Is globalism real?

[Pilarcraft]

In seriousness though, I wonder why so few people are pointing out that so many of his policies are the complete opposite of what he was saying only a few years back.

The quality of his opposition, really. Had video surfaced of Trump licking poo off the barrier glass in the ape house at the zoo, the refrain would still be "at least he's not Hillary."

I mean, on the other hand, the main reason that the majority of the voters supported Clinton was "well she's not trump!"
it's not like Donald Trump has a big popular base in the Population right now. The Majority of his voters practically voted for him only to stop another Clinton from running the country. a lot of that base has dwindled by now.

[Bakery Hill]

Yes it is and it's a Judeo-Bolshevik plot to destroy the white race.

As a Jewish communist, someone forgot to give me a heads up.

Weren't you a Baha'i?

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Weren't you a Baha'i?

Yep. That has been my religion since I was 14, but I was raised in a nonobservant Jewish family.

[HMS Queen Elizabeth]

This would make sense in Latin America, appropriately since Trump is the first Peronist president

Peron was educated, Trump can't read.

But, snark aside, Peron was a pupil of Mussolini, who in turn sprung from left-wing agitants, so we're still on the left side of the fence.

There isn't a damned thing right wing about Trump.

Sadly I think that is right.

Populism is democracy is communism.

Trump is a populist, democrat, communist.

Trump is less crazy than our elite, because the proles are less crazy, because our elite is now very very crazy. So populism is more orderly than elitism. But that only goes to show how fucked we are, rather than making Trump right wing.

[Nat Socs]

This would make sense in Latin America, appropriately since Trump is the first Peronist president

Peron was educated, Trump can't read.

But, snark aside, Peron was a pupil of Mussolini, who in turn sprung from left-wing agitants, so we're still on the left side of the fence.

There isn't a damned thing right wing about Trump.

WHAAAATTTTT???? Not a single thing? Not one? Not his deregulation, not the lower taxes, not opposition to abortion, not support of border security, not support for strong national defense, not his support of school choice, not his support of welfare reform and descalation, not his nominations of originalist supreme court justices? Nothing? Hmmmmmmmm ok.

dumbass.

[Nat Socs]

Sadly I think that is right.

Populism is democracy is communism.

Trump is a populist, democrat, communist.

Hold on, what? In what world can you possibly say democracy is communism? Sure, democracy over time leads to communism, if you allow the tyranny of the majority to take control, which is why it's important to have a strong government to prevent that. But populism, democracy, and communism are three very different things. Populism is non-ideological. It's a political attitude of opposition to a corrupt elitist class. A libertarian could be a populist. Ron Paul ran against the crooked fat cats who depend on what he views as an out-of-bounds government. A conservative could be a populist. Pat Buchanan warned about the dangers of a liberal elite that pushes social degeneracy and cultural marxism. And yes, a leftist or a totalitarian can be a populist as well.

So you and this other guy are confusing me. Seriously. Listen to yourselves, throwing around labels that don't make a lick of sense. What are you trying to say?

[Taihei Tengoku]

Trump is also a legit Maoist

[HMS Queen Elizabeth]

Sadly I think that is right.

Populism is democracy is communism.

Trump is a populist, democrat, communist.

Hold on, what? In what world can you possibly say democracy is communism? Sure, democracy over time leads to communism, if you allow the tyranny of the majority to take control, which is why it's important to have a strong government to prevent that. But populism, democracy, and communism are three very different things. Populism is non-ideological. It's a political attitude of opposition to a corrupt elitist class. A libertarian could be a populist. Ron Paul ran against the crooked fat cats who depend on what he views as an out-of-bounds government. A conservative could be a populist. Pat Buchanan warned about the dangers of a liberal elite that pushes social degeneracy and cultural marxism. And yes, a leftist or a totalitarian can be a populist as well.

So you and this other guy are confusing me. Seriously. Listen to yourselves, throwing around labels that don't make a lick of sense. What are you trying to say?

Democracy is communal ownership of all property. The People might choose to assign some property to private controllers temporarily but ultimately they can seize it back any time they like. There is no constitutional protection for property (in a pure democracy, there is no constitutional protection for anything).

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Hold on, what? In what world can you possibly say democracy is communism?

Many communists, myself included, distinguish between socialism or communism from the top and socialism or communism from the bottom. Communism from the bottom is a form of radical democracy. The so-called democracy under capitalism is not, from a communist perspective true or proletarian democracy. It is bourgeois democracy.

[Nat Socs]

Hold on, what? In what world can you possibly say democracy is communism? Sure, democracy over time leads to communism, if you allow the tyranny of the majority to take control, which is why it's important to have a strong government to prevent that. But populism, democracy, and communism are three very different things. Populism is non-ideological. It's a political attitude of opposition to a corrupt elitist class. A libertarian could be a populist. Ron Paul ran against the crooked fat cats who depend on what he views as an out-of-bounds government. A conservative could be a populist. Pat Buchanan warned about the dangers of a liberal elite that pushes social degeneracy and cultural marxism. And yes, a leftist or a totalitarian can be a populist as well.

So you and this other guy are confusing me. Seriously. Listen to yourselves, throwing around labels that don't make a lick of sense. What are you trying to say?

Democracy is communal ownership of all property. The People might choose to assign some property to private controllers temporarily but ultimately they can seize it back any time they like. There is no constitutional protection for property (in a pure democracy, there is no constitutional protection for anything).

Uh, heh, no. Democracy is when the citizens elect their leaders in government. Think western enlightenment/classical liberalism philosophy. Communism is just mob rule.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Trump is also a legit Maoist

Trump, to be overly generous to him, is an anarcho-capitalist. A Maoist? I don't think so.

[HMS Queen Elizabeth]

Democracy is communal ownership of all property. The People might choose to assign some property to private controllers temporarily but ultimately they can seize it back any time they like. There is no constitutional protection for property (in a pure democracy, there is no constitutional protection for anything).

Uh, heh, no. Democracy is when the citizens elect their leaders in government. Think western enlightenment/classical liberalism philosophy. Communism is just mob rule.

What's the difference?

[HMS Queen Elizabeth]

There pretty much weren't any democracies until the 20th century. The US was arguably one, but restrained by constitutionalism and federalism, which weren't fully destroyed until the 1960s. Democracy is not a property of enlightenment European societies. It was a popular goal in those societies, but not a characteristic of them.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Uh, heh, no. Democracy is when the citizens elect their leaders in government. Think western enlightenment/classical liberalism philosophy. Communism is just mob rule.

I think you are conflating the distinction Plato made between a republic (essentially representative democracy) and democracy (which he saw as mob rule).

[Albrenia]

I disagree that Trump is less crazy than the elite. He's just crazy in a different way.

[Nat Socs]

Trump is also a legit Maoist

Not possible. Trump supports free-market competition, and less government involvement in schooling. Sure, he's a protectionist, but that isn't exactly a trait I'd say defined Chairman freaking Mao.

Look at his speech on economics: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/c ... to-Detroit

Look at Mao's economic philosophy: https://www.marxists.org/reference/arch ... swv1_9.htm

Trump places his blame on bureaucracy and government leaders who seek to place development of other nations above development of America.

Mao placed his blame on the "bourgeois" and the rich. He also was a big atheist and a feminist. Whereas Trump staunchly supports promoting religion, and opposes political correctness.

Mao: http://sfr-21.org/mao-women.html

Trump: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... st/515445/

Also, I don't think I need to spell out the fact that Mao was a genocidal maniac... whereas Trump clearly isn't.

[Nat Socs]

Uh, heh, no. Democracy is when the citizens elect their leaders in government. Think western enlightenment/classical liberalism philosophy. Communism is just mob rule.

What's the difference?

Rule of law. Democracy, in order to function, is kept between loose restraints, of limits on the government's power, and limits on the power of the majority (you know, accounting for the 50%-1 as well as the 50%+1.)

[Albrenia]

Wait, Mao was a feminist?

[Nat Socs]

Uh, heh, no. Democracy is when the citizens elect their leaders in government. Think western enlightenment/classical liberalism philosophy. Communism is just mob rule.

I think you are conflating the distinction Plato made between a republic (essentially representative democracy) and democracy (which he saw as mob rule).

I understand that. But contemporarily, when people refer to America, they are describing a republic, yes, but calling it a democracy. Most of the time, when people talk about democracy, they mean it in the context of western republicanism; liberal democracy instead of illiberal democracy.

[Nat Socs]

Wait, Mao was a feminist?

Hell yeah. He even wrote a book about it. Women Have Gone to the Labour Front was the title, I believe.

[Imperium Centralium]

Wait, Mao was a feminist?

well he was quite supportive of equality for women and did a lot of things to demonstrate that

[Albrenia]

Huh. Well how about that, eh?

Strange world.

[Nat Socs]

Trump is also a legit Maoist

Trump, to be overly generous to him, is an anarcho-capitalist. A Maoist? I don't think so.

Frankly, he's just a moderate paleoconservative, like a watered-down version of the constitution party. To call him an anarchist would be just as inaccurate as calling him a communist. As a fascist, I'd like for him to be more authoritarian, but he's really just center-right and he dabbles in populism.

[HMS Queen Elizabeth]

What's the difference?

Rule of law. Democracy, in order to function, is kept between loose restraints, of limits on the government's power, and limits on the power of the majority (you know, accounting for the 50%-1 as well as the 50%+1.)

Rule of law isn't consistent with democracy.

[Nat Socs]

Rule of law. Democracy, in order to function, is kept between loose restraints, of limits on the government's power, and limits on the power of the majority (you know, accounting for the 50%-1 as well as the 50%+1.)

Rule of law isn't consistent with democracy.

Yes it is. It's the yin to democracy's yang. Inevitably, without a proper legal framework, society will devolve in to fractious factions and smother out liberty. So, paradoxically, liberty must be partially tempered for it to survive.