Real World Event Discussions
A thread for Democrats Only
POSTED BY: THGRRI
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 15:36
VIEWED: 755368
PAGE 92 of 725
Monday, April 23, 2018 5:54 AM
Quote:I'll say everybody benefits from living in a society when, by group, everyone has the same lifespan. But that's not true, so - obviously - some people are being killed by society to benefit others.
Originally posted by second:
Everybody benefits
In any case, we have strayed from the topic of identity politics. I see you don't have a rebuttal to my proposal.
Which to reiterate briefly is this: since identity politics accepts the current zero-sum game, one group can only advance at the expense of another. If the democrats or some other party is going to succeed at creating a broad coalition of voters, it needs to reject identity politics and advance the broad economic interests of people as a whole.
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Monday, April 23, 2018 5:55 PM
Quote:1kiki, remember those accusations of you being a Russian Troll? I truly do not believe you are even living in North America, let alone that you are a voting American citizen. It is a pure form of identity politics, I can't identify you as anything other than a distraction. I do not trust you in any way, shape, or form. I can't even verify you are in any group, from anywhere on earth, let alone one that I wish to be in a coalition. Having said all that, here is Thomas Piketty, living in France and using his real name, and I would trust Piketty not to lie or deceive me when he writes about economics and politics:
Originally posted by 1kiki:Quote:I'll say everybody benefits from living in a society when, by group, everyone has the same lifespan. But that's not true, so - obviously - some people are being killed by society to benefit others.
Originally posted by second:
Everybody benefits
In any case, we have strayed from the topic of identity politics. I see you don't have a rebuttal to my proposal.
Which to reiterate briefly is this: since identity politics accepts the current zero-sum game, one group can only advance at the expense of another. If the democrats or some other party is going to succeed at creating a broad coalition of voters, it needs to reject identity politics and advance the broad economic interests of people as a whole.
Is the Two-Party System Doomed?
A new study shows us what observation should already have made clear: a messy restructuring of America's political parties is coming.
www.rollingstone.com/politics/taibbi-piketty-study-is-two-party-system
-doomed-w518585
Thomas Piketty's new essay, called Brahmin Left vs. Merchant Right, studied electoral trends in three Western countries – France, Britain and the U.S. – dating back to the 1940s.
http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/Piketty2018.pdf
http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/Piketty2018PoliticalConflict.pdf PowerPoint slide presentation only
Piketty writes that across all three countries, we've seen the evolution of the same trend. Fifty or sixty years ago, voting with the "left-wing" side (which he terms the socialist/labour/democratic parties) tended to be associated with low income and low education. Conversely, high education and high-income voters in all three countries voted right.
Over the years, however, the "left-wing" has become more and more associated with higher-education voters, giving rise to what he calls a "multiple-elite" party system. High-education elites now vote for the “left”, while high income/high-wealth elites still vote for the “right” (though less and less so).
Piketty puts numbers behind an observation that anyone covering recent American presidential elections could have made: That huge pluralities of voters on both sides of the aisle increasingly see both major parties as tools of the very rich.
His belief is that a major reordering of the political landscape is coming. It will be based less on traditional notions of right and left, and more along the lines of what he describes as "globalists (high-education, high-income) vs. nativists (low-education, low-income)."
. . .
By the beginning of the 2015-2016 presidential election campaign, all trends had worsened significantly compared to 2008. Income disparity was worse. Indebtedness was worse. Even political influence was now significantly more imbalanced, after the Citizens United decision of the Supreme Court. People were angrier about all of it.
A few establishment voices, like Jimmy Carter, pointed to these factors when asked to explain the rise of Trump. But most pundits dismissed the discontent over these things, which played right into Trump's hands.
Candidate Trump's solutions were all lies. But his stump presentation hammered home an unfortunately true observation that politicians in both parties had incentives not to care about them, because they were sponsored by the same mega-donors.
. . .
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Monday, April 23, 2018 6:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:1kiki, remember those accusations of you being a Russian Troll? I truly do not believe you are even living in North America, let alone that you are a voting American citizen. It is a pure form of identity politics, I can't identify you as anything other than a distraction. I do not trust you in any way, shape, or form. I can't even verify you are in any group, from anywhere on earth, let alone one that I wish to be in a coalition.
Originally posted by 1kiki:Quote:I'll say everybody benefits from living in a society when, by group, everyone has the same lifespan. But that's not true, so - obviously - some people are being killed by society to benefit others.
Originally posted by second:
Everybody benefits
In any case, we have strayed from the topic of identity politics. I see you don't have a rebuttal to my proposal.
Which to reiterate briefly is this: since identity politics accepts the current zero-sum game, one group can only advance at the expense of another. If the democrats or some other party is going to succeed at creating a broad coalition of voters, it needs to reject identity politics and advance the broad economic interests of people as a whole.
How could anybody forget. Kiki and Sigs are probably called a Russian Troll by other trolls on this board almost everyday.
Quote:
Having said all that, here is Thomas Piketty, living in France and using his real name, and I would trust Piketty not to lie or deceive me when he writes about economics and politics:
Why do you trust this guy?
Why would this guy bother trying to lie or deceive you, personally, when he writes?
Quote:
Is the Two-Party System Doomed?
No. It's not. It's all just an illusion that's maintained to make the people believe they have any say in what goes on. There might be two parties that look different than they do today in the future. There might even be three or four. That's not going to make things change at all.
Our perception of what the Two-Party System is may be Doomed. But whatever form it morphs into will continue on as it always has.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Tuesday, April 24, 2018 12:27 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Is the Two-Party System Doomed?
No. It's not. It's all just an illusion that's maintained to make the people believe they have any say in what goes on. There might be two parties that look different than they do today in the future. There might even be three or four. That's not going to make things change at all.
Our perception of what the Two-Party System is may be Doomed. But whatever form it morphs into will continue on as it always has.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
6ixStringJoker, when the Federal government started in 1789, people like you had absolutely no say in picking George Washington or what the laws were. No slaves voted. No women voted. No men voted unless they owned significant property. We are still living in that exact same system with the same Constitution that George Washington signed, with a few minor adjustments. Why are you surprised that nobody will listen to you? The Constitution was never designed to make life comfortable for people like you or to give your life any meaning.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Tuesday, April 24, 2018 12:39 AM
"I truly do not believe you are even living in North America, let alone that you are a voting American citizen. It is a pure form of identity politics, I can't identify you as anything other than a distraction."
I started out fairly poor. By hard work, the luck of the genetic draw, and advantages like a poor to mediocre but not terrible schooling system, (though hobbled with a couple of significant disadvantages), I'm now relatively wealthy. Not like you of course, but far ahead the vast majority of Americans.
I do have one major difference, I believe, from most people in my position. I would give up everything I have - in a heartbeat, as they say - if it would guarantee a fair world. It won't of course, so I maintain my work schedule and my frugality. But my basic mindset is damn peculiar from other people with money, who become greedy, and suspicious of everyone, because they categorize everyone as trying to 'get' 'their stuff'. I don't.
And I want, more than anything else, to be able to give up 'my stuff' because we've achieved a fair world.
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Tuesday, April 24, 2018 12:53 AM
Quote:There is no need for "I would give up everything I have - in a heartbeat, as they say - if it would guarantee a fair world." I've got a list of minor changes, none of which will happen, to improve the functioning of the Federal Government:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"I truly do not believe you are even living in North America, let alone that you are a voting American citizen. It is a pure form of identity politics, I can't identify you as anything other than a distraction."
I started out fairly poor. By hard work, the luck of the genetic draw, and advantages like a poor to mediocre but not terrible schooling system, (though hobbled with a couple of significant disadvantages), I'm now relatively wealthy. Not like you of course, but far ahead the vast majority of Americans.
I do have one major difference, I believe, from most people in my position. I would give up everything I have - in a heartbeat, as they say - if it would guarantee a fair world. It won't of course, so I maintain my work schedule and my frugality. But my basic mindset is damn peculiar from other people with money, who become greedy, and suspicious of everyone, because they categorize everyone as trying to 'get' 'their stuff'. I don't.
And I want, more than anything else, to be able to give up 'my stuff' because we've achieved a fair world.
An unsatisfying litany of heavy political lifts, most of which will fail, and each of which on its own would only mildly improve matters if adopted. We should abolish the filibuster and Electoral College and eliminate midterm elections by having the House, Senate, and president serve concurrent four-year terms. We should adopt the Fair Representation Act to end gerrymandering and move toward proportional representation. We need a robust right to vote in the Constitution, public financing for elections, and more transparency for corporate and nonprofit political spending.
These seem like ambitious reforms, and in all likelihood most of them will fail, leaving us in a perhaps mildly better version of the morass we’re in now. Even in the extraordinarily unlikely event we make them all happen, a number of core problems in our politics will remain. You can’t legislate negative partisanship away, and you can’t entirely prevent corporations and the wealthy from exerting some degree of oligarchic power without trampling on freedom of speech.
www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/4/23/17233952/trump-democracy-dec
ay-decline-coup-war-collapse-impeachment
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Tuesday, April 24, 2018 1:04 AM
Quote:Your endorsement of Communism and your redistribution fantasies are not shared by as many as you imagine.
Originally posted by second:Quote:The zero-sum game that should be played is the one where the wealthy lose to everyone poorer. But that is not the game that Congress will allow to be played.
Originally posted by 1kiki:Quote:It's not true that one group will prosper only if other groups prosper, which is the only argument in favor of identity politics.
White trash think that dividing money equally with people they despise will mean far less money for white trash. But the white trash of America will never get the money they think they deserve unless Mexicans, niggers, queers and women also get a much bigger share of the wealth.
That argument is the fallacy of identity politics. Through it we are being played by identity politics into an unstated zero-sum game. The notion is that it's OK to be pitted against each other for survival, as long as the fight is FAIR. But it doesn't matter how FAIRLY we are judged in the arena. There will be the winners at the expense of the losers. If some groups rise it will be because other groups fall. It's still the same zero-sum game.
Democrats - or some new party that rises up out of the ashes - need to specifically reject the notion that people being FAIRLY pitted against each other for survival is the end goal.
The end goal should be to raise us all up. Together.
Thankfully, for America's sake.
How did kiki get sucked into this thread?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Tuesday, April 24, 2018 1:29 AM
Quote:I'm a registered democrat, from way back when, when democrats stood for the working class; and unlike the 'independent' person who started this thread 'for democrats only'.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
How did kiki get sucked into this thread?
But democrats have gone off the rails with identity politics, and with not looking after the 99%.
White people know that it's a zero sum system, which they previously won by virtue of their whiteness. They know that the more you promote 'other', the less will be reserved for whites. Racism (sexism, ageism, homophobia, etc) aren't as random and pointless as they seem. They're about economic security reserved for specific groups.
The author SECOND extensively quoted made the assertion that identity politics drives benefit for all. But that can't possibly be true in the system we have now, where my gain must be your loss. And if democrats hew to identity politics as a winning strategy, they will drive away the white vote which understands the outcome for whites of identity politics, and whose votes democrats can ill afford to lose.
The winning strategy is to call for opportunity for all who want it. And that means expanding the benefits of society past the current zero sum system.
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Tuesday, April 24, 2018 2:45 AM
Quote:6ixStringJoker, when the Federal government started in 1789, people like you had absolutely no say in picking George Washington or what the laws were. No slaves voted. No women voted. No men voted unless they owned significant property. We are still living in that exact same system with the same Constitution that George Washington signed, with a few minor adjustments. Why are you surprised that nobody will listen to you? The Constitution was never designed to make life comfortable for people like you or to give your life any meaning.
Originally posted by second:Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Is the Two-Party System Doomed?
No. It's not. It's all just an illusion that's maintained to make the people believe they have any say in what goes on. There might be two parties that look different than they do today in the future. There might even be three or four. That's not going to make things change at all.
Our perception of what the Two-Party System is may be Doomed. But whatever form it morphs into will continue on as it always has.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
I'm not surprised that nobody will listen to me. Your voice is going to get drowned out when there's 7 billion other voices.
What I find funny is when anybody thinks that their own voice matters to anybody but themselves.
News flash....
It don't.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Tuesday, April 24, 2018 7:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Our perception of what the Two-Party System is may be Doomed. But whatever form it morphs into will continue on as it always has.
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
6ixStringJoker, when the Federal government started in 1789, people like you had absolutely no say in picking George Washington or what the laws were. ... Why are you surprised that nobody will listen to you? The Constitution was never designed to make life comfortable for people like you or to give your life any meaning.
Quote:I think there's a gap between being 'listened to' as in 'obeyed' which is what SECOND seems to be referring to, and 'listened to' as in 'heard' which you seem to be referring to.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I'm not surprised that nobody will listen to me. Your voice is going to get drowned out when there's 7 billion other voices.
What I find funny is when anybody thinks that their own voice matters to anybody but themselves.
News flash....
It don't.
No one is going to 'obey' any of the hoi polloi (which includes me, btw). And - probably - 7 billion people aren't going to 'hear' you either, unless you have something very relevant to say, at a time and in a manner that they understand. But you can be heard small scale.
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME