|
Cerebral Bore posted:yeah this is true. the republicans are an actual political party that has the goal of seizing and wielding power and its leadership has to accommodate its base I'm not a fan of democracy and don't advocate for it but I just figured it was worth mentioning that the republicans are what you want your party to look like. Libs act like the speaker poo poo this week makes the republicans look bad but all I see is a party having to accommodate its actual constituent factions to govern. And also let's be real here, as someone who hates the US I don't want the government to work either. captainbananas posted:The EPA is a great example of Nixon's intelligence continuing to baffle subsequent generations. He created it to centralize federal environmental activity so he (and future conservative presidents) could better exert political control over it. Set Ronnie and everyone else up on easy mode. I didn't want to type a response to this at Panda Express but now that I'm home I'd say that while Nixon may have intended that to be the case, subsequent conservative administrations weren't able to weaken the EPA at all. Inertia, public support, and surprisingly well-crafted legislation at its founding actually ensured that it accomplished far more than would have without its existence. It was only with the recent USSC ruling that any significant blow was struck against it, fifty-ish years on. The New Deal was dismantled faster than that. The important thing is that until Trump, no one from Reagan on has operated with the belief that government can do anything for the average person. Through that lens of course Nixon would be preferable to any option we've had, he was the last to do anything at all that wasn't just stripping the copper from the walls. The head of the empire is always going to be a piece of poo poo but if we're strictly measuring against others in the same position I'm not sure he'd be in the bottom ten, let's say.
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 20:07 |
|
|
ClassActionFursuit posted:I'm not a fan of democracy and don't advocate for it but I just figured it was worth mentioning that the republicans are what you want your party to look like. Libs act like the speaker poo poo this week makes the republicans look bad but all I see is a party having to accommodate its actual constituent factions to govern. The EPA was designed to head off real and aggressive enforcement agencies that were being pushed by the left. Like the kind of enforcement agencies that would have sign off authority on all commercial or industrial activities. While the EPA certainly turned out stronger than Nixon hoped, it was still vastly weaker than the other very real options being contemplated at the time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 22:49
|
|
|
This sounds like the old bullshit meme about republicans falling in line and democrats falling in love. The democrats run a far tighter party than the republicans. The republicans party establishment wanted to stop trump from becoming the candidate and they couldn't do it while the dems easily manipulated the process to control the candidacy. Fighting over the republican speaker position has been a total circus while dems fell in line hard even the supposed freshmen insurgents. The dems just use the old chaos excuse when there are policies they don't care about, but when it's time for foreign policy, defense spending, or lobbyist goals suddenly that chaos evaporates. Both parties are lockstep on foreign policy with almost no air between them and will always ignore what their supporters say. Isolationism has been broadly popular in the US since the founding, but today neither party tolerates anything but full-throated support for empire. Whatever dumb gently caress starve the beast rhetoric republicans might use when campaigning it has never affected defense spending or foreign policy (even back to Reagan). There have always been two federal governments. The domestic social safety net federal governments which dems say is far too weak to accomplish much and republicans say they want to dismantle. Then there's the foreign policy/border/justice/intelligence federal government that both parties love and want to dump unlimited money into and will never consider cutting any programs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 23:42
|
|
|
poisonpill posted:Buckley sounded smart; he could articulate logical premises and identify fallacies; was polite and had upper class mannerisms. essentially the diametric opposite of the modern gop not quite diametric because he was still just a vacuous angry bigot
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 06:04
|
|
|
ClassActionFursuit posted:I'm not a fan of democracy and don't advocate for it but I just figured it was worth mentioning that the republicans are what you want your party to look like. Libs act like the speaker poo poo this week makes the republicans look bad but all I see is a party having to accommodate its actual constituent factions to govern. what the gently caress is this what the gently caress are you Trabisnikof posted:The EPA was designed to head off real and aggressive enforcement agencies that were being pushed by the left. Like the kind of enforcement agencies that would have sign off authority on all commercial or industrial activities. While the EPA certainly turned out stronger than Nixon hoped, it was still vastly weaker than the other very real options being contemplated at the time. stronger than nixon intended is, at best, damning with faint praise. as you know based on the rest of your post, but the median post reader may not so im gonna be annoying and repeat, is that the EPA has always been and will always be a half-hobbled limped-dick response to the unambiguous environmental shithow that everyone posting here has lived through. if you think it is progress then you need to get your fuckin facts straight.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 06:09
|
|
|
and the broader volley of post-1960s right wing revanchist policymaking, to bring things back full circle, is both a clear and central causal factor for why the us will lose ww3
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 06:12
|
|
|
Is there a term for that kind of sociopolitical wrangling? Where you make a lovely version of what people are clamoring for in order to suck the air out of a social or political movement. I think Obamacare would be another example, the democrats passed a health insurance reform law in order to quiet the calls for actual health care reform.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 06:24
|
|
|
captainbananas posted:what the gently caress is this what the gently caress are you they're saying that democracy is bad but if want to do things in one it is beneficial if the other people you decide to do things with can or want to do things. where'd you get stuck
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 06:25
|
|
|
BearsBearsBears posted:Is there a term for that kind of sociopolitical wrangling? Where you make a lovely version of what people are clamoring for in order to suck the air out of a social or political movement. I think Obamacare would be another example, the democrats passed a health insurance reform law in order to quiet the calls for actual health care reform. wrecking
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 06:30
|
|
|
BearsBearsBears posted:Is there a term for that kind of sociopolitical wrangling? Where you make a lovely version of what people are clamoring for in order to suck the air out of a social or political movement. I think Obamacare would be another example, the democrats passed a health insurance reform law in order to quiet the calls for actual health care reform. Democracy
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 07:42
|
|
|
Don't worry rest of the world, you can probably still buy guns from China and Russia. Might need to use a brics bank though. I don't know who that export ban was supposed to affect. Mexico?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 07:59
|
|
|
for every gun that arrives in ukraine one falls off the truck and ends up in israel, two end up with the taliban, and the last is used by hamas
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 08:14
|
|
|
BearsBearsBears posted:Is there a term for that kind of sociopolitical wrangling? Where you make a lovely version of what people are clamoring for in order to suck the air out of a social or political movement. I think Obamacare would be another example, the democrats passed a health insurance reform law in order to quiet the calls for actual health care reform. The Aristocrats!
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 08:19
|
|
|
BearsBearsBears posted:Is there a term for that kind of sociopolitical wrangling? Where you make a lovely version of what people are clamoring for in order to suck the air out of a social or political movement. I think Obamacare would be another example, the democrats passed a health insurance reform law in order to quiet the calls for actual health care reform. Bismarck gave people lovely social insurance in order to undercut the socialist left. Not sure if he was the first though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 14:19
|
|
|
BearsBearsBears posted:Is there a term for that kind of sociopolitical wrangling? Where you make a lovely version of what people are clamoring for in order to suck the air out of a social or political movement. I think Obamacare would be another example, the democrats passed a health insurance reform law in order to quiet the calls for actual health care reform. Sheepdogging.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 14:37
|
|
|
Nixon ftw
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 14:55
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Nixon ftw honestly this. dude was having fun. knew how to skulldug. knew what he was about. knew his history. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMfVnBmpMm8
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 14:58
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:The EPA was designed to head off real and aggressive enforcement agencies that were being pushed by the left. Like the kind of enforcement agencies that would have sign off authority on all commercial or industrial activities. While the EPA certainly turned out stronger than Nixon hoped, it was still vastly weaker than the other very real options being contemplated at the time. Obviously this is true but I guess what I'd say is that what we ended up with in the EPA is fine considering de-industrialization ended up doing the rest of the work for us. Put another way, considering how much cleaner everything is compared with where we started I'm not certain more was needed. When it comes to zero-sum policies like this where the ideal positions from the two sides are all and nothing, one has to accept that the best you can do is never enough from either perspective.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 15:08
|
|
|
ClassActionFursuit posted:considering how much cleaner everything is compared with where we started I'm not certain more was needed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 16:41
|
|
|
ClassActionFursuit posted:Obviously this is true but I guess what I'd say is that what we ended up with in the EPA is fine considering de-industrialization ended up doing the rest of the work for us. Put another way, considering how much cleaner everything is compared with where we started I'm not certain more was needed. have you heard anything about climate change op?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 16:54
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:what? how is everything cleaner?? the cars got a lot cleaner at least
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 16:56
|
|
|
Megamissen posted:the cars got a lot cleaner at least no car was made of plastic before the EPA
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 16:58
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:no car was made of plastic before the EPA in terms of how dirty they are when running, idk if that has anything to do with the epa but you dont have the thicker smellier exhaust that old cars had anymore
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 17:01
|
|
|
Megamissen posted:in terms of how dirty they are when running, idk if that has anything to do with the epa but you dont have the thicker smellier exhaust that old cars had anymore yes. the EPA/clean air act made catalytic converters a standard thing. they existed before but that legislation actually did make manufacturers put them on cars. also i think that was some of the first successful curtailing of leaded gasoline around the same time. nixon was nixon and the us isn't going to win any wars or awards these days but early EPA is a pretty silly thing to criticize compared to almost everything else you could. bringing up greenhouse gases and plastic is pretty funny
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 17:12
|
|
|
well yeah if you don't consider the largest pollutant a pollutant then things look positively rosy! just like inflation if you ignore housing and food
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 17:15
|
|
|
Cuttlefush posted:yes. the EPA/clean air act made catalytic converters a standard thing. they existed before but that legislation actually did make manufacturers put them on cars. also i think that was some of the first successful curtailing of leaded gasoline around the same time. nixon was nixon and the us isn't going to win any wars or awards these days but early EPA is a pretty silly thing to criticize compared to almost everything else you could. bringing up greenhouse gases and plastic is pretty funny the epa is overseeing the regime of electric cars which are killing the fish harder because they're so heavy the tires wear down way faster. shut it down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 17:16
|
|
|
Dommolus Magnus posted:Bismarck gave people lovely social insurance in order to undercut the socialist left. Not sure if he was the first though. every poor person in rome declared they'd rather live in the wilderness of a sacred mountain than continue to abide life under a hierarchical and cruel oligarchical republic and the romans gave them the tribunes of the plebs (a few guys they could bribe or assassinate that on paper could deter abuses) instead of full political rights and the suckers came back home
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 17:22
|
|
|
being a Roman citizen living in the city might have been the best life any human ever had except for post-WWII European socialism
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 17:27
|
|
|
not in 494 bce
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 17:30
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:the epa is overseeing the regime of electric cars which are killing the fish harder because they're so heavy the tires wear down way faster. shut it down. not in 1970 you dumbass Gunshow Poophole posted:well yeah if you don't consider the largest pollutant a pollutant then things look positively rosy! just like inflation if you ignore housing and food take whatever dumb poo poo this is to succ or something. broken rear end brain cannot handle the rigors of talking about things that happened in the past
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 17:31
|
|
|
Cuttlefush posted:not in 1970 you dumbass the epa preceded all this and worked to make it happen. they're chuds.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 17:34
|
|
|
tbh settle down im just posting ... I would never let the perfect be the enemy of the good
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 17:35
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:what? how is everything cleaner?? In the 1970s you couldn't even see most major cities in the US, it was just a cloud of smog surrounding them. Just a quick Google confirms that since the Clean Air Act, pollution is about 20% of what it was. I'm old enough to have lived through most of this period and it's not even close. Could it be better? Again, everything could in theory always be better, but the distance we traveled is pretty amazing and certainly more than we could manage today with today's political environment. fart simpson posted:have you heard anything about climate change op? The EPA or anything like it was never going to do anything for climate change. The things we'd have to do to abate climate change, like moving to cleaner forms of energy production and designing our cities around such ideas aren't in the purview of the EPA and even the stated aims of the environmental movement of that time were opposed to building the kind of infrastructure we'd have needed to build, such as more nuclear plants and wind farms. The EPA certainly wasn't going to stop white flight, which locked in cars as the only viable form of transport. I guess I have different expectations for environmental legislation written in the 70s than someone coming to the table 50 years later.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 17:41
|
|
|
ClassActionFursuit posted:I guess I have different expectations for environmental legislation written in the 70s than someone coming to the table 50 years later. your mistake, indeed. if the environmental legislation of 1970 didn’t perfectly address your concerns in 2023, it was completely bad and wrong and worse than nothing
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 18:03
|
|
|
ww3
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 18:17
|
|
|
ClassActionFursuit posted:In the 1970s you couldn't even see most major cities in the US, it was just a cloud of smog surrounding them. Just a quick Google confirms that since the Clean Air Act, pollution is about 20% of what it was. I'm old enough to have lived through most of this period and it's not even close. that 20% figure isn't every kind of pollution OP, its missing things like greenhouse gasses or microplastics. "The EPA or anything like it was never going to do anything for climate change" is both wrong (the EPA in fact has issued ruling on greenhouse gasses) and also not responsive to the idea that better and more empowered regulators would have had climate change and any emerging environmental hazard as part of their remit. that was in the realm of the politically possible, especially if Nixon hadn't stolen reelection or there had been a few less assassinations. you are correct to point out that even as pro-business and self-serving as the EPA is, that we couldn't do it now, is correct. and that lack of institutional strength is why we can't expect the US to be able to do anything new that's required to win ww3
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 18:42
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:you are correct to point out that even as pro-business and self-serving as the EPA is, that we couldn't do it now, is correct. and that lack of institutional strength is why we can't expect the US to be able to do anything new that's required to win ww3 Which brings me to the whole reason I read this thread--when is someone going to prove that we can't win WW3?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 18:58
|
|
|
ClassActionFursuit posted:Which brings me to the whole reason I read this thread--when is someone going to prove that we can't win WW3? most pages of this thread. recent history. happens pretty frequently
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 19:09
|
|
|
ClassActionFursuit posted:Which brings me to the whole reason I read this thread--when is someone going to prove that we can't win WW3? Looks like Hezbollah might be the first to try
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 19:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 20:07 |
|
|
Inshallah
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2023 01:10
|
|