It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Revenge of the Lower Classes and the Rise of American Fascism - Chris Hedges

page: 9
70
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: HoldMyBeer

No, he's just another politically biased fool looking for any opportunity to blame the "big bad liberals" while letting conservatives off for doing exactly the same, and worse. He completely ignores the fact that REPUBLICANS are just as self-serving, just as greedy, and damaged American economy just as much as any other politician.
Funny how he completely ignores the fact that BUSH was POTUS when the economic trouble happened, what exactly did he do to prevent it? To change it? To stop it? Oh yes, he paid out billions upon billions of your $'s to corporate buddies and bankers, with almost no oversight at all.

Tell me, where is all the condemnation for Bush? Surprisingly the average Republican seems to be so selective in their anger at politicians they conveniently forget his entire time in office, the bailing out, the Patriot act, 2 wars and thousands dead. While you're all screaming about "evil Obama" for daring to push through sensible laws to try to prevent the mass murders of innocent kids, you all ignore the fact that Bush destroyed plenty of your rights and freedoms, opened the floodgates of mass surveillance, bailed out the evil bankers and sent thousands of Americans into two fruitless wars.

Even though the economic problem was a culmination of decades of unravelling of sensible restrictions and laws on bankers (which the Republicans supported too btw), Bush did nothing to prevent or mitigate the catastrophe, he added to it.

I would be willing to agree with the sentiment talked about in that piece (the anger people feel for politics in general and the knee-jerk desire to break the system), but he's wrong in many respects. This is not at all about middle America raging against the "political elites", this is about a right-wing Conservatism feeling increasingly desperate as the country moves on and tells them that their traditional, backward, authoritarian, privileged way of life is no longer acceptable.

Sure, a lot of Americans are fed up with a political class running the show, but they're not stupid enough to want to support the most vile and extreme politician as a result of that disillusionment.

The Republican party is dead, their following is dissipating, what's left is an extreme core of backward thinkers who are terrified of their control slipping away and the country evolving without them. They're angry about BLM, they're angry about immigrants, they're angry about same sex marriage, they're angry about gun control, they'll use their "disillusionment" of politicians as an excuse for what they really think and feel, because to do otherwise forces them to admit that they're really just ignorant people who support an ignorant politician, to the detriment of their own country.

This is nothing new. We've been seeing this conservative extremism growing for several years now. There have been numerous examples of it over the last three of four years alone - shootings by Conservatives of black Americans, protestors, armed men patrolling outside Mosques, the Oregon standoff, the shooting of innocent people at a family planning clinic...

You'll all want to refuse and deny it of course, but it's absolutely clear that the US government was absolutely right to describe right-wing extremism as a bigger threat to the US than Daesh.

No, I don't think all Trump supporters are fascists, Nazis and racists, I certainly don't think they're all right-wing extremists, but they are most certainly ignorant. No sensible and sane person could possibly accept the things he wants to do without being an ignorant fool. It's really as simple as that. If you believe what he says about refugees, immigrants and Muslim Americans, you are an ignorant fool, no debating over semantics will change that.




posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 11:48 AM
link   
The fact of the matter is that just as the rich are secure in their wealth and material maintenance to a certain degree, and don’t have to worry about the things the other classess have to worry about, is the issue.

Were not trying for creating nirvana or a utopia here; were not asking for that

It’s just that a modern civilized society should easily produce certain basic material realities for its citizens


The fact is every middle class person should have a good paying job produced easily from the MACRO economy


The fact is every middle class person should NOT have to worry about health care


The fact is every middle class person should have a retirement opportunity about the age 60… And have a secure retirement pension


The fact is every middle class person should have the opportunity to education without going into massive lifetime crippling debt

All that should be available to every citizen who wants it.

The fact is, it’s not now available because in 1980 they high jacked a developing economy and crippled it!



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 12:21 PM
link   
I thought I'd add my two cents worth. The basic argument is one I agree with. I myself am furious with the current state of affairs in the west. Bearing in mind im a generation X'er and up until my mid 20's I was completely indoctrinated into the supposedly "progressive" left's politically correct mainstream brainwash offered to us in the UK, via the likes of the guardian "newspaper" and the BBC (British brainwashing corporation).

See you are either a left wing socialist (aka working class and poor) or a right wing capitalist (extremely greedy, psychopath) in the UK. This is the choice your offered politically and one ideology resonates with you more than the other depending on what your character is and more typically depending on your background.

You do get rich "campaign socialists" who tell everyone how it's great for a country to be overrun by dozens and dozens of different cultures and how it's all a big melting pot and how everyone wins..these people obviously have either no experience of ordinary living standards or have been rich for so long they are all but forgotten ordinary life. These people predominantly come from the entertainment industry and are used as talking heads and mouthpieces to promote that agenda, because they are already popular with the public due to their music or acting personas.

You also get poor working class fascists who, gravitate to things like football hooliganism or other forms of low level street violence. These people, by and large, are ignorant and completely immune to brainwashing. This is actually a real thing in hypnosis. People with high levels of education are far, far more suggestable to brainwashing than people termed as uneducated and ignorant. However even some hooligans are highly educated professional people, but they are a minority.

It's also part of the reason few, if any 9/11 truthers are academics and instead most come from more humble backgrounds. It doesn't mean 9/11 truthers are stupid (other than those who support holographic planes perhaps, but I always took it that theory was a deliberate Psyop to muddy the waters and discredit the whole movement), far from it, I'm one myself, it just means they typically have not been controlled by the media brainwashing that repeatedly tells them they are nuts. The theory about mass brainwashing and social conformity is based around the fact, that people who do well academically have spent years, if not decades, following rules other people and institutions have set out for them. Rule following behaviours are what make up a society, otherwise we would have anarchy. However these unquestioning, predictable, though patters are used against our best interests, quite often. To the point that lots of people might go to their doctor for a pain in their finger and be asked to drop their pants...and of corse many will do it, without question.

The truth in all this is that human beings are tribal. It's a defence mechanism and almost certainly an evolutionary strategy, to ensure the survival of the tribe long term. If we compare this to something like sports teams. Especially a sport like football(soccer) which traditionally has always been a working class pastime and has also been riddled with a right wing, tribal hooliganism. The tribal aspect of being a football fan runs deep and it's only been in the last 30 year that team members routeenly swap teams (this would have been unforgivable at one time) and foreign players became a regular occurrence. This has also coincided with lots more middle class men becoming football fans. Ticket prices also jumped massively in price and that changed the make up of the whole football scene.

Things like "stamping out rascism" in football have become popular political movements within football, but as with all mainstream movements in our politically correct and artificial culture, it's a top down cultural force, it never arises from the ground up. Where as up until the late 90's being rascist and shouting rascist abuse was commonplace for football fans, because that rascist culture in football arose from the actual working class, football culture itself, that's why it's so hard to stamp it out. But stamping things out is a good description for politically correctness. They use the boot of the media to hammer messages of what are and are not socially acceptable.

that's not me agreeing with racism.. I'm explaining where it comes from. due to ignorance but prejudice has a foundation in our evolutionary strategy to continue as an independent culture, all cultures do the same thing. More than that though is the word rascism and how miss leading is can be and has been, in my belief deliberately so.

Muslims for example, the majority of them are Arabs, but if you have an issue with Islam your tarred racist, right off the bat. It's the same with feminism, if you have an issue with that your automatically a woman hater. If you take issue with some of Judaism your an anti Semite. Nor for gay adoption? You're homaphobic. Its this reason lots of people who are not totally ignorant are moving towards someone like Trump. I personally don't like trump and do find him to be obnoxious but if I could vote in the US elections, even though I come from a socialist viewpoint, I'd probably vote for him over sanders.

Where as trump is ignorant, crass and a billionaire, atleast he isn't pandering to political correctness. Sanders, who on paper, I would normally support, is even more politically correct than Barak Obama or the clintons and we dont need a continuation of this thought control and censorship. Plus sanders pandering to African Americans as being "more poor" than poor whites is sickening and a perverse reverse racism. This is what the so called progressive but in reality "regressive" left have been doing to people for decades. There is no striving for the alleged goal of equality, instead there is always a perpetual victim who must continually be held up above everyone else to be pitied and helped out more than everyone else. There must also be a group to hate and blame for everything, even though this group (straight white men) are responsible for even allowing themselves to be put in the position they have been put in, by relinquishing power to "progesssive" feminists.

So what we have is two teams of bigotry. An obvious far right one that is anti immigration but a more deceptive far left one that is anti straight white men. It's this bipolar mentality that most people can't grasp as two sides of the same coin. The issue is if your a straight white man, just by uttering the sentence as a self identifier, you will be shamed for being homophobic, rascist and a woman hater. Because the reverse racism, sexism and hatered of being heterosexual is now so dominant in western culture that we hardly even notice it anymore. blaming one specific group for all the wrong in the world, even though a tiny elite are pulling the stings. Of corse it's this tiny elite that disseminate the self hating rascism, in order to drive destruction of European cultural identity. Isn't that why George Soros sponsors movements like black lives matter after all. Order from chaos.
the divide and concur plan has won out and I now view things in the same terms as someone in prison. Not how I want to be but it's been forced upon me, to pick a team

edit on 13-3-2016 by Counterintelligence because: Edited



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 12:46 PM
link   
m.youtube.com...

And it's feminists like this who are causing such a bitter reaction, with whites who previously swallowed the cool aid of feminism and multiculturalism.

The abject failure of political correctness and liberalism is the dispicable attitude of the intellectual middle class that thinks it's minority opinions, morals and ethics should be forced Upton the majority, via their controlled mainstream media.

In some respects the minority opinion will be a valid opinion however it's never allowed to be critiqued. Multiculturalism for instance, is not a melting pot, it invariably leads to ghettoisation and self segregation. This is what would be more accurately termed as the fractioning of society rather than any imagined melting pot. Even in the states, where generations of blacks are born into the culture, there is no signs of any real melting pot, even with a mixed race president. Once again proving the tribal mentality of social groups, who stick together due to skin colour or religion. It's not always straight, white, men to blame, more often it's just human nature.

What the so called progressives should have done, if they truly believed in their own bull#, is they should have shown the majority of our society the benefits of feminsm and multicultural rather that insisting they were benefits.

We have seen the gradual destruction of the family in the west since feminism and progressive liberalism. The needs and now just the desires of women in the west, come above the needs of the family, children and society as a whole. Importing millions of Muslims, many of which are intent on converting the entire world to Islam and who publicly like to admit it, comes before daring to question multi cultiralism for fear of being racist.

Things have been designed to get so bad, Cologne for instance, Ferguson for instance etc, repeated reports of racist "white male" police killings of "innocent blacks", that it was predictable that someone like trump would become massively popular with a white citizenship that feel they are being targeted...because they are being targeted, by the media and lots of black people have apparently fallen right into the trap they were supposed to fall for, gravitating toward divisive and poisonous groups like black lives matter.

www.usatoday.com...


fortune.com...

www.theguardian.com...

Even reported in the guardian (of all places) of corse the headline indicates it's rascist and of corse they disabled comments under their version of the story.
If I can figure this out then so can George Soros. So can Fox News (Rupert Murdoch) and I've no doubt mark Zuckerberg too.

The whole purpose of this mainstream narrative is to continually infuriate whites and blacks to hate each other and it's working. I'm well aware of what's going on and even I am now being put into a corner, because joining a liberal elite isn't goin to work for me, as I'm not already a member of that elite. i don't live in a wealthy neighbourhood and the reality of what the media has been stirring up since Trayvon Martin is felt in the lower ends of the sociology economic scale. So we can riot and fight it out and get the pleasure of being racist and then incarcerated, we being both white and black.

Of corse if "we" had a tribal mentality of all being in the same boat due to being poor then that would be a genuine threat and it would end the puppet masters who are pulling our collective strings, playing us off against each other, black against white, woman against man. That's why any notion of "all lives matter" will be continually rubbished end and ridiculed as rascist..proving beyond a doubt that the agenda has nothing to do with equality.




edit on 13-3-2016 by Counterintelligence because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 01:59 PM
link   
a reply to: masqua



I like your optimism, that the fall could be only a "few years" away and not sooner.

Yes on Citizens United and money!! Won't happen if a conservative gets appointed.

Yes on Libertarianism! They need to understand the economics of it, not just the social side, and understand that there would be NO federal govt left between them and the corporation! THAT is what Koch wants .Unrestrained capitalism.

Well,I didn't mean to be such a downer this morning, so, to help cheer things up a bit, I have thought over what the US would look like under the Koch Libertarian system. Afterall, the Kochs are big on philanthropy and wanting a jolly world for all. For example, once the federal govt is drowned in the bathtub, and the IRS will not exist to tax people---and corporations are people, too, my friend---who will take care of our roads and bridges?

I trust my sources who say that WalMart will fund the highway system, and it will be called the WalMart Distribution System. Likewise, United Parcel Service, once it is edged out of land shipping by WalMart, it will agree to funding airports.

And, as a bonus, UPS will monopolize the skies. It will establish their passenger service. But, be careful! When booking a flight on United Passenger Service, do not go through United Parcel Service! Although, since passengers who book tickets must submit their dimensions and weight and thus be assigned a ticket price and seat based on those measurements, UParcelS is looking at a possible Human Flight Container, just in case there is a mixup.

And, UPassengerS allows online booking. You merely print out the Boarding label, once your measurements are inputed and price assigned, stick it in a plastic baggie, and tape it to your forehead at the boarding gate, where it will be scanned by a scanner as you walk by.

Mexico will still not build a wall, but Mex and China will offer scholarships to medical school, to increase the number of doctors, who will be needed for the increasing incidents of citizens who fall ill to contaminated imported food, medicine, and products. Are you starting to feel better, cheerier?

Govt will no longer offer consumer protection, and if WalMart poisons you, hell, all you have to do is not shop there, although that will be very difficult, as they will have established a retail monopoly. Haha and we used to laugh at the old USSR and their GUM dept stores. A Libertarian Paradise!



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rocker2013
a reply to: HoldMyBeer

No, he's just another politically biased fool looking for any opportunity to blame the "big bad liberals" while letting conservatives off for doing exactly the same, and worse. He completely ignores the fact that REPUBLICANS are just as self-serving, just as greedy, and damaged American economy just as much as any other politician.
Funny how he completely ignores the fact that BUSH was POTUS when the economic trouble happened, what exactly did he do to prevent it? To change it? To stop it? Oh yes, he paid out billions upon billions of your $'s to corporate buddies and bankers, with almost no oversight at all.

Tell me, where is all the condemnation for Bush? Surprisingly the average Republican seems to be so selective in their anger at politicians they conveniently forget his entire time in office, the bailing out, the Patriot act, 2 wars and thousands dead. While you're all screaming about "evil Obama" for daring to push through sensible laws to try to prevent the mass murders of innocent kids, you all ignore the fact that Bush destroyed plenty of your rights and freedoms, opened the floodgates of mass surveillance, bailed out the evil bankers and sent thousands of Americans into two fruitless wars.

Even though the economic problem was a culmination of decades of unravelling of sensible restrictions and laws on bankers (which the Republicans supported too btw), Bush did nothing to prevent or mitigate the catastrophe, he added to it.

I would be willing to agree with the sentiment talked about in that piece (the anger people feel for politics in general and the knee-jerk desire to break the system), but he's wrong in many respects. This is not at all about middle America raging against the "political elites", this is about a right-wing Conservatism feeling increasingly desperate as the country moves on and tells them that their traditional, backward, authoritarian, privileged way of life is no longer acceptable.

Sure, a lot of Americans are fed up with a political class running the show, but they're not stupid enough to want to support the most vile and extreme politician as a result of that disillusionment.

The Republican party is dead, their following is dissipating, what's left is an extreme core of backward thinkers who are terrified of their control slipping away and the country evolving without them. They're angry about BLM, they're angry about immigrants, they're angry about same sex marriage, they're angry about gun control, they'll use their "disillusionment" of politicians as an excuse for what they really think and feel, because to do otherwise forces them to admit that they're really just ignorant people who support an ignorant politician, to the detriment of their own country.

This is nothing new. We've been seeing this conservative extremism growing for several years now. There have been numerous examples of it over the last three of four years alone - shootings by Conservatives of black Americans, protestors, armed men patrolling outside Mosques, the Oregon standoff, the shooting of innocent people at a family planning clinic...

You'll all want to refuse and deny it of course, but it's absolutely clear that the US government was absolutely right to describe right-wing extremism as a bigger threat to the US than Daesh.

No, I don't think all Trump supporters are fascists, Nazis and racists, I certainly don't think they're all right-wing extremists, but they are most certainly ignorant. No sensible and sane person could possibly accept the things he wants to do without being an ignorant fool. It's really as simple as that. If you believe what he says about refugees, immigrants and Muslim Americans, you are an ignorant fool, no debating over semantics will change that.




Really an outstanding post!


I agree with you on Hedges. He is an angry progressive who is putting it all on the moderate liberal class and neglecting the devil before our eyes, the conservative GOP party of selfish greed that has produced a goblin like Trump...very predictable.


Sure the Clinton’s and Obama’s have come up real short but this analysis is a perfect example of the principle of Occam's razor.


Hedges seems to be hedging this reality



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Counterintelligence

There is a very simple way of determining where one sits on the political spectrum. You either want control or you want to let go of control.

If you want control, you prefer a form of government which works to keep unwanted elements of society away, either by imprisonment or deportation. You would also prefer a government which is willing to do whatever it takes to keep the population as safe as possible. Individual rights would give way to the rights of the many. It is about being a static society and contrary to any changes.

If you would rather see less control, then a government (for example) which is less concerned about being hard on crime is better and individual rights would be more important than the rights of the majority. It is about allowing radical change to happen, wherever it may lead.

Either form has its time and place. Once the choice is made, it needs to play out its 'Action Plan' over the course of its time in power. But for every action, there will be an equal reaction and the pendulum will eventual swing back the other way. Whether the change is violent or peaceful depends entirely upon the society we are.

Should a society be violent, the changes will be rife with violence.
If peaceful, the change would be peaceful.

The question then is: What kind of society do we live in? Is it hateful and mistrusting or is it better than that?



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

"It's like money laundering - only with ideology" ....so funny!!

Re Ex-Im Bank

“Instead of providing low-interest loans to multi-national companies that are shipping jobs to China and other low-wage countries, we should be investing in small businesses and worker-owned enterprises that want to create jobs in the United States and lift Americans out of poverty and into the middle class,”Sanders policy director



The most important reason, however, that the Export-Import Bank’s charter should not be reauthorized is that it is neither morally correct nor constitutional for the federal government to use general taxpayer money to promote the economic welfare of specific groups.

CATO Inst

The difference is that Bernie still wants govt to invest in citizens. Koch does not, period; plus, in his nutty thinking, there would be no fed govt left anyway.

In the old days (1980s?), there could have been a compromise. Not today, as Republicans would not vote for Bernie's using govt money to help citizens.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: masqua

What were dealing with though is the superrich doing violence to the macro economy and to the political system through bribery.


How do we deal with that?


How do we control that?

By Electing?



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: desert
In the old days (1980s?), there could have been a compromise. Not today, as Republicans would not vote for Bernie's using govt money to help citizens.


Lolled.

When the banks and Wall Street got bailed out after the 2008 crash, it was posited by Obama that perhaps those citizens who lost their homes could use some help as well.

Rick Santelli’s Rant is famous for jumping all over that notion.



Two Obama terms later...



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

What is happening now unfortunately is not cyclical. This political polarization has not been seen for 150 years, the time of the Civil War.

It's a calculated endeavor by the Kochs to impart their ideology. The GOP produced Trump, but the Koch brothers have produced the extremist GOP. It's a monster within a monster.

We cannot even use the old, "there are checks and balances". Besides influencing the Congress, the Kochs have left their mark on the Supreme Court

Buried in this document, however, is a surprising revelation about the role two supposedly impartial jurists have played in these extended fundraising solicitations: “Past meetings have featured such notable leaders as Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.”

source



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

No... by laws. Good luck with gutting Citizens United, especially with a SCOTUS bought and sold by the Heritage Foundation (et al).



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

Exactly! !00%

What's interesting is that campaigning Ronald Reagan never told the American people exactly what he would do to bring down inflation. That ended up being unemployment and "trickle down" economics with its tax cuts and deregulation. After 1980, all his voters wanted were family values and to win the culture wars (ultimately wedge issues).

By letting the Koch brothers spread their extremist right wing propaganda and take over an entire party without dispute, the GOP allowed trickle down to vacuum up wealth upward to the 1% and never return wealth to the 99%. And destroy govt to boot, which is their path to "drowning govt in a bathtub"!

The GOP has, in effect, sold out to an unlimited supply of Koch money. They sold out their party and their country, which they claim to love.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 03:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: desert
a reply to: Willtell

Exactly! !00%

What's interesting is that campaigning Ronald Reagan never told the American people exactly what he would do to bring down inflation. That ended up being unemployment and "trickle down" economics with its tax cuts and deregulation. After 1980, all his voters wanted were family values and to win the culture wars (ultimately wedge issues).

By letting the Koch brothers spread their extremist right wing propaganda and take over an entire party without dispute, the GOP allowed trickle down to vacuum up wealth upward to the 1% and never return wealth to the 99%. And destroy govt to boot, which is their path to "drowning govt in a bathtub"!

The GOP has, in effect, sold out to an unlimited supply of Koch money. They sold out their party and their country, which they claim to love.


even more telling is that Reagan was THE FATHER of the modern national debt. He accrued more DEBT than ALL the president before him combined. It is ironic that the guy who was touted as being the free market conservative spent like a drunken sailor and essentially stimulated economic growth through massive expanse of government through defense spending, the war on drugs, proxy wars and deficit spending ALA Keynesian economic theory.

It is arguable that the growth of the Reagan era cannot be examined without examining that he injected the economy with a massive amount of tax payer money via governmental spending.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: masqua

I disagree. This belief system of right or left is now showing its populist face in extreme right winger Trump and extreme liberalist Sanders...where as Hillary is a continuation of the failure to represent either side of the population and simply represents the interests of the 1%. She is of corse is supposedly a centralist, in her case central left, as have been most western leaders for the past 50 years or so. Largely a reaction to the likes of Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin etc.


The idea of a central left politician is not much different to a central right one that's why people have become dissatisfied with centralist governments right and left, that never represent he populations they speak down to. They only ever represent continuity of government and the continuity serves bond holders and banksters.

If however we had social policy that prevented ghettos in the first place and ensured a reasonable standard of housing, health and education for all people. Governments wouldn't be able to rely on huge parts of the disenfranchised population to be pitted against each other, in times of predicated economic crisis.

The predictable economic crisises known as "boom and bust" and now practical economic collapse..come from centralist political governments because they are the glove puppets of international banksters. These governments basically use the populations as a method to generate profits for the 1%. Once the inevitable cycle that abject greed produces occurs...the same governments need skape goats and distractions.

They can't produce these distractions unless they already have a huge reserve of people they can manipulate into action. For example a huge black population that have always been living in segregated communities even after official segregation ended.

The fact Trump, a billionaire who is a consequence of centralist politicians, that enabled him and his greed and repeated crony bankruptcies, and people are looking at him for solutions...shows how messed up the whole system is.

Sanders as I said is a mirror image of a rascist and bigoted right winger, except his predudice is a result of being shamed and being guilt tripped about "white male priviledge" to the point that he will represent the black community above and beyond even a barrack Obama.

Because more white voters than ever will come out for this election, voters who never voted in their lives, like disenfranchise whites from trailer parks. I can almost guarantee Trump will trounce Sanders. But as I said if people are going to continually side along lines of race, which they are doing, then they leave any ordinary voter who knows what's going on, to have no choice, unfortunately.

Trump will win and will be the worst president ever. Inequality will get even worse and the 1% will be gods on earth. And even that is a better option than sanders if your poor and white.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: yesyesyes

even more telling is that Reagan was THE FATHER of the modern national debt.


And all with a full Democrat majority House of Representatives for 8 years !!!!




posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Counterintelligence

Ask yourself these 4 parenting questions: Which of these would you support?

Independence or respect for their elders?
Curiosity or obedience?
Self Reliance or obedience?
Being considerate or being well-behaved

The difference in them relates to authoritarianism.


When it comes to authoritarianism, Trump supporters are also distinct in their attitudes from the followers of the other Republican candidates for president. Support models for Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, Marco Rubio, and Jeb Bush that are run among likely Republican primary voters and include the same set of independent variables tested for when analyzing Trump find that authoritarianism has no effect on support for Trump’s opponents.

The difference between the predicted authoritarian support for Trump and all other Republican candidates is readily apparent when combined into one chart (Figure 2). When looking at this chart, it is important to remember that authoritarianism is only a statistically significant variable for Trump. Thus, while the difference between the predicted value of Trump’s support among authoritarians and non authoritarians is statistically meaningful, any variation in support across the authoritarian scale for the other candidates is not.



On most of these questions, Trump voters exhibit statistically significant and substantive authoritarian attitudes. For example, Trump voters are statistically more likely to agree that other groups should sometimes be kept in their place. They support preventing minority opposition once we decide what is right.


blogs.lse.ac.uk...



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: masqua

Yes I agree Trump is an authoritarian (you're fired). I don't need statistics or scientific proof to state the obvious.
The point is centralist governments are only in place to feed and support the 1%...people just like Trump.
Maybe I'm not expressing myself clearly, as I admit I hold an unusual position here. I do not like Trump as a personality, nor do I agree with most of his rhetoric. However I, like most other people, am sick of the Bushes, Clintons and puppets operated by the likes of Trump.
This is a paradoxical argument and position I'm making. Trump and people like him, are the cause and symptom of centralist governments. He and his ilk are the cause and symptom of the worst form of capitalism, cronyism, and he and his sort are the cause and symptom of the worst inequality in history.


He represents virtually everything I am against...people will end up even poorer under Trump. However out of the candidates, it is a 50/50 weather Trump would continue provoking and agitating disorder in foreign countries. Where as its a guarantee Hillary will continue this madness and ramp it up to a probable WW3, if we don't get there before the election.

Sanders, could have been and should have been the obvious choice except for his blind support for Israel and his pandering to African Americans at home.

It's come down to a choice, in my perspective, of having worsening inequality for everyone under Trump but with the possibility of no WW3 and a more pragmatic foreign policy. Plus an end to the maddening cultural elite forcing political correctness down our throats and thus stamping all over free speech.

Where as Sanders has already indicated he will favour one race over another and if I were black I'd vote for him, but I'm not and its as simple as that. He also will increase political correctness and further stifle free speech. He also sounds contradictory and clueless on foreign policy issues. He got completly shown up on the Palestinian issue when ironically, black lives matter attacked him..he peddled the worn out and blinkered response that "Israel has a right to defend itself" coming from the "non rasicst" sanders. With the same attitude that American centralists have pushed for decades but worse more than, to push such an attitude after we all can witness live rolling news of Israel purposely blowing up schools full of children and worse still this coming from someone who supposedly stands for liberal leftist opinion.

m.youtube.com...

Is even trump this ignorant on Israel? Probably but but atleast he seems to want to sit down and make deals.

Further more, as I've stated Trump and his ilk buy politicians and we have a continuing situation where a diverse group of rich self interested assholes and psychopaths control puppets. The difference between having one self interested "king or dictator" in power may actually be better than having hundreds of such individuals who compete against each other and all attempt to control different industries and manipulate different markets. Having many psychopath, crony capitalist, operating a string of politicians, probably causes more damage globally than just one greedy narssacist who has one set of self interests in mind. How much damage can one psycho do in comparison to an army of competing ones, which is what we currently have operating our puppets?
edit on 13-3-2016 by Counterintelligence because: Edited



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

desert raises hand....If I may, I would like to voice my opinion. First, by electing. The GOP has forced onto this country a parliamentarian style of govt that is not suited for us. A third party at the national level will not work for us. We do not have the voting system for that.

The only way out of this mess is to temporarily (over years, election cycles) vote the GOP out of office. The GOP must be held accountable for allowing their extremist fringe to take control of their party (and country) and spreading nutty ideas. They must no longer be allowed to govern, as they have failed. The bleeding of Koch (and others such as Richard Mellon Scaife ) money into the GOP, where it finds a welcome home, must be
stanched.

A conservative says this


A devastating, top-to-bottom defeat in 2016 might force the party's conservative pragmatists, and the few moderates, to move more aggressively to take back control of their party. That would require a divorce from the Freedom Caucus Republicans, and a long period of readjustment to become competitive beyond red states.
.....
we have to try to change the campaign finance system, enlarge the electorate, change the nature of the House through redistricting and maybe even push for more substantial changes (like multi-member or at-large districts) and create a new public square. All of these are long-term battles. None is a panacea. The future still looks pretty grim.

source


another insight


If the next U.S. president is a joint GOP-Koch favorite like Marco Rubio, he will eagerly sign into law radical budgets shrinking federal domestic programs that the Koch-supported Speaker of the House, Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, has already drafted into congressional bills. If the new president is a loose cannon like Donald Trump, he may go off script but is likely to accept much of this far-right agenda. Trump lacks his own policy cadre, and his national campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, was previously the highly successful director of AFP-New Hampshire and will be able to draw appointees and ideas from the Koch network. Finally, if the new president is Democrat Hillary Clinton, she will have a guerrilla war on her hands. Democrats are in the minority in Congress and in most state governments, and Koch leaders and their well-organized allies are working through a radicalized GOP to enact policy changes that will be hard to reverse. The Koch brothers and other dark-money oligarchs may have to put up, now and again, with unruly grassroots populists and occasional Democratic victories. But they have the entire Republican Party in their grasp. They are patient and determined—and in it for the long haul.


The bottom line. Since those left in the GOP are hard core right wing, there are reactionary ( "opposing political or social liberalization or reform") conservatives (and there always has been) who will never vote for anything liberal (or have anything good to say about it), which has become anything to their left in their minds. You can never win them over. The GOP refuses to compromise, except as in an abusive relationship, where compromise means "do as I want".

There could be some who would vote as a Democrat in secret, but for the most part the party has shed anyone who would cross party lines to vote. One of those persons shed was Elizabeth Warren, and she found a home in the Democratic Party.

We must do as the first source says. Vote the GOP out down the line, and then push for the other reforms. 2016 will be the start of a "long-term battle". It is a Cold Civil War, but it must be fought.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: desert

You’re absolutely right about the GOP

Trump may be the last scam of the right to save the GOP.

If he does save them by bringing these deceived people into that party to breathe life into a dead body then you could bet it was all a plot.


Trump is a smoke screen.

He is hiding the evil of the GOP and what they have done to the country



new topics

top topics



 
70
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join