No post body was provided.
Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)
701–710 of 741 posts
Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)
#702I don’t have it twisted, I watch the news daily to be entertained by the dumpster fire of current events and idiot talking heads making nonsense of it.
Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)
#703Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are not contradicting views. If you look at them with a lenses of preserving wealth they align quite neatly. I’d like to see a counter example. Nazis are the very definition of preserving the wealth of a few. It’s just you have seen the words “National Socialism” and assumed that meant left. You’ll find the labels are high jacked quite often. But left and right remain more consistent. Are you saying that trying…
"It’s just you have seen the words “National Socialism” and assumed that meant left." No, I just happen to live in an area (in germany) with lots of nazis and had to engage with their ideology a lot. There definitely exist anticapitalist, socialist fascist today, as did back then. Those are the ones, that were put down in Nazi germany in 1934 in the Röhm Putsch, so they did not rose to power, but nevertheless exist.…
Seems you’ve applied values of your own. I didn’t frame one as selfish and the other as altruistic. I framed one as spreading wealth and one as consolidating it. I gave “selfish” examples for both.
If you care about preserving wealth with elites that is right wing… whatever weird political label you give it.
If you care about distributing it to non elites that is left wing.
Stalinists are not “left” they were about wealth and power consolidation.
This is why right and left are useful measures because it sees passes all the bullshit names/political measures and provides a simple scale: are you redistributing wealth (left)? Are you consolidating wealth (right)? Are you doing something in between (centrist)
Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)
#704Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are not contradicting views. If you look at them with a lenses of preserving wealth they align quite neatly. I’d like to see a counter example. Nazis are the very definition of preserving the wealth of a few. It’s just you have seen the words “National Socialism” and assumed that meant left. You’ll find the labels are high jacked quite often. But left and right remain more consistent. Are you saying that trying…
I can give you plenty of left-wing policies that ended in mass genocide. How do you fit that into your mental model?
Were they trying to redistribute wealth or consolidate it?
Where does genocide fit into anything I’ve said?
Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)
#705Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not the OP but, Right: conservative. Policy designed to preserve corporate interests and wealthy elite. Often masquerading as “looking after the middle class” - when really at best they get some trickle down benefits. Selfishly You should be right leaning if you are a significant owner of capital or have a very high chance of that (they will convince you that everyone has this chance). Left: Progressive (in that it l…
This seems to the world view of the Democratic Party as described by the Democratic Party.
Not American, so I wouldn’t know. But from outside the Democratic Party looked more right than left. Though I guess it’s mostly left of the republicans.
Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)
#706Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We ended up getting very close to throwing out the past election results We disagree on this. From what I've read, there was amateurish pontificating on throwing out election results, mostly by sub-Presidential aides or advisors. And most critically, rejected by almost everyone in a position of authority to legally do so. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the most serious legal action taken to deny the results…
The President of the United States claimed the election was fraudulent and directed the Vice President to throw out electoral votes and hand him the Presidency. Fake elector certificates were signed. The President called up state officials telling them to "find more votes", and refused to start the transfer of power. Election officials were threatened. The President's supporters attacked the Capital and (for a few ho…
The President's own Vice President, Attorney General, Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, et al. refused to participate in any of the schemes. Republican governors refused to participate in any of the schemes. Republican secretaries of state refused to participate in any of the schemes. The DoJ is now investigating and charging everyone who broke into the Capitol (-ol, not -al), who were evicted the same day by the National Guard, Capitol police, and DC police.
To me, that's a bunch of clowns without a plan.
A serious attempt looks like someone sitting down, planning out an attempt likely to succeed, and then enacting that plan in a competent and responsive manner.
Trump lied on national news, shouted from a podium, and inspired a riot.
At the founding of our country, that would have been a Tuesday.
For me to be concerned, I would have needed to see any other person of executive power or branch of government participate in the plot. Or enough members of Congress to actually threaten the normal process.
And if it had been successful, then you know what everyone does? They march on the Capitol and demand the rule of law be adhered to. Coups require consent. Withhold that, and they crumble.
Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)
#707Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It’s just you have seen the words “National Socialism” and assumed that meant left." No, I just happen to live in an area (in germany) with lots of nazis and had to engage with their ideology a lot. There definitely exist anticapitalist, socialist fascist today, as did back then. Those are the ones, that were put down in Nazi germany in 1934 in the Röhm Putsch, so they did not rose to power, but nevertheless exist.…
Seems you’ve applied values of your own. I didn’t frame one as selfish and the other as altruistic. I framed one as spreading wealth and one as consolidating it. I gave “selfish” examples for both. If you care about preserving wealth with elites that is right wing… whatever weird political label you give it. If you care about distributing it to non elites that is left wing. Stalinists are not “left” they were about w…
Ok, so how do the national socialist fit into your metric?
They are left, because they want to redistribute wealth, from the few rich (jewish) bankers, to the poor (aryan) german masses?
Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)
#708Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. The Economist is like NPR for rich people and diplomats. Head out to the parlor with your cigar and jacket and enjoy it. They are good in that they are informative and not subtle about the voice of the paper. But it gets a little boring to me if I read it for a few months.
What is NPR? I only found Nevada Public Radio.
National Public Radio.
Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)
#709Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems you’ve applied values of your own. I didn’t frame one as selfish and the other as altruistic. I framed one as spreading wealth and one as consolidating it. I gave “selfish” examples for both. If you care about preserving wealth with elites that is right wing… whatever weird political label you give it. If you care about distributing it to non elites that is left wing. Stalinists are not “left” they were about w…
Ok, so how do the national socialist fit into your metric? They are left, because they want to redistribute wealth, from the few rich (jewish) bankers, to the poor (aryan) german masses?
No, they wanted to move wealth, and consolidate it. So you could be fooled into initially thinking it was a leftist agenda when it was “take wealth away from rich bankers”. But it quite quickly deteriorated to something else.
It’s important distinction that at the extremes both left and right don’t look that different. It is essentially use extreme violence to achieve wealth distribution/consolidation. Typically once someone is in control of such power even if they set out/pretended to distribute they pivot to consolidation. I guess this is what is meant by “power corrupts”
Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)
#710One thing to keep in mind is that news is really entertainment. Hollywood companies spend a lot of money coming up with scripts that mimic the drama of real lives. The news are real life and it's basically free when compared to other entertainment.
Jeff Zucker, the president of CNN Worldwide, shaped his career around entertainment not journalism. And he was hired to punch up the news from NBC by Warnermedia, CNN's parent. It just goes to show that the media companies treat news as entertainment. I think we need to be aware of that and be careful how we consume it.