How 57,000 Socialists and Communists Plan to Take Over the Democratic Party (https://www.theepochtimes.com/how-57000-socialists-and-communists-plan-to-take-over-the-democratic-party_2654589.html)
QuoteIn a move that could have major implications for American politics, the leading socialist and communist organizations in the United States have formally allied to increase their infiltration and manipulation of the Democratic Party.
Communist Party USA (CPUSA) leader John Bachtell partially explained the new strategy in the pitch for party members to attend an online webinar that was held on May 23, 2018. According to Bachtell, the webinar would feature a panel of representatives from the CPUSA, Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), Freedom Road Socialists Organization (FRSO), LeftRoots, and others.
The event was sponsored by a group called the Left Inside/Outside Project, which is the idea of “building power inside and outside the Democratic Party.†The organization began shortly after the 2016 elections as a response to the Presidency of Donald Trump. Bachtell claimed that CPUSA “is collaborating with several left groups and progressive activists to promote unity and coalition building in the electoral arena.â€
The plan is to encourage all elements of the left to vote, which would result in “defeating the extreme right domination of government and the courts.†This “strategic imperative,†according to Bachtell, is why “building electoral coalitions with every force possible including with the Democratic Party is key.â€
Why are they covering their faces?
(https://www.theepochtimes.com/assets/uploads/2018/08/13/GettyImages-1011669564--700x420.jpg)
k
Quote from: pr126 on September 10, 2018, 09:09:45 AM
57,000 Socialists and Communists Plan to Take Over the Democratic Party
How many of that 57,000 are actual communists? How many are socialists?
In 2016, 62,980,000 Trump supporters, many who were also fascists, took over the United States of America. Democracy is a bitch. It's a real bitch, I tell you.
Furthermore, an even greater number of Hillary voters, (65,840,000) were denied their voice in America's destiny by the Electoral College.
https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=&oq=How+many+votes+&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ITVB_enUS637US637&q=how+many+votes+did+trump+get&gs_l=hp..0.0j0i131j0l3.0.0.0.8167...........0.gzABdXZtWdY
Yes ... post-Apocalypse coming to a town near you. "Kill them all, let G-d sort it out" - Papal nuncio circa 22 July 1209, Bezier France.
The Left took over a lot, and for decades now (thanks Baby-Boomer Commissars). We need zombie Sen McCarthy to get to the bottom of this graveyard of dead idiology. Used to be that the Communist party was outlawed. Should we outlaw the Democrat party? The very idea that the Republicans could collude with the Russians ... bwahah. FDR was our first Communist president - some claim ;-)
America love s witch hunt, and right now, efforts to the contrary, the Democrats look like a damned coven (sarc).
Quote from: pr126 on September 10, 2018, 09:09:45 AM
How 57,000 Socialists and Communists Plan to Take Over the Democratic Party[/url]
Why are they covering their faces?
(https://www.theepochtimes.com/assets/uploads/2018/08/13/GettyImages-1011669564--700x420.jpg)
They weren't covering their faces in that pictures. They were covering their mouths to avoid breathing in tear gas.
BTW, do you realize what a small percent of the voting public 57,000 socialists and communists would be? And how unlikely they would be to really influence events?
QuoteBTW, do you realize what a small percent of the voting public 57,000 socialists and communists would be? And how unlikely they would be to really influence events?
The Nazis and the Bolshevik were also small in numbers when they started.
How did that work out?
Quote from: pr126 on September 12, 2018, 05:42:37 AM
The Nazis and the Bolshevik were also small in numbers when they started.
How did that work out?
Neither were in a functioning democracy.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 12, 2018, 05:46:26 AM
Neither were in a functioning democracy.
Neither are we.
Quote from: Baruch on September 12, 2018, 06:41:08 AM
Neither are we.
We are. But when the Repubs absorb the US Nazi Party, I get out my crossbow... SBD...
Quote from: Cavebear on September 23, 2018, 02:05:03 PM
We are. But when the Repubs absorb the US Nazi Party, I get out my crossbow... SBD...
Haha ... says a Menshevick.
Quote from: Baruch on September 23, 2018, 02:19:07 PM
Haha ... says a Menshevick.
The crossbow sings its silent song in the night...
Quote from: Cavebear on September 23, 2018, 02:22:51 PM
The crossbow sings its silent song in the night...
Real men use an English longbow. They also shoot in daylight, because they actually want to hit the target.
(https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.204212963.0851/flat,550x550,075,f.u1.jpg)
(https://20thcenturylibrary.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/communism-poster-1950s.jpg)
Actually that was the US in the 1960s, under a dominant Democrat party.
Quote from: Baruch on September 23, 2018, 02:26:08 PM
Actually that was the US in the 1960s, under a dominant Democrat party.
No, it was Ike and then Nixon. You might recall the Repubs calling all Democrats "commies. Convenient memory you have it is.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 23, 2018, 02:34:38 PM
No, it was Ike and then Nixon. You might recall the Repubs calling all Democrats "commies. Convenient memory you have it is.
That was because of Korea. But Ike did solve the Korean problem, for that time, when he visited while still in uniform, before the 1952 election. He said that the Norks had to agree to a cease fire or he wouldn't be as tolerant as MacArthur. They got the message.
Quote from: Baruch on September 23, 2018, 02:44:19 PM
That was because of Korea. But Ike did solve the Korean problem, for that time, when he visited while still in uniform, before the 1952 election. He said that the Norks had to agree to a cease fire or he wouldn't be as tolerant as MacArthur. They got the message.
Right. When did the war end, BTW?
Quote from: Cavebear on September 23, 2018, 02:46:34 PM
Right. When did the war end, BTW?
The hot war ended. The cold war continues still.
Quote from: Baruch on September 23, 2018, 02:47:49 PM
The hot war ended. The cold war continues still.
My point. N Korea is bargaining to get the war declared over. But we never declared on, LOL!
Quote from: Cavebear on September 23, 2018, 02:54:26 PM
My point. N Korea is bargaining to get the war declared over. But we never declared on, LOL!
They were tough negotiators. They wanted to declare themselves the winner, and tell us to get the hell out. The Kim family is mighty brassy.
Ike wasn't negotiating, and they understood that. Had MacArthur been allowed to go nuclear, we would live in a very different world, assuming we were even alive.
Quote from: Baruch on September 23, 2018, 02:56:34 PM
They were tough negotiators. They wanted to declare themselves the winner, and tell us to get the hell out. The Kim family is mighty brassy.
Ike wasn't negotiating, and they understood that. Had MacArthur been allowed to go nuclear, we would live in a very different world, assuming we were even alive.
The A bombs on Japan were one thing. We didn't truly understand what they did. The same in N Korea would have been with malice aforethought. Very different.
At this point, socialists and communists seem more democratic than the rethuglicans.
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on September 24, 2018, 07:27:09 PM
At this point, socialists and communists seem more democratic than the rethuglicans.
Democracy ... a Nazi and a Stalinist discussing how to split Poland.
I don't discriminate on trivialities.
Socialism and communism are different so they ought not to be lumped together.
There are forms of socialism that are very just. Free healthcare is an example.
And socialism isn't opposed to democracy... it's opposed to capitalism.
I am not particularly interested in the economic side of politics, I'm more interested in social issues, but when it comes to economy I think a mixture of socialism and capitalism is the best bet.
Quote from: luckswallowsall on September 27, 2018, 07:03:24 AM
Socialism and communism are different so they ought not to be lumped together.
There are forms of socialism that are very just. Free healthcare is an example.
And socialism isn't opposed to democracy... it's opposed to capitalism.
I am not particularly interested in the economic side of politics, I'm more interested in social issues, but when it comes to economy I think a mixture of socialism and capitalism is the best bet.
I'll agree that socialism and capitalism combined carefully are a good bet, but you will get arguments about that here.
Quote from: luckswallowsall on September 27, 2018, 07:03:24 AM
Socialism and communism are different so they ought not to be lumped together.
There are forms of socialism that are very just. Free healthcare is an example.
And socialism isn't opposed to democracy... it's opposed to capitalism.
I am not particularly interested in the economic side of politics, I'm more interested in social issues, but when it comes to economy I think a mixture of socialism and capitalism is the best bet.
Called a mixed political economy. But it doesn't work if you have one or more extremist parties involved. That is unstable, it will always go tits-up. In the US, the mixed economy started dying in the jungles of Vietnam and Watts. The FDR zombie can only ramble on for so long. In GB, the mixed political economy started being under PM Thatcher.
Quote from: Baruch on September 27, 2018, 01:05:54 PM
Called a mixed political economy. But it doesn't work if you have one or more extremist parties involved. That is unstable, it will always go tits-up. In the US, the mixed economy started dying in the jungles of Vietnam and Watts. The FDR zombie can only ramble on for so long. In GB, the mixed political economy started being under PM Thatcher.
A mixed economy is more flexible.
What DOES "tits up" mean anyway? I've never been able to make sense of that. Field dressing a prey animal ""teats up"?
Quote from: Cavebear on September 23, 2018, 02:34:38 PM
No, it was Ike and then Nixon. You might recall the Repubs calling all Democrats "commies. Convenient memory you have it is.
I would be happy with Zombie Ike as dictator. He didn't support Sen McCarthy ... when he attacked the Army brass.
Quote from: Baruch on September 27, 2018, 01:11:14 PM
I would be happy with Zombie Ike as dictator. He didn't support Sen McCarthy ... when he attacked the Army brass.
OK, "I LIKE IKE". Smart politician, too. Trans US highways as "defense", LOL!
Quote from: Cavebear on September 27, 2018, 01:09:41 PM
A mixed economy is more flexible.
What DOES "tits up" mean anyway? I've never been able to make sense of that. Field dressing a prey animal ""teats up"?
To say that something has gone "tits up" is basically the same meaning as saying that something has gone down the drain.
Quote from: luckswallowsall on September 27, 2018, 01:21:41 PM
To say that something has gone "tits up" is basically the same meaning as saying that something has gone down the drain.
Given a basic assumption that all phrases make some sense at the time they were used, "down the drain" doesn't make any...
Quote from: Cavebear on September 27, 2018, 01:29:28 PM
Given a basic assumption that all phrases make some sense at the time they were used, "down the drain" doesn't make any...
To say that something has gone "down the drain" is to say that something has gotten very bad or that something has gone from bad to worse, or to say that something has collapsed or become corrupt, etc.
That makes sense to say.
Quote from: luckswallowsall on September 27, 2018, 01:31:43 PM
To say that something has gone "down the drain" is to say that something has gotten very bad or that something has gone from bad to worse, or to say that something has collapsed or become corrupt, etc.
That makes sense to say.
Wow, I never realized that! Thank you. You are the wind under my wings...
Quote from: Cavebear on September 27, 2018, 01:35:11 PM
Wow, I never realized that! Thank you. You are the wind under my wings...
You asked what "tits up" meant. I explained that it had a similar meaning to "down the drain"... you then said that "down the drain" made no sense... I then explained how it did make sense... you then respond with sarcasm and as if you already knew. Okay then.
Quote from: luckswallowsall on September 27, 2018, 02:16:56 PM
You asked what "tits up" meant. I explained that it had a similar meaning to "down the drain"... you then said that "down the drain" made no sense... I then explained how it did make sense... you then respond with sarcasm and as if you already knew. Okay then.
"tits up" and "down the drain" have no logical connection. That's all there was to my post.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 27, 2018, 01:09:41 PM
What DOES "tits up" mean anyway? I've never been able to make sense of that. Field dressing a prey animal ""teats up"?
I've always assumed it was exactly that. Flat on your back dead.
Quote from: SGOS on September 27, 2018, 02:26:37 PM
I've always assumed it was exactly that. Flat on your back dead.
Thank you. A clear statement of logical original meaning...
Quote from: Cavebear on September 27, 2018, 02:21:50 PM
"tits up" and "down the drain" have no logical connection. That's all there was to my post.
I wasn't saying that they had a logical connection. I was saying that "tits up" has similar meaning to "down the drain."
If I say X has gone tits up... that's saying the same sort of thing as if I were to say that X has gone down the drain.
You said you've never understood what "tits up" meant... so I tried to explain the meaning of tits up to you.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 27, 2018, 01:16:14 PM
OK, "I LIKE IKE". Smart politician, too. Trans US highways as "defense", LOL!
If you really hated Republicans, you would repudiate Lincoln too. But you won't ...
Quote from: luckswallowsall on September 27, 2018, 01:31:43 PM
To say that something has gone "down the drain" is to say that something has gotten very bad or that something has gone from bad to worse, or to say that something has collapsed or become corrupt, etc.
That makes sense to say.
Yes, but the turd isn't tits up right away. It has to go down the drain first. Then it ends up in the Thames River, where it is either a floater or a sinker (stinker).
Quote from: Cavebear on September 27, 2018, 02:28:42 PM
Thank you. A clear statement of logical original meaning...
For the loquaciously challenged.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 27, 2018, 02:21:50 PM
"tits up" and "down the drain" have no logical connection. That's all there was to my post.
"Tits up" probably comes from the same family of expressions as "belly up" â€" which makes a condition that applies to livestock (implying that the livestock is dead and no good or in a dire condition) to things other than livestock, and implying a similar condition.
"Down the drain" is giving up something for a loss, the same way you would give up on a washcloth that went down the drain of your toilet.
Metaphors are not really that hard.
Quote from: luckswallowsall on September 27, 2018, 07:03:24 AM
Socialism and communism are different so they ought not to be lumped together.
There are forms of socialism that are very just. Free healthcare is an example.
And socialism isn't opposed to democracy... it's opposed to capitalism.
I am not particularly interested in the economic side of politics, I'm more interested in social issues, but when it comes to economy I think a mixture of socialism and capitalism is the best bet.
Socialism is collective ownership of the means of production. Not a safety net. Not welfare. Not regulations.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on September 30, 2018, 10:44:50 PM
Socialism is collective ownership of the means of production. Not a safety net. Not welfare. Not regulations.
Please spread the word to the GOP.
Quote from: Hydra009 on September 30, 2018, 10:56:50 PM
Please spread the word to the GOP.
Whenever Republicans use the word "Socialism" to criticize the safety net, there are many Democrats, Socialists, Greens, etc, quick to correct them on that point. But whenever someone uses the word "Socialism" to praise the safety net, nobody except me corrects them.
If it is wrong to use it in criticism, it is wrong to use it in praise.
QuoteWhenever Republicans use the word "Socialism" to criticize the safety net, there are many Democrats, Socialists, Greens, etc, quick to correct them on that point.
No, there are many Democrats, Socialists, Greens, etc. quick to correct them on the necessity of those social nets, not the definition of socialism afaik. Not too many people are so hung up over terminology.
Quote from: Hydra009 on September 30, 2018, 10:56:50 PM
Please spread the word to the GOP.
That isn't their real problem. The problem is that you aren't out picking cotton in the field. They brought the S Democrats under their big tent, years ago.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on September 30, 2018, 11:22:38 PM
Whenever Republicans use the word "Socialism" to criticize the safety net, there are many Democrats, Socialists, Greens, etc, quick to correct them on that point. But whenever someone uses the word "Socialism" to praise the safety net, nobody except me corrects them.
If it is wrong to use it in criticism, it is wrong to use it in praise.
Republicans use the term "socialism" to suggest "communinism" in a Russian style, so that is inaccurate. I use the term "social democracy" to represent a democracy oriented toward progressive values of sharing general expenses like roads, education, health services, etc.
Quote from: Cavebear on October 01, 2018, 05:27:23 AM
Republicans use the term "socialism" to suggest "communinism" in a Russian style, so that is inaccurate. I use the term "social democracy" to represent a democracy oriented toward progressive values of sharing general expenses like roads, education, health services, etc.
Some things, like roads, fall naturally into the public sphere. And are corrupt if privatized. It isn't black and white, so I have to agree with that part. I don't believe in progress, but I do believe in balance. Progress means moving from one extreme to another.
Quote from: Baruch on October 01, 2018, 06:25:23 AM
Some things, like roads, fall naturally into the public sphere. And are corrupt if privatized. It isn't black and white, so I have to agree with that part. I don't believe in progress, but I do believe in balance. Progress means moving from one extreme to another.
Progress means living better than the previous generations. Unless you WANT to live in a cave up to your ankles in feces...
Quote from: Cavebear on October 01, 2018, 07:20:27 AM
Progress means living better than the previous generations. Unless you WANT to live in a cave up to your ankles in feces...
That isn't an improvement. Would rather be with a good person in a Medieval hovel, than with a bad person in a penthouse. But materialists are what they are.
Quote from: Baruch on October 01, 2018, 12:35:08 PM
That isn't an improvement. Would rather be with a good person in a Medieval hovel, than with a bad person in a penthouse. But materialists are what they are.
Your dichotomy is limited. I'd rather be a decent person in modern suburbia for example.
Quote from: Cavebear on October 01, 2018, 12:40:41 PM
Your dichotomy is limited. I'd rather be a decent person in modern suburbia for example.
Prepare to be disappointed.
Quote from: Baruch on October 01, 2018, 12:55:32 PM
Prepare to be disappointed.
I live on a dead-end street in semi-wilderness suburbia. I have a pond. My pond has frogs. There are toads and harmless (to me) snakes and turtles around. I have a hawk. I have deer (and may they choke eating my hostas). MY suburbis is not quite like most surburban houses.
Quote from: Cavebear on October 01, 2018, 01:06:09 PM
I live on a dead-end street in semi-wilderness suburbia. I have a pond. My pond has frogs. There are toads and harmless (to me) snakes and turtles around. I have a hawk. I have deer (and may they choke eating my hostas). MY suburbis is not quite like most surburban houses.
But alone, without the one essential species ... monkey people.
Quote from: Cavebear on October 01, 2018, 07:20:27 AM
Progress means living better than the previous generations. Unless you WANT to live in a cave up to your ankles in feces...
Yes, but since we're mixing colloquial usages and field jargon, I must point out that not everything a progressive does is necessarily progress.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on October 01, 2018, 07:57:28 PM
Yes, but since we're mixing colloquial usages and field jargon, I must point out that not everything a progressive does is necessarily progress.
And not everything a conservative does is conservative. What is your point?
At the end of the day, in America, progressivism has been a major part of our Golden Ages... the New Deal and recovering from the Great Depression, the abolition of slavery and later segregation, women's suffrage and increased rights to their bodies/better workplace treatment, the opposition to Vietnam and Iraq, child labour laws, medical safety nets, improvements to our education systems, the LGBT+ rights movement... all these things and so many more that made our country a shining beacon were championed by progressives.
What did conservatives offer the United States? The conservative Supreme Court shot down multiple organizations that FDR established to combat poverty. The conservatives were the ones fighting to protect slave owner's rights. The conservatives were the ones that fought to keep African Americans segregated. The conservatives fought to keep women from having the right to vote or the right to their body. The conservatives have stripped our education system bare in the name of "saving money". The conservatives have butchered our medical system in the name of "saving money". The conservatives were the one's who got us into Vietnam, Korea, Iraq all in the name of "conserving our culture against the threat of communism/'terrorism'." Conservatives were the ones who fought against 40 hour work weeks, minimum age laws and worker/union rights.
I could go on, but you get the point. Pointing out that progressives aren't always progressive is fair enough, so long as you are willing to admit that conservatives have a very long track record of being neither conservative nor right.
There are more than a fair few conservative points that I actually agree with, or at least think can be implemented into progressive ideology for a better out come, but when we look at the tract record of progressivsm vs conservatism in the United States... conservatives have been almost unerringly on the wrong side of history. And I am making a point to say progressives and conservatives vs Dems and Republicans because even to this day the Democratic party is overwhelmingly conservative because American culture is conservative.
You are like Spiderman, but without the suit ;-) You don't need the Justice League, you can do it all by yourself. With policy.
"And I am making a point to say progressives and conservatives vs Dems and Republicans because even to this day the Democratic party is overwhelmingly conservative because American culture is conservative."
That last part is ... excellent.
Very few people even understand what the term 'conservative' actually means anymore. In politics in the US or even the UK it certainly no longer means, "1 : favoring a policy of keeping things as they are : opposed to change. 2 : favoring established styles and standards He wears conservative ties. 3 : likely to be lower than what the real amount or number is a conservative estimate." as defined by Miriam Webster.
No, anymore it means extreme radicalism skewed towards Fascism along with redefining the parameters of what we have traditionally considered to be lying. Lying is now called alternative facts. It's still lying.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSNlyVvnq5g
Civil War began in 2016. It continues today. Both sides are self righteous crusaders, as they were in 1861.
Quote from: Baruch on October 01, 2018, 07:20:24 PM
But alone, without the one essential species ... monkey people.
Have you noticed that referenced to "monkey people" are offensive to African/Americans? Do you care?
Quote from: Cavebear on October 04, 2018, 01:10:18 AM
Have you noticed that referenced to "monkey people" are offensive to African/Americans? Do you care?
I am a white monkey. We all come from Africa. Stop being a White New England puritan (who has come to save the Uncle Toms from themselves). Are you the Great White Hope?
So no, I don't care who is offended. People can get thicker skin, or die in the coming catastrophe planned by the plutocracy.
You got us again prt.. We're all commies and socialists hell bent on letting MOOZLIMS take over the world..
Of course you're not wearing a tin foil hat..not you!
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on October 04, 2018, 01:12:32 AM
You got us again prt.. We're all commies and socialists hell bent on letting MOOZLIMS take over the world..
Of course you're not wearing a tin foil hat..not you!
Democrats are still Johnny Reb ... with gay people this time, instead of Uncle Toms.
Quote from: Baruch on October 04, 2018, 01:13:31 AM
Democrats are still Johnny Reb ... with gay people this time, instead of Uncle Toms.
I think you missed the 1960s when the southern Democrats all became Republicans following Nixon. In the Civil War, the Rebels were Democrats, the sides switched later. How unsurprisingly careless of you to have missed that...
Quote from: Cavebear on October 04, 2018, 01:27:21 AM
I think you missed the 1960s when the southern Democrats all became Republicans following Nixon. In the Civil War, the Rebels were Democrats, the sides switched later. How unsurprisingly careless of you to have missed that...
We are both as old as that old news. Get with it, grandpa. You are either with the central government or against it. Seems the D party has chosen the losing side again.
Quote from: Baruch on October 04, 2018, 01:55:28 AM
We are both as old as that old news. Get with it, grandpa. You are either with the central government or against it. Seems the D party has chosen the losing side again.
When you define modern day Democrats as the same as Civil War Democrats, it shows you fail History 001. I would explain that in some detail, but you would just make another joke about it.
Quote from: Cavebear on October 04, 2018, 02:53:48 AM
When you define modern day Democrats as the same as Civil War Democrats, it shows you fail History 001. I would explain that in some detail, but you would just make another joke about it.
History doesn't repeat, it rhymes. Democrats -- anti-central government aka confederates. Back then .. slavery was the issue. Today it is family matters (gay marriage, abortion). But qualify that ... Democrats pro central government, as long as they exclusively control it. Same then as now.
Quote from: Baruch on October 04, 2018, 06:40:37 AM
History doesn't repeat, it rhymes. Democrats -- anti-central government aka confederates. Back then .. slavery was the issue. Today it is family matters (gay marriage, abortion). But qualify that ... Democrats pro central government, as long as they exclusively control it. Same then as now.
More proof you fail at history. Dems and Repubs have switched positions in most ways. The Civil War Repubs were the party of strong Federal Govt (rather obviosly) and Dems were the conservation State-Rights rebels. But not today. Blame Nixon.
Don't you get tired of being wrong so often?
Quote from: Cavebear on October 04, 2018, 06:46:43 AM
More proof you fail at history. Dems and Repubs have switched positions in most ways. The Civil War Repubs were the party of strong Federal Govt (rather obviosly) and Dems were the conservation State-Rights rebels. But not today. Blame Nixon.
Don't you get tired of being wrong so often?
Why do you ignore my points? ignorance much? No, just in denial. You want to exterminate Republicans, for the same reason John Brown wanted to exterminate Democrats. I want both parties eliminated, so we half agree.
Quote from: Baruch on October 04, 2018, 06:49:35 AM
Why do you ignore my points? ignorance much? No, just in denial. You want to exterminate Republicans, for the same reason John Brown wanted to exterminate Democrats. I want both parties eliminated, so we half agree.
If all Repubs died suddenly overnight, the Dems would just split into 2 parties. And some would become just like Repubs. Do you forget I have a degree in Politics?
Our difference is that I don't want both parties eliminated. I just want the extremists on both sides to crawl back into their caves and paint pictures on the walls. So we don't even half agree...
Quote from: Cavebear on October 04, 2018, 06:56:49 AM
If all Repubs died suddenly overnight, the Dems would just split into 2 parties. And some would become just like Repubs. Do you forget I have a degree in Politics?
Our difference is that I don't want both parties eliminated. I just want the extremists on both sides to crawl back into their caves and paint pictures on the walls. So we don't even half agree...
See why I am not an idealist? I agree with you. "half agree" was a double entendre. To eliminate anyone South of the Mason-Dixon, it depends on which decade. Once upon a time it was D, now it is R. Fortunately it won't be necessary to eliminate Yankees ... because the Mexicans will eliminate them for us.
Quote from: Baruch on October 04, 2018, 06:59:14 AM
See why I am not an idealist? I agree with you. "half agree" was a double entendre. To eliminate anyone South of the Mason-Dixon, it depends on which decade. Once upon a time it was D, now it is R. Fortunately it won't be necessary to eliminate Yankees ... because the Mexicans will eliminate them for us.
Vincente Fox once referred to Mexican to US migration as "The Reconquista".
Quote from: Cavebear on October 04, 2018, 07:04:13 AM
Vincente Fox once referred to Mexican to US migration as "The Reconquista".
They are correct. Eat more tacos.
Quote from: Baruch on October 04, 2018, 07:09:26 AM
They are correct. Eat more tacos.
National borders change thoughout history. People move. Nothing stays the same. Trade routes change. Goods change.
Quote from: Baruch on October 04, 2018, 01:05:53 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSNlyVvnq5g
Civil War began in 2016. It continues today. Both sides are self righteous crusaders, as they were in 1861.
https://youtu.be/tEczkhfLwqM
If there is a civil war it started in the 1990's. It looks like the split has been more recent because in 2010 the number of Americans on social media reached fifty percent. The current polarization is fueled by social media. If there was no Facebook, Twitter, reddit or other social media you probably wouldn't know your neighbor's political opinions and the "culture war" would be taking place in print media, televised news and on university campuses. There would be no misinformation campaigns specifically targeted to individuals, where algorithms curate news based your specific political beliefs to keep you clicking. Trump wouldn't have been elected because his base wouldn't have had the ability to organize, the establishment would be intact. Without social media, we wouldn't be having this conversation inside our atheist echo chamber.
I don't think civil war is the right model for where America is right now. Due to technology we are in a completely new place where the old ways of looking at the world don't give us an accurate picture. For example, has there been any other civil war where if you aren't online you wouldn't know we are at war? Traveling around the USA over the summer I noticed no fenced borders, no soldiers, no curfews, no supply shortage, no protesters and almost everyone I talked to was perfectly pleasant. If we are in a civil war it has become so civil as to be innocuous. "Culture war" is an addictive online role-playing game.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on September 30, 2018, 10:44:50 PM
Socialism is collective ownership of the means of production. Not a safety net. Not welfare. Not regulations.
I didn't say otherwise so I am not sure why you're quoting me there.
Quote from: Cavebear on October 04, 2018, 07:28:51 AM
National borders change thoughout history. People move. Nothing stays the same. Trade routes change. Goods change.
Those without children don't sweat the future.
Quote from: Baruch on October 04, 2018, 12:43:56 PM
Those without children don't sweat the future.
Wrong, as usual. I have no children and I sweat every election. I plan to live another 20+ years. The future still matters to ME!
Quote from: Cavebear on October 04, 2018, 12:48:45 PM
Wrong, as usual. I have no children and I sweat every election. I plan to live another 20+ years. The future still matters to ME!
That is because you are as addicted to politics, as NY people are addicted to the NY Yankees?
People consider politics the new blood sport.
Quote from: Baruch on October 04, 2018, 12:51:18 PM
That is because you are as addicted to politics, as NY people are addicted to the NY Yankees?
People consider politics the new blood sport.
Working and living around Washington DC will do that. Our local newspaper is national...
But I don't consider politics a "blood sport". It is much meaner than THAT!
Quote from: Cavebear on October 04, 2018, 12:48:45 PM
Wrong, as usual. I have no children and I sweat every election. I plan to live another 20+ years. The future still matters to ME!
As an atheist who doesn't and will never have children, I feel less anxiety regarding what will happen in the future than people I know who have children. Children are an investment in the future and I hope parents are therefore highly motivated to create a future where their children will thrive. I certainly care about the world but I don't have such a personal investment. This difference in investment and motivation seems obvious to me but it is an unpopular opinion.
Quote from: GSOgymrat on October 04, 2018, 01:11:22 PM
As an atheist who doesn't and will never have children, I feel less anxiety regarding what will happen in the future than people I know who have children. Children are an investment in the future and I hope parents are therefore highly motivated to create a future where their children will thrive. I certainly care about the world but I don't have such a personal investment. This difference in investment and motivation seems obvious to me but it is an unpopular opinion.
It is only natural. But like an ex-smoker, the ex-smoker makes the best anti-smoking zealot. So if you want the best pro-child person, you need someone who used to be a child.
Quote from: GSOgymrat on October 04, 2018, 01:11:22 PM
As an atheist who doesn't and will never have children, I feel less anxiety regarding what will happen in the future than people I know who have children. Children are an investment in the future and I hope parents are therefore highly motivated to create a future where their children will thrive. I certainly care about the world but I don't have such a personal investment. This difference in investment and motivation seems obvious to me but it is an unpopular opinion.
Well, true, but we both still have a future to live through.
Quote from: GSOgymrat on October 04, 2018, 01:11:22 PM
As an atheist who doesn't and will never have children, I feel less anxiety regarding what will happen in the future than people I know who have children. Children are an investment in the future and I hope parents are therefore highly motivated to create a future where their children will thrive. I certainly care about the world but I don't have such a personal investment. This difference in investment and motivation seems obvious to me but it is an unpopular opinion.
During a conversation with a friend, who himself had kids and grandchildren, it came out that he didn't give a shit about global warming. When I asked if he was concerned about his children's future, he responded, "I suppose I should be," and then he stared off into space briefly, shrugged and added, "but I don't give a shit about it." It's odd, because he fawns over his kids excessively compared to other parents. I have no kids, yet I was more concerned for his kid's futures than he was.
I've had discussions with deniers, and the ill informed, but the only time I posed the question to a knowledgeable person, I got an "I don't give a shit." It kind of made me wonder why I should give a shit. I don't have any kids myself, but I do have compassion for the human race. But why should I care about other people's kids, or the human race for that matter? From an evolutionary standpoint we are the dominant species, but we act without regard for anything but our immediate greed. Not the entire race, and many people are not like that at all, but so many are that they will drag the rest of the species with them, and at the end, they will be pointing fingers at anyone other than themselves. So why should I give a shit about their kids? In the end, I have no faith in humanity, and but a minute amount of optimism over how we will shape the future. And in 10 years, I'm probably going to be dead anyway. Yet, I have this desire to preserve a good life for others. I can't explain it.
When a problem seems overwhelming sometimes people respond by feigning they don't care. Disinterest can be a psychological defense against feelings of helpssness.
Or perhaps he really "doesn't give a shit."
Quote from: GSOgymrat on October 10, 2018, 06:23:37 AM
When a problem seems overwhelming sometimes people respond by feigning they don't care. Disinterest can be a psychological defense against feelings of helpssness.
Yes, I sensed a tell in his reply that suggested his response was not quite what it signaled, although I don't know what it did signal, just that the response was not totally genuine, maybe. I tried to hint that in the way I wrote about his reaction, but it's hard to convey an intuition, so I didn't work very hard at it. In the end, I don't know. One thing that I do clearly know is that he holds conservation in very low regard. He might have hesitated over his disregard when confronted with thoughts about his grandchildren. It's possible he had never given it any thought.
At any rate, he's just one example, and doesn't necessarily represent the view's of all parents...
Quote from: Cavebear on September 12, 2018, 04:55:09 AM
BTW, do you realize what a small percent of the voting public 57,000 socialists and communists would be? And how unlikely they would be to really influence events?
Monster Shouters don't count monsters, they'd realize they were being silly if they did.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on October 10, 2018, 08:50:11 AM
Monster Shouters don't count monsters, they'd realize they were being silly if they did.
Inconsequential numbers? Then, one Jesus ... today, 3 billion people today. Or you can use Islam as an example. It takes one person to steer a ship, if you give them the helm.
Quote from: SGOS on October 10, 2018, 05:58:56 AM
During a conversation with a friend, who himself had kids and grandchildren, it came out that he didn't give a shit about global warming. When I asked if he was concerned about his children's future, he responded, "I suppose I should be," and then he stared off into space briefly, shrugged and added, "but I don't give a shit about it." It's odd, because he fawns over his kids excessively compared to other parents. I have no kids, yet I was more concerned for his kid's futures than he was.
I've had discussions with deniers, and the ill informed, but the only time I posed the question to a knowledgeable person, I got an "I don't give a shit." It kind of made me wonder why I should give a shit. I don't have any kids myself, but I do have compassion for the human race. But why should I care about other people's kids, or the human race for that matter? From an evolutionary standpoint we are the dominant species, but we act without regard for anything but our immediate greed. Not the entire race, and many people are not like that at all, but so many are that they will drag the rest of the species with them, and at the end, they will be pointing fingers at anyone other than themselves. So why should I give a shit about their kids? In the end, I have no faith in humanity, and but a minute amount of optimism over how we will shape the future. And in 10 years, I'm probably going to be dead anyway. Yet, I have this desire to preserve a good life for others. I can't explain it.
I "give a shit". Even though I have no kids, my years will be controlled by them in a way. That matters.
"Look out! The Democrats are coming to take away your rights and your freedoms! They're going to turn us into a Socialist country, or a Communist one! I'm not sure what the difference is, but they're doing it! Oo, scary! ...Okay, guys. They're distracted. Overturn Roe v. Wade before they notice."
Quote from: Blackleaf on October 10, 2018, 04:36:12 PM
"Look out! The Democrats are coming to take away your rights and your freedoms! They're going to turn us into a Socialist country, or a Communist one! I'm not sure what the difference is, but they're doing it! Oo, scary! ...Okay, guys. They're distracted. Overturn Roe v. Wade before they notice."
Very perceptive. Yes that is the Republican plan. Show them the County Fair Monkey Band and shove them out the exit when they aren't looking...
Quote from: Blackleaf on October 10, 2018, 04:36:12 PM
"Look out! The Democrats are coming to take away your rights and your freedoms! They're going to turn us into a Socialist country, or a Communist one! I'm not sure what the difference is, but they're doing it! Oo, scary! ...Okay, guys. They're distracted. Overturn Roe v. Wade before they notice."
Republicans are Nazis. Buy stock in furnaces and insect spray. Overturn all of Obama's legacy while he is still alive to explain it all to his family.
Quote from: Cavebear on October 10, 2018, 01:27:24 PM
I "give a shit". Even though I have no kids, my years will be controlled by them in a way. That matters.
Yes, the Clockwork Orange Millennials will entertain themselves by applying electricity to the gonads of Baby Boomers in nursing homes!! Even Lenin would be shocked, shocked I tell you ...
You political addicts happy yet ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvuM3DjvYf0
Democrats reveal their true nature?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RqVOn-pJsY
Quote from: Baruch on October 10, 2018, 08:31:19 PM
Republicans are Nazis. Buy stock in furnaces and insect spray. Overturn all of Obama's legacy while he is still alive to explain it all to his family.
That does seem to be the plan of the Republicans.
Quote from: Baruch on October 10, 2018, 08:32:32 PM
Yes, the Clockwork Orange Millennials will entertain themselves by applying electricity to the gonads of Baby Boomers in nursing homes!! Even Lenin would be shocked, shocked I tell you ...
You political addicts happy yet ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvuM3DjvYf0
Your words and the image don't match up. No great surprise there.
Quote from: Baruch on October 10, 2018, 09:04:03 PM
Democrats reveal their true nature?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RqVOn-pJsY
Repubs actually. You want to discuss that?
Partisan-R-Us. But not a discussion about the negativity of partisanship. Like a football fan who burns down the stadium if they don't win the game.
Quote from: Baruch on October 14, 2018, 07:58:47 AM
Partisan-R-Us. But not a discussion about the negativity of partisanship. Like a football fan who burns down the stadium if they don't win the game.
I don't tear down goalposts or anything. Very unviolent.
Quote from: Cavebear on October 14, 2018, 09:00:24 AM
I don't tear down goalposts or anything. Very unviolent.
Exactly. So you are not a "true believer" aka "ends justify the means". You are ... civilized.
Quote from: Baruch on October 14, 2018, 09:56:26 AM
Exactly. So you are not a "true believer" aka "ends justify the means". You are ... civilized.
Shocking, but yes. Unless you mean atheism... And the ends never do justify the means.
Quote from: Cavebear on October 14, 2018, 10:50:15 AM
Shocking, but yes. Unless you mean atheism... And the ends never do justify the means.
The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements - by Eric Hoffer. The psychologic of fanaticism. Not limited to theists.
Quote from: Baruch on October 14, 2018, 01:38:13 PM
The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements - by Eric Hoffer. The psychologic of fanaticism. Not limited to theists.
The Longshoreman Philosopher? I vaguely recall the name.
Quote from: Cavebear on October 14, 2018, 02:51:50 PM
The Longshoreman Philosopher? I vaguely recall the name.
Smarter than whatever polysci texts you read in college. You were "assimilated" by the Federal Borg. Today the "queen bee" is Hillary.
"Eric Hoffer was an American moral and social philosopher. He was the author of ten books and was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in February 1983."
Quote from: Baruch on October 14, 2018, 04:43:53 PM
Smarter than whatever polysci texts you read in college. You were "assimilated" by the Federal Borg. Today the "queen bee" is Hillary.
"Eric Hoffer was an American moral and social philosopher. He was the author of ten books and was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in February 1983."
I know who he was, Baruch... You love sarc, but you aren't very good at recognizing it.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 09, 2018, 01:08:10 PM
I know who he was, Baruch... You love sarc, but you aren't very good at recognizing it.
So you always claim, after the fact. I have problems, and you are older ... so I remain unconvinced.
Quote from: Baruch on November 09, 2018, 01:13:37 PM
So you always claim, after the fact. I have problems, and you are older ... so I remain unconvinced.
I listened to Eric Hoffer on PBS when I was a teen. And disagreed with him. Is that sufficient?
Quote from: Cavebear on November 09, 2018, 01:15:44 PM
I listened to Eric Hoffer on PBS when I was a teen. And disagreed with him. Is that sufficient?
That had enough detail, that I can accept that. That you disagreed with him is proof. You are ... disagreeable ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on November 09, 2018, 01:26:57 PM
That had enough detail, that I can accept that. That you disagreed with him is proof. You are ... disagreeable ;-)
To you, probably. Hoffer was just another politico-socialist I listened to once and then ignored. I am the only "philosopher" I pay any attention to.
Forgive me, "to whom I pay any attention".
Quote from: Cavebear on November 09, 2018, 01:34:48 PM
To you, probably. Hoffer was just another politico-socialist I listened to once and then ignored. I am the only "philosopher" I pay any attention to.
Forgive me, "to whom I pay any attention".
Is your ego big enough to fit in your house? ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on November 09, 2018, 01:36:57 PM
Is your ego big enough to fit in your house? ;-)
The house is sufficient to the requirements. Barely. Which means it is perfect. Which is why I have stayed in it for 32 years. No excess space, but neither a lack.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 09, 2018, 01:39:59 PM
The house is sufficient to the requirements. Barely. Which means it is perfect. Which is why I have stayed in it for 32 years. No excess space, but neither a lack.
Isn't it awkward taking the house off before you take a batch? Is it spandex?
Quote from: Baruch on November 09, 2018, 06:19:03 PM
Isn't it awkward taking the house off before you take a batch? Is it spandex?
OK, baffled by "take a batch". Do you mean a BAT file? I think we used to call those "macros".
Or is it some joke like "Holy Banana Peels, Robin.! Quick, into the BATmobile before he "slips" away!
Quote from: Cavebear on November 14, 2018, 04:01:25 PM
OK, baffled by "take a batch". Do you mean a BAT file? I think we used to call those "macros".
Or is it some joke like "Holy Banana Peels, Robin.! Quick, into the BATmobile before he "slips" away!
Bath ;-)