21–30 of 71 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The proponents of liberal democracy should have sold it better.
I don't disagree. Liberal Democracy inevitably leads to corporate capture and then Fascism, as the US is demonstrating beautifully right now. The ideal form of government is Titoism, with strong repression of regressive forces.
Does it? Is this a major problem in say Sweden, or Switzerland, or New Zealand?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't disagree. Liberal Democracy inevitably leads to corporate capture and then Fascism, as the US is demonstrating beautifully right now. The ideal form of government is Titoism, with strong repression of regressive forces.
> with strong repression of regressive forces. Things like freedom of speech or political organizations which are not subservient to the state? Of course unrestricted freedom of speech can devolve into whatever has been happening in the US for quite a while but still... don't see how "enlightened totalitarianism" is an answer to that.
This tends to allow corporations to do all the bad things that states can do, with no checks or balances.
Other countries have a far larger mistrust of corporations and use their voice in the state to attempt to moderate that.
International politics is revealing itself to operate on the principles of the mafia, where basically everything is leverage and where 'imposing costs' is the primary tool of discipline. Perhaps,'twas ever thus and Trump's main crime is being so crude about it that deniability is no longer plausible
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The proponents of liberal democracy should have sold it better.
> The proponents of liberal democracy should have sold it better. That sounds an awful lot like victim-blaming. What's worse is that your blend of comments somehow omits the fact that fascism is not being openly pushed onto people. Instead, fascists frame their intentions as granting them the authority to impose populist policies within the framework of liberal democracies. The problem is that, as Nazi Germany proved…
Contemporary fascists pay lit service to it and like to accuse opponents of not being democratic. Tho, to large extend, conservatives lead by Trump are also doing what was known they will do.
Apparently this (fueled by family members lobbying) has backfired in Brazil as members of Bolsonaro's base are disaponted by what is perceived as his anti national behaviour.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> with strong repression of regressive forces. Things like freedom of speech or political organizations which are not subservient to the state? Of course unrestricted freedom of speech can devolve into whatever has been happening in the US for quite a while but still... don't see how "enlightened totalitarianism" is an answer to that.
The problem the US has is it's unwavering belief that state = bad, not state = good This tends to allow corporations to do all the bad things that states can do, with no checks or balances. Other countries have a far larger mistrust of corporations and use their voice in the state to attempt to moderate that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The proponents of liberal democracy should have sold it better.
> The proponents of liberal democracy should have sold it better. That sounds an awful lot like victim-blaming. What's worse is that your blend of comments somehow omits the fact that fascism is not being openly pushed onto people. Instead, fascists frame their intentions as granting them the authority to impose populist policies within the framework of liberal democracies. The problem is that, as Nazi Germany proved…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> with strong repression of regressive forces. Things like freedom of speech or political organizations which are not subservient to the state? Of course unrestricted freedom of speech can devolve into whatever has been happening in the US for quite a while but still... don't see how "enlightened totalitarianism" is an answer to that.
The problem the US has is it's unwavering belief that state = bad, not state = good This tends to allow corporations to do all the bad things that states can do, with no checks or balances. Other countries have a far larger mistrust of corporations and use their voice in the state to attempt to moderate that.
authoritarian state that restricts basic individual freedoms = bad
Not sure sure how could you have inferred anything else from my comment.
> Other countries have a far larger mistrust of corporations
Grass is always greener and such. Corporations in Europe have massive amounts of political influence. They are just not as good at making money as American corporations so have less resources to spend on stuff like that.
International politics is revealing itself to operate on the principles of the mafia, where basically everything is leverage and where 'imposing costs' is the primary tool of discipline. Perhaps,'twas ever thus and Trump's main crime is being so crude about it that deniability is no longer plausible
It's challenging to comprehend this administration's "Strong with the weak, weak with the strong" approach to geopolitics. What's the end game here?
You assume that there is a long-term strategy: why do you think there is one?
What evidence do you have that Trump cares about anything more than the current day's headlines and whatever whims take his fancy in a particular moment?