Who are you going to replace that elite with? Are you going to do away with "experts" too?

I don’t think expertise and “eliteness” can be measured by formal credentials. Rather, I think positions of power and influence should be open to anyone of any class, so long as they possess the abilities and competence. I believe that until now the elite have ensured a monopoly over positions of power by teaching a certain culture through the public education system (the hidden curriculum), forcing others to acquire the credentials to compete in a subordinate job market and economy. In this way, elite institutions have remained closed to members of different classes and belief systems. We need to diversify, and not just in the way people look.

The “elite” have proven they are not equipped to govern. All they can do is talk, and as such, can only sing lullabies about this or that while they delegate the decision-making to “experts”.

The United States was, I think, the biggest PR firm in the world at one time. But PR politics are over. So It’s no surprise that those who rely most on American military power for their safety and comforts get most worried when it comes asking for compensation.

The free world is losing it’s meal ticket. The elites are watching their power wane. No more free rides.

Humans have a tendency for counterfactual thinking. It says more about psychology than metaphysics or ethics.

If we measure the spatiotemporal existence and its effects, “the internal monologue of our minds” is nothing in comparison to our concrete behavior and action. The fleeting voices and imagery found in the brain activity of an organism is secondary, tertiary, to the movements of the entire organism itself. One can have the most vile and violent thoughts and still be a nice person, because his thoughts affect little while his actions will always reverberate beyond himself. So in a way it is wrong to say our concrete actions and behaviors are a mere mask.

One cannot be “genuinely nice” or virtuous because his thoughts seem to him to be so. It exists in the actions, the behaviors, the mannerisms, and in how he treats others. What one “truly thinks” doesn’t matter—he can think whatever he wants with no demonstrable affect beyond his surface—but the manner in which one acts is key.

Trump trimming more fat.

Trump moves to overhaul Tennessee Valley Authority leadership

President Trump announced Monday he's firing the Tennessee Valley Authority chair and is pushing for the ouster of the corporate agency's CEO, citing the authority's outsourcing of American jobs and high compensation.

Seated near TVA employees at a White House roundtable, the president blasted TVA chair James Thompson and CEO Jeffrey Lyash. Lyash is the highest paid federal employee, earning $8 million a year in total compensation. Mr. Trump said he's also removing board member Richard Howarth. The president said any new CEO must earn no more than $500,000.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-to-overhaul-overhaul-tennessee-valley-authority-leadership/

I don’t think violence is justified, nor can I consider it a form of protest. However I think leaving the country is entirely justified. If the social contract is broken it makes no sense to stay in it and break it some more.

Anti-authoritarianism would destroy all concepts of "politics", and "government". Without authority no government, or society can be built. Authority is must to create society where we want to have "rights", without authority, everyone would have different conception of "rights", that lead to chaos and war.

Only thing that held societies together, is their authority, like politicians, army, police etc.

I'm not sure we can equivocate anti-authoritarianism with anti-authority because an authority is capable of defending rather than limiting individual freedoms. For instance I think it necessary that any free population organize a force to protect and defend themselves from attacks on their rights and property. If we are so anti-authority that we can't even create such a force to defend ourselves from threats to our freedoms, we are subject to Popper's paradox of tolerance.

That’s one of the things I enjoy about western culture in general, and American culture in particular. It has more or less vanquished its monsters. We have recognized and transcended our crimes, and continue to do so. That’s something to be proud of.

Given that, a nation cannot forever identify with its monsters, especially when freedom won out over oppression. That seems to be the case with the anti-Americanism, and in my estimation, authoritarianism pervading the culture these days.

Trump going after the disillusioned Sanders voter.

It’s true. The melting-pot vs multicultural society is an interesting dichotomy. I have trouble identifying as Canadian despite my citizenship, no matter how much hockey or maple syrup I imbibe.

But out of respect for the OP we should return to the topic if you can think of any way to swing it in that direction.

I’m a little too cynical to believe any one group of people is capable of such a conspiracy. So I have to attribute the behavior to some form or other of mass hysteria or megalomania.

Perhaps. I’m more American than Canadian. I suppose that’s the benefit of a multicultural society—I get to retain my culture at the expense of a new one.

And a weird touch of scatological homoeroticism as well. Sign of the times, I suppose.

Liberalism is fine, but I am still confused as to why you believe the way towards liberty is to ally yourself with Conservatives, especially when you don't agree with them. It seems like you'd be better off just trying to find some more like-minded people or more amicable allies.

I don’t believe that’s the way towards liberty, nor have I implied that. Like I’ve said, I side with them wherever they resist current encroachments.

Like “classical liberalism“, yes, but I would just call it liberalism. Rather than compromise between the tendencies of right and left with all sorts of political triangulation, like so-called neoliberalism, liberalism would prefer to go elsewhere, towards liberty.

I understand that “liberal” and “liberalism” has little to do with any political movement that goes under that name today. But I will retain the label.

But what about the social attitudes that Conservatives have towards individual liberties? I don't understand, when you seem to be of an either Post-Left Anarchist or Rational Egoist, in which case, I could, in part, understand, inclination, as to why it is that you would support people who are in favor of social repression.

I’m just a liberal. I do not align with a conservative’s social or even fiscal attitudes. Though I find valuable insight from many conservative thinkers, I do not align with many of their views on how a country should be governed, especially because, as I said, they fail to offer a different direction for society.

All you do is trust Trump and distrust anyone who says anything critical of him. It's all fake news and Democrat hoaxes and Trump Derangement Syndrome to you.

All of which was borne out by the results. He was right.

His actions have shown that his priority is to protect Trump from any accountability, so I have good reason to assume he's lying. And let's not forget that time he was caught lying when he announced that Geoffrey Berman had resigned. Or that time Judge Walton called Barr's summary of Mueller's report "distorted" and "misleading".

As Barr said in his most recent testimony, he used the language "stepping down" (not "resign", which is a lie) because this is the sort of language they use to offer flexibility after being removed, in this case Barr wanted to offer him another position the next day. Instead he got fired.

By statism I mean the belief that the state should have substantial control over social and economic affairs. Those who advocate for it advocate for a form of authoritarianism. This is because the state maintains the monopoly on violence and can thus coerce its citizens to relinquish their property for use by the state. It's not despotism proper, but it is what De Tocqueville called "soft despotism".

I side with conservatives regarding their resistance to current tendencies, such as the aforementioned statism, socialism and the growing intolerance against their views. Libertarians and anarchists lack any political power, I'm afraid.

As for collectivism, it's true that it is probably on the decline in tandem with the rise of individualism, and for good reason.

But we can't hold him to the same standard as journalists because it's not his job to keep us informed, so we can't assume he's telling the truth.

You can't assume he's not, either, and for the same reason.

So you finally admit that we can't trust what Trump and the White House say about what they get up to? Glad we got there in the end.

If you make a habit of trusting politicians you're going to have a tough go. The proof is in the pudding, not in the words.

Nice cherry picking. I do mention three issues. Let's start with his multitude of lies and work our way up from there.

Cronyism and contempt for the law. Obstruction of justice, having Barr intervene with Flynn. Commuting Roger Stone's sentence. Appointing family members to governmental positions. Giving out government positions to wealthy donors.

Fascism. His suggestion to postpone the election, activating federal officers to kidnap us citizens, the Bible bullshit, his on the fence reaction to racist protests ending in violence, retweeting racist and xenophobic shit.

But yeah, head in the sand, nothing to see here.

Trump has 25 pardons, 11 commutations. Compare that to Obama's 212 pardons, and 1,715 commutations. So big deal. Barr said Trump has never asked him to intervene, so you're inventing things without evidence. And there is nothing inherently wrong with appointing family members to government positions—RFK for example—or to donors, especially if they are not benefiting from it. Speaking of grasping for straws.

You don't know what fascism is. The federal officers are doing their job, protecting federal property and citizens from violent rioters and insurrectionists. As for tweets and retweets, this is the sound of me playing the world's smallest violin. You need a thicker skin or you won't be able to survive in this world.

About things that concern government activity? The President, of course.

Good luck with that.

I like your thinking here.

I do agree that the right has co-opted "the discourse centered around freedom", but mostly because the other side has largely abandoned it and replaced with some form or other of statism.

So with the continuing encroachment upon our liberties, freedom-loving individuals often find themselves on the side of conservatives given the common enemy. The problem is the tug of war between left and right can only affect the speed, not the direction, of current developments, and the right has many of the same collectivist tendencies of the left. That's why I think the liberty-minded should occupy a different space, away from that spectrum, because it is the only way a new direction can be fostered.

Who would you rather inform the public, journalists or politicians?

He's grasping at straws because that story is old (2018), which, for instance, that "fake media rag" the wapo reported on. Leave it to NOS to elevate a single instance to a standard, while failing to see the pattern of fascistic thought, contempt for the law and cronyism of the Trump administration.

Der Spiegel has one bad article and is untrustworthy. Trump lies everyday and he's a hero. NOS is the worst type of fool or paid.

The president is not a journalist and never has been, so holding him to the same standards as the people who are employed to inform us is stupid at best.

It wasn't just one article, a single instance, as Der Spiegel itself found Relotius to have fabricated around 14 articles. This is an egregious example, surely, but there is plenty of media mistakes that one can cite.

I can offer plenty of examples of these mistakes, while you offer exactly zero of Trump's "fascistic" thought crimes.

If one is anti-authoritarian he must also dislike coercion, which I think places him on the spectrum of the liberty-minded. What do you think of the concept of liberty and individual freedom?

Yes. Disgraced journo Claas Relotius of one of Europe’s most influential magazines peddled lies to its readers about the president and his supporters. This is just one example of the misinformation that anti-Trumpers feast on.

Racial, sexual, cultural, etc.

OP can say people should "renounce privilege" like a moron but perhaps someone here can actually give a compelling argument for why it is important for people to understand their privilege and why thinking about things in this way is important or useful?

I haven’t seen one. In fact I think the only difference between claiming one’s privilege and claiming one’s supremacy is a guilty conscience.

The media industrial complex had a little more credibility back then, let’s be honest. Just look at the lies of that Der Speigel journo. The fakest of news informs us. So it’s no surprise the ludicrous beliefs.

That's your Trump presidency. The captain can stay at his quarters and tweet with his phone, you know.

He can whip up the hostile press while running the most powerful nation the world has ever seen. Pretty amazing. One cannot say that about anyone else. But that’s what we should expect of a man of enterprise, as opposed to a lifelong politician and lawyer.

Anyway, you'll all love the shit show this is going to be in the end of the year.

I can’t wait.



Mass mail-in voting is ripe for voter fraud (ballot harvesting for instance), but given the delays of the NY primary with its own mail-in voting, one is forced to wonder what such a mess would look like on a national scale. I’m not sure what happens if a president isn’t decided by Jan 20th, but the thought of president Pelosi sends shivers down my spine.

The dem’s HEROES act, which is a coronavirus relief bill, has a lot to do with the elections For some reason.

Trolled by the president.

But it’s in a good way. With one tweet the president revealed the fear in delayed elections. As the New York primaries has shown, the system is not equipped for universal mail in ballots, which would result in delays the likes of which no national election has ever seen. It’s a hilarious move on his part.

It would be a shitstorm. But the president cannot delay the election, so it’s an absurd idea. The events you describe might also occur with universal mail-in voting.

I see nothing wrong with raising the question. Do you?

What do you mean?

Trump can rile up the media and his critics with a single tweet, in this case raising the question about delaying the election. Meanwhile news about the economy falls on deaf ears.

It’s a thing of beauty watching the cats follow the laser.

We all knew this was going to happen but we locked everything down anyway. Those who mocked and derided those worried about the economy can now witness the fruit of their labor.

From Latin America to South Asia to sub-Saharan Africa, more families than ever are staring down a future without enough food. The analysis published Monday found about 128,000 more young children will die over the first 12 months of the virus.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/virus-linked-hunger-tied-to-10000-child-deaths-each-month/2020/07/27/84d349ca-d059-11ea-826b-cc394d824e35_story.html

The economic, food, and health systems disruptions resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic are expected to continue to exacerbate all forms of malnutrition. Estimates from the International Food Policy Research Institute suggest that because of the pandemic an additional 140 million people will be thrown into living in extreme poverty on less than US$1·90 per day in 2020.4 According to the World Food Programme, the number of people in LMICs facing acute food insecurity will nearly double to 265 million by the end of 2020.5 Sharp declines are expected in access to child health and nutrition services, similar to those seen during the 2014–16 outbreak of Ebola virus disease in sub-Saharan Africa.6 Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, UNICEF estimated a 30% overall reduction in essential nutrition services coverage, reaching 75–100% in lockdown contexts, including in fragile countries where there are humanitarian crises.7

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31647-0/fulltext?fbclid=IwAR1HQCA_VMDyK-yPRQEdUM6HghHR0YrSX3VhI1VSYrMzG6vJsTqd5GT4gyM

Well said.

Often the claim of “privilege” is used as a cudgel or snarl word rather than an accurate description of one’s standing, especially when it is used in an accusatory fashion against a race or gender or class, no matter the lives of the flesh and blood human beings it is meant to describe. Then it becomes routine prejudice and bigotry. Like you said, one’s standing or upbringing does not preclude him from recognizing injustice or the violation of another’s rights.