Republicans: continued

[Brian Peacock]

We can bogeyman anyone and everyone if we like. If we don't do what the Saudi's say they won't buy our cluster bombs. If we don't do what the Japanese say they won't make their cars in our country. if we don't do what the Chinese say they'll sell all their property and call in their loans. In globalised capitalised markets everyone has leverage on everyone else, but the problem here is thinking of the nation state as a kind of closed economic structure. That economic model went out the window at the end of the 70s. Capital does what Capital does. It develops markets, which are systems of exploitation where the costs of production are keep deliberately low and the sale price deliberately high and the Capitalists take the bit in the middle for themselves. The Russian and Chinese Capitalists troll Capitalism by doing it harder and more efficiently than the competition, and they can do this because they have the backing of the state and a money-printing central bank and because they don't have the bonds of fealty and responsibility that post-war Western economies developed specifically to counter the Red Menace. The Russians and Chinese were late to the party, and now they personify the kind of totalitarian end game all good Capitalists dream of.

[Hermit]

Sure, but don't ask my government for a realistic assesment of the threat, or reasonable solutions, and especially not for self-reflection or trying something new.

Since when do the denizens of the US rely on its government for information on whatever threat there is, or are idiotic enough to agree with whatever the government says needs to be done about it? You are making your compatriots seem as moronic as some detractors make them out to be.

You're being silly. We all rely on them.

Talk about hubris! Hermit, an intelligence service to be reckoned with!

I won't pretend to be speaking on behalf of "we all", but I and most of the people I know tend to listen to what government figures, spooks and their mouthpieces with great dollops of scepticism and cynicism. We rely on information disseminated researchers, reporters, whistleblowers and such instead. They tend to dig out the sort of stuff governments and their minions don't want us to know about, and there is plenty of it seeping out at a steady rate.

My earliest encounter of that is when we found out the truth about the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which was used to justify putting American soldiers' boots on the ground in South Vietnam. A a couple of years later our then Prime Minister, Harold "All the way with LBJ" Holt, whose other main claim to fame was to disappear, presumed drowned, while swimming off Cheviot Beach late one stormy summer morning claimed the US President asked him for help fighting the onslaught of the communist dominoes by sending Australian troops to South Vietnam. This turned out not to be the case. Holt volunteered such assistance unbidden.

Subsequently there were hundreds more instances I am aware of, where the government told lies rather than spread information, and which were revealed to be lies. Enough of them to convince anyone with two brain cells to rub together that 1) "government information" cannot be relied on and 2) the truth will eventually surface via non-government agents. But yeah, this may be not the case for people you refer to as "we all".

[pErvinalia]

... and 2) the truth will eventually surface via non-government agentsGalaxian.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch ...

'Memo reveals a House Republican strategy on shootings: downplay white nationalism, blame left'

Congressional Republicans recently circulated talking points on gun violence that falsely described the El Paso massacre and other mass shootings as “violence from the left.”

A document obtained by the Tampa Bay Times and sent by House Republicans provides a framework for how to respond to anticipated questions like, “Why won’t you pass legislation to close the ‘gun show loophole’ in federal law?” and “Why shouldn’t we ban high-capacity magazines?" The answers are boilerplate Republican arguments against tougher gun restrictions.

But it also included this question: “Do you believe white nationalism is driving more mass shootings recently?” The suggested response is to steer the conversation away from white nationalism to an argument that implies both sides are to blame.

“White nationalism and racism are pure evil and cannot be tolerated in any form," the document said. “We also can’t excuse violence from the left such as the El Paso shooter, the recent Colorado shooters, the Congressional baseball shooter, Congresswoman Giffords’ shooter and Antifa."

[Sean Hayden]

Sure, but don't ask my government for a realistic assesment of the threat, or reasonable solutions, and especially not for self-reflection or trying something new.

Since when do the denizens of the US rely on its government for information on whatever threat there is, or are idiotic enough to agree with whatever the government says needs to be done about it? You are making your compatriots seem as moronic as some detractors make them out to be.

You're being silly. We all rely on them.

Talk about hubris! Hermit, an intelligence service to be reckoned with!

I won't pretend to be speaking on behalf of "we all", but I and most of the people I know tend to listen to what government figures, spooks and their mouthpieces with great dollops of scepticism and cynicism. We rely on information disseminated researchers, reporters, whistleblowers and such instead. They tend to dig out the sort of stuff governments and their minions don't want us to know about, and there is plenty of it seeping out at a steady rate.

My earliest encounter of that is when we found out the truth about the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which was used to justify putting American soldiers' boots on the ground in South Vietnam. A a couple of years later our then Prime Minister, Harold "All the way with LBJ" Holt, whose other main claim to fame was to disappear, presumed drowned, while swimming off Cheviot Beach late one stormy summer morning claimed the US President asked him for help fighting the onslaught of the communist dominoes by sending Australian troops to South Vietnam. This turned out not to be the case. Holt volunteered such assistance unbidden.

Subsequently there were hundreds more instances I am aware of, where the government told lies rather than spread information, and which were revealed to be lies. Enough of them to convince anyone with two brain cells to rub together that 1) "government information" cannot be relied on and 2) the truth will eventually surface via non-government agents. But yeah, this may be not the case for people you refer to as "we all".

Yep, we are all also more or less skeptical of the government. US citizens especially so. Except when it comes to war, then at least half of us are slow. What that has to do with our reliance on government is not obvious to me. Even your own example shows that we didn't learn of the deception until after the escalation had happened. It wouldn't be confirmed definitively until much later.

It is almost as though we rely on our governments to do the right thing, and boy wouldn't it be nice if there was some accountability there to help keep them in check?

[Tero]

The government tried to arrest me once for stealing a purse. The lady in the bowling alley lost her purse. She looked out the door, called 911 on the only car leaving the bowling alley, us. The cops chased us down and handcuffed me. A nice lady was called to take our kids. At this point the purse lady called the cops again. "I found the purse, I left it in the ladies room."

[Sean Hayden]

The stakes are a bit higher here Tero.

[Tero]

If they had put me in jail for even an hour, I would be a libertarian now!

[Sean Hayden]

With your own intelligence agency tirelessly thwarting government deception everywhere no doubt!

[Tero]

Hey, guys have to have hobbies:
https://karireport.blogspot.com/2013/12 ... e.html?m=1

[Sean Hayden]

That's been one of your best for awhile now, too funny.

[Hermit]

Sure, but don't ask my government for a realistic assesment of the threat, or reasonable solutions, and especially not for self-reflection or trying something new.

Since when do the denizens of the US rely on its government for information on whatever threat there is, or are idiotic enough to agree with whatever the government says needs to be done about it? You are making your compatriots seem as moronic as some detractors make them out to be.

You're being silly. We all rely on them.

Talk about hubris! Hermit, an intelligence service to be reckoned with!

I won't pretend to be speaking on behalf of "we all", but I and most of the people I know tend to listen to what government figures, spooks and their mouthpieces with great dollops of scepticism and cynicism. We rely on information disseminated researchers, reporters, whistleblowers and such instead. They tend to dig out the sort of stuff governments and their minions don't want us to know about, and there is plenty of it seeping out at a steady rate.

My earliest encounter of that is when we found out the truth about the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which was used to justify putting American soldiers' boots on the ground in South Vietnam. A a couple of years later our then Prime Minister, Harold "All the way with LBJ" Holt, whose other main claim to fame was to disappear, presumed drowned, while swimming off Cheviot Beach late one stormy summer morning claimed the US President asked him for help fighting the onslaught of the communist dominoes by sending Australian troops to South Vietnam. This turned out not to be the case. Holt volunteered such assistance unbidden.

Subsequently there were hundreds more instances I am aware of, where the government told lies rather than spread information, and which were revealed to be lies. Enough of them to convince anyone with two brain cells to rub together that 1) "government information" cannot be relied on and 2) the truth will eventually surface via non-government agents. But yeah, this may be not the case for people you refer to as "we all".

Yep, we are all also more or less skeptical of the government. US citizens especially so. Except when it comes to war, then at least half of us are slow. What that has to do with our reliance on government is not obvious to me. Even your own example shows that we didn't learn of the deception until after the escalation had happened. It wouldn't be confirmed definitively until much later.

It is almost as though we rely on our governments to do the right thing, and boy wouldn't it be nice if there was some accountability there to help keep them in check?

No, we do not rely on our governments to do the right thing. We can rely on governments to exploit our xenophobic tendencies that are so easily roused from their slumber. Right is on our side. We shall win, for God is with us. Home by Christmas. That sort of stuff. Hermann Göring explained it all so eloquently to his captors in 1945:

• Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

Not talking about nations - be they one's own or those of others - behaving in Machiavellian ways makes no difference. I will certainly keep assuming that that is what governments do.

[Sean Hayden]

You're free to give examples of the effectiveness of your skepticism. Until then I'll regard your claims to be able to see through the deception as largely irrelevant to the problem of a lack of accountability for those doing all the lying.

[Tero]

Party analysis with Trump the outsider taking over a do nothing bunch:
“ American Carnage isn’t just another drop in the deluge of Trump books; in fact, it isn’t really a Trump book at all. Instead it’s a fascinating look at a Republican Party that initially scoffed at the incursion of a philandering reality-TV star with zero political experience and now readily accommodates him. [Alberta] brings more than a decade of reporting and a real understanding of the conservative movement to American Carnage.” ( New York Times Book Review)
https://www.amazon.com/American-Carnage ... rta&sr=8-1

[pErvinalia]

If they had put me in jail for even an hour, I would be a libertarian now!