Because addressing only one of those things (hint: America’s responsibility) will prevent it from happening again.
1 Like
Incidentally, I have never said anything close to “HRC is a fascist”.
The Democrats are historically clueless, blatantly corrupt center-right twits, who are currently engaged in catastrophic collaboration with fascism.
But they aren’t fascists; they’re just privileged idiots.
3 Likes
#MOOSEANDSQUIRREL
That’s because they have their eyes on the prize.
They don’t care as long as that foreign power is on “their side”.
I have pointed out that by letting this stand, it is a proof of concept and Democratic candidates are going to cozy up with a cyber warfare power next election, and they are not going to like it. Crickets after that, is the usual response.
I think when you put it in those terms, they get it. Especially since it is easy for them to imagine Clinton doing so.
1 Like
America has a grave responsibility for coming to grips with the problems in our society that allowed a fascist to come into power.
America ALSO has a responsibility to address how badly we let ourselves get played by the Russians.
2 Likes
that does not mean he would have won the election. BLM may not have purchased such a particular ad at that particular time in that particular way for that particular purpose. using psychotactics targeting these particular regions the effect would be much more influential. the trump campaign could not be caught using such tactics.
Ah the good old ‘slippery slope’, and next men will want to marry farm animals etc.
Gotta go kids. Don’t drink the kool aid.
1 Like
American conservatives have shown themselves totally capable of spreading extreme perversions of BLM because of how fundamental racism is to most American politics. The Russians didn’t have to do a thing.
2 Likes
The US has had decades worth of right wing media funded by the rich who have been stoking the fires which all lined up behind Trump without any Russian help.
1 Like
Indeed, it would be idiotic to claim that the Russians are wholly responsible for Trump. We did most of the damage all by ourselves.
It would also be idiotic to claim there is no reason to believe the efforts of the Russian government had an impact on the election.
America fucked up the last election in a whole lot of ways. One of those ways was by either ignoring, dismissing or colluding with a hostile foreign power’s covert and widespread efforts to influence voters.
6 Likes
It’s one of the many factors.
The difficulty with an election this close is that everything that had more than a miniscule impact “tipped the balance”.
If not for misogyny, Clinton would have won. If not for voter suppression, Clinton would have won. If not for the spectacularly incompetent mismanagement of the Democratic Presidential campaign, Clinton would have won.
Etc. etc.
If not for Russia, Clinton would have won. But that was only one of a thousand factors that created the current mess, and the key factors in that list go all the way back to the 3/5ths Compromise.
1 Like
Do keep in mind that it wasn’t “The Russians”, it was the Putin regime. Most of the Russian people do not approve of or consent to Putin’s rule.
4 Likes
In this sense, Americas could be said to be “traditionally” Native American. I don’t really see any other groups predating “Western” colonial influence or having some better claim to the land.
I also seriously doubt any group, besides the alt-right, has any intention of deliberately undermining liberal democracy or would benefit from doing so. I wouldn’t dare to speak for BLM but I’d wager their general goal is much closer to: “We want the police and the criminal system to treat people of all ethnicities fairly and equally.” than: We want to destroy the republic and replace it with… what exactly?
That depends a bit upon how you’re defining your terms.
Liberalism is a center-right ideology, and the socialist/anarchist/etc left are quite open about their opposition to it.
The linguistic commonality between “liberal” and “liberal democracy” isn’t just a natural coincidence. It’s the result of a deliberate political move by the liberal establishment to frame the debate with themselves in a privileged position.
2 Likes
it’s not even that really.
voter disenfranchisement is a huge problem. voting in person. with long lines. requiring state issued ids. the fact voting falls on a tuesday. understaffed polling places in minority ( and democract ) areas…
the list goes on for things that voters are not to blame for. ( and, i believe there are statistics that indicate in wisconsin there were more likely clinton voters who did not vote than what’s his name won by. )
republicans have fought tooth and nail for every single vote, in ways of questionable ethics and legality. and, sure no single thing put him over the electoral vote edge. it took all of it to win.
which things it took to win are, id argue, 20/20 hindsight. ( and, probably various things were tried that failed. )
what i think we’re learning now is that russian ads were one of those things that worked.
we can try to learn from it. or not.
I disagree and I think you are factually wrong.
That indeed depends on which definition are you using. In continental Europe, it traditionally means what Americans would call libertarianism. In Britain, it’s a specific individualistic doctrine, somewhat right of the center. In US it means center-left, if anything.
“Liberal” in the context of “liberal democracy” however means “ensuring individual liberties.” Which does not necessarily have to go hand in hand with a democratic method of establishing the government. You could have a system of democratic elections in an otherwise strongly authoritarian/martial/directive society. Note that the term is being used for the model of governance in question all over the world, in places which often do not have any political group labeled explicitly as “liberals.” It has also been in use since the late 18th century when it was a distinctly radical leftist ideology, as far as the spectrum can be applied at all, and long predates any “liberal establishment.” So the nominal causality goes the other way.
As for the opposition in the United States specifically - there is no meaningful political group other than the alt-right which explicitly aims to undermine and replace the current system of government. Bernie Sanders, a self-described socialist and, I think, the most leftist public figure of any importance, is clearly dedicated to reforming the system and working within it; not repealing the constitution and transferring power to the local soviets.
1 Like
Liberalism is center-right, in the US as in the rest of the world. If you are a capitalist, you are not left wing.
The US use of “liberal” as a synonym for “left” is not just a linguistic quirk of geography. It is the consequence of the historical suppression and erasure of the American left, which is itself the consequence of the fascist influence that has been present in American politics since the birth of the nation.
The center of American political opinion does not lie halfway between the neoliberals of the Democratic Party and the fascists of the Republican Party. Measured on the issues, when you count the views of all people rather than just “likely voters”, the center of American political opinion is slightly to the left of the Democrats. Roughly equivalent to the Berniecrats.
The Overton Window of elite America has shifted far to the right, because the American working class are functionally disenfranchised. But we are now in an era of street politics, where access to the ballot box no longer matters. The working class are back, and they will not be ignored.
The real American left is on the march. The Democrats are a rapidly fading rump.
3 Likes
uh huh. Just how old would you say this coinage was?
1 Like
