Trumpism is fascism, and fascism is the political manifestation of psychopathology...specifically, the driving need to dominate and control, coupled with a total lack of conscience. This cluster of characterological traits can develop as a result of chronic and massive failures of empathy on the part of caregivers in the first three years of life.
Amphetamines produce those symptoms, were invented in Germany in the 30s, and were used heavily by the Nazi storm troopers. And the Nazi regime was fascism on speed, complete with the burnout... And Trump's skinhead fans are generally speed freaks as well. The food news is that so many were arrested after the Jan 6th insurrection, and they have had a chance to see the consequences. when they aren't jacked up.
2Peter from what I am told by someone who participated in a college course on Facism, Hitler and his leaders were using methamphetamines, which explains a lot. Take 1 psychotic lonely personality, add testosterone and a couple portions of speed to produce 1 toxic stew. A simple but destructive recipe.
Captagon has been found in contemporary terrorist groups as well. I heard it was found on the bodies of Hamas fighters. Not sure about how valid that is, but it wouldn’t be surprising. It gets the empathy right outta there.
Great point, Madeline! This is the very same thing I've been trying to point out and warn about in education from the very young on up, for 35 years now. It's the emotional intelligence damage, resulting in personnel deep wounds and often the emotional diseases that grow from them: sexism (the primary superiority/inferiority caste system structure, racism, and all "other-isms" enforced by control and violence. I focused on how the Far and Religious Right learned this before we did, and started their takeover even under Reagan's administration militarily toned education attack: "A Nation at Risk". We were, from their autocratic and emotional/culturally abusive standardized education overly imbalanced to STEM "testing", actually damaging the human minds and hearts of almost all the children we were 'processing' through that model. It resulted in deep learning damage, turning the innate and necessary social-animal emphasis on human connection and empathy to thrive/learn together, to competitive machining the human education/upbringing for the surest short-term result for profiteers. What we are actually all "paying for' is the resulting deficits of understanding of how to problem-solve in individual lives in an increasing disconnected, transactional and calloused society/neo-liberal world. I saw this more than 30 years ago, and warned at that time, specifically that it was a "underlying value system implicit control" that would literally result, "in a character as characterless and venal as Donald Trump, as a national leader." I wrote that in 1989, using the biggest "famous bufoon" that I could use as an example. Sadly, I truly thought I was exaggerating. It is why I went on to found The Transformative Education Forum (tef-global.org). It is the heart that we damage first and can then be manipulated in hate, anger, fear against others, the most affectively by insatiable greed's control, but for all humanity's and even planetary loss.
I agree, June...when adults damage a child's good feeling about him/herself, then stuff him or her with what THEY want the child to believe, we deform their capacity to care about themselves and others. A child's first "teachers" are the parents. They unconsciously and sometimes consciously send messages to the child based on how they treat him or her. Those messages can enhance or corrode s child's sense of self-esteem. The educational system takes over from there and can do ill or good depending on the belief systems of the adults in charge.
I was a preschool and elementary school teacher until I was 35 and I think it's one of the most important professions, but the least valued and the least compensated. Thank you for telling me about the transformative education forum that you found it ♥️😊
For many Americans “fascist “ is a dirty word, worse than “communist” and “socialist” but I doubt the definition of any of these is clear. Donald calls his enemies all of these because they are hated labels. It really doesn’t matter what the word means if it is a despised label.
If we need to define the word as the name calling continues we are already in a losing situation. The voters that matter will not likely follow the debate on who really fits the word.
What I have seen is that if we say Donald is senile, he will pickup that word and say Biden is senile. It’s a tactic. “Trump crime family” leads to “Biden crime family.” “Trump is a threat to democracy” leads to “Biden is a threat to democracy”
It’s like the playground. “I am rubber you are glue. What you call me bounces off and sticks to you.”
We need to do more than use labels and phrases. They have the response that muddies the waters for the uniformed. need visuals short and frightening examples.
Yes DK, the right-wing under Trump simply picks up our words and throws them back at us but that doesn't make the words or what they mean any less relevant . I don't cave in just because the other side tries to dominate the frame. I think it's important for all of us to retain the legitimacy of our own perspective and not allow ourselves to be erased just because the other side tries to do that.
Well stated. My fundamental concern is purposeful ignorance magnified by disinformation. Party labels have become quaintly archaic in the “firehouse” of garbage folk consume…and as the old techie saying goes…”garbage in, garbage out”, or even older, “you are what you eat”!
Folks who refuse to face established fact are pathological…the late, great Bob Dole was often quoted, “you can have your own opinion, but not your own facts.” (Mic drop)…
Madeline, i 100% agree with you on the definition of psychopathology. My only addition would be that, it actually affects a good majority of all politicians, not just republicans.
As a card carrying member of the Democratic Party, as a Miamian, a member of the local Executive Committee, that's bullshit. As a matter of fact, Democrats out register Republicans in Miami Dade County. The mayor of Miami Dade County, Daniella Levine Cava is a Democrat.
It is true that we have a lot of people who live here who support a dictatorship ala Fulgencio Batista, Francisco Franco, Rafael Trujillo, Juan Peron, et al and see Trump as a caudillo. Those who are citizens, register as Republicans.
Can't tell you how many people who live here have an abuelo named Adolfo, Francisco or Jose Antonio (named for José Antonio Primo de Rivera, Spanish Fascist) in honor of their heroes.
In 2020 Trump lost Miami Dade, but won the state by 3.2%. It is true that Democrats underperformed in 2020 and 2022. This year, we have abortion and marijuana on the ballot. Some Republicans are flipping. https://rvat.org/
Trump is a fake "strongman." He is a liar, a scapegoat-er, and a flip-flopper. He also despises women and thinks that their most important concerns should be up to the states to resolve.
I just had a conversation with a MAGA man yesterday. He told me that trump is a strong leader, a DEVOUT Christian, a good businessman who knows how to make money. So kinda the same old story but this time devout Christian is added which I wasn’t hearing in 2016. He is concerned that social security won’t be there for him but he’s fallen for the GOP scheme of making us invest our ss in the stock market. My impression was a man that is disappointed in where he is in life and sees the trump illusion as what he wants to be.
True and so sad. We seek false security when we enclose ourselves in mental bubbles.When someone tries to pierce the bubble s/he is perceived as a threat. Reinforce their beliefs and you own them.
The system Trump is building looks a lot like Animal Farm. The MAGAs look like the horse, his plan to hire loyalists within the admin reminds me of the dogs and I think we all know who the pigs are...
Professor Reich: i'm currently reading a book that details the last months (mostly day-by-day) before hitler siezed control of 1920s germany, which was a functioning, abeit imperfect, democracy (quite like america today, actually). although the author never mentions modern america in the book, he doesn't need to because this is parallels what we are experiencing first-hand. truly the stuff of nightmares.
We just watched the new six part series on Netflix that shows the why and how Hitler got power in the first few episodes. It is frightening how similar Trump is to Hitler.
Of course the Islamist would pipe in with that b.s. DAESH, HAMAS, or Hezbollah.
Doesn't matter that you have a 1400 year old war of extermination against the Jews, does it, playing the victim,as you aggress and wipe out or subdue the infidel is the leitmotif of Islam.
At least the Saudi's don't hide it, they have a sword in their flag.
I calls i as I sees it. You injected Israel into the conversation, .
I am what I am, an independent minded person. I am able to admit that a broken clock is correct twice a day, once a day if on a 24 hr clock as I am
And while I am a progressive in most things, I will not eat the whole pizza or pie. And I am not an ideological purist either. So know I don't fit just at home with MAGAts anymore than I fit at home with Leftists.
But I do know that I will crawl over broken glass to vote for Biden, just to keep Trump out of office, even if sends 2,000 lb bombs to israel. Those that won't are voting for Trump
i agree -- trump himself is rather stupid, but he is the front man for a much larger nazi conspiracy -- but in this book, hitler does not look like a brilliant or politically astute man, either. he rather bumbles along, a petulant toddler, really, screwing up frequently, but LEARNING FROM HIS MISTAKES, unlike the government and other authorities of the time, who refuse to look at what's happening in front of their very eyes.
"Bad Faith" is a documentary that can be rented from Prime video for one dollar. I recommend it because it shows the history of the Christian National movement since before Reagan that has led to them wanting to destroy democracy. It was an eye opener for me. Hartman recommended it in his report yesterday and called it brilliant. Now I need to find Robert Reich's video on fascism. I learn so much from the substacks and the participants in the comments.
If Trump succeeds in becoming King, the Christian Nationalists (really the New Apostolic Reformation which is actually more than Christian nationalism) will get rid of him at their first convenient opportunity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Apostolic_Reformation.
Fortunately the Constitution is very specific about Treason:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."
That's it.
What you likely mean is Sedition. "Sedition is inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority to destroy or overthrow it."
But I'm not sure that only the FBI can be the investigating agency....the US has many law authority agencies capable of investigating and arresting although the FBI is primary as it is an arm of the Justice Department.
Yes, but so much more. He wants to essentially nullify the Legislative branch....and the judicial. Within the Executive branch he would be all powerful with the ability to hire and fire with no oversight. In other words, Trump wants to run the US as a business. The model is his business which has no board of directors. Within the Trump Organization Trump is KING. That's the model he will use to remake the US.
I voted for <Trumpism is more dangerous to America> because his victory would allow Putin & Xi free reign to use their superior supersonic missile technology against Europe, Taiwan, us and the rest of the world. Trump's rabid MAGA supporters will unleash terror on Americans worse than the KKK did. And, Putin's drone-supplying Ayatollah pal, and his minions, will unleash the Armageddon fight Evangelicals want against Bibi & his ultra-orthodox bloc
What you describe is not improbable, hopefully sanity will prevail…but I would offer these few observations:
* Nature is a self correcting system
* humans are best understood as the latest in a constantly changing hierarchy of predator and prey. We are the current “alpha.” Collectively…
Since we, the human race, seem intent on damaging the essential life systems of Gaia, we should expect a correction which may be one more mass extinction
Mass extinction is where we are headed, either from nuclear war or climate change. The politics, the self-centered ideologies, and the financial incentives are there.
Yep, there's no upside to a 2nd Trump presidency......except possibly Christian Nationalists. These folks are already at work preparing to the day after. Once Trump is elected he will swamp the Executive branch with True Believers of the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) whose job it will be to convert America to a Christian Nation. You may know some of these people already. Leonard Leo, Mike Flynn, Marsha Blackburn, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Tim Scott....a very long list.
I think it's figure out where you want to go then pick and choose among the texts to find the justification. Again, not really sophisticated as most followers are not raging intellectuals. Just has to pass the smell test of a dolphin (hint: they can't).
Much of the Trump Putin sniveling started with this lie.
Putins contempt for NATO was due in large part to the 2014 coup that overthrew Ukrainian democracy in favor of a Victoria Nuland appointed turd. The United States military got its ass handed to it in Afghanistan by the Taliban. Both Sargent Billy and the United States are great at starting things they can’t finish.
But if they would admit when they lied or were wrong that would be a good idea.
That's assuming that he doesn't win. Which, terrifyingly, he might, given those who can't bring themselves to vote Democrat because they "don't like" the present leader or have preferences stronger than the need to keep Trump out. The same people who "didn't like" Hilary Clinton and gave us Trump the first time.
Yes- if you notice the non committed don’t want to talk politics in casual conversation - I always point out that staying at home and not voting is a vote for Trump - that usually scares them .
I watched Stephanie Rhule, on the 11th hour last night, I never watched it before, but caught it and it was a round table of average persons, demographcally split by generation, gender and race.
There was the young black guy, made great points, but got hung up on race and white inustice to blacks. His points were valid, but not his conclusion that blacks were justified in sitting out the election. Nobody,not even Stephanie raised the issue, that not voting was in fact a vote for Trump.
Maybe not voting doesn't count in blue and red states, but in swing states and here are only five this election, AZ, NV, MI, PA, WI AZ has 10 electoral Votes, NV 6, MI 15, WI 11, PA 19.
The election is going to be decided in MI, PA, WI, three states that have a Muslim Population in the 100,000's who have threatened to sit out the election, and MI and PA have black populations over 20%, and many also threaten to sit out the election, to give Biden the fingr and punish the Democrats.
But they are only punishing themselves, if Trump wins, then there will be no chance in 2028 to undo the damage that they did, and when the hammer of Thor, wielded by Trump and his white christian nationalists come down on these people, it will be too late to have their regrets.
I am sure there were millions of Germans who regretted voting for Hitler in his referendum. He was not elected as Chancellor but appointed by Bismark, but was confirmed by a referendum.
Billy, you’re a liar and you deserve to lose. The reason Trump is going to win is because you’re delusional. The 50 lying snakes at the FBI that swore that hunters laptop was a Russian hoax crapped on this country’s credibility. The j6 hearings where no one can say exactly how many agents were in the crowd. Were they instigating the violence. The DOJ has brought no charges against Trump in 3 plus years. Either Garland and Biden have failed to prosecute the most heinous crime in our history (except for that nastiness in Dallas) or they both know if you start peeling that onion, even you will be crying.
The trials have been a sham. The one I have always wanted to see was Georgia and somehow the left crapped their pants on that one. Every goddamn one of them comes up in the election year? Thats the most banana republic thing ever.
You guys can clutch your pearls. It’s going to be painful. But if we get to2028 and don’t live in post apocalypse caves, maybe just for a second ask yourself, In the face of the new Hitler, how did you nominate a genocide loving, geriatric moron like Biden and only a heart beat away is Kamala Harris. I don’t know how you can be so stupid and indignant at the same time.
Chuck, C., I don't know where you get the idea that Biden is weak or "genocide-loving". Likely it's his interaction with Netanyahu, which, if you look at the whole picture, there's an image of Joe Biden walking a tightrope. Biden is enforcing our alliance with one of the many "western" countries sworn to support each other. If the USA fails to support Israel will he then begin to betray France, Great Britain, Germany, Poland, Finland, and on and on? Of course not, but that's not how the NATO alliance will see it. The alliance is important to maintain. The children in Gaza need protection that Biden can't provide, whether he helps the Yahu or not. We're all appalled at how Israel is conducting the war. I've written to Biden to stop sending weaponry, but in my gut I know he has no real choice. If we withdraw our aid, defying NATO, Israel will sink back to the familiar forever conflict with continued occasional bombing in Palestine, and the children of Gaza will not be made safe, regardless. By providing armament, perhaps the hardships there will end sooner. Think it through, as Biden has. It's a first-class tragedy, but get it right.
REcent report in The NY Times that many new American citizens, former migrants themselves, plan to vote for Trumpty , as they think he will be border tight. They cite folk pouring over the border since Biden's Presidency, only now slowing down. This is so dangerous. Many are from Catholic, conservative social backgrounds, coming to the US and dragging us backwards. What a joy..
Among those Vicki, is Mayra Flores, herself an illegal immigrant, now a Congress critter for 18th US District, She is about as far right as you can get and she isn't alone. It seems that the worst of the anti immigrant crowd are 1st and 2nd generation immigrants be hey Ms Flores, Nimrata Halley or Vivak Ramaswamy.
Sally, I don't like or trust the Clinton's but no way could I have voted for Trump.
In fact 2016 is the first time I registered to vote since 1968, just because of Trump. My mind was made up when he came down the escalator and opened his filthy mouth.
Unfortunately I am not voting for. I am voting against and it is not the lesser of two evils. I don't consider Hillary or Biden evil either. I have issues with both, but I have a bigger issue with Trump. I pegged him for what he is, and what harm he will do, the moment he opened his mouth. And I knew nothing about his history in New York., New Jersey or business.
William, I agree. I was turned off by Trump from his "Apprentice" days; I couldn't watch him for more than five minutes. I like your view of the regular democrats you've named, but I urge you to take a more thorough look at Biden before you dismiss him as the candidate you're only voting for in order to defeat his evil opponent. Biden has done a spectacular job as president, and he also carries an understandable disrespect for public relations, in which he fails at every turn..
They're owned too. No one can save America, unless...... Biden can be a dictator first, before the election. Trump can't be allowed to control our military. And like you said, Trump isn't smart enough to pull this off by himself. Some accessories are obvious, but others are devious. I'd say your definition "trumps" Klaire's.
How long can we let this go on? Come on USA get it together!
It’s such a shame that we can’t enjoy such heartfelt moments which President Biden currently delivers in his speech last week. Without being overshadowed by this felon who appears unstoppable!
I think I just read that the CEO of that org announced he will be retiring but first they are looking for a replacement. The right wing keeps the young inflow, just like they did with the Supreme Court. The Dems need to be mentoring and preparing more young people. They have not kept up and now we have a very old presidential candidate!
I recognized trump as a fascist from 2017. But them I am old. In 1939 I was 6 years old when WW2 officially began. I asked my father what fascism meant and he told me. How rich men liked it because it made them more money. And certain types of people were bullied and killed because they were different. During the nearly 6 years of war I learned more and more about fascism. But also about propaganda, the partner of spreading fascism.
IF ONLY, the different systems of government were taught in schools. Children aren't as stupid as adults think they are. By the age of 18 everyone should know: True Democracy only existed in Athens Greece for a very short time 2000 years ago. It only works in very small groups. What we have is a representative democracy. But even representative democracies only work for those who care. It's up to you to vote for the candidate who shares your view of how the country should be governed. Even then, you should stay in contact, if you disagree ask why a certain vote was made
Unfortunately with social media being owned by the candidate himself spewing lie after lie to the public. - the truth about Trumps fascism isn’t getting out -
This is my thinking also. How about a national Civics exam before voting? Certainly before running for office. Yes. Representative Democracies only work for those who care.
Democracy does not work for donkeys. They do not like the burden, but what can you do about it; all humans are the same---except when a man shows up with a carrot in hand.
I read that certain countries require or mandate that citizens vote. Australia, for example. There are fines for not voting!? I'm not sure that would be a panacea. It depends on who the candidates are. Hopefully. There would be good choices.
Mandating voting is not enough. Putting government education in schools is not enough. People need critical thinking skills. In this red state, the GOP are always putting ballot candy into the election statements for bills. The recent one will be that non-citizens cannot vote. That’s already the law! But they want to put it in so people will be fooled into voting their way.
Keep in mind that the difference between a psychopath and a sociopath is that the former is born, and cannot be healed. The latter is made by circumstances and can be healed.
I have read that some studies show that the sociopath’s brain is smaller in the frontal lobe. (I’m not a doctor or researcher.). If that is the case, though, it would seem that sociopathy can’t be healed.
Fascism has been demonstrated and others on this site have described it well. Trump himself is a threat to be sure. But Trump is also a mouth of rhetoric and ignorance. He is led by his ego and quest for power. But he is also limited by his ignorance. I am more concerned about the mealy-mouthed elected officials who follow his path, and those behind him who appear to have both the zeal for power and the intelligence to pursue it. Those who follow in his steps. Trump himself has a limited trajectory. He has unleashed a cadre who will be more devastating to our democracy. We deceive ourselves if we focus too narrowly on Trump himself.
You all hate Trump, so vote Democrat, all of you. Please don't p*** about voting for third parties because you don't like the current Democrat leader. That's how you (and we, the rest of the world) got Trump last time. We don't want him again in his second and far more terrifying incarnation. We don't have a vote. We depend on you to vote Democrat.
On the 80th Anniversary of D-Day, how depressing the United States of American is contemplating another Hitler as a leader. Whatever happened to our moral compass of life, liberty and freedom? Why did so many men loose their lives on the beaches of Normandy only to have a corrupt Republican Party stand behind a mad-man? Did my father fight in World War II for nothing?
four feet, your father is what is right with our country! Never doubt that true Americans who value life, liberty and freedom are so very grateful for your father and all of the other military men and women who laid down their lives for the very liberties and freedoms we have today. He did not fight for nothing. Your father, to me, is a true hero!
No, either your father or my father fought for nothing ! They gave us the chance to become THE designated world power with national prosperity and world cooperation for many decades. But now we are down to a few elderly men and women in wheel chairs on a barren windswept field, filled with crosses in France. Hard to compete with Taylor Swift or Beyoncé or even Donald Trump. But we remember, children of the late 1930s and 40s who are still around.
Geoff - The U.S. was the defender of democracy during World War II. Since then, it has been busy - bipartisan wise - building its own empire, not of territories but of economic and political dominance that empowers U.S. government to 'persuade'/lean on so-called free countries and impinge on their sovereignty. The excuses have varied. Re: Vietnam, it was to save it from the 'yellow hordes from the north' and arresting an inevitable 'domino effect'. More recently, the excuse has been 'regime change'. In fact, U.S. intervention (via the use of the IMF) in Russia under Yeltsin in the 1990s demonstrated that what the U.S. was really about was to destroy economic competitors. This policy was confirmed less than two years ago when the U.S. decided to destroy the Nord Stream pipelines in the Baltic Sea; that was industrial sabotage against 'friends' and 'allies'; it violated their sovereignty.
However, I agree that Trump is a loser. But he's the logal extension of U.S. post-war policy. He's just more honest about it. He hasn't got the brains to formulate a self-serving national ideology. His is simply self-serving in a crass form.
There have been cracks and some (quite a few) failures, but if I had to pin my hopes on any democracy it would have been the USA until around 10 years ago. The trickle down theory has failed the vast majority of citizens, but I had thought the democratic institutions strong enough to fix it. I was wrong.
Geoff - The point I'm making is that a country or city-state can be both democratic and imperial. Gandhi noted that British democracy was a wonderful thing - in Britain - but its empire building had as its aim to maintain enlightened despotism in India. Going back in time, Athens had a democracy of free men, and was one of the world's centres of philosophy and high culture, but engaged in empire building and massacre, also.
Gunnar, you are Sisyphus, rolling the stone of human nature up a hill.
Empire-Democracy. Empire-autocracy.
The American "Empire" (as you call it) is benevolent, and not oppressive, it is flawed (beyond question or doubt) but it swims in the sea of justice and the rule of law.Laws cobbled together by those who are ruled. At least until the Federalist Society had it's judges appointed to the bench by Trump, and until Trump wins (god forbid) election and the Heritage Foundations Project 2025, and Trumps Project 47, are implemented on Jan 20th 2025, then Katy bar the gates, because all hell is going to be unleashed on the U.S.A, then the world
William - There is no such thing as 'human nature' - unless you think that Sigmund Freud outlined it in his psychoanalytic theory. Even then, the ways human express 'human nature' are numerous and highly divergent. In itself, 'human nature' has no predictive value.
You claim that the American empire is benevolent. Well, sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't. Beating Hirohito and Hitler were benevolent goals; helping depose the elected Prime Minister of Fiji in 1987 wasn't - it was a coup d'Etat and a breach of the rule of law. Likewise, the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline in the Baltic Sea two years ago was an act of industrial terrorism - it was a breach of international law.
America's dilemma is not just about Donald Trump. One problem is that U.S. judges are political appointees. I appreciate that there are reasons for this, but we can now see why it might be a disadvantage.
I am not going to get bogged down in a side bar about Human Nature, needless to say I disagree.
I do not disagree with your other complaints, but again it is wrong to lump them under empire..
Nations act in their own perceived benefit. I myself bitch about Exxon using it's money muscle to isolate Venezuela because it had the temerity to believe that it's oil belonged to Venezuela. Then there are the Banana Wars, the Ovethrow of Mossadegh MI 6 and the CIA), Coca cola funding right wing death squads in Honduras, Dubya invasion of Iraq, his fathers invasion of Panama to arrest a CIA bagman.
I have a longer list than you, but the list is not about empire, that is a wornout Marxist trope. It is all about shareholder value, return on investment, executive salaries and bonuses.
Chase swamp gas if you like I will keep my eye on the target, not illusions like "empire".
I live in the real world of America in 2024, and there are only two choices, a right wing theocratic dictatorship under Trump or a flawed and faulty democratic Republic.
William - The British empire was also about making money. The East India Company, for example, made a lot of money in India - see for example: Shashi Tharoor interview: How British Colonialism 'destroyed' India - YouTube. - You are right that nations pursue their own interest, and the definition of 'empire' has fuzzy boundaries. But empire has to do with national reach and degree of influnce. During Cold War I we often spoke of the 'Soviet empire', referring not just to its claim to Siberia and Central Asia, but to its influence in Indonesia and Africa and Cuba. Since c. 2008 and the start of Cold War II, NATO has started referring to Russia as an empire. And yet, in terms of territory, while Russia shrunk, it was NATO that expanded during the 1990s.
Empire also has to do with attitude. How often do we hear U.S. Presidents refer to "our power" and "our friends across the globe" in the same breath during their inaugural address? Empire has to do with prestige and arrogance, with the knowledge that wherever you go, you will be listened to with respect, resentment, and obedience. I put it to you that the Vietnam War had less to do with establishing new markets for Coka Cola and more to do with 'extending' the reach, prestige and military power of the U.S. Vietnam was a demonstration case. Maybe this was the psychological reason why LBJ and Nixon kept fighting it for so long.
I suppose foreigners are more likely to perceive 'empire' than the nation state that is accused of it. We foreigners take note of 'American exceptionalism' and see in it signs of empire. You Americans probably see it too but read the signs differently. - As I said, the boundaries are fuzzy.
Who did the East India Company make money for? It made it for it's stockholders.
I repeat while Marxists and Liberals kvetchabout Empire, they should be looking behind the curtain. It isn't Governments that are the problem, it is the stockholders who use government as a tool and a weapon.
It is these same forces that fund the political parties, that control the government.
A nation is it's governing body,, the governing body is simply a tool. But you and so many others are stuck looking at the Wizard on the screen and not the man behind the curtain.
In 1600 a group of investors got together and asked,( bribed) Elizabeth 1 for a royal charter (a monopoly) to form the East India Company, to compete with Spain in it's exploitation of the America's. It eventually had enough power to use the English Army, the red coats, in it's drive for profits and power, and you and others call that Empire, when in reality it is a profit making corporation using the collective power of the state.
Same here in America, what Coca Cola wants, what Exxon Mobil wants, what any large financial institution or corporation wants they get, because they have the money and thus the power over politicians.
It isn't empire, it is return on investment, shareholder value, and those that increase it, like CEO's, Lobbyists, Boards of directors are richly rewarded, those impede it pay a price, either politically or personal, but the political is personal, especially when it means loss of life and/or income and social status.
So talk about Empire and Imperialism all you want, but you are yammering at the projected Wizard on the Screen, not the man behind the curtain.
Here is a concept. the USA is a joint venture company, it's shareholders are corporations, who themselves are in competition, at war with each other, let's call it a vessel, USA Inc.
We are passenger and deckhands on the jolly ship America, it's captain is elected by the passengers and deck hands, much like pirates elected their captains, the crew that mans the ship, is also elected.
Every four years a new captain takes charge and orders the ship to veer port or starboard, and after it has veered far enough of course to satisfy the passengers ,that are paying for the voyage, there is an election and a new captain takes over and orders a course correction,putting the ship back on track for it's final destination.
In the meanwhile this joint venture company, needs to protect it's assets and itself, and also secure resources so it sends out arned crew to fend off threats or secure vital resources.
An Empire serves a person, the Emperor, one person not a nation. The Roman Empire had an Emperor. Charlemagne was an Emperor, Napoleon was an Emperor, Victoria was an Emperor.
Wiiliam - Thank you for your thought-provoking post!
I will focus on the British Empire because it is the one that I know best. You seem to reduce the Empire to the shareholders of the East India Company (EIC). Yes, EIC raised its own army in India; it saved the British government money and effort. Then came 1857 and the Mutiny or War of Independence, and after it had been put down, Queen Victoria (the British government) took over the military occupation of British India.
Because India was not just a colony to be squeezed of its raw materials - although of course that was one aspect of Empire. India was also a prestige thing - big in area, populous, requiring travelling judges to uphold law and order, and a network of spies to detect groups of restive natives. In fact, Britain had a civil service In India, quite a bureaucracy. And missionaries, out to abolish suttee, for example. Britain had set herself the task of civilizing the country. To believe that this apparatus and purpose was simply to make money is a form of commercialist reductionism, William, and maybe your attempt at letting the U.S.'s empire off the hook. After all, who can object to be bit of international commerce in far-flung corners of the world? Sounds innocent and well-meaning enough!
Empires do not simply serve one person. Where do you get that from? Mind you, following the debacle of 1857, Queen Victoria became the Empress of India. But actually, India dwelt in the hearts of many others.
So, prestige is an important element in Empire maintenance. An example: in 1976, the artist Val C. Prinsep is given a commission: to paint as many of the Rajahs as possible. The plan is to then combine all the portraits into one large painting - a prestige piece. The way he talks about his father is telling; his father spent 33 years in the Indian Civil Service - "an example of unselfish devotion to duty and unassuming ability found in many of those who have by their unrecognized labours made India what it is" ("Imperial India. An Artist's Journeys", p. 2).
Sure, Princep was an "accredited painter to the Government" (p. 74), so he was paid. But this is not simply about money. The way he speaks about his father's "service" to India is the way a member of a colonial family conceals from himself the true nature of Empire.
But I can see that I will not convince you. You don't like the idea that your country might be engaged in empire building. Maybe you find the thought vulgar. Your country is more refined than that - more honestly commercial. Be that as it may be!
I think you are stuck in a paradigm, left over from when Kings ruled all,or people thought that they did.
The EIC, it didn't become the BEIC until The Acts of Union, in 1707 passed by the English and Scottish Parliaments in 1707, led to the creation of a united kingdom to be called “Great Britain” on 1 May of that year.
None of what England then Britain did until Elizabeth I was for the King or Queen,and it is royalty that is Emperor. Sir Benjamin D'Israeli declared Victoria to be Empress, and thus Britain and Empire.
Kings, Queens, Emperors need a medium of exchange, money, they obtain this via taxes and loans.
Edward I borrowed money from the Jews of London and when he couldn't pay back the loan, he banned Jews from England
The Fugger Brothers of Italy, were a wealthy Florence banking institution, and made out loaning money to crowned heads.
They loaned money to Ferdinand and Isabella, who refuse to pay it back, they didn't have the money That bankrupted the Fugger brothers. Still in the need for money, they evicted all Muslims and Jews from Spain, and confiscated their property, in their need that backed Columbus voyage and he set sail for America on the very day the eviction edict took place.
Frances I of France, needed money so he borrowed it from the international financial institution known as the Knights Templar, unable to repay the loan he had the Pope declare them heretics,manufactured evidence and thus not have to repay the loan, and while at it he tried to confiscate their wealth,but the Knights spirited it away.
If you insist on seeing Empires as Nations I can't dissuade you, however the driving force behind Empire are not royals or president or Prime Ministers, except in the case of Putin, Hitler and Mussolini.. Certainly inot in America, not with it's turnover of Presidents and Congress critters.
The driving force is what would be called today, Capitalists, Plutocrats, billinaires and were called in their day adventurers. That was the term used for people who put up money and invested in the East India and London Company of Virginia.
Talking of the latter, it was not Imperialism that motivated the formation of the London Company of Virginia, it was profit. A group of investors, one of whom was my ancestor, bought stock in this venture, called a joint venture.
The purpose of which was to exploit the gold and silver, which they believed lay in abundance in that land across the Atlantic which the Spanish were explotiting and making them wealthy and the base of the Holy Roman Empire.
They prevailed upon James I for a charter to go forth and exploit the country.
That was in 1607, the quest came to naught, and were it not for Turkish Tobacco seeds carried by John Rolfe, the enterprise would have ended, just as the Virginia Company of Plymouth ended. There charter was formed by a group of Plymouth, England merchants who wanted to exploit, the Northern part of Virginia, which at the time was the entire east coast from the latitude of Roanoke to the Latitude of Maine.
James 1 hated tobacco, a foul smelling weed, and the Virginia Company would have come to an end, but for the efforts of a distant cousin named Nicholas Ferrar,who was a shareholder, a member of the governing board as well as influential in the religious life of England.
Two years after the disastrous attack by the Powhatan Indians,known as the Jamestown massacre, and because it had not found gold or silver nor returned a profit,on ay 24, 1624, the Virginia Company's charter was revoked by King James I due to overwhelming financial problems and politics, and Virginia became a royal colony,
Still England was not an Empire
There followed the English Civil war and with the victory of Cromwell, royalists fled to Virginia like geese, They became the planters the upper class, supplanting the old upper class of adventurers.
Still England was not an Empire. Whether or not an idea lies in the breast of many people, it is not an Empire
Nothing dwells in the hearts of others, because people are too involved with the affairs of surviving
I really don't know what you are arguing for,other than you have this idea (is it sincere or propaganda) that there is an American empire and thus all Americans are complicit, and that I am trying to get America off the hook. I am not,but you are trying like hell to put America on the hook. perhaps because it is the cornerstone of your political ideological foundation or agenda.
OK Gunnar, you have painted a picture of the pimples on the ass of the U.S.A., Now what is your solution, and what are the unintended results of your solution. Or do people think that far ahead, content with pointing fingers, calling names and venting their spleen, but nary a solution.
Fair question, William! - Well, one solution is to take back the power of the masters of the universe and their corporations. One step toward this would be to stop private election campaign contributions and introduce state-subsidised contributions instead. Another would be limit private access to Congress men/women. On a grander scale, maybe there should be a public conversation about the role of the U.S. in the international domain. This would involve a reassessment of the use of international influence. It would include a debate about so-called 'rule-based' versus international international order - see https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/leiden-journal-of-international-law/article/choice-before-us-international-law-or-a-rulesbased-international-order/7BEDE2312FDF9D6225E16988FD18BAF0
All this ought to lead to a conversation about the role of taxation and the role of government. Most of us would say that, as a matter of principle, most of our tax money should benefit us in various way. (Some libertarians would disagree, but then most libertarians are young, able-bodied and inexperienced, or they stand to inherit). These days government regard tax money as 'theirs', not ours. The solution is somewhere in-between, but the conversation must establish the cut-off point. I am mindful of Social Contract theory, and the need to re-visit it - see https://www.worldhistory.org/Social_Contract/
Deep-seated racism has been and remains a very big stumbling block. You say that there is no such thing as "human nature; do you imply that the human mind is a tabula rasa?
Victor - Absolutely not! We are born with different levels of intelligence, for a start. We are also born with different emotional reactions - phlegmatism; reactivity of the nervous system (Hans Eysenck), etc. We are even born with different micro-behaviours, inherited from one of our parents.
As for racism: it's learned behaviour - learned from family and wider culture or sub-culture. The most vivid personal example of this was during my brief stay in Darlington in northeast England in 1980. I was attending an informal party of young white and Black English people and was struck by how well they got on. Complete integration. Absolutely no sign of racial tension!
I agree with you Gunnar, I really do, but I live in reality, not the world of what if's, wanna be's, my druthers, and the reality is that we have the best government money can be, literally. You don't get elected,much less re elected without serious financial backing, unless you live in a racial cultural enclave . and even then they have to fight it out in the primary, which means money for propaganda, and people are a sucker for propaganda, even in Scandinavia, brand power, they believe in brands, you can sell them anything if it is shown on TV,. It is a people problem, there is little in the way of critical thinking and perception among the general public, few have time, and those that do lack the facility.
To proceed to achieve your goals, you require a majority in the House of Representatives and a 60 votes out of 100 in the Senate. Lot of luck Gunnar.
What do they say about wishes. If they were horses beggars would ride.
Realistically changes like you propose are monumental and drastic, they can only be achieved via deceit, manipulation or surreptitiously. grdually one increment at a time, because the real powers that be, the corporations and billionaires like Musk, Peter Thiel, Jaime Dimon, keep a watchful, very watchful eye on political developments
The only way to achieve your and my goal is by a radical sweep of all elective offices by genuine progressives, and that is a tall,tall order.
Meanwhile I live in the real world, and the real world presents to choices, one between an outright pervert, a rapist, a thief, a grifter, a traitor named Trump and a bumbling, imperfect but well meaning man named Joe Biden.
There are no other choices Gunnar., so who will it be?
William - I was asked about my solutions, so I listed a few. Of course they are idealistic, and you are free to call them unrealistic if you want. Democracy was idealistic and 'unrealistic', too, once upon a time. Still, it's good to have goals to work towards. Signposts. Reminders.
What are those solutions? If you listed them I don't see them.
Here is the situation. Only problems have solutions. For some things there are no solutions, human nature, like the need to breed, are only solved through drastic and lasting measures like sterilization and old age. and even then old age is not a solution, and the need to breed is a biological imperative, motivated by a thing called orgasm, which in turn is motivated by hormones.
There are difficulties, difficulties have no solution, attempts to solve a difficulty only exacerbates the situation, makes it worse.
Inequality is not a problem, it is a difficulty, any attempt to solve the problem fails, and only leads to greater problems. The Bolsheviks tried to solve the problem, supposedly, by using drastic measures to eliminate the middle class and dissenters, but they didn't get rid of inequality, they only removed the rungs out of the ladder, the middle class, leaving only the top rung and the bottom rung.
In the USA they tried to solve the problem of inequality via affirmative action, but that only exacerbated the situation as there was a violent and vehement reaction and in their zeal the attempt elevated some personalities who had no business being elevated as they lacked the qualifications and ability to do the job, Clarence Thomas comes to mind.
All you can do with a difficulty is to ameliorate it's affects.
You can't solve a difficulty.
Racism is a difficulty, not a problem, because it has no solution, even if the whole world was brown, there would still be racism, brown eyes vs blue eyes.
The genocide of Tutsi's in Rwanda by Hutu's was a race war,yet both were black, they differed in stature, shape of head and nose.s, Tutsis being described as tall with thin noses and a lofty bearing, as opposed to Hutus, who were short, stocky, and flat-nosed. The Tutsis were sometimes even described as 'false negroes', as Europeans with black skin.
Shall we discuss the middle east, we can't do so without discussing religion.
To start with not all Arabs are Muslim, but 99.99% are, Arab is not a race,it is an ethnic identity based on one's native tongue. Jew is not a race either, it is an identity based on tradition,not a religion.
There are white, yellow, black Arabs, There are Muslim and Jew (Druze) Arabs.
Kurds are not Arab.
There are orthodox Jews, secular Jews, atheist Jews and even Christian Jews (Jews for Jesus), but no Muslim Jews,unless they are converts or descendants of same like Metin Kaplan.
So Jew is an ethnicity not defined by Race or Religion
Arab is not an ethnicity defined by race or religion
Christianity is not an ethnicity defined by race or religion
Hindu is not an ethnicity defined by race or religion
Same with Buddhism, or any other identity.
So we are left with the worlds greatest destabilizers, Religion.
Religion knows no ethnicity, it is trans national, trans ethnic.
An example, there are three Slavic nations in the Balkans, all cousins, all Slavs, but they differ by religion, Muslim, Roman Catholic, and Orthodox, actually four
Bosnia Muslim, Kosovo Muslim, Croatia Roman Catholic, Serbia Orthodox all enemies of each other yet all are Slavs. Rome called them Illyrians, Constantine was one.
We now get down to the problem of religion. It is not a problem because their is no solution, unless there is a great awakening and mankind realizes that religion doesn't solve it's problems and provides security, but causes them.
Back to the mid east, the conflict between Muslim and Jew is 1400 years old, it started with Muhammad beheading the entire Jewish tribe of Quaryza in Medina because he wanted their wealth, it is in the Quran.
And became a holy war, in the hadith of al Bukhari, verse (sahih) 129/1296, book 56, hadith 139, where it says "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem) (copy and pasted from the HAMAS covenant)
The day of Judgement is the end times, when the Mehdi/Mahdi will appear and all of the world becomes Muslim. it is , when Allah will decide how people will spend their afterlife. Yawm ad-Din , day of judgement will not come until all the Jews are obliterated.
Therefore there is no chance of peace between Muslim and Jew, thus not a problem that can be solved. On top of which Jews are occupying what Muslims believe to be sacred Islamic soil, especially the Dome of the Rock.
Russian aggression is a problem, however and there is a solution, Putin dies, and the oligarchs which are his power base and henchmen, along with him.
Still it will require a massive overhaul of the Russian mentality, for them subservience to authority, serfdom and slavery is part of their cultural inheritance from Jenghis Khan, through the Tsars, through the Bolsheviks to Putin.
The Russian ethos and legacy is Imperialism, conquest, obliteration of ethnic identities. Well not with Stalin, he incorporated the various ethnicities into the Soviet Union, so long as they served him and his purpose.
Putin is trying to do the same, with the exception of Ukraine, perhaps the Baltic states as well, there is in genocidal mode.
Muslim Chechnya rebelled because they felt that their ethic identity as Muslims was under attack by Orthodox Russia, Putin found a solution to that problem, by recognizing the leadership of the most ruthless Muslim thug as president, now he has a Muslim satrap.
William - Thank you again for an interesting post!
You write, "Racism is a difficulty, not a problem, because it has no solution, even if the whole world was brown, there would still be racism, brown eyes vs blue eyes". - My example for Darlington in northeast England in 1980 suggests that - whether a problem or a difficulty - there is a solution, but maybe we haven't studied the issue from the potentially most productive angle.
You also write, "Therefore there is no chance of peace between Muslim and Jew, thus not a problem that can be solved. On top of which Jews are occupying what Muslims believe to be sacred Islamic soil, especially the Dome of the Rock". - Well, Norwegians have a 'sacred place', too, namely Eidsvold, where our Consitution was drafted and signed by a group of respectable middle-class men. Even so, we have forged friendship ties with both Denmark and Sweden. The reason is that the circumstances and context for the earlier conflict have fallen away. That's what is needed in the Middle East. One stumbling block - among many - is the (by now) much-debated Empire.
You furthermore write, "So we are left with the worlds greatest destabilizers, Religion". - I'm not so sure about that. The great destabilisers are demagogues who happen to feel in a religious mood and who are inclined to use religion to climb the sleazy pole of fame and infamy.
In fact, there is an ecumenical movement, where representative cognoscenti from various world religions meet to explore common ground - and discuss how to defend each other against common evils like secularism, materialism, Marxism, atheism, and unholy doubt. So, in Britain we were blessed with an archbishop who defended sharia law and a parallel sharia court system in Britain. This came as a suprise to many Brits - see https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/archbishop-of-canterbury-clarifies-defends-remarks-on-shariah-law-1.698017
This means that you conclusion, "Therefore there is no chance of peace between Muslim and Jew, thus not a problem that can be solved" - although expressed with logical certainty - could be incorrect.
You assert, "The Russian ethos and legacy is Imperialism, conquest, obliteration of ethnic identities. Well not with Stalin, he incorporated the various ethnicities into the Soviet Union, so long as they served him and his purpose". - Yes, you are right: Stalin tolerated ethnic minorities and even promoted them on the 'everyday' cultural level, but within the national state-framework of the Soviet Union. In the United States, such a process used to be called "the melting pot". I'm not sure what it's called now, in our current age of diversity, polarisation, and assertive thinking.
As for Ukraine: Putin sees it as part and parcel of a wider nuclear-strategic issue of Russian self-protection: the problem of keeping one's adversaries at arm's length, always and everywhere. I agree that this is a phenomenon that marks out super-powers and/or narcent empires. The Monroe Doctrine has the same aim. It is sometimes referred to as 'areas of interest'.
I overllooked an important difference between Judiasm and Islam and Sweden, Denmark and Norway.
The Scandinavians share a cultural heritage, and a racial one at that.
Jews and Muslims do not, In fact their cultures are at odds with each other, and Islam demands subservience, not only of Jews but of your culture.
As regards Sharia in England and Norway, or Islam in the west. Bear in mind that when you are a guest in some one else;s home, you are on your best behavior
In New York city, where there are a lot of orthodox Jewish communities, Jewish family law (Halakah or The way to behave) is practiced, only to the extent that it doesn't conflict with secular law. The communities even even their own family courts.
If a Jew doesn't like the rabbinical ruling, then he leaves the community and is then subject to the laws of the state.
Sharia is more than family law, it is law that governs society. Female Genital Mutilation is permitted, because women are not suppose to enjoy sex, and indeed it is practiced in Muslim communities in America, especially among the Somali community in Minnesota. Homosexuality is punishable by death, leaving Islam (irtidad) is punishable by death, and has indeed been carried out in America, disrespecting the Quran and Muhammad is punishable by death. Honor killing is permissible, and indeed many cases of honor killing in America.
Polygamy is permitted in Islam, and despite secular laws against it, it is still practiced (also by Fundamentalist Mormons, who have more than the four wives permitted by the Quran)
Sharia is much more than family law
Here is the problem that Islam has in Europe and even in Norway, and it accounts for the rise of the right.
Islam has never undergone the reformation of Christianity, and it can't.
For instance there is no substantial difference from a westerners POV between Sunni and Shia Islam. Their's is an intramural fight over who is the successor to Muhammad., not one of doctrine, ritual or tradition.
Were it not for Charles Martel in 732 at Potiers' or John III Sobieski at the gates of Vienna in 1682, Europe or most of Europe would be Muslim and living under Sharia.
If you are a misogynistic, homophobic , female dominating patriarch who can stop what they are doing and pray five times a day, then Islam is for you.
But here is what accounts for the rise of the right in Europe.
When a minority culture reaches 17% of the population, there is a tipping point, in which the values, practices, traditions of that minority population bleeds over into the majority population,and women start wearing hijabs, not wearing short skirts, men became authoritarians over their wives and children., conversions become more frequent, and before you know it, there are Sharia law side by side with secular law, eventually, Secular law is replaced.
And it isn't about race, although there is some of that, it is about culture.
Islamic culture and western culture are incompatible. Water and oil, and there is no emulsifier.
I personally,and most people I know, could not survive in an Islamic society.
We would be dead.
To be fair, there are Christian cultures, in America, that are just as bad, and are even more threatening. They threaten to take over this country via Trump.
They are called Evangelicals, Dominionists, The New Apostolic Reformation, an extreme group of Christian nationalists, sees Trump as the anointed person to help create a Christian state.
They are transdenominational, includes Protestants and Catholics.
Dominionism was found by R J Rushdoony and Ted Cruz's father Rafael.
it seeks to restore order and like the NAR replace the constitution with Mosaic laws.
The Mosaic laws are the 613 laws of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, well not all of them, not the inconvenient ones like don't eat pork, shell fish or wear clothing of mixed fabric,only the ones of social control. Like death for less than faithful Christians, rebellious teenagers, atheists, adulterers and the method of execution is stoning, because stones are free.
In the case of these Christians vs Islam the fight is not cultural, because they are on the same side of the culture war. It is religious.
Islam is supremacist, exclusive. It accords Christians and Jews,the right to their worship and traditions, so long as they accept second class citizen status as dhimmis.
The History of Christianity, since Constantine, is all or nothing. The reformation ameliorated the harm of Christianity, after hundreds of years of war, torture, slaughter and burning at the stake, there has been a detente between Christian factions, and they have proliferated, but they stand united against a common threat.
Myself I don't give a fuck, so long as I can live in peace, in a society rule by secular laws. If women allow themselves to be brainwashed into objects, like Islamic women and the women of many Christian communities, that is their business, so long as it isn't the law and culture I live in.
If your government is regressive, backwards and unable to even feed it's people, like for instance, Afghanistan, then that is their problem, and we shouldn't bail them out, for their choices, and it is their choice, for like Mao said, the revolution(govenment) swims in the sea of the people.
When the people can't live with their choice, their government, their culture, they flee to a more prosperous and free culture, but drag with them the garbage that created their misery, as if it were precious gems, and try to remake the host culture that welcomed them, into the same pile of shit that they fled.
Thus the rise of the right in Europe.
America is different, here it is pure racism and the fear that maybe low wage unskilled migrants, who can't speak English will take away high paying jobs that require skills.
However the culture of North, Central and South America is Christian, Evangelical, Pentecostal and Catholic and ultra conservative at that, a perfect fit with the homophobic, misogynistic culture of Christian America, so the only reason for anti immigrant politics is racial and economic.
The economic complaint is a farce, because the immigrants do jobs,that Americans feel are beneath them and don't pay well enough.
So it is racial. And I don't care about race, I wish the whole world was brown.
There would be one less reason for conflict.
In America it is racial in Europe it is cultural, with a smattering of racism.
I have no idea of what you are talking about vis a vis Darlington. I repeat a difficulty has no solution, and a difficulty is not a problem. You have heard of solving a problem or problem solvers, ever heard of difficulty solvers
You can't compare a religious/ethnic war between Muslims and Jews, to
Norway, Sweden and Denmark,all of which are Scandinavian and share a common origin and history. The attempt to do is does not speak well.
What is with you and your fixation on Empire? And the only Empire in your lexicon is America and the west, but not Russia and Islam.
You sure are a Putin apologist and partisan, you have an excuse for everything Russian and Putin.
Again, what is it with you and your obsession with Empire.?
Biden ain't bumbling; he just walks like an 81-year-old man with pain in his body. He had only two years when he could get something done, and did he ever get something done!!!! Get with his record and stop complaining about him!
Sandra B - Well, Biden installed Janet Yellen; in an age of neoliberalism, this was no mean feat but not much commented on here in Britain. In this sense, Biden is well-meaning. However, when it comes to Israel's genocide in the Gaza Strip, he seems to have a blind spot.
I'm not complaining about him Sandra just being honest in my opinion with a Trump lover, cheese lighten up a bit don't be so defense. I'm 85, had a cancerous tumor removed in my brain, size of a tangerine, 7 years ago, and ten bouts of radiation afterwards, Result I stutter in speech and typing, and my sense of balance is shot.I would fall on my ass if there wasn't furniture and walls to grab.
Lighten up. I will crawl over broken glass to vote for Biden.
Just because there is a vote does not mean there is a democracy, and there is no democracy in any Islamic country, not with gender apartheid, an official religion, official punishment and death of gays, not with killing of unbelievers., and second class status for Christians and Jews (if you can find any in the countries), Most have no Jews.
For centuries Jews found safe refuge in Muslim Egypt and Muslim Palestine--then the Christian crusaders came. You probably know that Hitler regarded himself as a Germanic crusader.
Well, then perhaps you need to reconsider where you get your News at. Jews have lived in Iran for centuries and they have their own representative in their Parliament. You may also want to google 'Iranian Schindler' to learn who Iran saved Jews during WWII.
Of course, none of these will be beneficial to the Zionist/AIPAC propaganda.
Not their own parliament but their own representative in the Parliament. It was suppose to the "the Parliament" and not "their Parliament" Sorry for the mistype.
No disagreement with this view regarding the Islamic countries, of which just about nearly all their dictators are in power courtesy of the USA.
But as you put it, they don't pretend to be a democracy unlike the Zionist Israel which arguably has murdered far more than all those dictators combined.
Victor - Suharto presided over the mass killings of non-Communists, as well as Communists: ethnic Chinese, irreligious people and trade unionists, for example. Also, many people took the opportunity to murder neighbours they disliked for non-poltical reasons. The real figure, according to people who visited Indonesia at the time, may have been 2-2-1/2 million.
Oh how wrong you are. Zionists' haven't murdered more people than all Islamic dictators combined. Just the body count of people beheaded after Frida prayers in front of mosques exceeds the body count of people killed in combat by the IDF, then you have to talk about the ongoing massacres in Iran by the Ayatollahs and Republican Guard, or Saddam, how about DAESH,ISK, Hezbollah, the list goes on.
What is your problem with the Jews having their own state". There is one Jewish ethnostate in the UN and 57 Muslim ethnostates.? 193 states in the UN, the Jews are really underrepresented, I would say that they sit alone in a hostile environmen, literally and fighting for their lives.
There would not be the present trouble had not the Arabs attempted a genocide of the Jews on Nov 1948, again in 1956, again in 1967, again in 1993, and like the insane people they are, they haven't learned a lesson and keep coming back again and again, and promising to do so forever until the land is Judein Frei, as Yaha Sinwar said, they are a nation of martyrs, well not him, but the idiots he get to die for him.
We know that at least 37000 have been murdered just in last 8 months by the IOF.
So, if you want to put the records of the Zionist OCCUPIERS against all Islamic dictators, be my guest, you might as well add the Nazi record so your team look even better.
I am not defending those dictators which are in place because of the US backing, I am condemning those dictators AND the genocidal Zionist all together.
With that I have nothing else to say to you as you are obviously OK with genocide.
Free Palestine from the River to the Sea and Free USA from the Atlantic to the Pacific from the Zionist/AIPAC cancer.
Killed as collateral damage, we killed more French our allies in WWII, 20,000 alone in the invasion of Normandy.
Quite different than the brutal up front and personal Rape and murder of women, infants, toddlers, elderly and disabled by the terrorists of Islamic Jihad and HAMAS, wouldn't you say.
And while at, how about complaining about the full on genocide of Ukrainians by Putin. Ah but that doesn't bother you, only Arab deaths county.
What is happening in Gaza is not Genocide, Genocide is the intentiona obliteration of a people or group, accoding to the UN Convention on prevention of Genocide, there is no such intention on the part of Israel, at least not published, However Israel has a right to defend itself against people who seek to genocide the state, yes Israel has been threatened with genocide since 1948, HAMAS has it in their covenant, Islam has it in their sacred text, Muhammad started it when he beheaded the entire Jewish tribe (60 ,six at a time in the Market Place of Medina, which is a sacred Islamic city.
While there is a real genocide going on in Ukraine people like you are silent.
That slander doesn't work on me. Truth is truth. HAMAS has raped and murdered women,infants, toddlers, elderly and disabled. I bring up this facts and you call them racist.
We can study the history of fascism in Europe. We can see the evil and destruction. Trump on the other hand was just getting started during his first and only term as president. We can only imagine how it would have developed had he gained a second term. What we have learned from this experience is that a great number of people in and around our government at the time were really bad actors who came out of the closet when they saw the opportunity. In my opinion Trump himself is not capable of following a plan or of any consistent behaviour. He does provide an enviornmeent that allows evil to thrive. He is a loathsome and dangerous narcissist. But I doubt he could even provide a definition of Fascism.
Rob - You write, “Trump on the other hand was just getting started during his first and only term as president”.
Not sure what you are referring to. He didn’t start any new wars. He broke the self-imposed U.S. embargo on talking to North Korea. He broke new ground. He didn’t get very far, but then we don’t know what happened behind the scenes. Trump was up against a Washington Consensus that predated his administration by decades - a consensus that enjoyed blaming North Korea for being ‘isolated’ and ‘insular’ when in fact it was the U.S. that had isolated and embargoed it.
Yes, Trump tried to push the envelope against the Consitution, but never got very far. My impression as a non-American is that the Consitution and its defenders were robust. Yes, I am aware that Trump threatens to bend the Consitution if he is granted a second term. I don’t see how he will be able to do any of this. Please enlighten me. I would suggest that there is a lot of moral panic behind your sentence, in response to Trump’s empty appeals to his supporters and undecided voters. Unlike Hitler, he will have no military force to back his ambitions.
Gunnar, I am not sure how to enlighten you. You have equal access to the same information I do. (I live in London). You seem to have come to a different conclusion. You are free to do that in a democracy and you can freely communicate you opinions. I don't think that would be the case in a fascist state. And that is where Trump would take the USA.
Rob - Yes, Trump might do that - if allowed to do it. But American checks and balances appear to be robust because they are defended by so many at all levels of society and government. Trump needs careful supervision; he needs people and institutions to say 'No!' The U.S. has one big advantage over Britain: a written constitution. Even so, when Boris Johnson tried to prorogue Parliament, he found himself confronted by our legal system and was put back in his box. As long as people and institutions are prepared to stand up and say, "No!" there is little danger of a coup d'Etat either in Britain or the U.S.
I think you are naive Gunnar, making friends with Kim Jong Un will only lead to him invading South Korea. All he wants is permission. As I see it your opinion is that assent to aggressors is a virtue, and defense is a vice. Peace at any price. Is that correct. I don't know how else to take your comments Gunnar.
You come off as being the defender of autocratic aggressor nations and leaders. Correct me if I am wrong.
If America is neo imperialist, then it is benign compared to Russia and China. How about the Imperialism of small states, like the imperialism of Serbia. Or the imperialism of Islam. A religion can be and is imperialist. Christianity and Islam are imperialists, or haven't you thought of that.
My bitch with US neo Imperialism is that it is in service to international corporations and financial instiutions, not for the welfare and safety of America. It showed it head in Venezuela when Chavez had the temerity to actually think that Venezuelan oil belonged to Venezuela and not Exxon Mobil, who then mobilized it's power and used the USA, the State Department and the CIA to overthrow Chavez and his government and drive Venezuela into the arms of Iran and Russia. Just like they did with Fidel Castro.
There is a problem in America, not with Americans per se, but with the millionaires, billionaires and corporations that have accumulated so much money, that they have the power to influence policy not only to protect their wealth but to acquire more.
Yet with all of those defects and problems, there are still 100,000 or more people from all over the world lining up to get into the USA.
Meanwhile Norway, Denmark and Sweden are dealing with a problem, that was stopped at Poitiers by Charles Martelin 732 and at the gates of Vienna by John III Sobieski in 1683 an undemocratic, homophobic, gender apartheid, triumphalist and excursionist ideology that if successful will wipe out what remains of freedom, democracy and equality.
Thank you for your long and thoughtful response, William.
You write, "As I see it your opinion is that assent to aggressors is a virtue, and defense is a vice. Peace at any price. Is that correct". - On the whole, this is incorrect. A couple of years before I was born, my country-of-origin was invaded and occupied by the Nazi war machine. I wouldn't like to see this happen again, either to Norway or any other country in the world. The fact that you seem to think so, simply demonstrates your under-estimation of my political philosophy.
Having said this, during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, John Kennedy said, "I'd rather my children be red than dead" [quote from "Once upon a Secret: My Affair with John F. Kennedy and Its Aftermath", by Mimi Alford, p. 94]. - This, too, is part of my political philosophy.
You mention "the imperialism of Islam". - That's an interesting comment from a person who is American (I presume) - a citizen of the country that has meddled in the Middle East for decades. There is an informal dictum in life (and in politics) that every action gives rise to a reaction. I'm not defending the "imperialism of Islam" but then maybe the U.S. and some of its allies need to reassess its role in the Middle East? I should remind you that back in the day Islam in Spain was enlightened, and that it was the Catholic Church that began introducing anti-semitic rules and regulations. This was probably one reason that Baruch Spinoza's parents decided to leave Spain and settle in Holland.
I absolutely agree with your three paragraphs that start with "My bitch with US neo Imperialism ...". In particular, I agree that the problem is not with Americans per se; it is the politico-financial system that is the problem, and the source of many international problems.
You correctly identify "truimphalist ideology" as a problem. When the Soviet Union was dissolved, the West believed THEY caused it. They didn't - it was the idealist Gorbachev who done it! Furthermore, Gorbachev outlined a plan to transform Europe into a peaceful place. However, the West read Fukuyama's triumphalist and contageous book, "The End of History and the Last Man" (1992), and in our triumph we advanced NATO to borders of Russia. Today, in Ukraine, we reap the consequences. Every action provokes a reaction. Like Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Vladimir Putin has been thrown into crisis mode. But whereas Kennedy and Khrushchev were willing to negotiate, the West has refused Putin's repeated pre-invasion invitations to negotiate. That's an important difference.
Nothing I have said is to be construed as a defence of Putin's repressive domestic policies. However, it is as well to remember that when Putin first came to power, he was keen to see Russia become an integral part of Europe - he even suggested Russian membership of the EU. NATO and the EU were confused and uncertain, but it didn't take long for them to recover its Cold War bias and ignore Putin's invitations - as it had ignored Gorbachev's conciliatory invitations 10 years earlier. Could it be, then, that it was the West that erred - that we had made NATO a fetish, a goal in its own right, rather than an instrument whose life-span should have been permitted to ebb away?
Gunnar and William, When I wrote my short comment on DJT and fascism, I had no idea it would evolve into a full-blown debate. I stick by my original points. Gunner, nothing you have said has changed my mind. I assume you feel the same way. I lean towards William’s argument and wonder what the West should have negotiated with Putin about Gunner. Putin seemed to be saying, “Give me the rest of Ukraine (The part I didn’t take when I invaded in 2014. or I will invade you again.” That seems to be a difficult starting point for a negotiation.
I don't know what to do now. I stated my point of view in response to Robert’s invitation to comment. I have no interest in winning an argument, so it is unlikely we will meet again on this subject. If I am tempted to comment on another subject, I will be on the lookout for your difference of opinion. Life would be so boring if we all agreed on everything.
Rob - You may be reluctant to comment further on this subject, and you may be correct in saying we are too far apart politically to reach a consensus. But I think it's worth a try!
As I understand recent Ukrainian history, in late February 2014, there was a coup d'Etat in Kiev, and a new government had itself installed. The coup didn't arise from the peaceful 'colour revolution' of late-2013-January 2014, but came about when masked men dressed in black highjacked the peaceful demonstration and fought and killed police officers in their dozens. Eventually, these masked men prevailed, and a hyper-nationalist dominated government was formed. When counter-demonstrations errupted in the Donbass region in eastern Ukraine, instead of sending negotiators, the new government sent the Ukrainian army eastward to crush the protesters. As fighting began, Putin decided that the new government in Kiev might send air borne troops to Crimea to oust the Russian navy which was renting the premisses. To avoid this possibility, Putin's special forces took control of Crimea and a plebicite and annexation followed. About two months later, as the armed defenders of the Donbass began to lose ground to the Ukrainian army, Putin secretly intervened militarily; this was in April, I think, as far as we know.
So, the conflict in Ukraine began as a civil war and with the Russian annexation of Crimea. And yes, Putin installed a new military leadership in the Donbass and ensured that the 'rebels' held the front line against the Ukrainian army.
Putin had nurtured another concern - a broader strategic one - namely the presence of NATO on Russia's borders. He suggested negotiations; the West simply didn't react. And this eventually led to Putin's invasion of Ukraine. We blame him; he probably felt that in order to protect Russia's southern flank, he had no real choice - just as Kennedy felt he had no choice at the start of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.
That's really all I have to say about it. Each one of us can decide whether (1) NATO should have responded to Putin's invitations to talk; and/or whether (2) Putin acted responsibly or whether the invasion was an excuse to confront the West on his own ground. Our judgement involves the question whether there is such a thing as 'territories of interest', or not. I think it is fair to say that NATO's intransigence played a role in Putin's decision to invade. This doesn't let him off the moral hook.
As for Putin's motives as they developed following 2014, I can't be sure; I can only guess. He had been accused of arranging the destruction of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 in July 2014. No evidence supports this. Worse, no logic supports it, either. Putin lacked a motive, but no-one in NATO cared to ask "Cui bono?" (Who benefits?) - Why would Putin destroy a passenger plane which he he would immediately be blamed for - and for which NATO might use as a reason to directly involve itself in the conflict in Ukraine? This would be the last thing Putin would want to risk; he has always been afraid of NATO.
Who destroyed flight MH17? To ask this question is to ask, "Who had a motive?" If Putin didn't have it, who else? I think a faction within the Ukrainian government had a motive: to bring NATO into the conflict with the Donbass population. That's all I can say. I don't expect you to accept it. I'm not even sure that I firmly believe it. But ... cui bono?
In many ways, neither was Hitler. He couldn't be bothered with the minutiae of day to day governance, and that is where so many of his 'henchmen' came into the picture.
No discussion of Trumpism or fascism would be complete without an explanation of the enablers who form the inner circle of the cult and those who become the followers. We need to understand what kinds of personalities gravitate to authoritarian rulers and what socio-economic or cultural dynamics would leave them vulnerable to the con-men who prey on their vulnerability.
Yes. And once understood what can we do about them? It is said to be a cult mentality. How do we re-educate them? Persuade them to change their minds? Propaganda?
I think FOX "news" should go. Ignorance breeds ignorance. It is as if they take delight in our misery. Schadenfreude.
Robert Reich - You persist in drawing a parallel between Trumpism and (neo) fascism. That's fine with me. But I'm puzzled. You write well on America's economic system and the dominance of your American 'masters of the universe' and robber barons. My label for it is neoliberalism, whilst most Americans refer to the system as Reaganomics and Globalisation. Globalisation includes the use of so-called Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) clauses - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investor%E2%80%93state_dispute_settlement - within all recent international trade agreements. Britain seems to have embraced the system, also - see https://www.fieldfisher.com/en/insights/the-uk-and-isds-latest-developments
This system - neoliberalism - is just as (neo) fascist as Trumpism. The awful thing is that since Bill Clinton, the Democratic Party has adopted a 'soft' version of neoliberalism.
Gunnar You are absolutely correct. But trump derangement syndrome requires calling Trump a fascist. As you know, and anyone who doesn’t let msm dictate thought, actual fascism is merely the corporate takeover of government. Whether we pretend it’s still a democracy I will defer to you or others. But as you point out, Clinton and in my opinion Reagan started this process. To blame one party more than the other is part of the brew. Get the very stupid arguing about abortion guns pronouns fascism and corporate greed will launder money from the middle to the top. All the concentration camps, and genocide are merely an extension of the distraction.
Billy! Am I a bot? Or are you a bloviating turd. Remember when Clinton paid for the Steele dossier? The feds knew it was a lie in 2017 but let jag offs like you accuse a sitting president of collusion with Russia. Eight years later you still lie about it but also can’t understand why Trump gains in popularity every day. Good grief you’re not too bright.
This is the sort of reply that a person sends when he is bereft of any intelligent answer. It's a sign of intellectual short-circuit. It suggests that Chuck is absolutely correct and you're lost for words.
All you've managed to do is to simplify in ways that simple minds do. You've managed to extrapolate beyond the data given. I will try once more. Never let it be said that I'm not patient with you!
Nowhere have I said that Empire is totally bad, and nowhere have I said that "Russia is good". Nor have I ever meant to imply it. I've simply stated that the U.S. is building an empire and this entails being able to lean heavily on other nation states by economic and trade means and 'persuade' them to agree to things that other governments regret feeling compelled to do. I don't think this is good either for the other countries or for America's international reputation. So, the Vietnam War wasn't good for your country's reputation, nor was the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline good for you country's international reputation, especially not among your NATO allies.
Yes, Russia is one of the victims. That doesn't make Russia good. But it doesn't make Russia nearly as bad as the U.S. mainstream media propaganda tell you it is.
Palestine is another victim. Most of the international community are desperately trying to persuade the U.S. government under Joe Biden that supporting genocidal war by proxy is a bad idea. The international community is trying to rescue the U.S. power elite from itself. But we are not an empire; we don't have the clout to persuade the Biden administration to desist. And if Donald Trump wins in November, we won't have the clout to persuade him, either. It is what it is. It would be great if there were an Empire able to persuade the U.S. government - that would be a good empire, William.
With you, I'm up against it! You even deny that the U.S. (and Norway) was behind the destruction of Nord Stream. If you face facts with pollyannish denial, what can I do? What can anyone do? Ignorance is pure bliss.
What you have said, leads solidly to the conclusions I have drawn from your own statements. One doesn't have to say a thing directly
As regards Trump, it is obvious and known that he is Putin's puppet, from his efforts to get Vlad to approve a Trump hotel in Moscow, to asking him to provide Hillary's emails, to his private conference in Helsinki, where they evicted and forbade journalists and all translators save Putin's from the room.
Trump doesn't require persuading when it comes to Putin and other dictators, he is part of their club.
I do not amend or repudiate my assessments of your position, they are a reduction of your many, many words.
Russia is a victim, that alone gives you away. A genocidal aggressor is a victim, What he did to Chechnya to install his satrap is what he is doing to Ukraine and you call him a victim.
Wars against political Islam is brutal, whether it is waged by Russia or the U.S. Frankly, I'm not sure that there is a military answer. Maybe its Russia and we who need to change - in unexpected ways.
I'm going to diverge. You probably won't approve; you say you don't like 'distractions' - but there you are. There is a story circulating:
“The genteel gloss of Cairo’s Abdein area, where Mohamed Amir Atta lived, had faded to shabby disrepair by the early ‘80s, when he entered his teens. The government workers who had once lived well on $100 a month found themselves in a vortex of downward mobility, working second and third jobs to survive. … Atta graduated from Cairo University in 1990 and his father convinced him that only an advanced degree from abroad would allow him to prosper in Egypt. Soon he was headed to Hamburg Technical University on a scholarship. … Atta’s academic focus was Arab cities, specifically preserving them in the face of Western-style development. He returned to Cairo for three months’ research in 1995, and was angered at what he saw. “He said it was a completely absurd way to develop the city,” recalled Ralph Bodenstein, one of Atta’s fellow students, “to make a Disney World out of it.” … In November 1997, he made an unexpected visit to his academic supervisor, Machule, to discuss his thesis, then disappeared again for about a year. There is evidence that he trained at an al Qaeda camp in Afghanistan around this time. He reappeared in Hamburg in early 1999, from which time investigators connect him with a cell of about 20 suspected terrorists”.
So, maybe one way we need to change is our fancyfree approach to town planning in foreign cities. All I can say is that, by his own lights, Muhamed Atta found the 'perfect' target: a brutalist steel-and-glass twin tower, precisely the sort of architecture he had learned to hate. Having seen Melbourne undergo a ten-year 'facelift' in the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s, where the ruins of once-lovely old buildings were marked with signposts saying "Wheelan the Wrecker was here!" - The signposts seemed provocative. So, from this melancholy experience in Melbourne, I have a sense of how Mr Atta may have felt during his years of growing-up in Cairo. I guess the difference between him and me was that I 'moved on', as they sat these days, while he didn't.
Come on. I am not buying that both sides crap, and I don't think anyone else does either. There is a big difference between Bush's criminal war in Iraq and Putin, And Putin has declare Genocidal intentions, and is purposefully, targeting schools, maternity wards and civilians. He has said he wants to obliterate the Ukraine identity and culture he even denies the Ukrainian language, That is genocide, Bush's war was for oil, re election, to beat his Daddy, and for the sake of Saudi Arabia and Israel.
Try again.
If you aren't a Putinista, then you are trying very hard, and no one is buying your swill.
The thing is, William, that if you call me a "Putinista", you thereby throw doubt on you judgement that Donald Trump is "Putin puppet". The more you throw such labels around, the less discernment and credence you give yourself.
Isn't all this just a matter of where the $$ come from? Republicans traditionally get theirs from business/wall Street etc.. while Democrats sought theirs more from the workers. Clinton just said hell, we can do that and began imitating Repubs by talking to Wall Street. Its been a mess ever since.
Terry - No, neoliberalism goes beyond money and flirting with autocracy; it seeks the complete dominance of government that aims to structure society in the interest of money - and to infuse this ideology at the grassroots.
The most thorough analysis on this topic is "The New Way of the World: On Neliberal Society", by Pierre Dardot and Christian Laval, especially chapter 9: "Manufacturing the neoliberal subject" (pp. 255-299). It is a good book, well translated from the French, but written almost like a text book. I'd definitely recommend it; however, if you'd prefer something easier to read, I'd suggest "The Limits of Neoliberalism: Authority, Sovereignty and the Logic of Competetion", by William Davies. Or "The Silent Takeover: Global Capitalism and the Death of Democracy", by Noreena Hertz. Or "The Austerity State", edited by Stephen MacBride and Bryan Evans. There is also a book by Edward Luce called "The Retreat of Western Liberalism". This is in many ways an excellent book but Luce doesn't name neoliberalism as the culprit - except once, on p. 196!
Your wrong Terry, neo liberalism is taking government out of business. Putting government in Business is the classic definition of fascism. That is what Mussolini meant and did when he coined the term. His Chamber of Deputies was comprised of CEO's and Representatives from Italian corporations.
Lenin even said of the Soviet Union, it is State Capitalism, it was a combine of seven trusts organized along resource lines.
Neo-liberalism is a power philosophy created in 1938 (Lippmann, Hayak, Mises, later Friedman, etc) that saw politics as a vehicle to assure free-markets AND influence social issues. So, it's both political and economic -- but economic at its core.
Free markets, John, by neo liberal definition, are those devoid of government regulations, so it's use of politics is to rid the market of government regulations, that is why a major cause of Republicans is to dismantle the administrative state.
Correct. But to "rid the market of government regulation" you must have CONTROL of government policy, as the 1938 Lippman meeting concluded. Hence, neo-liberals use control of politics as a vehicle to establish de-regulated policies. Neo-liberals successfully lobbied Jimmy Carter (and Congress) to dramatically reduce Cap Gains tax rates in the late 1970s. This was followed by Reagan-Thatcher going "all-in" on neo-liberal policies in the 1980s, which dramatically reduced govt regulation while also reducing net tax rates on ultra-high incomes. Since 1980, these neo-liberal policies have redistributed HALF of middle-class wealth into the top 10%, and mostly the top 1%, and mostly again into the top 0.1%. At current rate of wealth redistribution, by 2050 the U.S. will become a kind of serfdom, with over 50% of national wealth held by the top 2% families and trusts.
John L. - You're absolutely correct. This probably sounds strange to William Farrar, so may I quote from my favourite book on neoliberalism, namely "The New Way of the World: On Neoliberal Society", by Dardot and Laval:
"... far from clashing with the logic of competition, [the government's] task is to remove all the obstacles to the free play of the markets by a veritable policing of the markets, one example of which is the struggle against cartels" (p. 86). - "The state must obviously start by respecting equality of opportunity in the competitive game, by abolishing anything that might resemble priviledge or protection granted to some special interest at the expense of others. One of the doctrine's main arguments, which we come across in other liberal currents, is that one of the principal tendencies in capitalism - excessive concentration and cartelization of industry - is not endogenous in nature, but originates in policies of priviledge and protection pursued by the state when it is under the control of large private interests. This is why a 'strong state', capable of resisting all pressure groups and free of 'Manchester School' dogmas of the minimum state, is required" (p. 88).
It's interesting, isn't it, that according to neoliberalism, in order to achieve 'free markets', a very strong state must ensure through regulation that the markets remains 'free'.
Hayek's quarrel was with those who favored a planned economy, not with market regulation. Later in life he explicitly broke with libertarianism, and argued that a modern economy needed a safety net for the less fortunate.
Libertarian ism leads inevitably to serfdom, For it to succeed requires the cooperation of like minded individuals, who respect each other and voluntarily accept the consensus opinion of everyone else.
Doesn't happen in reality, a strong man will emerge, then the strong mans cup bearers, his chamberlain,his courtiers and before you know it back to serfdom.
John, and Gunnar, I'm so sorry that the word "liberal" is part of that movement's lexicon, the way I don't like the word "socialism" in the title: National Socialism (Hitler's fascism). Whenever you see this kind of cross-over it's not a good sign.
Yes, neo liberals use government to achieve their ends of an unregulated free market. The statement is intuitively obvious. How else can they achieve that end, and as a matter of fact, that is what much of the political battle field is really all about.
The billionaires and corporations use the power of money, to buy politicians and political powers so they can neuter the government and the agencies created to control them. Nixon created the EPA, and the money powers have been after it (Big Ag, Mining, the Chemical Petroleum cabal) to defang and neuter it or just shut it's doors.
Shut down OSHA the NLRB, anything that interferes the ability of billionaires to buy a new Jet airliner or build a refugee on a mountain top or under the ocean.
OK. I am not arguing with you. What then do you propose as a solution? So neo liberals have screwed up the country, no argument here. They have used the immense power of the purse, to gain favor, no argument there, they have done it with Republicans and Democrats, no argument there.
It's less of an argument, and more of a treatise on fundamental greed and fundamental power, perhaps baked in to the human evolutionary condition. A class-cycle that has repeated itself throughout recorded history.
On that we agree, it started when a dude dressed in animal skins picked up the jawbone of an ass or leg of a mammoth and clubbed others into submission.
Terry - I'm not an expert on monarchism. I'd say that absolute monarchism allows for the active interference and regulation by the monarch in his country's economic affairs, whereas a constitutional monarch is supposed to sit back and allow the elected government get on with it.
The UK is not an Absolute or Constitutional Monarchy ....and there is no UK Constitution. Parliament rules and the monarchy has no say.... no veto.... no approval. The monarchy in the UK is the head of state and can do nothing as far as governing is concerned. Essentially all the monarchy in the UK can do is ask (beg) but never direct or order.
Yes, there are such models as Constitutional Monarchies but I don't know much about them except by their title.
Trump wants to be an Absolute Monarch. That's what he thought he would have by now but things kept getting in the way. He'll make sure that doesn't happen this time around and the Heritage Foundation is running interference to make it so. What fun. Of course the people behind him are Christian Nationalists. If Trump were to succeed it would be because of these people and his administration will be packed to the gills with them. How does King Donald sound? King Donald Jr?
Terry - Your comment on the UK monarchy and the British Constitution contradicts the evidence. The British Constitution is based on tradition and precedence. Hence, Boris Johnson's attempt to prorogue Parliament failed in the face of the opposition from the Judiciary.
So therfore, we have a Constitutional monarchy. The difference is that our Constitution is unwritten - or written down in various places.
As for the British monarch. He/she certainly wields considerable influence sometimes. How much real power - the power to actually override government. This we simply don't know. We assume he/she doesn't do that - but we don't know.
I understand what your're saying but isn't a Constitution by its nature a written and published document? Also your writing it made it seem as though the Monarch had real power of some kind. There's no evidence of that. And yes, you have a Judiciary but not necessarily one with a final say like the US. In any case, the Monarch is really not a player in the UK game of governance....and I've not heard of anyone holding their breath in the last 100 or so years.. As I understand it the UK Constitution is kind of scattered documents (Magna Carta as a founding doc) and of course unwritten Common Law is used to bridge the gaps. Do you think there will ever come a time to pull it all together and actually publish?
Biden has renounced "neoliberalism," because it is incompatible with democracy. What replaces it must be of concern to us, because it can easily slide into crony capitalism and oligarchy.
Gunnar: To help educate you The 14 Characteristics of Fascism. Tick them off, they are all Trumpism. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.bremertonschools.org/cms/lib/WA01001541/Centricity/Domain/222/Fourteen%20Defining%20Characteristics%20of%20Fascism%20slides.pdf
\
Are you sure you know what neo Liberalism is:?
Neoliberalism is a policy model that encompasses both politics and economics. It favors private enterprise and seeks to transfer the control of economic factors from the government to the private sector. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/neoliberalism.asp
That means no government control, no regulations, Reagan ism on steroids. R R in his many writings preaches against neo Liberalism.
Same thing. The hallmarks of fascism are highly centralized authority, rigid social and economic regimentation, and ruthless suppression of dissent. Look familiar? The American business oligarchs who are backing Trump are mirror images of the German businessmen who supported Hitler.
I'm amazed that all the disaffected people who are ready to vote for Trump can't figure out who's been screwing them for the last 40+ years. It isn't black, brown, Asian, gay, or LGTBQ people. It's the fascist super-rich.
I am English and I live in France, and I cannot help remembering the French Revolution when the poor executed the King and the rich landowners who kept all the wealth and let the poor suffer. The billionaires are the modern super rich who are likely to be turned on if Law and Order is overturned by the Fascists who are behind Trump.
Worst of all is the owner of X who can spread lies freely - stop looking at X.
That's how it looks to me as well, Gerry. It's interesting to me that the Koch brothers, by accounts that I've read, were raised by a Hitler loving nanny. Their parents wanted them to have "a strict upbringing." to my mind that translates as, no tenderness for those babies or little boys. They turned out to be emotionally ruthless even in relationship to members of their own family.
Trumpism is fascism, and fascism is the political manifestation of psychopathology...specifically, the driving need to dominate and control, coupled with a total lack of conscience. This cluster of characterological traits can develop as a result of chronic and massive failures of empathy on the part of caregivers in the first three years of life.
Amphetamines produce those symptoms, were invented in Germany in the 30s, and were used heavily by the Nazi storm troopers. And the Nazi regime was fascism on speed, complete with the burnout... And Trump's skinhead fans are generally speed freaks as well. The food news is that so many were arrested after the Jan 6th insurrection, and they have had a chance to see the consequences. when they aren't jacked up.
Interesting. Trump and his staffers may snort Adderall.
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-white-house-drugs-speed-xanax-1234979503/
I think we all kinda' knew that, yeah?
2Peter from what I am told by someone who participated in a college course on Facism, Hitler and his leaders were using methamphetamines, which explains a lot. Take 1 psychotic lonely personality, add testosterone and a couple portions of speed to produce 1 toxic stew. A simple but destructive recipe.
Captagon has been found in contemporary terrorist groups as well. I heard it was found on the bodies of Hamas fighters. Not sure about how valid that is, but it wouldn’t be surprising. It gets the empathy right outta there.
Yes- Trump is a psychopath
Great point, Madeline! This is the very same thing I've been trying to point out and warn about in education from the very young on up, for 35 years now. It's the emotional intelligence damage, resulting in personnel deep wounds and often the emotional diseases that grow from them: sexism (the primary superiority/inferiority caste system structure, racism, and all "other-isms" enforced by control and violence. I focused on how the Far and Religious Right learned this before we did, and started their takeover even under Reagan's administration militarily toned education attack: "A Nation at Risk". We were, from their autocratic and emotional/culturally abusive standardized education overly imbalanced to STEM "testing", actually damaging the human minds and hearts of almost all the children we were 'processing' through that model. It resulted in deep learning damage, turning the innate and necessary social-animal emphasis on human connection and empathy to thrive/learn together, to competitive machining the human education/upbringing for the surest short-term result for profiteers. What we are actually all "paying for' is the resulting deficits of understanding of how to problem-solve in individual lives in an increasing disconnected, transactional and calloused society/neo-liberal world. I saw this more than 30 years ago, and warned at that time, specifically that it was a "underlying value system implicit control" that would literally result, "in a character as characterless and venal as Donald Trump, as a national leader." I wrote that in 1989, using the biggest "famous bufoon" that I could use as an example. Sadly, I truly thought I was exaggerating. It is why I went on to found The Transformative Education Forum (tef-global.org). It is the heart that we damage first and can then be manipulated in hate, anger, fear against others, the most affectively by insatiable greed's control, but for all humanity's and even planetary loss.
I agree, June...when adults damage a child's good feeling about him/herself, then stuff him or her with what THEY want the child to believe, we deform their capacity to care about themselves and others. A child's first "teachers" are the parents. They unconsciously and sometimes consciously send messages to the child based on how they treat him or her. Those messages can enhance or corrode s child's sense of self-esteem. The educational system takes over from there and can do ill or good depending on the belief systems of the adults in charge.
I was a preschool and elementary school teacher until I was 35 and I think it's one of the most important professions, but the least valued and the least compensated. Thank you for telling me about the transformative education forum that you found it ♥️😊
For many Americans “fascist “ is a dirty word, worse than “communist” and “socialist” but I doubt the definition of any of these is clear. Donald calls his enemies all of these because they are hated labels. It really doesn’t matter what the word means if it is a despised label.
If we need to define the word as the name calling continues we are already in a losing situation. The voters that matter will not likely follow the debate on who really fits the word.
What I have seen is that if we say Donald is senile, he will pickup that word and say Biden is senile. It’s a tactic. “Trump crime family” leads to “Biden crime family.” “Trump is a threat to democracy” leads to “Biden is a threat to democracy”
It’s like the playground. “I am rubber you are glue. What you call me bounces off and sticks to you.”
We need to do more than use labels and phrases. They have the response that muddies the waters for the uniformed. need visuals short and frightening examples.
Very important point, DK. Thank you!
Yes DK, the right-wing under Trump simply picks up our words and throws them back at us but that doesn't make the words or what they mean any less relevant . I don't cave in just because the other side tries to dominate the frame. I think it's important for all of us to retain the legitimacy of our own perspective and not allow ourselves to be erased just because the other side tries to do that.
Well stated. My fundamental concern is purposeful ignorance magnified by disinformation. Party labels have become quaintly archaic in the “firehouse” of garbage folk consume…and as the old techie saying goes…”garbage in, garbage out”, or even older, “you are what you eat”!
Folks who refuse to face established fact are pathological…the late, great Bob Dole was often quoted, “you can have your own opinion, but not your own facts.” (Mic drop)…
https://www.thebulwark.com/p/former-trump-voters-say-lock-him?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=87281&post_id=145416290&utm_campaign=email-play-on-substack&r=zc69i&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Madeline, i 100% agree with you on the definition of psychopathology. My only addition would be that, it actually affects a good majority of all politicians, not just republicans.
Miami-democrats are right wing Republicans. Dino.
As a card carrying member of the Democratic Party, as a Miamian, a member of the local Executive Committee, that's bullshit. As a matter of fact, Democrats out register Republicans in Miami Dade County. The mayor of Miami Dade County, Daniella Levine Cava is a Democrat.
It is true that we have a lot of people who live here who support a dictatorship ala Fulgencio Batista, Francisco Franco, Rafael Trujillo, Juan Peron, et al and see Trump as a caudillo. Those who are citizens, register as Republicans.
Can't tell you how many people who live here have an abuelo named Adolfo, Francisco or Jose Antonio (named for José Antonio Primo de Rivera, Spanish Fascist) in honor of their heroes.
In 2020 Trump lost Miami Dade, but won the state by 3.2%. It is true that Democrats underperformed in 2020 and 2022. This year, we have abortion and marijuana on the ballot. Some Republicans are flipping. https://rvat.org/
Register Democrats--save Florida and the world.
https://www.fieldteam6.org/all-volunteer-ops
Yes, vote, and remind them of this: El tramposo dice que te quire ayudar y como todos los tramposos lo que quire es robar.
Read STRONGMEN:Mussolini to the Present by Ruth Ben-Ghiat
Trump is a fake "strongman." He is a liar, a scapegoat-er, and a flip-flopper. He also despises women and thinks that their most important concerns should be up to the states to resolve.
I just had a conversation with a MAGA man yesterday. He told me that trump is a strong leader, a DEVOUT Christian, a good businessman who knows how to make money. So kinda the same old story but this time devout Christian is added which I wasn’t hearing in 2016. He is concerned that social security won’t be there for him but he’s fallen for the GOP scheme of making us invest our ss in the stock market. My impression was a man that is disappointed in where he is in life and sees the trump illusion as what he wants to be.
True and so sad. We seek false security when we enclose ourselves in mental bubbles.When someone tries to pierce the bubble s/he is perceived as a threat. Reinforce their beliefs and you own them.
Victor read the book
I get her substack mailings. She is great.
The system Trump is building looks a lot like Animal Farm. The MAGAs look like the horse, his plan to hire loyalists within the admin reminds me of the dogs and I think we all know who the pigs are...
And the sheep!
One would hope your literary reference is not lost on today’s consumers.
But, I applaud your use!
Please don’t insult the pigs. 🐖
Orwellian pigs belong to a special category of beings. The sheep, it seems, are all the same.
Professor Reich: i'm currently reading a book that details the last months (mostly day-by-day) before hitler siezed control of 1920s germany, which was a functioning, abeit imperfect, democracy (quite like america today, actually). although the author never mentions modern america in the book, he doesn't need to because this is parallels what we are experiencing first-hand. truly the stuff of nightmares.
for those interested, the book is takeover: hilter's final rise to power by timothy w ryback (amazon US link: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0593537424/grrlscientist-20/ )
We just watched the new six part series on Netflix that shows the why and how Hitler got power in the first few episodes. It is frightening how similar Trump is to Hitler.
Hi, I think I saw that on PBS a couple of years ago. Very eerie how much alike those and these times are.
Wasnt there a National Geographic series?
Name of series?
Perhaps this explains our infatuation with Zionist and Israel. As I see it Israelis are closest to the Nazi than any other group.
Mehrdad, someone once asserted: "Whatever you defeat, you become."
Of course the Islamist would pipe in with that b.s. DAESH, HAMAS, or Hezbollah.
Doesn't matter that you have a 1400 year old war of extermination against the Jews, does it, playing the victim,as you aggress and wipe out or subdue the infidel is the leitmotif of Islam.
At least the Saudi's don't hide it, they have a sword in their flag.
And I thought this thread was about the MAGA cult and their flirtation with "alternative facts"
With your mindset, you will fit just at home with the MAGA cult.
I calls i as I sees it. You injected Israel into the conversation, .
I am what I am, an independent minded person. I am able to admit that a broken clock is correct twice a day, once a day if on a 24 hr clock as I am
And while I am a progressive in most things, I will not eat the whole pizza or pie. And I am not an ideological purist either. So know I don't fit just at home with MAGAts anymore than I fit at home with Leftists.
But I do know that I will crawl over broken glass to vote for Biden, just to keep Trump out of office, even if sends 2,000 lb bombs to israel. Those that won't are voting for Trump
How's them bean Yahya.?
You got one thing correct, you are who you are and your comment{S] here has been a good indication of that.
And that is your problem not mine, because I don't give a shit what you may or may not think. Your problem, not mine.
I believe Hitler took full control in 1934.
Thank you for sharing.
i agree -- trump himself is rather stupid, but he is the front man for a much larger nazi conspiracy -- but in this book, hitler does not look like a brilliant or politically astute man, either. he rather bumbles along, a petulant toddler, really, screwing up frequently, but LEARNING FROM HIS MISTAKES, unlike the government and other authorities of the time, who refuse to look at what's happening in front of their very eyes.
"Bad Faith" is a documentary that can be rented from Prime video for one dollar. I recommend it because it shows the history of the Christian National movement since before Reagan that has led to them wanting to destroy democracy. It was an eye opener for me. Hartman recommended it in his report yesterday and called it brilliant. Now I need to find Robert Reich's video on fascism. I learn so much from the substacks and the participants in the comments.
Trump is really pretty simple to understand. He just wants to be KIng. But the people using him want so much more and they are the scary ones. https://newrepublic.com/article/167499/new-apostolic-reformation-mastriano-christian Feel free to reply and add any new names you come across.
If Trump succeeds in becoming King, the Christian Nationalists (really the New Apostolic Reformation which is actually more than Christian nationalism) will get rid of him at their first convenient opportunity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Apostolic_Reformation.
You know some of these folks already. https://hartmannreport.com/p/america-is-under-assault-by-a-cancerous-ceb (Leonard Leo, https://newrepublic.com/article/167499/new-apostolic-reformation-mastriano-christian
And for those still involved with religion, regardless of faith, there's this:
https://www.crosswalk.com/church/pastors-or-leadership/what-christians-need-to-know-about-the-new-apostolic-reformation.html
Thank you for sharing.
"Bad Faith" is free right now on Tubi with no commercials. Everyone needs to watch this documentary.
https://link.tubi.tv/7VJsT5ItgKb
Oh Lord....
Thank you!
Fortunately the Constitution is very specific about Treason:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."
That's it.
What you likely mean is Sedition. "Sedition is inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority to destroy or overthrow it."
But I'm not sure that only the FBI can be the investigating agency....the US has many law authority agencies capable of investigating and arresting although the FBI is primary as it is an arm of the Justice Department.
Trump is trying to place key people in places of authority to stop any Justice investigation if he gets in office
Yes, but so much more. He wants to essentially nullify the Legislative branch....and the judicial. Within the Executive branch he would be all powerful with the ability to hire and fire with no oversight. In other words, Trump wants to run the US as a business. The model is his business which has no board of directors. Within the Trump Organization Trump is KING. That's the model he will use to remake the US.
And, of course, the king has control of the treasury
He reminds me of King George III. And his business model is about as successful .
Did you know George 3 suffered from a disease that made people think he was "Mad' ?? Not dementia. And he peed purple.
So what is the definition of war nowadays? It seems that there’s a propaganda war going here. We used to think of war as using deadly weapons.
I suppose it must be declared to be a war.
From today's WP
https://wapo.st/4e7oSAl
Trump plans to claim sweeping powers to cancel federal spending
Trump really doesn't need Putin. If the voters here elect him in November, much as Napoleon did, Trump will crown himself King
Of course that presents other problems/issues but Trump is pretty easy to read.
I voted for <Trumpism is more dangerous to America> because his victory would allow Putin & Xi free reign to use their superior supersonic missile technology against Europe, Taiwan, us and the rest of the world. Trump's rabid MAGA supporters will unleash terror on Americans worse than the KKK did. And, Putin's drone-supplying Ayatollah pal, and his minions, will unleash the Armageddon fight Evangelicals want against Bibi & his ultra-orthodox bloc
What you describe is not improbable, hopefully sanity will prevail…but I would offer these few observations:
* Nature is a self correcting system
* humans are best understood as the latest in a constantly changing hierarchy of predator and prey. We are the current “alpha.” Collectively…
Since we, the human race, seem intent on damaging the essential life systems of Gaia, we should expect a correction which may be one more mass extinction
Mass extinction is where we are headed, either from nuclear war or climate change. The politics, the self-centered ideologies, and the financial incentives are there.
Humans are quite numerous, but it doesn’t take a mass extinction for just one species to die out!
In earth’s evolution, it’s all in a day’s happenstance.
Yep, there's no upside to a 2nd Trump presidency......except possibly Christian Nationalists. These folks are already at work preparing to the day after. Once Trump is elected he will swamp the Executive branch with True Believers of the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) whose job it will be to convert America to a Christian Nation. You may know some of these people already. Leonard Leo, Mike Flynn, Marsha Blackburn, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Tim Scott....a very long list.
It seems that Christian Nationalists have nothing to do with Christ. It must be a convoluted belief system.
I think it's figure out where you want to go then pick and choose among the texts to find the justification. Again, not really sophisticated as most followers are not raging intellectuals. Just has to pass the smell test of a dolphin (hint: they can't).
Az, The problem is that Russia has not been declared an enemy. You can declare an enemy without a war. Witness Al Qaeda, DAESH, ISK.
There is a difference in definition between Treason and Sedition, though they both be inspired by the same actor (source).
Trump committed, commits, Treason for Putin, for transactional reasons.
His followers commit sedition, out of loyalty to Trump, who commits Treason for Putin.
All roads lead to Putin, but the intermediary is Trump. Even though the MAGAt crowd are Putin partisans.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/10/11/politics/steele-dossier-fbi-durham-danchenko/index.html
Much of the Trump Putin sniveling started with this lie.
Putins contempt for NATO was due in large part to the 2014 coup that overthrew Ukrainian democracy in favor of a Victoria Nuland appointed turd. The United States military got its ass handed to it in Afghanistan by the Taliban. Both Sargent Billy and the United States are great at starting things they can’t finish.
But if they would admit when they lied or were wrong that would be a good idea.
.-- . .-.. .-.. ..--..
I expect that Melania is tfg’s day to day handler, and she answers to someone near Putin.
I agree with you. There could be a blitzkrieg of an insurrection this time, so fast it will make our heads spin.
That's assuming that he doesn't win. Which, terrifyingly, he might, given those who can't bring themselves to vote Democrat because they "don't like" the present leader or have preferences stronger than the need to keep Trump out. The same people who "didn't like" Hilary Clinton and gave us Trump the first time.
Yes- if you notice the non committed don’t want to talk politics in casual conversation - I always point out that staying at home and not voting is a vote for Trump - that usually scares them .
I watched Stephanie Rhule, on the 11th hour last night, I never watched it before, but caught it and it was a round table of average persons, demographcally split by generation, gender and race.
There was the young black guy, made great points, but got hung up on race and white inustice to blacks. His points were valid, but not his conclusion that blacks were justified in sitting out the election. Nobody,not even Stephanie raised the issue, that not voting was in fact a vote for Trump.
Maybe not voting doesn't count in blue and red states, but in swing states and here are only five this election, AZ, NV, MI, PA, WI AZ has 10 electoral Votes, NV 6, MI 15, WI 11, PA 19.
The election is going to be decided in MI, PA, WI, three states that have a Muslim Population in the 100,000's who have threatened to sit out the election, and MI and PA have black populations over 20%, and many also threaten to sit out the election, to give Biden the fingr and punish the Democrats.
But they are only punishing themselves, if Trump wins, then there will be no chance in 2028 to undo the damage that they did, and when the hammer of Thor, wielded by Trump and his white christian nationalists come down on these people, it will be too late to have their regrets.
I am sure there were millions of Germans who regretted voting for Hitler in his referendum. He was not elected as Chancellor but appointed by Bismark, but was confirmed by a referendum.
Billy, you’re a liar and you deserve to lose. The reason Trump is going to win is because you’re delusional. The 50 lying snakes at the FBI that swore that hunters laptop was a Russian hoax crapped on this country’s credibility. The j6 hearings where no one can say exactly how many agents were in the crowd. Were they instigating the violence. The DOJ has brought no charges against Trump in 3 plus years. Either Garland and Biden have failed to prosecute the most heinous crime in our history (except for that nastiness in Dallas) or they both know if you start peeling that onion, even you will be crying.
The trials have been a sham. The one I have always wanted to see was Georgia and somehow the left crapped their pants on that one. Every goddamn one of them comes up in the election year? Thats the most banana republic thing ever.
You guys can clutch your pearls. It’s going to be painful. But if we get to2028 and don’t live in post apocalypse caves, maybe just for a second ask yourself, In the face of the new Hitler, how did you nominate a genocide loving, geriatric moron like Biden and only a heart beat away is Kamala Harris. I don’t know how you can be so stupid and indignant at the same time.
With people like you to confect idiotic outbursts of synthetic bullshit, the USA is finished anyway, by arid stupidity.
Chuck, C., I don't know where you get the idea that Biden is weak or "genocide-loving". Likely it's his interaction with Netanyahu, which, if you look at the whole picture, there's an image of Joe Biden walking a tightrope. Biden is enforcing our alliance with one of the many "western" countries sworn to support each other. If the USA fails to support Israel will he then begin to betray France, Great Britain, Germany, Poland, Finland, and on and on? Of course not, but that's not how the NATO alliance will see it. The alliance is important to maintain. The children in Gaza need protection that Biden can't provide, whether he helps the Yahu or not. We're all appalled at how Israel is conducting the war. I've written to Biden to stop sending weaponry, but in my gut I know he has no real choice. If we withdraw our aid, defying NATO, Israel will sink back to the familiar forever conflict with continued occasional bombing in Palestine, and the children of Gaza will not be made safe, regardless. By providing armament, perhaps the hardships there will end sooner. Think it through, as Biden has. It's a first-class tragedy, but get it right.
.-- . .-.. .-.. ..--..
Chuck, Kamala Harris is smart, experienced, and qualified. Your misogynism, racism, and cynicism are contemptible.
Not "Bismark", actually Bismarck, but by von Hindenburg.
Right, my fault, I keep getting them Germans all mixed up
REcent report in The NY Times that many new American citizens, former migrants themselves, plan to vote for Trumpty , as they think he will be border tight. They cite folk pouring over the border since Biden's Presidency, only now slowing down. This is so dangerous. Many are from Catholic, conservative social backgrounds, coming to the US and dragging us backwards. What a joy..
Among those Vicki, is Mayra Flores, herself an illegal immigrant, now a Congress critter for 18th US District, She is about as far right as you can get and she isn't alone. It seems that the worst of the anti immigrant crowd are 1st and 2nd generation immigrants be hey Ms Flores, Nimrata Halley or Vivak Ramaswamy.
Sally, I don't like or trust the Clinton's but no way could I have voted for Trump.
In fact 2016 is the first time I registered to vote since 1968, just because of Trump. My mind was made up when he came down the escalator and opened his filthy mouth.
Unfortunately I am not voting for. I am voting against and it is not the lesser of two evils. I don't consider Hillary or Biden evil either. I have issues with both, but I have a bigger issue with Trump. I pegged him for what he is, and what harm he will do, the moment he opened his mouth. And I knew nothing about his history in New York., New Jersey or business.
William, I agree. I was turned off by Trump from his "Apprentice" days; I couldn't watch him for more than five minutes. I like your view of the regular democrats you've named, but I urge you to take a more thorough look at Biden before you dismiss him as the candidate you're only voting for in order to defeat his evil opponent. Biden has done a spectacular job as president, and he also carries an understandable disrespect for public relations, in which he fails at every turn..
Upon reading all your posts, was wondering if I have an alter ego out there 😉
Trumpism is indeed fascism. He may be too ignorant to realize that because of his greedy reptilian pea brain. (Sorry to all peas out there).
And you might consider apologizing to the reptiles, too.
To a lesser extent, perhaps. Mea culpa, reptiles!
They're owned too. No one can save America, unless...... Biden can be a dictator first, before the election. Trump can't be allowed to control our military. And like you said, Trump isn't smart enough to pull this off by himself. Some accessories are obvious, but others are devious. I'd say your definition "trumps" Klaire's.
How long can we let this go on? Come on USA get it together!
It’s such a shame that we can’t enjoy such heartfelt moments which President Biden currently delivers in his speech last week. Without being overshadowed by this felon who appears unstoppable!
Az: YES! TREASON! I wish more of us would pull that word out of its hiding place!
It’s called Project 2025 written by the folks at The Heritage Foundation.
I think I just read that the CEO of that org announced he will be retiring but first they are looking for a replacement. The right wing keeps the young inflow, just like they did with the Supreme Court. The Dems need to be mentoring and preparing more young people. They have not kept up and now we have a very old presidential candidate!
I recognized trump as a fascist from 2017. But them I am old. In 1939 I was 6 years old when WW2 officially began. I asked my father what fascism meant and he told me. How rich men liked it because it made them more money. And certain types of people were bullied and killed because they were different. During the nearly 6 years of war I learned more and more about fascism. But also about propaganda, the partner of spreading fascism.
IF ONLY, the different systems of government were taught in schools. Children aren't as stupid as adults think they are. By the age of 18 everyone should know: True Democracy only existed in Athens Greece for a very short time 2000 years ago. It only works in very small groups. What we have is a representative democracy. But even representative democracies only work for those who care. It's up to you to vote for the candidate who shares your view of how the country should be governed. Even then, you should stay in contact, if you disagree ask why a certain vote was made
Unfortunately with social media being owned by the candidate himself spewing lie after lie to the public. - the truth about Trumps fascism isn’t getting out -
Yes. And we need to be rid of FOX "news". Propaganda machines.
This is my thinking also. How about a national Civics exam before voting? Certainly before running for office. Yes. Representative Democracies only work for those who care.
Democracy does not work for donkeys. They do not like the burden, but what can you do about it; all humans are the same---except when a man shows up with a carrot in hand.
Or before being graduated from high school...
Yes, Fay ; Democracy requires participation.
Thank you Laurie.
I read that certain countries require or mandate that citizens vote. Australia, for example. There are fines for not voting!? I'm not sure that would be a panacea. It depends on who the candidates are. Hopefully. There would be good choices.
Mandating voting is not enough. Putting government education in schools is not enough. People need critical thinking skills. In this red state, the GOP are always putting ballot candy into the election statements for bills. The recent one will be that non-citizens cannot vote. That’s already the law! But they want to put it in so people will be fooled into voting their way.
Midwest : yes; that is like them telling voters that "We'll allow you to breathe", after supporting a clean air bill.
Amen, Fay. Complete agreement.
He’a deranged narcissist.
Both of these fit:
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/oppositional-defiant-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20375831
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/narcissistic-personality-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20366662
Terry F.: Thanks for the first one; I've already visited the second.
Sociopathic narcissist
Keep in mind that the difference between a psychopath and a sociopath is that the former is born, and cannot be healed. The latter is made by circumstances and can be healed.
I have read that some studies show that the sociopath’s brain is smaller in the frontal lobe. (I’m not a doctor or researcher.). If that is the case, though, it would seem that sociopathy can’t be healed.
Fascism has been demonstrated and others on this site have described it well. Trump himself is a threat to be sure. But Trump is also a mouth of rhetoric and ignorance. He is led by his ego and quest for power. But he is also limited by his ignorance. I am more concerned about the mealy-mouthed elected officials who follow his path, and those behind him who appear to have both the zeal for power and the intelligence to pursue it. Those who follow in his steps. Trump himself has a limited trajectory. He has unleashed a cadre who will be more devastating to our democracy. We deceive ourselves if we focus too narrowly on Trump himself.
Bingo.
trump has teased that one of his children will rule after him. Just like a monarchy.
Nancy E., thank you for saying all that.
You all hate Trump, so vote Democrat, all of you. Please don't p*** about voting for third parties because you don't like the current Democrat leader. That's how you (and we, the rest of the world) got Trump last time. We don't want him again in his second and far more terrifying incarnation. We don't have a vote. We depend on you to vote Democrat.
And tell all your kids and grand kids. They may not be paying attention.
On the 80th Anniversary of D-Day, how depressing the United States of American is contemplating another Hitler as a leader. Whatever happened to our moral compass of life, liberty and freedom? Why did so many men loose their lives on the beaches of Normandy only to have a corrupt Republican Party stand behind a mad-man? Did my father fight in World War II for nothing?
four feet, your father is what is right with our country! Never doubt that true Americans who value life, liberty and freedom are so very grateful for your father and all of the other military men and women who laid down their lives for the very liberties and freedoms we have today. He did not fight for nothing. Your father, to me, is a true hero!
There’s a lot of uneducated people in America with degrees
No, either your father or my father fought for nothing ! They gave us the chance to become THE designated world power with national prosperity and world cooperation for many decades. But now we are down to a few elderly men and women in wheel chairs on a barren windswept field, filled with crosses in France. Hard to compete with Taylor Swift or Beyoncé or even Donald Trump. But we remember, children of the late 1930s and 40s who are still around.
Joan, G. et al.: I like this vicinity of Reich's chatroom. Most above are speaking my heart. Agree, agree, agree.
Vote BLUE 💙 or we're screwed 😭 😭
It’s more dangerous because it is in the heartland of democracy that has been the defender of democracy globally. Trump. Is. A. Loser.
Geoff - The U.S. was the defender of democracy during World War II. Since then, it has been busy - bipartisan wise - building its own empire, not of territories but of economic and political dominance that empowers U.S. government to 'persuade'/lean on so-called free countries and impinge on their sovereignty. The excuses have varied. Re: Vietnam, it was to save it from the 'yellow hordes from the north' and arresting an inevitable 'domino effect'. More recently, the excuse has been 'regime change'. In fact, U.S. intervention (via the use of the IMF) in Russia under Yeltsin in the 1990s demonstrated that what the U.S. was really about was to destroy economic competitors. This policy was confirmed less than two years ago when the U.S. decided to destroy the Nord Stream pipelines in the Baltic Sea; that was industrial sabotage against 'friends' and 'allies'; it violated their sovereignty.
However, I agree that Trump is a loser. But he's the logal extension of U.S. post-war policy. He's just more honest about it. He hasn't got the brains to formulate a self-serving national ideology. His is simply self-serving in a crass form.
There have been cracks and some (quite a few) failures, but if I had to pin my hopes on any democracy it would have been the USA until around 10 years ago. The trickle down theory has failed the vast majority of citizens, but I had thought the democratic institutions strong enough to fix it. I was wrong.
Geoff - The point I'm making is that a country or city-state can be both democratic and imperial. Gandhi noted that British democracy was a wonderful thing - in Britain - but its empire building had as its aim to maintain enlightened despotism in India. Going back in time, Athens had a democracy of free men, and was one of the world's centres of philosophy and high culture, but engaged in empire building and massacre, also.
Gunnar, you are Sisyphus, rolling the stone of human nature up a hill.
Empire-Democracy. Empire-autocracy.
The American "Empire" (as you call it) is benevolent, and not oppressive, it is flawed (beyond question or doubt) but it swims in the sea of justice and the rule of law.Laws cobbled together by those who are ruled. At least until the Federalist Society had it's judges appointed to the bench by Trump, and until Trump wins (god forbid) election and the Heritage Foundations Project 2025, and Trumps Project 47, are implemented on Jan 20th 2025, then Katy bar the gates, because all hell is going to be unleashed on the U.S.A, then the world
William - There is no such thing as 'human nature' - unless you think that Sigmund Freud outlined it in his psychoanalytic theory. Even then, the ways human express 'human nature' are numerous and highly divergent. In itself, 'human nature' has no predictive value.
You claim that the American empire is benevolent. Well, sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't. Beating Hirohito and Hitler were benevolent goals; helping depose the elected Prime Minister of Fiji in 1987 wasn't - it was a coup d'Etat and a breach of the rule of law. Likewise, the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline in the Baltic Sea two years ago was an act of industrial terrorism - it was a breach of international law.
America's dilemma is not just about Donald Trump. One problem is that U.S. judges are political appointees. I appreciate that there are reasons for this, but we can now see why it might be a disadvantage.
I am not going to get bogged down in a side bar about Human Nature, needless to say I disagree.
I do not disagree with your other complaints, but again it is wrong to lump them under empire..
Nations act in their own perceived benefit. I myself bitch about Exxon using it's money muscle to isolate Venezuela because it had the temerity to believe that it's oil belonged to Venezuela. Then there are the Banana Wars, the Ovethrow of Mossadegh MI 6 and the CIA), Coca cola funding right wing death squads in Honduras, Dubya invasion of Iraq, his fathers invasion of Panama to arrest a CIA bagman.
I have a longer list than you, but the list is not about empire, that is a wornout Marxist trope. It is all about shareholder value, return on investment, executive salaries and bonuses.
Chase swamp gas if you like I will keep my eye on the target, not illusions like "empire".
I live in the real world of America in 2024, and there are only two choices, a right wing theocratic dictatorship under Trump or a flawed and faulty democratic Republic.
There is no choice.
William - The British empire was also about making money. The East India Company, for example, made a lot of money in India - see for example: Shashi Tharoor interview: How British Colonialism 'destroyed' India - YouTube. - You are right that nations pursue their own interest, and the definition of 'empire' has fuzzy boundaries. But empire has to do with national reach and degree of influnce. During Cold War I we often spoke of the 'Soviet empire', referring not just to its claim to Siberia and Central Asia, but to its influence in Indonesia and Africa and Cuba. Since c. 2008 and the start of Cold War II, NATO has started referring to Russia as an empire. And yet, in terms of territory, while Russia shrunk, it was NATO that expanded during the 1990s.
Empire also has to do with attitude. How often do we hear U.S. Presidents refer to "our power" and "our friends across the globe" in the same breath during their inaugural address? Empire has to do with prestige and arrogance, with the knowledge that wherever you go, you will be listened to with respect, resentment, and obedience. I put it to you that the Vietnam War had less to do with establishing new markets for Coka Cola and more to do with 'extending' the reach, prestige and military power of the U.S. Vietnam was a demonstration case. Maybe this was the psychological reason why LBJ and Nixon kept fighting it for so long.
Mearsheimer says that the U.S. doesn't have an empire but has "imperial ambitions" - see https://meaninginhistory.substack.com/p/mearsheimer-american-imperial-ambitions
I suppose foreigners are more likely to perceive 'empire' than the nation state that is accused of it. We foreigners take note of 'American exceptionalism' and see in it signs of empire. You Americans probably see it too but read the signs differently. - As I said, the boundaries are fuzzy.
Who did the East India Company make money for? It made it for it's stockholders.
I repeat while Marxists and Liberals kvetchabout Empire, they should be looking behind the curtain. It isn't Governments that are the problem, it is the stockholders who use government as a tool and a weapon.
It is these same forces that fund the political parties, that control the government.
A nation is it's governing body,, the governing body is simply a tool. But you and so many others are stuck looking at the Wizard on the screen and not the man behind the curtain.
In 1600 a group of investors got together and asked,( bribed) Elizabeth 1 for a royal charter (a monopoly) to form the East India Company, to compete with Spain in it's exploitation of the America's. It eventually had enough power to use the English Army, the red coats, in it's drive for profits and power, and you and others call that Empire, when in reality it is a profit making corporation using the collective power of the state.
Same here in America, what Coca Cola wants, what Exxon Mobil wants, what any large financial institution or corporation wants they get, because they have the money and thus the power over politicians.
It isn't empire, it is return on investment, shareholder value, and those that increase it, like CEO's, Lobbyists, Boards of directors are richly rewarded, those impede it pay a price, either politically or personal, but the political is personal, especially when it means loss of life and/or income and social status.
So talk about Empire and Imperialism all you want, but you are yammering at the projected Wizard on the Screen, not the man behind the curtain.
Here is a concept. the USA is a joint venture company, it's shareholders are corporations, who themselves are in competition, at war with each other, let's call it a vessel, USA Inc.
We are passenger and deckhands on the jolly ship America, it's captain is elected by the passengers and deck hands, much like pirates elected their captains, the crew that mans the ship, is also elected.
Every four years a new captain takes charge and orders the ship to veer port or starboard, and after it has veered far enough of course to satisfy the passengers ,that are paying for the voyage, there is an election and a new captain takes over and orders a course correction,putting the ship back on track for it's final destination.
In the meanwhile this joint venture company, needs to protect it's assets and itself, and also secure resources so it sends out arned crew to fend off threats or secure vital resources.
An Empire serves a person, the Emperor, one person not a nation. The Roman Empire had an Emperor. Charlemagne was an Emperor, Napoleon was an Emperor, Victoria was an Emperor.
America has no Emperor, unless Trump is elected.
Wiiliam - Thank you for your thought-provoking post!
I will focus on the British Empire because it is the one that I know best. You seem to reduce the Empire to the shareholders of the East India Company (EIC). Yes, EIC raised its own army in India; it saved the British government money and effort. Then came 1857 and the Mutiny or War of Independence, and after it had been put down, Queen Victoria (the British government) took over the military occupation of British India.
Because India was not just a colony to be squeezed of its raw materials - although of course that was one aspect of Empire. India was also a prestige thing - big in area, populous, requiring travelling judges to uphold law and order, and a network of spies to detect groups of restive natives. In fact, Britain had a civil service In India, quite a bureaucracy. And missionaries, out to abolish suttee, for example. Britain had set herself the task of civilizing the country. To believe that this apparatus and purpose was simply to make money is a form of commercialist reductionism, William, and maybe your attempt at letting the U.S.'s empire off the hook. After all, who can object to be bit of international commerce in far-flung corners of the world? Sounds innocent and well-meaning enough!
Empires do not simply serve one person. Where do you get that from? Mind you, following the debacle of 1857, Queen Victoria became the Empress of India. But actually, India dwelt in the hearts of many others.
So, prestige is an important element in Empire maintenance. An example: in 1976, the artist Val C. Prinsep is given a commission: to paint as many of the Rajahs as possible. The plan is to then combine all the portraits into one large painting - a prestige piece. The way he talks about his father is telling; his father spent 33 years in the Indian Civil Service - "an example of unselfish devotion to duty and unassuming ability found in many of those who have by their unrecognized labours made India what it is" ("Imperial India. An Artist's Journeys", p. 2).
Sure, Princep was an "accredited painter to the Government" (p. 74), so he was paid. But this is not simply about money. The way he speaks about his father's "service" to India is the way a member of a colonial family conceals from himself the true nature of Empire.
But I can see that I will not convince you. You don't like the idea that your country might be engaged in empire building. Maybe you find the thought vulgar. Your country is more refined than that - more honestly commercial. Be that as it may be!
I think you are stuck in a paradigm, left over from when Kings ruled all,or people thought that they did.
The EIC, it didn't become the BEIC until The Acts of Union, in 1707 passed by the English and Scottish Parliaments in 1707, led to the creation of a united kingdom to be called “Great Britain” on 1 May of that year.
None of what England then Britain did until Elizabeth I was for the King or Queen,and it is royalty that is Emperor. Sir Benjamin D'Israeli declared Victoria to be Empress, and thus Britain and Empire.
Kings, Queens, Emperors need a medium of exchange, money, they obtain this via taxes and loans.
Edward I borrowed money from the Jews of London and when he couldn't pay back the loan, he banned Jews from England
The Fugger Brothers of Italy, were a wealthy Florence banking institution, and made out loaning money to crowned heads.
They loaned money to Ferdinand and Isabella, who refuse to pay it back, they didn't have the money That bankrupted the Fugger brothers. Still in the need for money, they evicted all Muslims and Jews from Spain, and confiscated their property, in their need that backed Columbus voyage and he set sail for America on the very day the eviction edict took place.
Frances I of France, needed money so he borrowed it from the international financial institution known as the Knights Templar, unable to repay the loan he had the Pope declare them heretics,manufactured evidence and thus not have to repay the loan, and while at it he tried to confiscate their wealth,but the Knights spirited it away.
If you insist on seeing Empires as Nations I can't dissuade you, however the driving force behind Empire are not royals or president or Prime Ministers, except in the case of Putin, Hitler and Mussolini.. Certainly inot in America, not with it's turnover of Presidents and Congress critters.
The driving force is what would be called today, Capitalists, Plutocrats, billinaires and were called in their day adventurers. That was the term used for people who put up money and invested in the East India and London Company of Virginia.
Talking of the latter, it was not Imperialism that motivated the formation of the London Company of Virginia, it was profit. A group of investors, one of whom was my ancestor, bought stock in this venture, called a joint venture.
The purpose of which was to exploit the gold and silver, which they believed lay in abundance in that land across the Atlantic which the Spanish were explotiting and making them wealthy and the base of the Holy Roman Empire.
They prevailed upon James I for a charter to go forth and exploit the country.
That was in 1607, the quest came to naught, and were it not for Turkish Tobacco seeds carried by John Rolfe, the enterprise would have ended, just as the Virginia Company of Plymouth ended. There charter was formed by a group of Plymouth, England merchants who wanted to exploit, the Northern part of Virginia, which at the time was the entire east coast from the latitude of Roanoke to the Latitude of Maine.
James 1 hated tobacco, a foul smelling weed, and the Virginia Company would have come to an end, but for the efforts of a distant cousin named Nicholas Ferrar,who was a shareholder, a member of the governing board as well as influential in the religious life of England.
Two years after the disastrous attack by the Powhatan Indians,known as the Jamestown massacre, and because it had not found gold or silver nor returned a profit,on ay 24, 1624, the Virginia Company's charter was revoked by King James I due to overwhelming financial problems and politics, and Virginia became a royal colony,
Still England was not an Empire
There followed the English Civil war and with the victory of Cromwell, royalists fled to Virginia like geese, They became the planters the upper class, supplanting the old upper class of adventurers.
Still England was not an Empire. Whether or not an idea lies in the breast of many people, it is not an Empire
Nothing dwells in the hearts of others, because people are too involved with the affairs of surviving
I really don't know what you are arguing for,other than you have this idea (is it sincere or propaganda) that there is an American empire and thus all Americans are complicit, and that I am trying to get America off the hook. I am not,but you are trying like hell to put America on the hook. perhaps because it is the cornerstone of your political ideological foundation or agenda.
And don't forget Chile
Indeed!
Very well put and understood.
OK Gunnar, you have painted a picture of the pimples on the ass of the U.S.A., Now what is your solution, and what are the unintended results of your solution. Or do people think that far ahead, content with pointing fingers, calling names and venting their spleen, but nary a solution.
Fair question, William! - Well, one solution is to take back the power of the masters of the universe and their corporations. One step toward this would be to stop private election campaign contributions and introduce state-subsidised contributions instead. Another would be limit private access to Congress men/women. On a grander scale, maybe there should be a public conversation about the role of the U.S. in the international domain. This would involve a reassessment of the use of international influence. It would include a debate about so-called 'rule-based' versus international international order - see https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/leiden-journal-of-international-law/article/choice-before-us-international-law-or-a-rulesbased-international-order/7BEDE2312FDF9D6225E16988FD18BAF0
All this ought to lead to a conversation about the role of taxation and the role of government. Most of us would say that, as a matter of principle, most of our tax money should benefit us in various way. (Some libertarians would disagree, but then most libertarians are young, able-bodied and inexperienced, or they stand to inherit). These days government regard tax money as 'theirs', not ours. The solution is somewhere in-between, but the conversation must establish the cut-off point. I am mindful of Social Contract theory, and the need to re-visit it - see https://www.worldhistory.org/Social_Contract/
All this would be a good start.
Deep-seated racism has been and remains a very big stumbling block. You say that there is no such thing as "human nature; do you imply that the human mind is a tabula rasa?
Victor - Absolutely not! We are born with different levels of intelligence, for a start. We are also born with different emotional reactions - phlegmatism; reactivity of the nervous system (Hans Eysenck), etc. We are even born with different micro-behaviours, inherited from one of our parents.
As for racism: it's learned behaviour - learned from family and wider culture or sub-culture. The most vivid personal example of this was during my brief stay in Darlington in northeast England in 1980. I was attending an informal party of young white and Black English people and was struck by how well they got on. Complete integration. Absolutely no sign of racial tension!
Yes, racism is learned behavior, a tendency towards tribalism, on the other hand, appears to be innate. So, it seems, is status-seeking.
I agree with you Gunnar, I really do, but I live in reality, not the world of what if's, wanna be's, my druthers, and the reality is that we have the best government money can be, literally. You don't get elected,much less re elected without serious financial backing, unless you live in a racial cultural enclave . and even then they have to fight it out in the primary, which means money for propaganda, and people are a sucker for propaganda, even in Scandinavia, brand power, they believe in brands, you can sell them anything if it is shown on TV,. It is a people problem, there is little in the way of critical thinking and perception among the general public, few have time, and those that do lack the facility.
To proceed to achieve your goals, you require a majority in the House of Representatives and a 60 votes out of 100 in the Senate. Lot of luck Gunnar.
What do they say about wishes. If they were horses beggars would ride.
Realistically changes like you propose are monumental and drastic, they can only be achieved via deceit, manipulation or surreptitiously. grdually one increment at a time, because the real powers that be, the corporations and billionaires like Musk, Peter Thiel, Jaime Dimon, keep a watchful, very watchful eye on political developments
The only way to achieve your and my goal is by a radical sweep of all elective offices by genuine progressives, and that is a tall,tall order.
Meanwhile I live in the real world, and the real world presents to choices, one between an outright pervert, a rapist, a thief, a grifter, a traitor named Trump and a bumbling, imperfect but well meaning man named Joe Biden.
There are no other choices Gunnar., so who will it be?
William - I was asked about my solutions, so I listed a few. Of course they are idealistic, and you are free to call them unrealistic if you want. Democracy was idealistic and 'unrealistic', too, once upon a time. Still, it's good to have goals to work towards. Signposts. Reminders.
What are those solutions? If you listed them I don't see them.
Here is the situation. Only problems have solutions. For some things there are no solutions, human nature, like the need to breed, are only solved through drastic and lasting measures like sterilization and old age. and even then old age is not a solution, and the need to breed is a biological imperative, motivated by a thing called orgasm, which in turn is motivated by hormones.
There are difficulties, difficulties have no solution, attempts to solve a difficulty only exacerbates the situation, makes it worse.
Inequality is not a problem, it is a difficulty, any attempt to solve the problem fails, and only leads to greater problems. The Bolsheviks tried to solve the problem, supposedly, by using drastic measures to eliminate the middle class and dissenters, but they didn't get rid of inequality, they only removed the rungs out of the ladder, the middle class, leaving only the top rung and the bottom rung.
In the USA they tried to solve the problem of inequality via affirmative action, but that only exacerbated the situation as there was a violent and vehement reaction and in their zeal the attempt elevated some personalities who had no business being elevated as they lacked the qualifications and ability to do the job, Clarence Thomas comes to mind.
All you can do with a difficulty is to ameliorate it's affects.
You can't solve a difficulty.
Racism is a difficulty, not a problem, because it has no solution, even if the whole world was brown, there would still be racism, brown eyes vs blue eyes.
The genocide of Tutsi's in Rwanda by Hutu's was a race war,yet both were black, they differed in stature, shape of head and nose.s, Tutsis being described as tall with thin noses and a lofty bearing, as opposed to Hutus, who were short, stocky, and flat-nosed. The Tutsis were sometimes even described as 'false negroes', as Europeans with black skin.
Shall we discuss the middle east, we can't do so without discussing religion.
To start with not all Arabs are Muslim, but 99.99% are, Arab is not a race,it is an ethnic identity based on one's native tongue. Jew is not a race either, it is an identity based on tradition,not a religion.
There are white, yellow, black Arabs, There are Muslim and Jew (Druze) Arabs.
Kurds are not Arab.
There are orthodox Jews, secular Jews, atheist Jews and even Christian Jews (Jews for Jesus), but no Muslim Jews,unless they are converts or descendants of same like Metin Kaplan.
So Jew is an ethnicity not defined by Race or Religion
Arab is not an ethnicity defined by race or religion
Christianity is not an ethnicity defined by race or religion
Hindu is not an ethnicity defined by race or religion
Same with Buddhism, or any other identity.
So we are left with the worlds greatest destabilizers, Religion.
Religion knows no ethnicity, it is trans national, trans ethnic.
An example, there are three Slavic nations in the Balkans, all cousins, all Slavs, but they differ by religion, Muslim, Roman Catholic, and Orthodox, actually four
Bosnia Muslim, Kosovo Muslim, Croatia Roman Catholic, Serbia Orthodox all enemies of each other yet all are Slavs. Rome called them Illyrians, Constantine was one.
We now get down to the problem of religion. It is not a problem because their is no solution, unless there is a great awakening and mankind realizes that religion doesn't solve it's problems and provides security, but causes them.
Back to the mid east, the conflict between Muslim and Jew is 1400 years old, it started with Muhammad beheading the entire Jewish tribe of Quaryza in Medina because he wanted their wealth, it is in the Quran.
And became a holy war, in the hadith of al Bukhari, verse (sahih) 129/1296, book 56, hadith 139, where it says "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem) (copy and pasted from the HAMAS covenant)
The day of Judgement is the end times, when the Mehdi/Mahdi will appear and all of the world becomes Muslim. it is , when Allah will decide how people will spend their afterlife. Yawm ad-Din , day of judgement will not come until all the Jews are obliterated.
Therefore there is no chance of peace between Muslim and Jew, thus not a problem that can be solved. On top of which Jews are occupying what Muslims believe to be sacred Islamic soil, especially the Dome of the Rock.
Russian aggression is a problem, however and there is a solution, Putin dies, and the oligarchs which are his power base and henchmen, along with him.
Still it will require a massive overhaul of the Russian mentality, for them subservience to authority, serfdom and slavery is part of their cultural inheritance from Jenghis Khan, through the Tsars, through the Bolsheviks to Putin.
The Russian ethos and legacy is Imperialism, conquest, obliteration of ethnic identities. Well not with Stalin, he incorporated the various ethnicities into the Soviet Union, so long as they served him and his purpose.
Putin is trying to do the same, with the exception of Ukraine, perhaps the Baltic states as well, there is in genocidal mode.
Muslim Chechnya rebelled because they felt that their ethic identity as Muslims was under attack by Orthodox Russia, Putin found a solution to that problem, by recognizing the leadership of the most ruthless Muslim thug as president, now he has a Muslim satrap.
There along discourse.
William - Thank you again for an interesting post!
You write, "Racism is a difficulty, not a problem, because it has no solution, even if the whole world was brown, there would still be racism, brown eyes vs blue eyes". - My example for Darlington in northeast England in 1980 suggests that - whether a problem or a difficulty - there is a solution, but maybe we haven't studied the issue from the potentially most productive angle.
You also write, "Therefore there is no chance of peace between Muslim and Jew, thus not a problem that can be solved. On top of which Jews are occupying what Muslims believe to be sacred Islamic soil, especially the Dome of the Rock". - Well, Norwegians have a 'sacred place', too, namely Eidsvold, where our Consitution was drafted and signed by a group of respectable middle-class men. Even so, we have forged friendship ties with both Denmark and Sweden. The reason is that the circumstances and context for the earlier conflict have fallen away. That's what is needed in the Middle East. One stumbling block - among many - is the (by now) much-debated Empire.
You furthermore write, "So we are left with the worlds greatest destabilizers, Religion". - I'm not so sure about that. The great destabilisers are demagogues who happen to feel in a religious mood and who are inclined to use religion to climb the sleazy pole of fame and infamy.
In fact, there is an ecumenical movement, where representative cognoscenti from various world religions meet to explore common ground - and discuss how to defend each other against common evils like secularism, materialism, Marxism, atheism, and unholy doubt. So, in Britain we were blessed with an archbishop who defended sharia law and a parallel sharia court system in Britain. This came as a suprise to many Brits - see https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/archbishop-of-canterbury-clarifies-defends-remarks-on-shariah-law-1.698017
This means that you conclusion, "Therefore there is no chance of peace between Muslim and Jew, thus not a problem that can be solved" - although expressed with logical certainty - could be incorrect.
You assert, "The Russian ethos and legacy is Imperialism, conquest, obliteration of ethnic identities. Well not with Stalin, he incorporated the various ethnicities into the Soviet Union, so long as they served him and his purpose". - Yes, you are right: Stalin tolerated ethnic minorities and even promoted them on the 'everyday' cultural level, but within the national state-framework of the Soviet Union. In the United States, such a process used to be called "the melting pot". I'm not sure what it's called now, in our current age of diversity, polarisation, and assertive thinking.
As for Ukraine: Putin sees it as part and parcel of a wider nuclear-strategic issue of Russian self-protection: the problem of keeping one's adversaries at arm's length, always and everywhere. I agree that this is a phenomenon that marks out super-powers and/or narcent empires. The Monroe Doctrine has the same aim. It is sometimes referred to as 'areas of interest'.
I overllooked an important difference between Judiasm and Islam and Sweden, Denmark and Norway.
The Scandinavians share a cultural heritage, and a racial one at that.
Jews and Muslims do not, In fact their cultures are at odds with each other, and Islam demands subservience, not only of Jews but of your culture.
As regards Sharia in England and Norway, or Islam in the west. Bear in mind that when you are a guest in some one else;s home, you are on your best behavior
In New York city, where there are a lot of orthodox Jewish communities, Jewish family law (Halakah or The way to behave) is practiced, only to the extent that it doesn't conflict with secular law. The communities even even their own family courts.
If a Jew doesn't like the rabbinical ruling, then he leaves the community and is then subject to the laws of the state.
Sharia is more than family law, it is law that governs society. Female Genital Mutilation is permitted, because women are not suppose to enjoy sex, and indeed it is practiced in Muslim communities in America, especially among the Somali community in Minnesota. Homosexuality is punishable by death, leaving Islam (irtidad) is punishable by death, and has indeed been carried out in America, disrespecting the Quran and Muhammad is punishable by death. Honor killing is permissible, and indeed many cases of honor killing in America.
Polygamy is permitted in Islam, and despite secular laws against it, it is still practiced (also by Fundamentalist Mormons, who have more than the four wives permitted by the Quran)
Sharia is much more than family law
Here is the problem that Islam has in Europe and even in Norway, and it accounts for the rise of the right.
Islam has never undergone the reformation of Christianity, and it can't.
For instance there is no substantial difference from a westerners POV between Sunni and Shia Islam. Their's is an intramural fight over who is the successor to Muhammad., not one of doctrine, ritual or tradition.
Were it not for Charles Martel in 732 at Potiers' or John III Sobieski at the gates of Vienna in 1682, Europe or most of Europe would be Muslim and living under Sharia.
If you are a misogynistic, homophobic , female dominating patriarch who can stop what they are doing and pray five times a day, then Islam is for you.
But here is what accounts for the rise of the right in Europe.
When a minority culture reaches 17% of the population, there is a tipping point, in which the values, practices, traditions of that minority population bleeds over into the majority population,and women start wearing hijabs, not wearing short skirts, men became authoritarians over their wives and children., conversions become more frequent, and before you know it, there are Sharia law side by side with secular law, eventually, Secular law is replaced.
And it isn't about race, although there is some of that, it is about culture.
Islamic culture and western culture are incompatible. Water and oil, and there is no emulsifier.
I personally,and most people I know, could not survive in an Islamic society.
We would be dead.
To be fair, there are Christian cultures, in America, that are just as bad, and are even more threatening. They threaten to take over this country via Trump.
They are called Evangelicals, Dominionists, The New Apostolic Reformation, an extreme group of Christian nationalists, sees Trump as the anointed person to help create a Christian state.
They are transdenominational, includes Protestants and Catholics.
Dominionism was found by R J Rushdoony and Ted Cruz's father Rafael.
it seeks to restore order and like the NAR replace the constitution with Mosaic laws.
The Mosaic laws are the 613 laws of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, well not all of them, not the inconvenient ones like don't eat pork, shell fish or wear clothing of mixed fabric,only the ones of social control. Like death for less than faithful Christians, rebellious teenagers, atheists, adulterers and the method of execution is stoning, because stones are free.
In the case of these Christians vs Islam the fight is not cultural, because they are on the same side of the culture war. It is religious.
Islam is supremacist, exclusive. It accords Christians and Jews,the right to their worship and traditions, so long as they accept second class citizen status as dhimmis.
The History of Christianity, since Constantine, is all or nothing. The reformation ameliorated the harm of Christianity, after hundreds of years of war, torture, slaughter and burning at the stake, there has been a detente between Christian factions, and they have proliferated, but they stand united against a common threat.
Myself I don't give a fuck, so long as I can live in peace, in a society rule by secular laws. If women allow themselves to be brainwashed into objects, like Islamic women and the women of many Christian communities, that is their business, so long as it isn't the law and culture I live in.
If your government is regressive, backwards and unable to even feed it's people, like for instance, Afghanistan, then that is their problem, and we shouldn't bail them out, for their choices, and it is their choice, for like Mao said, the revolution(govenment) swims in the sea of the people.
When the people can't live with their choice, their government, their culture, they flee to a more prosperous and free culture, but drag with them the garbage that created their misery, as if it were precious gems, and try to remake the host culture that welcomed them, into the same pile of shit that they fled.
Thus the rise of the right in Europe.
America is different, here it is pure racism and the fear that maybe low wage unskilled migrants, who can't speak English will take away high paying jobs that require skills.
However the culture of North, Central and South America is Christian, Evangelical, Pentecostal and Catholic and ultra conservative at that, a perfect fit with the homophobic, misogynistic culture of Christian America, so the only reason for anti immigrant politics is racial and economic.
The economic complaint is a farce, because the immigrants do jobs,that Americans feel are beneath them and don't pay well enough.
So it is racial. And I don't care about race, I wish the whole world was brown.
There would be one less reason for conflict.
In America it is racial in Europe it is cultural, with a smattering of racism.
I have no idea of what you are talking about vis a vis Darlington. I repeat a difficulty has no solution, and a difficulty is not a problem. You have heard of solving a problem or problem solvers, ever heard of difficulty solvers
You can't compare a religious/ethnic war between Muslims and Jews, to
Norway, Sweden and Denmark,all of which are Scandinavian and share a common origin and history. The attempt to do is does not speak well.
What is with you and your fixation on Empire? And the only Empire in your lexicon is America and the west, but not Russia and Islam.
You sure are a Putin apologist and partisan, you have an excuse for everything Russian and Putin.
Again, what is it with you and your obsession with Empire.?
What gives?
Biden ain't bumbling; he just walks like an 81-year-old man with pain in his body. He had only two years when he could get something done, and did he ever get something done!!!! Get with his record and stop complaining about him!
Sandra B - Well, Biden installed Janet Yellen; in an age of neoliberalism, this was no mean feat but not much commented on here in Britain. In this sense, Biden is well-meaning. However, when it comes to Israel's genocide in the Gaza Strip, he seems to have a blind spot.
I'm not complaining about him Sandra just being honest in my opinion with a Trump lover, cheese lighten up a bit don't be so defense. I'm 85, had a cancerous tumor removed in my brain, size of a tangerine, 7 years ago, and ten bouts of radiation afterwards, Result I stutter in speech and typing, and my sense of balance is shot.I would fall on my ass if there wasn't furniture and walls to grab.
Lighten up. I will crawl over broken glass to vote for Biden.
Cheese wiz.
William F., I'm sorry I was so abrupt. I overreacted. Glad to hear you survived such a medical attack as you had.
"that has been the defender of democracy globally"
Seems like you have drank that Koolaid they have been feeding us since birth.
But I could not agree more about tRUMP.
Just because there is a vote does not mean there is a democracy, and there is no democracy in any Islamic country, not with gender apartheid, an official religion, official punishment and death of gays, not with killing of unbelievers., and second class status for Christians and Jews (if you can find any in the countries), Most have no Jews.
For centuries Jews found safe refuge in Muslim Egypt and Muslim Palestine--then the Christian crusaders came. You probably know that Hitler regarded himself as a Germanic crusader.
And lets not forget that currently Iran is home to the largest Jewish community in Middle East outside of Israel.
This is news to me. Can you elaborate? Are they held as hostages (to deter Israel)?
Well, then perhaps you need to reconsider where you get your News at. Jews have lived in Iran for centuries and they have their own representative in their Parliament. You may also want to google 'Iranian Schindler' to learn who Iran saved Jews during WWII.
Of course, none of these will be beneficial to the Zionist/AIPAC propaganda.
Are you saying that Iranian Jews have their own parliament?
Not their own parliament but their own representative in the Parliament. It was suppose to the "the Parliament" and not "their Parliament" Sorry for the mistype.
No disagreement with this view regarding the Islamic countries, of which just about nearly all their dictators are in power courtesy of the USA.
But as you put it, they don't pretend to be a democracy unlike the Zionist Israel which arguably has murdered far more than all those dictators combined.
Mehrdad - Re: your second paragraph: Yes, with the possible exception of Suharto of Indonesia - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suharto
It's well to remember that Suharto had the full support of the U.S. president at the time.
Good point, Gunnar, but keep in mind that this was before the downfall of Communism.
Victor - Suharto presided over the mass killings of non-Communists, as well as Communists: ethnic Chinese, irreligious people and trade unionists, for example. Also, many people took the opportunity to murder neighbours they disliked for non-poltical reasons. The real figure, according to people who visited Indonesia at the time, may have been 2-2-1/2 million.
It seems that Suharto was not all that different from Pol Pot. No? Yet he had US support, didn't he?
Oh how wrong you are. Zionists' haven't murdered more people than all Islamic dictators combined. Just the body count of people beheaded after Frida prayers in front of mosques exceeds the body count of people killed in combat by the IDF, then you have to talk about the ongoing massacres in Iran by the Ayatollahs and Republican Guard, or Saddam, how about DAESH,ISK, Hezbollah, the list goes on.
What is your problem with the Jews having their own state". There is one Jewish ethnostate in the UN and 57 Muslim ethnostates.? 193 states in the UN, the Jews are really underrepresented, I would say that they sit alone in a hostile environmen, literally and fighting for their lives.
There would not be the present trouble had not the Arabs attempted a genocide of the Jews on Nov 1948, again in 1956, again in 1967, again in 1993, and like the insane people they are, they haven't learned a lesson and keep coming back again and again, and promising to do so forever until the land is Judein Frei, as Yaha Sinwar said, they are a nation of martyrs, well not him, but the idiots he get to die for him.
We know that at least 37000 have been murdered just in last 8 months by the IOF.
So, if you want to put the records of the Zionist OCCUPIERS against all Islamic dictators, be my guest, you might as well add the Nazi record so your team look even better.
I am not defending those dictators which are in place because of the US backing, I am condemning those dictators AND the genocidal Zionist all together.
With that I have nothing else to say to you as you are obviously OK with genocide.
Free Palestine from the River to the Sea and Free USA from the Atlantic to the Pacific from the Zionist/AIPAC cancer.
Killed as collateral damage, we killed more French our allies in WWII, 20,000 alone in the invasion of Normandy.
Quite different than the brutal up front and personal Rape and murder of women, infants, toddlers, elderly and disabled by the terrorists of Islamic Jihad and HAMAS, wouldn't you say.
And while at, how about complaining about the full on genocide of Ukrainians by Putin. Ah but that doesn't bother you, only Arab deaths county.
What is happening in Gaza is not Genocide, Genocide is the intentiona obliteration of a people or group, accoding to the UN Convention on prevention of Genocide, there is no such intention on the part of Israel, at least not published, However Israel has a right to defend itself against people who seek to genocide the state, yes Israel has been threatened with genocide since 1948, HAMAS has it in their covenant, Islam has it in their sacred text, Muhammad started it when he beheaded the entire Jewish tribe (60 ,six at a time in the Market Place of Medina, which is a sacred Islamic city.
While there is a real genocide going on in Ukraine people like you are silent.
Hypocrite.
Racist rants are ignored.
That slander doesn't work on me. Truth is truth. HAMAS has raped and murdered women,infants, toddlers, elderly and disabled. I bring up this facts and you call them racist.
That tells a lot about you.
I think you forgot the raping on cats, dogs and those fish in their fish tanks.
Flushed.....
You have quite the ego don't you. Fact is that you are of no account.
We can study the history of fascism in Europe. We can see the evil and destruction. Trump on the other hand was just getting started during his first and only term as president. We can only imagine how it would have developed had he gained a second term. What we have learned from this experience is that a great number of people in and around our government at the time were really bad actors who came out of the closet when they saw the opportunity. In my opinion Trump himself is not capable of following a plan or of any consistent behaviour. He does provide an enviornmeent that allows evil to thrive. He is a loathsome and dangerous narcissist. But I doubt he could even provide a definition of Fascism.
Trump doesn’t need to know what fascism means - he’s has plenty of very evil People behind him guiding and instructing him just like Hitler did.
Starting with the two Stephens: Bannon and Miller.
Trump would not have to define fascism because he’s everybody’s favorite useful idiot.
Rob - You write, “Trump on the other hand was just getting started during his first and only term as president”.
Not sure what you are referring to. He didn’t start any new wars. He broke the self-imposed U.S. embargo on talking to North Korea. He broke new ground. He didn’t get very far, but then we don’t know what happened behind the scenes. Trump was up against a Washington Consensus that predated his administration by decades - a consensus that enjoyed blaming North Korea for being ‘isolated’ and ‘insular’ when in fact it was the U.S. that had isolated and embargoed it.
Yes, Trump tried to push the envelope against the Consitution, but never got very far. My impression as a non-American is that the Consitution and its defenders were robust. Yes, I am aware that Trump threatens to bend the Consitution if he is granted a second term. I don’t see how he will be able to do any of this. Please enlighten me. I would suggest that there is a lot of moral panic behind your sentence, in response to Trump’s empty appeals to his supporters and undecided voters. Unlike Hitler, he will have no military force to back his ambitions.
Gunnar, I am not sure how to enlighten you. You have equal access to the same information I do. (I live in London). You seem to have come to a different conclusion. You are free to do that in a democracy and you can freely communicate you opinions. I don't think that would be the case in a fascist state. And that is where Trump would take the USA.
Rob, I'm with you.
Rob - Yes, Trump might do that - if allowed to do it. But American checks and balances appear to be robust because they are defended by so many at all levels of society and government. Trump needs careful supervision; he needs people and institutions to say 'No!' The U.S. has one big advantage over Britain: a written constitution. Even so, when Boris Johnson tried to prorogue Parliament, he found himself confronted by our legal system and was put back in his box. As long as people and institutions are prepared to stand up and say, "No!" there is little danger of a coup d'Etat either in Britain or the U.S.
I think you are naive Gunnar, making friends with Kim Jong Un will only lead to him invading South Korea. All he wants is permission. As I see it your opinion is that assent to aggressors is a virtue, and defense is a vice. Peace at any price. Is that correct. I don't know how else to take your comments Gunnar.
You come off as being the defender of autocratic aggressor nations and leaders. Correct me if I am wrong.
If America is neo imperialist, then it is benign compared to Russia and China. How about the Imperialism of small states, like the imperialism of Serbia. Or the imperialism of Islam. A religion can be and is imperialist. Christianity and Islam are imperialists, or haven't you thought of that.
My bitch with US neo Imperialism is that it is in service to international corporations and financial instiutions, not for the welfare and safety of America. It showed it head in Venezuela when Chavez had the temerity to actually think that Venezuelan oil belonged to Venezuela and not Exxon Mobil, who then mobilized it's power and used the USA, the State Department and the CIA to overthrow Chavez and his government and drive Venezuela into the arms of Iran and Russia. Just like they did with Fidel Castro.
There is a problem in America, not with Americans per se, but with the millionaires, billionaires and corporations that have accumulated so much money, that they have the power to influence policy not only to protect their wealth but to acquire more.
Yet with all of those defects and problems, there are still 100,000 or more people from all over the world lining up to get into the USA.
Meanwhile Norway, Denmark and Sweden are dealing with a problem, that was stopped at Poitiers by Charles Martelin 732 and at the gates of Vienna by John III Sobieski in 1683 an undemocratic, homophobic, gender apartheid, triumphalist and excursionist ideology that if successful will wipe out what remains of freedom, democracy and equality.
Thank you for your long and thoughtful response, William.
You write, "As I see it your opinion is that assent to aggressors is a virtue, and defense is a vice. Peace at any price. Is that correct". - On the whole, this is incorrect. A couple of years before I was born, my country-of-origin was invaded and occupied by the Nazi war machine. I wouldn't like to see this happen again, either to Norway or any other country in the world. The fact that you seem to think so, simply demonstrates your under-estimation of my political philosophy.
Having said this, during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, John Kennedy said, "I'd rather my children be red than dead" [quote from "Once upon a Secret: My Affair with John F. Kennedy and Its Aftermath", by Mimi Alford, p. 94]. - This, too, is part of my political philosophy.
You mention "the imperialism of Islam". - That's an interesting comment from a person who is American (I presume) - a citizen of the country that has meddled in the Middle East for decades. There is an informal dictum in life (and in politics) that every action gives rise to a reaction. I'm not defending the "imperialism of Islam" but then maybe the U.S. and some of its allies need to reassess its role in the Middle East? I should remind you that back in the day Islam in Spain was enlightened, and that it was the Catholic Church that began introducing anti-semitic rules and regulations. This was probably one reason that Baruch Spinoza's parents decided to leave Spain and settle in Holland.
I absolutely agree with your three paragraphs that start with "My bitch with US neo Imperialism ...". In particular, I agree that the problem is not with Americans per se; it is the politico-financial system that is the problem, and the source of many international problems.
You correctly identify "truimphalist ideology" as a problem. When the Soviet Union was dissolved, the West believed THEY caused it. They didn't - it was the idealist Gorbachev who done it! Furthermore, Gorbachev outlined a plan to transform Europe into a peaceful place. However, the West read Fukuyama's triumphalist and contageous book, "The End of History and the Last Man" (1992), and in our triumph we advanced NATO to borders of Russia. Today, in Ukraine, we reap the consequences. Every action provokes a reaction. Like Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Vladimir Putin has been thrown into crisis mode. But whereas Kennedy and Khrushchev were willing to negotiate, the West has refused Putin's repeated pre-invasion invitations to negotiate. That's an important difference.
Nothing I have said is to be construed as a defence of Putin's repressive domestic policies. However, it is as well to remember that when Putin first came to power, he was keen to see Russia become an integral part of Europe - he even suggested Russian membership of the EU. NATO and the EU were confused and uncertain, but it didn't take long for them to recover its Cold War bias and ignore Putin's invitations - as it had ignored Gorbachev's conciliatory invitations 10 years earlier. Could it be, then, that it was the West that erred - that we had made NATO a fetish, a goal in its own right, rather than an instrument whose life-span should have been permitted to ebb away?
Gunnar and William, When I wrote my short comment on DJT and fascism, I had no idea it would evolve into a full-blown debate. I stick by my original points. Gunner, nothing you have said has changed my mind. I assume you feel the same way. I lean towards William’s argument and wonder what the West should have negotiated with Putin about Gunner. Putin seemed to be saying, “Give me the rest of Ukraine (The part I didn’t take when I invaded in 2014. or I will invade you again.” That seems to be a difficult starting point for a negotiation.
I don't know what to do now. I stated my point of view in response to Robert’s invitation to comment. I have no interest in winning an argument, so it is unlikely we will meet again on this subject. If I am tempted to comment on another subject, I will be on the lookout for your difference of opinion. Life would be so boring if we all agreed on everything.
Rob - You may be reluctant to comment further on this subject, and you may be correct in saying we are too far apart politically to reach a consensus. But I think it's worth a try!
As I understand recent Ukrainian history, in late February 2014, there was a coup d'Etat in Kiev, and a new government had itself installed. The coup didn't arise from the peaceful 'colour revolution' of late-2013-January 2014, but came about when masked men dressed in black highjacked the peaceful demonstration and fought and killed police officers in their dozens. Eventually, these masked men prevailed, and a hyper-nationalist dominated government was formed. When counter-demonstrations errupted in the Donbass region in eastern Ukraine, instead of sending negotiators, the new government sent the Ukrainian army eastward to crush the protesters. As fighting began, Putin decided that the new government in Kiev might send air borne troops to Crimea to oust the Russian navy which was renting the premisses. To avoid this possibility, Putin's special forces took control of Crimea and a plebicite and annexation followed. About two months later, as the armed defenders of the Donbass began to lose ground to the Ukrainian army, Putin secretly intervened militarily; this was in April, I think, as far as we know.
So, the conflict in Ukraine began as a civil war and with the Russian annexation of Crimea. And yes, Putin installed a new military leadership in the Donbass and ensured that the 'rebels' held the front line against the Ukrainian army.
Putin had nurtured another concern - a broader strategic one - namely the presence of NATO on Russia's borders. He suggested negotiations; the West simply didn't react. And this eventually led to Putin's invasion of Ukraine. We blame him; he probably felt that in order to protect Russia's southern flank, he had no real choice - just as Kennedy felt he had no choice at the start of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.
That's really all I have to say about it. Each one of us can decide whether (1) NATO should have responded to Putin's invitations to talk; and/or whether (2) Putin acted responsibly or whether the invasion was an excuse to confront the West on his own ground. Our judgement involves the question whether there is such a thing as 'territories of interest', or not. I think it is fair to say that NATO's intransigence played a role in Putin's decision to invade. This doesn't let him off the moral hook.
As for Putin's motives as they developed following 2014, I can't be sure; I can only guess. He had been accused of arranging the destruction of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 in July 2014. No evidence supports this. Worse, no logic supports it, either. Putin lacked a motive, but no-one in NATO cared to ask "Cui bono?" (Who benefits?) - Why would Putin destroy a passenger plane which he he would immediately be blamed for - and for which NATO might use as a reason to directly involve itself in the conflict in Ukraine? This would be the last thing Putin would want to risk; he has always been afraid of NATO.
Who destroyed flight MH17? To ask this question is to ask, "Who had a motive?" If Putin didn't have it, who else? I think a faction within the Ukrainian government had a motive: to bring NATO into the conflict with the Donbass population. That's all I can say. I don't expect you to accept it. I'm not even sure that I firmly believe it. But ... cui bono?
Gratias Autem Habeo nullum responsum
You write, "Thanks but I have no answer".
You are welcome!
Bon nuit, Gunnar. Je par pour les cotswold demain matin.
In many ways, neither was Hitler. He couldn't be bothered with the minutiae of day to day governance, and that is where so many of his 'henchmen' came into the picture.
Trump should be fined and sentenced to a jail term for his felony conviction.
No discussion of Trumpism or fascism would be complete without an explanation of the enablers who form the inner circle of the cult and those who become the followers. We need to understand what kinds of personalities gravitate to authoritarian rulers and what socio-economic or cultural dynamics would leave them vulnerable to the con-men who prey on their vulnerability.
Yes. And once understood what can we do about them? It is said to be a cult mentality. How do we re-educate them? Persuade them to change their minds? Propaganda?
I think FOX "news" should go. Ignorance breeds ignorance. It is as if they take delight in our misery. Schadenfreude.
Madeline, I wish my "like" button would work. It seems to be turned off. You and others today are right to raise our awareness of the followers.
Robert Reich - You persist in drawing a parallel between Trumpism and (neo) fascism. That's fine with me. But I'm puzzled. You write well on America's economic system and the dominance of your American 'masters of the universe' and robber barons. My label for it is neoliberalism, whilst most Americans refer to the system as Reaganomics and Globalisation. Globalisation includes the use of so-called Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) clauses - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investor%E2%80%93state_dispute_settlement - within all recent international trade agreements. Britain seems to have embraced the system, also - see https://www.fieldfisher.com/en/insights/the-uk-and-isds-latest-developments
This system - neoliberalism - is just as (neo) fascist as Trumpism. The awful thing is that since Bill Clinton, the Democratic Party has adopted a 'soft' version of neoliberalism.
Gunnar You are absolutely correct. But trump derangement syndrome requires calling Trump a fascist. As you know, and anyone who doesn’t let msm dictate thought, actual fascism is merely the corporate takeover of government. Whether we pretend it’s still a democracy I will defer to you or others. But as you point out, Clinton and in my opinion Reagan started this process. To blame one party more than the other is part of the brew. Get the very stupid arguing about abortion guns pronouns fascism and corporate greed will launder money from the middle to the top. All the concentration camps, and genocide are merely an extension of the distraction.
Meanwhile Israel is in full 1939 mode.
So says the AI bot.
Billy! Am I a bot? Or are you a bloviating turd. Remember when Clinton paid for the Steele dossier? The feds knew it was a lie in 2017 but let jag offs like you accuse a sitting president of collusion with Russia. Eight years later you still lie about it but also can’t understand why Trump gains in popularity every day. Good grief you’re not too bright.
Chuck, keep it kind.
.-- . .-.. .-.. ..--.. And yes a bot, you exposed yourself.
William - You write, "So says the AI bot".
This is the sort of reply that a person sends when he is bereft of any intelligent answer. It's a sign of intellectual short-circuit. It suggests that Chuck is absolutely correct and you're lost for words.
Guunar. I have spent some time evaluating your arguments
Here is what I have deciphered.
Empire bad
USA is Empire
Russia victim defending itself from Empire
USA bad, Russia good.
All the rest, all of the other arguments and claims are superfluous and a distraction.
All you've managed to do is to simplify in ways that simple minds do. You've managed to extrapolate beyond the data given. I will try once more. Never let it be said that I'm not patient with you!
Nowhere have I said that Empire is totally bad, and nowhere have I said that "Russia is good". Nor have I ever meant to imply it. I've simply stated that the U.S. is building an empire and this entails being able to lean heavily on other nation states by economic and trade means and 'persuade' them to agree to things that other governments regret feeling compelled to do. I don't think this is good either for the other countries or for America's international reputation. So, the Vietnam War wasn't good for your country's reputation, nor was the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline good for you country's international reputation, especially not among your NATO allies.
Yes, Russia is one of the victims. That doesn't make Russia good. But it doesn't make Russia nearly as bad as the U.S. mainstream media propaganda tell you it is.
Palestine is another victim. Most of the international community are desperately trying to persuade the U.S. government under Joe Biden that supporting genocidal war by proxy is a bad idea. The international community is trying to rescue the U.S. power elite from itself. But we are not an empire; we don't have the clout to persuade the Biden administration to desist. And if Donald Trump wins in November, we won't have the clout to persuade him, either. It is what it is. It would be great if there were an Empire able to persuade the U.S. government - that would be a good empire, William.
With you, I'm up against it! You even deny that the U.S. (and Norway) was behind the destruction of Nord Stream. If you face facts with pollyannish denial, what can I do? What can anyone do? Ignorance is pure bliss.
What you have said, leads solidly to the conclusions I have drawn from your own statements. One doesn't have to say a thing directly
As regards Trump, it is obvious and known that he is Putin's puppet, from his efforts to get Vlad to approve a Trump hotel in Moscow, to asking him to provide Hillary's emails, to his private conference in Helsinki, where they evicted and forbade journalists and all translators save Putin's from the room.
Trump doesn't require persuading when it comes to Putin and other dictators, he is part of their club.
I do not amend or repudiate my assessments of your position, they are a reduction of your many, many words.
Russia is a victim, that alone gives you away. A genocidal aggressor is a victim, What he did to Chechnya to install his satrap is what he is doing to Ukraine and you call him a victim.
You expose yourself.
William - I agree that Putin's war on Chechnya was a gruesome conflict. So was the U.S.'s battle against ISIS in Iraq - see https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-37702442
Wars against political Islam is brutal, whether it is waged by Russia or the U.S. Frankly, I'm not sure that there is a military answer. Maybe its Russia and we who need to change - in unexpected ways.
I'm going to diverge. You probably won't approve; you say you don't like 'distractions' - but there you are. There is a story circulating:
“The genteel gloss of Cairo’s Abdein area, where Mohamed Amir Atta lived, had faded to shabby disrepair by the early ‘80s, when he entered his teens. The government workers who had once lived well on $100 a month found themselves in a vortex of downward mobility, working second and third jobs to survive. … Atta graduated from Cairo University in 1990 and his father convinced him that only an advanced degree from abroad would allow him to prosper in Egypt. Soon he was headed to Hamburg Technical University on a scholarship. … Atta’s academic focus was Arab cities, specifically preserving them in the face of Western-style development. He returned to Cairo for three months’ research in 1995, and was angered at what he saw. “He said it was a completely absurd way to develop the city,” recalled Ralph Bodenstein, one of Atta’s fellow students, “to make a Disney World out of it.” … In November 1997, he made an unexpected visit to his academic supervisor, Machule, to discuss his thesis, then disappeared again for about a year. There is evidence that he trained at an al Qaeda camp in Afghanistan around this time. He reappeared in Hamburg in early 1999, from which time investigators connect him with a cell of about 20 suspected terrorists”.
So, maybe one way we need to change is our fancyfree approach to town planning in foreign cities. All I can say is that, by his own lights, Muhamed Atta found the 'perfect' target: a brutalist steel-and-glass twin tower, precisely the sort of architecture he had learned to hate. Having seen Melbourne undergo a ten-year 'facelift' in the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s, where the ruins of once-lovely old buildings were marked with signposts saying "Wheelan the Wrecker was here!" - The signposts seemed provocative. So, from this melancholy experience in Melbourne, I have a sense of how Mr Atta may have felt during his years of growing-up in Cairo. I guess the difference between him and me was that I 'moved on', as they sat these days, while he didn't.
Come on. I am not buying that both sides crap, and I don't think anyone else does either. There is a big difference between Bush's criminal war in Iraq and Putin, And Putin has declare Genocidal intentions, and is purposefully, targeting schools, maternity wards and civilians. He has said he wants to obliterate the Ukraine identity and culture he even denies the Ukrainian language, That is genocide, Bush's war was for oil, re election, to beat his Daddy, and for the sake of Saudi Arabia and Israel.
Try again.
If you aren't a Putinista, then you are trying very hard, and no one is buying your swill.
The thing is, William, that if you call me a "Putinista", you thereby throw doubt on you judgement that Donald Trump is "Putin puppet". The more you throw such labels around, the less discernment and credence you give yourself.
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck it is a duck.
Maya D'Angelou said, "When a person shows you who he is, believe him".
You have shown yourself.
Isn't all this just a matter of where the $$ come from? Republicans traditionally get theirs from business/wall Street etc.. while Democrats sought theirs more from the workers. Clinton just said hell, we can do that and began imitating Repubs by talking to Wall Street. Its been a mess ever since.
Terry - No, neoliberalism goes beyond money and flirting with autocracy; it seeks the complete dominance of government that aims to structure society in the interest of money - and to infuse this ideology at the grassroots.
The most thorough analysis on this topic is "The New Way of the World: On Neliberal Society", by Pierre Dardot and Christian Laval, especially chapter 9: "Manufacturing the neoliberal subject" (pp. 255-299). It is a good book, well translated from the French, but written almost like a text book. I'd definitely recommend it; however, if you'd prefer something easier to read, I'd suggest "The Limits of Neoliberalism: Authority, Sovereignty and the Logic of Competetion", by William Davies. Or "The Silent Takeover: Global Capitalism and the Death of Democracy", by Noreena Hertz. Or "The Austerity State", edited by Stephen MacBride and Bryan Evans. There is also a book by Edward Luce called "The Retreat of Western Liberalism". This is in many ways an excellent book but Luce doesn't name neoliberalism as the culprit - except once, on p. 196!
The logic of competition: it is efficiency vs. human rights. As Prof. Reich points out, the key issue is who benefits and by what means.
Your wrong Terry, neo liberalism is taking government out of business. Putting government in Business is the classic definition of fascism. That is what Mussolini meant and did when he coined the term. His Chamber of Deputies was comprised of CEO's and Representatives from Italian corporations.
Lenin even said of the Soviet Union, it is State Capitalism, it was a combine of seven trusts organized along resource lines.
Thanks for the references. Neo liberalism is a political philosophy, am I correct?
Neo-liberalism is a power philosophy created in 1938 (Lippmann, Hayak, Mises, later Friedman, etc) that saw politics as a vehicle to assure free-markets AND influence social issues. So, it's both political and economic -- but economic at its core.
Free markets, John, by neo liberal definition, are those devoid of government regulations, so it's use of politics is to rid the market of government regulations, that is why a major cause of Republicans is to dismantle the administrative state.
Correct. But to "rid the market of government regulation" you must have CONTROL of government policy, as the 1938 Lippman meeting concluded. Hence, neo-liberals use control of politics as a vehicle to establish de-regulated policies. Neo-liberals successfully lobbied Jimmy Carter (and Congress) to dramatically reduce Cap Gains tax rates in the late 1970s. This was followed by Reagan-Thatcher going "all-in" on neo-liberal policies in the 1980s, which dramatically reduced govt regulation while also reducing net tax rates on ultra-high incomes. Since 1980, these neo-liberal policies have redistributed HALF of middle-class wealth into the top 10%, and mostly the top 1%, and mostly again into the top 0.1%. At current rate of wealth redistribution, by 2050 the U.S. will become a kind of serfdom, with over 50% of national wealth held by the top 2% families and trusts.
John L. - You're absolutely correct. This probably sounds strange to William Farrar, so may I quote from my favourite book on neoliberalism, namely "The New Way of the World: On Neoliberal Society", by Dardot and Laval:
"... far from clashing with the logic of competition, [the government's] task is to remove all the obstacles to the free play of the markets by a veritable policing of the markets, one example of which is the struggle against cartels" (p. 86). - "The state must obviously start by respecting equality of opportunity in the competitive game, by abolishing anything that might resemble priviledge or protection granted to some special interest at the expense of others. One of the doctrine's main arguments, which we come across in other liberal currents, is that one of the principal tendencies in capitalism - excessive concentration and cartelization of industry - is not endogenous in nature, but originates in policies of priviledge and protection pursued by the state when it is under the control of large private interests. This is why a 'strong state', capable of resisting all pressure groups and free of 'Manchester School' dogmas of the minimum state, is required" (p. 88).
It's interesting, isn't it, that according to neoliberalism, in order to achieve 'free markets', a very strong state must ensure through regulation that the markets remains 'free'.
It just occurred to me that when Hayek wrote "Road to Serfdom" he probably never realized that serfdom would be caused by his own ideology.
Hayek's quarrel was with those who favored a planned economy, not with market regulation. Later in life he explicitly broke with libertarianism, and argued that a modern economy needed a safety net for the less fortunate.
Libertarian ism leads inevitably to serfdom, For it to succeed requires the cooperation of like minded individuals, who respect each other and voluntarily accept the consensus opinion of everyone else.
Doesn't happen in reality, a strong man will emerge, then the strong mans cup bearers, his chamberlain,his courtiers and before you know it back to serfdom.
John, and Gunnar, I'm so sorry that the word "liberal" is part of that movement's lexicon, the way I don't like the word "socialism" in the title: National Socialism (Hitler's fascism). Whenever you see this kind of cross-over it's not a good sign.
Which sounds like an oxymoron. Seems that Trump though would like to fiddle as he sees fit. Sounds like a set up to me.
Yes, neo liberals use government to achieve their ends of an unregulated free market. The statement is intuitively obvious. How else can they achieve that end, and as a matter of fact, that is what much of the political battle field is really all about.
The billionaires and corporations use the power of money, to buy politicians and political powers so they can neuter the government and the agencies created to control them. Nixon created the EPA, and the money powers have been after it (Big Ag, Mining, the Chemical Petroleum cabal) to defang and neuter it or just shut it's doors.
Shut down OSHA the NLRB, anything that interferes the ability of billionaires to buy a new Jet airliner or build a refugee on a mountain top or under the ocean.
OK. I am not arguing with you. What then do you propose as a solution? So neo liberals have screwed up the country, no argument here. They have used the immense power of the purse, to gain favor, no argument there, they have done it with Republicans and Democrats, no argument there.
So where is the argument?
It's less of an argument, and more of a treatise on fundamental greed and fundamental power, perhaps baked in to the human evolutionary condition. A class-cycle that has repeated itself throughout recorded history.
On that we agree, it started when a dude dressed in animal skins picked up the jawbone of an ass or leg of a mammoth and clubbed others into submission.
How does it compare to monarchism?
Terry - I'm not an expert on monarchism. I'd say that absolute monarchism allows for the active interference and regulation by the monarch in his country's economic affairs, whereas a constitutional monarch is supposed to sit back and allow the elected government get on with it.
However, there are hybrid 'systems'. You may be aware that Prince Charles of Britain often wrote letters to Ministers of the Crown, making suggestions, even urging them to take certain steps. We also know that his mother effected a considerable number of changes in various laws - changes that benefitted the Queen and her family. - See for example https://theconversation.com/the-queens-gambit-new-evidence-shows-how-her-majesty-wields-influence-on-legislation-154818 and https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-culture/culture/a36608416/queen-law-exemptions/
The UK is not an Absolute or Constitutional Monarchy ....and there is no UK Constitution. Parliament rules and the monarchy has no say.... no veto.... no approval. The monarchy in the UK is the head of state and can do nothing as far as governing is concerned. Essentially all the monarchy in the UK can do is ask (beg) but never direct or order.
Yes, there are such models as Constitutional Monarchies but I don't know much about them except by their title.
Trump wants to be an Absolute Monarch. That's what he thought he would have by now but things kept getting in the way. He'll make sure that doesn't happen this time around and the Heritage Foundation is running interference to make it so. What fun. Of course the people behind him are Christian Nationalists. If Trump were to succeed it would be because of these people and his administration will be packed to the gills with them. How does King Donald sound? King Donald Jr?
Terry - Your comment on the UK monarchy and the British Constitution contradicts the evidence. The British Constitution is based on tradition and precedence. Hence, Boris Johnson's attempt to prorogue Parliament failed in the face of the opposition from the Judiciary.
So therfore, we have a Constitutional monarchy. The difference is that our Constitution is unwritten - or written down in various places.
As for the British monarch. He/she certainly wields considerable influence sometimes. How much real power - the power to actually override government. This we simply don't know. We assume he/she doesn't do that - but we don't know.
I understand what your're saying but isn't a Constitution by its nature a written and published document? Also your writing it made it seem as though the Monarch had real power of some kind. There's no evidence of that. And yes, you have a Judiciary but not necessarily one with a final say like the US. In any case, the Monarch is really not a player in the UK game of governance....and I've not heard of anyone holding their breath in the last 100 or so years.. As I understand it the UK Constitution is kind of scattered documents (Magna Carta as a founding doc) and of course unwritten Common Law is used to bridge the gaps. Do you think there will ever come a time to pull it all together and actually publish?
Biden has renounced "neoliberalism," because it is incompatible with democracy. What replaces it must be of concern to us, because it can easily slide into crony capitalism and oligarchy.
Gunnar: To help educate you The 14 Characteristics of Fascism. Tick them off, they are all Trumpism. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.bremertonschools.org/cms/lib/WA01001541/Centricity/Domain/222/Fourteen%20Defining%20Characteristics%20of%20Fascism%20slides.pdf
\
Are you sure you know what neo Liberalism is:?
Neoliberalism is a policy model that encompasses both politics and economics. It favors private enterprise and seeks to transfer the control of economic factors from the government to the private sector. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/neoliberalism.asp
That means no government control, no regulations, Reagan ism on steroids. R R in his many writings preaches against neo Liberalism.
Define, please, A SOFT VERSION of NEOLIBERALISM.
Thank you
Same thing. The hallmarks of fascism are highly centralized authority, rigid social and economic regimentation, and ruthless suppression of dissent. Look familiar? The American business oligarchs who are backing Trump are mirror images of the German businessmen who supported Hitler.
I'm amazed that all the disaffected people who are ready to vote for Trump can't figure out who's been screwing them for the last 40+ years. It isn't black, brown, Asian, gay, or LGTBQ people. It's the fascist super-rich.
I am English and I live in France, and I cannot help remembering the French Revolution when the poor executed the King and the rich landowners who kept all the wealth and let the poor suffer. The billionaires are the modern super rich who are likely to be turned on if Law and Order is overturned by the Fascists who are behind Trump.
Worst of all is the owner of X who can spread lies freely - stop looking at X.
It's the indifference to their suffering that can make the poor rise up and revolt against the economic elites in any generation.
That's how it looks to me as well, Gerry. It's interesting to me that the Koch brothers, by accounts that I've read, were raised by a Hitler loving nanny. Their parents wanted them to have "a strict upbringing." to my mind that translates as, no tenderness for those babies or little boys. They turned out to be emotionally ruthless even in relationship to members of their own family.
Fascists want three things:
1. Pillage and plunder the people and the nation's resources.
2. Control, exploit, and rule over people.
3. Be insanely violent, ruthlessly cruel, repressive, and murderous without any societal constraints or consequences.