Trump

[claig]

Another Trump thread for those who want to discuss what it all means

Article from another thread

"History Tells Us What Will Happen Next With Brexit And Trump"

www.huffingtonpost.com/tobias-stone/history-tells-us-what-will-brexit-trump_b_11179774.html?

claig

Trump is appointing aggressively racist and misogynistic people to positions of power.

Steve Bannon is not just "politically incorrect" and he's not challenging the elite for the good of the normal American citizen. He's fascist scum intent on creating an America where white men are in charge and where women and non-whites know their place.

You mentioned 1984 earlier, how about Animal Farm? "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." That is the politics of Trump.

There is no bigger critic of neoliberalism than I, but I'm just not buying the idea that Trump is anything more than an opportunistic, power-hungry bigot. You (and many other Trump supporters) may not be racist or misogynistic, but that doesn't stop Trump being exactly those things. A politician is NOT defined by the people who vote for him, and if you think otherwise you're being naïve.

All the stuff you are saying about how important it is to sweep away the old political regimes across the Western world so that fairness and social justice can be reatored... that has no bearing whatsoever on what Trump will actually do now he's in power. Trump is a con-man by trade and he's used you and people like you to get into power. And he'll continue to use you and those like you for as long as you turn a blind eye to the acts of injustice he commits in the name of "smashing the elite".

But he's in power now, so you've won and well find out if you're right or not. However, if it turns out you're wrong, it's going to be your responsibility to come on here and say that Trump needs to go. Whatever happens next is on you.

I'm not a celebrity but get me out of here.

you give claig too much credit

claig knows exactly what they are rooting for

they aren't confused, or tricked or fooled

NomNomNomBrains, Steve Bannon is not racist, he is anti-establishment and OK.

The worry about Trump is that he may start appointing the neocons agains - John Bolton as Secretary of State etc. Rudy Giuliani is OK, better than Bolton. We will have to see what Trump does.

'but that doesn't stop Trump being exactly those things'

Don't worry, Trump is not racist. But he may start putting neocons in and then we are back to Bush etc and war. Hopefully, he won't do that.

The Establishment is surrounding Trump and are trying to put their people in. Trump doesn't know all the ins and outs of politics and therefore some Establishment advisers may fool him. However, he has top advisers who know all the players well and they may advise him better. We will have to wait and see if the Establishment ends up controlling him or if he remains free and independent.

Trump says the media is lying about the transition process, so we will have to wait and see.

Nomnomnom ". Whatever happens next is on you."

Wow. Just simply wow. So half of the USA are on a white supremacist march (as are half of the UK as seen in brexit). What on earth are you basing that on?

Laura Ingraham is saying on Fox, that the candidates will have to follow Trump's worldview i.e. more Reaganesque than Bushite. Hopefully, that will be the case, otherwise we are all back to square one and Establishment warmongering etc.

Can't say I like the idea of Bannon, no-one likes him not even the loonier alt right. Not sure I like his circle either, Raheem Kassam wouldn't be my choice for a party invite.

Trust me when I say they would love to see the faux outrage and name calling, they wouldn't be influential without it.

Trouble is their agenda is to destroy though without any clue what to build in it's place. If there is a philosophy behind then I can't discern it.

Those who sling mud in their direction are cut from the same cloth, just opposite ends of the spectrum with little signal to noise and nothing constructive to say.

The appointment does indicate a desire for a Trump administration to destroy the GOP as it currently stands. This can be applauded, question is what is proposed to replace it?

Is Bannon likely to expose the little corruptions or merely reinforce them and create new ones? I have no doubt that political correctness will continue to drown in the tidal wave of illiberal tears and I doubt America will forget these protests against democracy. As Trump's strategist though does he know how to rout an already defeated enemy and for what reason.

An interesting appointment, the language from the democrats will be interesting as so far they are just rubbing salt into their own self inflicted wounds.

Not sure I really explained that too well, however the whole Nigel thing is a good example.

Relations between states are, or were, dictated by protocols and norms. Diplomacy a sombre business with plans and discussions in the background from civil servants and the like producing a coherent discourse through the established and proper channels. Ambassadors, state visits, all that sort of thing.

It wasn't just Farage taunting the foreign office and Theresa May, it was also Trump's team ignoring the norms by even meeting him. Which is a matter of strategy.

Now it may well just be just stating a self evident truth that a failed politician with no elected office or official capacity can short circuit the process, it may even be that said chap might have more influence than the proper channels. A willingness to embrace this this however shows a contempt not just for politicians and the establishment but for the entire apparatus of state.

If a radio shock jock has more influence than a government department then does that make the department obsolete? An anachronism?

Which is the point I was trying to make, destroying something is fine as a source of power, but what happens when you need the very thing you have destroyed and have not been able to replace it with something coherent?

This isn't just a Trump or Nigel thing, Obama for instance ordered that the hotline to the Kremlin be removed, which as a symbol of intent was more powerful than him removing Churchill's image from the Oval office. Those phones were there for good reason, not least the opaqueness of the Kremlin's processes. Removing it signalled that Russia didn't matter. Putin never mentions it explicitly but the butthurt is self evident.

Borris too not attending EU meetings. A crass and clumsy signal of intent.

I would suggest that ignoring the norms of diplomacy also ignores the lessons from history which formed them, slow and cumbersome though they may seem.

'Borris too not attending EU meetings. A crass and clumsy signal of intent.'

Boris had no choice. The entire world is scared of Trump and the UK didn't want to get on the wrong side of him by teaming up with the EU in a panic meeting over Trump. The UK had no choice but to signal that it stays with America rather than the EU. Even the French didn't go to that meeting either because they didn't want to get on the wrong side of Trump.

'If a radio shock jock has more influence than a government department then does that make the department obsolete?'

No, but Trump may staff his department with outsiders who are not Establishment because Trump is an outsider and does not trust a lot of the Establishment and the advice he received from them and nows all of the media owners and knows they were all against him.

Trump is appointing Etablishment like Reince Priebus because he needs people who know how Washington works and an entire team of outsiders couldn't get anything done.

But Trump represents a complete change, he doesn't trust a lot of the old guard who all insulted and opposed him, so we will have to wait and see if Trump is able to maintain control or if the Establishment will smother him in the end.

Sorry to lurk, but I'm genuinely interested to know more about those 'subtle racist digs' that were directed at Diane Abbott on HIGNFY last Friday, howabout ?

I hope I don't have to watch it on Iplayer again, the show was rather a dull one last week.

Tropezienne, I watched it on iplayer. I couldn't see any racist element in it. The way I read it, there was a mocking and dislike of Diane, probably based on the fact that she is associated closely with Corbyn and there is a strong dislike of Corbyn due to his policies by some people.

The Corbyn section, which involves the Diane bit, starts at about 15.00 into the stream. Unless there is another Diane bit later. I didn't watch it to the end.

Thank Claig .. I'll take a look

Thanks for the HIGNFY link Claig. Id lost the will to go seeking, so thank you for the quick reference. Tropez, no, no veiled anything. Id hope this can be put to bed now, though I think the positive discrimination debate could go on for some years yet.

Just one other point I meant to say whilst I was catching up here yesterday, language, and the 'disablist' storm. I think Claig had a good point when she noted a cultural/common useage issue. I forget who said 2 nations divide by a common language, but we all know that quote. There are indeed significant discrepancies between US and UK 'understandings' on language. For example, when the Black Lives Matter UK protests happened, I googled to find out more. Reading their website, I was struck between the eyes by their use of the word 'queer'. Now to any american readers out there, the term 'queer' here in the UK was consigned to the homophobic bin of utterly unacceptable words decades ago. What I think I concluded though from that was, it did indeed hugely detract from the point being made behind it.

We've all been confused by unacceptable terms then becoming acceptable if its 'reclaimed' by the group/identity who were originally offended by it. (The N word being the obvious) But Id reiterate Claigs points about PC correctness. If any point or concern raised, is dismissed due to either clumsy communication or a debatable terms used, then that in itself is wrong. PC correctness does indeed shut us down.

Market watch are selling potential 20% gains playing the mexican market at the moment, due to some confidence that Trumps 'bombast' was just that.

www.marketwatch.com/story/mexico-is-now-a-screaming-buy-for-investors-thanks-to-donald-trump-2016-11-16?reflink=zacks

A small flurry of uncertainty, or confidence that the bombast was indeed bombast?

Cleese, having worked with psychiatrist Robin Skynner, says there may even be something more sinister behind the insistence to be always be politically correct

Yes, I've always felt this. It gives me a shiver down my spine. The people I came across who are like that seem like automatons, like the Borg!

Just because Im looking at market watch this morning...

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bond-guru-bill-gross-says-trump-voters-will-suffer-most-from-election-result-2016-11-16?mod=MWstoryytopstories

Whilst the message is expected, I think this quote from Bill Gross shows a little insight. (From the above article)

"But if Trump fails to deliver on his campaign promises, neither the Democrats nor the Republicans are prepared to stem the tide of global populism, Gross says. Unless the political establishments adopts new, bold policies to help workers reclaim their lost share of U.S. GDP, “populists will reject establishment parties in almost every future election.”

Id agree with that.

*By the way, it's against the law to incite racial hatred and that includes using hate speak. Obviously the law has boundaries regarding what can and can't be said in a public sphere. Rightly so(

In that case, why is this type of demo allowed to continue? No one is ever cautioned or arrested. This is hate speech and incitement to violence made in public. And there are worst ones than these examples.

"Ukip donor Arron Banks to 'drain Westminster swamp' by taking on 'most corrupt' MPs

UKIP donor Arron Banks has vowed to “drain the Westminster swamp” by taking on 200 of the “most corrupt” MPs with his own political movement."

www.express.co.uk/news/uk/732550/Ukip-Arron-banks-drain-the-swamp-Westminster-Parliament

What is going on? Has Donald J Trump, leader of the Western world, given the signal to Banks to "drain the swamp"? Will there be a "draining of the swamp" all over Europe?

The only problem is that Banks doesn't want a party with policies, he is just interested in "draining the swamp".

While "draing the swamp" is a praiseworthy goal, what the people really want is some common sense policies and for that you need a common sense party, it is not enough just to "drain the swamp".

Oh my gosh!!!. Diane Abbot is being called a loony lefty, her voice impersonated and this is ethnic hatred? So Politicians can get satirised, impersonated and mocked all the time in this country but Diane Abbot's ethnicity means she can't be included in that and needs protection t?

You know howabout In Colonial times there was a very paternal relationship between blacks and whites in Africa. Whites often regarded blacks as children and treated them as such.

All this screeching that passes for debate, and the inability to name a problem and discuss it has had to come from somewhere. People who cannot acknowledge a reality have been brainwashed. This inculcation must have started in our schools and continues into university. It seems others seem to be of the same opinion:

"The proportion of far left academics in British universities is completely out of proportion with national population norms. An example? A leading prof at King's London, a Professor of European Studies, has been on the leadership of the Trotskyite Socialist Workers Party since the 1970s. He has been hugely influential in the lives of hundreds of students. The political indoctrination of students under the guise of university teaching has gone unchallenged in British academia for far too long."

www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/opinion/sunday/a-confession-of-liberal-intolerance.html?_r=1

Good post Southallgirl I completely agree.

Would you agree that IonaMumsnet's plee, not to use disablist language, is political correctness gone mad?

Jeez. If you cannot differentiate then you really do hv a problem.

We are run by the One Percent and their servants in the media. The only way they can control millions and billions of people is by divide and rule. They do that by identity politics and they use political correctness to quell any dissent by, as John Cleese said creating an environment which could one day lead to "an Orwellian nightmare" which is what they want because then freedom will have gone and the people will not be able to disagree with the One Percent.

So "political correctness gone mad" is done deliberately to impose control on minor issues, because if it works for those, it will work for bigger issues. If people become fearful of challenging the elites over minor issues, then they won't challenge them over major issues. So it is an incremental system of control.

As Dr Ben Carson said in the video linked to above

"it is used as a control mechanism and it is used for intimidation"

So if you don't think unisex toilets are a good idea, then you will eventually be too scared to say anything about it in case you are branded as being "politically incorrect".

Then along comes Trump, an outsider, who says "we are led by very, very stupid people" and who is the antithesis of political correctness and who says he will "drain the swamp" of these "very, very stupid people" and they are in panic because he poses an existential threat to the elites. So their media operations all call him racist, fascist etc etc to try to shut him up and slow him down, even though many prominent black people like Dr Ben Carson, Herman Cain, Mike Tyson, Don King, American black pastors, the Stump for Trump Sisters and may other people all support Trump, and even though his son-in-law is Jewish and he has many Jewish, black and gay friends.

Trump not only challenges their political correctness on minor issues, he also challeneges their big goals like climate change, he is politically incorrect over it, he doesn't believe them, and that is why they are all panicked by him and all their media teams try to mock and stop him.

Just like the elites don't like Corbyn because he is against war, so they don't like Trump because he says "wouldn't it be nice if we got along with Russia, folks?"

Trump goes against their "divide and rule", and he goes against their Syria policy of backing the Jihadis against a secular regime. One day the entire truth will come out about the pay for play charidees and Benghazi and who backed the Jihadis and who funded Isis and who promoted the divide and rule that caused so many problems across the world.