Random Politics Thread

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

A decent piece on that one.

Sure, the Democrats are screwed if they ignore the standard problems. I think that applies in general, though, and not just to Latino voters.

But that goes in line with what I've been saying the whole time. Even assuming we could restore "norms" it would not be enough, because it was the previous "normal" that produced the current situation anyway.

Is the argument you are making that the Democrats should copy the Republican line on immigration? That's kind of been tried and all that happens is that the Republican party gets more extreme. Obama built the cages for the kids, and he deported more people than any other president before Trump. Didn't stop Trump from riding anti-immigration sentiment to the presidency.

I think you are unaware of the dynamic that exists; the problems can't be resolved simply by Democrats negotiating with Republicans and being more open to the other side. This has already been done under Clinton and Obama and (naturally) with Biden as well. It got us in the current predicament. Why should that work this time?

Compromising does have the effect of tamping down the turnout and enthusiasm of the Democratic base, though, which as you've said before is key. The Democratic party has had a willingness to compromise as long as I can remember; it's merely something that gets exploited by Republicans who have a better understanding of the game that's being played; it usually has either no effect or a negative effect on the success of the Democratic party.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I've also always always known Republicans to delight in doing stuff like posting this video. (Well, it was really more of a gif of this since YouTube didn't really exist back then.)

This was in that glorious time I hear about every September when we all came together as a nation and there were no Republicans and no Democrats.

Really the issue with lack of civility is nothing new; in spite of what various op-eds and think pieces might tell you. I don't think it's going to be solved just by the other side just "being the bigger person" or something like that. After a certain point I almost consider someone persisting in believing that's a viable solution and not offering anything else is as worthy of condemnation as anything the other side is doing because in their desire to puff up their egos by feeling more righteous they're actually just helping to make the world a worse place.


I'm interested in doing what is effective, ultimately, rather than in adhering to some set of arbitrary norms that the other side has shown time and time again they don't care about.

I also think, from a purely ethical angle, what is actually praiseworthy is standing up for what one believes in rather than constantly immediately folding at the first criticism in the interest of "respecting decorum" or some bullshit code of conduct that, again, the other side doesn't follow,. They also have a habit of making up new rules about "the way things should be done" when it suits them which conveniently always end up being abandoned when it does not. (I can provide examples of this if necessary).

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

I don't think people appreciate how big a deal the whole twitter thing is. It's where the news gets it's news from.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I don't think people appreciate how big a deal the whole twitter thing is. It's where the news gets it's news from.

You're kinda proving the point I just made.

(In my last post, that is.)

 

[Virtual ghost]

Sure, the Democrats are screwed if they ignore the standard problems. I think that applies in general, though, and not just to Latino voters.

But that goes in line with what I've been saying the whole time. Even assuming we could restore "norms" it would not be enough, because it was the previous "normal" that produced the current situation anyway.

Is the argument you are making that the Democrats should copy the Republican line on immigration? That's kind of been tried and all that happens is that the Republican party gets more extreme. Obama built the cages for the kids, and he deported more people than any other president before Trump. Didn't stop Trump from riding anti-immigration sentiment to the presidency.

I think you are unaware of the dynamic that exists; the problems can't be resolved simply by Democrats negotiating with Republicans and being more open to the other side. This has already been done under Clinton and Obama and (naturally) with Biden as well. It got us in the current predicament. Why should that work this time?

Compromising does have the effect of tamping down the turnout and enthusiasm of the Democratic base, though, which as you've said before is key. The Democratic party has had a willingness to compromise as long as I can remember; it's merely something that gets exploited by Republicans who have a better understanding of the game that's being played; it usually has either no effect or a negative effect on the success of the Democratic party.

I am simply saying that you are visibly losing latino vote. The luxury that you can't really afford as a party.

Plus I think you have mistaken me for someone else here since these aren't really my positions. But yeah, democratic establishment could use a spine if that is your point. As I said I am from abroad and to me doesn't make sense that the parties are too much in agreement either. Too much of a conflict or agreement is bad and that is the main problem of the two party system. Ether you are splitting the country or you are bordering one party system. So as I said I think you could use more of active parties and just leave this "us vs. them" talk. I know that is probably unrealistic but since I have about 20 parties in the parliament this is where I would start. Since all of your problems are starting in the political system itself. The world of 21th century is too complex for black and white thinking. Too may things are sophisticated scales rather than absolute conclusions, not to mentions that scales are changing their balance from year to year at this point. Therefore the measures have to be fairly fluid since the world got fluid. What is very very hard to balance out even remotely correctly with just two poles and a filibuster.


As I said:

USA

Australia

New Zealand

Japan

EU

Germany

Belgium

Spain

Poland

Ukraine

Italy

Brazil

South Korea

South Africa

India

Argentina

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

I find Chinese-African relations fascinating, and a somewhat neglected topic in discussions of world news.

Another topic I would like to discuss: what nation in Arica is most likely to emerge as the next regional power? My money is on Ethiopia. This is of interest since trends seem to point toward a chaotic near future with no definitive superpowers and multiple new regional powers emerging from the ashes of colonialism and globalism. I think we will see more regional powers rallying their surrounding small and middle powers to form several new megastates and regional federations. USA may retain status as a great power for some time, but it's obvious her days as a superpower are numbered, and any hopes of becoming a world hyperpower died with the 90s.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Another topic I would like to discuss: what nation in Arica is most likely to emerge as the next regional power? My money is on Ethiopia. This is of interest since trends seem to point toward a chaotic near future with no definitive superpowers and multiple new regional powers emerging from the ashes of colonialism and globalism. I think we will see more regional powers rallying their surrounding small and middle powers to form several new megastates and regional federations. USA may retain status as a great power for some time, but it's obvious her days as a superpower are numbered, and any hopes of becoming a world hyperpower died with the 90s.

Africa is big and diverse, so it consists of a number of regions. In other words Ethiopia was a regional power until in fell into the civil war and now all of this thrown into question. Plus it is worth of mentioning that the HQ of the African union is in the Ethiopia's capital.

So the strong regional powers are Ethiopia in the east, South Africa in the south, Nigeria in the west and Egypt in the north.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Africa is big and diverse, so it consists of a number of regions. In other words Ethiopia was a regional power until in fell into the civil war and now all of this thrown into question. Plus it is worth of mentioning that the HQ of the African union is in the Ethiopia's capital.

So the strong regional powers are Ethiopia in the east, South Africa in the south, Nigeria in the west and Egypt in the north.

Do you see S.A. on the descent or ascent though? Difficult to forecast decades out, but Ethiopia seems poised to be an ascendant regional power but I don't know about S.A.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Do you see S.A. on the descent or ascent though? Difficult to forecast decades out, but Ethiopia seems poised to be an ascendant regional power but I don't know about S.A.

In my book climate change and population growth will devastate Africa. Especially since they lack tech and money to somewhat adapt to the changes. Therefore I am going in completely different direction than this question.

However regarding South Africa it all depends on how things go globally for their friends and allies. Since It is one of the rare countries in Africa that has a decent shot to make something out of itself. But that is still far from certain.

 

[Kephalos]

There is literally no point at all in electing any Democrat at all for anything at all if all they will do is carry out the Republican program once in office. The problem with the Republican Party (and with any and all conservatism anywhere in the world at any time in history and under any and all circumstances) is precisely the content of their ideology and, therefore, their political program and any decision that they make in a given particular circumstance to advance it.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

. USA may retain status as a great power for some time, but it's obvious her days as a superpower are numbered, and any hopes of becoming a world hyperpower died with the 90s.

But I thought the ever wise and superior judgement (to which our representatives "owe it to us" to follow and not sacrifice to our opinions) of the conservatives guaranteed a New American Century in the 2000s. Are you telling me that didn't actually happen or that they may have actually weakened the American position? Get out of here with that crazy kooky nonsense.

 

[Virtual ghost]

The move of Musk is an interesting one. Especially since EU just made a bunch of pretty strict laws about what should be illegal content on the internet. What almost surely leads into conflict with Musk. Especially since there is one internet, if you erase a post that is global.

The most gentle solution to this is retreat of Twitter from EU or it's complete ban. Either way this smells like drama.

We didn't have to wait long for confirmation that there will be problems.
Musk vs. Europe: The upcoming battle over free speech

However what is drama is the fact that both sides are unlikely to back down from their positions since that complicates their goals. Musk wants free speech and Europe wants to end large scale Russian disinformation campaigns and the rise of local extremists that the remains of Third reich or USSR era. However if Twitter leaves EU and it is already banned/ignored in good chunk of the world it is questionable if Musk can return the investment (most of third worlders are starving at this point). This will be drama however you turn it.

 

[Virtual ghost]

There is literally no point at all in electing any Democrat at all for anything at all if all they will do is carry out the Republican program once in office. The problem with the Republican Party (and with any and all conservatism anywhere in the world at any time in history and under any and all circumstances) is precisely the content of their ideology and, therefore, their political program and any decision that they make in a given particular circumstance to advance it.

The newest story is that they will support independent conservative in race for senate seat in Utah. Just to make it competitive. What they can probably do by having better ideas.

However they decided not to have a candidate and support this independent/third party guy. There is some logic in this but is just so spineless. Especially since this is being repeated in various ways for years.

 

[Kephalos]

@Virtual ghost

There is no point in having a cake if you can't eat it too. Winning elections is not an end itself, just as power of any kind is not an end in itself. The end of political power is to establish justice, and since winning elections is a means to obtain political power, there is absolutely no point in winning election an election, thereby getting political power, if such political power will be used for anything other than establishing justice. Anything, except everything, is nothing -- worse than nothing, indeed, when that "anything" becomes an obstacle to obtain the "everything".

I will never vote for conservatism, whether that conservatism is Republican, Democrat, Independent, or anything else. That applies to every other ideology that I do not accept as intending to actually build a better world AND that uses effective policies that do not violate any human rights in any way, shape, or form. I will only support and/or vote for progressive liberalism, to the absolute exclusion of anything and everything else. Above all, people (with the sole exception that any ideologica;ly acceptable candidate must also be a morally good person), parties, countries, winning elections, losing elections are totally and absolute irrelevant considerations, as far as I am concerned.

 

[Kephalos]

Biden Faces Moment of Truth on Renewing ICE Contract for Notorious Florida Jail

An ICE contract deadline is approaching for the Glades County Detention Center, a notorious Florida jail used to hold undocumented immigrants.

theintercept.com

That is not encouraging, since Joe Biden is a fundamentally faithless, dishonest, unprincipled person, who has already broken an important promose concerning one of the most egregious ongoing violations of human rights that take place in the United States:

Joe Biden’s Craven Death Penalty Reversal in the Boston Bomber Case

Joe Biden broke his promise and failed his first death penalty test in a very big way.

slate.com

 

[Virtual ghost]

EU plans Silicon Valley base as tech crackdown looms

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

In my book climate change and population growth will devastate Africa. Especially since they lack tech and money to somewhat adapt to the changes. Therefore I am going in completely different direction than this question.

However regarding South Africa it all depends on how things go globally for their friends and allies. Since It is one of the rare countries in Africa that has a decent shot to make something out of itself. But that is still far from certain.

I was thinking about global warming when I asked about Ethiopia. Their climate is milder due to a high altitude, so I suspect they may weather climate change better than some other African nations.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I was thinking about global warming when I asked about Ethiopia. Their climate is milder due to a high altitude, so I suspect they may weather climate change better than some other African nations.

But that isn't how this works.
Climate change is preferred term over global warming since there more aspect to it than just temperature. Such as average moisture, the amount of rainfall, how the rainfall is scattered through out the years, how much there will be snow in the mountains that will provide water during warmer periods of the year, sea level, species migration, new invasive species and parasites .... etc. Plus if you are the only one standing all your neighbors will move into your house regardless of what you think about it (or at least they will die trying). Therefore winning the climate change isn't really possible, especially since it will completely disrupt/destroy global economy and supply chains on the long run. Climate change is like nuclear war ... the only way to win is not to play at all.

 

[Red Herring]

But that isn't how this works.
Climate change is preferred term over global warming since there more aspect to it than just temperature. Such as average moisture, the amount of rainfall, how the rainfall is scattered through out the years, how much there will be snow in the mountains that will provide water during warmer periods of the year, sea level, species migration, new invasive species and parasites .... etc. Plus if you are the only one standing all your neighbors will move into your house regardless of what you think about it (or at least they will die trying). Therefore winning the climate change isn't really possible, especially since it will completely disrupt/destroy global economy and supply chains on the long run. Climate change is like nuclear war ... the only way to win is not to play at all.

I recently translated a glaciological study on the avalanche risk in some valleys of the Peruvian Andes. As glaciers melt the risk of entire cities being erased and many thousands of people dying in the process increases. High altitude won't save you.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I recently translated a glaciological study on the avalanche risk in some valleys of the Peruvian Andes. As glaciers melt the risk of entire cities being erased and many thousands of people dying in the process increases. High altitude won't save you.

They were talking about the glaciers melting when I spent a summer in Cusco in 2006. It's been happening for quite some time.