Donald Trump

"

coatofarms wrote:

Einkel:

Read up on "bridgegate". Christie is a crook and everybody knows it regardless of whether he is going to jail or not. it's like you didn't even read my full post. Oh right, your comprehension skills stink and regardless you don't know anything about anything anyways so who the fuck cares about your opinion?

Here's a fact, if you want to deport every single last illegal immigrant in this country like Trump does, you're a a bad person --a hitler. A presidential platform to deport all illegal immigrants from the US is unprecedented and definitely has a racial component to it. You ask yourself why the deep south and all the white supremacists are supporting Trump. Oh right, you don't give a fuck. Gee .. wonder why? /sarcasm

First, it's hilarious that you use the exact same tactics as Trump yet criticize it when he uses them. Insult and disregard instead of attack the argument.

Second, there was about 8 more paragraphs as part of the post that the system deleted probably because the "draft was out of sync" and I couldn't be assed to retype it, so I can understand you not having the full information that would have been contained within the post. However, that does not excuse your behavior which is, yet again, hilariously ironic.

Third, when did I ever say or indicate that I support Trump as a presidential candidate or agree with his stances? The closest thing I said was that I admire his ability to say what he wants to without fear of recompense. Something I try to do as well.

Fourth, deportation is not "Hitler-esque", that would be extermination. Hitler wanted all non-Aryan's to be exterminated as he thought they were inferior. Trump want's people to be deported because he believes that they are a negative impact on "American Ideals" and the "American Way". Saying this is "Hitler-esque" is an overstatement propagated by Liberal media that is using the same smear tactics that both parties have used for centuries. Before you bring up the bullshit of "He supports Muslims wearing armbands and identification." maybe you should listen the actual recording where he says he has no comment on the subject. Trump knew that no matter what he said it would be used against him. Unfortunately people take non-answer to mean whatever they want.

Fifth, you can't be racist against Islam or Muslims much like you can't be racist against Atheists or Christians. Faith is not a race. Deportation of Illegal Immigrants as well is not racist as long as it does not qualify Illegal Immigrant solely on race. (That becomes a separate issue all together)

Sixth, just because someone is a "Crook" does not invalidate their opinions and or the statements that they make. Yet again you love to use ad hominem as a way to dismiss arguments you don't like.

Seventh, why is it that you love to jump to insults?

I hope Trump will be the new president, I've never seen a president getting assassinated on national TV in my life

"

diablofdb wrote:

I hope Trump will be the new president, I've never seen a president getting assassinated on national TV in my life

I think they would assassinate him before he becomes president *tips tinfoil*

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

diablofdb wrote:

I hope Trump will be the new president, I've never seen a president getting assassinated on national TV in my life

I think they would assassinate him before he becomes president *tips tinfoil*

You are sort of correct in that they would use every trick in and off the books to prevent it. A very similar scenario played put in the U.S. before in 1992 where Ross Perot suddenly and inexplicably withdrew from campaigning when he was leading all polls. I don't subscribe to any particular conspiracy theory, but it was very clear that the powers that be (one or both major political.parties) gave Ross Perot an ultimatum that forced him to back down.

There have been some very good comments in this thread. I wish our leaders were as cognizant that the world is no longer a place where goverments can be re-engineered by changing the person who wears the big hat, and realize that long term guidance and cooperation are the key to improving the outlook for the future. A firm international resolve is also required to quell impetuous governments that would do major harm. The U.N. was supposed to be that body, but they have become a cartoon tiger with erased teeth.

I think the generation in diapers now will be far too information savvy for media and political groups to fool on a regular basis. The duty of our generations is to keep the internet and society as open as possible so future generations at least have the chance to make good decisions. If we as a modern society can be mindful, thoughtful and critical of what is happening around us without being disagreeable, the truth and good ideas will resonate and the ill considered miconceptions will fade away.

"

DalaiLama wrote:

I wish our leaders were as cognizant that the world is no longer a place where goverments can be re-engineered by changing the person who wears the big hat

it never mattered who's in charge in the government, muricans even elected real life actors into president positions to prove that point.

governments are exchangeable, everywhere. the guys in the background, basically owning the countries, define current politics.

i'm still shaking my head about that statement of yours that fascism is based on socialism. you're american, right? which literature tells that nonsense?

"

vio wrote:

"

DalaiLama wrote:

I wish our leaders were as cognizant that the world is no longer a place where goverments can be re-engineered by changing the person who wears the big hat

it never mattered who's in charge in the government, muricans even elected real life actors into president positions to prove that point.

governments are exchangeable, everywhere. the guys in the background, basically owning the countries, define current politics.

i'm still shaking my head about that statement of yours that fascism is based on socialism. you're american, right? which literature tells that nonsense?

Government leaders are not fungible, despite similarities in behavior.

Since you are unfamiliar with the history of the origins of the worst aspects of fascism (the Holocaust), I will put a few imperfect starters for you. They are not the links I would prefer to give, but Google flounders miserably when looking for something exact when it is not popular. There are two aspects to the rise of fascism from socialism - the economic side, and the more disgusting origin of eugenics from staunch progressives.

A few starter sites for you to begin your journey:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1220

http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/1796

http://www.amazon.com/Winners-Losers-Political-Polarities-America/dp/0822306026

http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/0767917189#immersive-view_1450796557105

That theory fails to explain most of the fascist governments since then in the world. Eugenics mattered in Germany, but it doesn't matter for, let's say, ISIS (and we can agree they are fascists; replace jews by everything that is not my fucked up variety of Islam, forget genetics). The idea of groups of people being unworthy is older than eugenics, eugenics merely meant a way to legitimizate it.

You can't explain fascism merely as a left wing thing. Or merely from socialism (not that I defend socialism). It's not historically accurate. A lot of those groups hated communism. Hell, fascists fought socialists eventually.

I recommend you to start from the basics:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism. See how right wing and left wing play ball with fascists. No one likes them. Again, third way, not left, nor right (far right socially, relatively far left economically, depending on how you see corporatism...some would say that the overemphasis on bussiness would be a right thing).

PS: A lot of progressives that founded US had slaves. Just remember that what is wrong or right, and what is progressive for a time period can be unsettling from our pointview. Just like now with progressives asking for awful things (see SJWs). Such is the tortured nature of progress. Change is painful.

Some snippage of the post I am replying to, due to the limited nature of my mobile device to navigate the reply subscreens.

"

NeroNoah wrote:

That theory fails to explain most of the fascist governments since then in the world.

You can't explain fascism merely as a left wing thing. Or merely from socialism (not that I defend socialism).
and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism. See how right wing and left wing play ball with fascists. No one likes them. Again, third way, not left, nor right (far right socially, relatively far left economically, depending on how you see corporatism...some would say that the overemphasis on bussiness would be a right thing).

PS: A lot of progressives that founded US had slaves. Just remember that what is wrong or right, and what is progressive for a time period can be unsettling from our pointview. Just like now with progressives asking for awful things (see SJWs). Such is the tortured nature of progress. Change is painful.

The definition of fascism must adequately describe fascism or it is worthless. Wikipedia is in general.a good resource, but when a topic becomes too heated the wiki lacks any semblance of neutrality. This will akways be true due to the nature of the wiki itself. Wiki may be referenced, but it lacks the real autbority of scholarship.

The left wing amd progressives have correctly distanced themselves from.eugenics after WW2.

I don't think fascism is currently part of any major left wing ideaology. My point was the origins of it.

As.for.being more of a right wing vs left wing thing - part of that will.depend.on. how those are defined. In some countries and states the.particulars.of what people are for or against vary. While any party with too.much power.will.try to control the populace, the idea that the human race/environment/planet will be improved by controlling every one is specific to those who place absolute faith in the current state of science. The opposing side may still want to control people, but tbat is due to wanting to maintain what already is. The economics of tbe state being best suited for almost all.economic control is almost entirely a thing of the progressiveideaology. There are definitely some things that need state operation for long term viability, but socialism, fascism and progressive economies take it far further than consevatives would.


I don't know that I would classify ISIS as anything but a thug theocracy. The social.aspects of control and appealing to long held tradition definitely place them in the conservative side of political polarity. The.only economics they have are war time.policies, which can be drastically different from a party's norm due to necessity.

Overall thie.placing of fascism as left wing is a case of squares amd rectangles. Fascism is the square, a particular case of the left wing rectangle.
Not all rectangles are square, and very few if any current left wing groups are fascist.

As for communism hating facism, there is some explanation of how that still fits in the sources I linked, at least in the original books. Off the top.if my head, I think the section discussing mentioned Lenin amd the phrase "Infantile.Communism"

I will agree with you on anything being conpletely right or.left. I think one of the big problems we face in finding solutions is the
tendancy to label.everything and everyone, and then automatically disagree with those who don't share the same.label.we wear.

A lot more listening, thinking and less.shouting and hatred would yield better answers.

Both sides have some good ideas that need to be heard amd acted on. The "enemies" are not our neighbors or even those who think and vote differently. Our enemies are those people.who are intentionally willing to make othes suffer for their own personal.gain.

That Umbrella of Evil may harbour all.sorts -from terrorists to corporations run amok to despots slaughtering millions.

There may yet come some.good out of Trump's noise and bluster on the issue that presumably inspired the original post.
Various Islamic groups are beginning to find their owm voice and speak out against the terrorists in their own way. There seem to be a.couple newsworthy items each day where some kind of action is taken against terrorists by the very group that is.so.easily demonized as the religious handmaiden of doom.

If this continues, the terrorists will be obvious pariahs in their own lands, and their ability to recruit will falter.

Let us hope the time for.crusades is coming to an end.

The master of free publicity did it again, the absolute madman.

"

DalaiLama wrote:

I don't know that I would classify ISIS as anything but a thug theocracy. The social.aspects of control and appealing to long held tradition definitely place them in the conservative side of political polarity. The.only economics they have are war time.policies, which can be drastically different from a party's norm due to necessity.

They (the leaders) are ultra conservative, or radical orthodox. Muslims in general, especially in the secular countries would say that Baghdadi misinterpretates the quran, therefore "Isis" is called Daesh in those countries and is seen as a terrorist organization or simply criminals by the majority.
(Being a catholic doesn´t make me an IRA supporter.)

And many of them (the followers from other countries) are simply criminals. Young men without chances that want to be someone, like many of those imprisoned within capitalist societies, especially the U.S., or young men growing up in slums, or like hell´s angels members or mafia-like organizations everywhere. Some of them are converts from European countries without any background of Islam.

And then you have those that started fighting against Assad in different (secular/liberal) groups, but have to feed their families. So they became mercenaries for Isis.

It´s sometimes more about materialistic things or a reaction to the lack of money or participation within a society and not so much about ideas/ideals. That´s one of the reasons why I don´t like pure capitalism/"neo-liberalism" and why I like social market systems.

From my point of view, lack of solidarity(within a society or between countries) results in more crime and more wars, which then results in higher expenses for prisons, policemen, secret services, security, border control, soldiers and weapons, you would have to expect in an economy. And having private prisons for example makes it worse, because then you have a lobby, people with a financial interest to have many criminals, just like the existing lobby for armaments companies needs big conflicts like (civil) wars.

It´s much better to use taxes for a social infrastructure instead and not only limited to your own country.