Know your Enemy: Steve Bannon by Amy Goodman

Page 9 of 13 [ 207 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

Adamantium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1020
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,863
Location: Erehwon

05 Feb 2017, 12:07 pm

http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/art ... ationalist

Quote:
"Like [Andrew] Jackson's populism, we're going to build an entirely new political movement," he told The Hollywood Reporter. "It's everything related to jobs. The conservatives are going to go crazy. I'm the guy pushing a trillion-dollar infrastructure plan. With negative interest rates throughout the world, it's the greatest opportunity to rebuild everything. Shipyards, iron works, get them all jacked up. We're just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks. It will be as exciting as the 1930s, greater than the Reagan revolution – conservatives, plus populists, in an economic nationalist movement."

"If we deliver we'll get 60 percent of the white vote, and 40 percent of the black and Hispanic vote and we'll govern for 50 years," he said. "That's what the Democrats missed, they were talking to these people with companies with a $9 billion market cap employing nine people. It's not reality. They lost sight of what the world is about."


Throwing it up against the wall and seeing if it sticks doesn't seem like a solid approach to the massive macroeconomic engineering project Bannon is outlining in this interview.

How do you get American shipyards and iron works running again? How are they supposed to compete against low labor cost competitors overseas? Unless Bannon has some secret means of restraining the invisible hand, basic economic forces say this vision is unworkable.


_________________
Don't believe the gender note under my avatar. A WP bug means I can't fix it.


Adamantium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1020
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,863
Location: Erehwon

05 Feb 2017, 12:10 pm

adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I feel like I'm talking to Sean Spicer.


I'm not interested in your feelings, Bill.


That's the problem with you people on the right.


The problem with people on "the right" is that they don't care about your feelings, Bill? Egocentric much?

I wonder what those members of PPR who actually do consider themselves "right wing" think of your using "right" as an insult for those who aren't. Seems rather bigoted to me, but I'm sure you have an evasive justification as to why that's okay when it's you doing it.

In the meantime, here's an object lesson for those who sling unsupported accusations around like rice at a wedding:

BuzzFeed sued over its publication of uncorroborated Trump dossier

Gawker 2.0 anyone?


Impressive concern for freedom of speech there.


_________________
Don't believe the gender note under my avatar. A WP bug means I can't fix it.


adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

05 Feb 2017, 12:15 pm

Adamantium wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I feel like I'm talking to Sean Spicer.


I'm not interested in your feelings, Bill.


That's the problem with you people on the right.


The problem with people on "the right" is that they don't care about your feelings, Bill? Egocentric much?

I wonder what those members of PPR who actually do consider themselves "right wing" think of your using "right" as an insult for those who aren't. Seems rather bigoted to me, but I'm sure you have an evasive justification as to why that's okay when it's you doing it.

In the meantime, here's an object lesson for those who sling unsupported accusations around like rice at a wedding:

BuzzFeed sued over its publication of uncorroborated Trump dossier

Gawker 2.0 anyone?


Impressive concern for freedom of speech there.


On the contrary. I fully support Buzzfeed's right to publish libellous material. Likewise, I fully support the rights of the libelled to seek restitution.



adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

05 Feb 2017, 12:19 pm

beneficii wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I feel like I'm talking to Sean Spicer.


I'm not interested in your feelings, Bill.


That's the problem with you people on the right.


The problem with people on "the right" is that they don't care about your feelings, Bill? Egocentric much?

I wonder what those members of PPR who actually do consider themselves "right wing" think of your using "right" as an insult for those who aren't. Seems rather bigoted to me, but I'm sure you have an evasive justification as to why that's okay when it's you doing it.

In the meantime, here's an object lesson for those who sling unsupported accusations around like rice at a wedding:

BuzzFeed sued over its publication of uncorroborated Trump dossier

Gawker 2.0 anyone?


Hey, we have the right to our opinions, you know, or are you guys planning to strip us of them?


Where would be the fun in that?

But seriously, you do have your right to your opinions, and you have the right to try and persuade people they're the best ones. As do I.

Incidentally, who is "you guys"? I presume to speak only for myself. My opinions are not representative of anyone but me.



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,241

05 Feb 2017, 12:32 pm

adifferentname wrote:
beneficii wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I feel like I'm talking to Sean Spicer.


I'm not interested in your feelings, Bill.


That's the problem with you people on the right.


The problem with people on "the right" is that they don't care about your feelings, Bill? Egocentric much?

I wonder what those members of PPR who actually do consider themselves "right wing" think of your using "right" as an insult for those who aren't. Seems rather bigoted to me, but I'm sure you have an evasive justification as to why that's okay when it's you doing it.

In the meantime, here's an object lesson for those who sling unsupported accusations around like rice at a wedding:

BuzzFeed sued over its publication of uncorroborated Trump dossier

Gawker 2.0 anyone?


Hey, we have the right to our opinions, you know, or are you guys planning to strip us of them?


Where would be the fun in that?

But seriously, you do have your right to your opinions, and you have the right to try and persuade people they're the best ones. As do I.

Incidentally, who is "you guys"? I presume to speak only for myself. My opinions are not representative of anyone but me.


Well, kraftiekortie (or was that Kraichgauer, I get them confused) in the other thread said that everyone in America, no matter what they say, is a member of one of 2 factions, the Clinton faction (the left) and the Trump faction (the right). Since I voted for Clinton, I represent the left, and since you support (and probably voted for) Trump, you represent the right.

It's like we're each a captain at the head of a large army, both of which have met to do battle, and we're negotiating terms.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

05 Feb 2017, 12:54 pm

beneficii wrote:
Well, kraftiekortie (or was that Kraichgauer, I get them confused) in the other thread said that everyone in America, no matter what they say, is a member of one of 2 factions, the Clinton faction (the left) and the Trump faction (the right). Since I voted for Clinton, I represent the left, and since you support (and probably voted for) Trump, you represent the right.


A common misconception around these here parts is that arguing against a position means you hold the diametrically opposite opinion or that you automatically belong to the other team. I "support" Trump as far as agreeing with those policies and expressed opinions which I agree with, as well as appreciating his ability to bulldoze through the identity fluff. And no, I don't vote in US elections.

Quote:
It's like we're each a captain at the head of a large army, both of which have met to do battle, and we're negotiating terms.


I'm an independent third-party mediator whose impartiality is being strained by the fact that one side accepts that I'm independent whilst the other is throwing it's excrement around indiscriminately and telling me I must be one of "them" because I don't look like one of "us" and I'm covered in faeces.

My own terms are pretty simple. Stop flinging excrement so we can have a dialogue. If you could pass that along to the large army of sh*t-sprinklers standing behind you I'd be most grateful.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

05 Feb 2017, 1:05 pm

Adamantium wrote:
http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-11-18/steve-bannon-im-not-a-white-nationalist-im-an-economic-nationalist

Quote:
"Like [Andrew] Jackson's populism, we're going to build an entirely new political movement," he told The Hollywood Reporter. "It's everything related to jobs. The conservatives are going to go crazy. I'm the guy pushing a trillion-dollar infrastructure plan. With negative interest rates throughout the world, it's the greatest opportunity to rebuild everything. Shipyards, iron works, get them all jacked up. We're just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks. It will be as exciting as the 1930s, greater than the Reagan revolution – conservatives, plus populists, in an economic nationalist movement."

"If we deliver we'll get 60 percent of the white vote, and 40 percent of the black and Hispanic vote and we'll govern for 50 years," he said. "That's what the Democrats missed, they were talking to these people with companies with a $9 billion market cap employing nine people. It's not reality. They lost sight of what the world is about."


Throwing it up against the wall and seeing if it sticks doesn't seem like a solid approach to the massive macroeconomic engineering project Bannon is outlining in this interview.

How do you get American shipyards and iron works running again? How are they supposed to compete against low labor cost competitors overseas? Unless Bannon has some secret means of restraining the invisible hand, basic economic forces say this vision is unworkable.


Are we believers of the invisible hand of the free market now? Bannon wants to spend a lot on infrastructure and negative interest rates are supposed to spur investment, are these things you support? How do other countries keep their industries? It seems protectionist policies can work and are used by pretty much every country with manufacturing. I think education is a very important thing to reform, part of the reason Germany has such a strong economy is the tiered education system that doesn't push every student into college. We need to be teaching kids trades that will get them jobs out of high school not whatever hyphenated-studies and a 100k in debt while not becoming any more employable. If public schools cannot prepare children for work then they should be abolished as we know them, the kids they're forcing into college are woefully unprepared. I am lucky I didn't go to a big school right out of high school, I would of probably dropped out and never get out of default but if there were actual jobs available to me then I probably would of never went in the first place and certainly not of come back like I am currently doing.


My idea is to scrap the income tax and replace it with a low across the board tariff, what is the difference between a tariff and a tax? The only thing I can think of is that the is another government involved that can retaliate whereas domestic taxpayers would need a revolution to challenge it. I really don't care if things we don't need anyways get more expensive if it produces a robust economy with a strong middle class and an open ladder of opportunity, I do not support rampant consumerism but rather saving & investing. American consumerism might generate a lot of economic activity and wealth for some but it's very unequal with almost everything being gained at the top which is why Obama's false recovery always rang so hollow with middle Americans. Wall Street recovered and then some multiple times over but Main Street didn't, it's been abandoned and neglected for decades instead.

Bannon doesn't sound very racist here btw, if you changed his name and put a D behind his name people would love him. The reason people voted Trump into office is his populist policies more so than the traditional fiscal conservative slate of issues we've c



Adamantium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1020
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,863
Location: Erehwon

05 Feb 2017, 3:35 pm

Jacoby wrote:
Are we believers of the invisible hand of the free market now?

Always were. The basic supply and demand mechanisms are factual observations, not just political theories or wish fulfillment fantasies like Marxist schemes.

Jacoby wrote:
Bannon wants to spend a lot on infrastructure and negative interest rates are supposed to spur investment, are these things you support?

Yes. These are obviously both necessary and beneficial.

Jacoby wrote:
How do other countries keep their industries?

Exploitation of cheap labor, mostly. When macroeconomic forces work against them, they often don't.

Jacoby wrote:
It seems protectionist policies can work and are used by pretty much every country with manufacturing.

It's hard to tell, really.
Image

Jacoby wrote:
I think education is a very important thing to reform, part of the reason Germany has such a strong economy is the tiered education system that doesn't push every student into college.

Part of the reason Germany has such a strong economy is that they are selling manufactured goods to China, India and Russia, while taking advantage of low cost east European labor and low cost west European financing.

Jacoby wrote:
We need to be teaching kids trades that will get them jobs out of high school

Flipping burgers? Home health care aide? What trades are we talking about? If a company wants to build a fleet of bulk carriers or tankers, there are good reasons not to do it here, no matter what kind of social engineering Bannon wants to use.

Jacoby wrote:
Bannon doesn't sound very racist here btw, if you changed his name and put a D behind his name people would love him.
Here in New Jersey, he sounds pretty racist.

Jacoby wrote:
The reason people voted Trump into office is his populist policies more so than the traditional fiscal conservative slate of issues we've c
I agree. The people who voted Trump into office and Trump himself are not nearly as awful as some of the people he is surrounding himself with.

Bannon is neither a conservative nor a liberal but he is a right wing extremist who wants to tear down the current system and rebuild something more to his liking from the ruins. I think he will work for the economic interests of disenfranchised workers as long as that helps advance those goals.


_________________
Don't believe the gender note under my avatar. A WP bug means I can't fix it.


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,671
Location: Seattle

05 Feb 2017, 3:39 pm

adifferentname wrote:

I'm an independent third-party mediator whose impartiality is being strained by the fact that one side accepts that I'm independent whilst the other is throwing it's excrement around indiscriminately and telling me I must be one of "them" because I don't look like one of "us" and I'm covered in faeces.


That right there is probably the best "in a nutshell" description of why I tend to favor the right when it comes to political discussions, even when my own position might be more left.


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,241

05 Feb 2017, 4:04 pm

adifferentname wrote:
beneficii wrote:
Well, kraftiekortie (or was that Kraichgauer, I get them confused) in the other thread said that everyone in America, no matter what they say, is a member of one of 2 factions, the Clinton faction (the left) and the Trump faction (the right). Since I voted for Clinton, I represent the left, and since you support (and probably voted for) Trump, you represent the right.


A common misconception around these here parts is that arguing against a position means you hold the diametrically opposite opinion or that you automatically belong to the other team. I "support" Trump as far as agreeing with those policies and expressed opinions which I agree with, as well as appreciating his ability to bulldoze through the identity fluff. And no, I don't vote in US elections.

Quote:
It's like we're each a captain at the head of a large army, both of which have met to do battle, and we're negotiating terms.


I'm an independent third-party mediator whose impartiality is being strained by the fact that one side accepts that I'm independent whilst the other is throwing it's excrement around indiscriminately and telling me I must be one of "them" because I don't look like one of "us" and I'm covered in faeces.

My own terms are pretty simple. Stop flinging excrement so we can have a dialogue. If you could pass that along to the large army of sh*t-sprinklers standing behind you I'd be most grateful.


You say "identity fluff". So are you talking about my attempts to advocate for myself as a trans autistic person with mental health problems? Are you talking about the injustices that disproportionately target black and brown people, such as a cost-prohibitive bail system, the school-to-prison pipeline, and the failure to provide indigent defense? Are you talking about people asking others to cut something out or do something differentlt because it's offensive?

You could be talking about any one of these things. Apparently, you don't think much of whatever you're talking about.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

05 Feb 2017, 4:50 pm

beneficii wrote:
You say "identity fluff". So are you talking about my attempts to advocate for myself as a trans autistic person with mental health problems? Are you talking about the injustices that disproportionately target black and brown people, such as a cost-prohibitive bail system, the school-to-prison pipeline, and the failure to provide indigent defense? Are you talking about people asking others to cut something out or do something differentlt because it's offensive?


No, I'm talking about identity fluff. I'm all in favour of discussing specific issues where the goal is to identify and solve a problem.

Quote:
You could be talking about any one of these things. Apparently, you don't think much of whatever you're talking about.


And yet I'm not. I'm talking about the rejection of individualism, which is at the heart of liberalism, in favour of collectivism. I believe the best interests of the group are best served by protecting the rights and freedoms of the individual. Anything that impacts those rights and freedoms is anathema to individualism.

The important question is: Are you advocating for yourself as a "trans autistic person", or are you advocating for yourself as a person who happens to be trans and autistic?

Here are a couple of really good pieces on identity politics, from sources considered to sit at either end of the "left-right" divide:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-brown ... 38722.html

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... g-us-apart

And here's Sam Harris on the subject:



I highly recommend at least 'watching' the Sam Harris video. He rather succinctly summarises something I (and many, many others) have been arguing for years.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,671
Location: Seattle

05 Feb 2017, 5:01 pm

Adamantium wrote:
Flipping burgers? Home health care aide? What trades are we talking about?


There actually are huge shortages in a lot of skilled trades, from experienced cooks to tool and die makers to machinists, too many kids are pressured into college when trade school might have been the better option.


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

05 Feb 2017, 5:01 pm

Adamantium wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Are we believers of the invisible hand of the free market now?

Always were. The basic supply and demand mechanisms are factual observations, not just political theories or wish fulfillment fantasies like Marxist schemes.

Jacoby wrote:
Bannon wants to spend a lot on infrastructure and negative interest rates are supposed to spur investment, are these things you support?

Yes. These are obviously both necessary and beneficial.

Jacoby wrote:
How do other countries keep their industries?

Exploitation of cheap labor, mostly. When macroeconomic forces work against them, they often don't.

Jacoby wrote:
It seems protectionist policies can work and are used by pretty much every country with manufacturing.

It's hard to tell, really.
Image

Jacoby wrote:
I think education is a very important thing to reform, part of the reason Germany has such a strong economy is the tiered education system that doesn't push every student into college.

Part of the reason Germany has such a strong economy is that they are selling manufactured goods to China, India and Russia, while taking advantage of low cost east European labor and low cost west European financing.

Jacoby wrote:
We need to be teaching kids trades that will get them jobs out of high school

Flipping burgers? Home health care aide? What trades are we talking about? If a company wants to build a fleet of bulk carriers or tankers, there are good reasons not to do it here, no matter what kind of social engineering Bannon wants to use.

Jacoby wrote:
Bannon doesn't sound very racist here btw, if you changed his name and put a D behind his name people would love him.
Here in New Jersey, he sounds pretty racist.

Jacoby wrote:
The reason people voted Trump into office is his populist policies more so than the traditional fiscal conservative slate of issues we've c
I agree. The people who voted Trump into office and Trump himself are not nearly as awful as some of the people he is surrounding himself with.

Bannon is neither a conservative nor a liberal but he is a right wing extremist who wants to tear down the current system and rebuild something more to his liking from the ruins. I think he will work for the economic interests of disenfranchised workers as long as that helps advance those goals.


I still don't see any evidence that Bannon is personally a racist, can you be against open borders and be a nationalist and not be considered a racist by your definition?

Right wing social engineering is probably an apt description of what Steve Bannon wants to do but I don't see that as any different than what left wing people want to do and have done. Left wing extremists were at one time the barbarians at the gate and they've made their mark on our culture and society; they tore down Christianity, the nuclear family, and pretty much all traditions that were held dear to further their agenda over the course of the last 40-50 years. Bannon wants to go a different direction and undo the excesses of the left that have left most of society worse off, things have gotten better for a small minority of the population but it has gotten worse for the vast majority. Did society want these institutions torn down or was this a social change forced upon them? What is ultimately the difference other than the ideology on subscribes to?

I don't know why you so flippantly dismiss the idea of teaching trades, there is this shortage or machinists/welders/plumbers/etc and I think higher education is kind of joke since the two of the most common degrees history and psychology aren't worse the paper they're printed on as far as jobs or really contributing to society. Interesting topics for people interested in them but not needed. I don't think the federal government should be guaranteeing undischargeable loans for useless degrees, that is selling yourself into slavery. Flipping burgers is not a trade or a career altho when I graduated high school that and retail were the ONLY jobs in the city I grew up in and it seems like middle aged people are now making up more of the ranks of these lowly fast food jobs. You should be able to get a job out of high school, the pushing of college on everyone has hurt our society tremendously. Our public schools don't prepare our children for a job or for college, it's just indoctrination and institutionalization. For a lot of the people I grew up with it was just a place to get a hot meal.

As for your chart, it's interesting but amount of regulations doesn't mean they're effective or were written without ulterior motives. In the US we have regulatory capture, there exists a revolving door between these big corporate industries and the regulatory agencies charged with watching over them which more times than not amounts to regulations which only serve the purpose protecting profits and stifling competition. You do not believe that industry can return to the US so must we accept our fate as serfs? How can one build a dynamic economy built on service industries without increasing inequality? I don't think that's possible, something has to give and to truth may be that a few eggs might have to be broken to create the new reality we want for ourselves.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,671
Location: Seattle

05 Feb 2017, 5:05 pm

Just to flip the script a bit, what is the difference between Bannon saying that there are too many Asian CEOs, and progressive activists saying that there are too many white CEOs?


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


Adamantium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1020
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,863
Location: Erehwon

05 Feb 2017, 6:42 pm

Dox47 wrote:
Just to flip the script a bit, what is the difference between Bannon saying that there are too many Asian CEOs, and progressive activists saying that there are too many white CEOs?


Not much, unless what they are really saying is that there is systematic racism that is preventing qualified candidates from being considered as CEOs, something that would require documentation of actual practices and not just an observation about numbers.

People on the left sometimes make stupid claims. Some stupidly formulated attempts at egalitarianism even end up being racist. Nothing about that justifies Bannon's remark about Asians or rose tinted view of the racist immigration policies of the past.

But not every claim that whites are over-represented in management are racist. For example, activists helped to sue Texaco in the 1990s, because of discriminatory practices. One set of statistics that came up in that case was:
Quote:
African-Americans make up some 12 percent of the United States population, but of the 873 executives at Texaco who make more than $106,000 annually, only 6 -- or 0.7 percent -- are black. And while the number of executives in the highest pay grade has grown 44 percent over the last four years, to 49, not a single black person has held such a job.

Does it sound like "too many whites?"
Maybe a little additional context helps:
Quote:
The Texaco executives' slurs caught on tape -- like ''black jelly beans'' and ''niggers'' -- go to the heart of that challenge. Were these the words of renegade executives -- including the former treasurer -- who had abandoned the company's self-proclaimed values? Or was this the unvarnished voice of Texaco's true corporate culture finally being heard?

''The tapes really do raise some profound questions about the integrity of Texaco's commitment to equal opportunity,'' said Wade Henderson, the executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, an umbrella group of 180 organizations. ''With the litigation and the tapes, serious questions emerge about whether this is an isolated incident or something far deeper.''


http://www.nytimes.com/1996/11/10/busin ... exaco.html

If you want to claim that Bannon has some non-racist reason for saying there are too many Asians, I would love to see that explained, as long as it isn't just the he doesn't dislike them for being Asian but for having "Asian culture" or not having "American cultural values" -- unless you are prepared to document those claims about culture with some evidence--the kind of evidence that progressive activists had to supply to make their case against Texaco.

When people like Bannon and Sessions chat about the wonderful effect of the Immigration act of 1924, they are talking about the height of Jim Crow and the days (1928) when the Klan marched in numbers on Pennsylvania Avenue.
Image

Is there some possibility that Bannon isn't racist but is just saying things which sound racist in order to get what he wants? Sure, I could believe he is that Machiavellian an operator. But until I see solid evidence that he isn't what he looks like, I will behave as if he is exactly that.

I am also not going to pay much attention to the arguments that I have to prove a court case against him, or else ignore my own instincts about what he means by this talk of too many Asians and how we need a pause like the good old days.


_________________
Don't believe the gender note under my avatar. A WP bug means I can't fix it.


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

05 Feb 2017, 9:02 pm

Was he talking about Asian and Indian Americans or foreign CEOs from Asia and India? If it's American citizens he is referring to then I would agree that it might be racist, you haven't posted the context tho so I don't know. There is nothing inherently racist about thinking there should be more American CEOs however in my opinion, do you think Steve Bannon is saying he wants to see more Russian or German CEOs versus Asian or Indian or is he just a nationalist? Very distinct difference! Do you not agree? You don't answer any of the questions about what you consider racist or not racist.