In the ongoing saga of Trump vs. Young, Neil Young's latest statement is:
"I don't hate Trump. I do hate that he is President."
In an annotated response on Lindsey Graham Thinks It's A Good Thing That Neil Young Is Suing Donald Trump | NYA, Neil explains his concerns.
 |
| Neil replies: "I don't hate Trump. I do hate that he is President." |
Here is a comment by Sedan Delivery: (please note per Comments Policy, publication does NOT necessarily constitute endorsement, OK?)
I love Neil, but he is gone.
I did not watch the convention so I can’t comment on it, but the constant assurances that it was a great success leads me to believe that it was not.
“Biden obviously thought this through and did a great job.” Does Neil really think Joe had any part in planning the convention? Vote Dem all you want, but at least be real with us.
I did however watch the clip of FWIW. Did anyone here actually enjoy that? It was one of the most cringeworthy things I’ve ever seen. It was like a bad MadTV skit. The only good thing was that Stills was involved first hand. Glad it was good enough for him.
I too appreciate the balanced responses in this post, though I strongly disagree with much of it.
I am happy that everyone agrees that FWIW was a jaw droppingly bad moment. Was that part of the success Neil was talking about?
I am also glad that no one has disputed my notion that Neil is either a fool or straight up lying when he says that Biden did a great job planning the evening. In Joe’s words ‘cmon man!” That sentence didn’t even need to be written, but was just a chance to artificially shore up concerns about Biden’s current abilities. This is what I’m talking about when I say the constant reassurances of the convention’s success are suspect. An actual example. Don’t just flip my logic and act as though you are disproving it.
There is no moral high ground in politics. To me, claiming to have it is a trait of liberals, but I suppose when you’re on the other side it looks like that’s what the republicans are doing. Every clip I’ve seen from the convention is talking about Joe’s heart and his empathy, his kindness, blah blah. In govt policy those words mean nothing. Every goal they want to achieve involves forcibly taking people’s income to give to others. Nothing you do with it after that can be considered moral or empathetic. The big lie is that we just need to elect “good people.” Power corrupts. The sooner you accept that, the more sense politics makes. All the original platitudes about America’s greatness were specifically because of its minimal federal govt. Not because we had magically moral politicians that would help fix all aspects of our lives. More freedom is always the answer.
I’m always fascinated by the obsession that Trump is destroying democracy. The DNC stole the nomination from Bernie in 2016 and 2020. This year was especially fun with Warren staying in just long enough to rob him of a couple primary wins, dropping out, and then still refusing to support him, even though she stole all of his policies. It’s all coordinated, folks. Is that not subverting democracy? Would love to hear Neil write a song about that. In fact, Neil’s current home state is having rolling blackouts and wildfires because of its failed liberal energy and land management policies. That would make for a good song as well.
As for the Russia stuff, feel free to cling to that as long as you wish. Same as with obsession that Trump is some sort of fascist. He has let states control their responses to both COVID and the peaceful riots. No situation could better prepackaged for a dictatorship, but that liberal dream simply has not come to pass. But people also think he called Nazis fine people, so anything is possible.
As for Neil, I still consider him to be a hypocrite until he issues a public apology for asking Trump for an investment and taking a smiling photo with him. I hope he realizes that photo is enough to destroy all of his credibility with the woke mob should the issue ever arise.
Thank you for the comment Sedan Delivery. While there is much we can and will say here, we do suggest that everyone consider SD's comments in their context and the replies that follow. This is what we call civil, respectful dialogue which we strive to engage in here @ TW, Btw - for the record - we're trying to celebrate our differences as rusties and NOT trying to create an echo chamber where everyone agrees on everything. It is these heartfelt dialogues with our readers that are better than silver & gold to us. (Again, please note per Comments Policy, publication does NOT necessarily constitute endorsement.)
Neil Young became a U.S. citizen earlier this year, immediately registered as a Democrat in order to specifically vote against president Trump. (See CITIZEN NEIL: Neil Young Becomes A U.S. Citizen.)
After becoming a U.S. citizen, Neil Young then filed a lawsuit against Trump for unauthorized use of his music.
Regarding Neil Young and Donald Trump, recall they were once more than mere acquaintances in New York City. Make no mistake, Donald Trump is a huge Neil Young fan, as we detailed here. In addition, we have detailed as to why Donald Trump is specifically playing the songs "Rockin' in the Free World" and “Devil’s Sidewalk” at his campaign rallies. This is not random, but intentional, deliberate and to signal a message. (For more, see why Trump plays Neil Young's songs at his rallies.)
Neil writes in response on Lindsey Graham Thinks It's A Good Thing That Neil Young Is Suing Donald Trump | NYA, about his relationship with Donald Trump:
"He used to come to my shows and he was always welcome.
I met him in a hallway once after a show. It’s too bad he could never attend one of them now. The country is no longer safe for him. He did that all by himself."Something that most everyone seems to forget today is that Donald Trump has always been a major player in New York City politics and always solidly in the Democratic camp.
Donald Trump only flipped to become a Republican with his first political campaign for President of the U.S. in 2016.
 |
| Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton (D), Bill Clinton (D) & Melania Trump - 2005 |
For more on these strangely coincidental connections which demonstrate the tyranny of the two party monotheistic system, see George & John, Donald & Neil + Bob: Sooner or Later, It All Gets REAL ... As in Now.
In these scenes, visualize that you are that man in the bar, or the woman on the couch, or the child staring in disbelief at the TeeVee screen. You are them.
As V says:
“Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth.”
"There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler.
He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. “
One more clip before we go, is Director Oliver Stone at the Writer's Guild Awards ceremony in 2017.
3 minutes of honesty out of milions of minutes of lies
— Angelo Giuliano (@AngeloG44126819) August 12, 2020
Oliver Stone's speech on American hegemony pic.twitter.com/wywVZkZvFO
and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Neil Young fan.
Then they came for Aaron Swartz,
and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t an opponent of the "privatization of knowledge" by corporations and academia.
Then they came for Oprah Winfrey & Beyonce,
and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a black female social justice warrior.
Then they came for Neil Young,
and I didn’t speak up, because I was Donald Trump voter.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me."
We first published these original words by Rev. Martin Niemoller here on Thrasher's Wheat on September 27, 2011 -- almost 9 years ago. And we insert the profound words of Rev. Martin Niemoller into our postings from time to time. And it's been 75 years since the quote originated.
So how much longer will this continue all of you communists, jews, trade
unionists, and catholics out there? How's that identity politics thing
working out for you these days?
And just in case anyone is missing the obvious point here, if they can censor and de-platform a rather benign music blog such as Thrasher's Wheat for getting out of line, then we can guarantee that much more serious throttling lies in wait. Be very careful what you wish for.
Because, remember,
like Rev. Niemoller, we will never forget those who stood with us and those who did not. Trust us.
I don’t hate president Trump, I feel sorry for him. He is clearly a person who has chosen a life based on how he was raised, just like all of us.
ReplyDeleteI was raised to respect every person I met until they gave me a reason not to, and to walk through this life with integrity and congruity. I was taught that honesty and accountability were two of the most important parts of living successfully in this world. I was taught that my word was my bond, and once people knew they could trust me then I could succeed in anything I wanted to accomplish.
Whatever I encountered in life needed to be measured with a morale compass that included independent thought and compassion. My folks always told me to trust my gut instincts, and not to judge too quickly. Listening with discernment before reacting has always been effective when dealing with people.
I’m not interested in changing anyone’s beliefs or opinions. I use the tools I was taught growing up to inform my ideas and perspectives. And my gut instincts tell me that I can’t trust the man in the White House, because he has illustrated through his words and his actions that he is not a stable person. Nor is he qualified to be president.
This is not an indictment on those who disagree with me, it is simply my opinion based on my personal observations. My intention is not meant to persuade anyone, but only to speak my truth.
What I have seen happening over the past four years is a intentional and successful attempt to divide this country with the sole purpose to weaken our ability to communicate with each other. And the vast majority have fallen for it. We are being played and manipulated so that both sides are completely convinced that they are right and everyone else is wrong. There is no absolutes when dealing in governing a country, there will always be compromise. It’s time we start listening to each other instead of fighting each other, or we could be setting ourselves up for unthinkable pain and suffering.
Peace 🙏
I have news for "Sedan Delivery": elections and the electoral process is hardly a sufficient condition for democracy, especially as we consider the moral axioms that ground democracy: self-determination and equal opportunity. The democrats certainly corrupt elections with various power blocs and elites. We know this and the question is how we can move past this form of "thin democracy."
ReplyDeleteDonald Trump is a nihilist. He has demonstrated his racism and sexism, even if he is only pandering to his base (which might even be worse than a more direct form of racism and sexism). His businesses are utterly corrupt. He has no concern for the many who are currently suffering. He is, in short, a completely worthless sack of shit.
And it does not follow from the fact that Neil Young sought an investment from him that Neil Young should now "apologize" to him. This is simply bad reasoning. Or the idea he owes anyone an apology for this, bad inference.
We are once again on the road to forgetting. Remember we saw a man murdered on the street this summer? Actually more than one. what does a real leader do in the face of this and the history that it quickly reveals if one pays attention? A real leader sets into motion a basis for radical change. Trump instead blows the trumpet for "law and order" (code for "we will not change your way of life which depends on their being gross disparities in power and wealth). Try to imagine the pain of frustration, the agonizing reality of human destruction. We need reparations and we need investment in all our citizens and neighborhoods. This will only happen from a prolonged infrastructure, social services, and investment revolution. Somehow I don't think the slob Trump has friends who favor this plan.
Trump, by the way, is an ignorant, uneducated clown. He knows nothing about the history of politics, science, religion, sociology, psychology and on and on, he doesn't even know how to pronounce "Yosemite"? Is this even possible? I think we could probably teach a raven better leadership skills.
Oh, and no offense Dan, I do hate Donald Trump insofar as I can keep up the energy to hate. I also hated Richard Nixon. These are people worthy of hatred (there is such a thing, hate is sometimes called for, it is the appropriate emotive response and disposition).
ReplyDelete@ Abner Snopes : No offense taken, but I would like to encourage you to lay your hatred down and realize that it simply doesn’t work. I understand your anger and frustration but you end up sounding just like the person you say you hate. One of my biggest problems with President Trump is his insistence on insulting people with disparaging name calling. This will never solve any problems we want to solve. He has given everyone permission to be disrespectful by his own vocabulary, and this is one way he keeps us divided. You can’t put out a fire by throwing gasoline on it. It’s simply unproductive and makes things worse. It plays right into his game. Your better than that.
ReplyDeletePeace 🙏
God bless President Trump.
ReplyDeleteThe far left propaganda that Neil is putting on Page 1 of the Times Contrarian lately is sickening.
Can't we just get excited about Way Down in the Rust Bucket & Archives 2?
@ ALL - thanks as always for the measured tone and your insightful contributions in comments here during these disconcerting times we all face.
ReplyDeleteIt is truly appreciated.
As we often say -- once again, another demonstration that Neil fans/rusties are some of the most knowledgeable and articulate music fans out there. we are humbled and honored.
@ Jonathan - once again & oh-so delicately...
this platform is a space to make your case. your team is squandering an opportunity to educate as to why anyone would support your statement: "God bless President Trump."
many feel Trump is the epitome of "Devil's Sidewalk". try to convince everyone as to why he isn't or something.
The rah-rah, go Team RED, simply doesn't cut it.
Facts matter. truth matters. Neil went through the same thing on TC as well.
Make a case and we'll print it.
And yes, we're very excited about Way Down in the Rust Bucket & Archives 2, of course.
Have you not seen our Friday morning posts here on TW extolling the virtues of The Bucket week after week, month after month?
http://neilyoungnews.thrasherswheat.org/2020/08/rust-bucket-video-premiere-like.html
The last installments's Hurricane, while not a 30 minute epic, was a relatively brief 12 minutes of furious Ol Black & CH jam.
The Power of The Horse? #DontSpookTheHorse
Why CH in RnR HoF? #CrazyHorse4HOF #InductTheHorse
#MayTheHorseBeWithYou
peace
I too would like to second the request from Thrashers for Johnathan to give us some detailed information supporting his position on our President. Accurate and factual information would be most welcome.
ReplyDeletePeace 🙏
sorry guys - I don’t come here to pusuade anyone about anything especially politics. Years ago I tried to do so but that era has passed. And Dan’s little snarky comment proves me right to not go there as he implies that any argument in support of Trump would be grounded in falsehoods. Why do I owe anyone an argument for supporting President Trump? I don’t. Everyone on here has their opinions and that won’t change no matter what. The guy won the Presidency as an outsider and has been under relentless assault even before his inauguration. And F your Russian collusion nonsense (not so delicate sorry Thrash).
ReplyDeleteDemocrat policies ruin everything.
Republicans aren’t too far behind them.
broad-sweeping assertions!
‘What is truth?’
I’d prefer discussing Neil’s music and our shared love for it.
@ Jonathan - Take #2 once again & oh-so delicately...
ReplyDeletethanks for followup. understand certainly about persuasion.
regarding preferring to discuss Neil’s music and our shared love for it. Of course. absolutely.
But you know as well as anyone that Neil himself has directly interjected politics into his music for the Campaign w/ LFAL 2020.
The story is major in the music press and politco sphere now w/ Tom Petty's estate weighing in today. The subject of Neil, Trump politics and music will herat up again just like 2006 & LWW times.
And new EP The Times is stil to come only to bring more.
All that said, let's turn it aroiund.
Rather than bash Trump or why he should be supported, hiw about this?
Why support Biden? What does he bring to the table? What will he do? What will be diff besides he's not Trump.
Our feeling here is that Biden is getting support only b/c he's not Trump. That seems pretty weak argument to us. It's only a lesser of 2 evils, which is still evil.
again, we ask in all sincerity here in these contrarian times we live in an attempt to bring a fair & balanced discussion.
frankly, we're hearing that w/i mail in there will be a huge write in for Bernie as burned voters the 2nd time by the DNC are totally fed up.
remember a write in vote is never wasted despite what the experts will tell you. the experts are always wrong b/c of hidden agendas.
our pledge.
@Johnathan : You have mistaken a genuine desire to hear your views as “snarky”. That was clearly not my intention. Frankly, your response is disappointing. I was looking forward to hearing your input. No malice was intended from me.
ReplyDeletePeace 🙏
Thanks Dan - apologies for misinterpretation on your comment as you seem like a reasonable good guy
ReplyDeleteI think I’ll fade into the background for a while as a lurker who doesn’t post.
I just don’t have the patience to get into a reasoned argument on a blog site. Scotsman and others have that covered and they do it well.
Thanks Thrasher for all you do and I mean that.
A reasoned argument on a blog site? Give it just a chance Jonathon. You might surprise yourself and actually come up with something. Comments that come from no base of reasoned argument are not very helpful when there is so very much at stake.
ReplyDeleteDan, have you read Hunter Thompson's obituary of Richard Nixon? Sometimes we have to speak what we think is true and have real reason for thinking that it is true. Yes, my comment did reach the level of insult in a couple of places. But Trump is a corrupt, lying, racist, hateful and finally incompetent asshole. No going back on this one. Truth Be Known.
Abner’s post is full of mind-reading. He knows what the president thinks and feels. He knows his true motivations. I’m glad he at least admitted that the Democrats have shown zero respect for elections.
ReplyDeleteAnd I would respectfully disagree about owing people an apology for appearing with Trump. In a reasonable world, of course he doesn’t, but that is not today’s world. People have gotten canceled for much more minor infractions. A smiling photo with Hitler Jr. himself?? If the mob cared about Neil at all he would be canceled in a second. Sad but true.
And to agree with Jonathan, the sarcastic calls asking for why anyone would support Trump just make it obvious that too few people read anything outside their narrative. Do you all really think Trump hasn’t done a single laudable thing in 3 years? I can only imagine the responses to this question, but sure I’ll give you some reasons bc I’m bored at the moment. Pushing for nuclear energy (he could be doing better at this), getting out of the Paris climate agreement (feel-good waste of taxpayer money), getting NATO allies to pay more, getting out of the TPP (this affected my job directly), pushing for school choice and against the teachers’ union, getting the federal government out of local zoning board decisions, understanding that strong police forces are necessary for peaceful cities (longtime NYC resident, city is collapsing before my eyes and communities of color are getting hit hardest), open to decoupling from China, standing with Hong Kong as much as he could, tax cuts, raising the issue of limiting immigration (the other side wants to have open borders and “free” healthcare - you have to pick one or the other), pressuring Mexico to finally enforce its own immigration laws, Middle East peace deal (even Biden had to praise it), taking out Iran’s top guy and standing up to Iran in general, ISIS is basically non existent, speaking out against tech censorship, calling to ban TilTok (China doesn’t allow our tech, why create an asymmetry of data collection with a country that wants to dominate us?). And apparently he has great taste in music. Idk, guess I’ll stop there for now.
The above were in no particular order, btw.
Now let’s hear it for Joe, hmm?
Thank you Sedan Delivery for your original comment which was the foundation of this post.
ReplyDeleteThanks also for trying to bring some balance to a lopsided game.
We challenge Bernie backers to weigh in as well.
And others who are not USA too.
If you're looking for a leader in 2020, that means you're a follower.
#WT1sWBW4
My apologies for not acknowledging the call out. Thank you!
ReplyDeleteI have spent and continue to spend my life reading all kinds of valuable books that are far outside my "own narrative." (Talk about "mind-reading"!) One does not have to be a mind-reader to see intentions, motives, beliefs and so forth. I suggest some reading in cognitive science and empirical psychology. To simplify, those mental states you mention such as motive and intention can be grasped through careful observation.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think Neil has it backwards......
ReplyDeleteI don't like Trump as a person, but I think he has been a most effective President. And I'm gonna be quite happy to vote for him in November.
And btw, I've voted Democrat since I turned 18. After watching what having Democrats run things has done to California, and especially my beloved Santa Cruz, I just don't think that I can go that way anymore.
Well, this is truly absurd! Donald Trump is President in 2020 and we're still talking like it could somehow make sense. If we had mail in voting twenty years ago like today, Al Gore would have been easily elected, the National Debt would be one third of what it is now, and the whole country would not be lost in an illusion. But let's do nothing and just watch the carnival! All good things must end and PresiDaddy is seeing to that.
ReplyDeleteWhy is a 77 year-old still wanting to become as a president in the USA?In our country-the Netherlands-it's common use that you retire at the age of 65 (not entirely true,because nowadays we retire some time later than 65 for economical reasons,which depend on when you were born).Everyone is entitled to have his or her opinion.You don't have the same.Everyone is different,unique and thank God most of us are free to say and think anything we want.Calling someone a hypocrite is easy to say,but in Neil's case,I know he isn't.Your opnion can change every moment or after a while and why isn't that possible?The world keeps changing,sometimes for the better,sometimes for the worst.But it's our choice and since the beginning of mankind we could choose and very often taken the wrong choice and blaming someone else.Nothing new under the sun.I'd say make the best of it,while you're on the Earth.I couldn't resist to comment on those issues.Normally I just write about music.
ReplyDeleteCan't forget to mention how "Acceptable" those Death Rates are to the majority and how "It's Going Well" for so many apparently with this ragged ass response to COVID. It's all so acceptable.
ReplyDeleteMister Henry, great point. death rates much higher among the marginalized. Totally unacceptable in every way.
ReplyDelete“Compassion is the spontaneous wisdom of the heart. It's always with us. It always has been, and always will be. When it arises in us, we've simply learned to see how strong and safe we really are.”
ReplyDelete-- Yongey Mingyur Rinpoche
I have always generally been a skeptical person by nature and have always favored the position of devil's advocate as a method to first challenge my own beliefs on a given subject and then, with an effort to be respectful, the beliefs of others who see things differently. Its proper to be a skeptic when one of the first lies youre told as a child is about an obese man in a red suit who can somehow negotiate even the narrowest of soot filled chimneys all with the intent to bestow me with toys...toys that were already manufactured with the intention of brainwashing children into the glorious adult world of consumerism. I still read skeptically, eat skeptically but perhaps most of all engage with fired up devotees of a particular system of beliefs skeptically. It has been proven time and time again that whenever there's an uptick in conspiratorial fervor there comes a parallel rise in anti semitism, or homophobia or "dont tread on me you leftist Commie queer rhetoric". I think the attraction to these idealogies is valid and deserves our attention and sympathy. People are lonely. They want to belong to a group that really is saying something different than all the lies we hear day in and day out until we no longer have the energy or patience to pick up a newspaper or flick to the local news. But once they are instituted into full fledged members of this miracle group of freed minds? The ones who have all the answers and are just chomping at the bit to make sure you hear them and know that they exist...what is their reward? My observation is theyre only trading one form of blindness for another. So many of the fiery and passionate posts which very tangentially originate at the intersection of elm and Houston streets in 1963 Dallas are masks people love to put it on. It gives them a break from their ordinary lives over which they have as little control as any of us do. It is quite the shot of andrenaline to be invited to join a club filled with members who have miraculously freed themselves from the lying freedom killers, but also from the blacks, from the Jews and eventually from anyone who has the audacity to see the world differently. "Well this is just a matter of exposure, ill show these newbies how it works here at Thrashers Wheat (the last I knew thrashers is not a political theorist haven but a Neil young appreciation society...wasnt it)all they have to do is watch a dozen youtube videos and divorce themselves of reason or the last scraps of dignity they may possess" To keep this already too long outpouring free of as one former fox news fallen idol loved to spout "bloviation" ill conclude with this. God help us all.
ReplyDeleteTo all,
ReplyDeleteOther than agreeing with Dan on hate and Abner on the merits of trying to engage in genuine dialogue, I will add only a couple of small points.
First, as a factual correction the OP, 2016 was not Trump's first time attempting to run for president. As I've noted before, and as a cursory google search will show, he tried to run back in 2000--for the Reform party, actually. That, to me, is an important bit of context which people have repeatedly overlooked.
My take is that Trump essentially wants to be on whatever side he thinks his winning--hence why he dropped the Reform malarkey fairly quickly, and why he has been constantly seen ingratiating himself with big players in politics, business, and entertainment over the years. Given this history, the narrative that Trump was once a Dem and is now GOP--or that he's some sort of reluctant martyr for the cause of American patriotism and freedom-- doesn't hold water. In point of fact,it's not so much that Trump has become Republican as the Republican Party has become (the party of) Trump, a state of affairs which should trouble anyone who still exercises their critical thinking faculties, regardless of individual party affiliation or voting habits.
Beyond this relatively narrow context of our own electoral system, however, simply making both parties guilty by association with Trump seems, to me, at risk of simply reproducing the whole "divide and conquer"/"Us Vs. Them" narrative, insofar as it tends to degenerate into partisan recriminations, finger-pointing, and frankly banal arguments about who's worse than whom. I know that seems to be the modus operandi in election campaigns, but that doesn't--evidently--make it a good strategy for accomplishing anything of value.
I can't count the number of times I've wanted to shake one candidate or another by the lapels, and shout through the screen or radio receiver: "I don't want to know how terrible the other guy is! Tell me he how *good* you are!" The same principle applies here. Simply talking about how we're all equally messed up in different ways, even when there may be truth in it, just doesn't get us anywhere I want to go to--and certainly isn't an effective-exercise in morale building, at the individual or group levels.
Having said all of that, I appreciate thrasher's good faith efforts to provide a forum for unfettered speech--although the cynic within me still can't help but notice that these "controversial" posts are always good for web traffic and, admittedly, some of the choices thrash makes about which comments to highlight are head-scratchers for me personally. If the intent is to drive engagement, there is a fine line here between sparking conversation and just being inflammatory, and I'd encourage our host to be mindful of that distinction even while facilitating productive free expression.
I responded to Sedan's highlighted comment on the original thread, and feel I've said my say regarding that. I do wish, in hindsight, my tone had been somewhat more measured. Certainly, I apologize for any comments that were abrasive or intemperate.
Thanks for the input and peace to all.
~Om-shanti.
Please read Hunter Thompson's "obituary" of Richard Nixon. A burst of inconceivable honesty and Thompson clearly "hates" Nixon. And he gives his reasons. I am not just "angry" at Trump as he extends Nixon's total disdain for the moral axioms of democracy. Anyone who aggressively perpetuates racism through inflammatory rhetoric, or God help us, the appeal to "law and order" deserves to be hated. What we must be sure to do is lay out the case against Trump FIRST and FOREMOST. (The white couple from St. Louis area who recently spoke at the RNC are paradigms of the law and order racist trope: soon Black Lives Matter activists will be taking over Mayberry and McMansion world.) Well, gee whiz, think of the moral axioms of democracy and how Trump shits on them daily and think about his grotesque friends and associates who perpetuate the order of history and so agony for the marginalized: yes, he is worthy of hatred. But make the case, as did Thompson. Actually, I am going to take it back. Disgust is a better concept. I am disgusted by Donald Trump. I will save hatred for something more competent, something overtly wicked and effective at wickedness. In this sense, Nixon is more trouble.
ReplyDeleteThe St Louis couple that Abner refers to owe nearly 25K in unpaid taxes https://www.kmov.com/news/mccloskeys-owe-nearly-25-000-in-unpaid-property-taxes/article_9e487bdc-e26a-11ea-963d-33d932d7d8ca.html
ReplyDeleteKenosha Wisconsin is exposing how fear and hatred manifest themselves. One feeds off the other, and the results are tragic. A young man throws his future away and two people are dead. This is what hate does. It destroys lives and solves nothing. Stop the hate.
ReplyDeleteVOTE 🙏
Let's not forget the causal history of what is going on in Wisconsin. It is better not to reduce it to fear and hate. Lives damaged and destroyed by oppression, disregard, abuse, and complete social disinvestment. I am in agreement that we must struggle against hatred to move forward and so not act on hatred. Many people who fight the good fight have done this and I am again in agreement with you Dan. The focus of my frustration was and is Trump and many of his type. It is incredible how he ignores, obfuscates and distracts. He also presents us citizens with a false dilemma: either law and order or mayhem on the streets. It is all so repulsive.
ReplyDeleteAbner, I fully agree and sympathize with the disgust, repulsion, frustration, etc. I was certainly not meaning to invalidate or disregard all of those natural, understandable responses and emotions. And you're right to point out the concrete social backgrounds to these horrible crimes.
ReplyDeleteHate and fear being abstractions (as are all the words we use to describe how we feel), they are much easier to understand, deal with, and resolve if we can translate them into an appropriate social or political context, in which we can actually determine concrete steps to solve material problems that can inflame the emotions. Otherwise, you're at risk of waging another "war on terror"--you can't fight feelings with tanks and guns.
If I'm to go all Zen about this, I suppose the point isn't struggle--but how to learn how not to struggle in our daily lives with these emotions. To make emotions as simple as eating and drinking, a natural part of life's course: good (or nutritious) parts in, bad (or unneeded) parts out. A filtration system of the mind, so to speak. This doesn't mean ignoring, sublimating, or suppressing the negative, pretending that things are honky-dory when they are not. It just means taking in a realistic view of what is happening, trying to reach the best ways of taking action to improve things, and finding healthy ways to express the difficult emotions. Sometimes, hopefully, parts 2 and 3 can be part and parcel of the same action.
Mr. Rogers (of all people to refer to here, but I think thrash will appreciate the reference) had a mantra that all feelings are mentionable and anything mentionable is manageable. It's relatively easy (and not wrong), in some ways, to preach against hatred. However, there's nothing intrinsically wrong or problematic with our feelings (which also, in my experience, are often transient rather than permanent states of mind). What ultimately makes more difference, and has more impact, is how we act or don't act on our feelings.
Maybe--and I could be getting overly theoretical at this point--that's why the Cartesian mind/body dualism so deeply grandfathered into Western culture and philosophy continues to fail us. It divorces thoughts and feelings (mind) from actions (body), separates emotional consequences from material ones, the sacred from the profane--whereas the two levels are actually linked, if they are even distinct levels. Even the distinction between culture and philosophy is suggestive of this seemingly omnipresent, perhaps illusive divide: it's impossible to fully extricate a philosophical and/or ideological movement from the material conditions in which it develops or vice versa. This doesn't rule out influences other than the strictly material, but it illustrates how things are much more fluid and ambiguous than we might at first (want to) believe.
Could the "divide and conquer" impulse actually be buried, embedded in Enlightenment Humanist thought?
~Om-Shanti
@Abner : I share your anger and frustration, and empathize with our struggle as humans to stand up against oppression and injustice. We are watching our country become fractured by a dictator who feeds fear in order to retain his power. I don’t have all the answers that plague this country, but I know that the path we’re currently on can only end with pain and suffering. Our only peaceful solution is to vote our conscious in November, and pray that the results are indisputable.
ReplyDeleteVOTE 🙏
@Dan, One of my deep concerns is indeed POTUS’ reliance on fear and doomsday prophesying to motivate his base; recourse to threats is, imho, even lower than the traditional empty or impossible promises. (“No new taxes”, anyone?)
ReplyDeleteI will say this: fear is not an American value. Not in the America I know. And that’s why it saddens and concerns me to see folks, regardless of who they are voting for, voting more from fear of the alternative than hope for the future.
However, it does make more sense if—like Sedan—you have concluded that character or moral ground don’t matter in politics because of inherent corruption. That allows ruthless pragmatism in terms of policy agenda to become the primary motivator. That being said, my sincere apologies to Sedan if I am misrepresenting their views, but that is how the argument reads to me. And I would add, if that is the case, one cannot in all intellectual honesty tar the character of your opponents if you have already decided character is irrelevant. Unless it’s only relevant when the character in question isn’t on your side.
Lastly, I am not and have never advocated “open borders” as a policy goal. In fact, I’ve mostly heard the phrase as a scare line from conservative lawmakers, and would challenge anyone to point me to the clause in the current Democratic platform that demands unsecured borders. This is a perfect example of having one’s views repeatedly, persistently misrepresented—whether from malice or ignorance. Without getting further into it, I will say, as anyone who has felt misrepresented knows, it is very difficult to have a reasoned conversation under those circumstances.
Edit: My awareness of how frustrating and stymying it feels to be misrepresented, or taken out of context, is why I give Sedan the benefit of doubt that maybe I’m misreading their argument. Peace to all.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletehttps://music.youtube.com/watch?v=xxa9lmCotAs&list=RDAMVMxxa9lmCotAs
ReplyDelete“We carry pain, too, when the falsehoods are said, then turn out to be terribly true. It is not our domain to be bearers of pain, for the truth is that we sometimes hurt just the same way as you. So don’t tar me up with that brush which you use for the rest; don’t tell me I’m bad and please don’t tell me I am the best. We only have what we were given and what can we do? For the truth is that we sometimes. hurt just the same way as you.”
-Ivan Drever.
~Om-Shanti.
Thanks Ian, good points all.
ReplyDeletePresident Trump has been a successful instigator for the extreme right, that I pray is a minority. He has simply given voice to ideologies that have sadly, always existed in this country. And perhaps always will. I have little hope the Democrats have all the answers to many of our challenges, but I do believe that moral integrity of the office of the President is a requirement, and that is in serious question right now. I honestly don’t think we can survive four more years of this indignity and treachery that has facilitated so much bitterness. It’s time we try logic and reason, as we have had to endure lies and fantasy for too long now.
Character and moral ground matter in government, if for no other reason than because of the corruption inherent in our system. The constitution includes checks and balances in the hopes to override corruption, but as we’ve seen it clearly isn’t full proof. I agree that fear is not an American value, nor should it be, yet here we are, polarized.
When I face adversity in my life, I prefer to tackle the problem one step at a time. I like to be methodical in my approach, using discernment and logic. In the case of this President, I can only suggest that the first step towards a better solution to our challenges requires us to reject four more years from this unstable individual. Then take it up with the next person in charge and start asking the tough questions. I think we’ve had enough malice and ignorance for a lifetime.
VOTE 🙏
I wrote my dissertation on Descartes and Wittgenstein's private language argument. I have since published multiple articles on Descartes.
ReplyDeleteAbner, in that case, I'll defer to your expertise. My mad theories are my own, and I was referring to Descartes only a broad, generalized sense, as is probably clear to someone who has read more philosophy than I have.
ReplyDelete@Dan, I think Trump has been in tune for some time with the utility of the alt-right as a convenient vehicle to further his own political ambitions. This goes right back to his brief Reform Party bid. Not that we had the term "alt right" back then, but it all fits into a broader trajectory of what I'd call right-wing populism.
ReplyDeleteIn the US, for various cultural reasons, when it comes to fringe groups the extreme right tends to have more traction and success in recruiting than the extreme left. The Sanders movement is the first significant challenge to a gradual rightward shift for quite a while. Not that I put too much stock in the left/right divide. Since it was created by humans, it's about as real as humans want it to be in terms of its impacts on society.
Ian, I was working with my puppy- new dog at home- and had to leave. Your "mad theories" are not made at all. Cartesian metaphysics and epistemology have done all the things you say and maybe worse. They are also carried around dutifully, although in a half-assed fashion, by most Christians.
ReplyDeleteI am enjoying this thread.
ReplyDeleteAbner, you are obviously a very learned guy, and I respect that (not saying this sarcastically) but I don’t believe that reading books allows you to know people’s private thoughts. I also don’t think it gets anyone closer to an effective analysis of politics.
As various posters have pointed out, I mostly see a lot of emotional appeals based on abstractions. “Doomsday prophesying” to one person might mean something completely different to someone else, and obviously it does or we wouldn’t be having this debate. I would put these terms in the same camp as searching for a moral high ground from politicians. A natural thing to do, but ultimately meaningless. I don’t think Ian really misinterpreted my view, and I don’t think I attacked any politician’s character, except to prove a point. The government’s role is to protect my rights, not be my role model.
I would strongly push back on the assertion that the extreme right is growing more quickly than the extreme left. Been to a major city lately? An entire section of Seattle (CHAZ/CHOP) was commandeered by “protestors” for almost a full month. Portland, Oregon, arguably America’s most liberal city, has seen over 80 straight nights of protests, completely disrupting any type of normal life for your average citizen. Just like in Seattle, the law abiding tax payer is on the losing end. Extremely liberal governors and mayors have seen the mob turn on them. This is the result of an entire generation (my generation) being raised without any respect for property rights or understanding of what government is supposed to do.
I’ve also found that usually when people downplay or demonize appeals to law and order, they live in places that are already lawful and orderly. The “defund the police” movement has been a disaster for high crime communities. A lot of people here seem to be blaming various community upheavals on Trump. What many people don’t know is that the Mayor runs the police force of his or her city. Let’s take a look at the cities that have been most destroyed because of police brutality incidents: Minneapolis (all Dem mayors since 1974), Louisville (all Dem mayors since 1969), Chicago (all Dem mayors since 1931!), Kenosha (current Dem mayor has been in power of 16 years). If their police departments are inherently brutal and racist then they have had decades to forge solutions. But to quote Thomas Sowell, “there are no solutions, there are only trade-offs.” I also wish more people had close friends in law enforcement, and I don’t mean a sheriff in a suburb somewhere, I mean in an inner city. It is a wake up call and allows you to understand these situations better.
As far as specially calling out the phrase “open borders,” I would say it’s a lot more accurate and less inflammatory than some of the terms being used to describe Trump in this thread, ‘worthless sack of shit” being a good example. But anyways, I have read the Dem immigration platform and I did not see anything about reducing or limiting immigration in any way. One can easily understand that if you advocate for large amounts of immigration while also advocating for “free” healthcare and “free” college, then you are saying it is up to the American taxpayer to provide those things for whoever can manage to make it to our shores. That’s a losing proposition. All the good intentions in the world can’t make up for more people taking out of the system than are paying into it. Yes, I know, countries in Europe do it to varying degrees, but they don’t have nearly the amount of immigration we do, among other specifically American challenges. Reduce immigration to a drip and we can discuss socializing things all day, or vice versa.
@Abner, I don’t like to lay the blame exclusively at Descartes’ feet. Seems unfair not to distinguish his ideas from everything other people have done with them.
ReplyDelete@Sedan, Yes the left/right thing is changing a bit.... it also depends on how you define these terms, as there’s nothing inherently left wing about movements opposing systemic racism. But in general, I was speaking historically, and would acknowledge that the current administration has galvanized left-leaning activism. And no, it’s not all Trump’s or his people’s fault (systemic racism is far older than Trump) but the bleak rhetoric and heavy-handed responses from the top down have inflamed tensions, giving a lot of minority folks the sense that no one at the top gives a fig about them or their circumstances. I would suggest voting patterns among various demographics are not going to shift until the GOP demonstrates it is willing and able to work those people’s interests. Correlation is not causation, and while Democrats are not innocent or blameless, the existence of police brutality and subsequent protests and unrest can’t be simplistically laid at the feet of whichever party dominates local government; that’s less reasoned discussion and more finger-pointing. And without belaboring the point, law enforcement has a reputation as a conservative field, and if anything, police departments as essential services have the potential to exert political influence over even Dem administrations: it may be changing now, but even being seen to go against police interests has been like opposing or limiting military funding, bound to get you tagged as weak on crime or even unpatriotic, and thus not politically viable.
Re: pathway to citizenship, the goal is to get as many as possible working and paying into the system. If we want to keep immigration manageable, however, we have to start by helping constructively to make the places people are coming from safer and more stable. Obviously, the US can’t have this burden alone, but we should want a place at the table. I‘d venture that many people don’t want to leave their homes, but they don’t feel they have a choice. In short, isolationism won’t necessarily solve much in terms of the immigration problem. International problems require international solutions. The emphasis shouldn’t necessarily be on limiting immigration, but on making sure those who come have the opportunity to be stable, productive citizens, and in investing—alongside other powerful nations—in development abroad. Of course, all of this is easier said than done, especially under the current conditions, but we at least must start with some sense of what our issues and goals are.
Lastly, I’d encourage you to be more considerate of “book smarts”, as they bestow much in regards to the valuable skill of thinking our ways around problems and possible solutions. Theory doesn’t always match perfectly with reality, but it’s about the best tool we have as humans for reasoning and navigating through our circumstances toward practical improvements. That being said, I hope my comments have been fair and constructive.
Book smarts are great, but the request in the other thread was for facts and evidence about why anybody would support Trump, so that has been my focus. I’m referring specifically to Abner’s comments calling Trump a nihilist and saying “he knows nothing about x, y, z, etc.”. That can’t be known, so let’s stick to real life. There’s plenty to discuss.
ReplyDeleteAs for the protests, beyond systemic racism there are many generational ideas coming home to roost at the moment, combined with the restlessness created by the pandemic. The resentment of wealth and private property being the biggest (note the fake guillotine recently built outside Bezos’ house). Obviously I can’t know what any protestor is thinking, but I know several people that are, let’s say, antifa-adjacent and an “eat the rich” sentiment is a common theme among them, along with a general rejection of authority. I also disagree that recognizing 50+ years of non-stop political power counts as mere finger pointing. We must confront evidence eventually. Every political decision punishes one thing and encourages another. Perhaps the decision makers in these cities have been focusing on the wrong things? Or perhaps not every social problem has a political solution?
Obviously immigration is a very complex issue. The amount of it only matters in relation to how much the taxpayer is expected to support. If I understand your logic, the American taxpayer needs to help build other countries, or face a potentially unmanageable flow of people, which would then also require taxpayer support? (At a disproportionate rate...I am not saying all immigrants rely on the system.). The intentions you laid out all sound great, but to quote Sowell again... “at what cost?” Biden’s site reveals how immigration is just one big government program to be manipulated for specific goals. It’s an emotional idea that’s easy to romanticize, but in reality it’s much messier. Diversity lotteries, specific visas for certain industries, allowing cities to petition for more immigration, etc. I know Joe didn’t invent these, but it’s just more govt involvement that opens the system up to more manipulation and corruption. Why does the flow of people into the country need to be engineered? Why can’t people be free to come here and make their own choices on their own merits?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteExtra thoughts, amplifying on the divergent camps of opinion that have emerged here: I think the underlying disagreement is regarding the role and scope of the government. As I've said before, in any system based on democracy, the government is supposed to be a representation and direct extension of the people. Ideally, for me, this is essentially manifest as a pooling of resources for mutual benefit, both to protect our rights and to ensure essential services are provided and needs met.
ReplyDeleteHow can we expect anyone, or any body of people, to protect our rights if we have thrown away the requirement of moral fiber? Whether you believe the purview of government bodies is to protect rights, provide for its people, or some combination of the two, these imperatives rely on principled, ethical leadership. Which, in turn, is reliant on our holding leaders and lawmakers accountable via the ballot box. Maybe, in an ideal world, there’d be no government bodies and we’d manage all this pooling, providing, and protecting without needing to be told to, but we are—clearly—not living in an ideal world. I'm not asking or expecting perfection here. Even a modicum of integrity would be reassuring.
Clearly, we can see where both Democrats and Republicans have not risen to this challenge, including on the issues of police reform/reorganization and improving relations between communities and law enforcement. But given the right to peaceful protest and resistance, we certainly need to clarify a middle ground between "law and order--Achtung!" and violent, wanton destruction. We can only get there by digging deep, with honesty, compassion, self-examination, and willingness to learn and to grow, into the frustrations, fears, and aspirations of all the people. Violence is not, and never has been, a stable pathway to positive change. You can't beat, bomb, or overthrow people into a new and better way of life. It takes recognition of shared interests and common humanity, commitment to communication, and the mutual winning of hearts and minds. In short, it's only when everyone is standing (and counted) that we can move meaningfully forward.
@Sedan, Your reply didn't come through until I had already posted my comment. Folks in urban areas vote in Democrats for other reasons--e.g. there are more people who need the welfare programs and support mechanisms that Republicans tend to be stingier about maintaining, and the fact that the GOP just hasn't been that welcoming to diverse populations due to the makeup of its coalition--which tends to favor both the economically advantaged (who tend to be white, for reasons I won't condescend to explaining) and "religious liberties" at the expense of civil equality. Remember, we're all choosing from an array of imperfect offerings. I dare say that many black and brown voters feel taken for granted by the Dems--but then, can you seriously tell me the GOP offers an attractive alternative for many of these folks?
ReplyDeleteYou yourself said unregulated immigration would become unsustainable. That's why it needs to be "engineered", if you want to call the process of becoming a citizen engineering. The call for limiting immigration to a drip simply does not lead, logically, to people being "free to come here and make their own choices on their own merits".
And in all of this, it is difficult to spare too much regard for the feelings of the likes of Bezos, even when they are subject to acts of political theatre.
So many thanks to all who are participating here.
ReplyDeleteThe level of sophisticated engagement, the balanced tone and the goal of peace, love & understanding is inspiring for us to behold.
We'd really like to identify a Comment of the Moment here.
This all started off of a COTM by Sedan Delivery, which prompted some head scratching over its selection. But we must say that SD's comment as catalyst sparking this dialogue was the overall goal. Promise made, promises kept.
The only way that we're going to get across this bridge over the Great Divide is working all together. No one left behind. The divisiveness is manufactured to divide & conquer. Once the illusion is seen, all is revealed.
Aside from mikeybost's provocative taunt, again, we'd really like to find the core here.
If anyone dares to attempt to try and summarize concisely the essence of this thread, the TW platform is open here to serve the rusted global village.
the microphone is yours. pick it up or drop it. challenges encountered, challenges met.
peace
Last night my wife and I watched the documentary, Best of Enemies. It’s the history of two men who are politically and socially polar opposites. William F. Buckley Jr. and Gore Vidal. The central focus of the film is their debates during the 1968 political conventions in Florida and Chicago. This film illustrates just how little this country has progressed over the past fifty or so years. The similarities to today was positively terrifying. The Republicans calling for Law and Order while the riots rage outside over the Vietnam war and police brutality. The Democrats calling for social justice for black citizens and the poor. With the exception of the current pandemic, this film could have been shot this past week.
ReplyDeleteThese two men were the extreme in their respective beliefs, yet they were like two versions of the same person. Both were articulate and well educated, yet both were unable to reconcile with the other. These guys truly hated each other and they both reveled in that hate. I found both men to be overtly arrogant and their views far too extreme for my taste.
The overriding experience watching this film was the events depicted are virtually happening right now. What is happening today was only in its infancy back then, with the overriding difference today being the overwhelming exposure we have with social media. Back then there were only three networks so we all were effected by the same information. We all shared a similar view of the world. But now we have unlimited access to every possible piece of information out there. Including extremes from both sides. We are no longer sharing the same view of the world or our country, and this has contributed to more polarized beliefs.
If you’re interested, I recommend checking out this documentary. It’s remarkable just how little has changed. The battle rages on the open page.
VOTE 🙏
gee whiz, Sedan Delivery, I did not mean to say that I only read books! I was responding more or less to your "narrative comment."
ReplyDeleteIan, yes, of course, in the history of philosophy Cartesian ideas spread like wild fire and the basic dualism was disseminated by all of western culture. It is not until the 20th century that the dualism is really attacked.
Sedan Delivery, the idea that private thoughts are forever hidden from view is an idea that goes back to the dualism, mind-body dualism. contemporary cognitive science has shown, in multiple studies, that our thoughts, motives, intentions and so on are- in fact- knowable by others.
I appreciate your comments about respect. I also have respect for you and I have severe reservations about the democratic party but for different reasons than you. I believe our first project must be to give citizens control over their own social circumstances, which is not happening in our country.
Thanks
@Abner, Thanks. And yes, the private has always--at some level--been political. I think I can safely say (speaking for me, myself, and I as regards this thread) that those of us who identify as lgbtq+, whose personal lives and loves have long been the subject of public debate and lawmaking, carry a particular awareness of this reality. In general, I think you reached a number of reasoned conclusions from the available evidence, but I wasn't going to be answerable to Sedan for your arguments.
ReplyDelete@Dan, Thanks much for the intriguing recommendation. Not that I see Sedan as WFBJR or myself as a Vidal acolyte. However, I'm pretty much at peace that I have a somewhat different take on the nature and function of governmental bodies than the classic American individualist, federalist orthodoxy. Compromise is generally required in politics, but I don't think individual liberties have to be ignored or trample to arrive at a more effective approach and nor would I ever wish that to occur.
If we exhaust, or simply neglect, other means, the use of force will be what eventually remains. And none of us should want to be in that position. I can understand and in many ways agree with the desire to keep government small and limited, but sometimes there are problems we can't solve as private individuals, and that's the point at which we must take a clear, honest look at the issues and potential needed solutions. Moreover, the this will to act and invest must emerge long before we reach cataclysmic circumstances where folks feel compelled to have boots on the ground. In my own view, one of the reasons we are, as "civilized" humans, are prone to war and violence is that we tend, for various reasons, to resist or withhold other forms of action from governmental bodies. Sometimes, we need to think with a little more complexity about problems that are larger than any one of us.
~Om-Shanti.
Edit: And if we're talking smaller government, a solid step in the right direction would be for GOP administrations and lawmakers to stop trying to carve out exceptions for concerns that happen to appeal to social and religious conservatives.
ReplyDeleteBut then, that would put their winning coalition at risk.
And @thrasher, I hear you. Credit where it's due: your gambit succeeded. I think my previous comments stand for themselves in the way of amplifying upon the concerns broached in this thread.
ReplyDeletePeace.