Mel Mudkiper posted:

Yes, but even then, posit a future in which its not someone's boot. As I said before and you never responded to, nations are fundamentally unethical. The very concept of the nation is an unethical conceit. The US is only unethical in its power because it has power. Any nation put into the position of a global superpower would be as bad as us, if not worse, because it is the nature of nations to exploit those weaker than themselves.

You cannot simply remove America from the equation of global power and expect a better world because someone else will just fill that vacuum and considering the nations likely to fill that void, I would not be thrilled with the replacement. The best way to make the world better is to push the established power bases as far left as you can. However, that is not going to happen through any sort of radical event. You push for the best choice in the primary, and then pick the best remaining choice in the national election. It's not a great solution, but I have not seen a pragmatic solution that is better.

the trump tutelage posted:

Is this supposed to be a defense? That her opponents are successful at persuading people of distrusting her?

CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:

You're right, we can have progress next year.

Bob le Moche posted:

Bernie Sanders actually showed better chances against Trump than Hillary did in the polls. The large swarths of angry disenfranchised people want socialism, not barbarism.

Fascism is what happens when you let the "moderate" party of liberal capitalists completely suppress any and all leftist alternatives to it. Hitler was not elected, he was appointed chancellor by a supposedly moderate and pragmatic government.

Bob le Moche posted:

Bernie Sanders actually showed better chances against Trump than Hillary did in the polls.

Bob le Moche posted:

The large swarths of angry disenfranchised people want socialism, not barbarism.

Bob le Moche posted:

Fascism is what happens when you let the "moderate" party of liberal capitalists completely suppress any and all leftist alternatives to it.

Mel Mudkiper posted:

Bernie Sanders also never had his policies vetted on a national stage like Clinton did.

CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:

You're right, we can have progress next year.

TomViolence posted:

I dream of one day allowing people in western Pakistan to have open air weddings again. Some day in the far future, of course, because America just isn't ready yet.

menino posted:

Except for that 14 month primary thing. He has a 91% awareness and +25 favorability.

Mel Mudkiper posted:

Explain how a destabilized US is better off in the long term for the world than a stable one

Buckwheat Sings posted:

Propaganda is a powerful drug. Notice how people keep going on about the whole email thing without being able to bring anything of substance?

Mel Mudkiper posted:

Because if America was gone Pakistan would be safe from foreign intervention?

TomViolence posted:

Everywhere in the world would be much safer if the Great Satan just hosed off yes. That's not even remotely controversial.

the trump tutelage posted:

A destabilized America may prompt election reform

the trump tutelage posted:

A destabilized America may prompt election reform.

TomViolence posted:

Everywhere in the world would be much safer if the Great Satan just hosed off yes. That's not even remotely controversial.

sarmhan posted:

Holy poo poo you really are a naive child aren't you?
Enjoy a return to pre-MAD politics.

Mel Mudkiper posted:

Why do you imagine America loving off would leave a vacuum that would remain unfilled?

Do you really think China or Russia would just leave the world alone in our absence?

There has never been a point in world history where a superpower has not exploited weaker nations. Removing America from the equation doesn't end imperial exploitation any more than removing England and France in the early 20th century did. No matter what there is going to be imperialism in a global economy. Push to make the system fairer and better, don't just reshuffle the deck.

Mel Mudkiper posted:

Because if America was gone Pakistan would be safe from foreign intervention?

Mel Mudkiper posted:

Hello, allow me to introduce you to the Tea Party

TomViolence posted:

Eifert Posting posted:

Bob le Moche posted:

Hillary Clinton is making no effort at all to distance herself from the ideological basis of movements like the tea party. The tea party exists because the American ruling class, democrat and republican, have been feeding a nationalist, bourgeois-worshipping, white supremacist ideology to them since forever and they end up believing it.

the trump tutelage posted:

A destabilized America may prompt election reform. Otherwise, we get to the terminus of your preference a lot faster. I'm really not persuaded by a "We're as good as you can expect!" argument for American imperialism.

quote:

No. However, outside of the Fox News circlejerk, I've noticed a lot of substance being brought forward that is casually dismissed.

sarmhan posted:

Mel already said it, but the US 'loving off' would just leave a massive power vaccum that'd lead to wars and global realignment behind other, worse imperial powers.

TomViolence posted:

Are you trying to say the US, like Hillary Clinton, is some sort of necessary evil?

I didn't think you guys still bought that World Police bullshit. I thought we were at least somewhat on the same page.

TomViolence posted:

Nice exceptionalism you've got there.

quote:

I'd much prefer a multipolar world rather than everywhere outside of the US being treated like a backyard full of abused toys personally. I mean maybe things are different, living in America, being dripfed constantly the idea that your nation is a world unto itself and the wild Mad Max-like wasteland beyond its fringes is something that needs to be managed and contained via the blunt instruments of a belligerent and overbearing foreign policy.

TomViolence posted:

I didn't think you guys still bought that World Police bullshit. I thought we were at least somewhat on the same page.

Lemming posted:

Again, the Democratic party platform is more progressive this year than it's basically ever been. Progress is being made, you just don't understand it because you care more about feeling superior to people than in improving things.

Eifert Posting posted:

Now those of his supporters who liked his actual policies and not his image only have to vote for the people who have agreed to support the platform. This primary has represented the biggest victory for progressives in my adult life.

Eifert Posting posted:

Reminder: By any metric that accounts for worldwide population growth this is the most bloodless era in recorded human history.

Bob le Moche posted:

If Hillary Clinton comes out and makes statements along the following lines:

- America is not the best nation on earth
- The founding fathers are not heroes
- Capitalism is not good for workers
- America stands on indigenous territory and was built by slaves

Then she will have my vote. Otherwise I consider her a collaborator and part of the reason why the Tea Party and Trump exist

Bob le Moche posted:

If Hillary Clinton comes out and makes statements along the following lines:

- America is not the best nation on earth
- The founding fathers are not heroes
- Capitalism is not good for workers
- America stands on indigenous territory and was built by slaves

Then she will have my vote. Otherwise I consider her a collaborator and part of the reason why the Tea Party and Trump exist

sarmhan posted:

Since when does "Without the threat of US intervention other world powers would be much freer and willing to wage war" equate to Bush-era World Police bullshit?

Mel Mudkiper posted:

How is it exceptionalism to agree that America is the current dominant superpower? That's exactly what you have been saying this entire time.

We live in a multipolar world already. US is the strongest, but China and Russia are also carving up their own portions of the globe to exploit. Removing the United States doesn't make geopolitics multipolar, it turns a three way struggle into a two way struggle. If you think the US is the only one currently exploiting the globe with overbearing foreign policy you are irreparably ignorant.

I don't know how you got "world police" from pointing out that contemporary geopolitics will inherently birth exploitative superpowers whether or not its the US. We're not arguing the US should be uniquely responsible for governing the world, we are pointing out that removing America wouldn't change the nature of imperialism, just change the players.

Mel Mudkiper posted:

Ok cool, enjoy riding your ethical superiority to historical irrelevance I guess?

Eifert Posting posted:

We are.

sarmhan posted:

Wow you really are the living example of someone who is so deeply concerned with ideological purity they will actively work against progressive policies. The perfect is the enemy of the good indeed.

sarmhan posted:

Wow you really are the living example of someone who is so deeply concerned with ideological purity they will actively work against progressive policies. The perfect is the enemy of the good indeed.

Bob le Moche posted:

Except I am actively working towards progressive policies in my political life, whereas what you seem to be doing is coming up with reasons why people like me should feel ashamed for that and align ourselves with a politician that we consider to be opposed to everything we stand for

sarmhan posted:

No one has said you should stop working FOR progressive policies, or completely align yourself with Hillary. People are saying that fighting against her now is self-destructive and stupid when she is the only hope in this election for progressive policies to actually happen on a broad basis.

Bob le Moche posted:

I'm pretty confident that all my problems with Hillary are very clearly things that Trump is not better at, and that me openly speaking out about them will not cause anyone to vote for Trump

TomViolence posted:

Oh, the system is there and I can't dispute that. I can, however, argue that the existence of such a system should not by itself justify itself. America, China, Russia, these empires do not get to be empires just because "contemporary geopolitics" dictate, that system of contemporary geopolitics is a product of their imperial staus. I can and will get cancer because of the laws of science, it shouldn't mean that cancer has to be accepted and that efforts should not be undertaken to cure it. It also means I'm well within my rights hating cancer and wanting it to gently caress off and considering my life better without it.

sarmhan posted:

Bullshit. Any system of ethics would call this out for being lovely behavior, because you're putting personal hangups over the general good.