The Other Side
It saddens & frightens me to see the level of paranoia on this site. I realize that the truly panicked will not see past the venue and the occupations of this post of mine, but this is as example (to me) of rational thinking.
I know that demonization will follow, but if even one person can get a new and more hopeful perspective, I’m going to assume it’s worth it - in the name of free expression
https://youtu.be/3z73JXD3pYU?si=SQPXtTm2jWIMLBGa.org
I know that demonization will follow, but if even one person can get a new and more hopeful perspective, I’m going to assume it’s worth it - in the name of free expression
https://youtu.be/3z73JXD3pYU?si=SQPXtTm2jWIMLBGa.org
Comments
It saddens and frightens me that you see paranoia rather than consider intelligently the possibility that you are just wrong.
I'm not going to watch a video that's an hour and fifteen minutes long. How about you use your own words to lay out a hopeful perspective?
Where to begin?? These are just gleaned in looking at the beginning of Trump will put people in camps thread
My son and I have already begun talking about what we'll do when they come for us. Because Trump has made it clear that he feels exactly the same about legal immigrants as well, and so we're making plans. And praying. Please pray for us
Yeah, it's not so much a planned purge of illegals, as of brown people.
Aside from illegal immigrants, who would we expect Trump to persecute?
Trans people. Homosexuals. Women who have had abortions or are suspected of having had an abortion. Non-Christians who are too loud about it.
Ruth, I went to a lot of trouble to post that video, and I am referring to the entirety of it. ( I had to learn BB code as I’m a 77-yr old retired female nurse who is the opposite of tech-savvy). It wasn’t hard, I grant you, due to the excellent tools provided by S of F.
But I can understand if you don’t want to spend the time.
Eh...
There is an entire PoliSci treatise called The Paranoid Style In American Politics, in which the term "paranoid" is used non-ironically by the author(*) to describe a particular rhetorical tendency he detects in the politics of the USA. It's been a long time since I read it(**), but I don't recall thinking his usage was particularly egregious. Granted, maybe pejorative, in a passive-aggressive sorta way.
Not that I would say the term "paranoid" applies to Ship discourse in any meaningful way. Just that it's not totally without conceptual validity. I do join @HarryCH in inviting the OP to submit some examples.
(*) Richard Hofstadter
(**) I assume he covers the usual favorites, the anti-masonics, know-nothing, klan etc. I have the vague idea that he attributes the style to a puritan cultural inheritance, but I could be overlaying my recollection with that of some university literature classes.
@Moyessa, you have posted a link to a lengthy video, instead of a discussion point.
I'm not currently able to watch the video, and I suspect the other Purgatory hosts aren't either.
Please reframe your OP as a discussion point in writing.
hostly hat off
North East Quine. Purgatory host
I am really sick of my views being mocked here and I need some support. These men are asking really good questions and making balanced & reasonable points. If it turns out that no one here thinks this is a worthwhile contribution, I will certainly accept that.
I am sickened by the level of hatred and paranoia in the mainstram narrative - which is reflected on the Ship, where I know people are thoughtful overall - so I just thought I’d take a chance.
Is my OP objectionable?
People who are afraid don't do a great job at analysis or at communicating.
I'm really not sure how to help. My real-world job has just asked me to produce a piece of radio that is intended to calm fear and encourage people to love their neighbors of all stripes. I am absolutely going to need massive amounts of prayer to get this one right.
@Moyessa the problem is that we don't know what your OP is without watching a lengthy video.
It's not enough to say that it's a video of four men having a rational discussion if you don't explain what the discussion is about.
hostly hat off
North East Quine, Purgatory host
Personally, as someone who would happily see Donald Trump share the Nobel Peace Prize for his DPRK outreach as long as he also had to do a life prison sentence for his domestic crimes(*), I don't a priori start screaming abuse at anyone with a more nuanced view of Donald J. Trump than the one promoted by, say, Rachel Maddow.
(*) Don't much feel like debating Trump's policies on North Korea right now, except to say that if you object to the outreach because you think North Korea is sinister, your argument is not simply with me, but with the entire centre-left government of the ROK at the time, who supported Trump's diplomacy as consistent with their own policy of maintaining friendly contact with the North. The historically pro-US Right is back in power now, and I assume they're not yearning for a revival of the "beautiful love letters" era in the event of MAGA returning to power in a few months.
For the record, Bernie Sanders and Jagmeet Singh also supported the summits. Anyone interested in further debate(though probably not with me) can be refered to Bruce Cumings' interview with The Nation headlined In Trump's Madness, There's Opportunity In Korea, as a starting point. Basic thesis is that Trump's very ignorance of the subject matter makes him more likely to question what Cumings views as the unproductively hostile nature of US policy toward the North that has prevailed since the Truman administration. Not sure what Cumings would think about the long-term results about the two summits and one casual meeting that took place, though I'd assuming he's still glad they happened.
To the TOP of my prayer list. I can’t think of a better thing to be spending time on.
(ETA deleted duplicate quote, DT Admin)
Thanks for response. I would have voted for Bernie Sanders. He never said one thing I disagree with, and the enthusiasm of young people was wonderful.
It will take me some time, but I will go back to the video and post my own response, though it will make my stomach sick and my heart hurt even more.
I guess that’s the least I can do, considering the daunting task that Lambchopped is taking on despite her trepidation.
(ETA deleted duplicate quote, DT Admin)
It isn't our responsibility to support your views if we don't agree with them, and you have provided no support for them yourself. You haven't even said on this thread what your views are - we're kind of guessing, based on context.
If you mean all the people at the Republican Convention holding up MASS DEPORTATION NOW signs, I agree.
I like him, too. Canadian socialism is heavily rooted in WASPy Social Gospel theology, and even the Jewish leaders(eg. David Lewis and his son Stephen Lewis, the latter Naomi Klein's father-in-law) tend to be considerably less borschty than Sanders. I think the whole kvetcher-in-a-rumpled-suit thing appeals more to Americans in particular.
Though I do know Sanders' brother was a Green leader in the UK; no idea how he was perceived over there. And the current NDP leader Singh is obviously not old-stock anglo, but definitely upper-middle class in his verbal and sartorial presentation.
The contents seem to be
(0:00) Bestie intros: Live from the RNC!
(1:34) Reacting to the assassination attempt against President Trump
(12:52) Impact of charged rhetoric
(21:15) Secret Service's massive failure; institutional decay
(37:02) Inside the RNC: Sacks breaks down his speech
(41:16) Trump picks JD Vance as his running mate
(58:52) All-In Summit scholarship applications are LIVE!
(59:46) VC update: Exits creeping back, Sequoia's secondary offering for Stripe, Google in talks to acquire Wiz for $23B
There is also an auto created transcript
The thing to remember about Trump is 6 January 2021
And, if you'd care to tell us more(as you wish), would you say these guys are advancing any particular ideology or set of opinions?
Duplicates deleted, DT, Admin.
The only alternative is to see the signs held up at the rallies about deportation, to see the plans about Project 2025, to listen to the actual words coming out of Trump's actual mouth and think to oneself "nope, he doesn't really mean it and they're just doing it as a joke"
Thanks for the labour!
What I feared had come upon me.
Later that morning I joined the Friends for their meeting. It was unlike any other I've attended. Younger Friends were clearly agitated and there wasn't a great deal of silent reflection but the reading of lurid passages from the Book of Revelation and comments full of fear and foreboding.
I'm not claiming any 'prophetic' insight or ability but I felt inclined to calm things down somewhat and used a pot plant on the table which showed various stages of growth and decay as a visual aid to make a general point about life going on, as it were, whatever the circumstances.
Towards the close of the meeting a North American Friend, I'm not sure whether she was American or Canadian, described a walk she'd undertaken in very inclement British weather in which she'd seen what she took to be a black plastic bin bag flapping furiously from a thorn bush in the wind and driving rain.
As she drew nearer, she realised it was a crow and she was fascinated by the way it was attempting to bring its wings under control, as it were, in the blustery wind. Eventually it managed to tuck itself together and hunkered down peacefully in the teeth of the gale.
There was something strangely cathartic and settling about this, not only in terms of content but delivery. The young woman started speaking nervously and erratically, 'I was like ... and it was like ...' you know how it goes. But eventually she achieved some kind of calm and equilibrium in the way she delivered her impromptu discourse. They was even a kind of unconscious and almost poetic rhythm and metre about it, as if she was somehow embodying and enacting the kind of calm she described.
It was quite extraordinary and made a strong impression on me.
I've tried to write a poem about it but couldn't quite capture it.
Now, I'm not saying we should retreat into some kind of quietist or pietistic navel-gazing and act as if everything will be OK in the sweet by and by.
But neither am I suggesting we should be doom-mongers (as referenced on my 'Dad's Army' quip on @Lamb Chopped's 'fear' thread.
Nor, to use another example from the same vintage TV show, go running around like headless chickens shouting 'Don't panic! Don't panic!' like Corporal Jones and making things worse.
I'm not sure what the answer is, but here on the Ship it behoves us to hear one another out and respond respectfully ... says he who has been suspended several times for not doing so.
I've not read the 'deportation' thread yet. To be frank, I'm rather nervous about doing so.
But I will read it and hear everyone out. I don't want to second guess my reactions but if it makes me think then it'll have done its job.
I was just noting what was at the podcast site. I did glance through the transcript which unfortunately has had no polishing at all. At least one or two were blaming the 'mainstream' media for amplifying the violent rhetoric on the Democratic side against Trump (they were also discussing a Trump fundraiser held at one of their houses if I'm parsing things correctly).
Okay, sounds like a pro-Trump video.
Turns out that the shooter in Butler was probably not inspired by violent rhetoric from either side, though he might have been anti-politician generally.
Other points I noted that they made:
- Trump was brave to stand up after being shot
- J D Vance is a good pick for running mate/VP
- Secret Service/Security was incompetent (with a certain amount of ‘no place for a woman’ stuff)
- Hostility to former Republican elites (Mitch McConnell etc. - but no mention of Pence)
- Iraq was a mistake
- Afghanistan withdrawal was bungled
- Russia invaded Ukraine because of Biden’s attitude to Nato
Apart from that it was mostly commentary without (in my view) very much analysis or deeper substance. It was a podcast.I’ll pick up on three points:
I agree security was bungled at the RNC. We may never find out how/why.
I agree the Afghanistan withdrawal was bungled. That began with the early 2020 US agreement with the Taliban - essentially that the NATO would withdraw its forces so long as the Taliban didn’t use, or allow the use of, areas controlled by them as a base for terrorism activities against them. The resulting reduced military support for the Afghan forces permitted the Taliban insurgency to thrive and began the collapse of the Afghan defence forces. It also IMO hamstrung US and allied forces in their roles. This led to a Vietnam-like departure since the (admittedly weak and corrupt) Afghan government was collapsing.
The NATO Open Door Policy was enacted in the Membership Action Plan at the Washington Summit in 1999. No new members joined NATO from March 2020 until after the 2022 Russian Invasion of Ukraine. Ukraine first sought membership in 2002, renounced its intention in 2010, and renewed it in 2014 when Russia occupied Crimea. My take on increasing NATO membership is that the Soviet Union and Russia under Putin have used fear and the threat of force to maintain some kind of suzerainty over former iron curtain countries. That fear and a desire to secure their independence, and to ally with those seen as powerful and prosperous have been the main drivers for countries seeking EU and/or NATO membership. Blaming it on Biden is facile and historically and politically myopic.
In terms of the Cynefin framework world affairs tend to be at best ‘Complex’ and frequently ‘Chaotic’. Human tendency is to want to get to ‘Clear’ with clear solutions. So that is what political campaigns of all stripes tend to offer. No party of any stripe tends to say ‘Well, we think we want to do this, but we’ll have to wait until we get into office and see the whole picture before we can sensibly decide on action.’ And of course the media are always asking “What are you going to do.”
Do you mean Bill Clinton? George W. Bush wasn't president until 2001.
You’re right, of course. I’ve removed the reference.
Minor point; he was picked up on to his feet by his close protection squad after it had been announced that the shooter was down (you can see this in complete video of the event).
As Burroughs said, "sometimes, paranoia is being in possession of all the facts."
A number of tech millionaires/billionaires have moved rightwards over the last few years; and are mostly reconciled with a Republican government. Thiel has long been the most prominent, but there are an increasing number of others. FT has a story on them today https://archive.is/1jDrB
Lower taxes and legislation are a powerful motivator, but some of them have moved in significantly more particularist and neo-reactionary directions:
https://newrepublic.com/article/180487/balaji-srinivasan-network-state-plutocrat
A lot of this goes back to the so called 'Dark Enlightenment' of Curtis Yarvin, Nick Land and others.
I've only once been involved in a very serious car accident and the three of us in the vehicle emerged remarkably unscathed.
I couldn't say anything coherent at all and as other motorists pulled up on the hard-shoulder and ran to see if we were OK, all I could think about was how to put a tiny green frog 🐸 that was on the crash barrier out of harm's way.
When the accident was happening and I had to kick out the side window to get out of the vehicle, all I could think of was how irritating the DJ on the radio was and why was he blathering on. Didn't he know we'd had a serious accident?
I'm not cutting Trump slack but how would any of us behave if a bullet narrowly missed our face and went through our ear?
It's possible to speculate, but exactly how the nuances of the 'fight or flight' response breaks has been subject to a lot of study, e.g https://abcnews.go.com/Health/psychology-people-disarm-shooters/story?id=96607941
There are plenty of rigorous studies giving backing to this kind of thing.
You did something similar; rather than roll into a ball instinct kicked in and you concentrated your aggression on the immediate barrier to your safety.
Ok. I'll buy that.
Which, reprehensible as it may sound, puts Trump's 'Fight! Fight! Fight!' into perspective, particularly if he assumed he'd been shot at by his political opponents.
Anyhow, my point wasn't that I'd uncharacteristically kicked out a window in a bid to escape from a stricken and upside down vehicle but was somehow irrationally irritated by the cheery radio DJ for not being aware that we'd come close to death or serious injury.
At least I rescued the frog ...
That bit makes sense.
Trump's concern about his shoes sounds odd but if a bullet had whistled through my ear and narrowly missed my head I'm not sure I'd be capable of saying anything profound.
Thank you.
I think if some leftist firebrand took a bullet to the ear, and his immediate response after getting up was "Fight! Fight! Fight!", most Shipmates would think it was great. "Right on, mate! Don't let the bigots win!"
Seriously, polls so far seem to indicate that Trump isn't getting much bump from the shooting anyway, so there probably isn't any use in progressives critiquing whatever aura of heroism has accrued to him. The people who were impressed with his performance were always gonna vote Republican.
Thank you. It is deeply disgusting to hear this being minimized, even celebrated by some very sick souls.
And my soul is not sick. Projection anyone?
So you think he had some pre-set plan for what to do immediately after surviving a bullet, and that's what we were seeing on the screen? Honestly, I think he just reverted to his usual polemical style, which is generally populist and adversarial.
Many years ago, I was on my way to my favorite coffee shop, to get a coffee and chat with the friendly baristas. On my way there, I got mugged, and took a few kicks to the ribs. So, I immediately...
...continued on to the coffee shop and chatted with the friendly baristas. Basically, carried on as planned, though the topic of conversation was somewhat different than I would have originally expected.
Half of the US population voted for this human being to lead the country over the feeble option they were given.
If you are very, very certain that they, by virtue uf the definition “Trump voter”, are evil, or scary - or in some way not deserving of consideration as a human being - please consider the implications.
I thought it was perfectly in keeping with his character. He’s a bare knuckle fighter with an innate grasp of the theatricality of any moment. I really wouldn’t have expected anything less than how he behaved.
To be clear, I don’t like him and will never vote for him and think he’s a threat to democracy everywhere, but I certainly don’t think he’s a coward.