Reflections on 2016 US election - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14841436
The Immortal Goon wrote:Newsflash:
The Democrats are bourgeois pansies
And
Anti-fa are mostly anarchists more worried about feather circles than real-world conditions!
I'm not sure how often this has to be acknowledged by virtually everyone.

Newsflash:
The Democrats are one of only two real choices in US elections.
And
Antifa are a violent gang of racist pricks who leave death and destruction everywhere they gang together.
So I guess "virtually everyone" would be...you?

BTW Mike, I understand Hillary-Billary released a new book in which she blames Bernie Sanders for her failure. And I say, "You Go Girl! Now come on dear, that's it, settle yourself in this nice padded room, and I'll be right back with your meds."
#14841457
Antifa are usually anarchists, while Pelosi and the Democrats are centre right liberals. They have no ideological connection or camaraderie.

Only people who imagine everyone left of Trump as a single imaginary group think otherwise.

Newsflash:
The Democrats are one of only two real choices in US elections.


This does not contradict TIG's claim that they represent the interests of capitalism and often denounce violence.

And
Antifa are a violent gang of racist pricks who leave death and destruction everywhere they gang together.


Nor does this contradict TIG's claim. Also, how are antifa racist? And who have they killed?

So I guess "virtually everyone" would be...you?


Or, everyone who actually analyses the situation critically and understands that the Democrat establishment and antifa have different and often opposing goals.

BTW Mike, I understand Hillary-Billary released a new book in which she blames Bernie Sanders for her failure. And I say, "You Go Girl! Now come on dear, that's it, settle yourself in this nice padded room, and I'll be right back with your meds."


There are stupider accusations, like people who blame the Charlottesville violence on the left.
#14841466
God knows I don't want to re-litigate the election on PoFo but considering how close the election was in the 3 states in question literally any one change would have flipped the election.

Her comments on Bernie that have been released we're actually somewhat amusing, Bernie was a politician and he played politics well. It also hurt her in the blue collar states that lost her the election. Regardless only a few pages are on Bernie, the book addresses many issues including how creepy she found trump as a human being etc.
#14841468
Buzz62 wrote:The Democrats are one of only two real choices in US elections.


A bourgeois party benefits from a bourgeois dictatorship. Very good!

Antifa are a violent gang of racist pricks who leave death and destruction everywhere they gang together.


This is my fault. It seems that I'm constantly overestimating the historic and linguistic powers of the right.

I mentioned that they were mostly anarchists. Do, at least, some very basic reading.
#14841483
The Immortal Goon wrote:I mentioned that they were mostly anarchists. Do, at least, some very basic reading.


When are you going to finally come out of the late 19th and early 20th centuries?

You are using old world examples that have very little if anything to do with the modern day.

From your link:

Some anarchists, such as Johann Most, advocated publicizing violent acts of retaliation against counter-revolutionaries because "we preach not only action in and for itself, but also action as propaganda."[3] It was not advocacy for mass murder, but a call for targeted killings of the representatives of capitalism and government at a time when such action might garner sympathy from the population, such as during periods of government repression or labor conflicts,[4] although Most himself once boasted that "the existing system will be quickest and most radically overthrown by the annihilation of its exponents. Therefore, massacres of the enemies of the people must be set in motion.


Just asking, what labor conflicts? Exactly who and what are repressing you, or antifa?
#14841485
mikema63 wrote:I would categorize Obama as more part of Hillary's wing than Bernie's. Obama ultimately proved to be a rather conservative democrat, his healthcare bill was basically a copy of the republican bill proposed in opposition to Hillary Clinton's more generous version in the Clinton administration.

I only mean party power politics here. Both Obama and Sanders were politically interested in Hillary's defeat, regardless of their policies or ideologies. The Clinton Clan became all too powerful and influential anyways, within the Democratic Party especially, so I wonder if anybody in the political establishment really misses them. They were tending to become a dynasty.
#14841493
mikema63 wrote:Obama backed Hillary from the beginning of the primaries, he talked biden out of running to help her. I don't really see what you mean? :?:

Maybe if Biden runs, then Sanders wins the primaries, which Obama clearly didn't want to happen, as well as he never wanted to confront the Clintons openly I guess.

I mean if Hillary wins, then Obama wouldn't be de facto leader of the party, he would only be a popular ex-president.
#14841497
maz wrote:When are you going to finally come out of the late 19th and early 20th centuries?


It's true. I'm guilty of using history and analysis to construct a worldview and argument. I suppose one could use his sad feelings to screetch about what a victim he is to anyone that would listen, but I suspect the former method is more accurate.

You are using old world examples that have very little if anything to do with the modern day.


This is the basis upon which anarchism is built. Something I've perpetually written was that between the early 20th century and now there was a sustained, violent, and official action against leftists that were not anarchists. Marxists, especially, were forcibly removed as an effective force on the left.

Naturally, of course, this would be history well into at least the 1980s that is essential for my analysis but invalidates your hysterics about Jews and Marxists being everywhere involved in an elaborate plot to make you sad. It is to your benefit to pretend such action did not exist; that history does not exist; that there is no bearing of reality upon your feelings, since your feelings appear to be the only part of your world view. Absent from any constructive understanding of history or how it may effect you, your analysis is to cherry-pick popular culture that validates these feelings. You are, in essence, being the same postmodernist feeling-monger you project upon the hysterics of the postmodernist feeling-mangers of decades past working with the bourgeois left of the 1990s.

In short, I take no shame from understanding and contextualizing the current with the past in a dispassionate matter. And the fact you attempt to use shame instead of logic is, in itself, a clue to the problems with your own conception of reality.

Just asking, what labor conflicts? Exactly who and what are repressing you, or antifa?


Labor is inherently a force that conflicts with capital.

The capitalist system, itself, is oppressive. This will, no doubt, garner a knee-jerk and emotional reaction, "What about all the good things capitalism has done?" And of course, this needs to be considered as it has a dialectic relationship with the present on the one hand; and your feelings about what is "good" are completely irrelevant on the other. Though I have tried at length to explain this on the board, usually to the deaf ears of professional victims, it has not worked. So, perhaps, a quote will illuminate this relationship:

Jameson wrote:The distinction I am proposing here knows one canonical form in Hegel’s differentiation of the thinking of individual morality or moralising from that whole very different realm of collective social values and practices. But it finds its definitive form in Marx’s demonstration of the materialist dialectic, most notably in those classic pages of the Manifesto which teach the hard lesson of some more genuinely dialectical way to think historical development and change. The topic of the lesson is, of course, the historical development of capitalism itself and the deployment of a specific bourgeois culture. In a well-known passage Marx powerfully urges us to do the impossible, namely, to think this development positively and negatively all at once; to achieve, in other words, a type of thinking that would be capable of grasping the demonstrably baleful features of capitalism along with its extraordinary and liberating dynamism simultaneously within a single thought, and without attenuating any of the force of either judgment. We are somehow to lift our minds to a point at which it is possible to understand that capitalism is at one and the same time the best thing that has ever happened to the human race, and the worst.

The lapse from this austere dialectical imperative into the more comfortable stance of the taking of moral positions is inveterate and all too human: still, the urgency of the subject demands that we make at least some effort to think the cultural evolution of late capitalism dialectically, as catastrophe and progress all together.


As for antifa, as a heavily anarchist organization, they are being suppressed by the same forces that suppress you and me; but their analysis is as wrong as your own.
#14841504
The Immortal Goon wrote:A bourgeois party benefits from a bourgeois dictatorship. Very good!



This is my fault. It seems that I'm constantly overestimating the historic and linguistic powers of the right.

I mentioned that they were mostly anarchists. Do, at least, some very basic reading.

And because you "mentioned" it, it must mean something...right?
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure you're a well-read scholar of some sort.
But if you wanna get "snarky", I can play that game too.

They are both the agents of dictatorial ambitions. The extreme right and the extreme left.
This is not some epiphany of yours. Its sort o' common knowledge.
As for your propaganda link...so what? Do you figure that somehow, knowing the anarchist justifies his actions by the presentation after the fact, is gonna magically do away with anarchists?

And while we're on the subject of propaganda and optics, I seem to remember the organizer of the UTR demonstration, trying to publicly apologize for the actions of one of their own, and getting assaulted while trying. A fairly anarchistic thing to do...wouldn't you say?

The propaganda does not justify the deeds. That's just ethical and moral horseshit.
#14841509
You are over complicating things. Obama and Hillary are both Chicago Democrats. They are part of the most corrupt political organization to ever exist in our country. There is nothing else worth knowing.
#14841512
One Degree wrote:You are over complicating things. Obama and Hillary are both Chicago Democrats. They are part of the most corrupt political organization to ever exist in our country. There is nothing else worth knowing.


I suppose a conspiracy theory based upon your feelings is always simpler than reality.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8

One unintended side effect of the focus on virtue […]

Is Trump Unpatriotic?

Trump is opposed to stupid wars, but all for sm[…]

Trump Takes on NFL

It's probably one of the most stupid ideas for pla[…]

CRY HAVOC AND LET LOOSE THE DOGS OF WAR Cry hav[…]