What’s needed to stop an American dictatorship?

If you don't know Social Darwinism you didn't get too far in school.

 

Word Salad describes all the none sense which originates your Rightest circles and Klaverns where you white nationalists meet. Your Christian extremism is responsible for the murders and enslavement of millions all over the world. Now you want to harm millions of Americans with your rightest extremism by spreading disease and at the same time deny government sponsored health care to the poorest Americans who need it most. You Orange Spray Painted leader has caused millions to get infected by Coronavirus by stalling the delivery of masks and ventilator machines. He has caused millions of Americans to become homeless and unemployed. And he has disrespected our congress while his supporter cheer on. I think rightest extremists who support Trump are terrible and deplorable persons.

 

Yeah but----

 

What's needed is to vote out as many republicans as possible.

 

You don't get to choose your evil dictator . The force that makes it possible is hate .
Perhaps you think evil should be hated , so actually you choose Trump . But you
don't get to choose .

 

I certainly didn't choose him! About as mild a comment that I can make about him is : He's not a very nice person.

 

Do you choose to be obsessed with Trump ? or is this about wizardry ?

 

I HAVE been obsessed with trump. It's not often one gets to see a true mental case in such an important position.

 

I see disparagement over mental cases . Feeling on the edge with worry .

 

Nope. Just the one and his minions.

 

What is it with the right wing and the amateur psychology? Everyone has a mental illness if they don't think like you.

OK 3 things

1. Fox spent several days each when Obama wore a tan suit and when he forgot to salute a Marine. Pretty mental
2. Once your party tells people to go to college you can be a psychologist.
3. Studies have shown that Republicans are for lack of a better word stupider and more cruel. Less able to understand complex topics and more prone to wan punishment for outsiders. All this means they are more likely to support fascist leaders.

As one Trump voter famously said "he is not hurting the right people". It does not mean you are all stupid but it does mean that people who see life as very simple black and white are often Republicans. The basic argument of a light switch being on or off is really common in right wing circles and they get really angry when you talk about dimmer switches.

 

srg

Sorry but that isn’t a counter argument it just comes across as petulant foot stamping (all those caps) I will repeat what I said –

I base it on what people say and don’t say – like yourself, you make statements that imply your views and when asked to clarify you refuse to do so which seems to confirm those implications.

I can only go on what people say if you wish to dispute my viewpoint of it (that I’m always happy to explain) then you need to explain why you think I’m wrong not just try and shout me down and stamp your little foot because that just makes it seem that I’ve hit a nerve and you have no real comeback.

I will also repeat in bold so you don’t miss it again

Who is more of a cretin -the person like yourself you is unable to defend your views from criticism or me who can and repeatedly does.

 

srg

LOL - No I knew exactly the image I wished to express, that the words were like the dribble of saliva that drops slowly from someone’s (usually a child’s) mouth.

But I’m glad you also thought Dax’s comments were drivel as well

 

Srg

As I’ve said before it amazes me how lazy many on the right are – I mean you even admit you don’t read the posts so don’t really know what’s going on.

And are you really saying you have no long term memory and never do any research – LOL how do you function in the real world have you a job in my experience even the most menial of jobs requires the retention of knowledge and training.

But I suspect this is just you been a dishonest debater – if you acknowledged previous post you would also have to admit that to all the outstanding criticisms of your views that you are unwilling or unable to address, better to claim that you treat each post on a standalone basis with none of that critical baggage.

LOL although the thing about doing no reseach seems to fit

Well from your post you clearly know of it so how would you define it, I mean have you some strange definition that is different from the norm?

But if it was possible to stop or limit the bad from happening why would you refuse to do so?

 

Srg

Visions of the future

As stated my vision for the future like many lefties is for a place where people can live healthy, prosperous lives and everyone can fulfil their potential. And the policies and ideas I often talk about explain and promote are about bringing that vision about such as universal healthcare, welfare, education, training, and a new green deal amongst others.

In your reply you indicate the kind of future you would prefer.

It would be a place where those deemed not worthy of life were terminated and such people already living presumably sterilised - to stop their genes from going forward

And a place with no public assistance so returning to a time when many needlessly suffered in hardship even unto death.

A place where preventable ‘bad’ things are allowed to happen

In what way is that a ‘better’ world and who do you think it benefits?

And in the context of this thread rather dystopian, I mean you warn about attempting to create a paradise on earth but seem happy to create something closer to hell for many.

 

"shit happens" is not a crude comment, but a commonly used phrase to describe things which occur or come to our attention without warning and which we have no control over.

I used it to reply to his "question", and I paraphrase, 'how do you deal with the reality that some people are born to parents who don't care about their kids and some people are born to parents who treat their kids as their first priority giving them a huge advantage and privilege over the former?'

As if he'd expect me to stop what I'm doing and go raise their kids or something. No, he just wants me to give some of my earnings to the family so they can have more dope at their parties.

I'd just as soon round em up and put em in containment camps where they can learn to break free from the bonds of drugs and laziness, learn life skills, and the importance of responsibility.
Now watch the violent opposition to this practical solution.

I got nothin against the people of antifa and other distopian groups like marxists or whatever. Let them be themselves - just not around me. I can nit pick about the stupidity of government bureaucracy, burdensome regulations, the catering to the lcd, and stuff like that, but I still love the institution of my country and respect the president regardless of any qualms I may have with his or her personality or policy. That's the difference. I'd create a new country for them somewhere on the globe and turn em loose to let them have their way to do what they want. US citizenship revoked. Then we'll all be happy about that.

I don't doubt that, there's a study for anything you want to show!

I would tend to agree that it would look that way from a leftist point of view. You guys have the artist types, the fiction writers, etc. I would say typically the type of people who would go for a bachelor of arts.
How many economists, chemists, physicists, engineers, and diagnostic technicians are leftist? People of the bachelor of science persuasion are better at analyzing so they're not as easily duped by the leftist drama.

So yeah, those guys who look at both sides of the coin, find there's a downside to robbing Peter to pay Paul, and see that "crying wolf" is manipulative, know that for every action there's an equal and opposite action -- they must look stupid and unapathetic to the people who fell hook, line, and sinker for some cause driven by some power hungry egomaniacs.

For example

And

Like that's some universal thing. Such narrow thinking.

You could put up signs.
You could put up a guard rail.
Or you could deny free people access.

How far is far enough?
Where does your responsibility to take care of yourself intersect with my responsibility to keep you safe???

Trade-offs are a foreign concept to some.

Suppose a foreign army is invading, you can shoot back or raise your arms. Doesn't matter which you do, you can't stop bad from happening.

Suppose you sue a drug mfr because your brain power was too low to resist their pain meds (which by the way they developed to help you deal with extreme pain) and now that's less money they can put into developing new cures and more they have to put into protection from an overzealous litigious institution. Not something greedy people think about when looking to fatten their wallets unscrupulously. What if we really sock it to those nasty profit seeking companies and put them out of business... Yay!!! Wait, what? No more aids drugs? No more cancer treatments? Oh my...
The other side of the coin.




These guys somehow think only they want

But their ideas of

while lofty goals, need some system to work them into place. We can't just sprinkle pixie dust or write laws and *poof* all's good with the world. Those things require a robust economy in order to fund. Otherwise people will be going without food and shelter, which, arguably, are a higher priority. There's an abundance of prattling on about the end state with little to no consideration of the process to get there. That's how we get entangled in messes that become nearly impossible to escape. People need motivation, they need personal gains in order to produce for the common good. Take that away and everyone's got their hand out. Pathetic, like baby birds in a nest when mama comes back with a worm in her mouth.

It all boils down to analytic ability, the ability to make good tradeoffs between multiple alternatives.
Not lock onto some target goal, torpedoes be damned. Any fool can do that. And only a fool would.

 

In a democratic country the people choose their leaders... they speak via the ballot box ...they reject those they believe will not govern in the way they would like them to govern. In a democracy those who are not chosen lick their woulnds and wait for the next election.
Americans will never allow those who are not chosen to cause chaos. Sometimes we get a very good government and sometimes we get a government that does not live up to our expectations. This happens thoughout the western world. We should not use violence to rotate our administration. This is not done in a democracy. Violence, burning & looting has no place in the USA today. If you do not get the leaders you wanted, you wait for the next election to vote them out.

 

The violence isn't being used to rotate our administration it's a reaction to police brutality. I prefer peaceful protest but some feel it's time for action, aka riots. I don't agree with them but that's their stand on the matter.

As for voting Trump out, he has stated the only way he can lose is if the election is rigged. Anyone with any sense knows that's bullshit, but his supporters aren't known for being sensible. I hope he loses by a landslide so he can't claim it was rigged, though he still might anyway. If he refuses to leave the White House, and his supporters back him, things could get much uglier than the current rioting.

 

To post 497. To reply to your treatise in a short manner.
According to those who study such issues as pre history and early human history, I don't think your present ideas are very far off from the way humans were in those times. Evidently and obviously , life was a struggle from the beginning that we sentient beings/humans had to navigate, such as crude shelter from the elements, the dangers from other sentience and ones neighbors. The results of the needs/wants were most definitely determined by brute force and the desire to have what others had at the expense of those others ,often just to stay alive. Not un-natural actions in a primitive, brutish world. Those characteristics from our earliest struggles of acquisition abide , however refined they have become as one century replaced another. My general feeling is, that we are not much different now.But what if somewhere back in the mists of time, after language was developed and was becoming common, farming had begun and humans could use some form of higher reasoning,---could there have been--somehow-- could there have been a paradigm shift from the needs and wants of individuals, of tribes, of the beginning of nation states that still prevails, to a reasoning that encompassed neither the prior reasoning of the the club and bow, nor the reasoning of the planes and bombs--or the shuffling of papers ,but the reasoning and the actions of empathy, caring, loving and serious concern for all of humanity? At some point in the past to have decided to use all the available resources on this planet to ensure that all were fed, housed and treated with dignity and respect? Educated and encouraged to discover and use all the abilities gained from such to benefit all sentience? To benefit the earth itself?

That would be and would have been earthly socialism as I see it-------but of course , it's too late for that. OR IS IT? Our earthly ancestors decided for us----can we now decide for ourselves?

 

Opinions?