#IMP45CH #LOCKHIMUP

[Free]

If only Trump was *just* a MLB manager. Please, can we live in that universe?!

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

The longer I do read about the inner status quo of America under Trump, the more I get the impression that America is a country on the brink of a civil war, or at least some heavy riots sooner or later.

But I also get more and more the impression, that while Trump is problematic, he's a symptom of the deeper problem. The field on which a Trump could grow and rise though was prepared and fertilized way back then by Bill Clinton. Trump's rise is a result of Clinton's work back then.

“Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living.” (Karl Marx)

 

[Jolene Benoir]

The longer I do read about the inner status quo of America under Trump, the more I get the impression that America is a country on the brink of a civil war, or at least some heavy riots sooner or later.

But I also get more and more the impression, that while Trump is problematic, he's a symptom of the deeper problem. The field on which a Trump could grow and rise though was prepared and fertilized way back then by Bill Clinton. Trump's rise is a result of Clinton's work back then.

“Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living.” (Karl Marx)

How on Earth can/do you lay this at Clinton's feet? America has always had people who would prefer fascism, hate other people based upon their race, religion, sex and sexual orientation.

They just didn't have a president directly working on their behalf in the White House.

 

[Aribeth Zelin]

It is much more something to be laid at the feet of Reagan, and further back; with the Republicans deciding to start appealing to the fears of the white males losing their ascendancy. With Republicans cutting education in states where they've had control, so they would have a poorly educated populace, who are easy to manipulate.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

How on Earth can/do you lay this at Clinton's feet? America has always had people who would prefer fascism, hate other people based upon their race, religion, sex and sexual orientation.

They just didn't have a president directly working on their behalf in the White House.

I think the problem may be that, as in much of Europe, the electorate in the USA seem to be offered a choice between continuing with liberal (in the economic sense) capitalist policies that disadvantage more and more people and a fascist alternative. While the former is obviously preferable to the latter, it's not a good choice, and the longer the choice is between the main anti-fascist party, who offer "more of the same, but at least we're not fascists," and the fascists, who offer a radical (though illusory) alternative, the more frequently the fascists are going to win.

 

[Jolene Benoir]

I think the problem may be that, as in much of Europe, the electorate in the USA seem to be offered a choice between continuing with liberal (in the economic sense) capitalist policies that disadvantage more and more people and a fascist alternative. While the former is obviously preferable to the latter, it's not a good choice, and the longer the choice is between the main anti-fascist party, who offer "more of the same, but at least we're not fascists," and the fascists, who offer a radical (though illusory) alternative, the more frequently the fascists are going to win.

While I would agree for the most part, I see it a bit differently. I think that people rose under FDR and other liberal policies and certainly European policies. I think that what we are seeing is the rise of the ultra-wealthy controlling countries. They have been able to hide their money in offshore accounts, pay no taxes, give no loyalty to their given country. They then use that money to essentially buy the government. Then, that government does their bidding, including promoting policies that have disadvantaged everyone but themselves. This seems to be happening worldwide, because again, they give no loyalty to their host countries.

After all, who made the choices to outsource work/take advantage of people in poor countries? Who loathes unions and worker rights? Who has taken all earnings and put the vast majority into their own pockets so that we have the largest income disparity since the 1920's? Who has bought the politicians to do their bidding and freely admit they expect payment of a sort such as Betsy Devos admitted to? Who wants to dismantle social programs and education? Uneducated and scared workers are complaint. Who wants to remove all regulations which form impediments to the acquisition of wealth? Who wants to takeover entire news organizations to promote their ideas? Who meddles in other countries affairs, again using their money?

Capitalism has always had a problem reining in unhealthy aspects. One method has always been regulation. That is being and has been heavily rolled back. While liberals certainly do play a part in the allowance of the removal of checks and balances on the power of the wealthy, it is the wealthy that are giving us fascists as they come under the guise of economic freedom while in actuality, it is they who are the driving force behind what we are seeing. It is they who are installing the fascists. They not only offer no freedom, they offer more of the same.

It's a con job.

 

[Jolene Benoir]

Just to add to my previous post, they have found in Donald Trump a man who represents the very worst of capitalism; a man who would be a carnival barker if not for his inherited wealth, a man with absolutely no qualms about refusing to pay for services rendered, a man who wears not paying his taxes as a badge of honor, who has committed fraud on a large scale yet nothing has happened to him legally, instead he has been rewarded, a man who availed himself of paying people 20 cents/hour, without the slightest bit of regard for either their welfare or the welfare of those who lost their jobs, a man who sees government as a means to enrich both himself and his cronies.

He also happens to have fascist tendencies and is rather easy to manipulate in all that is needed is praise and money. He is their dream come true.

But, of course, he isn't the only problem. It's happening worldwide. Russia is an example of oligarchy run wild. People want their strong man and all too many are willing to step into the role.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

While I would agree for the most part, I see it a bit differently. I think that people rose under FDR and other liberal policies and certainly European policies. I think that what we are seeing is the rise of the ultra-wealthy controlling countries. They have been able to hide their money in offshore accounts, pay no taxes, give no loyalty to their given country. They then use that money to essentially buy the government. Then, that government does their bidding, including promoting policies that have disadvantaged everyone but themselves. This seems to be happening worldwide, because again, they give no loyalty to their host countries.

After all, who made the choices to outsource work/take advantage of people in poor countries? Who loathes unions and worker rights? Who has taken all earnings and put the vast majority into their own pockets so that we have the largest income disparity since the 1920's? Who has bought the politicians to do their bidding and freely admit they expect payment of a sort such as Betsy Devos admitted to? Who wants to dismantle social programs and education? Uneducated and scared workers are complaint. Who wants to remove all regulations which form impediments to the acquisition of wealth? Who wants to takeover entire news organizations to promote their ideas? Who meddles in other countries affairs, again using their money?

Capitalism has always had a problem reining in unhealthy aspects. One method has always been regulation. That is being and has been heavily rolled back. While liberals certainly do play a part in the allowance of the removal of checks and balances on the power of the wealthy, it is the wealthy that are giving us fascists as they come under the guise of economic freedom while in actuality, it is they who are the driving force behind what we are seeing. It is they who are installing the fascists. They not only offer no freedom, they offer more of the same.

It's a con job.

That's pretty much my point, which probably occurred to me because I'm reading Slavoj Žižek's new book, Like A Thief In Broad Daylight, in which he remarks (of the recent French elections):

Of course Le Pen and Macron are not the same – the difference that separates them is obvious – but nonetheless the choice between the two of them is not a real choice. To see this, it is enough to focus on the background of each candidate: Le Pen is a racist populist, but also addresses popular and workers’ dissatisfactions; Macron presents himself as a tolerant, humane pro-European, but the economic policy he stands for is the main cause of popular dissatisfaction with Europe. The sad prospect that awaits us is that of a future in which, every four years, we will be thrown into a panic, scared by some form of ‘neo-fascist danger’, and in this way be blackmailed into casting our vote for the ‘civilized’ candidate in meaningless elections lacking any positive vision … Meanwhile we’ll be able to sleep in the safe embrace of global capitalism with a human face. The obscenity of the situation is breathtaking: global capitalism is now presenting itself as the last protection against fascism; and if you try to point out some of Macron’s serious limitations you are accused of – yes, of complicity with fascism, since, as we are told repeatedly by the big (and not so big) media, the extreme Left and extreme Right are now coming together: both are anti-Semitic, nationalist-isolationalist, anti-globalist, etc. This is the point of the whole operation: to make the Left – which means any true alternative – disappear. The woman behind Macron is not his wife but the proverbial TINA – the stance of ‘there is no alternative’. Macron doesn’t bring hope, he kills hope, the hope that we’ll really get rid of the threat of racist populism.

I'm not at all sure I agree with his overall analysis (I've not finished the book yet), and I'm a bit worried he's too dismissive of "identity politics" (he's certainly too fond of Julian Assnage for my tastes, too), but I do think it's a powerful point -- fascism is a response to real problems caused by capitalism, and currently the only mainstream political response to it is offered by parties advocating precisely the policies that generated the real dissatisfaction on which fascism feeds.

To that extent, I think the criticism that Bill Clinton shares responsibility for the rise of Trump is not without basis, in that he was responsible for advancing the policy of supposed "triangulation" between the right-wing Republicans and the more left-wing elements of the Democratic Party. The same could be said of Tony Blair and New Labour in the UK -- both leaders adopted Reagan and Thatcher's monetarist orthodoxy, and concentrated on trying to woo big business.

 

[Jolene Benoir]

That's pretty much my point, which probably occurred to me because I'm reading Slavoj Žižek's new book, Like A Thief In Broad Daylight, in which he remarks (of the recent French elections):


I'm not at all sure I agree with his overall analysis (I've not finished the book yet), and I'm a bit worried he's too dismissive of "identity politics" (he's certainly too fond of Julian Assnage for my tastes, too), but I do think it's a powerful point -- fascism is a response to real problems caused by capitalism, and currently the only mainstream political response to it is offered by parties advocating precisely the policies that generated the real dissatisfaction on which fascism feeds.

To that extent, I think the criticism that Bill Clinton shares responsibility for the rise of Trump is not without basis, in that he was responsible for advancing the policy of supposed "triangulation" between the right-wing Republicans and the more left-wing elements of the Democratic Party. The same could be said of Tony Blair and New Labour in the UK -- both leaders adopted Reagan and Thatcher's monetarist orthodoxy, and concentrated on trying to woo big business.

That's fair enough in that he definitely did court big money, he rolled back social programs, he encouraged corporations to move to cheaper shores, imo. However, I still see it, as the ultra wealthy holding the strings and manipulating the entire political system. As I recall, during his presidency there was a call for campaign reform. He did nothing to promote it, likely as he himself, as a politician benefited from political donations. He can be held accountable for not doing much to dissuade the removal of hard won economic freedoms. At the same time, globalism was making its impact felt. I'm not sure just what can be done when there is always going to be less economically developed countries which are going to be seen and used as sources of cheap labor. One country can attempt to minimize the damage done to their own country by forcing those who avail themselves of it to pay taxes on those earnings, but those methods in themselves are damaging, such as tariffs and they certainly cannot force other countries to aid them. Tax laws could theoretically be another method but tax laws certainly aren't changing to accommodate the transfer of wealth.

In this country, the union drive in the early 20th century led to many reforms which helped workers as did a functioning educational system. That likely cannot happen on a global level because different countries have their own needs, structure and ,again, there will always be somewhere where workers can be taken advantage of economically.

To be fair to Clinton, my response to Bartholomew was based upon seeing the social ugliness of the Trump era laid at Clinton's feet. It is my opinion that the people who are supporting fascism, are claiming that it is all about their economic losses, and while the average worker has lost, I believe that a certain percentage of these people would have supported a fascist even in the best of times, due to the simple usage of their prejudices. These people have always existed, but now they have a true champion in the white house. Moreover, I think that those who claim these losses are usually the same that voted for the very people who promoted policies that brought it upon them. If they are willing to tolerate fascism in the name of stepping on other people, with false promises of maintaining their role in society, they probably weren't that liberal to begin with, imo.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

I'm not sure just what can be done when there is always going to be less economically developed countries which are going to be seen and used as sources of cheap labor. One country can attempt to minimize the damage done to their own country by forcing those who avail themselves of it to pay taxes on those earnings, but those methods in themselves are damaging, such as tariffs and they certainly cannot force other countries to aid them. Tax laws could theoretically be another method but tax laws certainly aren't changing to accommodate the transfer of wealth.

Yes, and I think the point is that the alternative to fascism as a response to the ill-effects of globalisation and offshoring has to include a platform to mitigate those ill-effects through publicly-funded programmes. By this I don't simply mean assistance with retraining and so on, but more generally through improving public health services, unemployment benefits, education in general, public transport and so on. And certainly I would argue in favour of paying for that by increasing taxes on both larger businesses and wealthier individuals.

Certainly, too, I'm not unaware of the problems with raising and collecting taxes but it seems extraordinary that, in the last 30-odd years, so many people in mainstream politics seem to have become crazed Thatcherites, at least in economic terms. I'm not suggesting we try to adopt the economic policies of 30-years ago (that's one of my main problems with Jeremy Corbyn in the UK) but I do think opposition to fascism has to based on offering a positive set of social and economic policies that benefit the people who are clearly suffering from the status quo.

 

[Jopsy Pendragon]

LOL oh my god.....hahahahaahaaaahhhahahahahahahaahahahaaaa

... I have a shady Nightborne Elf Mage in Warcraft that I've named "Manaforte the Gullible". (because, obviously, mana is where a mage's strength comes from. )

 

[danielravennest]

A man ... who has committed fraud on a large scale yet nothing has happened to him legally, i

Today's news:

Four anonymous plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against President Trump, his business and his three eldest children in federal court Monday, alleging that the Trumps helped promote fraudulent investments that duped investors.

He's already had to pay back people sucked into Trump University. These cases aren't much, but they're a start. Get enough of them together to show a pattern of fraud, and the racketeering laws can be applied.

 

[Dakota Tebaldi]

IMPORTANT: Mueller is about to be attacked with a story about sexual harassment. Thread:


I will listen to ANY story of sexual harassment and always support the victim first. But this journalist is putting out this notice ahead of time, and it's worth taking a look at.

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

Thread.

 

[Jolene Benoir]

Today's news:

He's already had to pay back people sucked into Trump University. These cases aren't much, but they're a start. Get enough of them together to show a pattern of fraud, and the racketeering laws can be applied.

The Trump University settlement had him paying $25 million to people he bilked. He is having to pay back "up to" 90% of what they spent on the courses. That still leaves him with a $2.5+ million profit. He also didn't have to admit any wrongdoing. This is a far better result than the majority of fraud cases in which the fraudster only has to pay a pittance of their profits, but it still isn't exactly consequence. Consequence would be paying back ALL of their ill-gotten gains + a very large penalty.

We'll see on the new case. He is President now.

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

All References to Transgender Americans Scrubbed From Government Websites

 

[Porsupah Ree]

17m "Pittsburgh action at 16:00"

I just got an email about an anti-45 march in Pittsburgh, in response to him having the audacity to show his face there today:

Facebook page

(Apologies for a farcebork link, it's what was in the email.)

Hosted by Bend the Arc: Pittsburg. Starting at the corner of Beechwood Blvd and Forbes Ave.

SPREAD THIS LIKE WILDFIRE.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Pointing to Trump’s rhetoric, attorneys for Kansas militiaman convicted of mosque bomb plot ask for a more lenient sentence

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

IMPORTANT: Mueller is about to be attacked with a story about sexual harassment. Thread:


I will listen to ANY story of sexual harassment and always support the victim first. But this journalist is putting out this notice ahead of time, and it's worth taking a look at.

Fun with Jacob Wohl.

Thread by @KeyserSozeBro1: "My little Jacob Wohl story: August 2016, we're sitting around the trading turrets at my office on a bored to tears slow day. Our receptionis […]"

 

[Lianne Marten]

This is because they saw the anger over Kavanaugh and thought hey that almost worked maybe we should accuse this guy of sexual harassment too to get rid of him.

Everything with the Republican party is projection. There is nothing that they accuse other people of doing that they aren't or haven't done themselves.