Joe Biden Presidency thread *Please read OP - Threadbanned Users Added 4/5/21*

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I had Blair's New Labour in mind but more centrist than that. It might be down to definition. The term 'left wing' has to be understood in context. In Ireland, you could argue that the Labour party is left wing while Fianna Fáil is not. Yet I would consider Fianna Fáil to be more left wing than the Democrats when you look at each party's policies.

But that's exactly why I raised the point about Jus Soli, it was FF who ran a referendum to abolish Jus Soli in Ireland, you'd be called Far Right/Fascist by most Democrats today if you suggested that

Melanchthon wrote: »

But that's exactly why I raised the point about Jus Soli, it was FF who ran a referendum to abolish Jus Soli in Ireland, you'd be called Far Right/Fascist by most Democrats today if you suggested that

Jus Soli has been in existence in the US for centuries. Its history there is very much different to its history in Ireland, not least because of slavery. If you take a step back from the US, it is a country of two parties. One is economically right-wing and conservative, the other is relatively liberal and economically centrist. 'Left wing', as understood in Europe, doesn't exist in the US.

Invidious wrote: »

It definitely does ... look at the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.

To describe the Democrats as "relatively liberal and economically centrist" ignores the facts that (a) Democrats come in all ideological affiliations, from conservatives to moderates to democratic socialists, and (b) there is a pitched battle going on at present between older conservative/moderate Democrats and younger democratic socialists, with the latter making huge strides in recent times, especially among the young. The policies that the likes of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez want to see implemented are not all that different from what the European left also favors.

How much power does AOC and her ilk actually wield in today's Democrat party? Very little. Of course the Dems must have that broad church. No more than the Republicans must include white evangelicals and white supremacists, yet they could not be described as a white supremacist party. But the reality is that the vast majority of Dem voters and politicians are not left wing. Its real politik.

Invidious wrote: »

The don't have all that much power at the moment, but young people are politically much further to the left than older Americans. In the coming decades, we will see a major shift as more and more democratic socialists get elected, the conservative wing of the Democratic party loses its grip, and the Republican base weakens. AOC and her ilk are the future of American politics.

I agree that they will wield more influence in the future. Which might be in the Republicans' best interests as it happens. But right now, they don't define the Democrat party.

Melanchthon wrote: »

That's pretty fair but take the closed shop Union thing that's present in the USA that's classic old school left wing.

It's all become a bit messy in the last say 4 years, before that I'd say the Republicans could have been considered more economically liberal, with Trump and tarrifs not so much now.

I'd argue as well that overall the Democrats are more "socially liberal*", take the Trans stuff and positive discrimination, I am fairly certain UK labour have a more measured position on both those topics, similarly in France say the whole idea of positive discrimination is anathema. Then you have the states effect, California appears to be ridiculously regulation heavy, never been there but I actually have products in my house that are banned from sale in California but are ok in the EU (which isn't exactly lax on this stuff).

* Using liberal in the recent context it seems to have changed a lot in recent years and I am not just talking about Right Wingers pretending to be "classically liberal", take the UK Liberal Democrats, a party I used to have a lot of time for, they campaigned in the 2000's for a Brexit referendum (they were still pro-EU), skip to 2019 they said they would cancel Brexit without a referendum.

I think a case in point is Fine Gael. A gay leader/Taoiseach with Indian heritage. About as socially liberal a statement as you could make as a party. Yet nobody would say that Fine Gael are left wing.

“If a man is not a socialist by the time he is 20, he has no heart. If he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain.”

NIMAN wrote: »

“If a man is not a socialist by the time he is 20, he has no heart. If he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain.”

Tediously predictable

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Sure but the impetus for that change (along with the social contract) has been burned by conservatives and neoliberals.

How do you settle down if you can't afford a home? Today's youth are going to pay a fortune for education and spend the rest of their lives paying it off. There's no reason for them ever to vote conservative. They'll never have to worry about property or inheritance taxes.

I'm thinking nature provided a solution to the ever aging population issue but unfortunately with our science and tech we are managing to dodge the covid bullet. I suppose when all pensions collapse and/or there is no more opportunity for growth in the global stock market, the balance might be restored.

I often wonder if the future is just 80% over the age of 50 with the remaining all working in health services.

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't see a future where the United States can remain united. It's too broadly divergent in beliefs and attitudes.

I think it's true to say that many people have become politically polarised/radicalised through social media echo chambers and that this problem has manifested itself in a particularly spectacular way in the United States, but when you look at what the country has been through in its history, I would say it's pessimistic and sensationalist that the United States cannot hold itself together. It's like people have given up on solving the problem of online misinformation and toxic echo chambers without even trying.

It's worth remembering that the printing press led to a lot of social upheaval as well as information was able to spread so much faster. Misinformation as well. Ideas that threatened the social order of the time. But humanity largely got to grips with that in the end, and it became simply a part of the fabric of civilisation. I'm not hearing a definitive argument as to why the Internet can't be the same way.

As to economics being a factor in driving social strife, again these are problems which can be solved if there is a will. It may call for certain people willing to give a little ground, but ultimately this is better for them than society collapsing and all the money they have not being worth the paper it is printed on.

jill_valentine wrote: »

Very troubling details in this Wapo piece:





They were getting real time updates on the location of the Congress members from someone inside. A "prestrike" is a reconnaissance run. Who is Paul and what goodies would he have had for them...?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/conspiracy-oath-keeper-arrest-capitol-riot/2021/01/19/fb84877a-5a4f-11eb-8bcf-3877871c819d_story.html#click=https://t.co/2TbyCYkOzq

I wonder if he was one of the people taken on a tour of congress the day before by a member of congress.

jill_valentine wrote: »

Very troubling details in this Wapo piece:





They were getting real time updates on the location of the Congress members from someone inside. A "prestrike" is a reconnaissance run. Who is Paul and what goodies would he have had for them...?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/conspiracy-oath-keeper-arrest-capitol-riot/2021/01/19/fb84877a-5a4f-11eb-8bcf-3877871c819d_story.html#click=https://t.co/2TbyCYkOzq

A couple of suspects immediately spring to mind.

Suspects.... I imagine we're talking about Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Green. Two of the biggest headers in the American Header Party (AKA Republicans), right now. There are rumours about Boebert's mother being an instigator in the Capitol Hill riots, given that woman bearing a striking resemblance was photo'd and filmed giving instructions to rioters on how to take the building, and there is also that tweet she put out about the speaker being out of the chamber. Why she was tweeting anything during that time is questionable and shows a remarkable lack of decorum and weird priorities. The thing about her giving tours to people the day before is another allegation.

There is already conclusive proof of state legislators being among the riotous mob. If Congressmen or Congresswomen are proven to have been aiding and abetting rioters as well, that will be quite explosive.

briany wrote: »

I think it's true to say that many people have become politically polarised/radicalised through social media echo chambers and that this problem has manifested itself in a particularly spectacular way in the United States, but when you look at what the country has been through in its history, I would say it's pessimistic and sensationalist that the United States cannot hold itself together. It's like people have given up on solving the problem of online misinformation and toxic echo chambers without even trying.

It's worth remembering that the printing press led to a lot of social upheaval as well as information was able to spread so much faster. Misinformation as well. Ideas that threatened the social order of the time. But humanity largely got to grips with that in the end, and it became simply a part of the fabric of civilisation. I'm not hearing a definitive argument as to why the Internet can't be the same way.

As to economics being a factor in driving social strife, again these are problems which can be solved if there is a will. It may call for certain people willing to give a little ground, but ultimately this is better for them than society collapsing and all the money they have not being worth the paper it is printed on.

Regard your last paragraph.. if the GOP gave ground on this situation, they lose.

They have this mantra of pulling yourself up by the boot straps, If you go against that idea, they'll tell you to go back to where you came from, you're a socialist/communist thus reengaging their real base. Their base once they hear socialist/communist labeled against you, you are the enemy, thus keeping that simple divide in American politics solid, they hold on to power that keeps them relevant. The GOP are a dinosaur, but the US system it's twisted against it moving forward for everyone in term of the $

Joe has an enemy in the pharma sector..

https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein/status/1352759091416989697?s=19