Random political thought thread.

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Playing the nazi card in the Third Reich

(English subtitles available)

I have had a lot of arguments like this.

 

[Maou]

Lowkey check these threads to see how far the parallel universe has progressed, and it is always interesting.

 

[The Cat]

 

[Kephalos]

You know, looking at the evolution of the Republican Party over the last 24 years, I think one could very well say that it has become more and more parliamentarized, i.e. it behaves a lot like the kinds of political parties you see in parliamentary systems, both in its behavior in government and opposition as well as in its inner workings, despite the formal legal institucional structure of the Constitution and of the way political parties have traditionally worked in the United States.

You could observe some of this behavior already in the 1990s, when Newt Gingrich was for all intents and purposes a parliamentary opposition leader. Later, one could even compare the failed Clinton impeachment to a failed confidence measure, the kind that happen now and then in parliamentary systems. And during the time George W. Bush (Republican) had Republican majorities in either or both houses of Congress, the Republicans and the Republican administration acted like an absolute parliamentary majority government. When Barack H. Obama (Democratic) became president, the Republican Party behaved exactly like a parliamentary opposition party, both in the minority (congressional hearings, poitless or not, legal or judiciary ooposition, common opposition instruments in parliamentary systems) and with divided government with astonishing party discipline ("cohabitation" in the sense used by the French, although this would be more like a forced "cohabitation").

And now, ever since Donald J. Trump actually became President and later in opposition, the GOP has, in addition to the informally parliamentarist practices of the last decades, a party leader who remains as leader (although informally) and functions as such (selecting candidates, enforcing party-line discipline, etc.) even when the Republican Party has been in opposition, again both under conditions of being a minority opposition and under divided government.

The United States doesn't have the legal or formal structures of a parliamentary system and certainly the sort of adversarial dynamic between parties ("the spirit of faction") and also inside the Republican Party has always been rejected (or only tolerated to the extent that it was inevitable) in American political culture. This itself is problematic, apart from the inherent, ubiquitous, and obvious defects of parliamentarism and weimarization, as opposed to a properly balanced and checked presidential system.

 

[The Cat]

 

[Virtual ghost]

Musk feuds with Brazilian top judge over X

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Biden wants to play wartime President.

 

[The Cat]

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Watch his approval ratings soar when we enter a conflict with Iran. Voters don't like to change leaders during a war, even if the leader is somewhat unpopular.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Watch his approval ratings soar when we enter a conflict with Iran. Voters don't like to change leaders during a war, even if the leader is somewhat unpopular.

If that happened it would be extremely weird.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

You know, looking at the evolution of the Republican Party over the last 24 years, I think one could very well say that it has become more and more parliamentarized, i.e. it behaves a lot like the kinds of political parties you see in parliamentary systems, both in its behavior in government and opposition as well as in its inner workings, despite the formal legal institucional structure of the Constitution and of the way political parties have traditionally worked in the United States.

You could observe some of this behavior already in the 1990s, when Newt Gingrich was for all intents and purposes a parliamentary opposition leader. Later, one could even compare the failed Clinton impeachment to a failed confidence measure, the kind that happen now and then in parliamentary systems. And during the time George W. Bush (Republican) had Republican majorities in either or both houses of Congress, the Republicans and the Republican administration acted like an absolute parliamentary majority government. When Barack H. Obama (Democratic) became president, the Republican Party behaved exactly like a parliamentary opposition party, both in the minority (congressional hearings, poitless or not, legal or judiciary ooposition, common opposition instruments in parliamentary systems) and with divided government with astonishing party discipline ("cohabitation" in the sense used by the French, although this would be more like a forced "cohabitation").

And now, ever since Donald J. Trump actually became President and later in opposition, the GOP has, in addition to the informally parliamentarist practices of the last decades, a party leader who remains as leader (although informally) and functions as such (selecting candidates, enforcing party-line discipline, etc.) even when the Republican Party has been in opposition, again both under conditions of being a minority opposition and under divided government.

The United States doesn't have the legal or formal structures of a parliamentary system and certainly the sort of adversarial dynamic between parties ("the spirit of faction") and also inside the Republican Party has always been rejected (or only tolerated to the extent that it was inevitable) in American political culture. This itself is problematic, apart from the inherent, ubiquitous, and obvious defects of parliamentarism and weimarization, as opposed to a properly balanced and checked presidential system.

This reminds me of one of my many complaints with the Democratic party. When the Republican party changes the way the game is played, they don't react accordingly. They keep playing the same way because it's the "noble" thing to do; even though, given the stakes involved, it's not actually that "noble". Many of the Democrats are obsessed with protocol and tradition (which is really a conservative mentality, not a progressive one), treating them as unbreakable laws. If the world is burning down, it is not morally praiseworthy to insist on adhering to tradition simply because it's "the way it's done"; these things aren't laws. Clinging to normalcy when all the evidence shows otherwise is not a sound decision. Meanwhile, the Republicans don't care about protocol and tradition, unless caring about them can help them with their goals. That's hypocrisy, but the voters won't care, which is why they will never stop doing it.

I regret that I'm forced to keep voting for the Democrats because I think the Republican party is almost entirely a fascist movement at this point.

 

[SensEye]

Watch his approval ratings soar when we enter a conflict with Iran. Voters don't like to change leaders during a war, even if the leader is somewhat unpopular.

Typically true. But given the current state of affairs, not sure how it would play out this time. Republicans would probably be pro-Israel and want America involved, although these days they don't give a shit about foreign lands or democracy (but they do give a shit about AIPAC campaign funds). The vocal Democratic left is anti-Israel, so they might be anti Biden if he gets America involved, although moderate Dems would probably support him.

Interesting times.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

You know, people complaining about artists getting political never say that about views they agree with. Can't they just be honest and say that the real issue is that they disagree with their politics?

 

[The Cat]

You know, people complaining about artists getting it political never say that about views they agree with. Can't they just be honest and say that the real issue is that they disagree with their politics?

Oh Alice....No. Dear boy, this is Wonderland. That's just not how we do things here.

 

[The Cat]

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Oh Alice....No. Dear boy, this is Wonderland. That's just not how we do things here.

Well maybe at least I can have a good unbirthday party tomorrow. This unbirthday was lousy. I went to the grocery store, and only after I got home I realized I needed trash bags. I hate it when I do that. I didn't even get to have a party today because it was also my cat's unbirthday.

 

[The Cat]

Well maybe at least I can have a good unbirthday party tomorrow. This unbirthday was lousy. I went to the grocery store, and only after I got home I realized I needed trash bags. I hate it when I do that. I didn't even get to have a party today because it was also my cat's unbirthday.

On the bright side at least you had a grocery store to go to instead of a smoking ruin.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

On the bright side at least you had a grocery store to go to instead of a smoking ruin.

True.

 

[ceecee]

It's interesting to watch the right grapple mentally with how much they love Israel and how much they hate Jews and that's becoming more and more evident. They haven't gone this far in the US but I can't help but wonder if it's coming.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1778812550907318562

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

It's interesting to watch the right grapple mentally with how much they love Israel and how much they hate Jews and that's becoming more and more evident. They haven't gone this far in the US but I can't help but wonder if it's coming.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1778812550907318562

One of the things I remember on Facebook before I quit in October was a girl I used to know claiming Jewish Voice for Peace weren't really Jews.