Democrats Try To Find Economic Message To Use Against Trump

Post Reply New Topic

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/24/us/politics/democrats-economic-message-trump-2018-better-deal.html

Same sh!t, different day. It doesn't matter which party is spreading the sh!t, it stinks, and we have the same damn tired old solutions that have never worked. I say it's time the U. S. Became better aligned with the U.K. And the Royals, since we the people are too f!cking stupid nowadays to sh!t properly, let alone govern ourselves.

Probably much closer to the truth than many would want to admit.

Just say he'll make the country broke just as predicted in The Simpson's.

Both of you need to stop being so elitist.

"We the people are too f!cking stupid nowadays to sh!t properly, let alone govern ourselves."

How do you know? We've never gotten a chance to govern ourselves, since the elites have corrupted our democracy.

Going back to monarchy would be a disaster. Monarchs are unaccountable, since they cannot be voted out. All monarchs are scum by definition.

Monarchs, in general, only care about themselves because there is no system in place to punish them for their selfish behavior.

Modern capitalist "democracy" is an illusion. It's actually a plutocracy. The plutocrats tell us that our country is fully democratic so that we blame the average American for the problems with the US government. This makes people think "Rich people should run the world, since they are just plain better than everyone else."

Anyways, I read that article. This is the quote that really jumped out at me. I've bolded the key words.

"The event was ostensibly hosted by Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, a centrist, business-friendly Democrat who reached the governor’s mansion in 2002 in part by finding unlikely success with the kinds of rural voters who have since gravitated toward Mr. Trump."



Furthermore, this article does not mention a lot of key things. Corporate corruption is never mentioned. Lobbying is never mentioned. Bernie Sanders is never mentioned. The military-industrial complex is never mentioned.

This is a SCAM. Which billionaire is funding these charlatans?

"Howdy fellow peasants! Just a friendly reminder that the Democratic Party will actually care about the working people this time."

Most people in the working class are likely going to see this whole thing as insincere. Apart from the whole thing about monopolies, this article was pure wind. It was also boring and painful to read.

Here's an idea: If you want to get the working class on your side, you should rely on concrete solutions and not postmodern feelings. Speak out against corporate power. Say it like you mean it. Show some goddamn courage.

Trump is a charlatan who offers "solutions" that won't work ... but at least he offers "solutions". He acknowledges problems that mainstream Democrats won't address ... even if his proposed solutions are ludicrous.

The working people are tired of vague claptrap. They want something concrete. That's why so many of them are enthusiastic about Trump's wall.

Trump's wall would be real thing in the real world ... if it actually existed. It wouldn't just be "in our hearts". It wouldn't work, but the working people are desperate for tangible changes that they can see with their own eyes.

1. Me? An elitist? That's really rich!

2. Where have you been the past 40 years? The average American citizen has the intelligence of a flea. Actually the flea is a lot smarter. There's plenty of blame to go around why Americans are so f!cking stupid, from the educational system to modern society and its mores.

3. Personally, I've been burned by both parties platforms, as well as conservative and liberal political philosophies. I haven't voted in the last 40 years because every damn politician I've heard or read about has been nothing more than a bullsh!t artist, with maybe 4 exceptions.

4. I'd rather have a constitutional monarchy, a la the U.K. The Royals, as far as I can see, are politically impotent. They have NO political power. In a case like that, I could care less about the Royals, as they are only there for show.

Yes, I'd rather live in a nanny state, as certain users (if you can call them that) here on WP have accused me in the past. I've paid my dues since I've been 14, and the only thing I have to show for it is nothing. I'm just flat out tired of being screwed, but can't say anything it because losing my temper ends up with me being threatened with psychiatric meds and a frontal lobotomy. As a master of fact, I'd welcome the lobotomy. At least I'd no longer have any emotions.

In short, I'm done! Stick a fork in me, for all I care.

It's not an American phenomena, it's a human one. The stupidity of the electoral masses was noted by Plato back when democracy was less than 100 years old. There's a reason Greek democracy only lasted ~250 years, and every democracy today has been a democracy for less than that amount of time. Democracies tend to promote the worst of humanity, avarice and no accountability are what the people want for themselves after all.

Plato was an arrogant snotball who was out of touch with reality. The guy spent his whole life living in a bubble and sneering at everyone outside of it. The guy was a creep.



What's the alternative to democracy?

The alternative to democracy is authoritarianism. If you are against democracy, you are supporting a system where bad leaders can only be removed through violence.

In a democracy, we don't need to sharpen our pitchforks whenever our leaders turn against us.

That's an invective attack, not really a point of contention with what he had to say. Even your hero Marx knew the masses were ignorant dupes when he claimed 'religion is the opiate of the masses.'





Social species have existed for 300 million years minimum and that's how they've always dealt with poor leadership. Why change something that isn't broken? I guarantee you the leadership we have today wouldn't be so nonchalant about sticking the razor-edged dildo up the ass of the public if they knew the consequences were the guillotine. Furthermore, authoritarianism generally comes to power after a democracy fails; Mugabe in Zimbabwe, the Kmer Rouge in Cambodia, Chavez in Venezuela, Napoleon in France, and Hitler in Germany are all examples.

Also of note, there are many more options than either authoritarianism or democracy. There's absolute monarchy, oligarchy, theocracy, etc., not to mention more flavors of 'democracy' than Baskin Robbins. Furthermore, not every monarch is bad, or even bad for the people: Augustus Caesar, Emperor Qianlong, and Queen Elizabeth were more capable leaders and better for the average citizens of their realms than anything democracy is producing these days.

Marx did say that religion was "the opiate of the masses" ... but you need to put this quote into its proper context.

Marx said that because opium is a painkiller. Marx basically said that people adopt religion because they live hard lives. Thus, religion will continue to exist as long as people live hard lives. Religion will always exist until we make the world a better place.

"Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."
- Karl Marx



Do you want to place your life in danger whenever a bad leader is in charge?

You tell me.

We don't want to create a world in which violence in necessary. Isn't that just common sense?



The modern West isn't truly democratic.

That's why they do nasty things.



So?

Democracy doesn't have to fail. We can make it work. The internet is good for democracy. The internet will create more democracy all over the world.

By the way, Hitler would not have come into power if it weren't for the Treaty of Versailles. Democracy is often destroyed by outside forces.

Salvador Allende was democratically elected by the people of Chile. The US military replaced him with Pinochet.

What if democratic socialism succeeded in America? The American military would be under popular control. They would never create a dictatorship ever again. The American masses never want to create dictatorships. The corporate overlords always do that.



Absolute monarchy, theocracy and oligarchy are all types of authoritarianism.

There are many kinds of "democracy" ... but only one type of democracy - social democracy - is actually democratic.



HAHAHAHAHA

Augustus? He was a brutal imperialist.

I know what you are saying. You are referring to Pax Romana.

I've got news for you. Pax Romana was not a period of peace. Imperialist exploitation continued during that period. The period was just more peaceful than the previous period ... which isn't saying much.

Furthermore, what if Augustus suddenly had a bad day and turned nasty? Nobody would have been able to stop him.

Democracy created Bernie Sanders. He's way better than Augustus. Trump and Clinton were both created by unaccountable corporate powers. In other words, neither of them are products of democracy.

I totally get why people still admire the Roman Empire to this day. Ancient Roman propaganda was so effective that people are still fooled by it 2000 years later.

Thus, people still think that the Roman emperors were wise. People still think that the Celts practiced human sacrifice. People still think that the people of old Germany were savage "barbarians". The lies just won't die.

All I'm going to say is you really need to read up on Augustus Ceasar, yes he offed his political rivals, that's the way things were in Rome, but the everyday average people you claim you're representing with your argument did very well under both him and Julius. For forty years Rome suffered from a series of grain shortages and food supply issues that nearly crippled their empire, not to mention starved out a large portion of their citizens. These grain shortages were created by rival political factions in Rome playing politics with the food supply, the first two Caesars put an end to that. When people are starving they don't care what form of government they're under, just that it provides food, something the democratic institutions of Rome were not providing at the time, and yes they were democratic at that point the plebes got representation about 100 years beforehand.

On a side note, you can't claim to be a populist and not support the first two Caesars, Julius came to power not just by beating Pompey but also because he had the will of the people behind him, i.e. populism, and Augustus ruled the same. Your arguments tend to neglect the issue of power and how it operates, which makes them a bit silly, since the entire game of politics is based around power.