Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

02-04-2017 , 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostOstrich
I'm worried that this guy is right.

I mean, he's obviously wrong to blame "the left" for what's about to happen. But now when an Islamic extremist inevitably blows himself up, shoots up a mall or otherwise kills a load of people on US soil, the Trump fans will all scream TOLD YOU SO at anyone who objected to the ban. We can all sit here and patiently point out that the terrorists came from Saudi Arabia / were homegrown / wouldn't have been stopped by the ban, but nobody will listen and the Trump regime will have a mandate to not only implement even harsher restrictions on immigration, but to deport existing residents. Oh, and launch missile strikes on Yemen / Iran / whichever target Trump Fox News is discussing.

It's pretty chilling to see where this is heading.
What's more chilling is this:

One of the reasons we haven't had many terrorist attacks post 9-11 is because the DOJ and our intelligence communities have gotten pretty good at stopping them. Not because of idiotic things like muslim bans, but because of massive improvements in intelligence operations and law enforcement coooperation. IF the executive branch suddenly realizes that its politically advantageous for there to be a terrorist attack, some of these resources could be pulled back or downsized, allowing another attack.
02-04-2017 , 10:42 AM
Probably slow on this but "What Bannon Really Wants" is a good read. Bannon and Riverman have one shared belief (disdain for Boomers)
Quote:
Since this enlightened era, things have gradually gotten worse. (Hence the “crisis.”) The downward trend began with the 1960s and ’70s counterculture. “The baby boomers are the most spoiled, most self-centered, most narcissistic generation the country’s ever produced,” says Bannon in a 2011 interview.
https://qz.com/898134/what-steve-bannon-really-wants/
02-04-2017 , 10:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK

1. I am making this promise.
2. Now I am delivering on this promise.
lol.
02-04-2017 , 10:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by seattlelou
Probably slow on this but "What Bannon Really Wants" is a good read. Bannon and Riverman have one shared belief:


https://qz.com/898134/what-steve-bannon-really-wants/
Right. More stuff like this, seeing things as they really are. And more actually thinking about what you are doing.

I'm glad there are some people with brains still knocking around.
02-04-2017 , 10:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
In the first instance I think you have to pipe down, accept he won, re-group, think about what went wrong, think about how to beat him in four years.

Trump is one of the only politicians any of us have ever seen who does this:

1. I am making this promise.
2. Now I am delivering on this promise.

Now, given that, he's taking a huge risk with his base. If he cannot deliver his promise, if he screws things up, they will turn against him. If he doesn't, then hey ho, a good economy is a good thing right.

But if he does screw up, then you can start to really hurt him.

This stuff, this stuff right here, only makes him stronger.

He can turn and say "look, these elites are trying to stop the will of you, the people".

He can say "look, we were right, they are sore losers and they cannot take it, and they want to keep you down"

etc. etc.

Got to be smarter than this. If things continue this way, mark my words, Trump will win again. And after him someone like him again. And again.

And so on, until people learn the lessons of 2016.

Same here in the UK too.
So bend over and grab our ankles? No Mr. Chamberlain, we will not be doing that.
02-04-2017 , 10:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1
lol.
Why are you laughing? He literally campaigned on this stuff and now he's doing it?

Why is that a matter for laughter?

If you are so partisan you cannot even admit something as basic as that, you are coloured to the point where you are denying reality.

Is he building a wall? Did he try to control who was coming into the country? Is he levying tarrifs on companies trying to close down factories?

These are all things he said he'd do and he's doing them.

You may disagree with each policy, but don't deny that he's not doing what he said he would.

When you demonise people to the point where you cannot admit basic facts about them without twisting the truth or de facto posioning the well, you are no better than your opponents.
02-04-2017 , 10:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zikzak
So bend over and grab our ankles? No Mr. Chamberlain, we will not be doing that.
This is ridiculous hyperbole. Trump isn't Hitler in 1939 and he hasn't just invaded Poland.

Are you sure you aren't exageratting what has happened? Are you sure you have the analysis absolutely spot on here that you are dealing with the coming of the Anti-Christ?

How about calm down for five minutes? The more you get angry, the more you empower him.
02-04-2017 , 10:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
This is ridiculous hyperbole. Trump isn't Hitler in 1939 and he hasn't just invaded Poland.

Are you sure you aren't exageratting what has happened? Are you sure you have the analysis absolutely spot on here that you are dealing with the coming of the Anti-Christ?

How about calm down for five minutes? The more you get angry, the more you empower him.
You are really impressively bad at this.
02-04-2017 , 10:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
Yes.

And every time people do things like stop a Milo speaking at a university, or protest to the point where electoral promises are being overturned by judges ...

You vindicate Trump by making what he says correct -- literally putting him in the right, when he should be in the wrong.

I'm afriad by the time people on the left in general actually realise this -- that they have planned directly into the hands of Bannon's master strategy -- it will be too late.

It's what happens when people are partisan to the point where they are no longer really thinking about what they are doing or saying. Hence, widespread articles spinning their wheels about why it is ethically right to punch Nazis in the street or to stop someone from the alt right speaking at a university.

If you behave in a way that is no better than facists, and literally make them the victims, how do you ever expect to beat them?

You have to be smarter than that. I fear that no one can be or will be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
In the first instance I think you have to pipe down, accept he won, re-group, think about what went wrong, think about how to beat him in four years.

Trump is one of the only politicians any of us have ever seen who does this:

1. I am making this promise.
2. Now I am delivering on this promise.

Now, given that, he's taking a huge risk with his base. If he cannot deliver his promise, if he screws things up, they will turn against him. If he doesn't, then hey ho, a good economy is a good thing right.

But if he does screw up, then you can start to really hurt him.

This stuff, this stuff right here, only makes him stronger.

He can turn and say "look, these elites are trying to stop the will of you, the people".

He can say "look, we were right, they are sore losers and they cannot take it, and they want to keep you down"

etc. etc.

Got to be smarter than this. If things continue this way, mark my words, Trump will win again. And after him someone like him again. And again.

And so on, until people learn the lessons of 2016.

Same here in the UK too.
Quality posts. I think rebellion will achieve very little practically, it is probably more effective to just let him screw it up himself (inevitable at the rate he is going at) and politely ostracize those who support him. Then just let the same idiots who voted him in vote him out. Your outward anger only strengthens the oppositions conviction.

Realistically, this will never happen, so the question is who will America/Russia declare war with first.

NB. I think causing a huge ruckus could potentially oust Trump, but without letting him fail on his own accord I have a feeling he might just be replaced by a carbon copy.
02-04-2017 , 10:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwax13
I'm 30 years old; never struggled with anxiety, but it's been overwhelming me these last two weeks. I wake up every morning (after 4-5 hours of sleep) wondering if Trump has started WW3 yet. Anyone else having adult onset crippling anxiety due to this administration?
I wake up every morning wishing the people I know would talk about anything other than politics. Now I wish Hillary would've won just so everybody I personally know would stfu.
02-04-2017 , 10:56 AM
Why are Trumpists willing to accept the bizarre and outlandish conspiracy theories such as Soros paid protestors at the Women's March and airports?

Quote:
7. To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country. This is the origin of nationalism. Besides, the only ones who can provide an identity to the nation are its enemies. Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia. But the plot must also come from the inside: Jews are usually the best target because they have the advantage of being at the same time inside and outside. In the US, a prominent instance of the plot obsession is to be found in Pat Robertson’s The New World Order, but, as we have recently seen, there are many others.
One reason they got to this place:
Quote:
6. Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration. That is why one of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups. In our time, when the old “proletarians” are becoming petty bourgeois (and the lumpen are largely excluded from the political scene), the fascism of tomorrow will find its audience in this new majority.
Where does "Originalism" fit into all of this (ie Gorsuch, the far-right SC nominee):
Quote:
1. The first feature of Ur-Fascism is the cult of tradition. Traditionalism is of course much older than fascism. Not only was it typical of counter-revolutionary Catholic thought after the French revolution, but it was born in the late Hellenistic era, as a reaction to classical Greek rationalism. In the Mediterranean basin, people of different religions (most of them indulgently accepted by the Roman Pantheon) started dreaming of a revelation received at the dawn of human history. This revelation, according to the traditionalist mystique, had remained for a long time concealed under the veil of forgotten languages—in Egyptian hieroglyphs, in the Celtic runes, in the scrolls of the little known religions of Asia.

This new culture had to be syncretistic. Syncretism is not only, as the dictionary says, “the combination of different forms of belief or practice”; such a combination must tolerate contradictions. Each of the original messages contains a sliver of wisdom, and whenever they seem to say different or incompatible things it is only because all are alluding, allegorically, to the same primeval truth.

As a consequence, there can be no advancement of learning. Truth has been already spelled out once and for all, and we can only keep interpreting its obscure message.
Rejection of multiculturalism and diversity is becoming considered OK again by some people through the spread of Trumpism:
Quote:
2. Traditionalism implies the rejection of modernism. Both Fascists and Nazis worshiped technology, while traditionalist thinkers usually reject it as a negation of traditional spiritual values. However, even though Nazism was proud of its industrial achievements, its praise of modernism was only the surface of an ideology based upon Blood and Earth (Blut und Boden). The rejection of the modern world was disguised as a rebuttal of the capitalistic way of life, but it mainly concerned the rejection of the Spirit of 1789 (and of 1776, of course). The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.
Trumpists are happy with Trump so far because they can see that "he's a man of action", he "does what he says he's going to do" and "he doesn't wait, he goes in and makes the change and then lets the dust settle later":
Quote:
3. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action’s sake. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of Ur-Fascism, from Goering’s alleged statement (“When I hear talk of culture I reach for my gun”) to the frequent use of such expressions as “degenerate intellectuals,” “eggheads,” “effete snobs,” “universities are a nest of reds.” The official Fascist intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligentsia for having betrayed traditional values.
Trumpists fear "the other." Many Trumpists live in areas where there are very few people of color, immigrants, muslims, urban people, etc. They only know these people through messages and signals spread by the corporatist media. Much of that message is influenced by far right wing groups like Fox News. They take advantage of the lack of knowledge of their consumers and insert their own narrative where none exists.
Quote:
5. Besides, disagreement is a sign of diversity. Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks for consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.
Why are all Trumpist actions good as long as they irritate liberals, even if consumers (voters of Trump) actually realize they aren't economically practical, for example building a wall:
Quote:
9. For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle. Thus pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. It is bad because life is permanent warfare. This, however, brings about an Armageddon complex. Since enemies have to be defeated, there must be a final battle, after which the movement will have control of the world. But such a “final solution” implies a further era of peace, a Golden Age, which contradicts the principle of permanent war. No fascist leader has ever succeeded in solving this predicament.
What we have on our hands here is a new branch of fascism: Trumpism. It's got its own flavors but it's unmistakable.

Rhetoric has replaced reality:
Quote:
In 1942, at the age of ten, I received the First Provincial Award of Ludi Juveniles (a voluntary, compulsory competition for young Italian Fascists—that is, for every young Italian). I elaborated with rhetorical skill on the subject “Should we die for the glory of Mussolini and the immortal destiny of Italy?” My answer was positive. I was a smart boy.

I spent two of my early years among the SS, Fascists, Republicans, and partisans shooting at one another, and I learned how to dodge bullets. It was good exercise.
Freedom from rhetoric is true freedom:
Quote:
I was waiting for his speech because my whole childhood had been marked by the great historic speeches of Mussolini, whose most significant passages we memorized in school. Silence. Mimo spoke in a hoarse voice, barely audible. He said: “Citizens, friends. After so many painful sacrifices … here we are. Glory to those who have fallen for freedom.” And that was it. He went back inside. The crowd yelled, the partisans raised their guns and fired festive volleys. We kids hurried to pick up the shells, precious items, but I had also learned that freedom of speech means freedom from rhetoric.
Source:
Ur-Fascism by Umberto Eco
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/
02-04-2017 , 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
You are really impressively bad at this.
Alright let's do it your way. Good luck, good luck.
02-04-2017 , 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman220
What's more chilling is this:

One of the reasons we haven't had many terrorist attacks post 9-11 is because the DOJ and our intelligence communities have gotten pretty good at stopping them. Not because of idiotic things like muslim bans, but because of massive improvements in intelligence operations and law enforcement coooperation. IF the executive branch suddenly realizes that its politically advantageous for there to be a terrorist attack, some of these resources could be pulled back or downsized, allowing another attack.
This is something I've been musing about for a little while now. We are a long way from Putin-style poisoning of opponents etc, at least I hope anyway, but I wouldn't rule actions that indirectly increase the chance of some kind of attack in the US as the "downside" would be seen as having it's benefits.
02-04-2017 , 11:01 AM
If I was Trump right now, I would want there to be a terrorist attack.

To the point where I even wonder if Bannon and co wouldn't secretly set one up.

The potential up-side is enormous for them.
02-04-2017 , 11:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by np1235711
Having been in grade school during the aftermath of the Sputnik launch and the Cuban Missile Crisis, I have a pretty good feel what an actual serious threat of global thermonuclear war looks like, and IMO this ain't one of them.

Just sayin...
Which characteristics of Trump's temperament are the ones necessary to guide the nation through a Cuban missile-like crisis? Is it the petulance, vindictiveness, rashness or megalomania that we the people should take solace in?
02-04-2017 , 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
If I was Trump right now, I would want there to be a terrorist attack.

To the point where I even wonder if Bannon and co wouldn't secretly set one up.

The potential up-side is enormous for them.
Yes, pretty much everyone agrees with this.
02-04-2017 , 11:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson
Holy ****, this is getting scary.
tbf, he vowed to do it through the courts, not by ignoring the judge in Seattle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshfan
Yes, pretty much everyone agrees with this.
yep.
02-04-2017 , 11:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbfg
The chance that there is a terrorist attack on US soil that would have been prevented by the ban is really really low.

Maybe I just don't understand USA politics but if a USA-born muslim commits a suicide attack in a month this shouldn't change people their opinions on the ridiculous ban Trump tried to get through. It makes no difference.
Perception is reality. Trump lovers don't classify Muslims. To them brown is bad regardless of where they're from.

No matter how misguided or illogical it may be, any attack by a brown person will be used against the left and be justification for even broader bans. I wouldn't even be surprised if the administration allows an attack to happen or uses undercover agents to lure people into making such an attack.
02-04-2017 , 11:10 AM
I consider it a good sign the Admin has appealed last night's decision instead of telling the judge to **** off.
02-04-2017 , 11:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
If I was Trump right now, I would want there to be a terrorist attack.

To the point where I even wonder if Bannon and co wouldn't secretly set one up.

The potential up-side is enormous for them.
Getting caught would be too big a downside.
02-04-2017 , 11:12 AM
Why does Trump speak at the level of a Third grader?
Quote:
14. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. Newspeak was invented by Orwell, in 1984, as the official language of Ingsoc, English Socialism. But elements of Ur-Fascism are common to different forms of dictatorship. All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning. But we must be ready to identify other kinds of Newspeak, even if they take the apparently innocent form of a popular talk show.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/
02-04-2017 , 11:15 AM
I think Trump is a much more effective communicator than he's given credit for. Crystal clear messaging.

You may agree, you may disagree, but you know what he's saying.
02-04-2017 , 11:16 AM
What is our duty with regard to the ever-present and always renewing itself to meet the times threat of fascism (now Trumpism)?
Quote:
We must keep alert, so that the sense of these words will not be forgotten again. Ur-Fascism is still around us, sometimes in plainclothes. It would be so much easier, for us, if there appeared on the world scene somebody saying, “I want to reopen Auschwitz, I want the Black Shirts to parade again in the Italian squares.” Life is not that simple. Ur-Fascism can come back under the most innocent of disguises. Our duty is to uncover it and to point our finger at any of its new instances—every day, in every part of the world. Franklin Roosevelt’s words of November 4, 1938, are worth recalling: “I venture the challenging statement that if American democracy ceases to move forward as a living force, seeking day and night by peaceful means to better the lot of our citizens, fascism will grow in strength in our land.” Freedom and liberation are an unending task.
Quote:
Sulla spalletta del ponte
Le teste degli impiccati
Nell’acqua della fonte
La bava degli impiccati.

Sul lastrico del mercato
Le unghie dei fucilati
Sull’erba secca del prato
I denti dei fucilati.

Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi
La nostra carne non è più d’uomini
Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi
Il nostro cuore non è più d’uomini.

Ma noi s’è letto negli occhi dei morti
E sulla terra faremo libertà
Ma l’hanno stretta i pugni dei morti
La giustizia che si farà.

* * *

(On the bridge’s parapet
The heads of the hanged
In the flowing rivulet
The spittle of the hanged.

On the cobbles in the market- places
The fingernails of those lined up and shot
On the dry grass in the open spaces
The broken teeth of those lined up and shot.

Biting the air, biting the stones
Our flesh is no longer human
Biting the air, biting the stones
Our hearts are no longer human.

But we have read into the eyes of the dead
And shall bring freedom on the earth
But clenched tight in the fists of the dead
Lies the justice to be served.)
—poem translated by Stephen Sartarelli
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/
02-04-2017 , 11:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
I think Trump is a much more effective communicator than he's given credit for. Crystal clear messaging.

You may agree, you may disagree, but you know what he's saying.
If you mean he speaks the same mutant form of mangled English as most of his demented supporters, you have a point.
02-04-2017 , 11:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
I think Trump is a much more effective communicator than he's given credit for. Crystal clear messaging.

You may agree, you may disagree, but you know what he's saying.
doubt many would disagree


      
m