Alternatively, you could accept fearmongering that a nuclear war will take place and make your life decisions based solely on the paranoia of something that won't happen.
The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
- Status
Alternatively, you could accept fearmongering that a nuclear war will take place and make your life decisions based solely on the paranoia of something that won't happen.
Trump is dangerous and we can discuss all day long how to label him, but he is not a fascist at all. Using powerful labels carefully matters, because they lose their meaning otherwise. We are at the point where way too many people throw around these labels all the time and the result is that many people don't care anymore. Trump supporters often don't care anymore when they are called racist, because some people use these terms way too inflationary.
Fascism is something fairly specific and not every racist or authoritarian leader in fascist. Nowadays this specific label is misused almost every single times when it is applied to someone, because there are very few fascists out there. This list is not a good starting point at all.
What are you on about? He's quite literally doing the stuff he said he would during the campaign. He's planning to build the wall, is limiting Muslim entry into the country, is undoing action on climate change, and intends to repeal Obamacare.
The tapes of him bragging about groping women weren't a campaign gloat; it's material from years ago which exposes the nasty side of him as a person.
The whole 'wait until he does something' defence needs to stop. When Trump spoke during the campaign he wasn't gloating, or exaggerating. He was telling people what he was going to do. And now he's doing it.
Common guys, leave Raoul be. He is always incredibly positive which is a pretty good trait.
I'm enjoying it. This is what happens when you make valid points against self-reinforcing groupthink.
So what if it's not fascism, it's still fcuked up. I'm struggling to see your point. If you're telling people to be calm and wait and see, wait for what? And calm down how? Is anyone really overreacting in here right now? Haven't people already seen enough to say that it's all a bit messy?
No reason why we should all agree but let's at least try and keep our positions grounded in reality instead of arguing for the sake of arguing.
So basically you can take the things he does as legitimate promises and discard other things he says that don't happen, as just him chatting shit. Sounds good to me.
Last edited:
Well, no, not yet. But this is the point: you can't just label someone a fascist once they've actually become one, you've got to point it out and aim to tackle it while the warning signs are there. Trump's disdain for democracy, demonisation of certain groups of people, and attempts to undermine the free press whilst ignoring scientific consensus lean extremely close to fascism.
I agree. I said it was bad policy. Just pushing back against the emotionally flaccid hysteria about fascism and the like. Some people can't coherently criticize things without going too far.
You're arguing that he was just aiming to 'endlessly impress' people during the campaign. I'm arguing that this is a falsehood when he's quite literally enacting the key campaign promises he suggested during the campaign. He may have said more, but the key areas of importance to voters: ie, the wall, and banning of Muslims/people from certain countries, are quite literally being enacted as we speak. You can't just ignore that when discussing him.
So he might become a fascist at some point in the future ? Great.
Presumably because the more moderate analysis of him and the predictions he'd go back on certain pledges have been wide off the mark. The reason people are 'going too far' is because the 'going too far' opinion has almost always been correct until now.
no it doesnt. non of that makes him a fascist.
We also shouldn't forget that he is not an all-powerful dictator, but still part of a democratic system.
No one's arguing that. People are arguing he has a number of alarming fascistic tendencies and that his government is currently moving closer and closer in this direction. The fightback from the general public, and media organisations he doesn't like continuing to hold him to account, will be what hopefully prevents this from happening. For all my pessimism I do think America is too big and too widespread for him to ever gain full, complete fascistic control in the way he desires.
What moderate analysis ? He's been in office 8 days.
Well no, but he's got control of all the major houses and relevant organisations he needs, and is commander in chief of military forces. Add in his continuous insults to anyone, media or not, who criticises him and the signs of someone trying to seize absolute power are quite evident.
You can't conflate moaning on Twitter with actually taking action.
You're accusing people of going too far with their criticsm - perhaps rightly - but you are equally guilty of hugely underselling the nature of this administration.
It's more than just 'bad policy'. It's caused chaos and international condemnation, was drafted without consultation of the necessary agencies and is very likely to be unconstitutional in several aspects. It's so uniquely awful that a court case had to be rushed through to suspend the order.
This is more than a bit of 'bad policy'.
Again this is inaccurate. Both houses of congress aren't obliged to rubberstamp his policies.
The moderate analysis before the election, after his selection as the primary candidate, suggested he would moderate his positions and move to the centre-ground, showing a more liberal side due to his previous Democrat support. This was untrue. Instead, he insisted on building a wall, threatened to lock up his opponent, insulted the family of a dead soldier, and intended to accept the possibility of defeat with claims of an illegitimate election.
After the result it was suggested he would renege on key promises such as the wall and banning people from the country. This hasn't happened. Instead, he has kept his promises.
The fact he's been in office eight days is what should worry us the most, because he's already implementing extreme change to US society in a determined manner to extend his own personal power.
I don't see why you're ignoring the context of his election in any discussion of him and trying to restrict it to his time in power.
No, but thus far McConnell, Ryan and everyone else have shown themselves to be spineless shitebags, pathetic ideologues who will sacrifice any ideal they hold in order to retain political power.
You keep saying this but it doesn't help you fwiw. In that short time it seems like things have happened don't you think? Mostly bad things?
he got control of the GOP? well; we'll see. I also disagree that he tries to "seize absolute power", but I guess thats up to debate.
He is dangerous and can do a lot of damage. People should oppose him now and in any future election. He is still not a fascist regardless of what you think.
The whole fascism point is exaggerating the argument a bit.
A more relevant question for @Raoul is what it would take for him to accept that Trump will not become more moderate now that he is in office and that he actually intends to follow through on his election promises as much as he possibly can. Dragging the point out beyond that to actual facism is a bit unnecessary really.
A more relevant question for @Raoul is what it would take for him to accept that Trump will not become more moderate now that he is in office and that he actually intends to follow through on his election promises as much as he possibly can. Dragging the point out beyond that to actual facism is a bit unnecessary really.
The way this thing has been implemented just smacks of a disorganized white house that doesn't have its people in place (as mentioned earlier). Trump will now have to deal with this and I think he will back down once he sees that the shitstorm could actually affect his poll numbers.
Also, the entire order wasn't suspended. Only one part of it was (the one affecting detained green card holders caught in travel limbo as it went into effect).
You're still analysing him in the context of being a rational man.
He is a rational actor.
I believe the judge made a wider ruling than that, blocking deportation of any refugees detained under the order as well.
Occasionally he is. Most of the time he's a petulant baby though, who lashes out against anyone who dares insult him and who digs himself into deeper and deeper holes.
You are kind of making Raoul's point, that policy is more the fruit of idiocy than astute fascism. Someone like Putin would have done it in a much better way. Also the fact that the US judiciary system is actually acting against him also shows that we are not talking about an actual dictator/fascist.
Ok.
On the other hand...
Alarming that officials are already claiming to be above the law.
They're weighing up making folks show them their contacts and social media as well...
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/29/polit...grant-policy-social-media-contacts/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/29/polit...grant-policy-social-media-contacts/index.html
We're talking rational - as in rational choice theory. Not as in, "he's an irrational nutter".
I know. That's what Giulliani said in the tweet I posted. Trump wanted a ban on muslims. This is the closest they could get, legally. Hence he's calling it a fig leave on Trump's original intentions. I feel like I'm explaining this more than I should have to?
You will see that everywhere. You remember the burkini in France, some policeman, from the national police, tried to pull the same bullshit even though it's illegal in France.
I had no idea policies can be made that quickly, i always thought they needed to go through congress before they could take any effect.
Regardless of the actual policy, its a total dick move not warning people so they could make arrangements. The people affected would bills to pay, jobs, children in school etc
Regardless of the actual policy, its a total dick move not warning people so they could make arrangements. The people affected would bills to pay, jobs, children in school etc
And then the leader of our probable biggest post-Brexit trade partners says that if we're going to publicly undermine his administration like that then we can forget the trade deal, at which point we're royally screwed.
The hashtag is funny.
Obviously they are going to, the directive is real but you need to see what they are going to do when a judge tell them what to do. That's when you can worry.
How about this?
- Status