That's when 'the base' might begin to turn. I'm expecting June-July. — Wayfarer

Yeah, I mentioned earlier that the real pain will come after the next quarter. Then people will feel it and the companies earnings will show it. Basically, it's gonna get calmer for a while and then a big collective "what the f...!?" from everyone who didn't understand how tariffs work.

and a fight that Trump must loose. — Wayfarer

How?

I'm seeing daily stuff everywhere on how he oversteps all over the place, but nothing is happening. How many months of this before the riots begin?

Two weeks of tariffs is like a mouse fart in terms of geopolitics. No idea why people are getting overly emotional about it. — Tzeentch

Are you ignoring that all nations are reshaping their trades right at this moment? And the fact that the economical consequences will not be seen or felt until at least in the next quarter. How the market reacts is irrelevant since it's just operating on trying to predict the future. The real consequences takes some time.

So this is the test case. Trump is basically challenging the Supreme Court's order: 'you gonna make me?!?' — Wayfarer

Testing what? If Trump can follow normal practice of power under the constitution of the US, or if the guardrails of US democracy actually works?

If Trump doesn't comply, then marshals should drag his fat ass out of office to face the consequences.

There's so much BS going on that all the previous crimes and shenanigans of previous presidents seem rather innocent and unremarkable.

Why isn't the guardrails even stronger? There should be a non-tolerance against stuff like this. Immediate cancellation of presidential power. Any other nation with proper political structures would remove someone like Trump in an instance and declare immediate re-election.

I really don't understand what's so hard here. Is the US too corrupt, too stupid, or too incompetent? Or all at once? Maybe it's just too fundamentalist as a Christian nation, viewing the leader as a divine figure and untouchable. It's rather pathetic actually.

Imagine that you use that USB flash drive to access a Paper you have composed. Now think about the memory itself, do you really see the Paper (the supposed information) inside the USB stick? No. You see exactly what you said, variations in electrical charge. But you don't see the Paper. The Paper is created at the moment of contact and transcription with the interpretant. But before, it did not exist. — JuanZu

Neither does a real written paper, it's basically just carbon atoms in different constellations. So is the entire universe. What we perceive as relevant information to us is that which we can interpret as relevant. Language invented to communicate creates the information as a means of our navigation of the world, but our writing on a wall is nothing but entropic forces creating a deterministic movement of matter.

To the universe, the information on the USB stick and its presentation to us remains the same. There's no difference between our perception of the computers interpretation of it based on how we designed it to follow the structure of something perceivable by us... and the very existence of that information.

To the universe, the state at which a paper is perceived on the screen and how it rests on the USB memory is only differentiated by two states of being of the same thing. But even so, the universe would not perceive it has being the same thing as that is to a creation from us.

When thinking about these things it's easy to fall into humanocentrism, in which we value our own relation to something as humans as being equal or more important than what a thing actually is. Seen from the perspective of "something" that does not operate or exist as us humans, the nature of the information on the screen (interpretable by us) and the electrical state of the memory on the USB card, is fundamentally the same thing, or rather a state of something seen from different angles of reality. An object in which one side of it is the screen with the text, and the other side of it is its shape and form of the electrical state on the USB stick.

How we humans relate to things is very specific, very narrow and very biased to our own perception of reality, influenced by many things making a true observation of something flawed.

Nobel Peace Prize winner Maria Ressa, in Stockholm today, draws parallels to Rodrigo Duterte and warns about how the slide into authoritarianism can happen faster than people realize. And without a proper political opposition that is clearly rallying an opposition within the people, it can soon and quickly backslide the democracy.

https://swedenherald.com/article/feels-like-a-replay-comparing-trump-to-duterte

I also just saw a new video by "Then & Now" on YouTube which goes into detail the parallels between populists of the past and populists right now. And made the argument that we should talk about these times for what they are and not just call it "fascist". That the era we live in is truly populistic, in the same way we've seen populists in history rise and fall, but today, at a much greater scale.

The augmentation of populists through the use of social media has skyrocket their rise in society and formed a new global political behavior. The authoritarianism we see is fundamentally populistic rather than fascist. This form of populism will probably stay with us for long, as long as social media helps rallying these movements in the corners of democracies.

We will never be able to dismantle it because it's an inherent consequence of democratic societies. But in our social media age, it has risen to become a far more influential percentage of power within a democratic government.

And since the US operates on a bipartisan system, if populists gain power in one of the parties, they have a much greater chance to fully overtake the government, and to do it fast.

It all depends on how willing the people are to let this happen. If the Democrats are unable to muster an opposition fast, they can't be turned to for a solution. And so it's up to the people to govern and save democracy in the US from the risk of this backslide escalating.

In what way? I'm not sure, but million people marches and demonstrations outside the White House would certainly be the first step. To put a pressure on the powers on a scale rarely seen and not easily ignored. On top of that, making sure to help any investigative journalists getting access to evidence of Trump abusing his power, rigging the markets, connections to other authoritarian leaders of the world etc.

As we've seen in the protests so far, they can gain in strength. And the pressure cooker is on, people are starting to wake up to what Trump is doing and I think the wind blows in the right direction at the moment.

I just hope the momentum is there to course correct this blunder of giving Trump the keys to the kingdom before things get harder to do so.

The Constitution allows the president to become a temporary dictator during a war. — frank

Which is probably why Trump uses "emergency laws" for stuff that's not in emergency. He essentially invents some emergency out of thin air and then do whatever he wants.

If Trump does that (and doesn't end up with a bullet in his head), the problem is that Congress would likely go along with it. That's what's unusual about this situation. — frank

Not really, if Trump installs loyalists all around and threaten the careers of people, he can intimidate the congress to just follow what he wants. This is how fascist dictators comes into power from a democracy. Lazy and cowards who drop down kissing his ass because they risk losing their position of power or career. Republicans are full of these kinds of fuckers.

There would likely be riots that people like Joshs would attend, but riots don't do anything. — frank

Depends on the scale. If the US stands on the brink of actual dictatorship and fascism, I would hope millions of people take those fuckers down before its too late.

In other words, the fact that Vance is waiting to become president and we know he favors authoritarianism — frank

If so, then bullet to the head. Seriously, political violence is not a thing that should exist in democracies. But if democracy is dismantled and a nation is transformed into a proper dictatorship, then operation Valkyrie the way out of it. Preferably with success.

I mean, this is the core of my question. When will the people of the US do something? Like,at what point of a transition over to authoritarianism and a dictatorship is it appropriate to take action? And how do one know if it is going in that direction for certain?

We have the side of respecting democracy and protecting it even when someone we don't like has the power. And then we have nazi Germany. At what point in between do we know that "now is the time for another type of action to prevent nazi Germany"?

In my opinion, the time for action is already here. Trump has gone too far so many times that he should be dragged out of office and the nation initiates a re-election. It's better to do that now rather than risking it going so far that it's either too late or violence gets too real.

Exactly what is the negative aspect of doing a re-election demanding republicans to put forth a more proper candidate?

There are people who have been trying to ‘stop Trump’ since the first day of his calamitous rule. But as he’s won a democratic vote, there’s no obvious way to do it. Had he been convicted after either of his impeachments, it would have stopped him (damn you, McConnell!) Had the Supreme Court found that Article 19 or whatever it was disqualified him (which seemed obvious to everyone else) that might have stopped him. As it is, he’s been voted in, and the only apparent remedy is that he’s voted out, although whether he irredeemably damages the constitutional order in the meanwhile remains a possibility — Wayfarer

First, how can we know that Trump didn't work to oppose all of that behind the scenes? Second, it still shows the guardrails aren't working.

If he continues down the path of actual fascism, then it doesn't matter what the democratic process is as he has then dismantled it. Will people then still continue arguing that "he was elected" and "he wasn't voted out"?

My question is, at what point would people act outside of the normal procedurs to get rid of him? At what step, action or behavior from Trump and his followers, would the people say enough is enough and simply remove him by force.

Because we are witnessing something that could be at the very edge of a hostile takeover of power in the US. An installation of actual governmentally based true fascism. So I'm wondering, what would it take for people to act at the latest to stop something like that?

Or should it have been done already, by any notion of such behavior? Should a democracy tolerate things escalating to the very edge before taking actions to defend it? Or should it defend it sooner?

That returns to my questions... what should the public do about it. Or rather, how far will the US let Trump go before doing something?

If he's aiming to create a true dictatorship, changing institutions to the point he has absolute power, then why does the US population tolerate it? Why do people talk about this like it's ok because he was democratically elected? A democratically elected candidate who turns to demolish the democracy that created him, should be removed by force. Any notion that such action would be anti-democratic is simply delusional and ignorant of the problem with the tolerance paradox.

The US has the ability to stop this, but if he continues, and it gets worse, and people's rights are further being suppressed, they might not be able to. The whole point with comparisons to the third reich is to stop it before it happens. How many fantasies are there in fiction about stopping Hitler before he gained absolute power?

Even if Trump wouldn't go that far, the tendencies, the push to gather loyalists around him, to get rid of critics, to have power over institutions that should govern him, removing people in society and sending them away, are all showing a trend that shouldn't be tolerated in the US.

He's already crossed so many lines that agencies and the people should remove Trump and his loyalists. Brand them as a dangerous political fringe group and force republicans to get their shit together and exile any such people from their party.

Witnessing all of this from the outside, it's like that scene in the movie "Civil War" in which the journalists enter a small town where the owner of a store behaves ignorant of what is going on: "Oh, we don't really follow the news... there's so much negativity" is the gist of it.

When is it time to wake up for real? Less talk more action so to speak.

No one outside of Trump’s inner circle considers Miran’s ideas and plans to be coherent, credible, or realistic.

I know, but his inner circle are a bunch of conspiracy theorists and idiots like Kennedy. What normal people think about Miran's plan is not relevant to what Trump and his inner circle believes.

Trump himself isn’t following Miran’s roadmap. Instead of targeting specific trade imbalances or building pressure toward a coordinated currency adjustment, the administration’s tariff strategy in 2025 has been indiscriminate and poorly sequenced.

Because they are morons. Just look at the run through of how they came up with the tariff calculations. They essentially have a hand drawn blueprint to build a house and none of them has ever hold a hammer, that's how they're executing the plan.

Miran provides the blueprint of a modern Taj Mahal, Trump builds a treehouse with a blowtorch, and Republicans and their cheerleaders pretend it’s an architectural masterpiece. (Michael Barnard)

I actually wrote my answer before reading that segment so yes, exactly like that... except Miran didn't provide a blueprint of Taj Mahal, but a shopping mall with a roof that won't hold the coming winter snow.

This idea has been discussed. Most conclude
that Trump isn’t following the plan. — Joshs

So it doesn't matter if he isn't following the plan. People who've met Trump says that he acts all nice nice and shit in the room with them, but that he is totally clueless about most things overall. He has gathered loyalists around him and they all try to act out complex policies and orders on his behalf. They're the most incompetent cabal that's ever been.

Just because "there's a plan" doesn't mean anything is going well according to it, or that the plan was good to begin with, it just means that was the reasoning behind all of it.

If anything it hints as to when the dumpster fire might end as a failure to succeed with the end goal of the plan would be the reason to retreat from it. If the people doesn't demand Trump's blood, then the plan will surely be abandoned at some point.

In the end it doesn't change the fact that there are actual morons running the US. People usually say politicians are idiots, but that's mostly because they're failing something. This time... they are actual morons.

Has anyone considered that all of this is Stephen Miran's plan to devalue the dollar? His Mar-a-Lago accord spells out both increased tariffs and threatening to leave military collaborations, precisely what Trump has done.

https://www.nordea.com/en/news/mar-a-lago-accord-explained-a-new-era-for-the-dollar

Even if the tariffs won't increase more after the 90 days, I'm beginning to wonder what would happen if the EU goes in the other direction and lowers tariffs with other nations, even brining on free trade between the EU and nations outside the EU. Expanding free trade to Canada, Japan, Taiwan, India (get away from BRICS please), Australia, New Zeeland, maybe even Britain as well and many other nations who aren't among the BRICS.

Since the EU is behind on so many technological innovations and collaborations, this may be a golden opportunity to build bridges. Since the US was the largest competitor and they're beginning to alienate everyone, the EU could become a new superpower if playing the cards right.

And I rather have a superpower that's an alliance of diverse nations than a single nation as it's more robust against points of failure. It also incentivize nations to behave better to get closer to the EU as a true collaborator and ally, rather than having some toxic relationship with the US.

It would probably be the best course for the world really.

Did the thread spiral down into the lounge again?

If you go back to his videos from the 80s you'll find he was always a big believer in tariffs. I think he genuinely thinks they can be used to replace income taxes like in the 19th century, so we'll probably continue to see him trying to touch the stove like he did the last 2 times. — Mr Bee

Definitely, he's no better than any other believer who ignores actual research and knowledge. It's the main reason I am opposed all religions (though value the existential introspection they can help people with). Belief without anything else is never a path to anything but problems. And within politics, we separated the church and state for a reason, the US just didn't get the memo. Not only does it still operate on a religious belief similar to that of a king being appointed by God, the politicians operate on pure belief far more than on expertise, knowledge and wisdom.

We can probably count on one hand, no more, the number of people in US politics who performed their duties as representatives with wisdom, knowledge and listening to actual experts. It's rare in most nations, but more rare in the political halls of the US government. While authoritarian and broken states around the world either operate on authoritarian leaders urge for power, or they operate on being merely incompetent, the US is rather unique in that many politicians are actual idiots.

My jaw is on the floor most of the time when listening to politicians in the US. Seeing through the normal political jargon that any politician in the world keeps blabbering, there shines a void behind the words of a US politician and that's a deep lack of education, knowledge and wisdom.

You know, the memes of US tourists in other nations being absolute hollow heads to understand how to behave in another culture, that's how the rest of the world sees US politicians. Other nations has a few nutjobs, but the US government is so infested by them that it's a damn mystery the US has survived this long in the modern era of clown regimes.

But let's remember that now Trump has that trade war with China and still he has those tariffs with everybody at 10%. That 10% + China trade war will have an effect on the US economy. — ssu

As long as his followers suffer economically, but the economy doesn't crash, that's all good. The only way to get rid of him in a normal democracy is to hope fewer supports him, and with how bad people have it economically, and that his followers are mostly the people who are close to the bottom, it doesn't take much to make them suffer from their own vote.

Still, there was just a surge as stock market traders decided there were deals down in the valley that formed yesterday. — frank

The surge was because of the 90-day pause in tariffs.

I think he realized he fucked up, and that his advisor is even more stupid than he is. Maybe someone told him that the source of reasoning for why to install the tariffs comes from a crackpot who invented an expert for his book to look factual. That all of this is based on that non-existing person. And now that he knows this, he tries to back out in a way that doesn't paint him as a damn moron (more than usual).

:rofl: These fucking people.

The markets haven’t reacted as much as I was expecting, considering the size of the tariffs — Punshhh

They still believe he will back down. However, Trump isn't operating on logic or for the nation, he only cares about himself. He is like Putin in this regard; if something that would remove the tariffs were to paint himself as "the good guy" and give him praise, then he will remove them. But so far, removing them now is a failure on his part and therefor he won't back down.

The market doesn't operate on current events, they operate on possible future scenarios. And right now the future is in extreme fluctuation. This is why the market crashed but haven't crashed more.

If Trump had been a stable mind who clearly had a plan, then I think the market would have crashed more on the certainty that all of this will happen.

But he's operating based on "Art of the deal". He's trying to get a leverage for dealing with other nations. But he is too stupid to understand that China won't back down. They can let their population economically suffer much harder without risking their political power, something that Trump cannot. The US economy will collapse before China does anything and then China will be in the lead of deals with the US.

Everyone who has the slightest understanding of world economics and the dynamics of politics in China and the US can see this. Trump doesn't have the cards, to use his own rhetoric.

Trump has also dusted off the coal burning industry by using emergency laws...

If a president uses emergency laws while there's no active emergency, isn't that illegal and an abuse of his power? Shouldn't that warrant to remove him from office? Wasn't this essentially how the South Korean president was removed, using emergency laws to initiate marshal law.

There's no way to turn China into the US's main trading partner even counting value-added transactions. BTW, moving parts in and out of the US was mentioned in the article I posted about the UAW. Is that where you came across that issue? — frank

It doesn't have to be the main trading partner to have a significant impact on products and goods sold in the US.

Unless Apple takes less. — creativesoul

The amount of "less" is too much. Most of their profit goes into R&D departments and cutting those is not happening as the recent products haven't made a splash commercially and they're in dire need of a "next big thing". They will probably "take less", but even doing so it will cost above $3000.

The irony of it all is that the main argument for these tariffs are to get production back into the US, but the production of smartphones isn't some industrial railway industry where you just make a big steel factory. The complexity of modern technology can't just be "brought home". There's no competence in building the parts required for it and there are no specialized factories.

This could mean that many of the largest manufacturers of tech will move OUT of the US in order to keep the complex chain of production required.

16% of total imports into the US are from China. Total imports are about 16% of the GDP. — frank

Are you counting the entire production loop of how modern products are made? Is that just products themselves going into the nation to be sold to customers, or also the back and forth shipping of goods in the cycle of complex productions? Global trade is not just about a product being made and then shipped to be sold, it can be massive amounts of small parts going all around the world before becoming an actual product to be sold.

So what happens to ”US made” products that rely on a complex web of international trade, primarily China? Just for the sake of producing a product. The end price accumulates all rising costs along the entire chain of production, not just the end price.

On topic, Trump just slammed China with an additional 50% tariff. How many dropshippers will go bankrupt in the next month? What does it do to Amazon? — Benkei

I wouldn't be surprised if all of this escalate to the point protests form riots. When people start to actually feel the pain, companies go out of business, unemployment skyrocketing... I wouldn't be surprised if people demand Trump to be removed by force, or attempt to do it themselves. Trump survived one attempt on his life and another was stopped, but when people actually start to suffer, I'm wondering where things are headed in that regard.

The problem is that Trump is just trying to strong man other nations into giving the US something, but I don't think Trump understand that many nations will just meet his tariffs and the US economy will dive. After a while, there might be a blooming trade among other nations of the world, leaving the US out while Trump demands that manufacture magically appear within the nation meeting the same price points of products as when trade and manufacture was part of the globalized economy.

None of the people in the white house seems to understand how the economy works. Someone noted that Apple should just build their phones within the US. They don't understand that the price will increase to a point where an iPhone costs like $3500-$4500.

It's remarkable that people with this level of incompetence sit at the highest positions of power believing their own bullshit so much they don't even get the necessary cognitive dissonance from reality hitting them like a sledge hammer. So many advisors, so many economists, the entire market crashing... none matters to these conspiracy nutjobs.

I really do start to think that things will turn violent. Money is the one thing that if people start to lose, they will turn to violence. In the US, without all the social security of a healthy nation, if people face the reality of actual poverty, they will strike back if they feel mistreated.

Trumpsters and people who voted for Trump are "stupid", yet TPF categorically ignores what gave rise to Trump, and fails to provide a suitable alternative other than a return to the pre-Trump status quo - a status quo that American voters rejected.. — Tzeentch

Trumpsters can be stupid at the same time as Democrats failing to give a better alternative. What I see a failure of in most people discussing this subject is a failure to accept many angles to a problem as well as seemingly conflicting concepts.

And I've already said that the solution is for Democrats to go further left in their politics, because that would help people who won't get help from both Trump and the current liberal-centric Democrats. They just need to wrap it into an idiot-safe narrative so that the idiot voters can gather around slogans and marketing as they're not able to understand policies in themselves.

Lean further left, create a good narrative for marketing and campaigning, have a candidate who can speak to the working class without just trying to "play conservative".

While I embrace your sentiments, I think you give voters too much credit. — Relativist

Not really, I'm mostly speaking of the ideal voter who cares. I've already mentioned that I don't think democracy works anymore in a nation like the US. It's too entrenched in demagogian systems, enabling demagogues to be more able to gain power than actual representative candidates.

Either the US needs to install better guardrails that blocks demagogues from gaining power, or the US could evolve into the solution-based democracy I suggested. in which no campaigning or marketing for parties take place and instead leaders are calculated forward based on what the people need and wants.

a morally bankrupt criminal Republican is more acceptable than any Democrat. — Relativist

They had the Lincoln project. There's options for Republicans who want a 12-step program away from asslicking stupidity. They don't have to go Democrat, they can just... focus on a better candidate and not back down. But they're too comfortable being in the fringes of the Trump cult. But their children will remember and they will be despised by history.

That's also a good moral code to follow. How do you want to be remembered? Like an asshat who rolled out the carpet for the worst, or one who stood up against it and promoted the good? On the deathbed, will they think of all the suffering that was indirectly caused by being so bad at standing up something obviously bad?

People need to risk their jobs more for a better tomorrow. If enough people did it, we wouldn't have a problem and they would have their jobs anyway.

The folks who created the Constitution knew perfectly well "the people" could screw up, and provided for that with impeachment and if necessary the 2d amendment. And it is my understanding that the entire purpose of the electoral college was to negative the popular vote if the electors thought it necessary. And now there is the 25th amendment. — tim wood

Sure... and it doesn't function at all, so all of that is irrelevant and proves my point that this passive reaction to the disruption of what is supposed to protect the US democracy needs to be changed. The bad apples at the top won't change a winning concept for them, but the people should be enraged by how the constitution is treated, how the process of democracy is handled. Trump should be removed from office and it would be legally supported to do so. Some would say that this would be like Jan 6th but against Trump, but it's not as it's about how Trump disregards the basics of how the US democracy is supposed to work; or how people doesn't do their damn job in upholding those standards just granting him the keys to the kingdom.

The problem is bad people, both the stupid and ignorant who vote, and the bad people they vote for. But free elections and robust laws may well be the best way to control and correct for them short of revolution, murder, and civil war - although Jefferson famously thought that the shedding of a little revolutionary blood might on occasion be necessary. — tim wood

The robust laws have been changed tweaked or broken and no one cares. So what then? I don't think democracy works anymore, not in this track record. It's become too much of a demagogy, people too easily corrupted by the most minor push in a certain direction.

Basically, if the people are so broken down that their critical thinking isn't operating normally, then democracy is fundamentally dead. What then?

This is why I think democracy needs to evolve past what we think of as democracy today. There's a fundamental problem in having a representative democracy that operates as a popularity contest. That is NOT a democracy. If a true democracy can't be upheld, then it needs to evolve into something that removes the ability for grifters to exploit the public for their gain of power.

A couple of ideas I have are for the requirement to pass a one-time test to earn the right to vote. And it would have to be difficult enough to fail, at least at first, a lot of people. Perhaps requiring the equivalent of a very good high-school education to pass. Or four years' military service. Or four years' college plus two years' full-time employment. Or just a term of full-time employment, maybe six years. — tim wood

I don't think that would work as it would exclude minorities who didn't have the chance to get an education, service or job in the same way as more privileged people.

That kind of problem really only needs a pretty basic solution. People can only vote if they can list down what the policies are for different candidates. They can do this on their own at home, but need to have everything correct when turning in their votes. This would remove everyone who's so intellectually challenged that they don't have the ability to know what is good or not and it would remove those who are too lazy to think. It would also promote people to actually research answers and not just get stuck in their own echo chambers. Exposing them to ideas the candidates and parties have that they wouldn't otherwise.

Just look at how many Trump voters who just adore Bernie Sanders when he actually has time to explain his viewpoints. These people love him but are too indoctrinated to find out what he stands for on their own. Demanding voters to find information is at least a minor way to improve the quality of an election and remove the most obvious idiots from turning in their vote.

Another is the creation of a separate impeachment court that would come into being on 60% of state legislatures calling for it, the members of the court being three members from each states' legislature who would then meet, consider, and vote, a vote to impeach immediately ending the President's term. — tim wood

Yes. But there should be a nonpartisan part of the government that the president cannot rule over and that does not operate on popularity votes. Their entire purpose is to present an almost scientifically rigorous statistic on if a candidate is stable enough for being a democracy candidate. If they find anything that points to a candidate being unfit for office, they simply remove them from running. Their reasoning needs to be rationally argued, proved and reviewed, but the purpose being to review each party's candidate until there are candidates that are considered stable enough to handle presidency.

What the founders did not account for nor could anticipate was the speed of modernity. They were necessarily content to operate at the speed of horses, but the world works much faster, even at the speed of light. And lurking is the speed of a bullet. — tim wood

Which is why I think any constitution in any nation needs to be able to be changed and modified in a way that is only able to be done through vast majority. Many other nations has constitutions that are changeable, but it's hard to do so. However, it opens up the possibility to modernize.

But the US views their constitution as a religious text. They stand with one hand on the constitution and the other on the bible. It's religious zealotry to it rather than treating it like a political text. This is the problem with the US; they don't treat politics as politics, they treat it as religion; which in turn makes their president a deity. This form of thinking is overall a form of cult based in Christianity, giving themselves the rights to act in accordance to God. It's basically outdated norms of treating politics and that's why the nation is so fucked up really. Other democracies of the world seems to function pretty much in the way its intended, because they don't operate on religious terminology and ideology.

The separation of state and church in the US is a joke.

1,04

What's the prize?

On the other hand, it can also be telling of how many times I've been baited to respond. I've of late been better at just leaving conversations that go nowhere or not responding to people who are clearly not an important waste of my time.

I'm 1.05. — Hanover

Yey, the 1,0... somethingers-club :strong:

Big time stupid ( or as Paul Krugman calls him, ‘a feces-flinging chaos monkey’). And big-time dangerous. How did it come to this? Lots of people left behind by cultural and economic changes wanting to believe in a fantasy of a return to the days of abundant high-paying low skill industrial jobs. And a slimy used-car salesman who believes in that same fantasy uses his best skill, selling snake oil, to become the prophet of the deluded. But his own delusions of grandeur and need for absolute power will ultimately betray his own followers (and the billionaire ‘tech-bro’ supplicants who hoped to get even richer by ass-kissing the King, but are now seeing substantial chunks of their fortunes being wiped away in the carnage he is unleashing). — Joshs

I've been advocating for improving society and politics past democracy for years now. What we see here is the perfect example of why I think representative democracy isn't working anymore. There's this fundamental belief that the will of the people ushers in the best leader for the job, but powerful people have learned to adapt to this, using targeted ads, manipulation and indoctrination to guide elections by will.

Society needs to move into politics that is not operating on marketing and campaigning. In which the majority vote by their needs and wants rather than on a candidate.

Society needs to move away from democracy into a "solution-based democracy" formed around solutions to problems in society rather than on fantasies about some leader solving things.

We do not have actual representatives for the people in politics. We have people using their power and influence to remain in power and play power games to get what THEY want, not what's good for the people.

The only politicians who actually care are in the fringes of society and politics, never getting promoted or put into the spotlight because the people at the top of any party has accumulated so much support around them that they essentially controls everything.

It doesn't sound like Trump understands how tariffs work.... He's saying that inflation is gone and that these tariffs will get nations who treated the US badly to pay back billions. Like, how? They're not paying the tariffs, so is he just fucking stupid in all this believing the money will flow into the nation and not just out of the pockets of its businesses and citizens?

Like, what the fuck is going on here? Really?

In many cases, he is breaking the law in order to fulfill his camaign promises/threats. Many think it's great to deport alleged gang members, and don't give a damn if it violates Constitutional due process. — Relativist

Because he breaks it, innocents have been sent there. What the MAGA zealots think or not is irrelevant. Neonazis also like when laws are broken for something they think is right. But as a society, the majority would act when laws are broken. Democracy doesn’t work when part of the population aren’t able to act on a rational experience of truth. When people operate within a concept of reality more akin to the fantasies of a cult. That is not democracy, and if people want to protect democracy, they need to stop viewing things like there’s nothing that can be done ”because he was elected”. Democracy is never just the election every 4 years, yet people believe they’re powerless in between.

It’s the tolerance paradox. A tolerant society should not allow someone like Trump to be able to run in the first place. Especially not with the track record before this election.

I do not blame any of the racist, conspiracy idiots that gained power, they do what the do. I blame the apathetic other people who are so mentally lazy they never believed someone this incompetent and racist would be able to reach office… even as he’s already been in office one term.

Democracy doesn’t work in the US. Any time a person who’s clearly out to change or corrupt democracy gets into power through that democracy, that democracy is already dead.

There are dozens of current lawsuits against Trump’s executive actions. But legal cases take time, and Trump is a seasoned expert in throwing sand into the gears of lawsuits. Before the election, he managed to delay all of the actions against him until he was able to escape them altogether. I think real resistance is starting to manifest and is going to grow. There are multi-city demonstrations this weekend and meanwhile four Republicans joined a Democratic motion to limit Trump’s ability to impose tarrifs. And if Trump drives the economy into recession, which looks highly likely, then there will come a huge backlash. But so much damage has already been done. — Wayfarer

Yes, but I'm wondering what the people are willing to do if he starts to control the departments of government to the extent that he gains essentially authoritarian power through removing institutions which are supposed to stop a president from abusing power and breaking the constitution and laws of government.

What I find far more interesting than nations falling into dictatorships is the psychology of people existing in a society that is right on the edge of something like that. There has been lots of failures in other nations to fight back against someone abusing their power. Just look at Turkey and Hungary, or even Russia to some extent (even though it never really truly got out of its fucked up state after the wall fell).

Trump is trying to do what they did, it's so obvious. And if he starts to control the system that's supposed to be a fail safe against abusers of power, then the only way for people to fight back is by some form of revolutionary actions. Doesn't mean straight violence, but rather a disruption of the nation, like stop going to work or sabotaging. And if Trump fights back against that, it would probably just spark even more hostility against him.

I actually think the only way to fight the populistic conspiracy theory people in government would be if such a failure of them against the people of the US happened. Because the problem is cultural, not really just Trump. There needs to be a backlash on a certain type of opinions and thinking that we see in the MAGA cult. In which people look down on them with far more aggression. Really making "being a MAGA follower" something no one wants to associate with. Make it shameful socially, an unwelcomed status because they stand for something that nearly destroyed the nation. An enemy of the nation. That no media or influencer will want to be associated with promoting or legitimizing. It's kind of like this already, but no more than people laughing at them. It needs to be branded radicalized thinking, just as we think of any other radicalized religious thinking that has a negative effect on society.

How, though? He’s been empowered by the popular vote to do what he’s doing. The Republican voters still approve his actions overall. His campaign speeches were almost entirely negative, about how the country has been overrun by criminals and the economy a shambles, with the sinister authoritarian Project 2025 in the background, which is practically a blueprint for dictatorship. He’s a classical demagogue, who harnesses popular resentment to overturn the established order. They have been known since ancient times. So a large minority voted Trump in to do what he said he would do. When the s***t really hits the fan, the economy tanks, epidemics start to rage due to Kennedy’s utter incompetence, the international order falls to pieces, then MAGA faithful might turn. But it might be too late to restore the catastrophes wrought by this man. — Wayfarer

What I mean is, why aren’t anyone doing something when he breaks constitutional laws and regulations? Why aren’t anyone opposing and rallying the remaining mentally functioning republicans? If he continues with this he will at some point overstep so much it turns violent.

Point being, how far must he go before people start to oppose him? Or is the people just gonna sit around taking it. Where’s the million people protest march? The people who voted for him deserves the shit he pours on the nation, but so does the ones apathetic and ignorant.

Less in history sparked major outrage, but these times it seems people are so fucking addicted to their phones they never look up from the screen to make actual difference.

It turns out, that after the Laura Loomer meeting, Trump didn’t just fire the head and deputy head of the NSA. He fired four others as well.

These tarriffs have been dictated by Trump, with neither Congressional nor Senate contribution or approval. There can be no doubt that Trump is now a dictator. — Wayfarer

If so, then why don't people do anything about it? Why is everyone just accepting that all of this is going on? That Trump does what he does is nothing strange, what is strange is the total apathy and inaction of others. If he is indeed breaking against the constitution and ignore rules and regulations, then do something about it.

a) The World economy tanking, but especially the US economy going down
b) US prices going up (with "a" above that's stagflation)
c) Democrats winning the midterms, but Trump totally disregarding then the Congress
d) People protesting in large numbers against Trump
e) Trump using force against these protesters and MAGA-supporters clashing with demonstators
f) The US ending up with political instability like a country in Latin America. — ssu

A) I don't think the world economy tanks other than in the short term. But if the world retaliate tariffs against the US, then it doesn't look good for most citizens of the US.

B) Definitely.

C) They will win the midterms if this chaos continues. Just look at the recent win for the democrats in Wisconsin, it was technically a landslide compared to before in the region. Trump will continue do what he does, so things boil down to if people have the balls enough to stand up against it for real or just make public speeches against him for the sake of gaining points and saving their own asses (not so much actually do something for real against him)

D) If prices skyrocket for regular citizens, yes, and in massive scale. Protests so far have been ideological, but when people can't afford living they could become furious.

E) MAGA supporters clashing with them could happen, but since many MAGA supporters are the ones actually getting the worst of the economical fallout, they might just change side through cognitive dissonance. Trump using force against protestors might happen, but I don't think it would be worse than regular such happenings. If he goes too far that would be the end of him, literally.

F) Not likely. A nation's stability is also proportional to its size. A nation as large as the US takes longer to "fall" than smaller nations. As I see it, this is a conservative cult that has infected gullible republicans. And since most republicans seem to be just botox Karens and disgusting uncles, they are essentially doomed if you remove the cult factor of Trump. With Trump gone and if the nation finally stands up to ban conspiracy nutjobs from political power, it will return to "normalcy". Democrats have a problem at the moment, but they're still operating as a "normal" party. What will happen with republicans in the future I don't know; but I think that the self-radicalization of the internet is pretty damaging to the limited conservative mindset of that party. Essentially, the internet works better for progressive views to move fast, which is against what conservative ideals stand for and that incompatibility required essentially a cult to form stability. Without the cult, it's impossible for republicans to keep up with societal movements.

I think that's a good encouragement Benkei. I've been drawn away from the forum due to a rise in low quality and occasionally being baited into engaging with some of it which I often just regret.

But I do think that the problems stems less from stricter rules on how everyone behaves and more about a specific behavior of some that tend to poison discussions. While it's a hard balance to strike, I think it's obvious that some act without regards to facts that are easily looked up. Meaning, most of the engagements that are toxic tend to revolve around people who emotionally just say anything they like without regards for checking if what they say have any basic merits or backing. And when confronted with factual information just dismiss it over and over, repeating their rants ad nauseam.

I don't know what a good fix on that is. While I agree with the other decision to ban social media links, layers of rules that affect everyone could end up just being limiting rather than just double down on the key points that the perpetrators of toxicity fails to follow; mainly avoiding low quality posting; spamming and overuse of biased fallacy-ridden arguments.

Maybe the way to go is to simply make the lounge raise the bar a little bit in order to double down on increasing poster quality? A harsh strong language is still fine, but there has to be some foundation of thought behind things rather than regurgitating echo chamber rhetoric of public spheres.

I have no solutions really, I understand that it's hard to balance all of this and I'm actually impressed that this forum hasn't spiraled into utter chaos seen as the rest of the internet seem to have done so the past couple of years. With the amount of rather loaded topics that a philosophy forum like this gets, I think you mods need to take a moment and give a little praise to each other for managing such a place to not end up in utter chaos.

I just think that the issues at hand stems from a few riding right on the edge of the forum rules.

Trump will probably be followed by Vance, unless a Democratic superstar emerges. And even if a Democratic president follows, remember, Biden didn't rescind the tariffs from the first Trump administration, in fact he added to them. Completely exposing American labor to competition with China was a pretty brutal thing to do. The consent to do that again would have to be manufactured (to garble one of the chapter titles of David Harvey's book on neoliberalism). — frank

The tariffs against China are warranted though. They basically hide slave labor and has the government involved in all companies, making security in other nations a nightmare while pressing prices down to dominate against nations with better working conditions for their citizens. Such nations SHOULD have tariffs against them instead of enriching them and giving them influence.

It's the tariffs against other nations who are allies and collaborators that's nuts. No one benefits from it. The only thing would be if the tariffs became the cash to pay off the extreme dept the US has. But I've yet to see the money being bookmarked as such.

The left died. This is what's taking its place. — frank

Agreed, but mostly because the ones in the Democratic party with most power are liberal centrists. Every time someone more to the left, like Sanders speaks up, the people actually listens. The people, the actual people who votes and not the pseudo-intellectuals online, love Sanders; but the Democratic party does not push him out there enough.

What the Democrats need is a young, charismatic, more-to-the-left candidate who are versed in constructing a narrative to communicate the policies through.

The solution is quite simple, even if they don't get a candidate like that, at least they need the narrative bit. The right and conservatives have been framing everything in narratives and easily understood slogans.

The people are stupid, uneducated and must be considered so when drafting what to communicate to them. Not in terms of talking to them like the 5-year old's they are, but rather in terms of producing a narrative for them to gather around.

Any policy can be communicated through an easily understood narrative, getting to the heart and emotion of it for people to rally behind.

This is what the democrats need to do and as long as they have the elderly home of centrists controlling the party, they will fail. Hopefully they all die off until the next election and we have some proper young candidate who can give the people a confident and warm smile, that's mostly what the dumb mob goes for anyway.

The best thing for EU would be to actually not retaliate with tariffs and instead build new free trade routes. Like, towards Canada and like has been already reported on, towards India.

A big problem for the EU has always been to be a bit behind the US on certain innovations and technology, but with new trade agreements the EU could actually have the chance to surpass the US if done right.

That would be the most profound retaliation, far greater than any counter-tariffs as those would just make it more expensive to produce that which is in need of US supplies.

The important thing is that Trump chokes his own voters, that's the only way to get rid of him. Making his zealots turn on him.

It's popcorn time for anyone who likes to witness Trump supporters looking confused about their standards of living not becoming what they fantasized it to be under the orange demigod.

So many hard working people who got indoctrinated into voting for him will now wonder why every damn thing around them got so expensive.

Trump is entertaining the idea of seriously sitting a third term. While unrealistic to happen, if no one opposes his abuse of power, it could. If he takes action during these four years that erodes the fundamentals that prevent him from doing so, it could.

It's remarkable how closely all of this resembles the vague foundation for the movie Civil War. The only thing missing is a dismantling of the FBI and then an attack on US citizens and it will be pinpoint accurate to that premise for a president.

We had a rise in neo-nazis in the 80s and 90s as well. Right now it's being catalyzed by social media, which is a catalyst for everything. I usually look at fiction to see when society begins to wake up. We've had the trend of "down with the billionaire bad guys" for a few years, but now we've seen the Netflix series "Adolescence", which deals with exactly this self-radicalization among young boys that's the foundation for this behavior. This means that the public is starting to take note of what's going on to the point it becomes part of the official discussion through fiction.

I've said it before, I think we're witnessing a culmination of the problems with social media and the right-wing extremes rising. These kinds of trends will start to drop once the public realize the problems have moved into their own homes.

So now Trump is demanding that anything "woke" should be removed from The Smithsonian museums. And historians are pointing out that the specifics of it all is downright exactly what both the Italian fascists and Nazi Germany did.

Like, how much further is he going with this before the people wake the fuck up?

If you think I'm going to engage in a discussion with you, then you wasted a lot of digital ink and time.

I second that. :up: — frank

The reason is that I don't find the questions being asked on the level of rational discourse that is apt for this time in history, or morally overall. We know enough, we need to do more and the ethics are sane. Anyone objecting to that are either uninformed, a nihilist or an egotist only caring for themselves. I'm not interested in entertaining such perspectives on this topic as I find them irrelevant, uninteresting and self-defeating. There's no point in arguing with ideals and ideas that have no meaning to anyone outside of themselves. Their lack of universal meaning or pursuit of universal meaning means they are irrelevant for finding answers that is of any importance to the collective of everyone.