Nebraska voters, and nativists into the new Republican Party to stand against the Slave Power. Five years before, such a coalition would have been unimaginable. Members of those groups agreed on very little other than that they wanted all Americans to have equal economic opportunity. Once they began to work together to promote a fair economic system, though, they found much common ground. They ended up rededicating the nation to a "government of the people, by the people, and for the people."

Confederate leaders and Lincoln both knew about the political potential of a shock event. As we are in the midst of one, it seems worth noting that Lincoln seemed to have the better idea about how to use it.

Did I dream him saying he would ban all Muslims from entering the country and put those already in the country on a database?

This isn't, and shouldn't be a shock to anybody.

 

[Ashtonian]

Yeah...but this is bigger than that. It's really not an American issue. It affects British citizens. It affects citizens from all over the world.

Ash from Liverpool might achieve nothing, but when combined with John from Leicester, Gabriel from Puerto Vallarta, Jennifer from Santa Clara, Haruto from Kyoto, and literally millions of other voices, things can happen.

We have been weaned away from power for a long time, comfort keeping us paralyzed from marching for the rights of the under privileged. But it doesn't have to be so. We can stand up, disagree, and try to improve the world.

If we disagree, we shouldn't just throw our hands up and say, well - you won, you get to do whatever you want. That's not how democracy works, or has ever worked. We continue to argue, debate, disagree, and cajole. We work for what we believe and work to make the world a better place.

When faced with something I find utterly opposed to that...you're damn right I'm going to protest. I'm going to make my voice heard. I'm going to know that I did something for what I believed, and showed my kids that you stand up to power, not back down in face of it. I refuse to bend to authority simply because of the tautology that authority is right because it's authority.

He won. With 50 million votes in a country of 318 million - that's not a mandate. My fellow citizens do not stand united behind Trump. And even if they did - that doesn't make it right.

To scoff at protesters because it's meaningless....man, I'm actually a nihilist and I find that a bleak world view.

As I mentioned elsewhere it's not the protest of policies I find disagreeable it's the we didn't get our way idea. That is where I make the difference, protest the wall, the immigration policy your president brought in, protest the obama care , protest the anti abortion stuff, speak up against them because generally I agree with protesting against them. What I don't agree with is the protest when you lose philosophy, we didn't want Trump so protest it. That is what I argue against. That and the idea that people protesting in different countries will have a significant impact against it, whereas if 100 million Americans protested it then it would have much more of a impact in changing minds.

And if the system is broken then fight it, don't complain about it or do nothing. Protesting against the winner of the election is nothing if people used that power to fight the system instead. People forget that a government would fall if the people actually stood against it, all fancy and hyperthetical sure. But if Trump is so bad and the system which elected him is so broken then why doesn't America join together and fight the system now then. If Trump is the epitomy of that system massively failing them then fight it, unify against it. Otherwise in 4 years time you could be right back in the same situation.

 

[Ruairi77]

Bannon has Alinsky's playbook in his hip pocket. The left isn't used to dealing with that from the right. These comments are very aware of what's up.

You're right here, there's no 'Lincoln' type unifier and leader yet. In time this person, who ever they are, will have to unite the left and the right against the likes of Steve Bannon. Convincing the people who hate the left to get on board without changing their core beliefs won't be easy, not when the far right controls their flow of knowledge.

 

[Ruairi77]

Did I dream him saying he would ban all Muslims from entering the country and put those already in the country on a database?

This isn't, and shouldn't be a shock to anybody.

The shock isn't that he's doing it. It's the way that he's doing it.

 

[RaleighBlue]

As I mentioned elsewhere it's not the protest of policies I find disagreeable it's the we didn't get our way idea. That is where I make the difference, protest the wall, the immigration policy your president brought in, protest the obama care , protest the anti abortion stuff, speak up against them because generally I agree with protesting against them. What I don't agree with is the protest when you lose philosophy, we didn't want Trump so protest it. That is what I argue against. That and the idea that people protesting in different countries will have a significant impact against it, whereas if 29p million Americans protested it then it would have much more of a impact in changing minds.

And if the system is broken then fight it, don't complain about it or do nothing. Protesting against the winner of the election is nothing if people used that power to fight the system instead. People forget that a government would fall if the people actually stood against it, all fancy and hyperthetical sure. But if Trump is so bad and the system which elected him is so broken then why doesn't America join together and fight the system now then. If Trump is the epitomy of that system massively failing them then fight it, unify against it. Otherwise in 4 years time you could be right back in the same situation.

Look around.

We are. That's precisely what's being protested in the U.S. And now abroad. He did the stuff he said he would do. The very stuff that made my vote against him even more obvious. I was against it then, I am against it now, and I won't be silent about it.

The system is broken. A megalomaniacal slum lord has been elected president without (again) any mandate worth speaking of, and he has immediately shown his gross incompetence and utter inability to lead the country in a manner consistent with the ideals and institutions of the United States. He is ruling through fear, prejudice, and hate. It's fine to disagree with me here. We'll just disagree (and debate).

People protesting in different countries do not have the SAME impact, but they do have an impact. When the entire first world unites against you...you rethink your position. Or it gives strength to his opposition, knowing that the world is on their side. And that's completely ignoring the impact it will have on their own countries ruling elite. As I said, at worst, it's a warning.

And while I agree that there are a million other things worth protesting, for most people this isn't one or the other. It's not that their protesting Trump instead of some British domestic policy. Most of them are protesting Trump instead of staying at home watching the television. You've created a false dichotomy.

 

[mezzrow]

You're right here, there's no 'Lincoln' type unifier and leader yet. In time this person, who ever they are, will have to unite the left and the right against the likes of Steve Bannon. Convincing the people who hate the left to get on board without changing their core beliefs won't be easy, not when the far right controls their flow of knowledge.

Like Nixon, he's letting the protests in the streets work to unite and enlarge his base. Nixon's mistake was in getting himself tied to the sad black hole of suck that turned out to be the Plumbers operation. Just goes to show, just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not out to get you. Time will show whether the public goes with the media or with the President. If I'm on the streets these days, I'm really looking to make sure this doesn't get violent in any way that can be tied to protesters. I didn't have this view forty-five years ago, and I should have.

 

[Seanjd]

The shock isn't that he's doing it. It's the way that he's doing it.

By banning people from Muslim countries? How else did people think he would do it?

 

[Ashtonian]

Look around.

We are. That's precisely what's being protested in the U.S. And now abroad. He did the stuff he said he would do. The very stuff that made my vote against him even more obvious. I was against it then, I am against it now, and I won't be silent about it.

The system is broken. A megalomaniacal slum lord has been elected president without (again) any mandate worth speaking of, and he has immediately shown his gross incompetence and utter inability to lead the country in a manner consistent with the ideals and institutions of the United States. He is ruling through fear, prejudice, and hate. It's fine to disagree with me here. We'll just disagree (and debate).

People protesting in different countries do not have the SAME impact, but they do have an impact. When the entire first world unites against you...you rethink your position. Or it gives strength to his opposition, knowing that the world is on their side. And that's completely ignoring the impact it will have on their own countries ruling elite. As I said, at worst, it's a warning.

And while I agree that there are a million other things worth protesting, for most people this isn't one or the other. It's not that their protesting Trump instead of some British domestic policy. Most of them are protesting Trump instead of staying at home watching the television. You've created a false dichotomy.

The only other point I can offer back is if Trump changed his stance on all of his polices, what sort of president would that make him? If everything he promised to do was reversed then wouldn't that make him weak? This is the other side of it, to be a strong leadership he has to back his own words up and not go against what got him elected in the first place. In fact what wouod happen if you had one side protesting his actions and the other side protesting the fact he is reversing them? It would create chaos and potentially cripple the country.

Whether that is a marker as to why he shouldn't have been elected is another point entirely but right now, he has to back his own words up to even justify getting the job.

 

[bring the ghost on]

Yo guys.

I'm just catching up with discussions in here, but what are everyone's thoughts on the 1m signature petition to cancel the Trump state visit and Theresa May's reaction?

 

[Dylan]

You American morons, i bet some of you voted for this gigantic tit didn't you, i would revoke your Everton fan membership if i could.

I would remind you of the governing rule of this forum:

Our advice to make this forum work;

• Don't be a tit.

If you are, your account will be denied access to this forum.

 

[Seanjd]

Yo guys.

I'm just catching up with discussions in here, but what are everyone's thoughts on the 1m signature petition to cancel the Trump state visit and Theresa May's reaction?

It absolutely should be cancelled. Otherwise, Britain is supporting his methods.

 

[Ernie]

Trumps a G

 

[roydo]

It absolutely should be cancelled. Otherwise, Britain is supporting his methods.

How?

 

[Ruairi77]

By banning people from Muslim countries? How else did people think he would do it?

By going through the courts, seeing if it was legal. By figuring out the inner workings of the order before making it, by letting everyone from DHS to TSA know how it's going to work.
They've already rolled back on part of it.
What's shocking is the total disregard for procedure.
The order it's self, while not shocking, is appalling.

 

[Seanjd]

How?

By showing solidarity. If the government strongly disagrees with his methods, they should show it by cancelling his visit. That would send a message that we do not want to be friendly with a president willing to do such thingsz