Random Politics Thread

[Virtual ghost]

Disinformation and hacking is going to be a bigger thing in the future I think, along with the plausibly deniable bio-weapons campaigns and emp devices, all of which you can deny are actual aggressions.

Plus the big thing is weapons that will leave a territory intact while taking care of the suspect populations or enemy forces, basically the people. Even surgical or precision strike weapons are less favourable in those respects that climate weapons or disease.

There is no such a thing as climate weapon and it will not be for the foreseeable future, the science just isn't there jet since that needs huge amounts of energy (as well as focusing it). Plus climate weapon in order to have the impact will need to have so large impact it wouldn't be leaving territory intact. If you want to do that a disease is far better choice, but even here it is questionable if you can hit enough people before the areas goes into lockdown. However from what I understand the real tool for just removing people is neutron bomb. But only the most advanced countries have what is takes to build one, even if they exist for quite some time if I am not mistaken. But complicated making makes it kinda obvious who did this, what is a clear minus. The cartoonish presentation of EMP is also more of a science fiction at this point. Since it is hard to hit large area with it, especially since that would requires huge amounts of energy. What again makes is kinda obvious who is behind the attack and that probably leads into nuclear counter-attack. Unless you are hitting some random 3rd world country about which just about no one cares (and which doesn't have that much equipment in the first place). Although today everyone is in some kinds of a blocks and that will probably be the case even more in the future. Therefore with doing stuff like this you will probably just push the whole blocks towards your enemies, what isn't really that brilliant strategy.



Therefore I think we aren't really moving too far from "classical approach" weapons for the foreseeable future.

 

[Virtual ghost]

US: Florida governor urgently working to prevent 'catastrophic flood' in Tampa area

 

[Totenkindly]

This is pissing me off.

How White Evangelicals' Vaccine Refusal Could Prolong the Pandemic

Even that scrunk Franklin Graham has broken down (as much as he seems to hate everyone) and promoted the vaccination. I bet a lot of the ones that say "God will decide when I live or die" own life insurance, health insurance, wear seat belts, and if they got really sick or their family members go sick, they'd be bemoaning their fate and have a really hard time in the face of death.

“Fear is the motivating power behind all of this, and fear is the opposite of who God is,” said Teresa Beukers, who travels throughout California in a motor home. “I violently oppose fear.”

"violently"? Sounds like fear to me.

“Go ahead and throw us in the lions’ den, go ahead and throw us in the furnace,” she said, referring to two biblical stories in which God’s people miraculously survive persecution after refusing to submit to temporal powers.

Jesus, she added, broke ritual purity laws by interacting with lepers. “We can compare that to people who are unvaccinated,” she said. “If they get pushed out, they’ll need to live in their own colonies.”

All this martyrdom bunk. It's a sweet setup -- they refuse to be part of the community, putting the community at risk along with themselves, and then if the community gets upset, they cry out that they are being persecuted because the world is horrible and hates them.

Maybe this should be in the Coronovirus thread, sorry. it's still a political topic but if you want to move it there, go ahead...

 

[Z Buck McFate]

‘Stay out of politics,’ Republican leader McConnell tells U.S. CEOs, warns of ‘consequences’ | National politics | stltoday.com

I am so, so tired of these horrible, shitty people.

(This jackass fought long and hard for CEOs to have a wildly disproportionate advantage in politics when it benefited him).

(Fucking psycho).

 

[Stigmata]

‘Stay out of politics,’ Republican leader McConnell tells U.S. CEOs, warns of ‘consequences’ | National politics | stltoday.com

I am so, so tired of these horrible, shitty people.

(This jackass fought long and hard for CEOs to have a wildly disproportionate advantage in politics when it benefited him).

(Fucking psycho).

The hypocrisy becomes much less infuriating when you accept that the modern Republican party is as close as we'll ever get to having real Sith Lords. It is funny to watch the ensuing butthurt behind Mitch McConnell speaking out against the very system of corporate power in politics that he helped perpetuate for decades.

Since he wants corporations to stay out of politics, he shouldn't accept anymore donations for corporations, either. But we all know that'll never happen.

Also, 'Woke Corporate Hypocrites': Delta, Coca-Cola Face GOP Backlash for Knocking Georgia Voting Law

It is beautiful to watch the GQP flameout in spectacular fashion.

 

[Totenkindly]

The hypocrisy becomes much less infuriating when you accept that the modern Republican party is as close as we'll ever get to having real Sith Lords.

Honestly, you're just being mean to Sith now.

 

[Stigmata]

Honestly, you're just being mean to Sith now.

True. Even they had a coherent political platform.

 

[Coriolis]

The hypocrisy becomes much less infuriating when you accept that the modern Republican party is as close as we'll ever get to having real Sith Lords. It is funny to watch the ensuing butthurt behind Mitch McConnell speaking out against the very system of corporate power in politics that he helped perpetuate for decades.

(I had one of these bumper stickers on my old car. When I had to replace the car, the sticker never got replaced, sadly. There were people in my kenpo class unfamiliar with Harry Potter, who thought Voldemort was some candidate for local office in another town.)

 

[Lark]

As I understand it the alternative, lets call it socialism for a minute as its not communism/central plan or capitalism/planned or unplanned, would actually involve more personal responsibility than people supporting the status quo insist upon.

To a certain extent I get the idea that personal responsibility IS the answer whether you where directly responsible for creating the problem or not, its a kind of objective reality, even where you had little direct responsibility for creating the context or circumstances you have to choose your response and that is unavoidable.

Although "blaming the poor for poverty" is stupid too, especially structural problems causing poverty, those things are seldom of anyone's choosing at all, even the privileged people who direction or indirectly benefit from it all. Maybe squalor, violence, cruelty, predation etc. can be blamed on individuals, sometimes I think it sure should, but that is not exactly the same a poverty as I understand it, maybe they could be considered force multipliers or something.

Also, I think redistribution is more important than equality most of the time too, especially when equality becomes some kind of standardization and sameness, that sort of "barracks socialism" is a nightmare, I know why people rejected it in the past and are likely to in the present too, even if for a short time authoritarianism provides some sort of a kick to enforcer types. Marx and Engels actually had similar ideas about equality, which isnt that well known, Marx particularly dismissed it as cantor.

 

[ceecee]

‘Stay out of politics,’ Republican leader McConnell tells U.S. CEOs, warns of ‘consequences’ | National politics | stltoday.com

I am so, so tired of these horrible, shitty people.

(This jackass fought long and hard for CEOs to have a wildly disproportionate advantage in politics when it benefited him).

(Fucking psycho).

The landmark 2003 Supreme Court case McConnell v. FEC had that name because Mitch McConnell himself filed a lawsuit against federal laws that limited corporations’ ability to spend money influencing elections. Fast forward, in 2020 he took more contributions from Fortune 500 CEOs than any other member of Congress. Any other member - that's really saying something.

These old ass ghouls also need to stop saying "woke".

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

The landmark 2003 Supreme Court case McConnell v. FEC had that name because Mitch McConnell himself filed a lawsuit against federal laws that limited corporations’ ability to spend money influencing elections. Fast forward, in 2020 he took more contributions from Fortune 500 CEOs than any other member of Congress. Any other member - that's really saying something.

These old ass ghouls also need to stop saying "woke".

Yeah, the idea that conservatives now think corporations should stay out of politics is rich. I guess like so many things, it only becomes an issue worth worrying about when it starts to affect them. Why u want to punish success, bro? You were all cheering this shit on for the past twenty years (and probably before that) and now it's terrible and dangerous because now they're not on your side? Fuck off. What a bunch of idiots.

I think I'm going to watch a lot of baseball this summer just to trigger the cons.

 

[Burning Paradigm]

I like the idea of marketing "socialist" public goods as "super-capitalism", where each American is an investor (which is what taxpaying is at its best, an investment in needed public goods and services). It started as a meme, but is it crazy to think that strategy might actually work? It's difficult to openly deviate from the beaten "free" market capitalism path in this country, even when candidates like Bernie are immensely popular (granted, a large part of that is due to the erosion of barriers between corporations and democracy). But, this alternate branding could prove interesting.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I like the idea of marketing "socialist" public goods as "super-capitalism", where each American is an investor (which is what taxpaying is at its best, an investment in needed public goods and services). It started as a meme, but is it crazy to think that strategy might actually work? It's difficult to openly deviate from the beaten "free" market capitalism path in this country, even when candidates like Bernie are immensely popular (granted, a large part of that is due to the erosion of barriers between corporations and democracy). But, this alternate branding could prove interesting.

It's worth a shot, definitely.

 

[Lark]

Yeah, the idea that conservatives now think corporations should stay out of politics is rich. I guess like so many things, it only becomes an issue worth worrying about when it starts to affect them. Why u want to punish success, bro? You were all cheering this shit on for the past twenty years (and probably before that) and now it's terrible and dangerous because now they're not on your side? Fuck off. What a bunch of idiots.

I think I'm going to watch a lot of baseball this summer just to trigger the cons.

To be honest I think that these soundings globally, or rather within the whole of the anglo-sphere, is an indication that the privileged and privilege defending political classes are preparing to move away from neo-liberalism towards, well, something else, what is not altogether clear yet.

Last time this happened was after the second world war, in both cases I think its to do with high finance and boardrooms becoming less of an easy option for place seeking by old money graduates, they'll find some place else.

In post WW2 UK the "blimps" highly paid "officer class" individuals got boardroom and managerial positions in the newly created public services and newly nationalized utilities. I've read decent accounts of how this lead to the eventual ruin of these same publically own companies and made it easy for conservatives to argue that public ownership meant bad service, underperformance etc.

The privatizations of the eighties allowed politicians and the same class of privileged graduates to make a lot of money and to get a lot of work in finance and banking. This has become a problem again, now, for the UK economy at least, the percentage share of the economy that is finance and the power that finance commands over public policy are both a problem. If that's going to change, it has to change, then politicians will not need the same relationship to that sector.

In the UK there's signs already of transitions happening, the conservatives are talking about the north of england more, shifting towards old energy industries, setting up a new headquarters in the north of england (although this has something to do with the toxicity of westminister too, all told, with its culture of alcoholism and massive cocaine habits). I'm not sure what's going to happen because in any part of the anglo-sphere conservatives ARE the parties of "too little, too late" when it comes to government action, they've established really entrenched rationalizations about "small government/big society" and they know nothing but retrenchment of those ideas really. Any alternative is none existent really. Plus heavy industry? Now? Really? It really is yesterdays ideas, really and truly.

Plus, militarism is their default setting when all else fails.

 

[Lark]

I like the idea of marketing "socialist" public goods as "super-capitalism", where each American is an investor (which is what taxpaying is at its best, an investment in needed public goods and services). It started as a meme, but is it crazy to think that strategy might actually work? It's difficult to openly deviate from the beaten "free" market capitalism path in this country, even when candidates like Bernie are immensely popular (granted, a large part of that is due to the erosion of barriers between corporations and democracy). But, this alternate branding could prove interesting.

Started as a meme? It's something I'd associate with John Roemer and the Market Socialists from the nineties.

Roemer had the Market Socialists:

Market socialism - Wikipedia

Their ideas always struck me a bit difficult, and if they are difficult for me I dont hold out much hope of them working for the average citizen (at least here).

Anyway, so far as I know there was a number of ideas but one involved every citizen having a stock portfolio containing shares that could not be sold but which could be traded, so you could decide what part of the economy and public services should be prioritized instead of politicians doing it as they do today, in theory, when you give them a mandate at election time.

I'm not sure if its dividends on those shares or another, different set of bonds and shares, but every citizen has a share income in most of their alternative economies, this is not exactly a Universal Basic Income but it operates similarly to it, in theory, so no welfare state, no benefits, no entitlements, at least not as they have been understood or operated historically, some sort of private charity structure is possible, for people who mismanage their money, blow it all on drugs or alcohol or some other vice, but its either that, ie private altruism, or relying on your family but there's no welfare state.

I always found it interesting, liked it in theory but it does involve a lot of financial literacy, could fall afoul of speculators and all the traditional moral hazards and perils of a finance driven economy, old and new money can fuck it up, if they want or try to, and private vice, ie drugs pushers and traffickers, and black markets can totally boom and threaten it too.

The idea of taxpayers feeling ownership of or taking ownership of public finance IS something that really, really appeals to me, really appeals, without any of the zero taxation or flat taxes or sale taxes fantasies I always thought the tax payer alliances or protesters in the US and UK could make a lot of sense from time to time. I saw that as an unashamed socialist.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

To be honest I think that these soundings globally, or rather within the whole of the anglo-sphere, is an indication that the privileged and privilege defending political classes are preparing to move away from neo-liberalism towards, well, something else, what is not altogether clear yet.

Last time this happened was after the second world war, in both cases I think its to do with high finance and boardrooms becoming less of an easy option for place seeking by old money graduates, they'll find some place else.

In post WW2 UK the "blimps" highly paid "officer class" individuals got boardroom and managerial positions in the newly created public services and newly nationalized utilities. I've read decent accounts of how this lead to the eventual ruin of these same publically own companies and made it easy for conservatives to argue that public ownership meant bad service, underperformance etc.

The privatizations of the eighties allowed politicians and the same class of privileged graduates to make a lot of money and to get a lot of work in finance and banking. This has become a problem again, now, for the UK economy at least, the percentage share of the economy that is finance and the power that finance commands over public policy are both a problem. If that's going to change, it has to change, then politicians will not need the same relationship to that sector.

In the UK there's signs already of transitions happening, the conservatives are talking about the north of england more, shifting towards old energy industries, setting up a new headquarters in the north of england (although this has something to do with the toxicity of westminister too, all told, with its culture of alcoholism and massive cocaine habits). I'm not sure what's going to happen because in any part of the anglo-sphere conservatives ARE the parties of "too little, too late" when it comes to government action, they've established really entrenched rationalizations about "small government/big society" and they know nothing but retrenchment of those ideas really. Any alternative is none existent really. Plus heavy industry? Now? Really? It really is yesterdays ideas, really and truly.

Plus, militarism is their default setting when all else fails.

It could also be fascism. Fascism didn't mind appropriating anti-capitalist rhetoric if it suited them . Indeed, they positioned themselves as a "third way" alternative to capitalism and socialism. I think your reading is actually giving people like McConnell more credit than they deserve. Whenever the GOP tries to moderate itself, there's reactionary uprising from the base (the last time we saw it was with Trump). I suspect McConnell has recognized that it isn't in his interests as a Republican to do that. McConnell knows what GOP voters want, and it's more Trumpism.

 

[Totenkindly]

Arkansas Senate overrides Republican governor's veto on bill targeting trans kids

As expected.

I guess this is now going to court

 

[Coriolis]

Arkansas Senate overrides Republican governor's veto on bill targeting trans kids

As expected.

I guess this is now going to court

It's easy for politicians to do the right thing when secure in the knowledge that someone will come after them to reverse it.

 

[The Cat]

 

[Totenkindly]

It's easy for politicians to do the right thing when secure in the knowledge that someone will come after them to reverse it.

Yes. Apparently Hutchinson did meet with trans families/kids and with medical providers over the weekend, before choosing to veto the bill with good-sounding words. I would hope that he was being honest about his conviction that the bill was bad for trans families and bad for his state in many ways -- but considering the circumstances and the political climate, forgive me for still possessing some skepticism.