29
   

Rising fascism in the US

 
 
glitterbag
 
  1  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 12:51 am
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

blatham wrote:

One of my favorite things is watching American conservatives speak on the subject of Canadian history, culture and politics though having never lived here (in most cases never having even visited) nor actually having studied the subject at all. We should all cherish the wisdom that emerges.


Hasn't stopped certain Canadians from doing so about America...




So your answer to blatham is "nah nah nah nah nanny poo poo"? God bless the American pubic school system.
glitterbag
 
  3  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 12:56 am
@Real Music,
Ret. General McCafferty said today that the money we spend on Ukraine assistance is a fraction of the cost of our war activities in Iraq and Afghanistan. Personally I'm happy we have drawn down in those areas.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 07:06 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

Totally fact.

(You know I have a London accent.)




You are a genius at times, Izzy. I loved that comment.
hightor
 
  1  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 07:14 am
@McGentrix,
Quote:
Hasn't stopped certain Canadians from doing so about America...


Rolling Eyes

Another totally irrelevant response as the "certain Canadian" being referred to has lived in the USA and has studied US history in considerable depth. You should have an editor go over your posts and check them for logical consistency before you reply.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  2  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 07:22 am
Alexander Stern wrote:
(...) This is language [what Heidegger calls “idle talk”] not as it belongs to any individual expressing herself, but the average, everyday sentiment that circulates more or less thoughtlessly—that belongs to everyone and no one. It is the background talk against which genuinely original expression can emerge. “Idle talk” is not a problem in itself—it’s part of how language works. Life would be unbearable and exhausting if we had to express ourselves at every chance with fresh insight and constantly come to grips with the utterly original outpourings of others. The average expression and intelligibility of idle talk is a necessary default.

The trouble arises when we engage in nothing but idle talk and confuse it for genuine understanding. (...) While seeming to give us access to the objects it is apparently about, idle chatter actually closes them off, sealing them away under interpretations that are learned and repeated by “thought leaders” and thought followers. The more it circulates the further it departs from real objects and the further it blocks off the possibility of new interpretations. This language, of course, evolves, and there are dissenting views, but “the discourse,” as it’s sometimes called on Twitter, is all channeled down predictable, almost automated avenues. New variations on the same theme are developed; new mash-ups and remixes proliferate; and new objects are subjected to the near-industrial cycle of interpretation, dissemination, and reaction. But this production is involuted and self-referential: it is driven by motivations and incentives internal to “the discourse” and increasingly disconnected from the outside world.

Social media did not create but has accelerated and refined this process. To the extent that they appear at all, real events appear on Twitter as almost an embarrassment to be quickly covered over by the ready-made interpretations of a given political or cultural framework. What matters is not coming to grips with the world in all its ambiguity and with all its complicated, often contradictory features, but rather fitting the new phenomena into an existing discourse. New events seem to exist only to provide fresh fodder for interpretation that sets upon them like an algorithm on new inputs. The result is language that is more about itself than about the world. (...)

commonweal
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 07:26 am
@Frank Apisa,
Thank you.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  -1  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 10:11 am
@Real Music,
A fraction of the billions so freely handed to Ukraine could provide safe, warm housing for American elderly, poor, and minority families with children who deserve it.

We could ALL go to the doctor when needed instead of dying early because we could only rarely afford to get the medical care we need.

This isn’t a gotcha game. All anyone has to do is step back from tribalism and look with clear eyes at what’s happening.

The Biden administration ( And plenty others before him) say we don’t have enough money to institute a national healthcare program, or affordable, safe government housing for low income Americans, or an affordable education or to pay professional teachers, or to attract the best minds to serve our people.

Yet how many billions have we handed to an obscure country in Europe (the same country that paid the president’s cokehead son millions to do something he never did before and in fact never did.). You don’t have to come up with any answer for me here, but I hope you’ll actually think about it.

The BRICS+ countries know exactly what we’re doing.

Merkel has said openly what we’re doing.

Half of Europe realizes that they have the US government to blame for their current misery—and it’s about to get much worse.

Americans should finally wake up to what our government is doing to us and to the world.

revelette1
 
  4  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 10:30 am
@Lash,
Telling you all the vital reasons we must support Ukraine is a waste of time for me, so I will skip it.

Those in the US who oppose it usually fall into two categories, those who are against anything Biden related or those who follow Russian propaganda news sites and information or a mixture of the two.

The Hunter Biden story has nothing to do with supporting Ukraine in the Russian invasion of their country. Typical of you.
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  2  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 10:32 am
The following is from September 8, 2022, but the information is still valid today.

Does War in Ukraine Impact Vital US Interests?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 10:39 am
@glitterbag,
Quote:
McGentrix wrote
Hasn't stopped certain Canadians from doing so about America...

As you and highor suggest, McG could have been a tad slower to his keyboard on this one.

Now and again over the years, right wing American folks have responded to my posts with "shut up, ignorant foreigner" or some version of "Canada is a shithole communist country". Both sorts do tickle my fancy.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  -1  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 10:51 am
The best liars lay groundwork to precede the event they lie about.
The great lie about Russian bot / ‘misinformation’ was a brilliant boogeyman created by the DNC / FBI to cover for almost any crime they had on the planning table.

It has been incredibly effective.

As a Republican-leaning voter, I bought the fear-mongering about needing to fight for ‘democracy’ all over the world before we had to fight here. What I’ve discovered is that was bullshit and what our government, via the CIA mostly, has been doing is fomenting coups to stop people-centric governments—basically equating ‘democracy’ with ‘capitalism’ in gullible American minds.

Russian disinformation didn’t happen. American disinformation happened—as evidenced in the Twitter files.

People who want to know the truth can find it easily now.
People who are afraid of the truth or unable to acknowledge that they’ve been fooled continue to hide from it.

Period.
izzythepush
 
  3  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 10:54 am
@Lash,
And the worst liars are called Lash.
blatham
 
  2  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 11:35 am
Quote:
Tucker Carlson’s rage at Zelensky caps a year of getting things wrong

After Volodymyr Zelensky delivered a rousing speech to U.S. lawmakers this week, Tucker Carlson unleashed a diatribe that put schoolyard sadists everywhere to shame. “No one’s ever addressed the United States Congress in a sweatshirt before,” he seethed, slamming Zelensky as a “strip club” manager whose presence was “humiliating” to “the greatest country on Earth.”

Carlson’s attack on the Ukrainian president, whose olive green garb was meant to dramatize his country’s wartime plight, has sparked outrage because of its demeaning quality at a time of extraordinary duress for the Ukrainian people. But this episode deserves a deeper look than Carlson’s adolescent belittling usually merits.

Carlson’s rant carried a more hateful edge than usual, a kind of shrill fury. Perhaps that’s because Zelensky’s presence before Congress was far more humiliating to Carlson and his ideological comrades than to anyone else: It demonstrated how badly they misjudged Ukraine’s will to resist Russian conquest and the durability of the U.S. commitment to our beleaguered ally.

This represents the failure of a worldview, a strain of far-right authoritarian populism, that goes well beyond Ukraine. A whole lot of things have happened that — in Carlson’s mental universe — were not supposed to happen.

In his diatribe, Carlson depicted Zelensky as little more than a sleazy street thug who had come to “demand money” from Congress, telling his audience that the lawmakers “love him much more than they love you.” He exaggerated Ukraine’s conditions for ending the war, depicting Ukraine as the unreasonable party.

Carlson has long insisted that Ukrainians are “pawns” in the United States’ quest for “regime change” in Russia, predicting our warmongering would trigger nuclear catastrophe. He has trivialized the invasion as a faraway “border dispute,” and has scoffed that Democrats are hypnotizing Americans into feeling “hate” for Russia.

Carlson’s obvious bet has been that voters wouldn’t care about the conflict and would see little virtue in U.S. military aid to Ukraine. Lawmakers would ultimately abandon the cause.

But Zelensky’s appearance itself forcefully repudiated all of this. It demonstrated that Ukrainian resistance is driven by its people’s own extraordinarily courageous commitment to self rule. It showed that U.S. support for Ukraine is unwavering. It displayed the success of President Biden’s careful balance, which has enabled Ukraine to regain substantial ground while avoiding direct U.S. escalation, refuting Carlson’s predictions otherwise.

There is an ideology behind all that wrongness, and Carlson has clearly laid it out. It tells Americans that Democratic elites prioritize Ukraine’s border over our own — they love Zelensky more than they love you. This conflation of the two borders, a widespread right-wing populist trope, encourages Americans to turn inward in multiple ways, washing our hands of responsibility for international allies and desperate migrants alike.

This worldview also rails against elite wokeness. Carlson frequently tells viewers that the same elites who want people to hate Russia and are obliterating the southern border are also brainwashing kids with anti-White racism.

As Cathy Young writes at the Bulwark, right-wing populist distaste for Zelensky is driven partly by Ukraine’s desire for integration with the liberal, secular, internationalism-minded West. That through-line links attacks on elite wokeness, pro-Ukraine sentiment and receptiveness to migration.

As a political argument, all this has proved pretty impotent.

Just before the midterm elections, Carlson wrongly predicted a “humiliating repudiation” for Democrats. Importantly, Carlson based this in part on Democrats’ wokeness and border policies, hubristically certain that voters would reject both.

Carlson’s show also promoted 18 GOP candidates who went on to lose, as tallied by Matthew Gertz of Media Matters. And while Carlson backed Ohio Sen.-elect J.D. Vance, he also hawked Arizona Senate candidate Blake Masters as “the future of the GOP.” That’s almost certainly because Masters’s demonization of migrants (including ads featuring machine-gun fire at the border) was peerless. But Masters lost by 5 points — in a border state.

Outside our borders, Carlson also lionized Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro as one of the great illiberal populist hopes of the Western Hemisphere. This year, Bolsonaro was ousted after one term. (To be fair, Carlson was able to celebrate a hard right victory — in Italy.)

And Carlson has been ham-handed in his efforts to counter the House committee investigating Donald Trump’s insurrection with his own propaganda, even smearing the committee as “Stalinist.” He used similar language about the FBI search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort.

All this also reflects Carlson’s broader dogma: The elites who obsess about Ukraine’s border and are brainwashing kids are also wielding the “deep state” against Trump and his supporters (which is supposed to discredit elites’ devotion to the Western liberal democratic project).

But the revelations in the committee’s final report are utterly damning, and they’re heavily based on Republican witnesses. The Mar-a-Lago search produced devastating evidence and courts have validated it. All this is advancing the rule of law, no matter how hard Carlson tries to lie that away.

None of this should prompt liberal overconfidence. Future electoral losses are inevitable. Cultural liberals need a proactive case against charges of wokeness. The war will grind on. Trump may still evade accountability. Carlson-style politics is being wielded effectively by a certain presidential aspirant in Florida who is crouched in the wings.

But a year ago one couldn’t have predicted that Carlson’s brand of politics would be repudiated in so many ways. If that prompts a bit of, dare we say, Carlson-grade smugness from his critics, well, it’s well deserved.
Greg Sargent
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  -2  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 11:42 am
@Lash,
The 2014 Ukrainian Coup
https://www.transcend.org/tms/2018/06/how-and-why-the-us-government-perpetrated-the-2014-coup-in-ukraine/

Excerpt:

Incontrovertible proofs will be presented here not only that it was a coup, but that this coup was organized by the US Government — that the US Government initiated the ‘new Cold War’; Russia’s Government reacted to America’s aggression, which aims to place nuclear missiles in Ukraine, less than ten minutes flight-time from Moscow. During the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, America had reason to fear Soviet nuclear missiles 103 miles from America’s border. But, after America’s Ukrainian coup in 2014, Russia has reason to fear NATO nuclear missiles not just near, but on, Russia’s border. That would be catastrophic.

If America’s successful February 2014 overthrow and replacement of Ukraine’s democratically elected neutralist Government doesn’t soon produce a world-ending nuclear war (World War III), then there will be historical accounts of that overthrow, and the accounts are already increasingly trending and consolidating toward a historical consensus that it was a coup — that it was imposed by “somebody from the new coalition” — i.e., that the termination of the then-existing democratic (though like all its predecessors, corrupt) Ukrainian Government, wasn’t authentically a ‘revolution’ such as the US Government has contended, and certainly wasn’t at all democratic, but was instead a coup (and a very bloody one, at that), and totally illegal (though backed by The West).

The purpose of the present article will be to focus attention on precisely whom the chief people are who were responsible for perpetrating this globally mega-dangerous (‘Cold-War’-igniting) coup — and thus for creating the world’s subsequent course increasingly toward global nuclear annihilation.

If there will be future history, then these are the individuals who will be in the docks for that history’s harshest and most damning judgments, even if there will be no legal proceedings brought against them. Who, then, are these people?

Clearly, Victoria Nuland, US President Barack Obama’s central agent overseeing the coup, at least during the month of February 2014 when it climaxed, was crucial not only in overthrowing the existing Ukrainian Government, but in selecting and installing its rabidly anti-Russian replacement. The 27 January 2014 phone-conversation between her and America’s Ambassador in Ukraine, Jeffrey Pyatt was a particularly seminal event, and it was uploaded to youtube on 4 February 2014. I have discussed elsewhere that call and its significance. Nuland there and then abandoned the EU’s hope for a still democratic but less corrupt future government for Ukraine, and Nuland famously said, on that call “**** the EU,” and she instructed Pyatt to choose instead the rabidly anti-Russian, and far-right, Arseniy Yatsenyuk. This key event occurred 24 days before Ukraine’s President Victor Yanukovych was overthrown on February 20th, and 30 days before the new person to head Ukraine’s Government, Yatsenyuk, became officially appointed to rule the now clearly fascist country. He won that official designation on February 26th. However, this was only a formality: Obama’s agent had already chosen him, on January 27th.

The second landmark item of evidence that it had been a coup and nothing at all democratic or a ‘revolution’, was the 26 February 2014 phone-conversation between the EU’s Foreign Minister Catherine Ashton and her agent in Ukraine investigating whether the overthrow had been a revolution or instead a coup; he was Estonia’s Foreign Minister, Urmas Paet, and he told her that he found that it had been a coup, and that “somebody from the new coalition” had engineered it — but he didn’t know whom that “somebody” was. Both Ashton and Paet were shocked at this finding, but they proceeded immediately to ignore that matter, and to discuss only the prospects for Europe’s investors in Ukraine, to be able to get their money back — their obsession was Ukraine’s corruption. Ashton told Paet that she had herself told the Maidan demonstrators, “you need to find ways in which you can establish a process that will have anti-corruption at its heart.” So, though the EU was unhappy that this had been a coup, they were far more concerned to protect their investors. In any case, the EU clearly wasn’t behind Ukraine’s coup. Equally clearly, they didn’t much care whether it was a coup or instead what the US Government said, a ‘revolution’.

The network behind this coup had actually started planning for the coup back in 2011. That’s when Eric Schmidt of Google, and Jared Cohen, also now of Google but still continuing though unofficially as US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s chief person tasked to plan ‘popular movements’ to overthrow both Yanukovych in Ukraine, and Assad in Syria.

Then, on 1 March 2013, the implementation of this plan started: the first “tech camp” to train far-right Ukrainians how to organize online the mass-demonstrations against Yanukovych, was held inside the US Embassy in Kiev on that date, which was over nine months before the Maidan demonstrations to overthrow Ukraine’s democratically elected President started, on 20 November 2013.

The American scholar Gordon M. Hahn has specialized in studying the evidence regarding whom the actual snipers were who committed the murders, but he focuses only on domestic Ukrainian snipers and ignores the foreign ones, who had been hired by the US regime indirectly through Georgian, Lithuanian and other anti-Russian CIA assets (such as via Mikheil Saakashvili, the ousted President of Georgia whom the US regime subsequently selected to become the Governor of the Odessa region of Ukraine). Hahn’s 2018 book Ukraine Over the Edge states on pages 204-209:

“Yet another pro-Maidan sniper, Ivan Bubenchik, emerged to acknowledge that he shot and killed Berkut [the Government’s police who were protecting Government buildings] before any protesters were shot that day [February 20th]. In a print interview, Bubenchik previews his admission in Vladimir Tikhii’s documentary film, Brantsy, that he shot ahd killed two Berkut commanders in the early morning hours of February 20 on the Maidan. … Bubenchik claims that [on February 20] the Yanukovich regime started the fire in the Trade Union House — where his and many other EuroMaidan fighters lived during the revolt — prompting the Maidan’s next reaction. As noted above, however, pro-Maidan neofascists have revealed that the Right Sector started that fire. … Analysis of the snipers’ massacre shows that the Maidan protesters initiated almost all — at least six out of a possible eight — of the pivotal escalatory moments of violence and/or coercion. … The 30 November 2013 nighttime assault on the Maidan demonstrators is the only clear exception from a conclusive pattern of escalating revolutionary violence led by the Maidan’s relatively small but highly motivated and well-organized neofascist element.”
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 11:44 am
@izzythepush,
With arms deliveries from North Korea to the "Wagner Group", Moscow is forging another unusual alliance - Lash is just a relatively harmless but poor person in comparison.
Lash
 
  -1  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 12:26 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Hi! Relatively harmless Lash here👋

Do any outlets reporting this story offer any proof in addition to “US says…”?

🙂
0 Replies
 
coluber2001
 
  3  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 12:42 pm
@coluber2001,
coluber2001 wrote:

"I didn't believe it for a second."
-- Sean Hannity about the stolen election.

[youtube] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5YQlHaNTkM[/youtube]

This is proof that Fox is not a news channel but merely an entertainment channel that caters to the far right. That Hannity and other far-right talk show demagogues would knowingly exhort their followers with their lies about the election being stolen just for the purpose of profits is pretty disgusting. But these people want and even demand these types of lies and Hannity and Tucker Carlson types are merely taking advantage of these people for their own profit. As P. T. Barnum supposedly said, "There is a sucker born every minute." There are plenty of opportunistic demagogues willing to take advantage of this naivete.
Lash
 
  -1  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 01:00 pm
@coluber2001,
I think it’s safe to say Fox caters to the American right.

There was a huge market for that political slant because for at least 30 years, all of the other networks to different degrees catered to the Democrat narrative.

I complained about it here about 15 years ago. It was a bit validating when it was proven recently through emails between the FBI and Twitter. Did you know the FBI paid Twitter 3.4 million dollars to suppress the devastating information found on Hunter Biden’s laptop?
glitterbag
 
  4  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 01:21 pm
@Lash,
Did you know the FBI paid Twitter 3.4 million dollars to suppress the devastating information found on Hunter Biden’s laptop?


That's great info, where did you get it?
Lash
 
  -2  
Fri 23 Dec, 2022 01:45 pm
@glitterbag,
I’ve said many times where it is.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 11/14/2024 at 08:07:42