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

Status
Not open for further replies.
It happens...lol

It just it completely changed my point , which or the tone of it at least which is a bit frustrating. The 'but' is the indicatior that's what I meant .

I do understand , genuinely , that some people could be excited by what trump had to offer as an outsider at least in theory . I obviously don't agree with it but he was , much of the time , all things to all people and presented himself as speaking to the masses . I think the appeal of Bernie was also an indication of the appeal of the outsider or something new although comparing them as people seems difficult.

However the back him at all costs mentality, people claiming he's doing amazingly, backing his handling of Charlottesville, the complete dismissal of any criticism as a media conspiracy and the ignoring of his mishandling of the truth I find impossible to get my head round if I'm honest .
 
It's a fact of life that when you keep attacking people, verbally or written, people tend to fight back. Painting his supporters as knuckle draggers probably doesn't help.......

You are treading into the moral relativism/moral equivalence waters which is an indefensible place to dip your toes. As we've discussed before, we are not talking about a healthy political climate where two sides have equal footing in some even-handed political squabble. We are talking about woefully and willfully ignorant people who throw their support behind an empirically documented racist, sexist, lying, corrupt individual who is pathologically narcissistic, among his many other base-level faults. Trump, as you know, started playing to the lowest common denominator--that of racism, xenophobia, sexism--to a constitutent that was already residually racist and/or prone to scape-goating throughout his campaign (afterall, who else would vote for a candidate who implied that all mexicans are rapists in a campaign speech?). While you can claim that name calling doesn't help, you are not helping yourself by failing to recall any of the past 100 years and how history repeats itself. Politicians did the whole "both sides" issue during the civil rights marches in the 60s. History has shown that there was a clear right and wrong about that. Because there is. People opposed to civil rights were rightly called "racists," which is a perfectly good description of what they are--despite your sententious Sunday school condemnation of "name calling". And when people then start to call known racists by other terms, such as "knuckle-draggers" or "deplorables" this is just semantic spillover to describe a group of individuals who are, well, racist at worst, and woefully and willfully ignorant at best. Your position of "you're not helping the situation by name calling" is not a convincing defense in any abiding and morally-defensible way. Besides, name-calling is only a surface skirmish. More deeply, this is an all-out war for the moral-heart of our country. And like before, there is a clear right and wrong.
 

I'd of thought that Germans of all people would know not to throw around Hitler/Nazi references as though it ment nothing and compare anyone to that. Trump might be a lot of things but he's not no a par with a man responsible for the deaths of up to 42 million soldiers and civilians, including systematic butchering of up to 14 million. You don't have to like Trump to see how absurd and frankly distasteful that Is.
 
I'd of thought that Germans of all people would know not to throw around Hitler/Nazi references as though it ment nothing and compare anyone to that. Trump might be a lot of things but he's not no a par with a man responsible for the deaths of up to 42 million soldiers and civilians, including systematic butchering of up to 14 million. You don't have to like Trump to see how absurd and frankly distasteful that Is.

There's loads of parallels between him and Hitler. An authoritarian narcissist who detests democratic institutions and wishes to rule by diktat wherever possible, and has leveraged their position of power off the back of perceived injustices by the populace, has very strong prejudices towards certain groups of people with a growing paramilitary force of racists behind him.

In fact, it's harder to find differences between the two. It is disingenuous to ignore the similarities based solely on genocide and ignoring the actual politics, personality and procedure of the two.
 
There's loads of parallels between him and Hitler. An authoritarian narcissist who detests democratic institutions and wishes to rule by diktat wherever possible, and has leveraged their position of power off the back of perceived injustices by the populace, has very strong prejudices towards certain groups of people with a growing paramilitary force of racists behind him.

In fact, it's harder to find differences between the two. It is disingenuous to ignore the similarities based solely on genocide and ignoring the actual politics, personality and procedure of the two.

I think you're absolutely correct and I think the idea that sections of the population aren't being exterminated means you can't have comparisons isn't helpful .

Trump was elected and he isn't a dictator but the journey he is on whilst taking the country with him is understandably causing concern to many .

I make no apologies for posting again but below are the fourteen points that the US holocaust museum have on the wall to identify the rise of fascism:


Powerful and continuing Nationalism
Disdain for the recognition of human rights
Identification of enemies/scapegoats for a unifying cause
Supremacy of the military
Rampant sexism
Controlled mass media
Obsession with national security
Religion and government intertwined
Corporate power is protected
Labor power is suppressed
Disdain for intellectuals and the arts
Obsession with crime and punishment
Rampant cronyism and corruption
Fraudulent elections
 
I think you're absolutely correct and I think the idea that sections of the population aren't being exterminated means you can't have comparisons isn't helpful .

Trump was elected and he isn't a dictator but the journey he is on whilst taking the country with him is understandably causing concern to many .

I make no apologies for posting again but below are the fourteen points that the US holocaust museum have on the wall to identify the rise of fascism:


Powerful and continuing Nationalism
Disdain for the recognition of human rights
Identification of enemies/scapegoats for a unifying cause
Supremacy of the military
Rampant sexism
Controlled mass media
Obsession with national security
Religion and government intertwined
Corporate power is protected
Labor power is suppressed
Disdain for intellectuals and the arts
Obsession with crime and punishment
Rampant cronyism and corruption
Fraudulent elections

Hitler was put in his position 'legally' too. He was legally Chancellor and, indeed, legally made a dictator through the Enabling Act. People don't seem to remember that there was still a President when Hitler came to power - that was only abolished after Hindenberg's death.

There's no doubt in my mind that if Trump could do it, he'd get rid of Congress and rule by decree as a dictator. It's what he is.
 
I make no apologies for posting again but below are the fourteen points that the US holocaust museum have on the wall to identify the rise of fascism:

Powerful and continuing Nationalism
Disdain for the recognition of human rights
Identification of enemies/scapegoats for a unifying cause
Supremacy of the military
Rampant sexism
Controlled mass media
Obsession with national security
Religion and government intertwined
Corporate power is protected
Labor power is suppressed
Disdain for intellectuals and the arts
Obsession with crime and punishment
Rampant cronyism and corruption
Fraudulent elections

Notable how many of these were apparent long before Trump (or are apparent in other countries that should know better).

We are probably pretty lucky that Trump is such a dimwit. Essentially, the fascism gun went off, but the bullet was a dud, so to speak. When the next "outsider" Republican comes along, someone with even average levels of aptitude and work ethic, we might not be so fortunate. Fascism has long been latent in the United States. Just wait until the QE asset bubble pops.

Trump, meanwhile, seems to have effectively abdicated any real responsibility or authority - so long as he gets to keep having temper tantrums on the internet.

This Chris Hayes interview has been making the rounds, and it seems plausible:
"I don't think the president wants to be in charge. I think he wants to sit on his couch and yell at his TV screen and tweet things, but he's almost happy to be able to kind of get it out of his system and not have anyone listen to him. I think his optimal equilibrium is hectoring Jeff Sessions but Jeff Sessions not quitting, or tweeting out the thing about transgender service members and the military ignoring him, or tweeting out threats to North Korea and not actually changing American posture.

I think that that we have arrived at a new equilibrium in which both the interior members of his staff, the actual federal bureaucracy, the US Congress, the US public, the global public, and global leaders all basically understand the president is fundamentally a bullsh*t artist and you just shouldn't listen to what he says."


And really, this is what the Republican Party and the legendary "Deep State" had hoped for all along - like a reverse Wizard of Oz, where here, the frightened and confused old man is in front of the curtain, distracting from something much more sinister.

Far from the B-movie conspiracy rhapsodies which Trumplings and Fellow Travelers so ecstatically conjure, the actual Deep State (ie: the security forces, which Trump voters worship - not his idiot family and cartoon appointees leaking to advance their hissy-fit vendettas) is getting everything it wants from the vacuum.

The only authoritative people in the cabinet are now all Goldman Sachs bankers or generals - weird fringe generals, mind, save McMaster - and with Kelly now asserting control of all communications to and from Trump, the generals hold the strongest claim to the throne.

And sure enough, they get to play Cowboys and Indians in Afghanistan once again, and this time with none of the "politically correct" niceties against the wholesale slaughter of civilians which so triggered Muslim communist snowflake Obama.
 
Notable how many of these were apparent long before Trump (or are apparent in other countries that should know better).

We are probably pretty lucky that Trump is such a dimwit. Essentially, the fascism gun went off, but the bullet was a dud, so to speak. When the next "outsider" Republican comes along, someone with even average levels of aptitude and work ethic, we might not be so fortunate. Fascism has long been latent in the United States. Just wait until the QE asset bubble pops.

Trump, meanwhile, seems to have effectively abdicated any real responsibility or authority - so long as he gets to keep having temper tantrums on the internet.

This Chris Hayes interview has been making the rounds, and it seems plausible:
"I don't think the president wants to be in charge. I think he wants to sit on his couch and yell at his TV screen and tweet things, but he's almost happy to be able to kind of get it out of his system and not have anyone listen to him. I think his optimal equilibrium is hectoring Jeff Sessions but Jeff Sessions not quitting, or tweeting out the thing about transgender service members and the military ignoring him, or tweeting out threats to North Korea and not actually changing American posture.

I think that that we have arrived at a new equilibrium in which both the interior members of his staff, the actual federal bureaucracy, the US Congress, the US public, the global public, and global leaders all basically understand the president is fundamentally a bullsh*t artist and you just shouldn't listen to what he says."


And really, this is what the Republican Party and the legendary "Deep State" had hoped for all along - like a reverse Wizard of Oz, where here, the frightened and confused old man is in front of the curtain, distracting from something much more sinister.

Far from the B-movie conspiracy rhapsodies which Trumplings and Fellow Travelers so ecstatically conjure, the actual Deep State (ie: the security forces, which Trump voters worship - not his idiot family and cartoon appointees leaking to advance their hissy-fit vendettas) is getting everything it wants from the vacuum.

The only authoritative people in the cabinet are now all Goldman Sachs bankers or generals - weird fringe generals, mind, save McMaster - and with Kelly now asserting control of all communications to and from Trump, the generals hold the strongest claim to the throne.

And sure enough, they get to play Cowboys and Indians in Afghanistan once again, and this time with none of the "politically correct" niceties against the wholesale slaughter of civilians which so triggered Muslim communist snowflake Obama.

I think there was a lot already there but it's notable how much of it has ramped up since his presidency .

Trump has surrounded himself with generals & frequently quotes them as "my generals say/or tell me" and his obsession with national security is clear.

Trump's broadside and frequent criticism of the arts and the disputes with media becoming downright confrontational , his chief strategist at the time running a news website , whilst streaming their own 'real news' and once bannon left talk of brietbart news.

A president who advocates torture , extra judicial execution of terrorists families and gives speeches to cops suggesting they rough up prisoners .

Trump has demonised Muslims , immigrants , the media and liberals in a way I don't think any president has ever sought to do.

Trump has also stacked his cabinet with bankers , offering tax breaks for the super rich and doing just about everything to help the corporations. The religious stuff is fairly common in the US but his evangelical faith group certainly backs him and the sexism goes without saying .

I do take your point but I think we have to accept , on those points listed at least , trump is rushing to embrace the identifiers of the slide towards fascism .

On Afghanistan The trump supporters I've seen interviewed and the man himself do seem to have spent a lot of time talking about 'taking the gloves off ' , which isn't reassuring at all.
 
It's a fact of life that when you keep attacking people, verbally or written, people tend to fight back. Painting his supporters as knuckle draggers probably doesn't help.......

No, it does. You can't dance around issues like this. It's how we ended up BNP and UKIP on the rise here - people listened to the racists and pretended that they were a part of a balanced debate. You call the people racists, you call them out for accepting lies, you call them out for supporting a clearly ill-equipped and dangerous man for president. No good will come from doing anything but showing them as they are.
 
You are treading into the moral relativism/moral equivalence waters which is an indefensible place to dip your toes. As we've discussed before, we are not talking about a healthy political climate where two sides have equal footing in some even-handed political squabble. We are talking about woefully and willfully ignorant people who throw their support behind an empirically documented racist, sexist, lying, corrupt individual who is pathologically narcissistic, among his many other base-level faults. Trump, as you know, started playing to the lowest common denominator--that of racism, xenophobia, sexism--to a constitutent that was already residually racist and/or prone to scape-goating throughout his campaign (afterall, who else would vote for a candidate who implied that all mexicans are rapists in a campaign speech?). While you can claim that name calling doesn't help, you are not helping yourself by failing to recall any of the past 100 years and how history repeats itself. Politicians did the whole "both sides" issue during the civil rights marches in the 60s. History has shown that there was a clear right and wrong about that. Because there is. People opposed to civil rights were rightly called "racists," which is a perfectly good description of what they are--despite your sententious Sunday school condemnation of "name calling". And when people then start to call known racists by other terms, such as "knuckle-draggers" or "deplorables" this is just semantic spillover to describe a group of individuals who are, well, racist at worst, and woefully and willfully ignorant at best. Your position of "you're not helping the situation by name calling" is not a convincing defense in any abiding and morally-defensible way. Besides, name-calling is only a surface skirmish. More deeply, this is an all-out war for the moral-heart of our country. And like before, there is a clear right and wrong.

Fine. If you believe that half of your fellow Americans are knuckle draggers, who am I to disagree. I was just trying to point out that perhaps some of the 60+ million people might not be........
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top