111–120 of 153 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you drive a car, fly on a plane, have trucks in your supply chain, use plastic anywhere in your life- you support that engagement. Sucks but they're built in now.
They also contribute a lot to VC funds iirc
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Austria nearly does. Mr. Bond. I see little difference between tweets and political parody songs.
It does appear to me that America and the rest of the West are diverging on this issue. We do not criminally prosecute people for political speech. Even speech most of us find abhorrent. We draw the line at inciting violence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does appear to me that America and the rest of the West are diverging on this issue. We do not criminally prosecute people for political speech. Even speech most of us find abhorrent. We draw the line at inciting violence.
And look where that’s gotten you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Or is that only if I leaked the secrets of a state you consider a "good guy" state? Of course. There’s a difference between good and evil, as much as you’re trying to pretend otherwise.
Have you considered that after seeing how the US handled Manning, handled Assange, handled Snowden, handled Ellsberg, handled Martin Luther King Jr, handled the Vietnam war, the Iraq war, the Afghanistan war, Guantanamo Bay, and the countless other shit just in the last half century, I might have a hard time putting them squarely into the "good guys" bracket? That isn't to relativize in any way what others are doing…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does appear to me that America and the rest of the West are diverging on this issue. We do not criminally prosecute people for political speech. Even speech most of us find abhorrent. We draw the line at inciting violence.
And look where that’s gotten you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's neither all "freedom and democracy" nor all "ruthless greed". Your post feels like kool aid in "ruthless greed" direction. Government decisions are made by human beings in positions of power. Being in a position of power, such as the president of the United States, is a balancing of owns personal beliefs/morality and the interests of the United States. The composition of those components and the position of the…
> Your post feels like kool aid in "ruthless greed" direction. I have cited several examples, you cant call it kool aid because it disagrees with your beliefs. Feel free to offer counter examples. Counter examples I am looking for 1. American support for a democracy that is not conditioned on alignment with NATO. 2. Or equivalently displacement of a dictatorial regime that is aligned with NATO, with a democratic regi…
I know great people, far better than myself, that have dedicated themselves to these ideals. I feel that it is a disservice to them and those ideals to write them off or discount their existence because of instances of hypocrisy in US policy. That is all I wished to communicate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Your post feels like kool aid in "ruthless greed" direction. I have cited several examples, you cant call it kool aid because it disagrees with your beliefs. Feel free to offer counter examples. Counter examples I am looking for 1. American support for a democracy that is not conditioned on alignment with NATO. 2. Or equivalently displacement of a dictatorial regime that is aligned with NATO, with a democratic regi…
All I meant to say is that it is not an either/or situation. I acknowledge the United States engages in plenty of realpolitik that is hypocritical and runs counter to its supposed ideals. I think we should acknowledge that it is a topic whose breadth and complexity cannot be captured by a couple of forum posts. I know great people, far better than myself, that have dedicated themselves to these ideals. I feel that it…
I, personally, am not aware of a single counter example. FDR had started to deviate by establishing friendly relations with Stalin's Russia. The possibility of a president deviating from the agenda was put firmly to death by making it illegal for a president to have more than 2 terms, after FDRs death.
As much as I hate Trump and Putin, Trump was the only President to deviate from the NATO consensus on various issues. It was a bad idea and grift by Trump and I didn't support it.
> I know great people, far better than myself, that have dedicated themselves to these ideals.
I 100% believe that. I believe Obama was well intentioned as well. For example, he tried to reduce tensions with non NATO countries like Cuba and Iran. However, when push came to shove- he supported ISIS in Syria.
Even Bidens price cap on insulin was written so that insurance Corporations profits are completely unaffected, the costs will simply be spread out to all insurance customers.
As for the folks you know, they could be working with the US Government on providing humanitarian relief to Palestinians and Syrian refugees, while another arm of the government is fucking them over.
The point is - the overall structure of the US government is built to primarily advance the objectives of NATO corporations. There will be thousands of individuals doing good work within the government. I know several of them myself. However, these are secondary- not primary objectives of the state
Another example, George Bush removing democracy in Haiti and installing a dictator
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-mar-02-fg-usrol...
If it was Obama, he probably would have left Haiti alone. Haiti is strategically meaningless to USA. But Bush had to execute a coup.So, yes, the people in the government matter. But the singular thrust of US Foreign policy is alignment with NATO. It's as clear as daylight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All I meant to say is that it is not an either/or situation. I acknowledge the United States engages in plenty of realpolitik that is hypocritical and runs counter to its supposed ideals. I think we should acknowledge that it is a topic whose breadth and complexity cannot be captured by a couple of forum posts. I know great people, far better than myself, that have dedicated themselves to these ideals. I feel that it…
Like I said, I don't know of a single instance where US lent support to a faction that would not increase alignment with NATO corporations, post FDR. I am all ears, if there are any counter examples. My tool of choice is Occams razor and it has served me well so far. I, personally, am not aware of a single counter example. FDR had started to deviate by establishing friendly relations with Stalin's Russia. The possibi…
https://www.france24.com/en/20120715-egypt-clinton-urges-us-... https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/world/middleeast/egyptian...
I would also consider the continued humanitarian support of Afghanistan as not aligned with NATO corporate interests, broadly speaking. EDIT: As compared with the continued occupation of the country.
https://www.usaid.gov/news-information/press-releases/jun-28...
Double edit: Also as far as know European members of NATO hated the backtracking of American policy on Iran due to business interests. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-france-busin...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Americans fight for ideals all the time. Individual Americans do, and this includes individuals in government. It is true to say that much that is represented as being about ideals is really something else in disguise. And there is rampant corruption and so forth. But it takes cynicism too far to say that ideals never factor in. There are many principled people with ideals having impact in the world every day, and th…
> Americans fight for ideals all the time The US government, post ww2, fights for Corporations in the NATO axis that benefit from a particular regime being in power in a particular country. Sometimes these regimes are democratic, other times they are not. The ideals are kool aid to sell to the public to garner support for war. For eg, US has toppled democracies in Haiti and Iran to support corporate interests. It sup…
And before WW2, it was for it's own corporations. "I was a gangster for capitalism" is an interesting read.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Americans fight for ideals all the time The US government, post ww2, fights for Corporations in the NATO axis that benefit from a particular regime being in power in a particular country. Sometimes these regimes are democratic, other times they are not. The ideals are kool aid to sell to the public to garner support for war. For eg, US has toppled democracies in Haiti and Iran to support corporate interests. It sup…
> The US government, post ww2, fights for Corporations in the NATO axis that benefit from a particular regime being in power in a particular country. And before WW2, it was for it's own corporations. "I was a gangster for capitalism" is an interesting read.