How Did We Get Here?

[JackLuis]

The deep history of the radical right’s stealth plan for America

Author Nancy MacLean has unearthed a stealth ideologue of the American right. Her book, Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the Radical Right’s Stealth Plan for America, tells the story of one James McGill Buchanan, a Southern political scientist and father of “public choice economics.” MacLean details how this little-known figure has had a massive impact on the ideology of the far right. None other than Charles Koch looked to MacLean’s theories for inspiration. They are libertarian — but with a twist: bluntly, it “entails restrictions on the freedom of the great majority in order to protect property rights and the prerogatives of the most well off.” MacLean shows how this idea can be traced down through the last 60 years of right-wing politics, starting with Brown v. The Board of Education and continuing with the Koch brothers’ empire. And she demonstrates that those followers and those in thrall to the Koch billions are pumping up their fight under the new administration.

Trump, Populist or Puppet?

Who is pulling the strings?

 

[DrDelirium]

Are you under the impression that Trump did away with Glass-Steagal? Destroyed the welfare system? Passed NAFTA? Initiated an endless series of wars utilizing jihadist proxies? Created the Department of Homeland Security? These are all features of an on-going program of enriching the rich and impoverishing everyone else that has been going on with not just bi-partisan support, but bi-partisan leadership for more than fifty years. We 'got here' by buying into the tribal wars between two corrupt parties of the rich rather than examining actual policies and who supports them.

https://morganrlewis.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/mop-051.jpg?w=640

 

[JackLuis]

Are you under the impression that Trump did away with Glass-Steagal? Destroyed the welfare system? Passed NAFTA? Initiated an endless series of wars utilizing jihadist proxies? Created the Department of Homeland Security? These are all features of an on-going program of enriching the rich and impoverishing everyone else that has been going on with not just bi-partisan support, but bi-partisan leadership for more than fifty years. We 'got here' by buying into the tribal wars between two corrupt parties of the rich rather than examining actual policies and who supports them.

https://morganrlewis.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/mop-051.jpg?w=640

Not really. I'm under the impression that Trumpanzy is a fucking fool who could be hung for treason. Yes I know that the mess we are in is due to inadequate leadership since the Kennedy Administration. However the article was about the roots of the 'Conservative' agenda. Did you read it?

 

[DrDelirium]

Sure. Continue to slice reality into little bits and ignore those that don't fit your agenda. "Conservative agenda," "Liberal Agenda," these are just window dressing for the same agenda, the agenda of the very rich. But sure, the problem is Trump.

 

[Iceprincess12]

Once upon a time there was a rebellious single cell organism who decided to crawl out of the ocean and breathe air. The rest is history.

Rebellion is how we got here and how we will stay here.

I Linkin Park

 

[Hypoxia]

Once upon a time there was a rebellious single cell organism who decided to crawl out of the ocean and breathe air. The rest is history.

Actually there were cells that photosynthesized oxygen, poisoning and killing most of the sulfur-breathing life on Earth. It was mass genocide. Sure, some sulfur life survived. Cf gangrene.

Then there was the Permian-Triassic Extinction Event a quarter billion years ago, which killed about 98% of life here. Things were dicey back then. Yow.

 

[Iceprincess12]

Actually there were cells that photosynthesized oxygen, poisoning and killing most of the sulfur-breathing life on Earth. It was mass genocide. Sure, some sulfur life survived. Cf gangrene.

Then there was the Permian-Triassic Extinction Event a quarter billion years ago, which killed about 98% of life here. Things were dicey back then. Yow.

They killed off the fire breathing dragons didn't they? I hate germs even more now!

The 2% really are the most important

 

[Hypoxia]

They killed off the fire breathing dragons didn't they? I hate germs even more now!

Oh, the dragons came later. Cf medieval tapestries etc. I think dragons succumbed to the 'germ' of ergot, a grain fungus containing LSD that infested pre-Renaissance Europe. Humans with ergotism hallucinated, danced madly (St Vitus Dance), fucked orgiastically, spread STDs and parasites wildly, and raped dragons who never stood a chance. Ergotism is linked to the rise of the Reformation, resistance to royal authority, the spread of liberal ideology, and democracy. Whew.

The 2% really are the most important

They were mostly slime molds. Ah well, gotta start somewhere... Meanwhile, we seem to be back at the evolving-slime-mold stage of political life in USA. The 2% of the populace that are ultra-rich slime just ruin things for the rest of us. Have mercy!

 

[Iceprincess12]

Oh, the dragons came later. Cf medieval tapestries etc. I think dragons succumbed to the 'germ' of ergot, a grain fungus containing LSD that infested pre-Renaissance Europe. Humans with ergotism hallucinated, danced madly (St Vitus Dance), fucked orgiastically, spread STDs and parasites wildly, and raped dragons who never stood a chance. Ergotism is linked to the rise of the Reformation, resistance to royal authority, the spread of liberal ideology, and democracy. Whew.

They were mostly slime molds. Ah well, gotta start somewhere... Meanwhile, we seem to be back at the evolving-slime-mold stage of political life in USA. The 2% of the populace that are ultra-rich slime just ruin things for the rest of us. Have mercy!

Slime trickles at a robust rate. It should be hitting the dregs of the population any day now.

Dragon raping...there must be a movie in there somewhere. If they could do it with a Human Centipede, can you image what M Bay could do with a dragon? Move over Transformers.

 

[Gotham_Central]

In a perhaps pointless attempt to drag the thread back to the OP's original topic...

How we got here is a tangled mess that, IMO, can be boiled down to Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs. We all have the same basic needs, food, water, shelter, companionship, etc. Our ability -or more correctly perceived ability- to meet those needs in turn creates either confidence and self assurance or doubt and consternation. Either of which can be and is used against us.

If you're able to meet your own needs, your inclined to favor ideas that can be interpreted as favoring self reliance. If you can't meet those needs, your inclined to favor ideas that can be interpreted as communal. This is not true universally, but can be shown as the trend.

Those drawn to power long ago learned to capitalize on these fundamental concerns. One camp promises to help those challenged to meet their basic needs to meet them; often through collectivist measures. Another promises to defend the self reliance of their constituency; opposing the collective ideas of the first. Neither group of power mongers actually care about their constituency, just maintaining the power they have garnered and ensuring their own ability to meet their own needs. (Consider the number of US politicians that go to Washington nearly broke and in short order are incredibly well off.)

These same groups of politicians then work together to ensure need. Both "sides need poverty. One side needs it to trap their constituency in a cycle of dependency. The other side needs it so as to have collectivist(Big Government) ideologies to threaten the self reliance of their own constituency. Both groups of politicians preach fear and demonization of the other; "Republicans want to starve old people", "Democrats want to take what you worked so hard for."

We are drawn to voices who promise, or at least pretend, to have an interest in addressing our needs. When we side blindly with a politician just because they will give us something to meet a need, or because the will "protect what's ours", we often do so blindly. We never consider what that person is actually doing. How are they meeting their own needs, and what is it costing us.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

I blame Robert McNamara, the architect of the Vietnam war. The Viet Cong captured and tortured John McCain which caused his mental problems and poor decision-making skills. His poor decision-making skills lead him to choose Sarah “Looney Tunes” Palin as his running mate. She is the right wing phenom who launched the movement of deplorables.

I also blame the Hollywood writers strike which lead to reality TV which is advancing the decline of western civilization.

 

[BotanyBoy]

In a perhaps pointless attempt to drag the thread back to the OP's original topic...

How we got here is a tangled mess that, IMO, can be boiled down to Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs. We all have the same basic needs, food, water, shelter, companionship, etc. Our ability -or more correctly perceived ability- to meet those needs in turn creates either confidence and self assurance or doubt and consternation. Either of which can be and is used against us.

If you're able to meet your own needs, your inclined to favor ideas that can be interpreted as favoring self reliance. If you can't meet those needs, your inclined to favor ideas that can be interpreted as communal. This is not true universally, but can be shown as the trend.

Those drawn to power long ago learned to capitalize on these fundamental concerns. One camp promises to help those challenged to meet their basic needs to meet them; often through collectivist measures. Another promises to defend the self reliance of their constituency; opposing the collective ideas of the first. Neither group of power mongers actually care about their constituency, just maintaining the power they have garnered and ensuring their own ability to meet their own needs. (Consider the number of US politicians that go to Washington nearly broke and in short order are incredibly well off.)

These same groups of politicians then work together to ensure need. Both "sides need poverty. One side needs it to trap their constituency in a cycle of dependency. The other side needs it so as to have collectivist(Big Government) ideologies to threaten the self reliance of their own constituency. Both groups of politicians preach fear and demonization of the other; "Republicans want to starve old people", "Democrats want to take what you worked so hard for."

We are drawn to voices who promise, or at least pretend, to have an interest in addressing our needs. When we side blindly with a politician just because they will give us something to meet a need, or because the will "protect what's ours", we often do so blindly. We never consider what that person is actually doing. How are they meeting their own needs, and what is it costing us.

https://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/combatarms/images/8/88/Boom_headshot.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20110401133427