The far right has been on a four decade march to take over our government.
They have succeeded and now they are going to strive to “adjust” our democratic system to make sure that the liberal/enlightened types never ever again have a chance of achieving
serious electoral wins. Relegating Democrats to the token party (sort of like during post 9/11), there for some argument and good form, but forever impotent to effect events just the same.
Sadly, unless the national resistance ratchets up a whole bunch more and truly whips our near worthless Representatives into share,
the Christian Right, with all their absolutism and white supremacist instincts, and love of invasiveness into other peoples lives, not to mention their amoral ruthlessness.
I made the following comment at another thread but am starting a new thread because right now I’m wrestling with this the most and am trying to sort out my thought.
Would love to find our others are snooping along the same trail. What were the “enlightened* democrats” fundamental errors over the past 40 years Carter/Reagan years being the most important since that’s where it started.
With Republican Christian Reactionaries (of course spearheaded by some wanna be oligarchs) figuring out very early they wanted to take over our government,
And Democrats being bumbling idiots, easily led by their noses. But, that’s just my considered opinion. Any one been thinking about it. Any care to discuss it?
*Sadly this includes scholars and scientists.
This stuff is way over his head, CC. Much easier to believe nonsense than study science.
{still bet he votes}
True true, but the more I reflect on the failures of the past four decades, all of which paved this path to Vandals and treasonists being handed our government.
I believe the most fundamental was a
The acceptance of this sort of illusion as though it doesn't matter.
Specifically back to the 70s the
Jesus Freaks who's absolutism was accepted as okay in our modern enlightened world.
Not so much their absolutism, but that these delusionals actually believed they were dealing in a Universal Truth. And that has been given a pass.
No one ever strove to drive home the point that there are Personal Truths and there are Universal Truths - there is the spiritual world and the physical world.
Gould came closest* to defining a distinction, but that was never more than an intellectual curiosity.
*But still far short of the fundamental distinction betweenPersonal Truths for matters of faith and Universal Truths when it came to our physical world
which with it's billions of f-ing years in the making is clearly beyond a God who would visit humans.
It's okay to have one's Personal Truths with it's absolute right and wrong, black and white and nothing in between.
But we allowed them to transfer their Personal Truths into realms of the physical world where Universal Truths hold absolute sway, though we'll never get to fully understand them.
On NPR Breitbart is discussed as a great media success with Bannon a great strategist and highly qualified.
What the fuck about the fact that Breitbart traded in complete malicious fabrications intent on destroying people - yes he was successful but that makes him a societal criminal.
what about Breitbarts and Bannon absolute contempt for factual truth - when agenda and winning are all that matters because
these people are complete egomaniacs devoid of all empathy or understanding of the world beyond their own immediate infantile desires.
As far as I can tell the failure was Democrats going too far with identity politics. That had the effect of alienating regular Whites (who used to be the base of that party) as well as the fence sitters, so they moved to the other side and recharged it.
They have succeeded and now they are going to strive to “adjust" our democratic system to make sure that the liberal/enlightened types never ever again have a chance of achieving serious electoral wins.
I wouldn't go that far. Unless some major change occurs the country will become less and less white, that means the Democratic Party will be at the future table. However, it probably will not be a party that humanists, for example - hope to see.
They have succeeded and now they are going to strive to “adjust" our democratic system to make sure that the liberal/enlightened types never ever again have a chance of achieving serious electoral wins.
I wouldn't go that far. Unless some major change occurs the country will become less and less white, that means the Democratic Party will be at the future table. However, it probably will not be a party that humanists, for example - hope to see.
Of course, that's assuming Republicans don't manage to gerrymander and voter-restrict our voting system well enough that, together with corporate big bucks the Democrats will never get a serious chance at real power again.*
I firmly believe that is in the top 3 of the GOP agenda and given the Democratic Party record, seems to me like the GOP had a damned good shot at achieving that goal.
Unless something fundamental and unexpected happens.
Shall we bow our heads for a moment of prayer to the entity of your choice.
They have succeeded and now they are going to strive to “adjust" our democratic system to make sure that the liberal/enlightened types never ever again have a chance of achieving serious electoral wins.
I wouldn't go that far. Unless some major change occurs the country will become less and less white, that means the Democratic Party will be at the future table. However, it probably will not be a party that humanists, for example - hope to see.
So what happens if it becomes less and less white?
They have succeeded and now they are going to strive to “adjust" our democratic system to make sure that the liberal/enlightened types never ever again have a chance of achieving serious electoral wins.
I wouldn't go that far. Unless some major change occurs the country will become less and less white, that means the Democratic Party will be at the future table. However, it probably will not be a party that humanists, for example - hope to see.
So what happens if it becomes less and less white?
We learn to speak Spanish. Simple solution, really. I've always wanted to get fluent in Spanish.
We stuck to the two party, money based system. It’s too anti-democracy to continue to hold the interest of liberal values. There was a chance to consider some rule changes, to force more coalition building, when Perot made his run. Instead, they shut it out forever by taking the debates away from the League of Women Voters and making their own exclusive system.
I don’t really get the term “identity politics”. Seems like the same old personality and catch phrases over real issues thing we’ve seen since at least the 50’s. Republicans have just it better. They might have advantage because of the values of their voters. Liberals value change and inclusiveness. That can put you all over the map so it’s hard to create a platform. Conservatives like security, tight communities, tradition. Much easier to speak to those concerns. The Liberal challenge is selling the ideas like including Muslims in this country is better for all of us and security comes through peace and compromise. Those are challenging.
I think the main thing to address is how to fight back against a group that has adopted an Ends Justify The Means mindset. Combine that with the religious Us vs Them/everything is a black and white issue, and you have the makings of totalitarianism. And the Cons realized this around Reagan’s time and have coordinated their efforts for implementation. They ARE the true neo-Nazis but have realized you can’t express that belief. So they’ve perfected their own “dictionary”…pro-life, welfare queen, voters rights, etc. to hide their true desire. Support The Troops, God Bless America, and so on. Trump is just the logical conclusion they’ve all been waiting for. Of course some of them had to make a stink during the primaries to make it appear they didn’t agree with him. But they did. He’s their guy and their reward for all the work of the last 40 years.
We stuck to the two party, money based system. It's too anti-democracy to continue to hold the interest of liberal values. There was a chance to consider some rule changes, to force more coalition building, when Perot made his run. Instead, they shut it out forever by taking the debates away from the League of Women Voters and making their own exclusive system.
I don't really get the term "identity politics". Seems like the same old personality and catch phrases over real issues thing we've seen since at least the 50's. Republicans have just it better. They might have advantage because of the values of their voters. Liberals value change and inclusiveness. That can put you all over the map so it's hard to create a platform. Conservatives like security, tight communities, tradition. Much easier to speak to those concerns. The Liberal challenge is selling the ideas like including Muslims in this country is better for all of us and security comes through peace and compromise. Those are challenging.
They have succeeded and now they are going to strive to “adjust" our democratic system to make sure that the liberal/enlightened types never ever again have a chance of achieving serious electoral wins.
I wouldn't go that far. Unless some major change occurs the country will become less and less white, that means the Democratic Party will be at the future table. However, it probably will not be a party that humanists, for example - hope to see.
So what happens if it becomes less and less white?It becomes more divisive among progressives. Not to mention more religious, less reason based].
They have succeeded and now they are going to strive to “adjust" our democratic system to make sure that the liberal/enlightened types never ever again have a chance of achieving serious electoral wins.
I wouldn't go that far. Unless some major change occurs the country will become less and less white, that means the Democratic Party will be at the future table. However, it probably will not be a party that humanists, for example - hope to see.
So what happens if it becomes less and less white?
We learn to speak Spanish. Simple solution, really. I've always wanted to get fluent in Spanish.
Yes, but not everyone who is not white speaks Spanish, by a long shot. In fact most probably do not. Many speak various African languages, Tagalog, Chinese. Korean. Japanese. Farsi, Gullah, and Indian languages, among others.
They have succeeded and now they are going to strive to “adjust" our democratic system to make sure that the liberal/enlightened types never ever again have a chance of achieving serious electoral wins.
I wouldn't go that far. Unless some major change occurs the country will become less and less white, that means the Democratic Party will be at the future table. However, it probably will not be a party that humanists, for example - hope to see.
So what happens if it becomes less and less white?It becomes more divisive among progressives. Not to mention more religious, less reason based].
How's that. It's progressives who support diversity. It's conservatives who want to keep America white. Plenty of white people are also religious and less reason based: evidence: Trump's supporters, especially rednecks. Given enough rational education, a percentage of any group will become less religious and more reason based. It's probably a similar percentage across racial groups.
As far as I can tell the failure was Democrats going too far with identity politics. That had the effect of alienating regular Whites (who used to be the base of that party) as well as the fence sitters, so they moved to the other side and recharged it.
They have succeeded and now they are going to strive to “adjust" our democratic system to make sure that the liberal/enlightened types never ever again have a chance of achieving serious electoral wins.
I wouldn't go that far. Unless some major change occurs the country will become less and less white, that means the Democratic Party will be at the future table. However, it probably will not be a party that humanists, for example - hope to see.
I think the main thing to address is how to fight back against a group that has adopted an Ends Justify The Means mindset. Combine that with the religious Us vs Them/everything is a black and white issue, and you have the makings of totalitarianism. And the Cons realized this around Reagan's time and have coordinated their efforts for implementation. They ARE the true neo-Nazis but have realized you can't express that belief. So they've perfected their own "dictionary"...pro-life, welfare queen, voters rights, etc. to hide their true desire. Support The Troops, God Bless America, and so on. Trump is just the logical conclusion they've all been waiting for. Of course some of them had to make a stink during the primaries to make it appear they didn't agree with him. But they did. He's their guy and their reward for all the work of the last 40 years.
An enlightened approach to scientific facts and understanding. An enlighten appreciation for this planet we depend on.
An appreciation that there is a profound difference between Personal Truths and Universal Truths
and that this distinction NEEDS to be enunciated and understood and respected for a society to hope to function sanely.
Honesty and human dignity and behaving with grace and empathy towards others, particularly the less fortunate.
Rejection of absolutism.
Appreciation of curiosity, learning and diversity.
An appreciation that We Need Each Other to Keep Ourselves Honest.
and so on and so froth.
How's that. It's progressives who support diversity. It's conservatives who want to keep America white.
Black and brown democrats don't like white progressives and when they outnumber them they will no longer need them as they have in the past.
Plenty of white people are also religious and less reason based: evidence: Trump's supporters, especially rednecks.
(Not really accurate, but I'll let that go). Religious whites are still less religious than blacks and hispanics.
Given enough rational education, a percentage of any group will become less religious and more reason based. It's probably a similar percentage across racial groups.
Nope. Rational education has been the norm in America for at least 2 generations now,only whites have shown decreased religiosity.
As far as I can tell the failure was Democrats going too far with identity politics. That had the effect of alienating regular Whites (who used to be the base of that party) as well as the fence sitters, so they moved to the other side and recharged it.
What are "regular whites"?The straight white middle and working class.
An enlightened approach to scientific facts and understanding. An enlighten appreciation for this planet we depend on.
An appreciation that there is a profound difference between Personal Truths and Universal Truths
and that this distinction NEEDS to be enunciated and understood and respected for a society to hope to function sanely.
Honesty and human dignity and behaving with grace and empathy towards others, particularly the less fortunate.
Rejection of absolutism.
Appreciation of curiosity, learning and diversity.
An appreciation that We Need Each Other to Keep Ourselves Honest.
and so on and so froth.Sounds about right.
Yes, but not everyone who os not white speaks Spanish, by a long shot. In fact most probably do not. Many speak various African languages, Tagalog, Chinese. Korean. Japanese. Farsi, Gullah, and Indian languages, among others.
Most do. Spanish is quickly becoming our defacto second language. Hispanics are close to a majority in Texas.