BF2S Forums Presidential Election 2016

pirana6 wrote:

as opposed to all those other politicians?

Trump speaks a lot of nonsense but at least it's the junk that's in his own head. Same for Johnson and Stein. Hillary is a native advertisement.

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Jay wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

She has released hundreds of pages of proposed policies on her website and to the media. I know you don't pay attention to that stuff and only watch t.v. and read reason.com though so I don't expect you to know anything beyond that.

So you believe that she's written hundreds of pages of policy papers and that those are her own beliefs? I got a bridge to sell ya...

So you think her support for expanded healthcare, better protections for women and children, and support for reproductive rights have all been a 30 year ruse? You are pretty much the definition of someone who mistakes cynicism for intelligence.

I think she's a neocon, which is why you love her. Socialist domestic policies and aggressive foreign policy. Did you vote for Bush, too?

her ethos - get power, fuck everyone else

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Jay wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

So you think her support for expanded healthcare, better protections for women and children, and support for reproductive rights have all been a 30 year ruse? You are pretty much the definition of someone who mistakes cynicism for intelligence.

I think she's a neocon, which is why you love her. Socialist domestic policies and aggressive foreign policy. Did you vote for Bush, too?

So you agree that she does have beliefs and an ethos. Thanks for clearing all that up for us.

The entire neoconservative "ideology" is power as a goal unto itself. No set ideology to get caught up in, no ethos, no concrete ideas that can be attacked, vaguely populist, vaguely socialist, wholly interventionist because it is a projection of power, and power is always the goal.

Trump would've been the ideal strongman vessel for them to ride on except for the fact that he's anti intellectual and more likely to give them wedges than the power over policy they seek. Hence #NeverTrump

Last edited by Jay (2016-11-02 17:21:14)

Jay wrote:

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

I think she's a neocon, which is why you love her. Socialist domestic policies and aggressive foreign policy. Did you vote for Bush, too?

i don't think 'socialist domestic policies' were ever part of neoconservatism.

unless you mean that giant workfare scheme, the military ...

They absolutely are. Medicare had a huge expansion under Bush and his campaign slogan promised "compassionate conservatism". Read some Brooks or Kristol, and I don't mean that in a "go read a book noob" way. It's all there.

how about you literally go read some books on socialism. increasing medicare budget is not 'socialism'. jesus christ. this is like first year political science. compassionate conservatism cannot be SOCIALISM.

which is ironic because increases in state spending are classic economic and social stimuli of fascism. nazi germany spent a lot of money on healthcare, gymnasia and fitness resorts.

why is all redistribution socialist? you do know what socialism is, right? it's not using public taxes to pay for public services.

Last edited by uziq (2016-11-03 02:36:37)

sorry but i refuse to acknowledge moronic americans' hijacking of a 200-year-old term just because a sheer weight of them apply enough ignorance to misuse it.

it's worrying that you think they are interchangeable.

Jay wrote:

uziq wrote:

it's worrying that you think they are interchangeable.

It's worrying that you are still such a pedantic twit in your late 20s.

i'm sorry but it's not pedantic to state that there's a difference between a capitalist state having a public spending budget and socialism. go back to school. they even used the phrase "compassionate conservatism" ffs.

Last edited by uziq (2016-11-03 04:33:01)

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

uziq wrote:

it's worrying that you think they are interchangeable.

It's worrying that you are still such a pedantic twit in your late 20s.

i'm sorry but it's not pedantic to state that there's a difference between a capitalist state having a public spending budget and socialism. go back to school. they even used the phrase "compassionate conservatism" ffs.

The neoconservative wold view stems from the teachings of Leo Strauss when he was at the University of Chicago. It's an amorphous collection of ideas whose goal is power. The welfare state is a means to an end as it allows the worker to continue working without wasting energy on worrying about getting hurt or old. You are correct in that it does not advocate state control over the means of production, but that is not out of the question either if it is in the State's interest.

Control over the means of production is asserted by other methods anyway. Regulatory agencies are used to direct entire industries to the point that they become quasi-state run entities like utilities. Only whatever profit the regulators allow remains in private hands. This is the Obamacare model.

Every position leads to centralized control over the country, and this is the other half of compassionate conservatism. They believe that battles over gay rights are disruptive because it undermines the family structure that stability stems from. They oppose abortion because a lowered birth rate weakens the state and undermines the welfare state. They're for drug control because drugs lower productivity. It's all very rational if you view it from the nationalistic perspective.

It's not an inherently immoral or evil philosophy, but it's one that allows evil people to do a lot of damage if they gained control. It is almost completely identical to American Progressivism, the difference being it tends to be more hawkish and kinder to business. Hence the common complaint that Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same coin. They really are.

uziq wrote:

none of that has any relation even to the most basic and simplistic definition of socialism. you're describing how neoconservativism is basically fascist with an old-fashioned imperialist foreign policy – a commonplace analysis even 10 years ago. how is this even basically socialism?

we all know neocons came out of chicago. thank you for the wikipedia summary. i expect we've read more strauss and fukuyama than you. you are stumbling around like a moron in political science 101.

Ok

uziq wrote:

you do realise that half the political spectrum also involves the state running things, right? conservatism isn't all free-market ideology and no government. compassionate conservatism has been. a right-wing tenet since the days of Burke.

I never said that conservatism was about free market ideology. The right, here in America, does pay lip service to it while campaigning, but tends towards it's tariff loving, special interest favoring historical self while in power. Ideologically, the Republican party is a bastardised mix of free marketers, protectionists, nationalists, social conservatives, libertarians, constitutional originalists and neo conservatives. Right now the nationalists and protectionists are running the show in the form of Trump. Under Bush it was the social conservatives and neocons. Under his dad it was the free marketers.