Jump to content
DerelictStudios Forums
Count von Phoib

American Presidential Elections

Recommended Posts

That last article doesn't fit with your thesis. Just because someone voted with Barack does not make them a liberal. Especially if they're black, which is a race steeped in Baptist teachings and for a large part, socially conservative. Hence areas where Barack won in a landslide, social things like same sex civil unions or whatnot, were crushed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the world doesn't divide neatly along the spectrum of Liberal and Conservative. It makes me laugh when Americans like Icon call me a "liberal" when if anything my views on a lot of "moral" issues are pretty traditional/conservative. Politically I would call myself a social democrat rather than a "liberal". Liberal economics is awful, at least in practice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Son, if I didn't like you, I'd be calling you a communist. ;)

 

Also, the UK concept of liberal and conservative is quite...different than what in the States one would assume. Cameron for example would make more than a few people scratch their heads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The major difference that I can see is that moral issues don't really factor into party politics. Of course in the UK there aren't great divisions on the issues that have divided the US. Abortion, gay rights, gun control etc.

 

Cameron's big problem is that he doesn't have an obvious ideology. I think he is a closet Thatcherite, he was a civil servant while she was in power (as were most of his cronies), but smashing the welfare state isn't something you can really out and say. Instead they skirt around current affairs stuff like CCTV cameras and ID cards that are fairly unpopular and win them short term support. I don't think they are doing well in the current climate since they ended up looking like a bunch of opportunist amateurs (and the Osbourne thing really doesn't help XD).

 

I think the liberal/conservative divide in the US is based on very loose definitions, it almost has to since political issues divide a lot of ways, not down a single axis. The McCarthy purge of the left wing in the US has probably done a lot to cause that, since people now seem to collapse socialist ideas under "liberalism" which is weird. For example, there is very little that is liberal about welfare. Equally, small government and low taxes which are very much liberal ideals are considered conservative. It's all messed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is is that you guys consider welfare and government medical care and other social services as moral issues. Thats where a big divide of thinking is between the Americans and the Brits, nay Europe. It is viewed as more important that government makes sure no one is in need. Only in Amerikkka is it a majority opinion that government should leave one alone enough to pursue their own interests.

 

Also, for the record, McCarty was more or less right on the communist infiltration of government and Hollywood. And yes Hiss was a spy. So we're the Rosenbergs. Everyone who was executed was.

 

A cash strapped KGB/FSB can do wonders for retrospect history. :)

 

Its like how Stasi files outed a couple of German MPs as agents of the GDR. I'm sure one of our German friends will tell more?

Edited by IconOfEvi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming from you, that just means I'm doing a good job so far <_<

 

:domo:

Edited by IconOfEvi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, for the record, McCarty was more or less right on the communist infiltration of government and Hollywood. And yes Hiss was a spy. So we're the Rosenbergs. Everyone who was executed was.

 

This shows about zero understanding of the issues at play.

 

McCarthy, 'right' or not, turned the hunt for legitimate spies into a hunt for mere communist sympathizers which turned into a hunt for anyone left of center. You surely don't believe the end justified the means; the perversion of the U.S. justice system to the point where it might as well have been set up by the KGB.

 

And yeah, sure, everyone executed was a heinous spy on official record right, just like how everyone the Soviets executed was a spy?

 

We won the cold war not because the other guys tumbled, but because we didn't fucking become them. End of fucking story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The McCarthy era was one of absolute hysteria about the political left. I don't think that has left the minds of many Americans. The idea that socialism == undermining American values seems to be treated as a tautology.

My point was that dissolving the left wing constricts your ability to articulate the political spectrum. Liberalism is Adam Smith. Society run by private individuals working in their own self interest and government mostly existing to safeguard everyone's liberty. It isn't welfare or state handouts.

 

Regarding health, I don't think it's a moral issue. More like a religious issue. The NHS is like our state religion. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liberalism is Adam Smith. Society run by private individuals working in their own self interest and government mostly existing to safeguard everyone's liberty. It isn't welfare or state handouts.

Over here that gets called libertarianism. Unfortunately that usually gets articulated by nutcase lolbertarians who make Ron Paul look downright authoritarian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think both terms mean basically the same thing. Liberalism promotes liberty as the highest political value, just like Adam Smith, no? Maybe it's like the difference between a Marxist and a Communist. There are distinctions that I just can't see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Over here that gets called libertarianism. Unfortunately that usually gets articulated by nutcase lolbertarians who make Ron Paul look downright authoritarian.

lol I talked to hardcore libertarians for a while. Was major lolfest. They're nearly as dangerous as communists.

 

One thing is thats its incredibly easy to lead them into contradictions and circles ^_^.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody confirm/deny the validity of this assessment of how our economy got so fucked up?

 

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/11/...9542/629/660423

 

It sounds a lot like most of what I've been hearing, but I don't know for sure. If there's even a grain of truth to it, I'm going to march to DC and demand my bailout money back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anybody confirm/deny the validity of this assessment of how our economy got so fucked up?

 

The economic disaster we're in is kind of self-perpetuated at this point. Yeah, credit default swaps are a huge part of it. Essentially, imagine it like if you took out fire insurance on your house, and so did one thousand other people. They're all betting on it it burn. Throw in the massive amount of leverage banks had on their books, and the mortgage issue really was the straw that broke the camel's back.

 

Now, 700 billion later, nothing is really getting 'fixed', it's just clotting wounds on dying institutions. Sickening, and for the most part, never opposed for the right reasons.

 

The collapse has been a long time coming, and a surprising amount of it can be traced back to one old fogey named 'Alan'.

 

I think though, that in 2005, if lenders weren't so greedy as to refuse to negate the obviously predatory mortgages, holding out for money that didn't exist, this could have been eased.

 

Things are going to get so much worse than just a tumbling stock market before this thing is over... and so many CEOs are going to make out like bandits. "Crash and Earn" they call it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rattus mostly nailed it but I want to elaborate on this "crash and earn" motif. We can whine and bitch about golden parachutes all we want to. Guess what, all the competent CEO's are the thieving buggers that are sitting there right now. Nobody will take the position unless you assure them a nice fat paycheck for when they inevitably steer the company into debt. Thus we can expect to see all the competent CEO's (not good they just know how to run a business and keep shareholders happy) flee the business, management ends up in incompetent hands, companies go even further in the tank, we cry out for competent corporate leadership, the same weasels end up back in the boardrooms, repeat ad nausaeum.

 

The problem with the American system is that everyone is focused on getting money NOW. This impatience coupled with the wonderful swaps mentioned above, which have resulted in hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars of money without any base in a real asset, have made it where the economy was destined to fail unless some control was exerted. Unfortunately, trickle-down economics isn't about control. It also doesn't work for the people on the bottom of the pyramid. We're nowhere near the bottom yet and this country is too set in the "socialism BAD!!!" mold to take any of the good lessons from that ideology. Unless things change something fierce we'll be talking about the price of international commodities in something other than dollars before the next Presidential election. The only silver lining in the US is that since we're the first to fall we're at the front of the curve and thus should also be the first to get back up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that didn't happen last time...

 

If history is anything to go by we need large scale state spending.

 

 

Regarding the causes, blaming any one group for it is narrow minded. It was an amalgamation of many different mistakes and some bad luck combined with a collective refusal to respond to the warning signs. Having said that I do think it's bad that you can trade debt. If you lend someone money, then you should be responsible for the consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The good news about the 700 bailout is that it isn't liscensed to be appropriated all at once. Paulson has spent most of the initial 20 billion (I think its 20 bil) but there is some that remains. There is time to still cut the rest of the package now that he's announced he's not going to buy toxic assets after all, which, last time I checked, was the only reason it got approved.

 

Also, Hillary Clinton has pretty much snagged the job as Secretary Of State. So much for bipartisan.

 

Also,

The coup de grace was that she listens to PBS and NPR.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude I don't know who half those congresspeople were, the only one I had heard of was Pelosi. Not being able to answer this trivia doesn't say much about how brainless they are.

 

You want total retards you need to go to a rural rally like this:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But see, you're not voting here :P.

 

Its like expecting me to know who Cameron is.

Edited by IconOfEvi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I guess not knowning your goverment is limited just to Obama voters?

 

Yes...that makes sense...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised just how bad layoffs are getting here, having been down on the economy for a year I thought it'd be fairly restricted - everyone is cutting jobs. Friends have already been made redundant, with my company (large accounting firm) laying off numerous staff. Luckily my department should avoid very much of it, unless the clients actually go under (as some already have) and they need to scale down rather than the usual cost-cutting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, Hillary Clinton has pretty much snagged the job as Secretary Of State. So much for bipartisan.

 

Who would have been a bipartisan choice? Condi?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude I don't know who half those congresspeople were, the only one I had heard of was Pelosi. Not being able to answer this trivia doesn't say much about how brainless they are.

 

You want total retards you need to go to a rural rally like this:

 

Tell me that video is fake. I thought Al Jazeera was above crap like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought Al Jazeera was above

There's your problem ;).

 

Who would have been a bipartisan choice? Condi?

I didn't necessarily say so. Just funny, all his talk of being bipartisan and reaching out isn't really anywhere so far.

 

Hell, Colin Powell could be a good choice I suppose since after all, he seems to have been 'redeemed' after his conversion to Obama's camp.

 

Also, an interesting personal mea culpa by a former Khmer Rouge supporter.

Do you reckon we'll ever see mea culpa's from supporters of the Vietminh? Korean Worker's Party? Soviet Communist Party? Sandinistas?

 

Doubt it. These people are now by and large the establishment they used to rail against. No matter how stupid, what they did is 'right' now.

This guy's ability to see the light is appreciated to me at least, if a little to late. After all, the work of all the people who supported that current are next door...

Edited by IconOfEvi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×