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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The GOPs Age of Authoritarianism Has Only Begun - New York Magazine

page: 9
124
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

It is the timing. I am pissed at my state for buying one of those trucks for IED's but we close our homeless shelters and our shcools. My opinion does not count on it, just my tax burden. It feels like a totalitarian government in our small city. Our laws and life are ruled by a religious body. I may move, but where if the are taking over globally.




posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Why would we stop stalking about authoritarianism? That's the topic. Granted, we're looking at the innate authoritarian responses becoming more and more clear in the Party of Trump ... but as Kandinsky said ... this is not a US only phenomenon nor is it a "Republican only" phenomenon ... but that is the discussion. The indeterminate argument that "both sides do the same thing" is relative and not the focus here.



Oh, I think we're clear now on not confusing every day laws with the premise of the OP.
I read your linked article in detail and your position is clearly partisan. You have no meaningful insight to back up your assertions. Neither did the author.
Try and provide some substance.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

This is why journalism is dead. They need to leave their personal opinion out of it because the media dependent sheep tend to take it as gospel and we end up with ridiculous threads like this.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 11:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408
a reply to: Gryphon66

This is why journalism is dead. They need to leave their personal opinion out of it because the media dependent sheep tend to take it as gospel and we end up with ridiculous threads like this.


Amen. The author could have written a more compelling piece, but couldn't resist the emotional outbursts about Trump. He showed his biased hand very early.
edit on 2/11/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Kandinsky

It is the timing. I am pissed at my state for buying one of those trucks for IED's but we close our homeless shelters and our shcools. My opinion does not count on it, just my tax burden. It feels like a totalitarian government in our small city. Our laws and life are ruled by a religious body. I may move, but where if the are taking over globally.



It sounds like you are showing very authoritarian tendencies. You're pissed because tax money is not being spent the way you personally want it to be, never mind what everyone else wants.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408
a reply to: Gryphon66

This is why journalism is dead. They need to leave their personal opinion out of it because the media dependent sheep tend to take it as gospel and we end up with ridiculous threads like this.


It's ridiculous to point out the growing authoritarianism in the Republican party, along with all politics, both domestic and international???

I disagree. If you don't like the OP, the source or the discussion, you don't have to participate.

You've weighed in that it's "stupid" ... which, not for nothing, is kind of banal in itself.

Any specifics pro or con? I'd be glad to hear factual arguments from you (or anyone).



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: LSU0408
a reply to: Gryphon66

This is why journalism is dead. They need to leave their personal opinion out of it because the media dependent sheep tend to take it as gospel and we end up with ridiculous threads like this.


Amen. The author could have written a more compelling piece, but couldn't resist the emotional outbursts about Trump. He showed his biased hand very early.


And several posters have shown us their hands of defending any perceived slights of Mr. Trump (real or not) rather than having a factual discussion.

/shrug



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66




Taking that masque off for a quick minute ... I literally cannot believe that Hillary Clinton (whom I know to be an intelligent, gifted politician) was "dumb" enough to pull this stunt with the emails, then make half-true (though politically viable) public statements that have been challenged ever since.


It's as if the US political classes have become flabby and complacent. They've got lobbies and strong relationships with respective media corporations. Did they mistakenly assume that it's all a 'snap my fingers' game? Perhaps the hubris and apathy created far too much self-belief and her inner circle fell short of disagreeing with her? There haven't been many checks and balances for all this to have blown up so many years down the line? If there's one positive from the 2016 elections (just one?) it's that future hopefuls won't take candidacy for granted.

Of course, that could encourage better people to run. More likely is it'll encourage more secrecy as they hide their peccadilloes.





Politics, to me, is the human science of the distribution of power. On the spectrum between tyranny and anarchy, there are many places at which we could all live comfortably, if not in complete alignment with every single aspect.


Oh yeah. We're lucky to live in nations where we can baulk and grind teeth about the political chicanery. All the missed chances where we could live in a more peaceful world etc. It's frustrating that most people want the same things and somehow the political divide acts like a distorted mirror. We can't ever overlook the stupidity of human nature either.

Have you heard the fable of the frog and the scorpion? Simplistic and yet the same urge drives people as well as nations.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

That is why we have elections and free speech. Vote Blue! If there is a god, I pray he/she will get rid of this war republicans started and now no one wants to pay for.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

As you said "anyone", I will refer you the article itself to support the claim of 'personal opinion' made by LSU408.


Yet Donald Trump’s horrifyingly unique combination of personal traits, together with rather fluid beliefs about policy, has reoriented American politics as a psychology seminar. Never before in our history has a major presidential character stood apart as so great (in the Great Fire of London sense) or so opposite-of-great. We have been consumed with wonder at just what it would mean to have this flamboyant sociopath pacing the Oval Office. Trump has made Great Man theorists of us all. But something important is happening that has been obscured by the captivating spectacle. Forget about Donald Trump for a moment. Or — given how famously difficult it is to not think of a pink elephant, not to mention an orange one — consider Trump’s rise not in terms of his uniquely dangerous personality but instead as the interplay of broader trends.


In what world do you think this article will reach anywhere but the Democrat echo chamber? The author discredits himself in the first two paragraphs and can not be seen as a credible journalist. Everything he says from that point on is an emotionally driven piece of propaganda.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3

It's similar in the UK regarding the homeless. We've got more and more on the streets and the main people helping out are volunteers and charities. They're a societal problem and a society that ignores its most vulnerable needs to pause and change direction. It's a symptom of something deeper when the streets are increasingly populated by (currently) lost causes.

We don't have as much religious influence over here and I'd feel just like you if we did. I don't think religion (any of them) should have a place in the business of local politics and budgets.

You're making a rational and emotive case for why you don't support the GOP in your state. It's a shame then that others might dismiss your view without listening first.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: UKTruth

That is why we have elections and free speech. Vote Blue! If there is a god, I pray he/she will get rid of this war republicans started and now no one wants to pay for.



Exactly. If you live in a Republican led area, then that is who was voted in. You can't expect your minority view to be foisted upon everyone else. That is why you have a vote and the ability and freedom of speech to change opinions and vote in an alternative. In an authoritarian country, you would not have these freedoms.
edit on 2/11/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: MOMof3

It's similar in the UK regarding the homeless. We've got more and more on the streets and the main people helping out are volunteers and charities. They're a societal problem and a society that ignores its most vulnerable needs to pause and change direction. It's a symptom of something deeper when the streets are increasingly populated by (currently) lost causes.

We don't have as much religious influence over here and I'd feel just like you if we did. I don't think religion (any of them) should have a place in the business of local politics and budgets.

You're making a rational and emotive case for why you don't support the GOP in your state. It's a shame then that others might dismiss your view without listening first.


As it is me who 'dismissed' the view in question, I will respond.
Firstly, I have not dismissed any emotional or rational view that says the homeless should be taken care of. I happen to believe they should. I do however reject the view that it is authoritarian for a govt. to not force higher taxes on it's citizens to pay for the homeless. I reject it because it's nonsense and the very opposite of authoritarian.

edit on 2/11/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Yes, the article's tone is biased against Donald Trump.

That may prevent some from looking at and/or thinking about many of the other factual points made in the article.

As far as only reaching the "Democratic Echo Chamber" ... reference any low-hanging MSM article ... like The Republicans Opposing Donald Trump — And Voting for Hillary Clinton

Trump is the most unpopular candidate in history, followed closely by Mrs. Clinton. To imply otherwise is to skirt the edge of the truth at best.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: LSU0408
a reply to: Gryphon66

This is why journalism is dead. They need to leave their personal opinion out of it because the media dependent sheep tend to take it as gospel and we end up with ridiculous threads like this.


Amen. The author could have written a more compelling piece, but couldn't resist the emotional outbursts about Trump. He showed his biased hand very early.


And several posters have shown us their hands of defending any perceived slights of Mr. Trump (real or not) rather than having a factual discussion.

/shrug


If the slights are factual and at all relevant then it would be good to discuss them. Unfortunately, most tend to be politically motivated extrapolations to some doomsday scenario, or just plain lies.

/sigh
edit on 2/11/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Yes, the article's tone is biased against Donald Trump.

That may prevent some from looking at and/or thinking about many of the other factual points made in the article.

As far as only reaching the "Democratic Echo Chamber" ... reference any low-hanging MSM article ... like The Republicans Opposing Donald Trump — And Voting for Hillary Clinton

Trump is the most unpopular candidate in history, followed closely by Mrs. Clinton. To imply otherwise is to skirt the edge of the truth at best.


I am not denying that Trump is unpopular. However, letting that get in the way of journalism is a mistake and those journalists that make such a mistake discredit themselves. Unfortunately most have actually succumbed to emotion in this election on both sides, which is why I agree with LSU048 when he says journalism is dead. At least political journalism.

I have read the full article and commented in depth. I am informed on the authors views and reject them for the reasons I stated (a few pages ago).
edit on 2/11/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Yes, the article's tone is biased against Donald Trump.

That may prevent some from looking at and/or thinking about many of the other factual points made in the article.

As far as only reaching the "Democratic Echo Chamber" ... reference any low-hanging MSM article ... like The Republicans Opposing Donald Trump — And Voting for Hillary Clinton

Trump is the most unpopular candidate in history, followed closely by Mrs. Clinton. To imply otherwise is to skirt the edge of the truth at best.


I am not denying that Trump is unpopular. However, letting that get in the way of journalism is a mistake and those journalists that make such a mistake discredit themselves.


I agree that the best journalism is based entirely on facts and is devoid of any emotion or opinion not directed at a passionate defense or analysis of the truth.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

I wasn't referring to you in any shape or form. It was a broad swipe at the political debates that exist on the basis that 'the other side' are always wrong and probably 'morons.'

I generally see you as a rather entrenched and defined poster whose views won't often coincide with mine. That means we'd never have a constructive discussion and end up knee-jerk disagreeing. You enjoy the sport of partisan tit-for-tat and it's not for me.


I'm replying now so you know I'd reply directly and wouldn't go taking side-swipes.



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: UKTruth

I wasn't referring to you in any shape or form. It was a broad swipe at the political debates that exist on the basis that 'the other side' are always wrong and probably 'morons.'

I generally see you as a rather entrenched and defined poster whose views won't often coincide with mine. That means we'd never have a constructive discussion and end up knee-jerk disagreeing. You enjoy the sport of partisan tit-for-tat and it's not for me.


I'm replying now so you know I'd reply directly and wouldn't go taking side-swipes.


Good to know. Personally, I haven't formed an opinion of you. I might add that I wouldn't actually do so on the basis of political discussion anyway!


You might be surprised at my 'entrenchment'. When grenades are being lobbed from a trench, it's a good idea to dig your own trench and hunker down. I am all too willing to emerge for a 'Christmas game of football' but that requires both teams to participate.
edit on 2/11/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: UKTruth

I wasn't referring to you in any shape or form. It was a broad swipe at the political debates that exist on the basis that 'the other side' are always wrong and probably 'morons.'

I generally see you as a rather entrenched and defined poster whose views won't often coincide with mine. That means we'd never have a constructive discussion and end up knee-jerk disagreeing. You enjoy the sport of partisan tit-for-tat and it's not for me.


I'm replying now so you know I'd reply directly and wouldn't go taking side-swipes.


Good to know. Personally, I haven't formed an opinion of you. I might add that I wouldn't actually do so on the basis of political discussion anyway!


Well we're all good then




top topics



 
124
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join