Biden Shanked The Progs

[rkymtnman]

had the DP embraced and supported progressive policies and candidates

had they done what you suggest, trump would have won again.

progressives can't win, moderates can. this was proven in 2018 and this year.

sanders had grandiose dreams. that even he couldn't explain how to pay for them.

 

[Fogdog]

No need to, win and an expert panel will make the calls, one with clear purposes and objectives, European democracies can do it, so can America, it simply requires knowing shit from beans and saying so. Governments in modern multicultural societies must check social division and internal strife, it is one of their purposes and always has been, national unity. I'm talking about using liberal democratic means, there is no mention of extremism here, mostly traditional means of dealing with public information and media. We must adapt to this new communications environment, no government can survive competing socially destructive realities, a house divided cannot stand. Ideas are ok, but bullshit and disinformation kill, people and countries too, politics is about disagreement on common facts, this is something else.

Not interested in the kind of restructuring of media regulations that this Congress could pass. Gridlock is what was the Constitution was designed to produce in today's political climate. To more than half of us, the right wing media are a joke and the youth of today are mostly growing up knowing they are being lied to by radical right wing media. I have two nieces whose parents are right wingnuts. They are both approaching their 30's and neither are following their parent's examples. The youngest was vocally and strongly conservative when she was 13. As an adult, she's more left than I am.

I don't know what determines a person's susceptibility to the kind of crap that Fox and fiends produce but it isn't determined by genetics or nurture. So, I can wait this wave of right wing radicalism out. Like McCarthyism more than 50 years ago, it's not going to last. I don't want a hastily written bill that gives right wing radicals more control over the media than they already have.

 

[Bagginski]

That is pretty deep. Ive only in the last 4 years become more entuned with with whats really going on here and tbh I have trump to thank for that. I feel like after Obama became president there was this huge backlash on the conservative side and i believe thats what really kick started this in to motion. Conspiracy theories have always fluttered around now and then, but with the advent of social media and the reckless nature of the wild west of tech companies have things gotten substantial worse. Its crazy, we are literally in the age of information yet inaccuracies and conspiracies feel like they are at an all time high. We in the past, we may have disagreed on policy, but at least agreed on basic facts and unfortunately that is no longer the case.

I agree that Obama being elected in ‘08 was a huge (imaginary) insult to everyone who was raised to ‘never call a [black man] “SIR!” ‘. Much of what we see happening these last four years, and for the eight Obama years, had been building in preparation, but Obama in the White House made the red side of the aisle see...red.

since then, their power grabs have not been subtle, and collusion within the GOP has allowed them to be shockingly effective. I think it fair to say they overreached badly on several fronts: obstruction of the Mueller report’s documentation, the Ukrainian affair, the gifting of SCOTUS seats to repay Bush v Gore attorneys, the imposition of the Barrett - and the entire scheme of withholding judicial appointments from all but GOP bill-signers. The COVID deflections and the fake-everything, ending with the outright assault on the recent election, are extreme malpractice, and unacceptable behaviors, but are not explicitly political overreach IMO.

As far as ‘social media’ is concerned, and active propaganda - the propaganda has been rolling since Roe v Wade and the animation of the “moral majority”. GOP and its allies / fellow travelers have been actively and intentionally disinforming their captive audience about US a history, the Constitution, the government created by that constitution, right down to things like how elections and law enforcement are supposed to work.

It began long before social media, long before rage radio, the “tea party” - before Reagan, even: it began when wealthy segregationist white decided they weren’t going to let their (tax) money be used to integrate schools. Virginia ordered that any school system in the state, that attempted to conform with SCOTUS / desegregating, would be summarily closed, and began a program of state-funded tuition vouchers, which led to the rise of church schools, and eventually home-schooling.

The divisive, rancorous, outright false shit we’ve all been bombarded with, derives from and builds on the shit they’ve been bombarded with for decades, from sermons and Bible study...to “talk” radio at work, at the bank, at the liquor store, at the gas station...to television, including Wendy’s and other businesses that play Fox News or CNBC or Fox Business - or one of the later players, like OANN, Newsmax, Russia Today. Their beliefs establish a sense of identity between believers, and the constant reinforcement, social churn, and us v them rhetoric have weaponized what might otherwise have been simply mass ignorance into a weapon against the best interests of those who support the wielding of that weapon.

Maybe the most alarming subject they’re devoted to miseducating is economics. “Austrian” economics is a fraud, yet the Koch brothers (Charles most particularly) has used “education philanthropy” to essentially overhaul how economics is taught, and who’s teaching it...by demanding rights of refusal over faculty, texts, and syllabus at dozens of mid-level colleges and universities. The a-factual, entirely fictitious premises of the Friedman/Hayek/von Mises thought-experiment is a disaster in motion, and d it’s spreading.

As pertaining to the whole money thing, who knows, with dark money being spent behind the scenes and ,IIRC, the S.C. allowing this essentially from a verdict some 8 or 7 years ago. I cant remember the case off the top of my head. I dont agree with it, but we have meddled in so many other countries elections and political processes that this feels like its a really bad dose of karma..

You’re talking about Citizens United, I think? That has been a big part of opening the floodgates of dark money into politics - as have PACs and “non-profit” organizations like the NRA and the Heritage Foundation.

I agree that we have meddled in the internal affairs of other nations since the industrial revolution, including toppling governments. The historical record is unmistakable. And, yes, I believe there *is* karma in US political factions working to subvert and destabilize our own government processes - and most crucially, our elections.

Meddling in the affairs of other nations is one thing the Founders were in complete agreement on: don’t DO it, don’t even LOOK like you *want* to - and that’s my position on it, too.

 

[xtsho]

had they done what you suggest, trump would have won again.

progressives can't win, moderates can. this was proven in 2018 and this year.

sanders had grandiose dreams. that even he couldn't explain how to pay for them.

Exactly. Which is why everyone jumped behind Biden instead of Sanders. Had Sanders won the Democratic nomination trump would have won a second term and it would have been a landslide. trump would have won both the popular and electoral vote had he ran against Sanders which is why they were trying to help Sanders win the nomination. Biden was the one candidate they didn't want to run against because he was the only one that could actually defeat trump and he did. Biden got the majority of the independent vote. Something a self avowed Socialist would never have been able to do.

I have no issue with Biden putting together a moderate administration. In fact that's what he should be doing. He won because he is a moderate.

 

[hanimmal]

I think it is important to say though that 'corporations' should not be a bad word. A lot of Americans work at corporations and they do have a lot of insight that is very valuable to understand when it comes to policy.

That doesn't mean that a handful of the mega-wealthy that represent those corporations have not spent billions to warp the Republican party into their image, and attacked the federal governments ability to legislate for the best interests of 100% of the population.

I don't agree that all billionaires are bad. But I am totally fine with saying there are billionaires that are, and that they have a vastly larger ability to negatively impact our society.

 

[Bagginski]

Another oligarchy. Corporations still run your government. "corporate democrat" is just another traitor to the party. Glad Frump is done. But it ain't getting any better for us. This entire thread is pointless. The pres is irrelevant. Just a puppet for the last four decades. It will not matter who is appointed. Nothing will change in we the people's indentured servitude.

"How many terms have you watched change hands? " Nothing is ever fixed or improved for the people. Regardless of criminal enterprise in control. Change the corrupt system. Until then we are just being pacified by a false sense of a voice, voting.
We live in a democracy at the end of a gun.

I can relate to your depressive frame, but I can’t buy into it.

you put your finger on the exact,point: we need to change the system. That doesn’t mean we need to throw it out and make up something else, it means that there are two paths toward the end of remaking the government we have into what we want and need it to be: outright revolution, and MASSIVE CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT.

OF THE TWO, REVOLUTION IS THE WORST CHOICE BY FAR...and I say this as an old revolutionary.
The lessons warning us against revolution are thick-spread through history, but one of the most studied - and least discussed - is the French Revolution. The French Revolution is the disaster WE were spared. It was a disaster because their unifying spirit had no core: they wanted freedom, but freedom to the surviving ‘nobility’, the bishops / cardinals, the hungry, landless peasant, the angry ideologue were very different things. It’s how France ended up with Napoleon (Napoleon was not good for France).

If you think revolution in the US, today, is a sound, effective strategy for righting the ship, I urge you to spend the next six months studying the French Revolution , the individuals, the parties, the actions, the conflicting forces, and the way it all played out for the French people, nation, culture. We are dangerously at risk at this time; to run the very real extra risk of scuttling the ship in our efforts to right it is a very bad choice of action. We need better ideas than that - better plans, a real sense of purpose and direction in terms of our internal affairs and our relations with other nations. We need the constitution our Founders *would* write if they were writing it now (based in the work they did on our founding documents, not on supposition about whether they were the kind of people they could have been.

We need to rebuild the ship, from updated plans drawn from the original documents, with a clear eye on the mission statement (the Preamble to the constitution). A freer place, a place full of adventure and possibility, of education, art, science...a saner place - and safer because of it.

No more reigns of terror...or so I see it.

 

[DIY-HP-LED]

Not interested in the kind of restructuring of media regulations that this Congress could pass. Gridlock is what was the Constitution was designed to produce in today's political climate. To more than half of us, the right wing media are a joke and the youth of today are mostly growing up knowing they are being lied to by radical right wing media. I have two nieces whose parents are right wingnuts. They are both approaching their 30's and neither are following their parent's examples. The youngest was vocally and strongly conservative when she was 13. As an adult, she's more left than I am.

I don't know what determines a person's susceptibility to the kind of crap that Fox and fiends produce but it isn't determined by genetics or nurture. So, I can wait this wave of right wing radicalism out. Like McCarthyism more than 50 years ago, it's not going to last. I don't want a hastily written bill that gives right wing radicals more control over the media than they already have.

I think the key difference these days is that social media deepens the impact of disinformation and causes tribes to form around it, given the right conditions. I believe with Trump he provided a kind of center of chaos that they all coalesced around creating a perfect storm. Confirming socially destructive biases is becoming profitable, there is a segment of the right who want more and are being provided with it.

Perhaps much of it will fade away, like Nazism it might burn itself out with the disappearance of Trump and he will disappear, quicker than most people think. The base will have to deal with it, the judges and juries, it is what it is. Many in Donald's base are having as much difficulty with losing as Donald, he's brain damaged and has everything on the line, what's their excuse?

 

[hanimmal]

Great conversation btw.

I just came across a story it is worth looking at (too long to post) on the AP site.

https://apnews.com/article/imaad-zuberi-sold-donor-access-5a6b71bd05ddf2c1655847bb064edcc9


MORE ON ZUBERI

• – Trump donor charged with obstructing inauguration inquiry
• – Prosecutors: Political donor sought to silence witnesses
• – Globe-trotting political donor eyed in Trump inaugural probe

I really actually like Biden more after what this guy reported back to the Saudi's in 2014.

 

[Fogdog]

I think the key difference these days is that social media deepens the impact of disinformation and causes tribes to form around it, given the right conditions. I believe with Trump he provided a kind of center of chaos that they all coalesced around creating a perfect storm. Confirming socially destructive biases is becoming profitable, there is a segment of the right who want more and are being provided with it.

Perhaps much of it will fade away, like Nazism it might burn itself out with the disappearance of Trump and he will disappear, quicker than most people think. The base will have to deal with it, the judges and juries, it is what it is. Many in Donald's base are having as much difficulty with losing as Donald, he's brain damaged and has everything on the line, what's their excuse?

Yeah, it is a terrible thing that hundreds of millions of people freely share the stories of the day that they feel are worth sharing.

The price we pay for the connection that social media provides are the hundreds of millions of times where fake news and false conspiracies are included in those messages. If one looks at it from a value engineering perspective, where value = worth/price, then we need to examine what it is all worth. For myself, I find little worth in what people who don't know anything say. Facebook is just a gossip machine and has little worth in terms of the sharing of information. So, no value in terms of information sharing. It keeps families and people connected. There is much worth and value in that, so Facebook as we know it has to change. Facebook makes bank from all those bot posts and fake news stories. It's going to have to take a haircut. Cut out the long stringy hair with split ends and tidy the place up so that relatives and their children aren't subjected to the ugly, unkempt side of the internet when all they wanted to do was share pictures of some cookies they baked.

If you are advocating that because social media has low value as a tool for sharing information, it needs to be re-structured to take profit out of the dissemination of fake news. Then I agree. I simply don't want that legislation written by this congress. I can wait.

 

[rkymtnman]

Exactly. Which is why everyone jumped behind Biden instead of Sanders. Had Sanders won the Democratic nomination trump would have won a second term and it would have been a landslide. trump would have won both the popular and electoral vote had he ran against Sanders which is why they were trying to help Sanders win the nomination. Biden was the one candidate they didn't want to run against because he was the only one that could actually defeat trump and he did. Biden got the majority of the independent vote. Something a self avowed Socialist would never have been able to do.

I have no issue with Biden putting together a moderate administration. In fact that's what he should be doing. He won because he is a moderate.

well said. and Sanders should have the testicular fortitude to run as an Independent instead of riding the coattails and resources of the DNC.

 

[DIY-HP-LED]

Yeah, it is a terrible thing that hundreds of millions of people freely share the stories of the day that they feel are worth sharing.

The price we pay for the connection that social media provides are the hundreds of millions of times where fake news and false conspiracies are included in those messages. If one looks at it from a value engineering perspective, where value = worth/price, then we need to examine what it is all worth. For myself, I find little worth in what people who don't know anything say. Facebook is just a gossip machine and has little worth in terms of the sharing of information. So, no value in terms of information sharing. It keeps families and people connected. There is much worth and value in that, so Facebook as we know it has to change. Facebook makes bank from all those bot posts and fake news stories. It's going to have to take a haircut. Cut out the long stringy hair with split ends and tidy the place up so that relatives and their children aren't subjected to the ugly, unkempt side of the internet when all they wanted to do was share pictures of some cookies they baked.

If you are advocating that because social media has low value as a tool for sharing information, it needs to be re-structured to take profit out of the dissemination of fake news. Then I agree. I simply don't want that legislation written by this congress. I can wait.

They need to take their social and patriotic duties more seriously and if it takes twisting their arms to do it, so be it. Social media amplifies disinformation and propaganda in several ways, one of them is people sharing it as fact and the other is algorithms and automated means of "broadcast", bots. It needs to be looked into at the appropriate time, I'm not exactly advocating a full frontal assault, it must be more subtitle. Those who provided false public health information or advocated disregarding it and who are governed by the FCC, must be held to account, under existing law and regulation, they helped to kill people for profit too. Public hearings and use their content against them.

 

[Fogdog]

I can relate to your depressive frame, but I can’t buy into it.

you put your finger on the exact,point: we need to change the system. That doesn’t mean we need to throw it out and make up something else, it means that there are two paths toward the end of remaking the government we have into what we want and need it to be: outright revolution, and MASSIVE CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT.

OF THE TWO, REVOLUTION IS THE WORST CHOICE BY FAR...and I say this as an old revolutionary.
The lessons warning us against revolution are thick-spread through history, but one of the most studied - and least discussed - is the French Revolution. The French Revolution is the disaster WE were spared. It was a disaster because their unifying spirit had no core: they wanted freedom, but freedom to the surviving ‘nobility’, the bishops / cardinals, the hungry, landless peasant, the angry ideologue were very different things. It’s how France ended up with Napoleon (Napoleon was not good for France).

If you think revolution in the US, today, Is a sound, effective strategy for righting the ship, I urge you to spend the next six months studying it, the individuals, the parties, the actions, the conflicting forces, and the way it all played out for the French people, nation, culture. We are dangerously at risk at this time; to run the very real extra risk of scuttling the ship in our efforts to right it is a very bad choice of action. We need better ideas than that - better plans, a real sense of purpose and direction in terms of our internal affairs and our relations with other nations. We need the constitution our Founders *would* write if they were writing it now (based in the work they did on our founding documents, not on supposition about whether they were the kind of people they could have been.

We need to rebuild the ship, from updated plans drawn from the original documents, with a clear eye on the mission statement (the Preamble to the constitution). A freer place, a place full of adventure and possibility, of education, art, science...a saner place - and safer because of it.

or so I see it.

Personally, I was ready to vote for Elizabeth Warren if she had stayed in the race long enough for me to vote for her in the Oregon primary. Bernie was off my list once I got to know him better. I did vote for him in 2016 but completely lost interest in him when I had a closer look at his color blind economic policies. Also, he pandered to racist white voters in late 2016 and railed too strongly against Democrats in 2017 when we needed to pull together to save the ACA and Social Security. Bernie is too divisive of a leader to be president. Just like Trump.

BUT, love, love, love the analogy and lesson that the French Revolution provided. In early days, there were radicals to the left, to the right and moderates. With each shift in power, one group would start killing off the other side and the moderates were the first to go because left and right did them in whenever they could. Napoleon was the preferred outcome to rule by the Committee on Public Safety and their Reign of Terror. But then of course, Napoleon wasn't really a revolutionary. He was just a return to Monarchy with Imperial ambitions.

For those who are bored of what's on Netflix or Hulu and can stand to listen to a podcast, suggest listening to this:

Revolutions

A weekly podcasting exploring great political revolutions. Now: The Russian Revolution Next: ???

thehistoryofrome.typepad.com

I got hooked on his History of Rome podcast and after recounting nearly two thousand years of that history, he moved on to chronicling the various revolutions of the past 400 years or so, beginning with the English Revolution in the 1600's (Cromwell and all that), moving on to the American Revolution and in June, 2014 he started what took years for him to cover in monthly installments, the French Revolution. I was pretty ignorant about that bit of history and was shocked at how applicable lessons from that debacle are today.

He's a good story teller, a careful neutral historian and kind of a self-made businessman.

He narrates a chapter from a book that he wrote. In it he covers a seminal turn in the Roman Republic where their democracy began its 100 year slide to imperial rulers. After Rome conquered practically all of the Mediterranean, what is now Europe and a big chunk of the Middle East, wealth disparity led to the demise of Rome's form of democracy. It's worth a listen if you are interested in history that is relevant to today.

The Storm Before The Storm: Chapter 1- The Beasts of Italy

Podcast Episode · The History of Rome · 07/27/2017 · 56m

podcasts.apple.com

 

[Fogdog]

They need to take their social and patriotic duties more seriously and if it takes twisting their arms to do it, so be it. Social media amplifies disinformation and propaganda in several ways, one of them is people sharing it as fact and the other is algorithms and automated means of "broadcast", bots. It needs to be looked into at the appropriate time, I'm not exactly advocating a full frontal assault, it must be more subtitle. Those who provided false public health information or advocated disregarding it and who are governed by the FCC, must be held to account, under existing law and regulation, they helped to kill people for profit too. Public hearings and use their content against them.

You are preaching morality again.

 

[Bagginski]

had they done what you suggest, trump would have won again.

progressives can't win, moderates can. this was proven in 2018 and this year.

sanders had grandiose dreams. that even he couldn't explain how to pay for them.

I know that’s what the mythology tells you; I have my own opinions. I made them myself...out of decades of study, and observation, and experience, and being all over the political map myself at various times.

The big shame about our party politics is that we confuse this individual or that with some party line, some policy position, some real-or-not quote...and that makes it really easy for the people who have jobs running these things to keep reminding us to react, to look where we’re pointing - don’t think, don’t even wonder about whether it all holds together: “Believe it because we’re right, goddammit!” Over the past 50 years, we’ve gone from sober debate and discussion about the issues and the events of the day, to maliciously edited, photoshopped, meme’d images, with and without inflammatory text to help you know who to be mad at and ‘what they did this time’. The people who are destroying facts and reason and confidence today are doing it deliberately; they are doing it via tweets, official statements, vie email chains, via whatever Limbaugh’s or Hannity’s or Levin’s or Graham’s or Bannon’s or Carlson’s talking-point rant list / cheat sheet happens to include today. They are doing it by deliberate lies, brazen and shameless; by character assassination while pretending to occupy the moral high-ground; by constantly straining to find grievances, justifying and promoting them endlessly into their media channels - to include church services in many churches in the land.

They’re very good at making sure their subjects never get the chance to take a mental breath, sit down, and think about any of the things they keep being told - all they get to do is try to fit it in, to try and figure out how it *must* be true: team-sport politics, ‘us’ and ‘them’ and only winning counts. USA! USA! USA! Yeah, we’re divided alright, but not by party: roughly half the nation sees the other half as brainwashed and/or deeply fucked up; the rough other half sees the not-them half as just plain greedy, stupid and evil.

“tie two birds together: though they have four wings, neither can fly”

 

[rkymtnman]

“tie two birds together: though they have four wings, neither can fly”

holy shit, do you work at our favorite Chinese restaurant??? that was the fortune i got friday nite with my roast duck. lol.

to simplify my argument, you've got half the country that think: progressive=socialism=much higher taxes=more gov't control over the people
with Biden, he was able to bring over R's that can't stand Trump and I's that voted for Trump last time b/c Hillary was a horrible candidate

 

[DIY-HP-LED]

You are preaching morality again.

Morality is lacking and that is much of the issue

 

[xtsho]

well said. and Sanders should have the testicular fortitude to run as an Independent instead of riding the coattails and resources of the DNC.

I've always been a moderate. I don't like the extremes of both the left and the right. I don't agree with the far right and I don't agree with the far left. Living here in Portland I've had the unpleasant opportunity to see both sides up close. At this point all they've done is destroyed what was one of the most beautiful cities in the country. They have no viable solutions to anything other than to gather en masse and rant about everything except the damage they're doing to this nation. There was a time when both sides could work together. But now moderates from both sides can't compromise or they'll be targeted by the extreme factions of their party. The reason nothing gets done today is a direct result of the actions by the extreme elements of both parties. Both parties need to grow a spine and show the extreme elements the door. Let them form their own parties.

 

[schuylaar]

I understand your negative reaction: I have been and will remain a Sanders supporter, and I wish this were a Sanders administration...but it isn’t. Biden has a much weaker hand IMO than Sanders would have, had the DP embraced and supported progressive policies and candidates; I’ve been convinced for some time that the “Dems” are Eisenhower-Republican wannabes - and that the public at large wants a broader and more serious progressive turn in our governance, and that this is why the Dems have trouble with turnout and enthusiasm and real buy-in from their natural constituents.

But...we have what we have - and while it was unpopular when Sanders threw his support behind Biden, it was the smart move: we need to move as many GOP out of government as possible, that starts with an administration, and with seats in Congress. Biden not pulling cabinet secretaries and top advisors from the Senate is another smart move: we’re fighting for control, and if he pulled even ONE Senator off the floor to fill a post, that would cost us the Senate Majority, even if and when Warnock and Ossoff are seated. We simply can’t afford that: things need to be done, need to be set right - and that requires as long a period of Dem chain-pullers as we can arrange.

Bernie knows this. Elizabeth knows this. We all know this.

The Biden administration is a beachead: we need it to be back in the ‘game’, to make what strides we can, and generate enthusiasm for a more progressive and productive team in '16. We DO NOT need to play tanglefoot with the GOP, and we don’t need to shoot ourselves in the foot either. The GOP Senate map for ‘24 was a glum prospect for them before the election, it looking even more unwinnable for them in 4 years. There are senate elections every two years, just like with the House (only a third of the Senate is up for re-election every two years), and we need to turn out in big numbers in ‘22 and flip as many seats as possible in both chambers - and then again in ‘24. We could end up with 60 senators.

Bernie knows this, and I’m with Bernie.

since Bernie was leader of what makes it all go around- money..i reject the need to generate enthusiasm and that goes for 2020 as well.

amazing how the Dean Scream wasn't tolerated but a few short years later we had a presidential candidate grabbing pussy which was dismissed as 'boy talk'.

i no longer have hope for the future and when the time is right, i plan on assisted which is legal in colorado- my fvcking terms not theirs.

 

[DIY-HP-LED]

I've always been a moderate. I don't like the extremes of both the left and the right. I don't agree with the far right and I don't agree with the far left. Living here in Portland I've had the unpleasant opportunity to see both sides up close. At this point all they've done is destroyed what was one of the most beautiful cities in the country. They have no viable solutions to anything other than to gather en masse and rant about everything except the damage they're doing to this nation. There was a time when both sides could work together. But now moderates from both sides can't compromise or they'll be targeted by the extreme factions of their party. The reason nothing gets done today is a direct result of the actions by the extreme elements of both parties. Both parties need to grow a spine and show the extreme elements the door. Let them form their own parties.

While I sympathize with you, both parties are not the same here, one is completely controlled by the most radical elements and are led by a madman at war with the constitution, the rule of law and the democratic process. The right has few just causes, the left many, income redistribution is and will be the main issue, the left is more right than the right on this. 40% of the population is living on less than 5% of the national wealth and billionaires can afford their own space programs while paying virtually no taxes. The right uses social division to mask this fact and prevent social and political change. Technology concentrates wealth, particularly communications technology, it is a historical trend that causes economic imbalance.

There are few extremists on the left according to the FBI, not so much on the right, they are butt hurt now, you will see a lot of terrorism from them in the near future. Listen to their rhetoric and lies, their motives and intentions are clear enough and we've witnessed their actions. Many right wing thugs came to Portland to destroy it, the left mostly protested and were incited by Trump, remember the goon squad of secret police and shoving people in unmarked vans?

 

[Bagginski]

Personally, I was ready to vote for Elizabeth Warren if she had stayed in the race long enough for me to vote for her in the Oregon primary. Bernie was off my list once I got to know him better. I did vote for him in 2016 but completely lost interest in him when I had a closer look at his color blind economic policies. Also, he pandered to racist white voters in late 2016 and railed too strongly against Democrats in 2017 when we needed to pull together to save the ACA and Social Security. Bernie is too divisive of a leader to be president. Just like Trump.

I hear this, been hearing it since ‘16...but I never hear or read anything from Bernie that justifies the shade. I mostly hear it from serious Hillary fans who got poisoned by the divisive shit that got passed around by the disinformation gang. Bernie has - and has had - big support in the black communities I’m connected to. Still looking for that divisiveness of Sanders I keep hearing about and not finding.

BUT, love, love, love the analogy and lesson that the French Revolution provided. In early days, there were radicals to the left, to the right and moderates. With each shift in power, one group would start killing off the other side and the moderates were the first to go because left and right did them in whenever they could. Napoleon was the preferred outcome to rule by the Committee on Public Safety and their Reign of Terror. But then of course, Napoleon wasn't really a revolutionary. He was just a return to Monarchy with Imperial ambitions.

The terms “left” and “right” *only* have meaning in the context of the French Revolution...specifically, the location of the doors into and out of the National Assembly hall. Hint: nothing to do with “liberal” or “conservative” anything.

For those who are bored of what's on Netflix or Hulu and can stand to listen to a podcast, suggest listening to this:

Revolutions

A weekly podcasting exploring great political revolutions. Now: The Russian Revolution Next: ???

thehistoryofrome.typepad.com

I got hooked on his History of Rome podcast and after recounting nearly two thousand years of that history, he moved on to chronicling the various revolutions of the past 400 years or so, beginning with the English Revolution in the 1600's (Cromwell and all that), moving on to the American Revolution and in June, 2014 he started what took years for him to cover in monthly installments, the French Revolution. I was pretty ignorant about that bit of history and was shocked at how applicable lessons from that debacle are today.

He's a good story teller, a careful neutral historian and kind of a self-made businessman.

He narrates a chapter from a book that he wrote. In it he covers a seminal turn in the Roman Republic where their democracy began its 100 year slide to imperial rulers. After Rome conquered practically all of the Mediterranean, what is now Europe and a big chunk of the Middle East, wealth disparity led to the demise of Rome's form of democracy. It's worth a listen if you are interested in history that is relevant to today.

The Storm Before The Storm: Chapter 1- The Beasts of Italy

Podcast Episode · The History of Rome · 07/27/2017 · 56m

podcasts.apple.com

I appreciate the links, I’ll definitely check them out!

A book I recommend is sadly out of print, but can be found used and affordable: “Paris in the Terror”, Stanley Loomis; he does a great setup for the ascendency of the CPS and the Reign of Terror, and then moves into the real meat.