Are the Democrats back on track?

I was too nice, I guess. I didn't make clear that I think you may be as bad as or worse than a racist--a person who tries to exploit the xenophobic fears of others to stir up hatred. I have no respect for that at all, and your politics are way, way off.

 

I don't see the demise of western civilization on the horizon. I see attempts, sure. But so many of them depend on the infrastructure supplied by western civilization in order to remain a threat. We have seen this very thing before. And yet, we still have elements of Roman law built into our governmental systems. Still, I think the commies have given it a good run. But too many individual minds aren't buying it.

Consider though, what happens when the commies do manage to take over? Who gets the nukes? Who gets to keep those in control of the nukes from seizing power? Who protects the people from the darkest pits of human depravity should it find itself in control? What's amazing to me is that we haven't seen limited nuclear war already. If we humans really were savage assholes (especially in the west of course), wouldn't we just flatten minor opponents? Who was it that recently gave a well-deserved finger to the UN (which has become a perpetual cocktail party)?

I don't think it's possible to disengage technology from civilization as we currently sit. The inter-connectivity has advanced human knowledge and made fresh doughnuts from 30 miles away possible. While I don't agree with illegal aliens, even the hostile variety become infected with our take on civilization. And a lot of them like it. This infection spreads to their families, all over the planet. While fewer and fewer will admit it, they want to be Americans.

 

Mic drop

 

Cut the crap. You may be fooling yourself with that high-minded spiel, but you're just spouting variations on talking points by Milo. Your claim that we've all been indoctrinated to believe that the Islamic world is peaceful and progressive is way exaggerated. The prevailing view of Islam by the American public has been negative for as long as I can remember. I think it's important to be realistic and to see the world religions and cultures warts and all, but your "Katie bar the door" line is simply a variation of the "Know Nothing" nativist populism of the American Party that was the rage in this country in the 1850s--only directed at Catholics and Irish. Only present day Know Nothings have Fox, Breitbart, InfoWars an the internet to spread their propaganda, not to mention an army of trolls and bots. Muslim countries have their problems, some more than others. But to describe Islam as "a religion of conquest" is as stupid as saying that Christianity is a religion of "turn the other cheek" (I wouldn't put it to a test by slapping a Christian in an Irish bar). We should and do expect Muslims in this country to behave like other citizens, and if they don't we should treat them the same as other violators. I do think the U.S. needs to take control of the immigration process to prevent being overwhelmed by people from cultures that are hostile to our values, but I don't think that should be done by whipping up anti-immigrant hatred.

 

The commies? Who do you have in mind? Uncle Vlad and his FSB cronies don't like to use that term anymore. They've rebranded, and are now pushing the nativist ethno-nationalist line we've seen making headway in Europe, Canada and the U.S.A.--more like Nazism, but same difference. I used to think our western institutions and traditions of rule of law, respect for constitutional process and tolerance of diversity would be strong enough to stand up to this, but lately, seeing the craven Republicans in Congress at work subverting these, I'm having my doubts. Trump's attack on the FBI today is only the latest example.

I think we've been spared limited nuclear war so far because of mutual fears of retaliation and that it would escalate into an all out war to the detriment of all parties concerned. We've been fortunate to have world leaders who are rational enough to respond to those concerns. With Trump and Kim jong un in control of their respective arsenals, I'm not so sure.

Good point.

 

Go drink Starbucks and wear a funny hat.

 

I'm very familiar with this scenario, it's a classic. But it's only one is a series of 11 and is scene as the very worst. In reality there are lesser plans that choke off retaliatory capability. Some are rather disgusting, like scattering strontium 90 over the offending territory. And these were defined before we had a firm grasp on space travel. There's no telling how complicated things can be now.

A lot of study has gone into limited nuclear warfare, some of it driving massive ordinance programs. Somehow destroying a city with conventional explosives is more palatable than using a single small nuke. People are just as dead.

 

Ah, I understand. You think you're overweight and the fat pride movement is interfering with your motivation. But isn't it a bit round-about to accomplish that by shaming others, at the risk of causing unhealthy anorexia or even suicide? Try a refrigerator picture!

As a libertarian, you should understand that some women who are also overweight have chosen to go the route of fat acceptance. I think they face an uphill battle, but as a Christian, I'm cautious about inflicting pain on others simply because they don't conform to my own values. I know Milo thinks this is for their own good, but Milo is a sick, twisted, sadistic, sociopathic creep. It's much worse to be an Islamaphobe than to be overweight. I know it hurts to hear this, but Islamophobia is uglier than fat. And that's why I'm saying this (for your own good): You ugly, you ugly, you mama knows you ugly!

 

Oh yeah these Democraps are on the right track.

 

If neither party had shitty people in them, they'd be very small parties indeed.

They'd be more like political get togethers.

 

forget it Six eyed; Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, to use and old line; could shoot down someone right in the middle of Astoria Boulevard and her followers would be fine with it.

Was it Astoria Boulevard ?

Anyway, the Incumbent of the Congressional District is Joe Crowley, He is on the ballot for the November election courtsey of The Working Famlies Party.

Yeah, November,;when real voters come out to vote; we will see if "This Girl" , Ms. Cortez remains relevant after the election.

 

Most civilizations were built on the foundations of predecessors. It could accurately be said that western civilization is built on the achievements of Mesopotamia, Egypt and Persia. Islam's golden age went well beyond the achievements of its Persian predecessors. Arabic numerals were a Muslim invention. How would you like to do computations in Roman numerals . We're aslo in debt to Muslims for algebra, and such surgical instruments as the syringe, forceps, bone saw and surgical hook and needle, not to mention the beginnings of modern hospitals. Al-Idrisi's world map was the most detailed and complete in the Middle Ages. Islamic scholars preserved and translated classic Greek manuscripts, such as Aristotle, which then made their way to Europe and became the basis of Catholic theology via Saint Thomas Aquinas. Besides the Bible and Aristotle, Saint Thomas cited, as his authorities in Summa Theologica, Avicenna (Ibn Sina) and Averroes (Ibn Rusd), both Muslims. Islamic civilization flourished under the Abbasid Caliphate in Persia from the 8th to 13th century, under the emirate and Caliphate of Cordova in Spain and its successors from the 8th to 15th century, and finally under the Ottoman empire from the thriteenth to the early twentieth century.
Historian Niall Ferguson dates the turning point for Islam's decline at 1577, when fundamentalist clerics forced the closing of the great observatory in Istanbul. The rise of religious fundamentalism brought progress to a halt in the modern world, and is still a major impediment.

You say that if gays are put to death in 12 separate Muslim countries its their culture that's intolerant. By "their', I assume you mean the cultures of the twelve countries concerned. In 1856, the Ottoman empire became the first country in the world to decriminalize homosexuality--about a century before that was done in the west.To put the record in perspective there are lots of non-Muslim countries that have draconian penalties for homosexuality. In Tanzania, Uganda, and Barbados, the penalty is life imprisonment; in Gahna, up to 25years; in Kenya, Malawi, Seychelles, and Papua New Guinea its up to 14 years; in Buddhist SriLanka and Mannmar, its up to ten years. Of Muslim countries, homosexuality isn't illegal in Lebanon and Jordan. Iran and Saudi Arabia have been the most zealous in killing gays. Both of these regimes stand out as leaders of Islamic theocracy--the Wahabi/Salafi brand of homophobia, reinforced by the ultra-conservative Hanbali school of Sharia, and the Shiite brand in Iran, reinforced by the Jafari school of Sharia.

 

6

You defined what you thought was alt-right views and those views are ones you promote so yes you seem to identify as alt-right but i'm happy to call you someone with far right views.

Here are you own words “Some racists identify alt-right, but the movement is more diverse than that” then you go on to explain that to you the things that define someone as been part of the alt-right are a disgust in corporate globalism, global governance, wasteful interventionism and in despising such things as identity politics and language policing. All things that you have promoted in your posts – you self-identify as alt-right. (Oh then there are all the posts attacking islam and black lives matter)

LOL ok i'm game please explain to us what you think of as 'fringe left' and why i'm part of it?

Which social views of yours are 'center leaning', from what i've read they seem to be based on right wing Social Darwinist ideas.

So you are saying you are racist but that's ok because others are racists?

Thing is that i've not called you a racist or a white nationalist, i've just pointed out that you seem to define yourself as alt-right - i mean since the post where you do, have you changed your views that much? I have also pointed out that bigotry is not the same as racism but does have certain irrational traits in common.

And to add such bigotry is often more insidious than out and out racism which most see as repellent, it ties to use weasel words, misdirection and alternative facts to bring about division and even hate.

Oh for fuck sake man...we have been through all that and it became clear that it was just another form of your bigotry.

 

A lot of dick sucking going on in this thread. How many people here use alt left/right on a daily basis out in the real world? "Oh, I'm not alt left..." "I'm not alt right" *lifts skirt and flirtatiously reveals exposed thigh*

Almost like everyone's proud to finally have someone else to repeat these words with.

 

LOL this isn't the real world this is a politics forum

 

One thing I noticed is he's consistently adding to stuff he's supposedly so concerned about: division, polarisation, cultural/ethnic stereotyping.
Not by bringing up the topics that he does (that could be great discussions on itself), but by how he insists on doing it. Provoking (he calls it thought provoking ), always charging his statements often making them factual incorrect. Always rallying against and putting down the system or ideologies that in some ways disagree with the thing he favors (islam, socialism, etc.), instead of just try to have a honest discussion with nuanced statements focussing really on the exact troubles.
There's a reason all his political threads go the same. It's because of how he handles these topics and convo partners that have an opposing mindset.

@6-eyed shaman Don't confuse provoking with thought provoking. Stop charging your statements if it takes away from the real situation (it really rarely gets more thought provoking through that ). Unless of course you secretly don't want to have a better discussion. And the way it goes now every time suits you best

 

That, and if he can't respond to the criticisms of his statements he simply abandons the discussion, only to say the same exact things later and the whole scenario repeats itself. It all comes across as someone who works from a desired conclusion backward and is uninterested in actual veracity. It must be true because he believes it, almost like a religious ideology.

 

Right. Anyway I still have my doubts that the democrats will be able to take full advantage in November. Although if it's anywhere close to the red wave of the tea party years ago, that would be a fine start.

 

I agree but would add that to me people like 6 and other far right supporters and the idea of getting things back on track are connected.

One thing I’ve been arguing since I came to these forums is that there was little pull from the left in US society, all the pull seemed to be coming from the right.

The establishment basically tried to purge US society of left wing thought in the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s (McCarthyism, the Un-American Activities Committees) with some success.

This purge produced an environment from the 70’s where the deeply flawed ideas of neo-liberalism took root and then hold (there being little opposition) this again suppressed the spread of left wing ideas.

This in its turn then led to the rise of the neo-cons then the right wing libertarians and other forms of extreme right wing thought (tea party, alt-right).

When there is no pull from the left all the pull comes from the right and that pull has been in large part manufactured by wealth. The rise of neo-liberalism wasn’t an accident a lot of time and especially money was spent in promoting it by a whole plethora of wealth sponsored think tanks. These produced ‘reports’ and ‘studies’ that were simply disguised propaganda, which are then cited as ‘proof’ by the unwary or indoctrinated.

I’m sure we have all encounter some report from something like the Cato Institute (founded by Charles Koch) full of long words and complicated graphs that when actually examined turn out really to be a puffed up opinion piece whose conclusions were dubious at best and many times seem to contradict the information that was actually presented to give it a right wing spin

This dilution of public discourse has produced a political landscape in which rational thought comes second to belief and ‘facts’ are only those things that fit in with that belief.

In my view the lack of pull from the left has led to Trumpets and alt-righters which in a more balanced society would be seem as deranged and/or a bit of a joke but have instead become a serious problem.

In my view what the US needs to get back on track is a left wing.