There is a truly deadly menace loose upon us, we the people of the United States .
It has been intentionally spawned and inflamed by the ideologues, politicians, media, and operatives of the far Right. It has become a vast cult of ignorance and evil across our country.
Hate crimes have risen 20% in the past two years. This very real, and very deadly, national emergency is the fetid fruit of con-servatism.
The sooner we recognize this, the better.
The racism, resentment, anger, and hate is fed constantly by Trump, his party, and their media. Their war on decency, equality, justice, democracy and voter rights is designed to disenfranchise and marginalize minorities first and foremost. All else who oppose their extremist far Right agenda are also targets of lies and demonization.
And their war is lethal. It has bred homegrown terrorism. Racist white nationalism has become the loyal and brutal arm of modern con-servatism.
The horrible deaths of Americans by Right wing terrorists are becoming routine.
Unitarians were murdered in a Tennessee church. Blacks were massacred in their church in Charleston. A woman was killed and others were injured in Charlottesville. Jews were slaughtered in their synagogue in Pittsburgh. The MAGA Bomber attempted to kill Trump’s opposition and journalists.
The list of innocent victims is only getting longer. The bloodshed continues.
The latest terrorist, a former Marine and Coast Guard lieutenant, has been apprehended before he could unleash his racist, and far Right political, terrorism. This happened as Trump once again accused the New York Times of being the “enemy of the people”.
This terrorist MAGAt’s hit list includes Democratic politicians Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Sens. Chuck Schumer, Cory Booker, Richard Blumenthal, and Kamala Harris, and former Rep. Beto O'Rourke. Other intended targets included CNN journalists Don Lemon, Chris Cuomo and Van Jones and MSNBC's Chris Hayes, Ari Melber and Joe Scarborough.
His goal was death for all who publicly criticize the Tangerine Tyrant.
So don’t give me that “mental illness” crap. It is pure evil. And it is not just racism. This is far Right, politically motivated terrorism too.
This man's beliefs are shared by countless other Americans on the far Right. I'm not saying all Trump voters are evil. Many are duped by the evil. That is how fascism and tyrants seize power.
This is an evil that infects a large percentage of the US population, and it must be called out for what it is.
This facts need to be stated every day.
Trump fuels hate. Trump is a pathological liar. Trump is a racist. Trump is willfully ignorant and indifferent to human suffering. Trump is fond of dictators and extra-judicial killings.
Hate is evil. Pathological lying is evil. Racism is evil. Being willfully ignorant and indifferent to human suffering is evil. Dictators and extra-judicial killings are evil.
Trump is evil.
Those who support Trump wittingly, or unwittingly, support evil.
Does anyone who follows this blog call themselves a socialist?
Dave, last week I watched an episode of The Young Turks where Cenk Uygur had a segment titled Fear and Loathing in the Conservative Mind. Cenk hits upon everything you've been saying -- and more -- about con-servatives. Thought you'd enjoy.
Your resident troll, Vern, should watch this also -- along with T. Paine, or Rex, or whatever he's calling himself these days.
Maybe he's now known as "Carrie". ;-)
Thanks for the link. Too bad Vern and his fellow believers have no curiosity to check it out.
Trumpist evangelicals are primarily authoritarians, rubes, dupes, or bigots. They are so whacked out they think Jesus sent Trump to save America. He is their new savior and prophet. They choose Trump's hate over Jesus's message of love.
There are many reasonable Christians who can see Trump is evil. Not that it takes that much insight and moral depth of character to see a puppet of Putin and tool of the Great Deceiver.
JTF wants to know who the socialists are. This seems more important to him than condemning his fellow white nationalist and True Believer arrested for domestic terrorism. Their beliefs seem identical. The targets of their hate are the same.
Trump was asked about the terrorist plot. He called it “a shame” and “a very sad thing when things like that happen.” (Because he got caught being an evil MAGAt?) Asked whether he bears any responsibility for the way he speaks about journalists and Democrats, Trump said: “No, I don’t. I think my language is very nice.” (Just like the terrorist's language, no doubt.)
Back to his question.
I would answer his question only after he can tell us the difference between democratic socialism and Stalinism. If he doesn't know by now, there's no point responding to him.
In fact, I would say he's a socialist to the degree he supports Trump's government handouts to farmers screwed by his trade war.
I would say he's a socialist to the degree he supports or accepts Social Security and Medicare, and the VA, and consent of the governed, and Constitutional taxes, regulation of commerce and providing for the general welfare. All of these are old-fashioned American socialistic concepts.
Real American values.
Like many Americans he doesn't understand how socialist he really is.
I bet he even supports some gun control, unless he thinks teenagers should be allowed to carry bazookas to school.
As Dave said (see below), define your understanding of "socialist".
Say, Vern, do you receive Medicare benefits?...or Veteran's Affairs benefits?...or Social Security benefits?
Just as I thought! You're a socialist!
Socialist Vern is deflecting and name-calling again. How much more time and effort will he waste?
Not unlike an evil-doer terrorist, one reason "Socialist Vern" does it is for the attention -- the notoriety.
He hasn't figured out, yet, the reason T. Paine shut down his blog is because of Vern's overt racism and ignorance. Mr. Paine found it wasn't possible to cover for his little buddy anymore.
A dictionary definition of socialism, A Marx quote, and a personal insult was all JTF could muster for my request on the difference between socialism and Stalinism.
What a socialist.
Vern begs for your attention.
I suspect the son who supports him is rethinking his past promise of help when he offered Vern a roof over his head and a good, hot, meal.
I'm guessing his son wants to kick himself. I know I would be...
Yeah, Vern's a certified card carryin' socialist. Just ask to see his Medicare card. LOL
He's sucked more outta the Treasury coffers than you or me combined.
So Vern threw a Marx quote at ya', huh? Which one?...Groucho, Harpo or Chico?
"Hate is evil. Pathological lying is evil. Racism is evil. Being willfully ignorant and indifferent to human suffering is evil. Dictators and extra-judicial killings are evil. Trump is evil." ~~ Dave Dubya
Truly. And this evilness and disregard for human suffering is not only extra-judicial, it's extra-obvious.
This administration's blatant disregard for sovereign borders and the rights of others to their own political determination is on the table for all to see.
Republicans f**ked up Iraq, Syria and Libya. Now their sights are on doing the same to Venezuela.
"Does anybody really think that Donald Trump, Mike Pompeo, John Bolton and Elliott Abrams care one bit about the welfare of the Venezuelan people? These are thugs in tailored suits whose views are far closer to Al Capone than to Thomas Jefferson.
This is gangsterism masquerading as statecraft.
They want their hands on the oil, this regime change; and this is about US hegemony, red in tooth and claw,” ~~ John Wight, political analyst and journalist
F**king the planet, one continent at a time.
I can assure you, Vern's on the bandwagon with this Trump escapade also.
You are a lying coward DUKE, that is why you are afraid to publish my posts. why are so afraid of the truth?
...And with that tone, the angry, tantrum throwing crybaby whines about not being allowed in the conversation.
This will be his final posting of his fellow Klan member's name. No more racist dog-whistle. That ends now.
Once again, here's what he is welcome to do to prove his accusation:
“Dave, I have to say you are wrong in stating (_____) and claiming (_______). These facts (_____) and (____) suggest you are mistaken.”
Who's really afraid of the truth? Who's really the lying coward?
At least he proves I am correct.
They can't fill in the blanks because they have been indoctrinated to BE the blanks that Trump and FOX(R) fill.
"...with that tone, the angry, tantrum throwing crybaby whines about not being allowed in the conversation." ~~ Dave Dubya
Ya' buy 'em books, send 'em to school, and all they do is bite the teacher. [head shaking]
Dave, I suggest you treat him like all convicted trolls and take away all comment privileges for 30 days.
TB3, I'm sure, will continue to contribute. We'd finally be able to have some adult conversations.
Possibly even T. Paine will make time to join us. ;-) Or he'll send Rex over.
"They can't fill in the blanks because they have been indoctrinated to BE the blanks that Trump and FOX(R) fill." ~~ Dave Dubya
"Fill-in-the-blank" templates don't work with white supremacist alt-right assholes.
It's too hard for them.
"False-and-false" tests are more adaptable to their limited intellect.
Authoritarian personalities hate to explain themselves. They see it as "weak". It is assumed their indoctrinated beliefs are correct and everyone else is wrong.
They don't understand "debate" means employing reason, logic, evidence and fact. All they are capable of is regurgitating their indoctrination, beliefs, and leader's talking points.
And that is as far as their closed minds can go.
The Right is doing its best to frame all opposition as "socialism". Even the corporate media are playing along.
Note Kamala Harris's response when interviewed on MSNBC:
KH:... I strongly believe we need to have Medicare for all.”
Q: Do you think that is socialist or not?
KH: “No no. It’s about providing healthcare to all people. It’s about understanding that access to affordable healthcare should not be a privilege. It should be a right...In the way we have constructed our democracy, we at least in concept, have said that your access to public education, public health and public safety should not be a function of how much money you have.”
Brilliant response. That is how it's done. Call it universal public healthcare and most people like it. Call it "socialism" and the brainwashed cult reacts as they are conditioned to react.
They really are too ignorant to understand socialism is not Stalinism. Trumpism is much closer to Stalinism.
Hard to quote Harpo, he was the silent Marx brother.
"Trumpism is much closer to Stalinism." ~~ Dave Dubya
Absolutely! And I agree, it's odd they cannot see this.
Once again, since Trumpism I no longer wonder why the German people let the authoritarian Hitler destroy their culture and lives.
It's very similar to mass suicide.
There is no doubt Trump would be praising Hitler and Stalin as much as he does Putin and Kim.
"Very fine people".
Just The Troll clearly admires Putin as much as he hates Obama, just like his leader.
Reality TV will be interesting this week. Kim will be spinning the Dotard as Cohen spills the beans.
"Reality TV will be interesting this week. Kim will be spinning the Dotard as Cohen spills the beans." ~~ Dave Dubya
Isn't that the case! Can't wait!
Hmm... Wasn't there another Marx brother also?
Dave, I'm just wondering...
Did Vern ever reply that he has received Medicare benefits, or Veteran's Affairs benefits, or Social Security benefits?
Or even took state unemployment insurance benefits at some point in his working life?
I'm guessing he hasn't.
His refusal to answer is proof he has.
It's proof Vern's a socialist.
None of Vern's love notes mentioned any objection to any social program. He just hates us for supporting them, but's IOKIYARS. (It's OK If You're A Republican Socialist)
So let him express his love/hate and his psycho-sexual frustrations. I think he feels the same about his Social Security as he does for liberals. He wants to hate us, but he needs us. We give him meaning, we pay for his socialized retirement benefits, and of course he thrives on the negative attention, like a child.
No wonder the poor thing feels like such a disoriented angry victim.
I think Vern is suffering an internal conflict similar to a bi-curious fundamentalist. It must be terrifying having tendencies you're indoctrinated to despise. Like a Nazi learning he has Jewish heritage. Who knows, maybe all of these apply to him.
Deep inside he's a closeted socialist. Our brother just wants a little nudge to come out of that closet. Unfortunately their cult bubble keeps most of them trapped in the same closet, with all their psyco-sexual frustrations rubbing against one another.
I hope he finds our discussion therapeutic. It's about him, and his fellow closet denizens.
Dave, I assume you've read the latest Hedges article. Check into the Extinction Rebellion. Read their many PDFs.
Our last and final hope? Takes only 3.5% of the population to create change. (It only took 1% on their part to lead us down the current deadly path.)
TB3, have you heard about this organization and its objectives?
I have never heard of that organization. After a quick google search, I am aware of them and their goals. I see nothing wrong with another organization or group advocating action toward addressing climate change.
Extinction Rebellion raises one term, and suggests another, that we understand and share: Sortition and Gandhi’s Satyagraha
"Extinction Rebellion raises one term, and suggests another, that we understand and share: Sortition..." ~~ Dave Dubya
Exactly, Dave, which is what caught my eye in the Hedges article:
"The optimal transition is going to be from the corrupted 'representational' model to a sortition model in the same way aristocratic law shifted to representational law at the end of the 17th and beginning of the 19th century."
The next, new, paradigm?...
"I see nothing wrong with another organization or group advocating action toward addressing climate change." ~~ TB3
I believe the climate crisis isn't just another fire to put out. Like the New Deal of the 1930s, the collective solutions will create totally different world outlooks and viewpoints.
Something analogous to, or similar to, the Green New Deal may be the doorway or pathway to a totally different age.
There are ways to meet these goals and objectives, but no doubt they'll require resolve and commitment.
The next decade will be the tell-all. Either the old ways are phased out and replaced, or extinction is a very real and distinct possibility.
We have a lot of turmoil to endure before we're out of the woods. That's a given.
"The next, new, paradigm?..." - JG
It's always good to have high goals to reach for.
"There are ways to meet these goals and objectives, but no doubt they'll require resolve and commitment." - JG
And consensus and politics-proofing. It's all well and good to have resolve and commitment, but if a Green New Deal leaning Congress and President implement sweeping reforms, it shouldn't be easily nixed if Anti-Green New Deal politicians come into power. Unfortunately, Climate Change has been politicized. Look at some of the initiatives promoted and started during the Obama administration? Fuel emissions standards, Paris Climate Accord, Solar and Renewable Energy credits and incentives? Everything's been nixed or neutered because these things have been politicized and we have a thin-skinned President in office.
"extinction is a very real and distinct possibility." - JG
Whether this is true or not, using this kind of language isn't going to win over skeptics or deniers. Even if it is true, it's too hyperbolic SOUNDING. It's a theme in movies/books/tv. Maybe there needs to be a focus on the less END OF DAYS rhetoric. Especially considering there is a not-insignificant contingent of our fellow citizens that happily count down and wait for the events of Revelation.
Good point. Not only has global warming been politicized, it has also been "religionized" to the extent millions are eagerly awaiting their Rapture, Four Horsemen, and other apocalyptic conclusions predicted within their belief systems.
For those people, it's "bring it on" time. The few among them who might conclude it's not inevitable in their child's lifetime are not the ones on TV and in mega-churches. Armageddonists will welcome war, pestilence, famine, instability and chaos... in shit-hole countries, of course.
Ignorance and fear always have a much louder voice than science and reason. Yearnings for Armageddon paired with the over-active amygdala of the authoritarian mind are not a good formula for a saner future.
We already have enough nuclear weapons to bring about our self-extinction. Dr. Strangelove's mushroom clouds could still finish us off before catastrophic global warming.
A volitional evolution of human consciousness and conscience is the only antidote to the certain chaos and eventual extinction of our species. The best strategy is getting people to understand what is needed for the health and safety of their children and grandchildren.
This new enlightenment is not what our power structure wants.
The ominous rise of corporatocracy and white nationalism is only taking us in the opposite direction.
Maybe these dark times are a temporary setback and people will wake up to the danger. There are rays of hope. Bernie and younger politicians like AOC are the refreshing and vital voices we need for a saner and more compassionate future.
But we don't have a lot of time for regression and inaction either. Trumpism will either mark a turning point, or will be the point of no return.
It's up to us.
"The best strategy is getting people to understand what is needed for the health and safety of their children and grandchildren." - DD
Exactly. So adopting less hyperbolic rhetoric will help to achieve this understanding. Less The Day After Tomorrow, More food and water rationing. Less rhetoric that conjure images of action heroes running from tsunamis and more pictures of actual people in the Dust Bowl.
"But we don't have a lot of time for regression and inaction either. Trumpism will either mark a turning point, or will be the point of no return."- DD
Trumpism is many things, but mostly it's a rubberband effect of the Obama years and changing demographics. Mix with alleged foreign influence. However, Trumpism only capitalized on the already politicized nature of climate change. If the Venn Diagram of political "beliefs" between Donald Trump overlapped more with people who want to act on climate change, you know damn well, he'd pander to them. There's just not enough racism, "evangelicals", and contrarians on that side of the diagram, though.
The greater question is why was Climate Change politicized in the first place? The old wedge issues aren't as sharp as they used to be, why was Climate Change relegated to being a wedge issue? The profit potential of attempting to dig out of that hole, EVEN IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT, is enormous. New infrastructure building, levy and flood mitigation technology, new car/airplane/vehicle construction opportunities, R&D Dollars towards carbon capturing/scrubbing, genetically modified food/plants/animals, water reclamation technology, waste treatment, Solar panels. Re: Solar panels - I can't think of a reason why solar panels aren't heavily encouraged on every new building/home built or tax credits to retrofit buildings with Solar-powered water heaters like I've seen on many houses in the Carribean. All I see are opportunities for dollar signs. Why does a certain flavor of the political spectrum hate capitalism so much?
Instead of these conversations, we just have head in the sand responses, outright denial, or manufactured outrage over a certain freshman politician's attire.
"Climate Change has been politicized." ~~ TB3
Yes, as has everything ~~ including war. Yet mobilization for war has a better chance for national consensus. The dangers of global warming are too incremental and not apparent, paradoxically until a tipping-point is reached and it's too late to do anything about it.
Between a rock and a hard place...
"Even if [extinction is a very real and distinct possibility] is true, it's too hyperbolic SOUNDING." ~~ TB3
Agreed, but it's because the corporatist mainstream media is omissive, or even dismissive, in explaining the consequences.
It's so much more than melting glaciers and rising ocean levels, yet it never broaches those very real probabilities.
"Maybe there needs to be a focus on the less END OF DAYS rhetoric." ~~ TB3
Hedges has explained, repeatedly, that the corporate state is well on its way to driving the final nail into the coffin of our democratic republic. He also maintains that any chance of reviving our chances will ultimately be, and only be, accomplished through extensive and continuing civil disobedience.
This is what I found particularly unique in Extinct Rebellion's strategic approach to protesting against a politically-entrenched system that chooses to ignore the warning signs.
"Why does a certain flavor of the political spectrum hate capitalism so much?"
That would include the "Keep govt hands off Medicare" crowd, I'm sure. Must be all that socialist Social Security and healthcare they seem to like.
Or it's all about the "Right" capitalism. Their loyalty is to the "Right" capitalists and the "Right" corporations who truly deserve all the corrupt leverage, representation, corporate welfare and trickle up wealth.
These are frightening times. The entrenched "Greed-is-good Gang" need protection from all the commies being elected to office by mob rule.
They are a threat to our specially designed economy, of, by, and for the Right elites and their Right Capitalism.
No "green-is-the-new-red" hippie upstarts are welcome. It's the only Right way for America, after all.
"Yes, as has everything ~~ including war." - JG
Yes. My overarching point, though, is that we should look to depoliticize it.
"Agreed, but it's because the corporatist mainstream media is omissive, or even dismissive, in explaining the consequences." - JG
You're pointing a finger at something that is currently inconsequential to solving or addressing the problem. If, today, someone that can make decisions at NBC/ABC/FOX/CNN/CBS/BBC/ETC/ETC/ETC snapped their fingers and started to broadcast the truth as you see if, it's been politicized to such a point and people have already picked their "teams" that what good would that do at this point? Look at JTF. Provide all the credible information from credible sources that you want on any of a litany of subjects, they have already decided what they believe and, if they even counter, will counter with something from inside his bubble. Probably 'pwnthelibtards.ru' or something.
"that the corporate state is well on its way to driving the final nail into the coffin of our democratic republic." AND
"This is what I found particularly unique in Extinct Rebellion's strategic approach to protesting against a politically-entrenched system that chooses to ignore the warning signs."
Admirable. But what about Extinct Rebellion's strategic approach would address our situation with the timeliness that is required? I admit I've only done my cursory bit of research, so I'm legitimately asking you this before I dive deep into it to learn. From my perspective, advocating a political paradigm shift is a slow process. Look how well it's worked for Greenpeace and Sea Shepard.
Also... that name. Extinction Rebellion? That's pretty off-putting and the name they choose to use is hyperbolic and intended to elicit emotion. Emotion is divisive and people that have picked their sides will only dig their heels in deeper and probably blame a certain freshman congresswoman's boyfriend having a job with her campaign as a reason not to worry about rising sea levels.
"Greed-is-good Gang" - DD
Greed is good; It's a powerful motivator. That's what I don't understand about those on the "Right". Dangle the carrot of profit in front "Capitalists" and they should be reaching out for it. Instead, government initiatives to have companies improve emmission standards and build a Renewable Energy sector of the private sector economy is decried as socialism, rather than embraced as the money making opportunity that it is.
"They are a threat to our specially designed economy, of, by, and for the Right elites and their Right Capitalism." - DD
I guess it's 'cause Capitalism has become a code word as much as Communism or Socialism has. Divide. Divide. Divide.
E Pluribus Unum: More than just foreign words on our currency.
”I guess it's 'cause Capitalism has become a code word as much as Communism or Socialism has. Divide. Divide. Divide.”
That’s the plan. Divide and conquer is vital to any authoritarian ruling class or power. Invoke the dreaded “other”. Make up your own definitions. This is amply illustrated by the tactics of Frank Luntz and other propagandists of the Right. They have learned there is power in unilaterally defining terms. Our language is flooded with terms like “death tax” and “job creators”.
As long as they get away with it they will have power. Agreement on definition of terms is key to discussing, debating, and resolving issues. They don’t want to debate. They want to dominate. This is the difficulty that a reality based opposition must face.
And yes, the Left can apply that tactic too. This is the point of my rants on authoritarian Con-servatism. If we don’t define them accurately, they will define us as they see fit.
Capitalism, socialism and communism have become nebulous code words, especially when assigned to opposing viewpoints. The same is true with fascism. Even liberal capitalists have been labeled communists, socialists and fascists by the Right. They don’t care what the words really mean, it’s the emotional impact of their accusations.
George Orwell discussed this turbulence of shifting meanings in “What is Fascism?”.
It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.
Yet underneath all this mess there does lie a kind of buried meaning. To begin with, it is clear that there are very great differences, some of them easy to point out and not easy to explain away, between the régimes called Fascist and those called democratic. Secondly, if ‘Fascist’ means ‘in sympathy with Hitler’, some of the accusations I have listed above are obviously very much more justified than others. Thirdly, even the people who recklessly fling the word ‘Fascist’ in every direction attach at any rate an emotional significance to it. By ‘Fascism’ they mean, roughly speaking, something cruel, unscrupulous, arrogant, obscurantist, anti-liberal and anti-working-class. Except for the relatively small number of Fascist sympathizers, almost any English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for ‘Fascist’. That is about as near to a definition as this much-abused word has come.
So let's get this as accurately as possible. Trump and the racist, authoritarian, white nationalist Con-servatives are bullies. The same goes for the Republican Party and their corporate owners.
Some are as openly fascist as Nazis, others are not. But they are bullies. They want power to dominate and control the rest of us.
"My overarching point, though, is that we should look to depoliticize it." ~~ TB3
I'm not sure once something is politicized, it's even possible to "depoliticize it".
"You're pointing a finger at [the corporatist mainstream media] that is currently inconsequential to solving or addressing the problem." ~~ TB3
It's inconsequential to solving the problem, but certainly not to addressing it. Its failings have been decades in the making.
"...[if the heads of corporate media] snapped their fingers and started to broadcast the truth as you see if, it's been politicized to such a point and people have already picked their 'teams'" ~~ TB3
As I said, everything that can be conceived, can be politicized. We've seen, firsthand, facts politicized by this administration and turned inside out.
With global warming, for example, the factual, overwhelming consensual, information is out there, but the media chose and continue to choose to ignore it. It's almost ignored as much as alternate theories of what occurred on 9/11.
If the corporate media don't want us to learn about something, they just ignore it. It's their sins of omission.
"...what about Extinct Rebellion's strategic approach would address our situation with the timeliness that is required?" ~~ TB3
Probably, in reality, nothing -- other than it's a last gasp effort. Ghandi knew civil disobedience was all that's left when political processes fail. Extinction Rebellion approaches the situation from the same perspective.
Their approach is one of desparation.
"Emotion is divisive..." ~~ TB3
Losing one's home, and the prospect of extinction, can be emotional. ;-) It need not be devisive.
"I'm not sure once something is politicized, it's even possible to "depoliticize it"." - JG
Some people believe that if climate change is occurring, there's no consensus on if it's even possible to halt or reverse it. Like with climate change, there's no harm in trying. :)
"It's inconsequential to solving the problem, but certainly not to addressing it. Its failings have been decades in the making." - JG
But it is being addressed. Talking about the problem and "awareness" isn't going to solve it. If awareness solved problems, Susan G Komen would have licked Breast Cancer by now. You mentioned in a prior comment that the "collective solutions [of climate change] will create totally different world outlooks and viewpoints." Greenpeace has been screeing about the planet and its fate for decades. A new organization with a doom and gloom name that can be vilified on Fox News and OAN, getting themselves arrested, and graffiting buildings isn't going to the win the hearts and minds of skeptics to get to that 3.5%. Just in my opinion. I need to note; I'm not a skeptic. Climate change is happening and it needs to be dealt with. I'm just questioning this new group's approach and whether chants and slogans will effect change in the timely manner it needs to happen in.
"If the corporate media don't want us to learn about something, they just ignore it. It's their sins of omission." - JG
Yet you and me and millions of other people around the world are able to acquire information in regards to the truth about the matter, despite efforts or indifference of the media. This isn't a powerful argument. You're making the same argument "Right-wing" "Conservatives" make about the "Liberal" Media. Sins of Omission are what they harp on. "Why do they always focus on the bad things *Insert their team member* does and not all the good things? Bias!" Their cries of media bias against their point of view hasn't won you over to their side, has it? Why would the same argument tactic replacing "Conservative" views with facts on climate change work?
"Losing one's home, and the prospect of extinction, can be emotional. ;-) It need not be devisive" - JG
Losing one's home and the prospect of extinction can be emotional, I agree. What I am saying; appealing to that emotion isn't effective... because the prospect of exctinction and losing one's home is currently not real to the people that need to be convinced. We can see how well that kind of appeal worked in a children's story: Chicken Little. When the unconvinced can look at the weather and say 'It's snowing' or 'We're having record cold', never mind the fact that weather is different than climate, they can dismiss the 'Sky is falling' emotional appeals.
After enduring the Blitz, maybe Brits feel more attuned to a threat of extinction? It may resonate more with them.
There is a reason why a higher percentage of Americans deny global warming. Republican lies, the corporate media's neglect, and "both-siderism" have taken a severe toll on dissemination of facts.
Nothing can penetrate the cult bubble, but more media recognition of a real crisis would only help the majority learn the facts.
Peaceful protest and non-cooperation are still viable and visible means of calling attention to global warming. There's nothing wrong with appealing to emotion, as long as the science is presented as well.
Remember the "Daisy Ad"? Instead of extinction, their signs would be more effective if they's show children facing catastrophic events tied to global warming.
How about a little child asking Republicans why oil company profits are more important than their future? Show parents fleeing inundated coastal regions, apologizing to their children for trusting Big Oil and the Republicans. Show images of privation, hunger and devastation for the masses, along with the cozy gated enclaves protecting the privileged.
Make it about them, their children and their future.
"Peaceful protest and non-cooperation are still viable and visible means of calling attention to global warming. There's nothing wrong with appealing to emotion, as long as the science is presented as well." -- DD
I totally agree that peaceful protest and non-cooperation are viable and visible means of calling attention to something. What I quibble about is its efficacy in achieving the change necessary to deal with the problem. Calling attention to climate change is like putting a bucket under a leak in the ceiling. You're aware of the problem, but it's not fixing it. Earlier in this thread there was talk of paradigm shifts and a different age. I just don't think that this approach would achieve the desired goals in the necessary time frame that keeps getting mentioned in conversations about dealing with climate change. Isn't there a red line that scientists keep saying that we're coming up on? I believe peaceful protest and non-cooperation are wonderful tools when we're not butting up against a timeline. I believe electing more people with priorities with dealing with climate change will be more effective in the short term. More, young, like minded people to AOC in Congress for instance.
"Remember the "Daisy Ad"? Instead of extinction, their signs would be more effective if they's show children facing catastrophic events tied to global warming." -- DD
Yes. However, referencing the Daisy Ad, is Apples to Oranges here. Daisy fed on an existing fear of Nuclear Armaggeddon. A similar ad here would only stoke the fears of people that already believe in the catastrophic effects of climate change. It would elicit eye rolls and dismissals from those we would hope to sway to our side. This brings me back to my previous comments on the need to NOT SOUND hyperbolic. We see news coverage of the terrible forest fires and mudslides and hurricanes every year. People still deny it has anything to do with climate change, so showing them advertisements with this kind of imagery will only reinforce each side's opinions.
"Show images of privation, hunger and devastation for the masses, along with the cozy gated enclaves protecting the privileged.
Make it about them, their children and their future." - DD
Again. I'm not being a contrarian here. I'm just failing to see how this tactic will, at all, convince the deniers and unbelievers. I can see images of privation, hunger, and devestation for the masses when I see those 'Feed the children for just 27 cents a day' commercials. It's hard to convince someone the sky is falling when they look up and don't see it happening. It's hard to convince someone of a future of hardship when they are currently living in relative comfort and always has.
Gee, I'm not used to being ya'll's foil in these conversations. :) I just want to reiterate that I'm on your side of the climate change debate. Chants, slogans, signs and spray paint may be acts of despiration... but I feel if people willing to do that put that energy into putting themselves in a position to inact legislation or government action we'd see faster movement in the right direction. I'd anticipate a dismissal of this citing corporatism and corporate media, but such an avenue shouldn't be outright dismissed so simply. See how quickly the Green New Deal came into the public zeitgeist when AOC was sworn in. Had she lost her election, how loud would her voice be advocating for it?
"There is a reason why a higher percentage of Americans deny global warming." Gee, maybe it's because it's claimed that the USA is the source of man caused global warming.
One of the strongest Arctic outbreaks of winter is ready to surge into the Lower 48 soon
By Ian Livingston
The Washington Post
Updated 2/26/2019 1:58 PM
Atmospheric River Is Pummeling California's Sierra With Feet of Snow, Topping February Records
By Jonathan Erdman
The Weather Channel
Los Angeles is officially experiencing the coldest February in nearly 60 years, according to the National Weather Service, as the city has endured a series of storms and is bracing for more later this week.
"But [climate change] is being addressed [by the corporate media]." ~~ TB3
The media have nibbled around the edges, yes, but haven't reported, in depth, the ramifications of atmospheric and oceanic warming on eco-system breakdowns, pathogen developments, extinction rates of non-human species, etc., etc. Ask the common person what the consequences of warming climate means, and I'm sure they're limited to discussing ice-shelf loss and rising sea levels.
That's what I'm meaning when I say it hasn't been adequately addressed. That's what I mean about sins of omission.
"If awareness solved problems, Susan G Komen would have licked Breast Cancer by now." ~~ TB3
That's pure speculation.
If the corporate media really made an effort to report corporate malfeasance (i.e., pollution of our air and waterways, the contamination of our foods and drinking water, etc.), perhaps every cancer would be eradicated by now.
There's big money in treating cancer, not unlike the money that's to be made in supplying the implements of war (or in incarcerating prisoners, as just one more example).
Follow the money.
"[Conservative] cries of media bias against their point of view hasn't won you over to their side, has it?" ~~ TB3
Do you think it has? Has it won you over? ;-)
My disagreement with the conservative argument is its insistence that the media bias is of the liberal variety.
"...because the prospect of exctinction and losing one's home is currently not real to the people that need to be convinced. We can see how well that kind of appeal worked in a children's story: Chicken Little." ~~ TB3
Yet, the fairytale Jesus stories always strike a chord with the willfully uninitiated. ;-)
As previously mentioned, galvanizing a population for war is an easy task. (Just ask George W. Bush.) With something like climate-warming, where the threats are not as easily apparent or discernable, obviously the challenges are enormous.
Hence, a last-gasp effort at swaying at least 3.5% of the population to engage in civil disobedience. Obviously Extinction Rebellion believes any redundant political processes are ineffective and not expedient enough to turn the tide.
Good points were made. Calling attention to a problem does not fix anything, but it is an important step.
And so is putting a bucket under a leak to lessen the damage. It is temporary, but means more is to be done.
There are several fronts in this struggle against catastrophic warming.
You're right. Most important is the need for more courageous or younger or politicians like AOC to actively bring legislation into addressing global warming.
Now about that corporatocracy and corporate media. We can't dismiss their roles.
The corrupting influence on government by Big Oil is still a major impediment. They are funding the Republicans and the climate change denial industry. Big Oil pumps a lot of cash into corporate media. It is a real problem. Especially in this country. This is why there is a larger percentage of Americans questioning global warming than in any other country's population.
Now we're on the cusp of our corporate media cheer-leading military intervention in Venezuela. The Military Industrial Complex also pumps a lot of cash into corporate media.
We'll probably see protest demonstrations against this, but they will be too late, and as ineffective as with Bush's invasion of Iraq.
We're not trying to reach the cult, but those who can be swayed by truth and science.
Nothing will convince the brainwashed true believer that climate is different from weather.
Schumer: Voting On Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal Is A “Sham”…
I shocked, I'd think Chuck would want America to know how much DEMOCRATS support the NGD with their vote. I wonder how the NGD's co-sponsor, Senator Markey, feels about being dissed?
The imbecile, "Just the Facts" still has no clue what's the difference between climate and weather.
TG3, I apologize. You're right, it doesn't matter whether the corporate mainstream media is comprehensive or not. There are way too many dumb-asses.
Extinction Rebellion's tactics of civil disobedience may be our only option.
"I wonder how the NGD's co-sponsor, Senator Markey, feels about being dissed?" -- JTF
No you don't. :)
Right. This is why these people need to be considered when making arguments. If we marginalize them and dismiss them, than we end up with more politicians like our current President.
I suppose, one day, we'll find ourselves in an Idiocracy -- like in the 2006 science fiction dystopian comedy. We're almost there.
Enjoyed bantering with you...
Post a Comment