Random political thought thread.

[DiscoBiscuit]

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

The fed has a closed door meeting Monday morning, everyone thinks this is in response to the incipient crash of Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank.

If the Fed is more afraid of their crash than inflation here, get ready for some more money printing.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

 

[Kephalos]

"Twin Brothers": European Anti-Semitism and Anti-Americanism." Andrei Markovits.

• The new anti-Semitism revives stereotypes of traditional anti-Semitism and has a specific element that decades-old hostility to Israel is directed against the existence of an entire country in its capacity as a "collective Jew." It is mainly, among other things, a consequence of anti-Americanism.
• In Europe, unlike in the period before World War II - and in contrast to the situation in the countries of the Soviet bloc following that war - contemporary anti-Semitism is completely society and not state driven. Much of it is Israel driven. The left's anti-Semitism, rather than the right's conventional version of this hatred, comprises the key ingredient of anti-Semitism's current European existence.
• Currently the relationship to the Jewish minority in Europe is being discussed anew. Especially in the countries of Eastern Europe, new axes and levels of discussion are forming in which Stalinism plays a greater role.
• Nazifying Israel has three objectives. The delegitimation of Israel by associating it with the symbol of evil par excellence. Furthermore, one can attack and humiliate the Jewish people by equating it with the perpetrators of the brutal genocide that nearly succeeded in exterminating the Jews completely. Finally, it frees Europeans of any remorse or shame for their history of a lethal anti-Semitism that lasted centuries.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

 

[Kephalos]

People think they have more rights than they actually have; they seem to think they have rights that are just not there. -- Janice Bellace, J.D. (Professor Emeritus of Legal Studies & Business Ethics at the Wharton School of Business). Quoted in: Facebook Passwords, Privacy and the Lack of Legal Protection (Knowledge at Wharton). 2012.

And the rather limited Bereich of privacy and employment law. It is an all-pervasive misperception, this overestimation one's rights, either by being mistaken about their extent, scope, applicability, and their enforceability just as much (perhaps less TBH), as about their very existence. It has its foundation in ignorance (I'm being generous here) and enabled by careless (again, this is me being generous) rhetoric.

Hans Vaihinger. "The Philosophy of ‘As If’: A System of the Theoretical, Practical and Religious Fictions of Mankind," trans.CK Ogden, London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner (1924).

I for one would pick (a hundred times out of a hundred) the theoretical, practical, and religious truths of mankind over the theoretical, practical, legal, and religious fictions, as the best starting point for fixing the absolute mess of a world we live in now (especially the absolute messes of countries that define and constitute the general, global absolute mess). Because in the end, at bottom, fiction, no matter how good or true to life it may be, is fictional, it can only aspire to try to imitate the truth -- and this only by mere accident or chance.

 

[The Cat]

...everything old is new again...
how many songs must be resung?​

 

[Burning Paradigm]

Slava Ukraini

 

[The Cat]

 

[The Cat]

"...The party of 'family values' doesnt care about families. They don't. They care about an image. They care about a tv family that never existed. A family without problems. That's what they care about. Big surprise, something fake. Those which you heard in that voicemail. Those are family values: 'No matter what you need, I love you.'..."​

 

[The Cat]

 

[Burning Paradigm]

A subpoena, eh? I cannot WAIT to see what attempts at evasion Trump tries to come up with for this. Most certainly will not be a shitshow. /s

 

[Kephalos]

A subpoena, eh? I cannot WAIT to see what attempts at evasion Trump tries to come up with for this. Most certainly will not be a shitshow. /s

IF it ever gets that far, which probably it won't.

Donald Trump will most likely ignore the subpoena and have his lawyers challenge it. In the mean time, while the lawyers and the courts are processing the challenge, the new Republican majority in the House of Representatives will most certainly, unceremoniously dismiss and dissolve the Capitol Riot Committee (if it doesn't in addition to dismissing them it also censures and disciplines its members). A Congressional Committe which, by the way, will by that time not include either Cheney, who lost her reelection bid, or Kinzinger, who, unlike Cheney, saw the writing on the wall and didn't even try to seek reelection.

Summoning Trump to testify is at this time not only pointless, in the sense that I have just mentioned above, but also positively counterproductive, in that one, the DOJ is pursuing a more promising case against Trump that has nothing at all to do with the Capitol Riot (the Jan. 6th Committee is getting in the DOJ's way here as it could provide the Trump legal team with the argument that the proceedings against Trump are politically motivated); two, the Committee has failed to come up with plausible criminal charges against Trump which makes having Trump testifying superfluous; and, finally, three, counterproductive for the Committee itself in the sense that by not having summoned Trump to testify until now, the Committee is has made itself vulnerable to being questioned (quite justifiedly so, I might add) as to why they waited this so long to do so, not to mention to being questiined as to why this whole investigation had to wait two years after the events in question took place, wait until it was an election year, wait, in fact, until the last minute before the Midterm Elections are supposed to happen.

The January 6th Committee is, in my estimation, quite careless and cavalier about its own credibility.

The Jan. 6 committee preaches to the choir. Gary Abernathy, Washington Post.

 

[ceecee]

IF it ever gets that far, which probably it won't.

Donald Trump will most likely ignore the subpoena and have his lawyers challenge it. In the mean time, while the lawyers and the courts are processing the challenge, the new Republican majority in the House of Representatives will most certainly, unceremoniously dismiss and dissolve the Capitol Riot Committee (if it doesn't in addition to dismissing them it also censures and disciplines its members). A Congressional Committe which, by the way, will by that time not include either Cheney, who lost her reelection bid, or Kinzinger, who, unlike Cheney, saw the writing on the wall and didn't even try to seek reelection.

Summoning Trump to testify is at this time not only pointless, in the sense that I have just mentioned above, but also positively counterproductive, in that one, the DOJ is pursuing a more promising case against Trump that has nothing at all to do with the Capitol Riot (the Jan. 6th Committee is getting in the DOJ's way here as it could provide the Trump legal team with the argument that the proceedings against Trump are politically motivated); two, the Committee has failed to come up with plausible criminal charges against Trump which makes having Trump testifying superfluous; and, finally, three, counterproductive for the Committee itself in the sense that by not having summoned Trump to testify until now, the Committee is has made itself vulnerable to being questioned (quite justifiedly so, I might add) as to why they waited this so long to do so, not to mention to being questiined as to why this whole investigation had to wait two years after the events in question took place, wait until it was an election year, wait, in fact, until the last minute before the Midterm Elections are supposed to happen.

The January 6th Committee is, in my estimation, quite careless and cavalier about its own credibility.

The Jan. 6 committee preaches to the choir. Gary Abernathy, Washington Post.

Not sure if you know who Gary Abernathy is but what else would a conservative, very much in favor of Christian Nationalism, say? Of course they waited. The Republicans would do the same and Gary Abernathy should know, he worked for Republicans forever before the WaPo gig

 

[The Cat]