Drlee wrote:Bernie is not a socialist in any real sense. Even if he was, he would not have the power to impose socialism even with control of the house and the senate to boot.
Hmm, let me see...involved in communism in the 1970’s, visiting the USSR, praising Fido Castro, etc. He is about as socialist as one can get. His supporters are even worse, describing gulags as a necessary response to reactionaries. Sure sounds like communism to me.
The US can not afford more debt. Trump is bad enough with his spending increases and tax cuts. Obama was shocking at driving up debt, mainly with large welfare programs. Bernie will be a complete disaster.
But you have to see the big picture.
The problem of the West is it’s own success. The golden years were to early to mid 20th century. Back then getting everyone better educated seemed like a good idea. Wealth was abundant and wasteful spending like arts degrees, didn’t look like a problem.
Socio economic inequality has since been constantly rising since the 1970’s in the West. This has been a period of decline which all empires go through. The elites become more competitive as they fight over a bigger share of the pie for themselves. This drives political instability as ruthless people undermine old standards of conduct and thus credibility of institutions.
The tea party, Trump and his base didn’t just come out of nowhere. They are a popular response to this declining political order and the increased competition. So is the fracturing of the DNC internal consensus and the hard left’s increase in influence.
The hard left appeals to the legions of middle class kids, trained to be useless but harbouring great expectations for themselves. They are clever at debate and can reason why they deserve a slice of the cake someone else created. But ultimately, they are completely useless and will only be able to maintain their hold on resources through power. Authoritarian ideologies using claims of unjust distribution, suit perfectly the agenda their lack of ability dictates them to follow.
As I said, this is common to all western countries, not just the USA. The final stage in an empire’s decline is when the state is bankrupt and can’t pay soldiers and police. That is when the factions of elites can fight without obstruction from the state. The thing for western countries to avoid is bankrupting their state. Otherwise those nations will sink into internal instability.
Still, it doesn’t always work out like that. The 13th century Muslims got conquered by the Mongols before they would have collapsed if left to themselves. So conquest by barbarians is another viable solution. Note that this in effect solved the excess elite issue the Muslim empire of the day had. The Mongols replaced the elites with themselves and forcefully suppressed the educated but unproductive class.
Western nations are in trouble. They are approaching the end of the decline phase in the life cycle of empires. More of the same sort of affluent society solutions that got western nations to this point will not work in getting them out.
Anyway, I wouldn’t vote for Sanders. He will bankrupt the state faster than anyone else. Then the political class will fracture and fight each other while the state is broke and powerless to stop them. If you must vote democrat, Bloomberg would appear to be a better choice. He has the sort of discipline the left really needs. He is nasty enough, and finally prudent enough, to be willing to forcefully suppress @Donna and his unproductive buddies, in the same fashion as the Mongols. But Bernie? No way! He would be the final nail for America.
- By paeng
- By Pants-of-dog
- By Godstud