Assasination attempt on Donald Trump today (July 13, 2024)

[Gregor Samsa]

Yes, aware you were responding to Born and not me. But you did rather accuse me of all sorts of similar unpleasantness in several of your posts.
You suggest in your post that 'race' was the biggest factor in those events. I was originally asked whether 'racism' was the biggest factor in those events. Those are different things. But no, I'm not sure whether 'race' was the biggest factor in all those events. It may have been. In the Rodney King case, for example, men in uniform don't need an excuse to beat up a civilian. That happens in every country in the world, and is rife in many African countries, for example. The officers who beat up Rodney King were charged with assault and using excessive force. None were charged with racially aggravated assault, so there must have been no evidence that 'race' or 'racism' was a factor when they were prosecuted. Was 'race' or 'racism' a factor in the jury finding them not guilty? I don't know. I don't think anyone can know, except the jurors themselves.
This focus on 'common decency' I think is the central issue. I don't think that is a constant, which you seem to be suggesting it is. Over the past 1000 years - 'common decency' was that women are the property of their husband and should not have the vote; that children should have no rights of any kind; that animals should have no rights of any kind; that public execution and torture of criminals is appropriate; that any form of sexual behaviour other than between a man and a woman who are married is a sin; that any child born outside marriage is a bastard; that Empire is a great thing, white people are born to rule the world and the rest of the world should know their place, etc. Only really very gradually in the 19th and 20th century did 'common decency' start to change towards something we might recognise as 'common decency' today in 2024. And even today, there is still much disagreement about what constitutes 'common decency'. I am not sure if I place that much weight on 'common decency'. And it is also not a constant across cultures. What constitutes 'common decency' in Sweden, may not constitute 'common decency' in Saudi Arabia.
What I would suggest is more of a constant is the untrustworthiness of those in power. And how the educated class and the institutions that you so praise act in their own interests and not in the interests of those they claim to serve. Those holding power tend to use it for their own ends. I would suggest that is pretty much a constant over the past 1000 years. The same people who for a 1000 years told us white people are born to rule the world, are now the same people telling us diversity is a strength. Is it because those who rule us have suddenly morally evolved? I don't think so. I think it is because telling us 'diversity is a strength', and the mass immigration and low wages that comes with it, serves their interests. And you seem entirely comfortable giving those in power the right to control what we say, and therefore, what we think. I don't call that progress.

Let’s agree to disagree. You and I may never see eye to eye on these issues. And now my heart is full and my stamina is spent. I wish you the very best and I hope we can have more pleasant conversations about other topics in the future.

 

[gashonthenail]

I wish you the very best and I hope we can have more pleasant conversations about other topics in the future.

On that sentiment we can 100% agree. Have a great Sunday.

 

[Les Tameside]

To be fair though, Gregor, no one on this thread has suggested that disparities in crime statistics are due to one race or ethnic group being 'inherently bad' or 'inherently criminal'. I certainly haven't and wouldn't suggest that. Far from it. But that is how you have interpreted some of the posts on this thread, regardless of the fact that no one posting on this thread has actually said that. My guess is that most people who have contributed to this thread would agree that there are lots of different factors at play in creating disparities in crime statistics - economic and historical. I certainly would. This is why I refused to answer the question as to whether 4 very different events in history were 'racist' - much to the chagrin of yourself and Zoom. Just as in those disparities in crime statistics, I think there were lots of different factors at play in those 4 events, economic and historical. Don't forget, the cops who beat up Rodney King were not convicted, and the men who murdered Emmett Till were not convicted. The judge in the trial was biased and disallowed evidence that might have convicted the killers. The educated class and the institutions you praised in one of your posts failed. A song like Only A Pawn in their Game very well describes the wider economic and class factors that arguably play a part in such events. The same is very true in the other events you mentioned in your list. The creation of apartheid laws in South Africa were very much driven by wider economic and ownership of wealth considerations. And so too was the Holocaust. It is estimated that the Nazis seizing Jewish wealth amounted to as much as 20 billion US dollars in today's money. And that doesn't include the profits that several corporations made out of the Holocaust - it was, after all, the application of Fordist production methods applied to mass murder, rather than making cars. Were things like racial purity ideology and race hatred also a factor? Of course. But I just think putting all 4 of the events you listed down to 'racism' and nothing else, is overly simplistic and not helpful. Maybe you need to read a bit more Marx and the role of 'materialism' in world history? Marx wasn't one for the idea that history is driven by abstract concepts in people's heads.

A third of Nazis' war effort funded with money stolen from Jews, study finds - World Jewish Congress

German dictator Adolf Hitler's Nazi party “actively worked to destroy Europe's Jews financially,” and nearly a third of the German war effort was paid for with money stolen from Jews, according a new study about the role of the German Finance Ministry during the ‘Third Reich’.

www.worldjewishcongress.org

The Role of Business Elites

To implement their policies, the Nazis had help from individuals across Europe, including professionals in many fields. Learn about the role of business elites.

encyclopedia.ushmm.org

You are correct in saying that’s the Marxist perspective. I don’t think it’s contested by anyone who actually reads Marx. The biggest loser in ‘Neo-Marxist’ contexts is Marx.

 

[gashonthenail]

You are correct in saying that’s the Marxist perspective. I don’t think it’s contested by anyone who actually reads Marx. The biggest loser in ‘Neo-Marxist’ contexts is Marx.

Quite.
My intention as well though was to demonstrate just how much Marx transformed the study of history and society. Thomas Sowell talks articulately about how he started off as a classical Marxist - as, let's face it, did just about anyone in the Western world who studied at university in the second half of the 20th century. The 2 minute Youtube clip I posted in this thread earlier - in which Sowell says let's not worry about 'racism', something intangible inside people's heads, and instead focus on 'discrimination', something tangible we can measure - is pure Marxist materialism in many ways. And demonstrates how Marx saw himself as applying the principles of the Enlightenment to society and political economy.
You are correct that the current version of 'left wing' politics has moved far away from Marxist materialism. And the Enlightenment. Marx would be appalled by the idea that a man can become a woman simply because of a 'feeling' inside. That is a post-rational and anti-materialist supposition.
There is a very good clip on Youtube of Douglas Murray talking about how there were 2 lessons of the 20th century - but sadly we only seem to have learned 1 of them. The first lesson was that fascism is shit. Totally agree with that. The second lesson was that communism / socialism is just as shit, if not worse. Totally agree with that too. Unfortunately in our politics and in our discourse we don't seem to have learned that second lesson in quite the same way.

 

[Les Tameside]

Quite.
My intention as well though was to demonstrate just how much Marx transformed the study of history and society. Thomas Sowell talks articulately about how he started off as a classical Marxist - as, let's face it, did just about anyone in the Western world who studied at university in the second half of the 20th century. The 2 minute Youtube clip I posted in this thread earlier - in which Sowell says let's not worry about 'racism', something intangible inside people's heads, and instead focus on 'discrimination', something tangible we can measure - is pure Marxist materialism in many ways. And demonstrates how Marx saw himself as applying the principles of the Enlightenment to society and political economy.
You are correct that the current version of 'left wing' politics has moved far away from Marxist materialism. And the Enlightenment. Marx would be appalled by the idea that a man can become a woman simply because of a 'feeling' inside. That is a post-rational and anti-materialist supposition.
There is a very good clip on Youtube of Douglas Murray talking about how there were 2 lessons of the 20th century - but sadly we only seem to have learned 1 of them. The first lesson was that fascism is shit. Totally agree with that. The second lesson was that communism / socialism is just as shit, if not worse. Totally agree with that too. Unfortunately in our politics and in our discourse we don't seem to have learned that second lesson in quite the same way.

I will look at it when I’m on Wi-Fi.

I read The Madness of Crowds, and found it a great and interesting read—though he occludes a lot to make his points. Nevertheless, his broad position—that politicians dangerously collude to circumvent the electorate’s will—seems undeniable. It seems that’s about to catch up with them; to our cost as much as their’s.

I’m not sure communism and socialism can be easily pushed together. The latter has much in common with feudalism.

Nietzsche argued that The Enlightenment was, actually, all about feelings. And he anticipated that once it’d completed the dirty job (of deconstructing and then destroying institutions), that would become obvious. I’d say he was right.

 

[NealCassidy]

What do we reckon, Kamala Harris? Hillary Clinton?

 

[Gregor Samsa]

This is huge (yuge). It’ll be damn near impossible for the Democrats to mobilize enough support and pull off a decent campaign, but I wish them the best.

 

[Lucifer Sam]

This is huge (yuge). It’ll be damn near impossible for the Democrats to mobilize enough support and pull off a decent campaign, but I wish them the best.

Why do you wish them the best? They pushed an unpopular incompetent senile candidate through a primary process without a single debate, and then immediately turned around and stabbed him in the back and kicked him to the curb when the truth about his incapacity came out in an actual debate with Trump. Anyone who didn't believe the Democrats were totally corrupt (and I don't know how you could not) before this should certainly be able to see it now.

 

[Les Tameside]

What do we reckon, Kamala Harris? Hillary Clinton?

Even John Wayne couldn’t beat Trump. It’s over.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

Why do you wish them the best? They pushed an unpopular incompetent senile candidate through a primary process without a single debate, and then immediately turned around and stabbed him in the back and kicked him to the curb when the truth about his incapacity came out in an actual debate with Trump. Anyone who didn't believe the Democrats were totally corrupt (and I don't know how you could not) before this should certainly be able to see it now.

Why I wish them the best? I think it’ll be better for the presidential race if there are two strong candidates against each other.

 

[bhops]

Why do you wish them the best? They pushed an unpopular incompetent senile candidate through a primary process without a single debate, and then immediately turned around and stabbed him in the back and kicked him to the curb when the truth about his incapacity came out in an actual debate with Trump. Anyone who didn't believe the Democrats were totally corrupt (and I don't know how you could not) before this should certainly be able to see it now.

What's even worse is they ran a guy in 2020 who they knew already had dementia. The Dems are reaping what they are sowing. But things are cyclical and it will swing around the other way in a short period of time.

 

[Lucifer Sam]

Why I wish them the best? I think it’ll be better for the presidential race if there are two strong candidates against each other.

That was never in the cards. Donald Trump, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris all have poor favorability ratings. This was always going to be a race of who is the worst candidate, not who is the best. The edge goes to the Republicans because their voter base actually likes their guy. The Democrats have been fear-mongering with “anyone but Cheeto Hitler,” and that’s not likely to change with Harris, an unpopular and maladroit politician. They can only make a negative case.

 

[Was I ever any good]

Do American politicians ever talk about polices that they would introduce if
Elected?
I’ve never heard one politician talk about one single policy whatsoever.
It seems that who ever can say I love America the loudest, and most consistently is all they ever say.
This shit show will be thrown down the worlds throat until November.
As soon as this election comes on the news I switch channels.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

That was never in the cards. Donald Trump, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris all have poor favorability ratings. This was always going to be a race of who is the worst candidate, not who is the best. The edge goes to the Republicans because their voter base actually likes their guy. The Democrats have been fear-mongering with “anyone but Cheeto Hitler,” and that’s not likely to change with Harris, an unpopular and maladroit politician. They can only make a negative case.

Yes, okay. Yet, one must wish. For the sake of the election.

 

[Crisstti]

Do American politicians ever talk about polices that they would introduce if
Elected?
I’ve never heard one politician talk about one single policy whatsoever.
It seems that who ever can say I love America the loudest, and most consistently is all they ever say.
This shit show will be thrown down the worlds throat until November.
As soon as this election comes on the news I switch channels.

You don't remember Trump's wall?

 

[Redacted]

Do American politicians ever talk about polices that they would introduce if
Elected?
I’ve never heard one politician talk about one single policy whatsoever.
It seems that who ever can say I love America the loudest, and most consistently is all they ever say.
This shit show will be thrown down the worlds throat until November.
As soon as this election comes on the news I switch channels.

They do, and if you are actually interested you can Google for their campaign sites where their platforms should be laid out

 

[gashonthenail]

Do American politicians ever talk about polices that they would introduce if
Elected?
I’ve never heard one politician talk about one single policy whatsoever.
It seems that who ever can say I love America the loudest, and most consistently is all they ever say.
This shit show will be thrown down the worlds throat until November.
As soon as this election comes on the news I switch channels.

This is the guy you seem to be delighted to be our next prime minister. They are all in the pocket of big corporations and will say anything to get elected.

 

[No 27]

Do American politicians ever talk about polices that they would introduce if
Elected?
I’ve never heard one politician talk about one single policy whatsoever.
It seems that who ever can say I love America the loudest, and most consistently is all they ever say.
This shit show will be thrown down the worlds throat until November.
As soon as this election comes on the news I switch channels.

 

[gashonthenail]

Nietzsche argued that The Enlightenment was, actually, all about feelings. And he anticipated that once it’d completed the dirty job (of deconstructing and then destroying institutions), that would become obvious. I’d say he was right.

I think ultimately Nietzsche distrusted the Enlightenment because it was based on the idea of 'progress'. He was skeptical when it came to progress. Marx totally believed in progress - he thought the revolution was inevitable as the human race evolved and society perfected itself. It is funny how the word 'progressive' is still used to describe those on the left of politics. In many ways Marx and Darwin are the end point of the Enlightenment and the belief in 'progress'. They both had a vision of the human race as something that was evolving into something better. We know what Marx's ideas led to in the 20th century. Darwin's ideas led to eugenics and, in many ways, to Hitler and the Nazis.
I'm with Nietzsche. Progress is a myth. Human civilisation is getting worse, not better. Look at the USA in 2024, and it's hard to come to any other conclusion.

 

[Light Housework]

I think ultimately Nietzsche distrusted the Enlightenment because it was based on the idea of 'progress'. He was skeptical when it came to progress. Marx totally believed in progress - he thought the revolution was inevitable as the human race evolved and society perfected itself. It is funny how the word 'progressive' is still used to describe those on the left of politics. In many ways Marx and Darwin are the end point of the Enlightenment and the belief in 'progress'. They both had a vision of the human race as something that was evolving into something better. We know what Marx's ideas led to in the 20th century. Darwin's ideas led to eugenics and, in many ways, to Hitler and the Nazis.
I'm with Nietzsche. Progress is a myth. Human civilisation is getting worse, not better. Look at the USA in 2024, and it's hard to come to any other conclusion.

Kind people light the way. It’s dim so far but hopefully there’s enough light for us to see what we’re doing and gradually come to a breakthrough where kind people take the reigns and get narcissistic sadists’ hands off the controls. Treat them kindly but keep their damned fingers off the sensitive buttons, and build refuges for their ‘loved’ ones where brilliant therapists await.