American political forces, spent and rising

[pecksniff]

Populist nationalism is over. It might play a role in Congressional elections here and there, but it will never again be an important national force like it was in 2016. The fact that immigration is going to permanently change our ethnic-racial demographics is now something the American people are used to.

Neoliberal economics is over. The whole supply-side theory is more thoroughly discredited than Marxism. It has been tried and tried and tried, and it has never accomplished anything but its real intended purpose, which is to make the rich richer.

The religious right is over. It will remain relevant only in certain cultural enclaves. Everybody else just points at it and laughs.

Neoconservative warhawkery is over. Even the GOP has repudiated it. PNAC shut down more than a decade ago. After Iraq and Afghanistan, nobody takes seriously any more the idea that the U.S. can invade any other country and do "nation-building" to any beneficial effect.

If there is any Wave of the Future in American politics, it will come from the left, and not from the Democrats. That's not going away, because it is rooted in the very real economic needs and demands of distressed and anxious Americans who can see very clearly that wealth inequality, as such, is a problem.

 

[pecksniff]

Relevant article: The scam of the Reagan-era neoliberalism is crumbling — and there's a battle for its replacement.

 

[Lady2020]

I think you're naive.

 

[pecksniff]

I think you're naive.

On which point?

 

[Lady2020]

On which point?

All of it.

 

[KeithD]

I don't see any of this being over for some years to come. If it is, why are so many, including Democrats, assuming the Republicans take both houses of Congress in 2022? With all the crap Trump and the Republicans are doing, they should lose biglie in 2022, but few seem to believe the OP changes are going to kick in anytime soon. The rightest coup is continuing. There's no guarantee it won't stop or slow down a change in who holds functional power in the United States.

 

[pecksniff]

I don't see any of this being over for some years to come. If it is, why are so many, including Democrats, assuming the Republicans take both houses of Congress in 2022?

Because the sitting president's party always loses seats in the midterms. It's traditional.

 

[JohnnySavage]

I think you're naive.

Possibly.

The general consensus though is delusional

 

[Champakian]

What is it that your gollum Trump is still doing?


Melania?


I thought DeSanta was now the Lexus of hate for what he "might" do...

 

[icanhelp1]

Populist nationalism is over. It might play a role in Congressional elections here and there, but it will never again be an important national force like it was in 2016. The fact that immigration is going to permanently change our ethnic-racial demographics is now something the American people are used to.

Neoliberal economics is over. The whole supply-side theory is more thoroughly discredited than Marxism. It has been tried and tried and tried, and it has never accomplished anything but its real intended purpose, which is to make the rich richer.

The religious right is over. It will remain relevant only in certain cultural enclaves. Everybody else just points at it and laughs.

Neoconservative warhawkery is over. Even the GOP has repudiated it. PNAC shut down more than a decade ago. After Iraq and Afghanistan, nobody takes seriously any more the idea that the U.S. can invade any other country and do "nation-building" to any beneficial effect.

If there is any Wave of the Future in American politics, it will come from the left, and not from the Democrats. That's not going away, because it is rooted in the very real economic needs and demands of distressed and anxious Americans who can see very clearly that wealth inequality, as such, is a problem.

We all know the political strategy by the marxist left is open borders and all the crap that comes with it, most of what you listed above.

 

[Rightguide]

Populist nationalism is over. It might play a role in Congressional elections here and there, but it will never again be an important national force like it was in 2016. The fact that immigration is going to permanently change our ethnic-racial demographics is now something the American people are used to.

Neoliberal economics is over. The whole supply-side theory is more thoroughly discredited than Marxism. It has been tried and tried and tried, and it has never accomplished anything but its real intended purpose, which is to make the rich richer.

The religious right is over. It will remain relevant only in certain cultural enclaves. Everybody else just points at it and laughs.

Neoconservative warhawkery is over. Even the GOP has repudiated it. PNAC shut down more than a decade ago. After Iraq and Afghanistan, nobody takes seriously any more the idea that the U.S. can invade any other country and do "nation-building" to any beneficial effect.

If there is any Wave of the Future in American politics, it will come from the left, and not from the Democrats. That's not going away, because it is rooted in the very real economic needs and demands of distressed and anxious Americans who can see very clearly that wealth inequality, as such, is a problem.

Relevant article: The scam of the Reagan-era neoliberalism is crumbling — and there's a battle for its replacement.

No matter the direction a search for the truth may take, Peck's intellectual compass will always snap to true left, and wind up 180 degrees in the opposite direction.

 

[GothTalk]

Populist nationalism is over. It might play a role in Congressional elections here and there, but it will never again be an important national force like it was in 2016.

Neoliberal economics is over.

The religious right is over.

If there is any Wave of the Future in American politics, it will come from the left, and not from the Democrats. That's not going away, because it is rooted in the very real economic needs and demands of distressed and anxious Americans who can see very clearly that wealth inequality, as such, is a problem.

You're delusional, about every word of this.

Inequity (we have equality) is a problem...LOL

All of it.

I don't see any of this being over for some years to come. If it is, why are so many, including Democrats, assuming the Republicans take both houses of Congress in 2022? With all the crap Trump and the Republicans are doing, they should lose biglie in 2022, but few seem to believe the OP changes are going to kick in anytime soon. The rightest coup is continuing. There's no guarantee it won't stop or slow down a change in who holds functional power in the United States.

I mostly agree with you here. But your side loosing because it's insistence on obviously bad policy isn't a rightist coup.

Because the sitting president's party always loses seats in the midterms. It's traditional.

One, not always, and not always as bad.

The fact that your side lost it's ass in the darkest of blue strongholds like Seattle?? Indicates a really really really bad year for (D)'eez in 2022 and probably 2024.

Not to mention it shits all over your assertions in OP.

As usual, you're 180 from observable, objective reality.

 

[icanhelp1]

I don't see any of this being over for some years to come. If it is, why are so many, including Democrats, assuming the Republicans take both houses of Congress in 2022? With all the crap Trump and the Republicans are doing, they should lose biglie in 2022, but few seem to believe the OP changes are going to kick in anytime soon. The rightest coup is continuing. There's no guarantee it won't stop or slow down a change in who holds functional power in the United States.

Maybe you can be more specific, what crap are “republicans doing”, especially since the (D)espicables own both chambers of congress and the executive branch?

 

[pecksniff]

We all know the political strategy by the marxist left is open borders and all the crap that comes with it, most of what you listed above.

"Open borders"?

 

[pecksniff]

Inequity (we have equality) is a problem...LOL

I specified economic inequality, and that is a problem. It is also the toughest nut to crack, the very last fallback line the RW will defend after giving up anything else, because it's the point on which the plutocracy will fight the hardest and spend the most.

 

[GothTalk]

Maybe you can be more specific, what crap are “republicans doing”, especially since the (D)espicables own both chambers of congress and the executive branch?

Nationalism and populism. The things you say are over.

You BARELY eeked those things out, about to lose all of them and you've totally lost your ass's at the local/state level. Turns out "anything but Trump!!" didn't have staying power once you guys started fucking the middle/working class over.

2025, Democrats and the left will have 5 states and half a dozen cities.

I specified economic inequality, and that is a problem.

Inequity and inequality are not the same thing.

We don't have inequality, we have inequity and it's not a problem.

It is also the toughest nut to crack

Because inequity is the result of success, and if you punish the successful for making the failures feel bad then EVERYONE fails and suffers.

This how "progressive" shit holes mad Nazis look like amateurs in the mass murder game for the last 100+ years.

, the very last fallback line the RW will defend after giving up anything else, because it's the point on which the plutocracy will fight the hardest and spend the most.

Oh the plutocracy fantasy again...

https://c.tenor.com/d-CLcpHUYQgAAAAC/conspiracy-theory.gif

 

[pecksniff]

Nationalism and populism. The things you say are over.

Over as a force capable of electing a president. They still matter -- but in every election cycle from here on out, they will matter a little less than in the cycle before. Mainly because of generational demographics -- the Millennials are less xenophobic and less racist than any elder generation.

 

[pecksniff]

Neoliberal economics is over. The whole supply-side theory is more thoroughly discredited than Marxism. It has been tried and tried and tried, and it has never accomplished anything but its real intended purpose, which is to make the rich richer.

I notice that nobody has yet disputed this.

The religious right is over. It will remain relevant only in certain cultural enclaves. Everybody else just points at it and laughs.

Or this.

Neoconservative warhawkery is over. Even the GOP has repudiated it. PNAC shut down more than a decade ago. After Iraq and Afghanistan, nobody takes seriously any more the idea that the U.S. can invade any other country and do "nation-building" to any beneficial effect.

Or this.

 

[pecksniff]

Inequity and inequality are not the same thing.

We don't have inequality, we have inequity and it's not a problem.

Relabeling any effort toward economic equality as having to do with "equity" does not render it inadmissible in serious political discussion.

 

[GothTalk]

Over as a force capable of electing a president.

That's quite the goalpost move.

And still wrong.

They still matter -- but in every election cycle from here on out,
they will matter a little less than in the cycle before. Mainly because of generational demographics -- the Millennials are less xenophobic and less racist than any elder generation.

Except that's not what's actually happening.

That's a fantasy you want to pretend is happening because you just took major blows this year and are looking like you're going to get absolutely fucking CRUSHED for the next year and likely in 2024 as well. .

I notice that nobody has yet disputed this.

Or this.

Or this.

"I'm just going to ignore reality." LOL.....

Relabeling any effort toward economic equality as having to do with "equity" does not render it inadmissible in serious political discussion.

I didn't say it did, I said you're conflating them and almost certainly dishonestly so.

We have economic equality in the USA, that's why we have so much inequity.

You don't want equality, you fucking hate it and call it "racist" because it causes inequity.

You want equity, and you can't have it.

 

[pecksniff]

We have economic equality in the USA, that's why we have so much inequity.

No, we don't have economic equality. We have legal equality. Economic equality would involve a low Gini coefficient.

 

[GothTalk]

No, we don't have economic equality. We have legal equality.

No, we have both.

Your dollar spends exactly the same as mine and everyone else's.

Economic equality would involve a low Gini coefficient.

^^ a measure of inequality of distribution, or economic inequity of outcome given legal and economic equity of the dollar itself.... the great equalizer.

 

[pecksniff]

No, we have both.

Your dollar spends exactly the same as mine and everyone else's.



^^ a measure of inequality of distribution, or economic inequity of outcome given legal and economic equity of the dollar itself.... the great equalizer.

You have finally hit on a form of insistent terminology that makes even less sense than your definition of "liberal."

 

[GothTalk]

You have finally hit on a form of insistent terminology that makes even less sense than your definition of "liberal."

The definition of liberal, not my definition.

liberalism, political doctrine that takes protecting and enhancing the freedom of the individual to be the central problem of politics.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/liberalism


And it makes sense if you stop rejecting reality.

We have economic equality, our dollars are all worth the same and spend the same.

What we have and you resent is the unequal distribution of the dollars, or economic inequity.

 

[pecksniff]

The definition of liberal, not my definition.



https://www.britannica.com/topic/liberalism

No, this is what liberal means.

We have economic equality, our dollars are all worth the same and spend the same.

That is not economic equality. It is a situation that prevails in any society, however stratified, that uses a common currency. I hope you would not suggest medieval England had economic equality because a penny was a penny everywhere.