Trump as tragicomedy

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

hardlawjockey
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 59
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2018 3:30 pm

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by hardlawjockey » Mon May 21, 2018 5:37 pm

Maddy wrote:
Mon May 21, 2018 3:31 pm
The cover-up continues to unravel . . . For the first time today, I actually think people will be going to prison.

Add to Trump's accomplishments the exposure of the massive core of corruption within the DNC and its role as the waterboy of the Deep State.
Some bit players may go to jail, probably on the Republican side only, but I seriously doubt that any of the big names are ever going to end up in prison - and they know it. After all, Nixon started a secret war in Laos and Cambodia resulting in the deaths of millions and though he was driven out of office for political shenanigans he never faced any kind of criminal prosecution for any of the things he did. It just seems like when you reach a certain level in government you are handed a get out of jail free card.

Maybe this is because we don't like to see ourselves as a banana republic where being elected to high office is often the first step on the way to prison.

I was always skeptical of the "Deep State", as I tend to discount most conspiracy theories and I still don't believe there are Deep State planning meetings taking place any where. Having said that, there does seem to be some sort of cabal though I doubt it will ever come to light in our day. If it does only our grandchildren will read about it as history.
User avatar
Maddy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 8:43 am

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by Maddy » Mon May 21, 2018 8:17 pm

hardlawjockey wrote:
Mon May 21, 2018 5:37 pm
I was always skeptical of the "Deep State", as I tend to discount most conspiracy theories and I still don't believe there are Deep State planning meetings taking place any where. Having said that, there does seem to be some sort of cabal though I doubt it will ever come to light in our day. If it does only our grandchildren will read about it as history.
Look no further than the board rooms of the six multinational corporations that control virtually everything having any economic significance. They're right there in plain sight, and there's nothing secret about their agenda or about who they own.
I seriously doubt that any of the big names are ever going to end up in prison - and they know it.
Watch Hillary's health. I predicted on this forum about the time she first got those prism glasses that she was beginning to run scared. I've seen it too many times with clients facing serious prison time. They see it coming and, well in advance, pad those medical records so that in the event things go south they get a hospital room rather than a cell.
hardlawjockey
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 59
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2018 3:30 pm

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by hardlawjockey » Mon May 21, 2018 8:46 pm

Maddy wrote:
Mon May 21, 2018 8:17 pm
hardlawjockey wrote:
Mon May 21, 2018 5:37 pm
I was always skeptical of the "Deep State", as I tend to discount most conspiracy theories and I still don't believe there are Deep State planning meetings taking place any where. Having said that, there does seem to be some sort of cabal though I doubt it will ever come to light in our day. If it does only our grandchildren will read about it as history.
Look no further than the board rooms of the six multinational corporations that control virtually everything having any economic significance. They're right there in plain sight, and there's nothing secret about their agenda or about who they own.
I seriously doubt that any of the big names are ever going to end up in prison - and they know it.
Watch Hillary's health. I predicted on this forum about the time she first got those prism glasses that she was beginning to run scared. I've seen it too many times with clients facing serious prison time. They see it coming and, well in advance, pad those medical records so that in the event things go south they get a hospital room rather than a cell.
I think one of those multinational corporations has an office right across from my house. When I go out on my back porch to smoke some pot before going to bed I can see people still working in offices late at night and I wonder what they are doing. The name of the company is Lockheed Martin so you can use your own imagination. They actually have three other offices in the county where I live, right along with a company called General Dynamics.

They are working to keep us all safe from existential threats, of course.

I recently read that the cost of the "war on terror" was now up to almost 3 TRILLION dollars.

Don't even think about what 3 trillion dollars could buy if it was spent on something else.

Without even calculating the math I'm guessing that amount of money could be used to place at least 100 policemen in every school in America to prevent the mass murder of children. Probably with a lot left over.

So go figure.
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by Kriegsspiel » Tue May 22, 2018 7:04 am

Desert wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 5:12 am
Ignoring Trump for a minute, I do find it really interesting to watch the political parties lurch from one extreme to the other on several issues. For example:
1. For most of my lifetime, the right has been vehemently anti-Russia, while accusing the left of practically collaborating with Russia. Now it's completely reversed. Most of the Right now defends Russia and Putin, and the left is accusing the right of collaborating with them.

2. The GOP railed on Obama for 8 years about the exploding deficits. With the new tax bill, the deficits will increase even faster, but now only Democrats are worried about the deficit. The GOP only talks about deficits when a Dem is in office, and vice versa. We're now back to the Cheney "deficits don't matter" belief.

3. The left has historically been very critical of big law enforcement. Now the left loves the FBI, while the right has convinced themselves that the FBI is picking on them.

All very interesting to watch. Earlier in history we watched the parties flip over Civil Rights, with the Republicans leading the charge on freeing slaves and protecting AA's in the South. Later, the parties switched positions, with the Democrats leading the way on Civil Rights legislation over the protests of the GOP. I would love to see a party formed that could rise above the sports fan level of thought and actually stand for individual rights and freedom, on a more consistent basis.
No Desert, we've always been at war with Eurasia.

I don't visit news sites anymore, what do you mean by the Right defending Russia and Putin? When I was reading about it a while ago, the narrative from the Ds was that Russia placed pro-Trump (it might have just been anti-Hillary, can't remember) advertising on FB and a Russian "hacked" (phished) Hillary's/Podesta's email accounts and released them. The narrative from the Rs was that whoever hacked the emails, it was good for us to see what the Ds were up to, and that who cares if Russians placed ads on FB, anyone can do that because advertising isn't illegal.

I don't remember the Rs defending anything Russia's done (invading Crimea, shadow war in Ukraine, etc).
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7680
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by moda0306 » Tue May 22, 2018 8:23 am

Desert wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 5:12 am
Ignoring Trump for a minute, I do find it really interesting to watch the political parties lurch from one extreme to the other on several issues. For example:
1. For most of my lifetime, the right has been vehemently anti-Russia, while accusing the left of practically collaborating with Russia. Now it's completely reversed. Most of the Right now defends Russia and Putin, and the left is accusing the right of collaborating with them.

2. The GOP railed on Obama for 8 years about the exploding deficits. With the new tax bill, the deficits will increase even faster, but now only Democrats are worried about the deficit. The GOP only talks about deficits when a Dem is in office, and vice versa. We're now back to the Cheney "deficits don't matter" belief.

3. The left has historically been very critical of big law enforcement. Now the left loves the FBI, while the right has convinced themselves that the FBI is picking on them.

All very interesting to watch. Earlier in history we watched the parties flip over Civil Rights, with the Republicans leading the charge on freeing slaves and protecting AA's in the South. Later, the parties switched positions, with the Democrats leading the way on Civil Rights legislation over the protests of the GOP. I would love to see a party formed that could rise above the sports fan level of thought and actually stand for individual rights and freedom, on a more consistent basis.
So much of all this is theater. Think of professional wrestling. They don't really want to beat each other up. They just want your money, and YOU want to see them beat each other up (I just assume anyone who likes beer & brisket as much as you is probably into WWE) ;).

These people have two main objectives:

1) Get re-elected or retain your job...
1a) A big subset of which is raising money, particularly from corporations.

2) If you don't continue as an elected representative, to a have a very lucrative job waiting for you "outside" of government...

The rest is PR to make it look like they're doing something and getting their base fired up, the ultimate result is never really a threat to establishment power structures, no matter how bombastic their language might be.
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by Kriegsspiel » Tue May 22, 2018 9:33 am

Desert wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 8:00 am
Regarding Russia/Putin support by the right, a few examples are:
1. Trump's decision to block sanctions against Russia, despite bipartisan support in Congress (maybe more of a Trumpist action rather than GOP as a whole, but of course congress will take no action).
I'd have to look into this.
2. GOP view of Putin/Russia very positive in the Trump era ... look it up, here's one article on the topic:
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-fr ... -of-putin/
Some things I'm seeing from Russia with love by the right are things I'm cool with, or things that seem like normal things that other countries do too, like trying to get their "lesser evil" candidate elected. He keeps trying to say that Russia "turned" conservatives, I think it's more the case that geopolitics happened, and the enemy of my enemy wound up aligning with some of my values on some things. The world is always churning and it happens.
3. Anecdotally, I've seen many FB posts in the past year or so, from some of my right wing friends from the past, expressing strong admiration of Putin.
About what? One could a black belt in a martial art. One could admire him for killing ISIS and not trying to topple another Middle Eastern country. But I don't like how he runs an authoritarian police state, invades his neighbors, hates on the gayz, etc. What people like is going to reflect their values.

Take something like Trump saying he thinks Putin is a better leader than Obama. At face value, that's a valid point. Leadership does not equal making smart policies. Leadership is more intangible, it's a feeling. Obvious US example was military views on Bush and Obama. Bush was a leader despite his flaws and strategic blunders, he had a leader's attitude and bearing. Obama seemed weak and prissy, even though his policies were pretty militaristic. Putin gives off the leadership vibe, Obama doesn't. But it's easy to spin it as "Trump mires Putin, hates Obama/America" because people want to see it.
User avatar
Maddy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 8:43 am

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by Maddy » Tue May 22, 2018 1:54 pm

Well, Putin is not only a strong leader (the Russian people LOVE strong leaders), but he's the epitome of a strong, NATIONALISTIC leader. And, more to the point, he's the only significant force pushing back against the western corporate oligarchy as it marches forward in its quest for western hegemony in the middle east and Africa. IMHO, the teams are going to line up for or against Putin accordingly.
stuper1
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1365
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:18 pm

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by stuper1 » Tue May 22, 2018 2:07 pm

Oh no, horrors, not the N word! Don't tell me that a leader is actually supposed to look out for what is best for his Nation. That is such backward thinking.

By the way, +1,000,000 to moda's post about politics being like professional wrestling. You nailed it.
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7680
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by moda0306 » Tue May 22, 2018 4:11 pm

Desert wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 3:11 pm
Maddy wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 1:54 pm
Well, Putin is not only a strong leader (the Russian people LOVE strong leaders), but he's the epitome of a strong, NATIONALISTIC leader. And, more to the point, he's the only significant force pushing back against the western corporate oligarchy as it marches forward in its quest for western hegemony in the middle east and Africa. IMHO, the teams are going to line up for or against Putin accordingly.
Thanks Maddy, your post is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. I don't know your political history, but no Republican would have ever said anything like this just a few short years ago. This was the left/Democrat message; Only strong, socialist governments could contain the capitalist/corporate machine.

I'm not saying you're right or wrong, I'm just saying the parties have flipped positions here. Maybe that's not interesting to anyone else, but I find it fascinating to watch. It demonstrates the "sports fan" mentality of many voters. They'll switch positions entirely, as long as that position is one that is being put forward by their "team."

And moda, yes, I understand that politics is largely theater. Trump has taken the theater to a whole new level, which isn't surprising, since he's a lifelong showman. And WWE works in the U.S., because we love to be entertained, even if we know it's fake.
Everything you said about teams and convenient flip-flops of narratives is spot-on. The conclusion is "Trump is pretty great stuff" or "Trump isn't that bad but 'the left' is terrible." Whatever logic you have to use (temporarily, of course) to get there is valid.

I wasn't an avid anti-deep-state civil-libertarian until about 2015-2016 or so when I started expanding my political influences to folks like Chomsky/Greenwald and other anti-war folks. Dan Carlin gets the credit for starting to crack my shell a bit with some historical perspective. I NEVER heard Republicans talking about the "deep state" or pro-Russia then. I had a conversation with a guy (who's a huge Trumper today) shortly after the Obama debate with Romney where Romney declared Russia our largest threat, and my friend was somehow remarkably of a very similar opinion to Romney. He's completely changed his tune. And of course there's no fundamentals behind it nor admitting he ever believed any different... otherwise I'd give him credit for changing his mind rather than roll my eyes.

Meanwhile, "the left," since it had forgotten its antiwar sentiment to a large degree, was going to side with Obama's argument because they trusted him with power and identified with the guy.

But while "the right" wants to talk about the "deep state" because it makes them feel rebellious and all but the sliver-sized Ron/Rand wing of the right cares anything about disassembling the perma-war surveillance state (aka, the deep state). They just want to use it in different ways than certain elements "the establishment," and of course the theater is part of the act.

I feel like we're fighting a culture-war in disguise... and it's based on very odd virtue-signalling around race, culture, guns, and rural vs urban locales trying to pretend to be a political debate on fundamentals. It's sad and disappointing to see. Of course, I'm far more disappointed right now in my conservative friends than my liberal ones, but if/when liberals put up Flava Flav as their candidate I'll be sure to roast them as well. I hope you'll be there to join me.
User avatar
Maddy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 8:43 am

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by Maddy » Tue May 22, 2018 5:01 pm

It isn't so much that individuals have flip-flopped on their positions (implying a lack of intellectual rigor and/or a want of principle), but that the labels applied to those positions have in many instances taken a 180-degree turnabout in meaning. Recall that I regarded myself as a "liberal" 30 years ago when that meant that you cared about individual liberties. My views on things haven't changed, but the way I describe myself certainly has.
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by Mountaineer » Tue May 22, 2018 5:39 pm

Maddy wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 5:01 pm
It isn't so much that individuals have flip-flopped on their positions (implying a lack of intellectual rigor and/or a want of principle), but that the labels applied to those positions have in many instances taken a 180-degree turnabout in meaning. Recall that I regarded myself as a "liberal" 30 years ago when that meant that you cared about individual liberties. My views on things haven't changed, but the way I describe myself certainly has.
Indeed!
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
Maddy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 8:43 am

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by Maddy » Tue May 22, 2018 6:45 pm

moda0306 wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 4:11 pm
But while "the right" wants to talk about the "deep state" because it makes them feel rebellious and all but the sliver-sized Ron/Rand wing of the right cares anything about disassembling the perma-war surveillance state (aka, the deep state). They just want to use it in different ways than certain elements "the establishment," and of course the theater is part of the act.
This may be a reasonable portrayal if, by "the right" you mean the establishment beltway politicians that wear the "Team R" tee-shirt. But it's all too clear at this point that the Washington insiders, whether they be "Ds" or "Rs," are all playing for the same side.

If the previously inconceivable victory of Trump in the last election means anything, it stands as living proof of the fact that the vast majority of "the right" is firmly, intractably, anti-establishment.
clacy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1128
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:16 pm

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by clacy » Tue May 22, 2018 7:53 pm

moda0306 wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 4:11 pm
Desert wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 3:11 pm
Maddy wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 1:54 pm
Well, Putin is not only a strong leader (the Russian people LOVE strong leaders), but he's the epitome of a strong, NATIONALISTIC leader. And, more to the point, he's the only significant force pushing back against the western corporate oligarchy as it marches forward in its quest for western hegemony in the middle east and Africa. IMHO, the teams are going to line up for or against Putin accordingly.
Thanks Maddy, your post is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. I don't know your political history, but no Republican would have ever said anything like this just a few short years ago. This was the left/Democrat message; Only strong, socialist governments could contain the capitalist/corporate machine.

I'm not saying you're right or wrong, I'm just saying the parties have flipped positions here. Maybe that's not interesting to anyone else, but I find it fascinating to watch. It demonstrates the "sports fan" mentality of many voters. They'll switch positions entirely, as long as that position is one that is being put forward by their "team."

And moda, yes, I understand that politics is largely theater. Trump has taken the theater to a whole new level, which isn't surprising, since he's a lifelong showman. And WWE works in the U.S., because we love to be entertained, even if we know it's fake.
Everything you said about teams and convenient flip-flops of narratives is spot-on. The conclusion is "Trump is pretty great stuff" or "Trump isn't that bad but 'the left' is terrible." Whatever logic you have to use (temporarily, of course) to get there is valid.

I wasn't an avid anti-deep-state civil-libertarian until about 2015-2016 or so when I started expanding my political influences to folks like Chomsky/Greenwald and other anti-war folks. Dan Carlin gets the credit for starting to crack my shell a bit with some historical perspective. I NEVER heard Republicans talking about the "deep state" or pro-Russia then. I had a conversation with a guy (who's a huge Trumper today) shortly after the Obama debate with Romney where Romney declared Russia our largest threat, and my friend was somehow remarkably of a very similar opinion to Romney. He's completely changed his tune. And of course there's no fundamentals behind it nor admitting he ever believed any different... otherwise I'd give him credit for changing his mind rather than roll my eyes.

Meanwhile, "the left," since it had forgotten its antiwar sentiment to a large degree, was going to side with Obama's argument because they trusted him with power and identified with the guy.

But while "the right" wants to talk about the "deep state" because it makes them feel rebellious and all but the sliver-sized Ron/Rand wing of the right cares anything about disassembling the perma-war surveillance state (aka, the deep state). They just want to use it in different ways than certain elements "the establishment," and of course the theater is part of the act.

I feel like we're fighting a culture-war in disguise... and it's based on very odd virtue-signalling around race, culture, guns, and rural vs urban locales trying to pretend to be a political debate on fundamentals. It's sad and disappointing to see. Of course, I'm far more disappointed right now in my conservative friends than my liberal ones, but if/when liberals put up Flava Flav as their candidate I'll be sure to roast them as well. I hope you'll be there to join me.


Republicans used to not worry or talk about the Deep State, but that was because we were lied to from top to bottom from Bush 41 through Obama.

The Deep State is an insidious scourge that has dominated both parties for the at least 40 years (probably much longer than that, considering they likely killed JFK).

The fact is the Deep State has infiltrated virtually all levels of the Federal government and was orchestrating nearly complete control. They would let the D's and R's fight it out in public, but control the votes more or less on the major issues. Obviously they have a globalist/Neo-Con/Neo-Dem agenda.

I would say that Trump may be closer to a blue dog Dem than virtually any Dem of any relevance today. It's hard to distinguish between Bush 41, Bush 43 and Obama. For the most part they are the same person, minus the last name.

I think myself, like a lot of Trump voters feel that we were betrayed and lied to since at least 1988 when the pro-American Republican platform essentially died.
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7680
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by moda0306 » Tue May 22, 2018 8:38 pm

clacy wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 7:53 pm
moda0306 wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 4:11 pm
Desert wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 3:11 pm


Thanks Maddy, your post is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. I don't know your political history, but no Republican would have ever said anything like this just a few short years ago. This was the left/Democrat message; Only strong, socialist governments could contain the capitalist/corporate machine.

I'm not saying you're right or wrong, I'm just saying the parties have flipped positions here. Maybe that's not interesting to anyone else, but I find it fascinating to watch. It demonstrates the "sports fan" mentality of many voters. They'll switch positions entirely, as long as that position is one that is being put forward by their "team."

And moda, yes, I understand that politics is largely theater. Trump has taken the theater to a whole new level, which isn't surprising, since he's a lifelong showman. And WWE works in the U.S., because we love to be entertained, even if we know it's fake.
Everything you said about teams and convenient flip-flops of narratives is spot-on. The conclusion is "Trump is pretty great stuff" or "Trump isn't that bad but 'the left' is terrible." Whatever logic you have to use (temporarily, of course) to get there is valid.

I wasn't an avid anti-deep-state civil-libertarian until about 2015-2016 or so when I started expanding my political influences to folks like Chomsky/Greenwald and other anti-war folks. Dan Carlin gets the credit for starting to crack my shell a bit with some historical perspective. I NEVER heard Republicans talking about the "deep state" or pro-Russia then. I had a conversation with a guy (who's a huge Trumper today) shortly after the Obama debate with Romney where Romney declared Russia our largest threat, and my friend was somehow remarkably of a very similar opinion to Romney. He's completely changed his tune. And of course there's no fundamentals behind it nor admitting he ever believed any different... otherwise I'd give him credit for changing his mind rather than roll my eyes.

Meanwhile, "the left," since it had forgotten its antiwar sentiment to a large degree, was going to side with Obama's argument because they trusted him with power and identified with the guy.

But while "the right" wants to talk about the "deep state" because it makes them feel rebellious and all but the sliver-sized Ron/Rand wing of the right cares anything about disassembling the perma-war surveillance state (aka, the deep state). They just want to use it in different ways than certain elements "the establishment," and of course the theater is part of the act.

I feel like we're fighting a culture-war in disguise... and it's based on very odd virtue-signalling around race, culture, guns, and rural vs urban locales trying to pretend to be a political debate on fundamentals. It's sad and disappointing to see. Of course, I'm far more disappointed right now in my conservative friends than my liberal ones, but if/when liberals put up Flava Flav as their candidate I'll be sure to roast them as well. I hope you'll be there to join me.


Republicans used to not worry or talk about the Deep State, but that was because we were lied to from top to bottom from Bush 41 through Obama.

The Deep State is an insidious scourge that has dominated both parties for the at least 40 years (probably much longer than that, considering they likely killed JFK).

The fact is the Deep State has infiltrated virtually all levels of the Federal government and was orchestrating nearly complete control. They would let the D's and R's fight it out in public, but control the votes more or less on the major issues. Obviously they have a globalist/Neo-Con/Neo-Dem agenda.

I would say that Trump may be closer to a blue dog Dem than virtually any Dem of any relevance today. It's hard to distinguish between Bush 41, Bush 43 and Obama. For the most part they are the same person, minus the last name.

I think myself, like a lot of Trump voters feel that we were betrayed and lied to since at least 1988 when the pro-American Republican platform essentially died.
Can you lay out for me how exactly you see the "deep state" as being a phenomenon that started under Bush I? To me, it's been firmly entrenched at the very least since the post-WWII period, if-not earlier.
clacy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1128
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:16 pm

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by clacy » Tue May 22, 2018 9:49 pm

moda0306 wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 8:38 pm

Can you lay out for me how exactly you see the "deep state" as being a phenomenon that started under Bush I? To me, it's been firmly entrenched at the very least since the post-WWII period, if-not earlier.
Yes I would agree, which is why I said "probably has much longer than that, back to at least the JFK assassination".....

But I think it's gained huge traction, like all insidious bureaucracies in the last 40 years. Bush 41 was very likely privy to the JFK assassination from my research, and he was an unabashed Globalist, even promoting the term "New World Order".

I think the Clintons, Bush's and Obama counter-inflitrated the Deep State so the Deep State more or less merged with the Bush/Clinton Neo-con/lib model.

They all have the same world view, despite publicly quibbling over domestic policy issues (which they still ultimately mostly agree on).
User avatar
Maddy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 8:43 am

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by Maddy » Tue May 22, 2018 10:10 pm

clacy wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 9:49 pm
I think the Clintons, Bush's and Obama counter-inflitrated the Deep State so the Deep State more or less merged with the Bush/Clinton Neo-con/lib model.
Clacy, could you expand on that? For some time, I've thought it likely that there are at least two camps, each warring for dominance, within the western oligopoly. According to one former member of the intelligence community, it was the plan of the Elites prior to the last election that Hillary would ultimately run against none other than Jeb Bush. . . and that she would lose. It was to be, according to this theory, a controlled demolition in which the intelligence community would deliberately tank her candidacy, vaulting their boy Bush III into the White House. Quite a few events have similarly raised the specter of betrayal and outright warring within the ranks of the Elite, but I have never been able to put my finger on who is in which camp and what objectives/ideology each of those camps represents. Is this something you've ever looked into?
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14225
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by dualstow » Wed May 23, 2018 7:24 am

The plot thickens:
On Saturday, the New York Times reported that an Israeli company is being investigated by former FBI director Robert Mueller for allegedly aiding Donald Trump to win the 2016 presidential elections by launching an online manipulation campaign.
https://m.calcalistech.com/Article.aspx?guid=3738491
RIP Marcello Gandini
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by Kriegsspiel » Wed May 23, 2018 7:54 am

If all it takes to swing an election is the ability to create fake social media accounts to pump up a candidate, we are sheep and we are fucked. I am of the opinion that all this social media is a curse. Maybe Joel Zamel and the Russian twitter bots are the poetic justice warriors we deserve.
WiseOne
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2692
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2022 11:08 am

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by WiseOne » Wed May 23, 2018 8:06 am

Interesting discussion about the parties flipping positions. I think it's more like they are each drifting further away from the centrist platforms they held, say, 30 years ago, into the nether regions of extremism where they may fight over details, but are otherwise hard to tell apart - since extreme beliefs are essentially the same on either the left or the right. In the case of Democrats, they've done an about face on individual liberties, which is what they used to be about. Now it's about political correctness, thought control and ever-tightening regulation. I find them to be more than a bit frightening. I agree with Maddy: I feel like I stayed in place and the political party moved away from me, not the other way around.

I'm not sure what happened to Republicans though. They used to be about extreme religious conservatism, which has always scared me when it's in the political/government sphere, and fiscal responsibility. Neither of those is the case anymore, and I don't rightly know what's taken its place. Trump's populist message filled the vacuum, but it's not the main focus of the party.
WiseOne
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2692
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2022 11:08 am

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by WiseOne » Wed May 23, 2018 8:10 am

So fake news is a seriously new problem, is it?

Image

Odd how we've managed to survive all these years...

(finally figured out how to post images!)
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14225
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by dualstow » Wed May 23, 2018 8:23 am

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Wed May 23, 2018 7:54 am
If all it takes to swing an election is the ability to create fake social media accounts to pump up a candidate, we are sheep and we are fucked.
...
So you’re saying the Russians are sheep-fuckers. I have always suspected them.
RIP Marcello Gandini
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7680
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by moda0306 » Wed May 23, 2018 8:40 am

Maddy wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 6:45 pm
moda0306 wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 4:11 pm
But while "the right" wants to talk about the "deep state" because it makes them feel rebellious and all but the sliver-sized Ron/Rand wing of the right cares anything about disassembling the perma-war surveillance state (aka, the deep state). They just want to use it in different ways than certain elements "the establishment," and of course the theater is part of the act.
This may be a reasonable portrayal if, by "the right" you mean the establishment beltway politicians that wear the "Team R" tee-shirt. But it's all too clear at this point that the Washington insiders, whether they be "Ds" or "Rs," are all playing for the same side.

If the previously inconceivable victory of Trump in the last election means anything, it stands as living proof of the fact that the vast majority of "the right" is firmly, intractably, anti-establishment.
"The right," (meaning the voters in this instance), certainly are willing to explore anti-establishment rhetoric or ideas when it fits their tribal identity in the moment. But it certainly isn't a matter of principal. As soon as someone they don't identify with starts to rock the boat, their a "militant leftist," or a commie, or whathaveyou... and this isn't just a policy preference issue.

If a "leftist" had been challenging Romney on his take that Russia is a threat, every Republican I know with the exception of one or two that are truly independent would have responded with standard Republican talking points. That's really all they do. They're not "mavericks" unless it's against a liberal.

Mind-you, I'm not saying my liberal friends are really much different at all. The ones who were anti-war in 2003-2008 were all-but-silent during Obama's years. They felt (as conservatives do now) that if they yield to the left it will weaken them against "the right," which is a far bigger threat (in their minds). And so the game goes.

There are some areas where conservatives will embrace some anti-establishment ideas more consistently, but usually they're the ones that are in no way a threat to the deep state or corporatocracy...

- Self-interested total war hawkery (Trump's idea to take all the oil out of Iraq for instance)
- Anti-anti-racism, soft-to-heavy xenophobia
- Masculinity and Christianity as cultural value drivers
- Low taxes and eliminating social welfare programs

There are probably more, but these aren't a threat to corporate profits and the plutocracy. In fact, the fact that these issues are taking up so much of our time in debate and works to divide lower-to-middle class folks along cultural lines is probably the biggest tool the plutocrats have. If poor West Virginians realized they have a ton more in common with poor Mexicans than Donald Trump or Mitt Romney, and identified themselves as such, it would be a huge threat to the plutocracy.
stuper1
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1365
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:18 pm

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by stuper1 » Wed May 23, 2018 11:12 am

Desert wrote:
Wed May 23, 2018 8:58 am
moda0306 wrote:
Wed May 23, 2018 8:40 am
"The right," (meaning the voters in this instance), certainly are willing to explore anti-establishment rhetoric or ideas when it fits their tribal identity in the moment. But it certainly isn't a matter of principal. As soon as someone they don't identify with starts to rock the boat, their a "militant leftist," or a commie, or whathaveyou... and this isn't just a policy preference issue.

If a "leftist" had been challenging Romney on his take that Russia is a threat, every Republican I know with the exception of one or two that are truly independent would have responded with standard Republican talking points. That's really all they do. They're not "mavericks" unless it's against a liberal.

Mind-you, I'm not saying my liberal friends are really much different at all. The ones who were anti-war in 2003-2008 were all-but-silent during Obama's years. They felt (as conservatives do now) that if they yield to the left it will weaken them against "the right," which is a far bigger threat (in their minds). And so the game goes.

There are some areas where conservatives will embrace some anti-establishment ideas more consistently, but usually they're the ones that are in no way a threat to the deep state or corporatocracy...

- Self-interested total war hawkery (Trump's idea to take all the oil out of Iraq for instance)
- Anti-anti-racism, soft-to-heavy xenophobia
- Masculinity and Christianity as cultural value drivers
- Low taxes and eliminating social welfare programs

There are probably more, but these aren't a threat to corporate profits and the plutocracy. In fact, the fact that these issues are taking up so much of our time in debate and works to divide lower-to-middle class folks along cultural lines is probably the biggest tool the plutocrats have. If poor West Virginians realized they have a ton more in common with poor Mexicans than Donald Trump or Mitt Romney, and identified themselves as such, it would be a huge threat to the plutocracy.
Wow, that's a beautiful point. So true.
Well, it may be true, but I don't really see how that realization is going to make a difference to either West Virginians or Mexicans. Are you suggesting that they are going to rise up and create some sort of socialist utopia where no one goes hungry? Of course, it's not going to happen. In the real world, what West Virginians need is jobs, which is the same thing that Mexicans need. Hopefully, the leader of the U.S. will do what he/she can to help West Virginians have jobs, and the leader of Mexico will do the same for Mexicans. If some Mexicans want to immigrate to the U.S., or some West Virginians want to immigrate to Mexico, then they should go through the proper procedure to see if they can make that happen, but there is no fundamental human right for a citizen of one country to become a citizen of a different country.
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7680
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by moda0306 » Wed May 23, 2018 11:45 am

stuper1 wrote:
Wed May 23, 2018 11:12 am
Desert wrote:
Wed May 23, 2018 8:58 am
moda0306 wrote:
Wed May 23, 2018 8:40 am
"The right," (meaning the voters in this instance), certainly are willing to explore anti-establishment rhetoric or ideas when it fits their tribal identity in the moment. But it certainly isn't a matter of principal. As soon as someone they don't identify with starts to rock the boat, their a "militant leftist," or a commie, or whathaveyou... and this isn't just a policy preference issue.

If a "leftist" had been challenging Romney on his take that Russia is a threat, every Republican I know with the exception of one or two that are truly independent would have responded with standard Republican talking points. That's really all they do. They're not "mavericks" unless it's against a liberal.

Mind-you, I'm not saying my liberal friends are really much different at all. The ones who were anti-war in 2003-2008 were all-but-silent during Obama's years. They felt (as conservatives do now) that if they yield to the left it will weaken them against "the right," which is a far bigger threat (in their minds). And so the game goes.

There are some areas where conservatives will embrace some anti-establishment ideas more consistently, but usually they're the ones that are in no way a threat to the deep state or corporatocracy...

- Self-interested total war hawkery (Trump's idea to take all the oil out of Iraq for instance)
- Anti-anti-racism, soft-to-heavy xenophobia
- Masculinity and Christianity as cultural value drivers
- Low taxes and eliminating social welfare programs

There are probably more, but these aren't a threat to corporate profits and the plutocracy. In fact, the fact that these issues are taking up so much of our time in debate and works to divide lower-to-middle class folks along cultural lines is probably the biggest tool the plutocrats have. If poor West Virginians realized they have a ton more in common with poor Mexicans than Donald Trump or Mitt Romney, and identified themselves as such, it would be a huge threat to the plutocracy.
Wow, that's a beautiful point. So true.
Well, it may be true, but I don't really see how that realization is going to make a difference to either West Virginians or Mexicans. Are you suggesting that they are going to rise up and create some sort of socialist utopia where no one goes hungry? Of course, it's not going to happen. In the real world, what West Virginians need is jobs, which is the same thing that Mexicans need. Hopefully, the leader of the U.S. will do what he/she can to help West Virginians have jobs, and the leader of Mexico will do the same for Mexicans. If some Mexicans want to immigrate to the U.S., or some West Virginians want to immigrate to Mexico, then they should go through the proper procedure to see if they can make that happen, but there is no fundamental human right for a citizen of one country to become a citizen of a different country.
No, I'm not suggesting that they're going to start a socialist revolution...

You sort of said it... that these people could be more concerned with their governments paying more attention to what is going to benefit their economic situation the most...

Which would mean, first of all, that they would be far-less concerned with guns and cultural issues like gay marriage, as well as patriotism virtue signalling, and issues of freedom of travel of "those people" (aka, illegal immigration). Further, they'd be more concerned with things like universal healthcare, universal basic income, local environmental issues, etc, as well as upending the most nefarious aspect of trade deals, which isn't necessarily tariffs, but the "corporate and investor rights" aspects that allow owners of the means of production to better play countries' workers against each other.

I'm not saying these are all the correct opinions to have, but they're certainly more consistent and reasonable than them throwing their lot in with the ilk of (insert almost any Republican politician here including Trump) to supposedly help them retain some cultural superiority while they lose any semblance of economic footing.

But what happens instead is this form of "wage-earner nationalism" gets takes an unnecessary and massively unproductive xenophobic turn without any actual concrete material concessions to the interests of the lower/lower-middle class, which Plutocrats love, as they know as long as they can invest lucratively around the world, keeping labor from being able to move freely isn't that much of a burden to their profits.

They're rearranging deck chairs on the titanic because it feels better than embracing certain leftist ideals that include a multi-cultural element.
stuper1
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1365
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:18 pm

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Post by stuper1 » Wed May 23, 2018 12:22 pm

And culture? Does culture mean anything? Is West Virginian culture the same as Mexican culture? Is that okay, or is it racism? Are all cultures equally good? If one culture has resulted in relative abundance, and another in relative poverty, was that just due to luck? If a bunch of West Virginians want to move to Mexico and change Mexican culture, do the Mexicans get to say anything in response?

If I want to visit say India, but I find that the culture there is the same as back home due to globalization, has something been lost? Why do I even bother making that trip? Are Indians allowed to protect their culture? Are West Virginians allowed to protect their culture?
Post Reply