|
The Kingfish posted:I just realized that Bernie and Warren are the leaders of the party now. it ought to be the case but who knows if it is. im not seeing any emails. i think bernie might be grouching by the lake
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 01:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 18:07 |
|
|
https://usuncut.com/politics/bernie-sanders-vows-stop-donald-trump/quote:In a viral Facebook post, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) has vowed to do everything in his power to block President-elect Trump’s agenda. Bernie posted:Donald Trump tapped into the anger of a declining middle class that is sick and tired of establishment economics, establishment politics and the establishment media. People are tired of working longer hours for lower wages, of seeing decent paying jobs go to China and other low-wage countries, of billionaires not paying any federal income taxes and of not being able to afford a college education for their kids - all while the very rich become much richer.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
JOSÉ SARAMAGO’S SEEING TELLS THE STORY OF THE STRANGE EVENTS in the unnamed capital city of an unidentified democratic country. When the election day morning is marred by torrential rains, voter turnout is disturbingly low, but the weather breaks by mid-afternoon and the population heads en masse to their voting stations. The government's relief is short-lived, however, when vote counting reveals that over 70 percent of the ballots cast in the capital have been left blank. Baffled by this apparent civic lapse, the government gives the citizenry a chance to make amends just one week later with another election day. The results are worse: Now 83 percent of the ballots are blank. Is this an organized conspiracy to overthrow not just the ruling government but the entire democratic system? If so, who is behind it, and how did they manage to organize hundreds of thousands of people into such subversion without being noticed? The city continues to function near-normally throughout, the people parrying each of the government's thrusts in inexplicable unison and with a truly Gandhian level of nonviolent resistance. The lesson of this thought-experiment is clear: the danger today is not passivity but pseudo-activity, the urge to “be active,” to “participate,” in order to mask the vacuity of what goes on. People intervene all the time. People “do something.” Academics participate in meaningless debates, and so on. The truly difficult thing is to step back, to withdraw. Those in power often prefer even a “critical” participation, a dialogue, to silence, because just to engage us in dialogue, is to make sure our ominous passivity is broken. The voters’ abstention is thus a true political act: it forcefully confronts us with the vacuity of today’s democracies. This, exactly, is how citizens should act when faced with the choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. When Stalin was asked in the late 1920s which deviation is worse, the Rightist one or the Leftist one, he snapped back: They are both worse! Is it not the same with the choice American voters are confronting in the 2016 presidential elections? Trump is obviously “worse.” He enacts a decay of public morality. He promises a Rightist turn. But he at least promises a change. Hillary is “worse” since she makes changing nothing look desirable. With such a choice, one should not lose ones nerve and chose the “worst,” which means change—even if is a dangerous change—because it opens up the space for a different more authentic change. The point is thus not to vote for Trump—not only should one not vote for such a scum, one should not even participate in such elections. The point is to approach coldly the question: Whose victory is better for the fate of the radical emancipatory project, Clinton’s or Trump’s? Trump wants to make America great again, to which Obama responded that America already is great. But is it? Can a country in which a person like Trump has a chance of becoming president be really considered great? The dangers of a Trump presidency are obvious: he not only promises to nominate conservative judges to the Supreme Court; he mobilized the darkest white-supremacist circles and openly flirts with anti-immigrant racism; he flouts basic rules of decency and symbolizes the disintegration of basic ethical standards; while advocating concern for the misery of ordinary people, he effectively promotes a brutal neoliberal agenda that includes tax breaks for the rich, further deregulation, etc., etc. Trump is a vulgar opportunist, yet he is still a vulgar specimen of humanity (in contrast to entities like Ted Cruz or Rick Santorum whom I suspect of being aliens). What Trump is definitely not is a successful productive and innovative capitalist—he excels at getting into bankruptcy and then making the taxpayers cover up his debts. Liberals panicked by Trump dismiss the idea that Trump’s eventual victory can start a process out of which an authentic Left would emerge. Their favorite counterargument is a reference to Hitler. Many German Communists welcomed the Nazi takeover in 1933 as a chance for the radical Left as the only force which can defeat them. As we know, their appreciation of Hitler’s rise was a catastrophic mistake. The question is: Are things the same with Trump? Is Trump a danger that should bring together a broad front in the same way that Hitler did, a front where “decent” conservatives and libertarians fight together with mainstream liberal progressives and (whatever remains of) the radical Left? Fredric Jameson was right in a November 4 interview to warn against the hasty designation of the Trump movement as new fascism: “People are now saying—this is a new fascism and my answer would be—not yet. If Trump comes to power, that would be a different thing.” (Incidentally, the term “fascism” is today often used as an empty word when something obviously dangerous appears on the political scene but we lack a proper understanding of it. No, today's rightwing populists are NOT simply Fascists!) Why not yet? First, the fear that a Trump victory would turn the United State into a fascist state is a ridiculous exaggeration. The United States has such a rich texture of divergent civic and political institutions that their Gleichschaltung (the standardization of political, economic, cultural and social institutions as carried out in authoritarian states) cannot be enacted. Where, then, does this fear come from? Its function is clearly to unify us all against Trump and thus to obfuscate the true political divisions that run between the Left, as resuscitated by Bernie Sanders, and Clinton who is the establishment’s candidate supported by a rainbow coalition that includes neocon Iraq War advocates like President George W. Bush’s Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and interventionists like Ronald Reagan’s Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy Richard Armitage. Second, the fact remains that Trump draws support from the same rage out of which Bernie Sanders mobilized his partisans. The majority of his supporters view him as the anti-establishment candidate. And one should never forget that popular rage is by definition free-floating and can be re-directed. Liberals who fear the Trump victory are not really afraid of a radical Rightist turn. What they are really afraid of is actual radical social change. To repeat Robespierre, they admit (and are sincerely worried about) the injustices of our social life, but they want to cure them with a “revolution without revolution” (in exact parallel to today's consumerism which offers coffee without caffeine, chocolate without sugar, beer without alcohol, multiculturalism without conflict, etc.): a vision of social change with no actual change, a change where no one gets really hurt, where well-meaning liberals remain cocooned in their safe enclaves. Back in 1937, George Orwell in The Road to Wigan Pier wrote: We all rail against class-distinctions, but very few people seriously want to abolish them. Here you come upon the important fact that every revolutionary opinion draws part of its strength from a secret conviction that nothing can be changed. Orwell’s point is that radicals invoke the need for revolutionary change as a kind of superstitious token that should achieve the opposite, i.e., prevent the only change that really matters, the change in those who rule us, from occurring. Who really rules in the United States? Can we not already hear the murmur of secret meetings where members of the financial and other “elites” are negotiating about the distribution of the key posts in the Clinton administration? To get an idea how this negotiations in the shadows work, it suffices to read the John Podesta emails or Hillary Clinton: The Goldman Sachs Speeches (to appear soon by OR Books with an introduction by Julian Assange). Hillary’s victory would be the victory of a status quo overshadowed by the prospect of a new world war (and Hillary definitely is a typical Democratic cold warrior), a status quo of a situation in which we gradually but inevitably slide towards ecological, economic, humanitarian and other catastrophes. That’s why I consider Ian Steinman’s “Leftist” critique of my position extremely cynical. He writes: Yet while we can do little to predict how the pieces will fall, we know that to intervene in a crisis the left must be organized, prepared and with support among the working class and oppressed. We can not in any way endorse the vile racism and sexism which divides us and weakens our struggle. We must always stand on the side of the oppressed, and we must be independent, fighting for a real left exit to the crisis. Even if Trump causes a catastrophe for the ruling class, it will also be a catastrophe for us if we have not laid the foundations for our own intervention. True, the left “must be organized, prepared and with support among the working class and oppressed”—but in this case, the question should be: Which candidate's victory would contribute more to the organization of the Left and its expansion? Isn’t it clear that Trump's victory would have “laid the foundations for our own intervention” much more than Hillary’s? Yes, there is a great danger in Trump's victory, but the Left will be mobilized only through such a threat of catastrophe. If we continue the inertia of the existing status quo, there will for sure be no Leftist mobilization. To quote the poet Hoelderlin: “Only where there is danger the saving force is also rising.” In the choice between Clinton and Trump, neither “stands on the side of the oppressed,” so the real choice is: abstain from voting or choose the one who, worthless as s/he is, opens up a greater chance of unleashing a new political dynamics which can lead to massive Leftist radicalization. Think about Trump’s anti-establishment supporters who would be unavoidably upset with Trump’s presidency. Some of them would have to turn towards Sanders in order to find an outlet for their rage. Think about the disappointed mainstream Democrats who would have seen how Clinton’s centrist strategy failed to win even against an extreme figure like Trump. The lesson they would learn would be that sometimes, to win, the strategy of “we are all together” doesn’t work and we should instead introduce a radical division. Many poor voters claim Trump speaks for them. How can they recognize themselves in the voice of a billionaire whose speculations and failures are one of the causes of their misery? Like the paths of god, the paths of ideology are mysterious. When Trump supporters are denounced as “white trash,” it is easy to discern in this designation the fear of the lower classes so characteristic of the liberal elite. The title and subtitle of a Guardian report of a recent Trump electoral meeting puts it this way: “Inside a Donald Trump rally: good people in a feedback loop of paranoia and hate. Trump’s crowd is full of honest and decent people—but the Republican’s invective has a chilling effect on fans of his one-man show.” But how did Trump become the voice of so many “honest and decent” people? Trump single-handedly ruined the Republican Party, antagonizing both the old party establishment and the Christian fundamentalists—what remains as the core of his support are the bearers of the populist rage versus the establishment, and this core is dismissed by liberals as the “white trash”—but are they not precisely those that should be won over to the radical Leftist cause (this is what Bernie Sanders was able to do). One should rid oneself of the false panic, fearing the Trump victory as the ultimate horror which makes us support Clinton in spite of all her obvious shortcomings. Fat-Lip-Sum-41.mp3 has issued a correction as of 02:25 on Nov 10, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
Glenn Quebec posted:Hillary lost because she came off goofy. She acted all friendly and it came off stilted. Like, look lady, we know you're a hardened career politician -- act like Margaret Thatcher and be an enormous tough bitch. Her image loving sucked and came off disingenuous. Looking forward to Chelsea 2020. ha i just tried to picture Chelsea and thought she must have gotten plastic surgery or something because she looked good, then i realized i was thinking about Ivanka.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Campaigning on a message of Sanity didn't work What, you don't remember? "I go, you go." Obama went, now Trump goes.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
Cubey posted:yeah it was very very flawed and needed loads of work but it was way better than what we had. losing it will not help make healthcare better fast, it will accomplish literally the opposite. going back to square 1 does not benefit anyone. Fortunately it can't just be repealed since the health industry requires it to function. It has to be replaced with something comprehensive. My guess is the republicans won't bother with that, so in the end it will be tweaked.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 03:27
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:I got terrible news for you. The healthcare provider I used to work for privately decided to leave the exchange awhile back because it just wasnt worth it. They also had a lot of employers convert plans to HSAs and private plans to avoid ACA regulations, and it was apparently really easy to get exemptions from ACA regulations for the remaining plans. I think many health insurers could shut down their exchange plans in a startlingly short amount of time. You can't avoid all ACA regulations. It's full of nuts-and-bolts stuff. As I understand it, it isn't just a layer of regulation over a pre-existing framework, it IS also the framework. That's why you can't just pass an act that says "ACA is repealed."
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:Part of why she was such a bogeyman for the old boys. They wouldn't be having fun at all when it was turned into an old girls club Human Resources is already this.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:it doesn't matter what trump will do. whatever trump does doesn't change the fact that the democratic party betrayed the working class in these states. of course it does. the rust belters who give him votes are not going to wait long for results. if trump doesnt show them something in 18 months, they'll be done with him. the democratic party has to be ready. thats why they are already voicing support for trump's working class promises. popular rage can be redirected.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
it used to be just that, when the democratic party was the party of landowning farmers.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
Howard Dean is Iron Man Kieth Ellison is Captain America Bernie Sanders is Nick Fury i havent seen the movie
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
So what are the victorious 2020 progressive democrats going to do with a national debt of more than 30% gdp? Infrastructure will happen and the republicans aren't gonna pay for it. Gen Z is getting older, time to open credit cards in their name.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
BUSH 2112 posted:if you don't think zionists should be allowed to commit war crimes YOU ARE UNAMERICAN, SIR i think the, "what are you gonna do, vote trump?" argument only really works on the jewish bloc. so that's a plus.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
trigger warning: wokeness incoming https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bixgOtkLao
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Why the gently caress won't he stop wiping his nose? Woke Syndrome
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
mrmcd posted:I think it's kind of interesting, as a newly reformed hillbot who signed the Keith petition, is that the first email list spam I got from Bernie was asking me to get more people involved and included no appeal for money. probably mulling over where they would put it. There's Our Revolution, which was raising funds right up to the Trump victory, and that was, I think, intended to fuel selected progressive democratic candidates during Hillary's presidency. But with Trump in charge and the DNC under possible progressive control... Fat-Lip-Sum-41.mp3 has issued a correction as of 14:11 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
quote:Here's the thing, Hillary Clinton did try to reach out to the Sanders voters with policy concessions, but Sanders voters, especially his most activist core, are process people. They're not policy wonks. They're people who want big money out of politics. They're people who want fairness from the DNC Chair. They're people who want every vote to count. They're the people who don't like Wall Street money. Right? They're primarily about the process of politics and whether or not it's fair and whether or not big money elites are rigging things in your favor. They don't care how many zeroes you add onto your promised education college policy, if they don't trust you in the first place. Hillary floated a $10 billion plan to help some people get some degrees. People aren't fooled by "big numbers" like $10 billion when AIG got $182 billion. Iraq war? $2 trillion. Bank Bailouts? $700 billion . Education for the people? $10 billion GEE WHIZ THANKS HILLARY YOU'RE THE BEST
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Any fear of Trump's realization at the enormity of the job and basically nothing getting done, need not worry! I'm the photo of part of the statue of liberty hung within skeeting distance of geogre washington's portrait
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
Is Bernie's book a snappy 50 pages of normal print like Trump's book and how many celebrities does he dish on
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
jackofarcades posted:Bernie didn't connect with a lot of POC voters in the primary and we gotta figure out why if he's going to be leading the charge going forward. He's an old yankee Jew, the Clintons were from the drat South, the majority of Black leaders were #wither, and it was believed that Obama tacitly supported the Clinton campaign. Also Southern states are large and well-populated, unliked the midwest which is large and sparsely populated. It takes a long rear end time to visit every community in the South, which is what Bernie would have had to do just so people would know who the hell he was. He didn't have time.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
etalian posted:Trump supporters attacked the cast of SV at a LA bar and got thrown out You can't say "cuck" out loud in real life. Just like you don't say "epic fail." What is wrong with people? Stop speaking Internet in the real world.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
https://keithfordnc.org/ Come to sunny Keith Ford, North Carolina.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:Extremely intelligent person: Voting for Trump is a vote for racism and anti-environmentalism *climbs into electric car manufactured in some of the most brutal conditions in a developed nation and speeds off* what is it like one guy running back and forth to oil the robots without getting crushed
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
Is there any loving way to sideline Soros and the Koch from politics permanently? Can we unironically stuff them on a resort island, like in the Prisoner? "You are here because you have too much drat money."
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 04:12
|
|
|
MrCussMustard posted:IMO a president is cheapened by using Twitter in the first place. It's the sort of thing that leads to the popularity contest mentality that's taken over. Now watch me whip. Watch me nae nae. Look how fun and cool I am. I disagree. Trump's tweets wield awesome power. If I was a head of state, I'd be drat careful about meeting with the Donald. If the meeting goes badly, in all likelihood Trump will tweet within seconds and the entire world will know. I mean the ENTIRE WORLD. Instantly. Trump's twitter account is the singularity.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
Zythrst posted:Or just use it like Bernie as more time in the day to be stumpin! It's interesting the way they use it. Trump uses Twitter as his Id broadcast: he uses the medium to send messages you can't send on more "dignified" channels like the news. Bernie's team uses twitter to repeatedly hammer core points derived from messages he sends in other media. I have to say Trump's use is superior, because it is innovative. It takes full advantage of the fact that twitter, as a medium for legitimate discussion, cannot be taken 100% seriously.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
Beachcomber posted:Oh hey, look at this: They desperately need to bring office drones into the mix though. Just look at what Disney did the IT guys who did the infrastructure for DisneyWorld. Labor isn't just work you do outside or on the factory floor.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Ironically enough the main symbol of office-drone oppression is Dilbert It's a catastrophe. In UK Office there's this loving scene where Martin Freeman is walking down to the warehouse as part of some workplace education thing, and he's like, "Alright, folks, we're about to encounter working class... so brace yourselves." or something. Bitch that's YOU! If no one works for you and your wages are poo poo, YOU ARE THE WORKING CLASS.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Which is my point. There's so much pearl clutching in Democratic circles about, "Oh, we can't promise THAT - we'd never get it through Congress!" Well, no poo poo. That's part of a successful electoral strategy: over-promise, and if you don't succeed at getting the policy through once elected, blame it on the other side. It's amazing to me that the Dems have gotten so bad at this. But you can promise single-payer. It can get through Congress. I mean, conceivably. You could, with enough votes, actually do it. The preamble to the SCOTUS ruling on the ACA says just that. And you could, with taxes, actually pay for it. You cannot, however, build a wall between the US and Mexico. It doesn't matter how many people want it. You cannot do it. There isn't enough concrete. You cannot deport every illegal immigrant. Doesn't matter who wants to do it. You cannot do it. ICE isn't SEA PATROL, they don't have unlimited resources. So you see, the democrats are careful not to promise things that can be done, so they never have to do them, and the republicans are careful to promise things that cannot be done, so they never have to do them.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
logikv9 posted:the plan has been expanded to kill the families of everyone who could be a terrorist, thus preventing them from having terrorist ties in the future by ????? the best way to accomplish this is to call in drone strikes on wedding parties, quick someone call Langley
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:
we play monster im a very good monster
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2016 02:11
|
|
|
getting a puppy in two weeks i shall name him bernie
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Hilariously LTTP, but I couldn't post because I was at work. While we were on that topic of STEM vs Arts, I notice that a common argument for focusing near exclusively on STEM is because we are "falling behind" many countries in East Asian who do not. I recall while working at a University we had plenty of exchange students from all over the world. What stood out to me was how the East Asian students, especially the Chinese, were anti-social to the point where they didn't experience anything. They didn't bother mingling with others or learning about the people around them. This was a stark contrast to all the other exchange students. I feel that this connects with how so many Asian countries tend to be far behind other nations, especially Western in various social and political culture. Let's take Japan for example. The nation has been in economic crisis since the 90's. However, has since done basically jack poo poo about it. When "Abenomics" is seen as some type of rogue change in the field of government and economics, you know you lack ideas. I couldn't imagine a wave of political thinkers like Sanders or Warren coming from the country. It just isn't politics though, but business as well. Any nerd knows how backward Japanese business is. You have the same fossils running the show without much change or say from young blood. This has resulted in the country from dominating the electronic industry, and has lost footing, primarily to South Korea and America. In contrast, the Western world is filled with companies shaking things up, at least relatively. Google is notorious for a lot of their products starting off from hobbies created by their employees, Valve is pretty much a cooperative, Apple is always engaging innovations for the next big thing, Tesla is doing that on a much larger scale by taking insane risks that only mad people would do. I just don't see these type of things in Japanese businesses or politics, and certainly not in East Asian politics and businesses at large. Do you think these plans and ideas were inspired by people sticking their noses in a STEM book or possibly in philosophy, political, or social science classes? I'd guess the latter. did your liberal arts education mention paragraphs at all or is that "spacist" on second though there is too way much whitespace in text
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
I like Obama re: the Dakota pipeline. He said, on national news, that the Army Corps of Engineers was "looking into it," or something. Of course, all of industry was in shock because no one had told them anything of the sort. Of course, no one in the Army Corps of Engineers had ever heard anything of the sort, either. Obama just loving says poo poo that he thinks is the right thing to say, but what he says has nothing to do with what's happening in reality.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 04:38
|
|
|
Holy crap what? They had more money than the Trump campaign, why not steamroll him? Oh, right, kickbacks and embezzlement.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
the middle class was created to divide the working class into two parts that dislike each other
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 04:50
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wN5DZQ41Evo&t=1188s Is all this is true, why hasn't the ACLU sued?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:i'm...i'm bad at leading. and speaking. i doubt i would accomplish anything rather than either be cowed into silence, or speak up in anger and get kicked out. i feel powerless on my own. Do you think Bernie is a good speaker? That gruff grandpa? I mean, compared to OBama? Consider sanders has been speaking for decades, and that's how he speaks. He says good things, but he not a good speAker. He is an authentic speaker. If you are authentic, you can do it. Every person who has ever spoken to a crowd has eaten poo poo the first time.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:i'm not confident that i can say anything important, or that ill be taken seriously. but at this point, being able to express myself in any way possible is enough to relieve my frustration. All you have to do is repeat Bernie's in your own words and maybe talk about how your life reflects the struggles he's talking about. The more times people repeat the message, the more convinced the old folks will be that this is the direction the party has to tAke.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 18:07 |
|
|
Hey what is Sander's stance re: Inflation? Because we are going to get Inflation right about the same time the Republicans agree to raise the minimum to $15/hr so Trump looks like he's keeping working class promises (and because they know inflation is coming, in a big way). Inflation is going to make $15/hr irrelevant, though. Bernie is going to get screwed here, along with the working class. Any min wage increase enacted over the next four year must be pegged to inflation or it will be meaningless. Fat-Lip-Sum-41.mp3 has issued a correction as of 18:24 on Nov 18, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2016 18:21
|
|