Minerals deal signed. Another stupid and disastrous move by the clown train. But they sure do make idiotic decisions quickly. That counts for something. — Mikie
What does? — Vera Mont
Who does this interrogation of whom before what power can consolidate, and how, without prediction, can anyone - everyone? - do this? Attempts have been made, based on warning signs and predictions but the collective responsibility was unresponsive. Liberalism fails because it lacks the vocabulary of fear and loathing. — Vera Mont
But of course there are alternatives to Marxism. Liberal government is one such alternative! OSHA is an example of a peaceful political change to accommodate the then extant problems with industrialization. — NotAristotle
Predicting a rights violation before it happens would be great, if you have any recommendations of how we can do this, I am all ears. But really I think this kind of predictive ability is not beyond only liberal governments, but any government that does not have a crystal ball or precogs or something like that. — NotAristotle
Freedom of speech is a qualified right in the US and probably in most liberal countries. It's true that the qualification isn't explicitly liberal, but it is within a framework that is largely liberal, and by that I mean freedom of speech is protected extensively.
Your concerns about collective power and algorithmic control will turn out to be true If you ignore successful lawsuits against companies like Facebook as well as lawsuits initiated by the United States government for anti-trust violations.
Regarding gene appropriation, have you heard of the case of Myriad Genetics vs. Association for Molecular Pathology?
I would say these can be seen as cases involving rectification of rights infringements, which is a core liberal value. — NotAristotle
I've given you plenty of suggestions. You're just refusing to read them, apparently. — Tzeentch
Who do I trust? Benkei, who thinks the governing body of the world's most powerful nation is stupid, or the people who put in an effort to understand what's actually going on? — Tzeentch
Your argumentation means nothing to me if at the end of the day all you're doing is calling the White House stupid. — Tzeentch
I don't feel one way or the other about the article. But it's clear to me that the situation is scarcely as cut and dry as you pretended. — Tzeentch
On the contrary, I am actively hypothesizing possible reasons for the things we see, while the rest of the forum cannot seem to produce anything beyond "it's stupid". — Tzeentch
Oh boy... TPF looking mighty silly once again. Ya'll gotta stop basing your opinions on regurgitating below-average media slop. — Tzeentch
I wasn't suggesting as much. But only a fool would assume there isn't one. — Tzeentch
For the U.S. to remain relevant on the world stage she needs to work with China and Europe to reach stability and pragmatism and restore the global order that was being forged via the UN. This is not a good time due to pandemics and climate change to break the world order. — Punshhh
The reason why people are discounting it is because they aren't short sighted. In 4 years is the US policy gonna be as pro-Russia and maniacally protectionist as it is now? Russia isn't gonna abandon a stable China for an unstable US, but the EU may abandon the unstable US for a more stable China. — Mr Bee
For the U.S. to remain relevant on the world stage she needs to work with China and Europe to reach stability and pragmatism and restore the global order that was being forged via the UN. This is not a good time due to pandemics and climate change to break the world order. — Punshhh
If the Americans have to give up Europe to get Russia back on their side (something which the Russians were very interested in prior to 2014), they will. They need Russia to counterbalance China. — Tzeentch
Let's hear it! — Tzeentch
The days of US primacy are obviously definitively over, the system has become multipolar and the US is having to shift its strategy accordingly. — Tzeentch
The US empire is wildly overextended, leaving it no room to divert its resources towards China which is the only peer competitor in the system, and thus the most important.
In other words, the US is already in the process of cutting its losses to create a situation from which it can counteract China sustainably. It is weighing which interests to keep afloat, and which to cut off. — Tzeentch
That's why the US is seeking to restore ties with Russia - it was historically used to counterbalance China. That's why the US is taking a more critical stance towards NATO - the Europeans lack the will and capability to engage in a power struggle in the Pacific. That's why Trump is trying to cut a deal with Iran - Israel cannot win a war on its own, and the US is too weak to bail it out. etc. — Tzeentch
My main point here being: this easily fits into the changing global security and power structure, and thus there is little indication that 'the Blob' has lost control. — Tzeentch
It's you who tries to warp that into talk of cabals, because probably the idea that states function along other lines than the democratic deeply conflicts with your worldview, and the way you cope is by writing me off as a 'conspiracy theorist'. — Tzeentch
I've already given you the quotes in which both articles describe in detail what the elite class is comprised of, and it is clearly not strictly structural (though obviously, a considerable part is structural), by virtue of the simple fact that parts of the foreign policy elite have public panel discussions in which they openly discuss their ideas, the well-known power of lobbies, etc. - even single lobbies, for example AIPAC. — Tzeentch
That much remains to be seen. — Tzeentch
Only focusing on the short-term makes one miss the bigger picture, and if the various Trump threads attest to anything it's TPF's complete obsession with Trump's daily ramblings, or whatever Trump's political opponents vomit out at the same frequency.
In terms of geopolitics, a few months is insignificant. Even a single presidency is insignificant, as Trump 1 proves; back then people were exhibiting the same mass hysteria and nothing ended up happening.
I agree that liberalism is preferable to collectivism or theocratic culture where values are imposed. — Wayfarer
I know it's very popular to chalk all of this up to Trump's incompetent machinations, but I don't subscribe to such a view. I don't think he's all that important or powerful. Washington drives this bus - they aren't dummies - and people like Trump are the perfect lightning rod. — Tzeentch
It's fine if you disagree, but you can disagree without all the phoney shit where you have to pretend there isn't an academic basis for the ideas I'm proposing, and without strawmans about cabals and what not. — Tzeentch
Both articles point towards a foreign policy elite that spans both sides of the aisle. A 'deep state', if you will. Stephen Walt, Mearsheimer, etc. - they'll all say the same thing.
Who or what exactly comprises this 'deep state' is a more murky topic, but not necessarily all that relevant. — Tzeentch
If you're categorically uninterested in my line of thought, why be so disingenuous as to ask for sources, and then proceed to give me this cunty attitude when I go through the effort of finding quotes for you? I even literally asked you whether you were genuinely interested.
Man, didn't know you were such an asshole. — Tzeentch
Could just be "Trump’s loose lips and sticky fingers" I suppose. Insider trading is still illegal. — jorndoe
I know it's very popular to chalk all of this up to Trump's incompetent machinations, but I don't subscribe to such a view. I don't think he's all that important or powerful. Washington drives this bus - they aren't dummies - and people like Trump are the perfect lightning rod. — Tzeentch
In this context, "Washington" is primarily the United States foreign policy establishment aka "the Blob". If you're genuinely interested I can provide some sources, but considering your tone I doubt that you are. — Tzeentch
I know it's very popular to chalk all of this up to Trump's incompetent machinations, but I don't subscribe to such a view. I don't think he's all that important or powerful. Washington drives this bus - they aren't dummies - and people like Trump are the perfect lightning rod. — Tzeentch
No, I think it is quite right. Though, I look at it a bit from a more cynical perspective. — Tzeentch
The big problems are getting it to work and getting it to work safely. — Agree-to-Disagree
“This was his strategy all along, and that you might even say that he goaded China into a bad position, they responded. They have shown themselves to the world to be the bad actors, and we are willing to cooperate with our allies and with our trading partners who did not retaliate. It wasn’t a hard message, don’t retaliate, things will turn out well.”
The easiest thing to do would be to devalue their own currencies relative to the dollar. Trump has already issued a warning to them not to do that. There aren't any countries whose trade with the US is large enough to make that option reasonable though. — frank
Isnt the fear at the moment that the markets are headed for a liquidity crisis, which happened during the 2008 financial crisis? In such a crisis, panicked investors sell everything, even bonds, so instead of what usually happens during a downturn, that investors turn to bonds as a safe haven, lowering their yields, they are sold along with everything else and their yield jumps. In 2008 the Fed has to step in and provide liquidity. — Joshs
During a recent speech at the American Bankers Association, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said this:
"For the next four years, the Trump agenda is focused on Main Street. It's Main Street's turn. It's Main Street's turn to hire workers. It's Main Street's turn to drive investment. And it's Main Street's turn to restore the American dream."
"For too long, financial policy has served large financial institutions at the expense of smaller ones. No more. No more. This administration aims to give all banks the chance to succeed, whether it's JP Morgan or your local mortgage and loan."
"It aims to get capital to Americans who need it by getting bureaucracy out of the way. For the last four decades, basically since I began my career in Wall Street, Wall Street has grown wealthier than ever before, and it can continue to grow and do well.
(I would post the video, but these kinds of facts are now verboten).
Given that wealth inequality has been on the lips of progressives for who knows how long, if this plan bears fruit for the working class, will it change some minds here? Or is it anti-Trump all the way down? — NOS4A2