Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
wvParticipantspoiler alert
wvParticipantOliver Stone interviewing Putin. Megyn Kelly interviewing Alex Jones.
Strange times, TSRF.
w
v
As beautiful as the chance encounter of a sewing machine and an umbrella on an operating table.”
― Comte de LautréamontwvParticipantPutin is basically a gangster running a nation.
However it is spun, the guy is Al Capone.
—————-
Well maybe. Maybe he’s more than that. According to the stats quoted by Stone, ordinary lives of the Russians have improved over the Putin years.
Also, what is Trump/Obama/Bush/Clinton ? How are they not ‘gangsters’ too?
I dont think Americans know a whole lot about Putin. I think we mainly just repeat the standard MSM-view of him. I know “I” dont know much about him. I’m trying to learn more though.
w
vwvParticipantAt the 11:40 mark of part2, Oliver Stone insists on watching Dr Strangelove
with Putin. Putin hadn’t seen it.w
vwvParticipantsix minute mark of the 2nd video — Putin says the American scientists themselves provided the soviets with info on the A-bomb. The Rosenburgs transferred the info but it came from the scientists.
w
vwvParticipant================================
Freedom(by Himani Bannerji: 1986)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himani_BannerjiSomeone is standing in a three-piece suit.
He is lecturing at us.
The stylus of his teeth are falling precisely
in the right grooves.
He has filled the black spaces behind him
With abstractions of paper flowers and birds
He wants them to sing, to go on blooming
“I am talking about freedom,” he says
“A complete freedom of thought and action,” he says
“Over there in Russia they have put out her light.”Over here
Below the platform he stands on
A woman is counting her pennies for coffee
She has a plastic bag which is her cosmos
Her flat feet are terribly swollen
Blue veins stand out on her legs
like a child’s page of knots and crosses
Her mouth hugs the French fry
as the only certainty she knows
She eats with great love, lingeringly
wipes her hand on her hair
Her eyes weep freely unaccountably.Sighing, listening to the radio she turns to me
“That’s right dear,” she says to me “Here we are free
we can vote here you know
choose our own government
They can’t over there in Russia.”wvParticipantOkay all that aside.
Let me ask this. What’s the difference between saying “we’re doomed” and “I give up”? (And I respect burn-out btw.)
And remember, to me, saying we’re doomed isn’t based on evidence, it’s based on a certain way of interpreting SOME of the evidence. So my counter-claim is that human nature isn’t a homogeneous enough or unitary enough thing to make predictive claims about the future. If it were that settled then we would all still be under the Egyptian empire with no real change. Meanwhile the concept of human rights is only about 300 years old.
===============
Well fwiw:
1) I usually say what amounts to “we’re PROBABLY doomed, bash on relentlessly anyway.” Kinda relying on the same wellspring that Malraux is probly talking about here:“The greatest mystery is not that we have been flung at random between this profusion of matter and the stars, but that within this prison we can draw from ourselves images powerful enough to deny our nothingness.”
Les Noyers de l’Altenburg: Andre MalrauxSo i never say ‘give up.’ But i do say we are probably doomed.
2) I try to remember to say “probably” doomed all the time, but sometimes i forget. The probably indicates I cant tell the future. No-one can. So humility is necessary. Having said that the evidence suggesting doom looks like a Tsunami to me. Looks to me like we are in a unique time, and the mountain of evidence is bad. The Bernies and Corbyns look like small armies in a fort surrounded by a big army of white walkers.
I mean even if a Bernie of Corbyn got elected the corporotacracy would wait them out. Same way they waited out Chavez and Venezuela and now Castro in Cuba. The corporotacracy doesn’t die and it doesnt go anywhere. And i think its different from any ancient Egyptian empires.3) My views on all this have darkened over the last year or so. But i dont think its my disposition — i think I’m just following the evidence.
…Btw…You havent changed but i have. And its got nuthin to do with Trump. I’d feel the same way if Hillary had stolen the election instead of Trump.4) I agree we are all comrads here, we are all parts of the leftist-tree, and there’s room for various kinds of leftists. We just have to work on talking to each other, communicating. Like in any relationship that is a never-ending but rewarding process.
w
vwvParticipant“…I generally find that people with the most negative assessments are just prone to that, personally. I don’t think it’s analysis. I think it’s a predisposition.”
Well, i know you think that, and thats ok and all,
but its almost impossible not to take that as an insult if you are on the receiving end of that kind of thinking. Its like you end up dismissing other people’s views by waving them off as ‘predispositions’ or personality traits.Now, you may very well be right. But…it would be like me saying “well zn, i just think of views like yours as reflective of people who cant face dark facts and evidence and have to invent rainbows and sunshine, etc”
See where that leads? That ‘your argument is based on predisposition’ thing ?
Again, though, it may very well be true. But who knows. And. It creates a tricky dynamic.
w
vwvParticipantwvParticipantWell so much for Greg Robinson.
wvParticipantNewt Gingrich is one of the Leading Assholes in the increasing divisiveness we are suffering from in our country right now. The government is dominated by completely shameless hypocrites who say and do the most appalling things, and blame others for it. And I don’t see how we pull back from this civil divide when hot-headed rhetoric is now fully ingrained in media marketplace, making millionaires and celebrities out of people who feed the fires of resentment.
==============
Well in one way yes, i agree about Newt. On the other hand i think about Hillary/Bill/Obama and what they stand for (neoliberalism) and…..ya know. Is Newt really that much worse? We could argue about it but You know my schtick by now 🙂
Assange called Trump Gonnorhea, and Hillary Cholera. I’m not sure what disease Newt is. But he’s a disease.
There’s Bernie and 99 diseases in the Senate. I guess I’m just not into pointing out that the Reps are ‘worse’ diseases than the Dem diseases. I just cant do it anymore. Its a plague. I’m more interested in the general broad fact of…the plague.
w
vwvParticipantIt’s really no mystery why people choose a six-pack and a television rather than read books by John Stockwell.
We are so fucking doomed.
Interestingly enough, Stockwell doesn;t think that way.
I generally find that people with the most negative assessments are just prone to that, personally. I don’t think it’s analysis. I think it’s a predisposition.
Do I have a different predisposition? Yes. Is it BETTER? No, obviously. It’s just different. I see myself as a kind of cautiously optimistic Vulcan.
So, live long and post on.
=======================
What evidence are you basing your ‘cautious optimism’ on ?
Cause the air, water, and ground are getting more polluted everyday.
w
vw
vwvParticipantThe CIA has never been one thing. It has never been unified either. Just as the Hoover FBI isn’t the same thing as the current FBI. So what is it now? Well not the little sisters of the poor, but, it is interesting to ask.
================
Well to me, thats like saying “Charles Manson has never been one thing.”
True, Manson is probably nice to his mother, and gives to charity and brushes his teeth. But the bad parts of Manson are…ya know.
w
vwvParticipantThe mainstream-corporate articles are vague
The last 2 articles on this in this thread are from Vox and Mother Jones, so this way too conveniently over general idea that mainstream news is always one single identifiable homogeneous thing doesn’t apply in this case.
================
I dont think the MSM is “one single identifiable homogeneous thing” but i think its pretty close.
I dont consider M.Jones to be part of the MSM. I dunno anything about Vox.
At any rate, i still dont know what ‘exactly’ the ‘hacking’ accomplished. I dont know the specifics. Did they delete a single solitary vote?
Obama didnt think they did enough to even justify saying anything to the public. That says a lot to me, considering the rooskies were trying to help a Republicrat.
w
vwvParticipantWell assuming any or some of that is true (for the sake of argument) I still dont understand what the ‘russian hackers’ could accomplish. The mainstream-corporate articles are vague on this ‘hacking’ — were they Deleting votes? Were they making it impossible for voters to vote for Hillary? What exactly did the hackers do?
I also think this stood out:
“…Some inside the Obama administration wanted to go public with the information. But the White House decided against it, claiming it wasn’t worth risking people’s faith in the election’s integrity.”So when all was said and done, Obama didnt think enough damage was
done to even tell the voters about it.w
vwvParticipantIt seems like a slow drip-drip-drip towards fascism. The problem for Republicans is that impeaching Trump is political suicide. An impeachment is going to be followed by a house-cleaning of the GOP. Being hitched to the Trump wagon is dangerous, too, because there may well be backlash in 2018 and 2020. But impeachment is almost certain death. They are in a tight spot. And they won’t bail on Trump until it becomes clear that sticking with Trump is certain death. Trump’s unpopularity has to reach a level in enough districts to make GOP incumbents on the losing side of the polls within their districts before they will turn on him in desperation to save their own jobs. This, actually, is our best and most realistic hope. We certainly don’t need the entire GOP. Just enough of them to create a majority with the Democrats. Weirdly, it may take FOX to assist in this. There has been a little bit of head-shaking on that network. That needs to increase, and for that to increase, there has to be more smoking guns.
==================
Luckily for all of civilization,
Mr Pence is standing by.I agree with Noam, btw — i think the Reps are the most dangerous organization in world history.
And thats APART from Trump.
Trump is a separate issue and sui generis.
w
vwvParticipantHere’s the supposedly ‘left’ Guardian on Corbyn. (the BBC was about the same on Corbyn)
wvParticipantI’m guessing its not making a dent,
Nope.
Not a dent.
==================
In one of those vids someone (j oliver?) quuotes a leading Rep as excusing Trump by saying “well, he’s new at this…blah blah” — and i was thinking that will play just fine with the Replicants. That will work. They think of Trump as the outsider and the ‘Naive Mr Smith goes to Washington” type of guy.
A testament to corporate propaganda, or whatever ya want ta call it.
I also wonder how this is playing to the middle-of-the-roaders. That nebulous group that is neither solid Dem or Solid Rep.
…ps…as far as the ‘what happened’ part of this — fwiw, i have zero doubt Trump fired Comey coz Comey was investigating Trumps boys, and thus was ‘disloyal’.
Trumps word against Comey’s though. Unlike Nixon Trump was not vain enough to tape everything he said.
w
vwvParticipantThis is a ‘what happened’ thread, and i have nothing to say about that, but,I’m interested in how this is all playing in the red-staters-minds.
So somebody keep an eye out for info on how this is all playing to Right-wingers or Trump-voters.
I’m guessing its not making a dent, but i dunno.
w
vwvParticipantIn regard to capitalism. I think SOME capitalism can be a good thing, as long as it is tightly regulated. My God–without it would we have fidget spinners?
================
I gave a fidget spinner to a prosecutor last week. I put some glitter on it too.
w
vwvParticipantwvParticipantThe scarcity thing was Lee Camp. Funny guy. I have been thinking about Lee Camp, Colbert, and Jon Stewart today. Camp is the ‘leftist’. Cobert and Stewart are the ‘liberals’. 🙂
wvParticipantDanny Glover
wvParticipantAlso, WV:
Would enjoy reading your ideas of having an economic mix. It sounds like you’re saying mostly socialism, with a dash of capitalism. Would like to hear your thoughts on why you think it’s important to have that mix, etc.
After my sudden burst of posts today, I’ll go silent again for a bit and check back later. Will just read what you’ve written and let it sink in, etc. No comments until next weekend, at the earliest.
Take care, all.
========================
Well, yes, a ‘dash of capitalism’ is all I’d want.
But again, my brain just wont ‘go there’ anymore — ie, my brain just wont spend time imagining utopias, or my personal vision of a just society, etc. My brain just wont do it anymore. We have a history that we are stuck with. A constitution written by white-male-capitalists. A long history of various kinds of capitalist propaganda. Our institutions, schools, religions, media, etc have been captured by capitalist ideas (mostly). Corporate-capitalism has colonized most Americans minds now.
Given that, I just ‘set my personal utopia-visions aside’ in my brain. Its too painful to even consider them in a large scale. (though there’s always small-scale intentional community visions that appeal to me)
I’m left with the here-and-now policies of the Bernies and the Jills. Even THAT seems like pie-in-the-sky most of the time. Ah well.
Time for me to water my plants and dig in the earth a bit. Gardening keeps me sane.
w
vwvParticipantMy view is that it accurately describes most leftists. Not all of them, of course. It doesn’t describe your views, for example, if I read you correctly. Or WV’s — who sees corporate capitalism as the problem, not capitalism itself.
=================
Well, corporate-capitalism iz what we got, so thats what i talk about. As far as some other kind of capitalism that might be regulated and tamed — i dunno, BT. I can envision a socialist system with a little capitalism mixed in.
I dont spend much time anymore thinking about wv-ram’s idea of ‘utopia’. Ya know. It aint here now, and it gonna happen, so i dont spend a lotta time thinking about it. For me it comes too close to ‘day dreaming’.
w
vwvParticipantwvParticipantI’m a tiny bit concerned about the alliance with the DUP, though. The Tories have formed a government with an even MORE conservative party in order to form a government (at least, so it appears. I’m going to contact a couple Brit friends of mine to see what they’re thinking). But looks like May herself won’t last the year as PM, and Brexit is all fucked up now.
================
i found this article useful. Its a bit of history of the Labor party etc. Written before the election :
aljazeera:http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/06/uk-general-election-corbyn-labour-unknown-170601110228591.htmlw
vwvParticipantYeah, one of my female-friends saw it and liked it. She thought it was the first time Hollywood has done a decent female-super-hero character.
I have no desire to see it though. I’m boycotting super-hero movies until Hollywood makes a marxist super-hero.
w
vwvParticipantwvParticipant===========================================
Jeremy Corbyn was just 2,227 votes away from becoming Prime MinisterWinning seven Tory knife-edge seats would have put Labour leader in Downing Street
Harriet Agerholm
@HarrietAgerholm
The Independent OnlineJeremy Corbyn was just 2,227 votes away from becoming Prime Minister in the general election, new analysis has revealed.
If the Labour leader had won seven marginal Conservative seats and formed a so-called “progressive alliance” with all other smaller parties – barring the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) – it would have been enough to command a working majority.
The Labour Party has said it was prepared to form a coalition government, with Mr Corbyn announcing: “We are ready to serve.”
However, if the Conservative Party had won just 287 more votes needed to secure five knife-edge Labour seats, they would have commanded a majority alone.
The calculation comes as the Tories were reeling from the loss of their majority, which it had looked as though they would substantially increase when Theresa May called the election in April.
The DUP, which increased its number of seats to 10, said it was working on a deal with the Tories whereby it would support them on a vote-by-vote basis.
With seven more Tory constituencies falling to him, a coalition of Labour, Liberal Democrats, Scottish National Party (SNP), Plaid Cymru, the Green Party and one independent MP in the House of Commons would have held 322 seats — enough for Mr Corbyn to enter number 10.
This figure is based on Labour winning Kensington, where counting has been suspended until Friday evening.
The Green Party, SNP, Plaid Cymru have all spoken in favour of alliances, although the Liberal Democrats – for whom a coalition with the Conservatives has already proved devastating – had ruled out joining with other parties.
Seven Tory constituencies, including those held by Home Secretary Amber Rudd and former minister Stephen Crabb, were won with small majorities in the tens or hundreds, including Southampton Itchen, Preseli Pembrokeshire, Hastings and Rye and Chipping Barnet.
Had the Conservatives seized five seats including Dudley North, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Crew and Nantwich and Canterbury from Labour – seats where Mr Corbyn’s party won by a small margin – Theresa May would have gone into Brexit negotiations with a majority in the Commons.
However, even this would have been a huge disappointment to Mrs May, who claimed the reason she called the election was to secure a more substantial mandate for Brexit, as it would still have represented a much weaker position than the one from which she called the election.
-
AuthorPosts
