Delightful Life
M&M, Cascadian Lovers
- Pronouns
- She/Her/Her
TRUMP - Some people think......... How do you feel?
- Thread starter crazyheart
- Start date
Welcome to Wondercafe2!
A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!
Graeme Decarie
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't buy direct democracy. I would vote for a person I agree with rather than one who would agree with me. We elect leaders to make decisions, not to ask us what to do. If that were all they were required to do, we could hire presidents - cheap.
Bear in mind that most people have little to no understanding of politics Many , many people are highly conformist and will vote as their neighbours do. That's very common here in New Brunswick.
And the role of a political party should be to prod people's thinking, not to take away the need for it.
No, I would vote for a person whose principles and views I can agree - or mostly agree - with. That's what real democracy is. To vote for somebody whose talent is to agree with others is a waste of effort, and an obstacle to change.
Bear in mind that most people have little to no understanding of politics Many , many people are highly conformist and will vote as their neighbours do. That's very common here in New Brunswick.
And the role of a political party should be to prod people's thinking, not to take away the need for it.
No, I would vote for a person whose principles and views I can agree - or mostly agree - with. That's what real democracy is. To vote for somebody whose talent is to agree with others is a waste of effort, and an obstacle to change.
Graeme Decarie
Well-Known Member
I'll be a little more provocative - but sincerely so.
Us humans are dreadfully conformist. it's very noticeable here in New Brunswick where people make it point to avoid controversial issues. But it's true of people everywhere. We don't need conformity in politics. We need to challenge, to think wherever the thinking takes us. We need (but don't have) leaders who actually lead and spark our minds.
But in our society, anybody who thinks differently is likely to cause fear. We don't want to be different. We want to conform - and we even make up myths about how these conformings are a part of what we call our culture.
Church goers should understand that. Very often, people go to church because they want to conform with others. And they adopt the version of faith that conforms with the crowd they want to be accepted by.
(That's particularly true of fundamentalists.) But it can be found in all churches. I cannot think, for example, of any church in Canada or the U.S. which has ever been critical of any war we have engaged in. The Nazi armies were well stocked with chaplains.
That's just the way us people behave.
Us humans are dreadfully conformist. it's very noticeable here in New Brunswick where people make it point to avoid controversial issues. But it's true of people everywhere. We don't need conformity in politics. We need to challenge, to think wherever the thinking takes us. We need (but don't have) leaders who actually lead and spark our minds.
But in our society, anybody who thinks differently is likely to cause fear. We don't want to be different. We want to conform - and we even make up myths about how these conformings are a part of what we call our culture.
Church goers should understand that. Very often, people go to church because they want to conform with others. And they adopt the version of faith that conforms with the crowd they want to be accepted by.
(That's particularly true of fundamentalists.) But it can be found in all churches. I cannot think, for example, of any church in Canada or the U.S. which has ever been critical of any war we have engaged in. The Nazi armies were well stocked with chaplains.
That's just the way us people behave.
Yes...he's more insane and imbalance and is a racist sexist jerk hanging on to dying breaths of the ol' boys club that he wants to revive and rebrand. He will make the economy and problems at home worse. He's $650 mil in debt - he is not even a good businessperson - and he is actively encouraging further dumbing down of the people by blatantly buying the people who own the message he wants to manipulate their heads with. He is a pro at that!!!! More than any previous example. He will shut down competing opinions - he may even punish them. He will be in the NRA's back pocket and do nothing to advance gun control and impose assault weapon bans. He will devolve humanity. He will embolden the right wing racist white supremist parties sense of entitlement and advancement - Mr. Brexit. No...friggin...way...he's better! And because he got new speech writers and is reading the teleprompter better in the past few days will not change my mind.
Graeme Decarie
Well-Known Member
Oh, agreed.
And Hillary will lead the world into its last war.
And Hillary will lead the world into its last war.
That's not a forgone conclusion.
He doesn't stand for peace. He's openly pondered using nukes! On micro scale he's driving a wedge between families. He's creating racial unrest while he's not going to address gun control. Peace?
This, unfortunately, explains the Trump phenomenon. Anyone who thinks Trump is better should read it and examine what's really influencing them.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/11637008
Graeme Decarie
Well-Known Member
Tell me about Obama's efforts to bring about peace - to introduce gun controls - to tone down nukes (in fact, he's the one who has moved up nukes to the Russian border). Hillary, if anything, is worse.
She is heavily backed by the arms industry. That's the one that makes weapons for the armies of the world - and also sells combat weapons by the millions in the US. It's the same people. I have been in American gun stores. I know quite a bit about guns. The weapons they sell are the same ones they sell to tyrants all over the world.
Trump is creating racial hatreds? What do you think Bush and Obama have been doing? What do you think Hllary will do differently?
Hillary is as insane as American billionaires in general have become.
It's not a foregone conclusion she will use nukes? Surely you know Obama has been building and refining nukes more than any president since 1945.
U.S. business leaders want (must have) war with russia and china. They have said so publicly. (project for the new american century, American Exceptionalism....) The U.S. cannot possibly fight a conventional war against Russia and China. If you knew anything about the military, you would know that. US business domination of the world cannot happen without nukes. That IS a foregone conclusion. And the US has been moving its nukes around in a VERY aggressive fashion.
Look. It's not Clinton. It's not Trump. US democracy has been bought a long time ago - even before the years of Reagan. There is not and will not be a democratic government. It will be a government controlled by the billionaires who have made Hillary and Bill extremely wealthy. That's been true for years now. The U.S. is a country in the deepest sort of corruption and decay. It has destroyed the middle east. Most of those countries will not survive and will not in any foreseeable future be stable.
Americans have very little sense of what has been done. That's because their only source of information is news media that are also owned by the billionaires.
Trump is not more insane than Clinton. And I doubt whether he is more corrupt than she is. It's tough to beat Hillary's standards of corruption.
The greed and corruption is so pervasive, there really is no point in talking about any of the leaders. They're not different enough from each other to matter. We are watching a society in collapse. Watch either of them on TV. Both are unspeakably trivial. Both have no sense of the issues the U.S.has to deal with - let alone having any solutions to offer. it amazes me to see commentators discussing their speeches as if they have actually said something.
Watch for splits as other countries get scared of the direction the U.S. is moving in. In fact, that's why Turkey has been moving toward Russia. expect some NATO countries to start looking for a way out.
And Justin Trudeau has put Canada up to its ears in this insanity. It's easy to send just a thousand troops to Latvia and a few hundred to Syria. But it's one hell of a job to get them out.
She is heavily backed by the arms industry. That's the one that makes weapons for the armies of the world - and also sells combat weapons by the millions in the US. It's the same people. I have been in American gun stores. I know quite a bit about guns. The weapons they sell are the same ones they sell to tyrants all over the world.
Trump is creating racial hatreds? What do you think Bush and Obama have been doing? What do you think Hllary will do differently?
Hillary is as insane as American billionaires in general have become.
It's not a foregone conclusion she will use nukes? Surely you know Obama has been building and refining nukes more than any president since 1945.
U.S. business leaders want (must have) war with russia and china. They have said so publicly. (project for the new american century, American Exceptionalism....) The U.S. cannot possibly fight a conventional war against Russia and China. If you knew anything about the military, you would know that. US business domination of the world cannot happen without nukes. That IS a foregone conclusion. And the US has been moving its nukes around in a VERY aggressive fashion.
Look. It's not Clinton. It's not Trump. US democracy has been bought a long time ago - even before the years of Reagan. There is not and will not be a democratic government. It will be a government controlled by the billionaires who have made Hillary and Bill extremely wealthy. That's been true for years now. The U.S. is a country in the deepest sort of corruption and decay. It has destroyed the middle east. Most of those countries will not survive and will not in any foreseeable future be stable.
Americans have very little sense of what has been done. That's because their only source of information is news media that are also owned by the billionaires.
Trump is not more insane than Clinton. And I doubt whether he is more corrupt than she is. It's tough to beat Hillary's standards of corruption.
The greed and corruption is so pervasive, there really is no point in talking about any of the leaders. They're not different enough from each other to matter. We are watching a society in collapse. Watch either of them on TV. Both are unspeakably trivial. Both have no sense of the issues the U.S.has to deal with - let alone having any solutions to offer. it amazes me to see commentators discussing their speeches as if they have actually said something.
Watch for splits as other countries get scared of the direction the U.S. is moving in. In fact, that's why Turkey has been moving toward Russia. expect some NATO countries to start looking for a way out.
And Justin Trudeau has put Canada up to its ears in this insanity. It's easy to send just a thousand troops to Latvia and a few hundred to Syria. But it's one hell of a job to get them out.
Obama didn't create racial hatred. He was a target of it! The whole Birther thing, egged on by Trump? And that lit the spark of underlying racial hatred from people who never thought, and didn't even want to consider, that there would ever be a black man in the Whitehouse! It stoked the fear that white male superiority was losing its grip. One thing that even in bad times - gives people a slight edge. Because they've always had it - but things are changing and they don't like it. Some refused to even aknowledge that Obama was the president! I wonder if that includes generals and political opponents? How has Obama deliberately made racial tension worse?
Obviously life is chaos ... and some don't believe in chaos theory ... fi life is chaos, des that put and end to that narrative?
No, but more guns will support the war industries and little green mouldering men! Contributes to the fertility of the earth as manifest destiny ...
Could there be a counterpoint to this from people of wisdom ... wisdom is ethereal in our present state of emotions ... kind a' vacuous?
No, but more guns will support the war industries and little green mouldering men! Contributes to the fertility of the earth as manifest destiny ...
Could there be a counterpoint to this from people of wisdom ... wisdom is ethereal in our present state of emotions ... kind a' vacuous?
When Obama makes an impassioned plea for gun control - senate blocks - and/ or gun sales go up. The president gets screwed when he tries to do good things.
And nuclear proliferation is just an insane chest puffing exercise. "My stockpile is bigger than your stockpile". As a muscle flexing, supposed, deterrent. I disagree with them in every respect and I don't actually defend Obama on his record on disarmament. I wish he'd done more. There've been enough to destroy the world, in existence, for decades. Increasing them, though, doesn't increase the potential damage, logically. The damage would be total. That's as true today as it was 40 years ago. It doesn't matter if the powers have 100 nukes each, or 1000 or 5000 each, does it? Other than them being a depraved psychological deterrent. They can't one up mass extinction - so it's just the world's most insane dangerous pissing contest. The only way to decrease the potential damage would be to have a nuke free world. I wish we'd already achieved that by now.
Last edited:
I worry about NK most. Kim Jung Un is a madman who even executes his own family members, has a largely uninformed brainwashed population isolated from the world - he has the bulk of his citizens ecstatic about his propaganda - and I think his "guidance system" is way off, in more ways than one.
Seeler
Well-Known Member
revsdd
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure that there's a significant policy difference between Clinton and Trump. On the issue of sanity, I think both are sane. The difference might be that Clinton is coldly rational (which isn't as wonderful as it sounds) whereas Trump is more of a loose cannon. In any event, I tend to think that presidents have a very limited ability to control policy - and not because they're controlled by Congress, but because the "system" (acting outside the control of president, Congress, courts, etc.) has a life of its own and even those who get elected to office with the absolute best of intentions are inevitably sucked into it and end up with important sounding titles that for the most part give them the right to do the system's bidding. Eisenhower spoke of the "military industrial complex." Simply put, the defence industry donates to the politicians, who then do the bidding of the military, because giving the military free reign benefits the defence industry, who will then continue to donate to the politicians, etc., etc. So the role of the government becomes simply to continually build up the military. The military takes up well over half of the US budget - money that's being spent on development of weapons that really aren't necessary. The United States spends more money on its military than the next eight highest spending countries COMBINED. Largely, that level of military expenditure doesn't make the United States safer, but it does make the defence industry richer. Ironically, in some ways the last president the US had who had the credentials that might have allowed him to have potentially challenged the military-industrial complex was Eisenhower: a former five star general highly respected in the military and by the public. But even Eisenhower had so little freedom to act that he waited until he was almost out of office before he issued his famous warning about the military-industrial complex. Had he really either been concerned about it or wanted to do something about it or felt he could do something about it he probably would have said something about it before January 17, 1961 - three days before he left office, when no one was really listening to him anymore anyway because they were all by then fixated on Kennedy and the American Camelot that was going to replace him a few hours later. Of course, the "military-industrial complex" is played out on various levels with various players. The NRA plays the game. Corporations play the game. "Donate so much money that the politicians can't say no." Oh, sometimes some of the politicians will speak up (like Obama on gun control every time there's a mass shooting) - but the money is too great to get enough of the politicians to do anything - and lone voices are actually helpful because they give the illusion that something "might" be done to deal with situations the public are concerned about. Gun control is a great example. Polls show that the majority of Americans favour gun control, so having a few political types speak in favour of it actually supports the current system that prevents gun control laws. Sort of like letting the lid off the pressure cooker every now and then. The same general principles operate in Canada - just on a much smaller scale. Presidents, prime ministers - they set policies to the extent that the system allows them to set policies, but they don't have the power or the freedom to act that many think they have. They do have the ability, I would say, to impact the tone of civil discourse, perhaps, or the style of the game that's being played (Trudeau did that; so did Obama - Trump, I would argue, has done it in a negative sense, whereas Clinton is basically a mainstream politician who plays the game like it's always been played) but it's doubtful that anything substantive in terms of policy changes will come out of it.
I agree with Graeme's comparison of the United States with the waning years of the Roman Empire. Rome was beset in its last couple of centuries by constant wars, leading to an overextended military, leading to overspending to finance those wars and the military that fought them at the expense of other priorities. Rome was faced with a widening gap between rich and poor, by people wealthy enough to avoid paying taxes (setting up essentially the ancient equivalent of off shore tax havens.) There was barely hidden political corruption. Citizens lost their sense of pride and trust. Romans lived in constant fear of invasion by outsiders. The Emperors became puppets of the military.
It all does sound familiar.
I agree with Graeme's comparison of the United States with the waning years of the Roman Empire. Rome was beset in its last couple of centuries by constant wars, leading to an overextended military, leading to overspending to finance those wars and the military that fought them at the expense of other priorities. Rome was faced with a widening gap between rich and poor, by people wealthy enough to avoid paying taxes (setting up essentially the ancient equivalent of off shore tax havens.) There was barely hidden political corruption. Citizens lost their sense of pride and trust. Romans lived in constant fear of invasion by outsiders. The Emperors became puppets of the military.
It all does sound familiar.
revsdd
Well-Known Member
The American Empire will fall. That's inevitable. All empires fall. Trump's "I'll make America great again" is foolishness. The empire is in a state of decay and collapse. Trump can't stop that. The question is when the final collapse will come and whether they'll take the rest of us out with them when the final collapse comes. That's not inevitable. The Soviet Union had to make that choice in its dying days - and there was an attempt to install a hardline government that wanted to make the USSR great again, and that might have gone to frightening lengths to try to stave off the ultimate collapse. Remember the attempted coup against Gorbachev? In the end, the coup failed and the Soviet Union went with a whisper and not a bang.
Who knows? Maybe Revelation is pretty accurate - God recreates heaven and earth because the first are no more. I'm saying that not really seriously (in the sense that I don't think nuclear war is God's preferred way of re-creation) but there are probably fundamentalist and apocalyptic Christians who look forward to nuclear war because they see it as a fulfilment of Revelation. Just like there are probably some who see the looming environmental catastrophe in that same light.
Pontifex Geronimo 13
#walkaway
Probably right on a lot of this. I do not agree that it must fall, although I think the fall will be a little down the road, maybe two generations. The last empire will be Islamic Europe and Asia.
99%ers sitting on their butts is not a movement, because it does nothing. Right wing Trump infiltrating the system could be a start of getting something done. But the problem is every other elected republican is already on the take. So maybe Trump is assassinated or otherwise stifled. What is needed is a bunch of representatives who are not already corrupt politicians. A third party set on total change and common sense, which can only come from the right.
Canada has already passed or in the process of passing laws that will allow the banks to confiscate your money that you have on deposit when the SHTF.The better thing to do than the French Revolution, when they lopped off all the heads of aristocrats, would be to pass laws that just wipes the debts owed to them. A year of Jubilee. (Not likely though as head removal is prophesied in Revelation)
But as you say, I think Revelation will be accurate. A third of the land, air and sea is going to perish. Islamic Europe and Asia is going to march on Israel and be destroyed in their tracks - maybe by nuclear war, it fits the description, or something worse, the Hand of God.
Last edited:
Pontifex Geronimo 13
#walkaway
Hilary is not going to win this election.
...Wars and rumours of wars - see that your hearts not be troubled. (Easier said than done - at least Trump has been comical)
Alternately to revsdd and PG13 - once the baby boomers pass on the world will look a lot different. It will reflect millenials' values, the establishment will change to something different...Islam will become more progressive and fair like Christianity did...hang on!
Alternately to revsdd and PG13 - once the baby boomers pass on the world will look a lot different. It will reflect millenials' values, the establishment will change to something different...Islam will become more progressive and fair like Christianity did...hang on!