PDA

View Full Version : 'The End of American Exceptionalism'



midcan5
02-28-2014, 12:34 PM
There can be no question the rise of conservatism, especially since Reagan, has had a negative effect on American society and its working people. The right wing ideas and policies today are a burden not only to needed change but even to individual freedom. The article below outlines the reasons conservatives threaten America's fundamental values.


"American exceptionalism ... which according to Factiva appeared in global English-language publications fewer than 3,000 times during the Bush administration, has already appeared more than 10,000 times since Obama became president."


"The very attributes conservatives say make America special — religiosity, patriotism, and mobility — are ones they've inadvertently undermined. Is it any wonder millennials are less impressed with their country?"


http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/the-end-of-american-exceptionalism-20140203


.

Peter1469
02-28-2014, 12:37 PM
PC and liberals killed it.

Captain Obvious
02-28-2014, 12:43 PM
PC and liberals killed it.

Shit - you beat me to it.

Progressives fear and are threatened by exceptionalism because they know they cannot nor will they ever be exceptional. Furthermore, liberalism and progressiveism thrives on failure and mediocrity. Without them progressiveism cannot succeed.

Peter1469
02-28-2014, 12:54 PM
Liberals seek the lowest common denominator so people are equal. I reject that 100%, because I am on the other end of the bell curve in most respects.



Shit - you beat me to it.

Progressives fear and are threatened by exceptionalism because they know they cannot nor will they ever be exceptional. Furthermore, liberalism and progressiveism thrives on failure and mediocrity. Without them progressiveism cannot succeed.

Cigar
02-28-2014, 01:24 PM
PC and liberals killed it.

Ever been to WallStreet ?

BB-35
02-28-2014, 01:34 PM
What an utter load of road apples....

Common
02-28-2014, 02:05 PM
Were not exceptional because our corporations gave what made us exceptional to everyone else for cheap labor. Now many do what we do and know what we know.

Conservatism was created by the rich for the rich, Liberal Progressive was created by pockets of special interests that want something.

Milliinials arent impressed with their country because the land of opportunity was given away by our Corporate and wall street interests out of pure greed. They have stripped american workers of their dignity and ability to make a decent living.
The rich have gotten fabulously richer while everyone else got poorer.

I know conservatives tell me over an over its not true and the facts will always prove you wrong.

Paperback Writer
02-28-2014, 02:06 PM
Perhaps the workers ought to be exceptional then?

Peter1469
02-28-2014, 07:23 PM
The concept of American exceptionalism does not rest on corporations and their workers.

zelmo1234
02-28-2014, 08:39 PM
Were not exceptional because our corporations gave what made us exceptional to everyone else for cheap labor. Now many do what we do and know what we know.

Conservatism was created by the rich for the rich, Liberal Progressive was created by pockets of special interests that want something.

Milliinials arent impressed with their country because the land of opportunity was given away by our Corporate and wall street interests out of pure greed. They have stripped american workers of their dignity and ability to make a decent living.
The rich have gotten fabulously richer while everyone else got poorer.

I know conservatives tell me over an over its not true and the facts will always prove you wrong.

Don't suppose that you could post a few of those facts showing how the liberal policies of Carter and Obama are helping the poor and middle class.

Clinton? Well that 1997 tax cuts, welfare reform, and the cuts in spending are hardly liberal policies are they?

zelmo1234
02-28-2014, 08:41 PM
You have to really give credit to our liberal posters, They will post a Thread based on a lie! And then once the facts start to come out, they are gone, but wait a day or 2 and they will be back within a day or 2 posting the same lies again!

They are relentless in there lies and deceit to defend liberalism!

Boris The Animal
02-28-2014, 08:48 PM
And that's what irks me about Liberals. They will do anything and everything to try to "cut" the US "down to size".

Dr. Who
02-28-2014, 09:47 PM
The position of the Americans is therefore quite exceptional, and it may be believed that no democratic people will ever be placed in a similar one. Their strictly Puritanical origin, their exclusively commercial habits, even the country they inhabit, which seems to divert their minds from the pursuit of science, literature, and the arts, the proximity of Europe, which allows them to neglect these pursuits without relapsing into barbarism, a thousand special causes, of which I have only been able to point out the most important, have singularly concurred to fix the mind of the American upon purely practical objects. Alexis de Tocqueville - Democracy in America, 1835/1840.

Tocqueville accurately predicted the dominance of the industrial class and their becoming the new aristocracy in America, the veritable 1%. However as in the case of all aristocracies, they all tend to succumb to the depravity of greed and begin to take more than they give and ultimately start to bleed the people dry. The American model works only so long as there is not a powerful ruling class, irrespective of how it evolves. Once the ruling class can buy power, they are no different than the monarchies of old. They similarly create an incestuous network of marriages and family obligations. The only difference in this scenario is the introduction of fiat currency, which requires the indebtedness of every American citizen to continue to enrich the ruling classes. The interest paid on credit becomes the tithes paid to the King. This is merely the exchange of one form of feudalism for another. Through globalisation, it has become America's greatest export. Humanity sought to rid itself of hereditary monarchies, but simply replaced them with a less structured version of the same thing. The result is the same, an increasingly large peasant class, a tiny middle class, and an incredibly rich upper class.

Max Rockatansky
02-28-2014, 09:50 PM
The concept of American exceptionalism does not rest on corporations and their workers.

Agreed. Nor does it rest on a particular political party. It has to do with the fact we have political parties to begin with. That we embarked on the Great Experiment of a Republic after kicking out our King. While Europe remained mired in monarchies, we were exceptional in not having one. Now most modern countries are republics. If they have kings, they are figure heads and mostly for ceremonial purposes as opposed to actual rulers.

We're no longer exceptional because everyone else is like us.

zelmo1234
03-01-2014, 03:44 AM
We are no longer exceptional, because we have taught out children that everyone is the same. That striving for excellence is no different that getting by!

We are no longer exceptional because of liberalism!

Look at the good DR's post! He blames the rich, Democrats demand that we take from the rich and distribute to the poor! Republicans demand that we stop the size and scope of government, but only is such a way that they get to keep their power.

We teach our children that if you are a doctor, lawyer, or government worker, then you can be proud, but if you have to work on a farm, or cleaning streets or in a restaurant, then you are better off just collecting a check. We drum into their heads that they can't make it in America, because the rich won/t let them, and our educational system for the past 4 decades is designed to build only one thing, dependency on an all powerful government.

American excellence is not dead, it has just been suppressed by Socialism, disguised as compassionate liberal policies.n President Obama is the first President of this train of thought.

And unfortunately, exceptionalism can not return when you have leaders that not only do not understand it, but think it to be evil!

Libhater
03-01-2014, 08:08 AM
And that's what irks me about Liberals. They will do anything and everything to try to "cut" the US "down to size".

Of course the liberals blame worldwide poverty on America, and go so far as to call the killing of innocents during war our fault, but only if its done while a
Republican president is in office. No where in the lib media will you see any complaints that innocents were killed in war while obummer is president. So
the leader of this effort to cut down America is of course the un/anti/non American barfuck hussein obummer. What a pantload.

donttread
03-01-2014, 09:36 AM
There can be no question the rise of conservatism, especially since Reagan, has had a negative effect on American society and its working people. The right wing ideas and policies today are a burden not only to needed change but even to individual freedom. The article below outlines the reasons conservatives threaten America's fundamental values.

The fault lies with the "two parties which are really one"


"American exceptionalism ... which according to Factiva appeared in global English-language publications fewer than 3,000 times during the Bush administration, has already appeared more than 10,000 times since Obama became president."


"The very attributes conservatives say make America special — religiosity, patriotism, and mobility — are ones they've inadvertently undermined. Is it any wonder millennials are less impressed with their country?"


http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/the-end-of-american-exceptionalism-20140203


.

Dr. Who
03-01-2014, 09:48 AM
We are no longer exceptional, because we have taught out children that everyone is the same. That striving for excellence is no different that getting by!

We are no longer exceptional because of liberalism!

Look at the good DR's post! He blames the rich, Democrats demand that we take from the rich and distribute to the poor! Republicans demand that we stop the size and scope of government, but only is such a way that they get to keep their power.

We teach our children that if you are a doctor, lawyer, or government worker, then you can be proud, but if you have to work on a farm, or cleaning streets or in a restaurant, then you are better off just collecting a check. We drum into their heads that they can't make it in America, because the rich won/t let them, and our educational system for the past 4 decades is designed to build only one thing, dependency on an all powerful government.

American excellence is not dead, it has just been suppressed by Socialism, disguised as compassionate liberal policies.n President Obama is the first President of this train of thought.

And unfortunately, exceptionalism can not return when you have leaders that not only do not understand it, but think it to be evil!
You misunderstood my post - I don't blame wealth per se. I blame the system that the corporatist new monarchy have created to ensure that the middle classes continue to become poorer. These are the people who encouraged a change in the monetary system, away from one backed by something tangible like gold, to one based on debt and the industry that has evolved to enable the indebtedness of the American population and the indebtedness of the government. Debt has become a commodity unto itself. It is bought, sold and traded. Money is printed, based on debt, so you end up with a paradoxical situation where the increasing national debt generates more currency and the illogical statement that debt = wealth. So while you may be a successful entrepreneur, you are operating in a system that is really a house of cards. When it collapses one day, unless you have converted all of your assets to tangibles, you will be wiped out. The 1% will not be wiped out - they always convert their assets to tangibles.

Peter1469
03-01-2014, 09:58 AM
The government could at least print its own money so there is no interest to be owed....

Dr. Who
03-01-2014, 10:36 AM
The government could at least print its own money so there is no interest to be owed....Unfortunately it allows a collection of bankers to control its monetary system. Much like putting the wolf in charge of the henhouse.

Chris
03-01-2014, 10:53 AM
It seems sourpussed progressives like those at ThinkProgress are these days Cheering The Death Of American Exceptionalism (http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2014/02/28/3344061/boo-exceptionalism/#)


We are perpetually being told that President Obama is destroying “American exceptionalism.” When conservatives talk about the concept, they don’t simply mean that America is different than other countries — an unobjectionable claim — and that there are some great things about this country — also unobjectionable. They mean that America is not just different, but better. And better in special ways that give it a special mission on the planet.

The features of American exceptionalism conservatives love are going way. The culprit, however, is neither President Obama nor his party. Rather, the American public and the world economy are changing in fundamental ways. These changes, far from undermining America as a country, will allow us to be a better country in a better world. If that means the end of “American exceptionalism,” than that’s a small price to pay.

In a recent essay, Peter Beinart identified three key features of American exceptionalism: our extremely high religiosity, our belief that America can and should act unilaterally to promote freedom in the world, and our belief that social mobility in America is so strong that class distinctions are not a barrier to success. All of these have eroded significantly in recent decades....


If we've lost exceptionalism it's to level-the-playing-field progressivism.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTSyzIzilGc

Paperback Writer
03-01-2014, 11:57 AM
American exceptionalism seems to be your ability to excel at the crass and banal.

http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-26381566

The First Lady of the United States will appear in Parks and Rec, a sit-com. A sit-com. That says it all. What's next? The President adds his flow to a rap track? :roflmao:


Exceptional

http://www.thediamondjubilee.org/sites/www.thediamondjubilee.org/files/styles/lightbox/public/camsp2be2fa v2_0.jpg


American Exceptionalism

http://media.salon.com/2014/02/Screen-Shot-2014-02-21-at-8.39.22-AM-620x347.png


http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/516/409/278.jpg

Gerrard Winstanley
03-01-2014, 11:59 AM
American exceptionalism seems to be your ability to excel at the crass and banal.

http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-26381566

The First Lady of the United States will appear in Parks and Rec, a sit-com. A sit-com. That says it all. What's next? The President adds his flow to a rap track? :roflmao:


Exceptional

http://www.thediamondjubilee.org/sites/www.thediamondjubilee.org/files/styles/lightbox/public/camsp2be2fa v2_0.jpg


American Exceptionalism

http://media.salon.com/2014/02/Screen-Shot-2014-02-21-at-8.39.22-AM-620x347.png


http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/516/409/278.jpg
Fucking British troll.

Chris
03-01-2014, 12:00 PM
Are you saying we also excel at the inexcellent (inelegant excellence)? :happy20:

Paperback Writer
03-01-2014, 12:04 PM
Fucking British troll.

Fucking English troll, mate. "British" includes Wales and Scotland. One I cannot defend against, the other I repudiate with vigor! :occasion14:

The Sage of Main Street
03-01-2014, 04:03 PM
When America was British territory, the spoiled-rotten and lazy aristocrats didn't want to suffer the hardships of the frontier. So they let pioneers come out here from the despised and excluded British proletariat. When, contrary to delusions of innate class superiority, the Americans built a safe and prospering society, the Redcoat bluebloods wanted to rule it by parceling out each county to a Fortunate Son.

Not respecting hereditary rule, unlike the self-hating proletariat that had stayed in England, the Americans declared independence. However, they never overcame their genetic disability that caused them to create their own guillotine-fodder Preppy Republic. But it wasn't until the 1960s that Class Supremacy finally took over and ended American Exceptionalism by putting us on the path to repeat thousands of years of European history.

Dr. Who
03-01-2014, 08:49 PM
When America was British territory, the spoiled-rotten and lazy aristocrats didn't want to suffer the hardships of the frontier. So they let pioneers come out here from the despised and excluded British proletariat. When, contrary to delusions of innate class superiority, the Americans built a safe and prospering society, the Redcoat bluebloods wanted to rule it by parceling out each county to a Fortunate Son.

Not respecting hereditary rule, unlike the self-hating proletariat that had stayed in England, the Americans declared independence. However, they never overcame their genetic disability that caused them to create their own guillotine-fodder Preppy Republic. But it wasn't until the 1960s that Class Supremacy finally took over and ended American Exceptionalism by putting us on the path to repeat thousands of years of European history.
Notwithstanding the rhetoric in your post, your point is well taken. The US has permitted the recreation of the monarchy of old, in the elite class of today although I would say that it began long before the 1960's.

Bob
03-01-2014, 09:10 PM
The government could at least print its own money so there is no interest to be owed....

The way it works is that the Federal Reserve, non government bankers, request X dollars be printed. Request goes to Government. Treasury is in charge of printing currency and coin.

So, the Government does print currency and stamp coins.

Peter1469
03-01-2014, 11:00 PM
The way it works is that the Federal Reserve, non government bankers, request X dollars be printed. Request goes to Government. Treasury is in charge of printing currency and coin.

So, the Government does print currency and stamp coins.

Now address the interest issue that I raised. One would think that was the real important part of the post....

Dr. Who
03-01-2014, 11:06 PM
Now address the interest issue that I raised. One would think that was the real important part of the post....

America is no longer exceptional. Globalism has transformed the world into sameness once again.

zelmo1234
03-01-2014, 11:17 PM
The problem is, America Was NEVER exceptional. American's were exceptional.

Liberalism has spent the past 4 decades telling our children that it is wrong to be exceptional. For god sake we don't even let them keep score in sporting events anymore!

Children are taught that Trophies, Respect, Self Esteem and Money are all to be given, not earned.

Look at the Liberals on this very Forum, Most would never think of going the extra mile, but darn sure demand all of the free stuff they can get and want those that will go the extra ,mile to be force by the government to pay for it

There is no problem getting the people of this country to become exceptional once more. However, it will likely take the country going broke to make that happen.

Once the nanny state is dead, exceptionalism will return!

Max Rockatansky
03-02-2014, 06:37 AM
The problem is, America Was NEVER exceptional. American's were exceptional.

Liberalism has spent the past 4 decades telling our children that it is wrong to be exceptional. For god sake we don't even let them keep score in sporting events anymore!

Children are taught that Trophies, Respect, Self Esteem and Money are all to be given, not earned.

Look at the Liberals on this very Forum, Most would never think of going the extra mile, but darn sure demand all of the free stuff they can get and want those that will go the extra ,mile to be force by the government to pay for it

There is no problem getting the people of this country to become exceptional once more. However, it will likely take the country going broke to make that happen.

Once the nanny state is dead, exceptionalism will return!Disagreed since trophies, respect, self-esteem and money are not what made us exceptional.

Libhater
03-02-2014, 06:43 AM
The problem is, America Was NEVER exceptional. American's were exceptional.

Liberalism has spent the past 4 decades telling our children that it is wrong to be exceptional. For god sake we don't even let them keep score in sporting events anymore!

Children are taught that Trophies, Respect, Self Esteem and Money are all to be given, not earned.

Look at the Liberals on this very Forum, Most would never think of going the extra mile, but darn sure demand all of the free stuff they can get and want those that will go the extra ,mile to be force by the government to pay for it

There is no problem getting the people of this country to become exceptional once more. However, it will likely take the country going broke to make that happen.

Once the nanny state is dead, exceptionalism will return!

I hear what you're saying and I agree with you one hundred percent. Many problems here in returning our nation back to the enterprising capitalistic society we once knew
under Ronald Reagan's glorious eight years in office. Least of which would be to devise a way to shitcan any and all liberal media hacks that are fully embedded with obummer's
agenda, and who are complicit in maintaining this behemoth nanny state.

One quick example of the media's leftist dedication to ensure the focus remains on the entitlement/nanny state.

Ed (fathead) Shultz kept a nightly vigil alive on his MSNBC show to pound the message forward to extend the unemployment benefits for the 99ers, or for those unemployed
for a full 99 weeks. Lets get real here, we're talking about people who scam the system and are unemployed for almost two years to where now they're looking to stay on the
dole for even a longer time? This reminds me of how the liberals want to increas the minimum wage. If 99 weeks isn't a long enough time for the unemployed to get a job, then
why should we increase the minimum wage just a couple of bucks an hour.....why not increase it to $50 an hour? You see, liberals/leftists have no clue as to how to run an
economy and or how to grow an economy. They're all nanny state clones, and as such we need to eliminate them el pronto.

Max Rockatansky
03-02-2014, 06:51 AM
Those who keep harping that it is materialism that made America exceptional are not only missing the point, IMO, but also destroying their own argument that killing off or otherwise eliminating Liberals will allow us to be exceptional again. If materialism and profit are all that made us exceptional, then we are being out-exceptionalized by the Germans and the Chinese.

Rather than American Exceptionalism being purely greed and material concerns, I think it is our political system of a Federal Constitutional Republic that made us exceptional and which has become more the norm around the world. We are exceptional because we were first.


http://iantyrrell.wordpress.com/papers-and-comments/
In its classic forms, American exceptionalism refers to the special character of the United States as a uniquely free nation based on democratic ideals and personal liberty. Sometimes this special character is inferred from the nature of American political institutions founded in the 1776-89 period–the declaration of independence (1776), revolution (1776-83), constitution (1787) etc. Thus the “revolution” and its aftermath freeing the US from British control are important in ideas of American exceptionalism. But often the political differences are said to be underpinned by material differences brought about by the wealth/resources of the United States, sometimes seen as a direct product of the freedom of the American people, but by others as the product of the inheritance of the North American continent’s abundant resources. This is the frontier version of the theory, and this and the ideas of social mobility and immigrant assimilation are closely tied to this set of ideas of American material prosperity. Many aspects of American history may be left out or distorted in the traditional narratives–particularly the histories of Amerindian peoples and the contribution of other ethnic groups that preceded the Anglo-Americans, e.g. Hispanics. Race and slavery are seen as tragic exceptions, and the abolition of the latter was viewed as a partial resolution, encompassed in Lincoln’s idea of a “new birth of freedom” in the Gettysburg Address.

zelmo1234
03-02-2014, 07:00 AM
Disagreed since trophies, respect, self-esteem and money are not what made us exceptional.

You are right telling people that they are great for participation, not requiring them to learn anything. making darn sure they know how to blame others for anything and everything. and seeing to it that they can live fully dependent on the government with no fell of shame is working out so well.

Achievement is darn sure what made this county exceptional, just because the followers want the same rewards as the leaders has not change that, it has just changed the fact they we have very few that still reach for the stars

Libhater
03-02-2014, 07:07 AM
Those who keep harping that it is materialism that made America exceptional are not only missing the point, IMO, but also destroying their own argument that killing off or otherwise eliminating Liberals will allow us to be exceptional again. If materialism and profit are all that made us exceptional, then we are being out-exceptionalized by the Germans and the Chinese.

Rather than American Exceptionalism being purely greed and material concerns, I think it is our political system of a Federal Constitutional Republic that made us exceptional and which has become more the norm around the world. We are exceptional because we were first.


http://iantyrrell.wordpress.com/papers-and-comments/

What's with all your double talk? You say our nation was based on democratic ideals and personal liberty. So how does the want and desire of today's liberal to
keep and maintain a big government nanny state sit with those ideals? It doesn't! You can't find 'AMERICAN EXCEPIONALISM' coming from a leftist or coming
from a leftist ideology. It just isn't going to happen. Need I refer to obummer's European speech where he debased and or ridiculed America's exceptionalism
for further proof of the un/anti American message coming from the left?
nanny state

zelmo1234
03-02-2014, 07:08 AM
Those who keep harping that it is materialism that made America exceptional are not only missing the point, IMO, but also destroying their own argument that killing off or otherwise eliminating Liberals will allow us to be exceptional again. If materialism and profit are all that made us exceptional, then we are being out-exceptionalized by the Germans and the Chinese.

Rather than American Exceptionalism being purely greed and material concerns, I think it is our political system of a Federal Constitutional Republic that made us exceptional and which has become more the norm around the world. We are exceptional because we were first.


http://iantyrrell.wordpress.com/papers-and-comments/

You mean the system that current politicians are trashing and have total disregard for?

I would agree, and that Freedom provided by the former constitution, as this administration does not give a crap what it says, is in part rooted in the free enterprise and darn sure is rooted in Personal responsibility!

Liberalism is neither about personal responsibility, Freedom or about that wonderful constitution! As a matter of fact most liberals, including our President look upon the constitution with distain, and contempt!

Liberalism is about power and control of others that you have determined to be beneath you. because they do not think like you do. They call the persecution of these people Tolerance!

The exceptionalism that brought people to this country from all around the world, was the economic possibilities that that freedom offered to all that were willing to strive for it.

They go hand in hand!

Gerrard Winstanley
03-02-2014, 07:22 AM
What's with all your double talk? You say our nation was based on democratic ideals and personal liberty. So how does the want and desire of today's liberal to
keep and maintain a big government nanny state sit with those ideals? It doesn't! You can't find 'AMERICAN EXCEPIONALISM' coming from a leftist or coming
from a leftist ideology. It just isn't going to happen. Need I refer to obummer's European speech where he debased and or ridiculed America's exceptionalism
for further proof of the un/anti American message coming from the left?
nanny state
Leftism isn't just "the Democrats".

zelmo1234
03-02-2014, 07:30 AM
Leftism isn't just "the Democrats".

You are correct there are plenty of "progressive Republicans" that are part of the problem

Max Rockatansky
03-02-2014, 07:36 AM
You mean the system that current politicians are trashing and have total disregard for?

To be factual, politicians have been bitching and trashing each other since before Burr shot Hamilton.

One thing I do know is that hating or blaming others for one's own problems isn't exceptional. In fact, it's downright ordinary.

Chris
03-02-2014, 12:01 PM
Notwithstanding the rhetoric in your post, your point is well taken. The US has permitted the recreation of the monarchy of old, in the elite class of today although I would say that it began long before the 1960's.

I would disagree if you're referring to corporatism. Prior to the 16th amendment big business had the upper hand and government (politicians) had to do their bidding. Passage of the 16th however gave big government the upper hand with direct access to wealth through income tax. Over the last several decades it seems that these two, big business and big government have partnered up in the collusion called corporatism, government offering up political means for purchase by the highest bidders. More and more the middle and lower classes are gutted to enrich the rich.

Chris
03-02-2014, 12:05 PM
Leftism isn't just "the Democrats".


You are correct there are plenty of "progressive Republicans" that are part of the problem



Now if we just substitute statism for "leftism" we'd capture those conservatives on the right who seek just as much a nanny state as progressives do, just that the nannyisms are slightly different, though that doesn't matters to those of us who prefer liberty.

Dr. Who
03-02-2014, 01:02 PM
I would disagree if you're referring to corporatism. Prior to the 16th amendment big business had the upper hand and government (politicians) had to do their bidding. Passage of the 16th however gave big government the upper hand with direct access to wealth through income tax. Over the last several decades it seems that these two, big business and big government have partnered up in the collusion called corporatism, government offering up political means for purchase by the highest bidders. More and more the middle and lower classes are gutted to enrich the rich.
So they ruled directly before and by proxy now. While the latter is more disturbing from the point of view of ethics on the part of government, it is practically speaking a distinction without a difference, with the corporate masters continuing to call the shots. The real question is how far the control extends. Does it merely involve domestic policy and legislation that provides unfair advantage to big business or does it also affect foreign policy?

Chris
03-02-2014, 01:30 PM
So they ruled directly before and by proxy now. While the latter is more disturbing from the point of view of ethics on the part of government, it is practically speaking a distinction without a difference, with the corporate masters continuing to call the shots. The real question is how far the control extends. Does it merely involve domestic policy and legislation that provides unfair advantage to big business or does it also affect foreign policy?

The distinction is government still rules. Business must purchase its power from government. It also helped that socialists conceded the economic calculation and coordination problems in the 90s and many switched to social democracy, with advocated like Krugman and Obama. Again Robert Reich: The Answer Isn't Socialism; It's Capitalism That Better Spreads the Benefits of the Productivity Revolution (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/the-answer-isnt-socialism_b_1491243.html) -- Reich you''ll remember was Secretary of Labor under Clinton.


The difference has little importance until it comes to considering solutions to the problem. Given that government provides the political means for corporations, the solution to reding the power of corporations is not to increase the size of government but to decrease it.

Dr. Who
03-02-2014, 02:45 PM
The distinction is government still rules. Business must purchase its power from government. It also helped that socialists conceded the economic calculation and coordination problems in the 90s and many switched to social democracy, with advocated like Krugman and Obama. Again Robert Reich: The Answer Isn't Socialism; It's Capitalism That Better Spreads the Benefits of the Productivity Revolution (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/the-answer-isnt-socialism_b_1491243.html) -- Reich you''ll remember was Secretary of Labor under Clinton.


The difference has little importance until it comes to considering solutions to the problem. Given that government provides the political means for corporations, the solution to reding the power of corporations is not to increase the size of government but to decrease it.

Not that the government couldn't use some downsizing, as long as the electoral process is predicated on corporate financing, the fundamental cause of the corruption and collusion will remain.

Chris
03-02-2014, 03:26 PM
Not that the government couldn't use some downsizing, as long as the electoral process is predicated on corporate financing, the fundamental cause of the corruption and collusion will remain.

Why do you blame corrupt politicians who can be bought so cheaply on those who buy them?

Contrails
03-02-2014, 04:26 PM
Progressives fear and are threatened by exceptionalism because they know they cannot nor will they ever be exceptional. Furthermore, liberalism and progressiveism thrives on failure and mediocrity. Without them progressiveism cannot succeed.

Yeah, because people like Larry Ellison, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, George Soros, Steven Spielberg, Michael Moore, Ronald Burkle and Jeff Zucker are nothing if not mediocre failures.

donttread
03-02-2014, 06:44 PM
I would disagree if you're referring to corporatism. Prior to the 16th amendment big business had the upper hand and government (politicians) had to do their bidding. Passage of the 16th however gave big government the upper hand with direct access to wealth through income tax. Over the last several decades it seems that these two, big business and big government have partnered up in the collusion called corporatism, government offering up political means for purchase by the highest bidders. More and more the middle and lower classes are gutted to enrich the rich.

I would disagree and go so far as to say that the 16th was in fact the Republic's death warrant . It opened up pork barreling and gave the feds the ability to blackmail the states into accepting their will, via the Apportionment Clause

Dr. Who
03-02-2014, 07:27 PM
Why do you blame corrupt politicians who can be bought so cheaply on those who buy them?

Creating a climate for corruption to flourish is a self-fulfilling prophecy. You won't get the kind of politician that you want, so long as the prerequisite to getting elected is dependent upon satisfying the underwriters of the politician's career first and the people second. Unless the electoral process itself is funded by government and disallows any private contribution, the result will always be the same. The people who run for elected office, or at least those who succeed will be the ones who are for sale to the highest bidder and can therefore mount the better campaign and reach the larger number of people. We can hope that the internet makes a difference, but thus far it doesn't make enough of a difference.

Paperback Writer
03-02-2014, 07:45 PM
Yeah, because people like Larry Ellison, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, George Soros, Steven Spielberg, Michael Moore, Ronald Burkle and Jeff Zucker are nothing if not mediocre failures.

Bill Gates no longer considers himself a Democrat. His latest interviews show free market and libertarian leanings. Democrats were the gods that failed him, I believe. As to the rest, with the exception of Spielberg they're mostly hypocritical twatters.

Businessmen of a left-leaning persuasion exist. The good ones just didn't make your list.

Mainecoons
03-02-2014, 07:58 PM
Bill Gates no longer considers himself a Democrat. His latest interviews show free market and libertarian leanings. Democrats were the gods that failed him, I believe. As to the rest, with the exception of Spielberg they're mostly hypocritical twatters.

Businessmen of a left-leaning persuasion exist. The good ones just didn't make your list.

Damn, I'm glad you're back. :grin:

Contrails
03-02-2014, 08:30 PM
Bill Gates no longer considers himself a Democrat.
The comment was about progressives, not Democrats. Funny how so many conservatives can't seem to tell the difference.

Libhater
03-02-2014, 09:11 PM
The comment was about progressives, not Democrats. Funny how so many conservatives can't seem to tell the difference.

I for one cannot tell the difference, probably because there is none. Anyone who votes for a democrap votes for a
leftist, a statist, a liberal, a socialist, a progressive, a multiculturalist, a race baiter, a communist, a baby killer, a
euthanasia advocate, a capitalist hater, an atheist or a combination of all, etc.

Paperback Writer
03-02-2014, 09:58 PM
The comment was about progressives, not Democrats. Funny how so many conservatives can't seem to tell the difference.

Who's the conservative, or can't you tell the difference?

zelmo1234
03-03-2014, 05:01 AM
Bill Gates no longer considers himself a Democrat. His latest interviews show free market and libertarian leanings. Democrats were the gods that failed him, I believe. As to the rest, with the exception of Spielberg they're mostly hypocritical twatters.

Businessmen of a left-leaning persuasion exist. The good ones just didn't make your list.

The funny part is even Buffet is not a true Democrat, he uses his posturing to make sure they don't adjust the capital gains taxes, so he keeps his rates low! All of the internet based and communication based companies are turning as the Democrats move to control speech!

Liberals are actually getting weaker, and have not yet realized it! And how knows they might have figured out how to rig the elections, or they finally have enough un educated people through there public school system to insure there power and control? only time will tell

Max Rockatansky
03-03-2014, 06:53 AM
Liberals are actually getting weaker, and have not yet realized it! And how knows they might have figured out how to rig the elections, or they finally have enough un educated people through there public school system to insure there power and control? only time will tell

The Democrats are certainly getting weaker, but not as weak as the Republicans.

As for this Liberal vs Conservative argument, from what I've seen posted up to now, the only difference is who they hate. I've yet to see anyone post a definition of what they believe a conservative is. We've just seen who they hate.

Common
03-03-2014, 07:19 AM
the democrats are certainly getting weaker, but not as weak as the republicans.

As for this liberal vs conservative argument, from what i've seen posted up to now, the only difference is who they hate. I've yet to see anyone post a definition of what they believe a conservative is. We've just seen who they hate.


bingo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Common
03-03-2014, 07:24 AM
zelmo :) The left gets elected, they piss the people off and the Pendulum swings. Then the right gets elected, they piss the people off and the pendulum swings. The left gets elected again and does the same thing and the cycle continues.

All my life it went back and forth, I dont see it changing. Obamas unfavorables are at 56% right now today. Congress as a whole is in the toilet lower than ever. Obama being so unpopular will certainly hurt democrat candidates in the midterms and possibly for potus.
You can bet though if the GOP takes over their popularity will PLUMMET and fast too.

Chris
03-03-2014, 08:17 AM
I would disagree and go so far as to say that the 16th was in fact the Republic's death warrant . It opened up pork barreling and gave the feds the ability to blackmail the states into accepting their will, via the Apportionment Clause

I'll agree it did much more damage than what I was focused on.

Chris
03-03-2014, 08:21 AM
Creating a climate for corruption to flourish is a self-fulfilling prophecy. You won't get the kind of politician that you want, so long as the prerequisite to getting elected is dependent upon satisfying the underwriters of the politician's career first and the people second. Unless the electoral process itself is funded by government and disallows any private contribution, the result will always be the same. The people who run for elected office, or at least those who succeed will be the ones who are for sale to the highest bidder and can therefore mount the better campaign and reach the larger number of people. We can hope that the internet makes a difference, but thus far it doesn't make enough of a difference.

But again it is the politicians themselves that create the climate of corruption. It's only human nature to take the easiest, least costly means, and so for businesses to use the political means offered is only natural. People often quote Madison's "If men were angels, no government would be necessary," but leave off the more important following words: "If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."

Chris
03-03-2014, 08:47 AM
When it comes to partisanship, there simply is no difference between Dems and Reps nor Libs and Cons.

midcan5
03-03-2014, 10:45 AM
You have to really give credit to our liberal posters, They will post a Thread based on a lie! And then once the facts start to come out, they are gone, but wait a day or 2 and they will be back within a day or 2 posting the same lies again!

They are relentless in there lies and deceit to defend liberalism!

Haven't read through the replies yet, but this one made me laugh. Note there is no substantive reply, the replies I did read fall in the same category. A childish, 'no, you are.' That explains the failure of conservatives when they gain power for they lack ideas and historically have been a complete failure. Check their history in my sig.

It is important though that liberals, progressives, and independent thinkers CONSTANTLY call out conservatives and republicans for the failure of supply side economics and policies that only help the moneyed. If liberals have a problem, it is the assumption that rational debate wins elections. People are not rationally motivated and if you doubt that that listen to Fox or Rush or any number of talking heads whose only accomplishment for America is to feed themselves enormous sums of corporate moneys. Of course the moneyed pay for and perpetuate myths that the wingnuts believe as a child believes and as their replies above attest to.

I find this conservative interesting but he is a rarity among the puppet class of the right. "Kristol was trying to detach conservatism from its schizophrenic devotion to free markets on the one hand and tradition on the other. He knew that you can't revere tradition if you admire the "creative destruction" that capitalism brings to life. He knew that you can't insulate the nuclear family from the heartless logic of the market if you accept the dictates of free enterprise. He knew that conservatism had to become more liberal if it were to sound like something more than hidebound devotion to a phantom past. A "combination of the reforming spirit with the conservative ideal," he declared, "is most desperately wanted," and cited Herbert Croly, the original big government liberal from the Progressive Era, as his source of inspiration.

Kristol also knew that the competitive, entrepreneurial economy Friedman and Hayek posited as the source of freedom was a mere fantasy. Capitalism had long since become a system in which large corporations, not small producers, dominated the market - those anonymous and unknowable laws of supply and demand which once made all producers equally subject to the discipline of market forces had been supplanted by the visible hand of modern management: "There is little doubt that the idea of a (free market,' in the era of large corporations, is not quite the original capitalist idea." Some producers had more market power than, others: some persons (and this is how corporations are legally designated) were more equal than others. So everyone was not "free to choose," as Friedman would have it, simply because he or she inhabited a market society. Corporate capitalism remained a moral problem. For in "its concentration of assets and power-power to make economic decisions affecting the lives of tens of thousands of citizens - it seems to create a dangerous disharmony between the economic system and the political." P11 'The World Turned Inside Out' James Livingston

Libhater
03-03-2014, 10:53 AM
Haven't read through the replies yet, but this one made me laugh. Note there is no substantive reply, the replies I did read fall in the same category. A childish, 'no, you are.' That explains the failure of conservatives when they gain power for they lack ideas and historically have been a complete failure. Check their history in my sig.

It is important though that liberals, progressives, and independent thinkers CONSTANTLY call out conservatives and republicans for the failure of supply side economics and policies that only help the moneyed. If liberals have a problem, it is the assumption that rational debate wins elections. People are not rationally motivated and if you doubt that that listen to Fox or Rush or any number of talking heads whose only accomplishment for America is to feed themselves enormous sums of corporate moneys. Of course the moneyed pay for and perpetuate myths that the wingnuts believe as a child believes and as their replies above attest to.

I find this conservative interesting but he is a rarity among the puppet class of the right. "Kristol was trying to detach conservatism from its schizophrenic devotion to free markets on the one hand and tradition on the other. He knew that you can't revere tradition if you admire the "creative destruction" that capitalism brings to life. He knew that you can't insulate the nuclear family from the heartless logic of the market if you accept the dictates of free enterprise. He knew that conservatism had to become more liberal if it were to sound like something more than hidebound devotion to a phantom past. A "combination of the reforming spirit with the conservative ideal," he declared, "is most desperately wanted," and cited Herbert Croly, the original big government liberal from the Progressive Era, as his source of inspiration.

Kristol also knew that the competitive, entrepreneurial economy Friedman and Hayek posited as the source of freedom was a mere fantasy. Capitalism had long since become a system in which large corporations, not small producers, dominated the market - those anonymous and unknowable laws of supply and demand which once made all producers equally subject to the discipline of market forces had been supplanted by the visible hand of modern management: "There is little doubt that the idea of a (free market,' in the era of large corporations, is not quite the original capitalist idea." Some producers had more market power than, others: some persons (and this is how corporations are legally designated) were more equal than others. So everyone was not "free to choose," as Friedman would have it, simply because he or she inhabited a market society. Corporate capitalism remained a moral problem. For in "its concentration of assets and power-power to make economic decisions affecting the lives of tens of thousands of citizens - it seems to create a dangerous disharmony between the economic system and the political." P11 'The World Turned Inside Out' James Livingston

You really are hopeless. Supply side economics is the only plan that has worked for America. What we have today is a progressive Kenyesian type of economics that is ruining our nation.
Why in the world would you favor a statist big government monopoly with its administration's hands doling out bail outs and boucoup monies to failed green energy start-ups etc to the point of having us go into default? The economy booming eighties from the supply side Reagan should give you all the proof you neeed to realize that capitalism is king and socialism is dead.

midcan5
03-04-2014, 12:43 PM
You really are hopeless. Supply side economics is the only plan that has worked for America. What we have today is a progressive Kenyesian type of economics that is ruining our nation.
Why in the world would you favor a statist big government monopoly with its administration's hands doling out bail outs and boucoup monies to failed green energy start-ups etc to the point of having us go into default? The economy booming eighties from the supply side Reagan should give you all the proof you neeed to realize that capitalism is king and socialism is dead.

Show us a time when supply side worked? You do remember "it's the economy stupid." You do remember the GD and GR don't you? The options aren't either or they are bits and pieces of all. Reagan was finally a failure, voodoo just doesn't work. But I do him some credit, he raised taxes at least eleven times, some say thirteen. He also worked with the democrats to help support social security. Reagan's worst fault was the myth that grew out his anti labor anti government rhetoric. The odd thing is Reagan did little the right wanted him to do, but who else can be canonized among the republicans of recent history. Even Eisenhower is forgotten but he too used Keynesian ideas with the creation of the Interstate system. Maybe that is why he is overlooked?

"A great transformation of American politics began during the years that Ronald Reagan was in the White House. This might not, at first, have appeared the likely outcome of his two administrations. Conservative activists (the same ones who would in later years celebrate Reagan as a saint) struggled during the 1980s with various disappointments: as president, Reagan did not end abortion, he met with Soviet leader Mikhail Corbachev, and he failed to eliminate the welfare state or even notably shrink government bureaucracies. And the enthusiasm within the business community that followed his election did not last long, as the economy sank into a deep recession, with unemployment rising to nearly 10 percent in 1982. As the manufacturing belt began to rust over, political conflicts between industrial companies desperately seeking subsidies and protection and those businesses that were able to thrive in global free markets grew more heated and intense. Tensions erupted between the owners of stock - newly confident and aggressive about using their financial power to compel management to do anything to raise returns - and career corporate executives. Today, the economic changes that began during the 1980s have an air of inevitability about them - the advent of globalization, the shift to a service economy. But at the time these transformations proved devastating to many of the manufacturing companies that had once most vociferously protested the New Deal.

And yet over the course of the decade the old skepticism toward business that had been born in the Great Depression and reawakened for a new generation in the Vietnam era finally began to disappear. The economic transformations of the decade would be interpreted through the framework of the free market vision. The 1970s campaigns to revive the image of capitalism among college students bore fruit in the 1980s. Universities created new centers for the study of business themes such as entrepreneurship. Students in Free Enterprise, a group started in 1975 to bring students together to "discuss what they might do to counteract the stultifying criticism of American business," thrived on small college campuses, funded by companies like Coors, Dow Chemical, and Walmart (as well as the Business Roundtable). The group organized battles of the bands, at which prizes would be doled out to the best pro-business rock anthems, helped silkscreen T-shirts with pro-capitalist messages, and created skits based on Milton Friedman's writings, which college students would perform in local elementary schools. In the workplace, the decline of the old manufacturing cities of [he North and Midwest and the rise of the sprawling suburbs of the Sunbelt metropolises marked the rise of a new economic culture, dominated by companies such as Walmart and Home Depot and Barnes & Noble." Kim Phillips-Fein, 'Invisible Hands,' Great book.