Random political thought thread.

[ceecee]

[MENTION=4050]ceecee[/MENTION]:

There are no deep reasons for this sudden love for Queen and Country. The political right does have a reactionary, contrarian component: they oppose what they perceive the political left to support by default. For example, I have read for years arguments by right leaning economists that recommend social spending in the form of cash instead of in-kind. Well, a lot of in-kind social services have been replaced by cash payments by Mexico's left-wing government, and a lot of those economists have come out against this. It's mere contrarianism.

To me, historical revisionist don't necessarily have left or right political leanings- it's much more about the reactionary component as you mentioned. The Lost Cause fallacy was successful throughout the south as the apologists wrote textbooks and syllabus for all education levels in those states, in addition to the avalanche of propaganda in every form for a century plus, not to mention white supremacist symbolism thrown up anytime that ideology was at all threatened. (Confederate general Joseph Johnston statue was installed at the Bentonville battlefield in 2010.)

I think contrarianism is way understated as a coping method. Some see it as being courageous, non-PC, non-filter, anti-SWJ or whatever favorite keywords pundits are using. But it all boils down to the same thing - contrarians are sheep, exactly the same as they rail against.

 

[Kephalos]

This is funny:

Obama Persuades Republicans to Take Vaccine by Urging them not to. (Satire)

Speaking to reporters, Obama said that he was “pleased” that his targeted message to Republicans appeared to be having the desired impact. “Looks like I’ve still got it,” he said.

 

[The Cat]

 

[The Cat]

This is funny:

Obama Persuades Republicans to Take Vaccine by Urging them not to. (Satire)

Ive wondered if that would actually work. Just beg the GOP not to throw us into the briar patch. And they better stay the hell out of our laughin place.

 

[Totenkindly]

Sidney Powell Says 'No Reasonable Person' Would Believe Her Election Fraud Lies

Sidney Powell has moved to dismiss Dominion's defamation lawsuit. She argues that when she accused Dominion of being part of an election-rigging scheme with ties to Venezuela, "no reasonable person would conclude" those "were truly statements of fact"

FFS. I hope she loses, and loses big.

 

[Stigmata]

Sidney Powell Says 'No Reasonable Person' Would Believe Her Election Fraud Lies



FFS. I hope she loses, and loses big.

Grifters admitting to being grifters.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Ive wondered if that would actually work. Just beg the GOP not to throw us into the briar patch. And they better stay the hell out of our laughin place.

Is this related to Splash Mountain somehow?

 

[Kephalos]

An old one but a good one:

It’s Time to Ban Guns. Yes, All of Them.

Ban guns. All guns. Get rid of guns in homes, and on the streets, and, as much as possible, on police. Not just because of San Bernardino, or whichever mass shooting may pop up next, but also not not because of those. Don’t sort the population into those who might do something evil or foolish or self-destructive with a gun and those who surely will not. As if this could be known—as if it could be assessed without massively violating civil liberties and stigmatizing the mentally ill. Ban guns! Not just gun violence. Not just certain guns. Not just already-technically-illegal guns. All of them.

 

[Totenkindly]

Yeah. That's gonna work. Because first you'd have to collect all the guns that already exist (good luck with that, there's a war for you); and then you've got the problem where in rural areas guns actually function usefully and are needed [hunting; self-protection; property protection], whereas the main issues are in urban areas (where they don't serve the same functions as guns in rural areas).

 

[Virtual ghost]

Yeah. That's gonna work. Because first you'd have to collect all the guns that already exist (good luck with that, there's a war for you); and then you've got the problem where in rural areas guns actually function usefully and are needed [hunting; self-protection; property protection], whereas the main issues are in urban areas (where they don't serve the same functions as guns in rural areas).

Well you could make sure that the public can't legally or easily buy the ammunition for the more powerful guns, so that should help with the problem on the long run.
However the best way to do this is probably by trying to build genuinely functional society as much as you can. Therefore when everything gets more functional the situation with guns will improve and people will much easily move away from the gun culture. Since your general guarantees in life are pretty low in the current social model and that simply pushes people into gun culture. Actually I can totally see myself being a "gun nut" in the case that I live in the US. Since that is just how the things work there.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Btw banning this kinds of pseudo-political shows in MSM would probably do more on the long than just banning guns. Since this is basically the main source of mass psychosis and political gridlocks.
In this part of the world philosophers and sociologist are talking that this is basically complete perversion of what TV should be (left-right doesn't matter that much to them). Since politics as entertainment is the core problem. Because the entertainment is by definition distorted picture or "looking the other way".

 

[Kephalos]

Yeah. That's gonna work. Because first you'd have to collect all the guns that already exist (good luck with that, there's a war for you); and then you've got the problem where in rural areas guns actually function usefully and are needed [hunting; self-protection; property protection], whereas the main issues are in urban areas (where they don't serve the same functions as guns in rural areas).

Gun ownership is extremely concentrated. It would not be that difficult.

 

[The Cat]

 

[The Cat]

 

[The Cat]

 

[The Cat]

 

[Virtual ghost]

If this is true there will be some major changes down the road.

 

[The Cat]

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

If this is true there will be some major changes down the road.

It's funny, there was this guy on here who was going on about how the generation after millennials were part of a new conservative counter-culture, fed up with political correctness, that was going to vote reliably Republican for the foreseeable future. I guess he didn't think about the fact that maybe young people don't want incompetent politicians who make their lives worse and that this can also affect voting patterns.

If the "conservative counter culture" thing was even true, which always seemed dubious; the things he was talking about seemed more like just a product of people growing up under the Obama administration and reacting to that, which isn't the same thing as having support for the Republif Lcan agenda, but people in general have a hard time grasping the fact that not liking the way one party does things isn't the same thing as supporting the other part. He spoke about them being attracted to a new conservative movement that was "socially liberal" but "economically conservative" and was cool with LGBT people which doesn't seem to actually exist after Trump. (Conservatives really only pushed that angle in 2016 because of the Pulse Nightclub shooting, which I guess was only a big deal because a Muslim was doing it; same as if the response to the Tree of Life thing would have been way different if a Muslim had done it and not a fellow traveller.) The average American is actually "economically liberal" but "socially conservative" which nobody really wants to acknowledge. To me it seemed like all Trump did was push Zoomers who might have gone for a Republican party (after all the quagmire of Iraq and the Great "recession" was probably something that happened before they were old enough to follow politics) that wasn't wedded to the idea of being batshit lunatics who judge everything by the metrics of how it serves their personality cult and turned them into bonafide leftists. I've seen it happen . Maybe the Republican party could have won those people over if they actually had any interest in electing competent people who have more to offer than just bullshit macho posturing and authoritarianism.. As we now all know, that's not the case because that's not what the people who vote Republican among the other generations actually want. They don't want to preserve what exists or slow down the pace of change. It's not even entirely accurate that they want to turn the clock backwards; they're just radical authoritarians; their concept of an "originalist" interpretation of the constitution for instance, is a sham.

 

[Virtual ghost]

It's funny, there was this guy on here who was going on about how the generation after millennials were part of a new conservative counter-culture, fed up with political correctness, that was going to vote reliably Republican for the foreseeable future. I guess he didn't think about the fact that maybe young people don't want incompetent politicians who make their lives worse and that this can also affect voting patterns.

If the "conservative counter culture" thing was even true, which always seemed dubious; the things he was talking about seemed more like just a product of people growing up under the Obama administration and reacting to that, which isn't the same thing as having support for the Republif Lcan agenda, but people in general have a hard time grasping the fact that not liking the way one party does things isn't the same thing as supporting the other part. He spoke about them being attracted to a new conservative movement that was "socially liberal" but "economically conservative" and was cool with LGBT people which doesn't seem to actually exist after Trump. (Conservatives really only pushed that angle in 2016 because of the Pulse Nightclub shooting, which I guess was only a big deal because a Muslim was doing it; same as if the response to the Tree of Life thing would have been way different if a Muslim had done it and not a fellow traveller.) The average American is actually "economically liberal" but "socially conservative" which nobody really wants to acknowledge. To me it seemed like all Trump did was push Zoomers who might have gone for a Republican party (after all the quagmire of Iraq and the Great "recession" was probably something that happened before they were old enough to follow politics) that wasn't wedded to the idea of being batshit lunatics who judge everything by the metrics of how it serves their personality cult and turned them into bonafide leftists. I've seen it happen . Maybe the Republican party could have won those people over if they actually had any interest in electing competent people who have more to offer than just bullshit macho posturing and authoritarianism.. As we now all know, that's not the case because that's not what the people who vote Republican among the other generations actually want. They don't want to preserve what exists or slow down the pace of change. It's not even entirely accurate that they want to turn the clock backwards; they're just radical authoritarians; their concept of an "originalist" interpretation of the constitution for instance, is a sham.

The changes of what I am talking about mostly go in direction that GOP will have to rewrite their platform to fit the 21th century. Or they will implode just as that map suggests.
Young voters are evidently online generation and therefore they talk to the their family, friends and co-workers in other developed countries all the time. What simply makes it inevitable that some ideas spill over the line (like medicare for all). The claim that this isn't viable just doesn't stand if you regularly talk to people that are covered with such program. Especially since I see people from other countries actually pumping for the idea. Since if they can flip US on this topic the odds that their own healthcare system will be deregulated are quite slim. Kinda similar is with green deal, elections based on popular vote .... and similar topics. That is why I believe that this map could be correct for the most part. Since those newer generations will not change too much as they grow older, since their environment and life goals are simply different. Not to mention that almost half of them isn't white. Therefore the GOP will have to be remade or it will implode. Especially since if you have clear advantage in numbers you can move people around the country, what can quickly push various states politically.



I mean I have this at home as well, however since this is multiparty system both main parties are being slowly but surely rejected by the younger or more educated people. While new parties are growing in strength. Just in my city the polls are saying that that two main parties together will win only about 30% of the vote (while likely new Mayor will be in his 30s and what is in US seen as "progressive"). So this is kinda global, new generations simply want different things. Especially since ignoring new technologies and new realities like climate change isn't really a viable strategy for a happy life.