The Biden Administration and All Things Politics

[Bucknutz]

For a crowd that claims to not care what others think about them, you sure seem sensitive.

What crowd are you referring to?

There are conservatives on here who debate things fine with others like me.

Which ones? I don’t see many left on this forum. No one really debates you because post and run and never respond except for calling people names and then blocking. They do debate others on the left, because they respond.

It seems like Trumpers really a struggle because they have no issues to debate, just blind defense of and for their Orange god king, Trump. Just as I said in the previous post, you’re making my point for me. Trumpers can’t debate issues, only defend and excuse the weak boy who’s angry that his parents never loved him. Sad.

They can debate issues and they have. Roe v Wade, Immigration, School choice, CRT, health care, Filibuster, Voting requirements, Inflation, etc… there is a ton to debate about. You just choose to call them names and not really debate.

I know you probably hoped to end this debate since you sensed you were losing by reaching out to attack me personally. While I’m flattered that you compare my posting to a message board to the former president, it’s just not even close to the same.

Didn’t attack you personally, just about your forum rhetoric. Yet you didn’t respond to any of it.

Distraction aka whataboutism is a common tactic by Trumpers. So I’ll help ya with that off-ramp, If want to debate further the inflammatory rhetoric in politics, we can continue.

Sure but you actually have to respond, rather than post and run.

If we’re going to drown in pissing matches like these, you can an back onto the block list.

You block everyone that pushes back on you. No difference to me.

Lastly, I’ll always stand by Trumpers being ignorant, stupid, or lacking in character. After everything he’s done and said over the past 6 years, one can only still support that man either by being woefully ignorant, incredibly stupid, or severely lacking in character. If you find that inflammatory then perhaps some introspection is necessary? *notice I said Trumpers and not conservatives.

Introspection for you? Tell me, who do you consider conservatives? Anti-Trump republicans? Of all the 80+ million people who voted for Trump, which ones are independent, conservative and then Trumpers?

This is an important distinction that will probably go over your head.

Is that a personal shot? Classy.

 

[Deleted member 365]

What crowd are you referring to?


Which ones? I don’t see many left on this forum. No one really debates you because post and run and never respond except for calling people names and then blocking. They do debate others on the left, because they respond.


They can debate issues and they have. Roe v Wade, Immigration, School choice, CRT, health care, Filibuster, Voting requirements, Inflation, etc… there is a ton to debate about. You just choose to call them names and not really debate.


Didn’t attack you personally, just about your forum rhetoric. Yet you didn’t respond to any of it.

Sure but you actually have to respond, rather than post and run.


You block everyone that pushes back on you. No difference to me.


Introspection for you? Tell me, who do you consider conservatives? Anti-Trump republicans? Of all the 80+ million people who voted for Trump, which ones are independent, conservative and then Trumpers?


Is that a personal shot? Classy.

I have never blocked anyone for disagreeing with me. I only block posters who I don’t believe add anything to the discussion other than trolling.

There are plenty of conservatives on this board. LG, Colton, fishon, and GF have traditionally held conservative views. None of them are what I’d call liberal. I don’t think any are registered as “Democrat.” But you’re right, there’s a diminishing number of conservatives who also identify as Trump supporters. Again, some introspection might be necessary.

 

[Deleted member 365]

This is an important read.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/17/us/american-democracy-threats.html

It’s a self perpetuating problem. On one hand, American democracy struggles to solve real problems for the majority of the population, which feeds inflammatory rhetoric and authoritarianism. However, the inflammatory rhetoric really fuels the base and makes it even harder for American democracy to function. The structure of the American government gives way too much weight to the minority, which creates even more frustration at the system failing to govern. Which just perpetually provides fertile group for partisans and populists.

All while partisan media exploits these frustrations for clicks.

 

[Red]

Interesting stuff here. Shawn Rosenberg, Professor of Political Science and Psychological Science, UC Irvine:

Democracy Devouring Itself: The Rise of the Incompetent Citizen and the Appeal of Right Wing Populism

Author(s): Rosenberg, Shawn | Editor(s): Hur, D; Sabucedo, Jose-Manuel | Abstract: For 60 years after the end of World War II, democratic governance has flourished and expanded its reach. Now it appears this process has stalled and is even reversing in many of the established democracies of...

escholarship.org

Abstract

For 60 years after the end of World War II, democratic governance has flourished and expanded its reach. Now it appears this process has stalled and is even reversing in many of the established democracies of Europe and North America. Momentum now appears to be with right wing populist alternatives to democratic governance. In attempting to make sense of these developments, I argue that they are not the result of fluctuating circumstances or a momentary retreat in the progress toward ever greater democratization. Adopting a broadly political psychological perspective, I instead suggest they reflect a structural weakness inherent in democratic governance, one that makes democracies always susceptible to the siren call of right wing populism. I will further argue that as practices in countries such as the United States become increasingly democratic, this structural weakness is more clearly exposed and consequential. In the process, the vulnerability of democratic governance to right wing populist alternatives becomes greater. Hence the conclusion that democracy is likely to devour itself.
————————————-

It’s a long paper. If one wants a taste of Rosenberg’s thoughts, this interview in Salon is highly recommended. Since it is a left leaning outlet, I’m including a link to Rosenberg’s academic profile. Because it’s his thoughts that are of interest, and I found him to be highly insightful, IMHO….

Scholar who saw all this coming: Americans "do not really understand liberal democracy" - Salon.com

Shawn Rosenberg predicted the "inexorable decline" of democracy in 2019. But he still thinks it's not too late

www.salon.com

“I argued that liberal democratic politics is complicated, and populist alternatives offer a vision that is much simpler. All that populism demands is a simple story of cause and effect. All one needs to do is act: Authoritarian power is the solution.

This populist vision also has a very simple story about society and identity. In this story, social groups are natural. We think of them categorically. They don't have lots of overlap. In-groups and out-groups are distinct. Evaluative judgments are binary, a simple black-and-white story. There is good and bad. It's not a judgment in the sense of a subjective judgment. This way of thinking offers simple understandings of what is objectively true and what is not true, and is therefore deemed to be less valuable

Populist ways of thinking about the world are ultimately just a lot simpler than the complexities of thinking about action as having multiple causes and consequences, thinking about groups being inherently diverse and overlapping, and thinking of judgment as a subjective, tentative thing. All of that is way too complicated for populists. Most people, not all, naturally incline toward that simpler vision if it is offered to them.

We tend to think about groups in negative terms, and when you're making evaluative judgments about things, they tend to be dualistic, black-and-white and unequivocal. That type of populist thinking was marginalized for a long time. What were once unacceptable ways of talking about politics are now part of the global discourse, and people are attracted to them. Many people do not really understand what liberal democracy is and why it is important, so they ultimately end up choosing populist alternatives”

UC Irvine - Faculty Profile System - Shawn W. Rosenberg

 

[Deleted member 365]

Interesting stuff here. Shawn Rosenberg, Professor of Political Science and Psychological Science, UC Irvine:

Democracy Devouring Itself: The Rise of the Incompetent Citizen and the Appeal of Right Wing Populism

Author(s): Rosenberg, Shawn | Editor(s): Hur, D; Sabucedo, Jose-Manuel | Abstract: For 60 years after the end of World War II, democratic governance has flourished and expanded its reach. Now it appears this process has stalled and is even reversing in many of the established democracies of...

escholarship.org

Abstract

For 60 years after the end of World War II, democratic governance has flourished and expanded its reach. Now it appears this process has stalled and is even reversing in many of the established democracies of Europe and North America. Momentum now appears to be with right wing populist alternatives to democratic governance. In attempting to make sense of these developments, I argue that they are not the result of fluctuating circumstances or a momentary retreat in the progress toward ever greater democratization. Adopting a broadly political psychological perspective, I instead suggest they reflect a structural weakness inherent in democratic governance, one that makes democracies always susceptible to the siren call of right wing populism. I will further argue that as practices in countries such as the United States become increasingly democratic, this structural weakness is more clearly exposed and consequential. In the process, the vulnerability of democratic governance to right wing populist alternatives becomes greater. Hence the conclusion that democracy is likely to devour itself.
————————————-

It’s a long paper. If one wants a taste of Rosenberg’s thoughts, this interview in Salon is highly recommended. Since it is a left leaning outlet, I’m including a link to Rosenberg’s academic profile. Because it’s his thoughts that are of interest, and I found him to be highly insightful, IMHO….

Scholar who saw all this coming: Americans "do not really understand liberal democracy" - Salon.com

Shawn Rosenberg predicted the "inexorable decline" of democracy in 2019. But he still thinks it's not too late

www.salon.com

“I argued that liberal democratic politics is complicated, and populist alternatives offer a vision that is much simpler. All that populism demands is a simple story of cause and effect. All one needs to do is act: Authoritarian power is the solution.

This populist vision also has a very simple story about society and identity. In this story, social groups are natural. We think of them categorically. They don't have lots of overlap. In-groups and out-groups are distinct. Evaluative judgments are binary, a simple black-and-white story. There is good and bad. It's not a judgment in the sense of a subjective judgment. This way of thinking offers simple understandings of what is objectively true and what is not true, and is therefore deemed to be less valuable

Populist ways of thinking about the world are ultimately just a lot simpler than the complexities of thinking about action as having multiple causes and consequences, thinking about groups being inherently diverse and overlapping, and thinking of judgment as a subjective, tentative thing. All of that is way too complicated for populists. Most people, not all, naturally incline toward that simpler vision if it is offered to them.

We tend to think about groups in negative terms, and when you're making evaluative judgments about things, they tend to be dualistic, black-and-white and unequivocal. That type of populist thinking was marginalized for a long time. What were once unacceptable ways of talking about politics are now part of the global discourse, and people are attracted to them. Many people do not really understand what liberal democracy is and why it is important, so they ultimately end up choosing populist alternatives”

UC Irvine - Faculty Profile System - Shawn W. Rosenberg

I’m going to read this when I have more time. Earlier this week I was rereading one of my favorite texts, “Defying Hitler” by Sebastian Haffner. Are you familiar with his work? This was written right before he fled to the UK as WWII began. This part really stood out to me. What do you think? Chapter 4:

Unfortunately, much of what ails western democracies is that we’ve had a few generations now that haven’t known any real pain or suffering. Ukrainians are struggling for their lives while Americans whine about wearing cloth masks during a pandemic, paying a few dollars more in gas, and go ballistic if a flight attendant asks them to bring their seat and tray to the upright position. Western Europeans whine about similar things. So much prosperity and ease has made life too boring for many.

That’s why so many are looking for releases from their boring prosperous lives through election fraud and Qanon conspiracies, absurd “holy wars” against the LGBT community and black people, and by electing profane and vulgar strong men for entertainment.

 

[Deleted member 365]

Imagine how many children could’ve been brought out of poverty, working mothers financial aid, and student debt could’ve been forgiven had these monies been spent to help people instead of making a political stunt to go on Fox News.


View: https://twitter.com/crampell/status/1571593666136776704?s=46&t=PNmxYBOyxC0k3p3hBeLtOg

 

[Red]

What do you think?

Consider this paragraph by Rosenberg, from the Salon essay:

“Many people do not really understand what liberal democracy is and why it is important, so they ultimately end up choosing populist alternatives. Ultimately, that outcome is an ironic result of the greater openness of the public sphere and the democratic arena of ideas, where more people are empowered to make choices on their own. The gatekeepers have lost control.”
——————-
Many people will reject that take because they will see it as promoting elitists(the gatekeepers). Yet, consider was has replaced human reason in a large segment of the American people. Consider the widespread rejection of authority(gatekeepers) in so many areas of human knowledge. People dismiss science, they dismiss accurate history, they reject intellectuals. They dismiss facts and embrace conspiracy theories.

Now, consider his thought further:

“Some of my peers rebutted my thesis. They said I was arguing that people are genetically incapable of democracy, I'm not saying that. My argument is that the educational system, in combination with the demands placed on citizens by the political system in Western democracies, have failed to educate the public to understand complex questions of society and politics.

Many people do not understand the importance of the rule of law or why the division of powers in government matters or why open and respectful debate is so important to a healthy democracy and society.”
——————-
What could possibly be the solution short of education? IMHO, not only should Civics be elevated to the core of the core of our education, beginning in grammar school, but that education has to include teaching people how to recognize cynical opportunists trying to use human ignorance to advance agendas, by playing on human fear and anger.

It absolutely has to include education in how to recognize demagogues, right wing populists, and the severe limitations, and dangers, of simplistic emotive-based populist arguments.

But, such an education is long term, does not happen overnight, and is needed at a time when conspiracism, not rational thought, is becoming the default thinking mode, and when anti-elitism, anti-intellectualism is cresting like never before in our history. As Issac Asimov observed:

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”

Sadly, it just seems to me that Rosenberg is correct in pointing out authoritarian populism is something hard to avoid. We have had our spells of such in our history, just nothing like Trumpism in its present form. And with Trump now far more openly embracing QAnon, my response is WOW, are we ever in the deepest **** imaginable where irrational nonsense overcoming rationality is concerned. I understand many Americans despise elitism now, despise the idea of establishment “gatekeepers”, but good lord, where are we heading otherwise ?! Rosenberg may be right. A popular democracy like ours, where politicians vie for our votes and allegiance, will lead to simplistic and alluring populism without a rigorous education in civics from an early age.

We are in deep, deep trouble. That’s what I think….

 

[Red]

What could possibly be the solution short of education?

To this I want to add: “Know thyself”. Not only must people be educated in the dangers and oversimplifications of emotive-based populism, but they must be educated in what makes people tick. What makes themselves tick. Some fundamentals of human psychology must be a part of that education in civics, and education in responsible citizenship.

If fears and anxieties in the face of the modern world are a part of their lives, then they need to understand how that can lead to irrational responses on their part. People need to understand themselves better. It’s not a case of ignoring or dismissing fear, anxiety, and anger. It’s a case of helping those people understand what can happen when they don’t know themselves, and instead reach for simplistic populists as a solution for those anxieties.

And to be careful what you wish for when authoritarian rule appeals. Many Americans are attracted to a Strongman type. Such as Trump. It’s part and parcel of right wing populism. Yet Trump has made it clear to those whose sight and self-knowledge is not occluded, that he is here for power alone. He is taking advantage of the allure of populism for self aggrandizement. A population poorly educated in civics and human psychology/motivations, makes this outcome possible in a popular based democracy.

A dedicated goal of education, in both civics, and a much clearer understanding of the underlying dynamics of human response to societal stress is needed. But, if we believe man is not a rational animal, we acknowledge what a supremely difficult goal this really is. It is one of the most formidable challenges facing our society. What a daunting task.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

be careful what you wish for when authoritarian rule appeals.

Red, you just posted an appeal to authoritarian rule. You are the one authoritarian rule is appealing to. Take a step back and look at the passage you found to be so appealing.

“Many people do not really understand what liberal democracy is and why it is important, so they ultimately end up choosing populist alternatives. Ultimately, that outcome is an ironic result of the greater openness of the public sphere and the democratic arena of ideas, where more people are empowered to make choices on their own. The gatekeepers have lost control.”

That passage wants to strip choice from commoners because it causes the gatekeepers (authorities) to lose control. It is advocating for the authority to have control. It is advocating for authoritarian rule. That advocacy resonates with you. You read it, agreed with it, and posted it.

The reasons given for establishing authoritarian rule don't stand up to anyone who has even the least of critical eyes. Here they are again:

consider was has replaced human reason in a large segment of the American people. Consider the widespread rejection of authority(gatekeepers) in so many areas of human knowledge. People dismiss science, they dismiss accurate history, they reject intellectuals. They dismiss facts and embrace conspiracy theories.

What constitutes "they"? Is it 2 people? Is it a plurality? Is it a majority? Is it everyone? There are a number of people who eat fiberglass insulation. "They" eat fiberglass insulation. People eat fiberglass insulation. The passage doesn't even try to define the size of the issue because the piece isn't giving you any information. The passage lists a string of information-free anecdotes intended to appeal to those who already agree with the premise that we must strip the ability of commoners to decide things and institute authoritarian rule.

 

[str8line]

Yay! Trump finally got his very own salute!

 

[Gameface]

Yay! Trump finally got his very own salute!

View attachment 13070View attachment 13071

 

[Red]

Red, you just posted an appeal to authoritarian rule. You are the one authoritarian rule is appealing to. Take a step back and look at the passage you found to be so appealing.


That passage wants to strip choice from commoners because it causes the gatekeepers (authorities) to lose control. It is advocating for the authority to have control. It is advocating for authoritarian rule. That advocacy resonates with you. You read it, agreed with it, and posted it.

The reasons given for establishing authoritarian rule don't stand up to anyone who has even the least of critical eyes. Here they are again:

What constitutes "they"? Is it 2 people? Is it a plurality? Is it a majority? Is it everyone? There are a number of people who eat fiberglass insulation. "They" eat fiberglass insulation. People eat fiberglass insulation. The passage doesn't even try to define the size of the issue because the piece isn't giving you any information. The passage lists a string of information-free anecdotes intended to appeal to those who already agree with the premise that we must strip the ability of commoners to decide things and institute authoritarian rule.

No, son, it’s an argument for the education required for a people to act responsibly and rationally in a popular democracy. We don’t need authoritarians. We need education. Exactly as I described, not how you twist it.

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”​

― Isaac Asimov

You are the one who has consistently argued that direct democracies are dangerous, precisely because you fear mob rule. An effective democracy depends on an educated electorate. Educated in civics, educated in what it means to live in a liberal democracy. It does not advocate to strip “commoners” at all. It simply points out what we can expect to happen when people are not educated enough to understand their own government and society. When enough people reject all sources of authority and resort to conspiracism as their default thinking mode, then yeah, everybody loses. Relying on knowledge, relying on good information, relying on truth, none of those things represent authoritarian rule!! They have not in the past, now, all of a sudden you think a call to listen to knowledge, to utilize rationality, is a call to dictatorship? Nobody is better than you at twisting things to fit your own interpretation.

But, personally, I’m not sure we’ll ever be rational enough overall to avoid emotive-based populism.