tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post2863322946813765712..comments2024-03-28T14:07:18.682-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: Issues of note in an election yearDavid Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger103125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-91060014474198886602016-02-19T05:57:33.667-08:002016-02-19T05:57:33.667-08:00I've seen you cite the military readiness stat...I've seen you cite the military readiness statistics a few times, but I can't find the reference you must have provided in your first citation. I would love to be able to provide this to my otherwise intelligent friends who repeat what they're told about how bad our military has gotten under Obama.<br /><br />Thanks!Joe Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09083738933624003227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-72757135328624279722016-02-18T14:25:43.796-08:002016-02-18T14:25:43.796-08:00Hi Laurent,
Re Trump voters - I see them as a spe...Hi Laurent,<br /><br />Re Trump voters - I see them as a spectrum - <br />From racist who will NOT be swayed by the Bern through to people who have always been Republicans but realize that the GOP is now unashamedly focused on further enriching the 0.1% <br /><br />Those people would NEVER vote for Hillary - but may vote for Bernie,<br /><br />Our Tacitus2 may well be a member of that group, - duncan cairncrosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14153725128216947145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-43618607353110323632016-02-18T14:21:50.631-08:002016-02-18T14:21:50.631-08:00onward
onwardonward<br /><br /><br /><br />onwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-879306477155135802016-02-18T13:25:32.058-08:002016-02-18T13:25:32.058-08:00* "They didn't ignore them, in each case ...<b>*</b> "<i>They didn't ignore them, in each case they very carefully balanced the forces against each other. A western-allied minority rule, an oligarchy made to depend on that rule, and a poor majority from a different faction which the ruling-minority fears.<br /><br />Horrible, but not a "mistake" of "ignoring". A mistake of very deliberately putting Realpolitik ahead of progress.</i>"<br /><br />Oh but there was a very big, glaring mistake: they believed the regime they installed would be stable and reliably dutiful toward their colonial overlords.<br /><br />Far from being adept at realpolitik, the West-European upper-class is inordinately fond of the oxymoronic fantasy of the "<i>Enlightened Despot</i>", and as a result, they thought that if they created the conditions for such "<i>Enlightened despots</i>" (read: rich dudes educated in Western capitals who share the <i>White Bourgeoisie</i>'s contempt for the Arabic plebs) to emerge and take control, they would turn their country into stable buffer states.<br /><b>Every</b> attempt at prompting these "<i>Enlightened Depots</i>" ended either in failure or catastrophe, yet you still see the same pseudo-intellectuals claiming that subsidizing the latest Egyptian putschist general or allowing Putin to slaughter the Syrian Turkmens and starve Aleppo will bring stability to the region and its neighbors this time.<br /><br />***<br /><br /><b>*</b> "<i>Currency and the Collapse of the Roman Empire</i>"<br /><br />Debasement of the currency had little to do wth the Empire's collapse: the urban elites refusing to pay taxes and demanding that the burden be transferred to the poorer rural populations, the wealthier landowners preferring cash crops over more vital foodstuff, over-reliance on egyptian wheat, which was so overexploited that egyptian lands became barren despite the Nile's silt plus a nasty case of climate change that began circa 300 AD, when temperatures suddenly dropped, which caused the usable agrarian lands' surface to shrink, the productivity to drop and an inflation that had less to do with lack of precious metals and more with the fact that the roman economy <i>was producing less stuff</i>.Laurent Weppenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-54245181552939690112016-02-18T13:22:20.307-08:002016-02-18T13:22:20.307-08:00* "are the Trumpeters more interested in his ...<b>*</b> "<i>are the Trumpeters more interested in his racism or in his economic populism?</i>"<br /><br /><b>*</b> "<i>Donald OTOH is a totally different phenomenon. He is – I believe – LYING about nearly all of his most odious views. Which is utterly bizarre because that makes him a sociopath… yet probably more pragmatic and moderate by far, in policy</i>"<br /><br />Urk, here we go again.<br />How many time have I to repeat it: as a rule right-wing demagogues <b>do not</b> believe their own rhetoric, and <b>neither do their followers</b>.<br /><br />Unlike its left-wing counterpart -which is all about making the future autocrat look like an idealistic rogue trying to give the Powers That Be what for- right-wing demagoguery is a <b>two-pronged</b> con that target simultaneously its followers <b>and</b> its foes:<br /><br />• To its followers -who are well aware that the demagogue they're supporting won't bring singing tomorrows- it sells the implicit promise that the -grossly unfair and prone to employ violence against dissenters big and small- regime it intends to establish will reward its voters by giving them preferential access to the ruling-class' scraps.<br />It works because the audience of right-wing demagogues is deeply cynical: its members are well aware that the game is rigged, realize that the game isn't rigged in <b>their</b> favor (or not as rigged as is used to be: White males went from owning the Konami Code to being downgraded to Scalzi's Easy Mode), and <i>convinced themselves than fair governing is all but impossible</i>: if the schoolyard is to belong forevermore to the bullies, then the smart thing to do is to either become one, or to become part of one's posse of favored lackeys and be rewarded for one's submission.<br /><br />• To its foes, it sells the idea that its rank and file voters are merely misplacing sincere and legitimate anger. Here's the thing: fascism pseudo-populist rhetorics are not meant for fascist voters: <i>they are meant for the rest of us</i>: their role is to incapacitate the progressive opposition by convincing its members that <i>if only they found the right argument, the right words, the right </i>tone<i> they would <b>convince</b> the wayward far-right voters to come back home</i>, so they waste precious time & energy wringing their hands about devising the perfect magical silver-bullet argument that will "<i>win the debate</i>" instead of working toward shunning the demagogue and his followers away from any form of political power, big or small<br /><br />Hence two things:<br /><br />1. Trump voters, by and large, won't ever be swayed by Sanders: they don't give a shit about Trump's pseudo-populism, they aren't here for that, and therefore they won't give a shit about Sanders' more sincere brand of rebelliousness.<br /><br />2. The fact that Trump most certainly doesn't believe one half of a third of a quarter of a fifth of the filth he spews is both absolutely true and <b>absolutely irrelevant</b>: Trump won't deliberately harm American Muslims because he or his voters sincerely view them as million of Daesh's sleeper agents: Trump will deliberately harm American Muslims because his zero-sum voters sincerely believe that by banishing/disenfranchising/ghettoizing/exterminating/mass-raping-<i>à-la-Serbe</i> them, the resources they own will flow back to the White population, and the same can be said about any and every <i>bogeyman-du-jour</i> who did and will receive the dubious honor of becoming the focus of one of his rantsLaurent Weppenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-84880530923929803112016-02-18T12:54:44.803-08:002016-02-18T12:54:44.803-08:00Um, how about the “hope” of trouncing the GOP so b...<i>Um, how about the “hope” of trouncing the GOP so badly that statehouses change hands and gerrymanders cured and science restored and Tacitus-style conservatives rise up en masse and yank their party back to adult sanity?</i><br /><br />Alas, Dr. Brin, I have very little hope in that. From what I read in the polls, the Senators and Congressmen who have been elected are pretty much representative of their constituents. Gerrymandering has some effect on the outcome, but I fear that it is not significant enough to change the overall outcome. About half the voters are Republicans, and there is little that Hillary, Bernie, or any Democrat can do to change that. And if the Tacitus-style conservatives haven't risen yet, I see no reason that will rise now. Perhaps after the Republican Party finally breaks and realigns itself...<br /><br />So I foresee Congress to change little in this election (if we're lucky, the Senate may go back to the Democrats, but that's about it). So the next President will have to deal with the same obstructionism that Obama did.<br /><br />But I am a lousy prognosticator, so there is hope. :)<br /><br /><i>Senator Clinton has some insight that Senator Sanders doesn't? Her 8 years in the Senate, versus his 16 years in the House and 10 years in the Senate?</i><br /><br />Paul, Hillary has experience being attacked by the Right for the last--what is it?--20 years or so. If she can't handle 'em, no one can.<br /><br />I don't think Bernie has experienced the full wrath of the Right, so I don't know how he would handle it. And while it may take the Right a while to build up steam, they will hit him, as hard as Obama or worse.<br /><br /><i>No. Clinton supporters are, by definition, pragmatic moderates. For example, female supporters of Clinton didn't stay at home or switch parties after Obama won the nomination in 2008.</i><br /><br />I primarily considering minorities who are looking for someone to champion their causes. I've heard that a sizeable chunk feel strongly about Hillary; they may not feel that strongly about Bernie. But how big a chunk that is remains to be seen. It may be small, but I believe they are there, and shouldn't be discounted off-hand.A.F. Reynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-31748786028148329982016-02-18T12:37:35.631-08:002016-02-18T12:37:35.631-08:00@locumranch: Populism doesn't kill the Democra...@locumranch: Populism doesn't kill the Democrats. They live for that stuff. Go Underdog!<br /><br />Turkey will manage. What will die over there is the period of retreat from the world stage. They got torn apart with WWI and died s slow death of centuries before that. The Ottoman period died and Turkey was born in its place. The 20th century pressures that encouraged them to hide and lick their wounds are almost gone, though. With conflict on their borders, they will have to behave more like the empire of olde. They will or they will get eaten alive. I'm betting they will come out of their shell.<br /><br />As for the EU... well... Europe has never been all that unified even under conquerors.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-13127620075266414832016-02-18T12:33:37.533-08:002016-02-18T12:33:37.533-08:00That 538 article was excellent even if I disagree ...That 538 article was excellent even if I disagree with some of the methodology (relying on Facebook Likes, etc. in place of polling). Thanks.<br /><br />It looks like Massachusetts and Colorado will be the bellwethers to watch. Very good information. matthewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17757867868731829206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-4466713370694027282016-02-18T11:42:55.818-08:002016-02-18T11:42:55.818-08:00This may spark some dispute; hopefully worthwhile ...This may spark some dispute; hopefully worthwhile dispute. Any analogies to now?<br /><br />Currency and the Collapse of the Roman Empire<br />http://money.visualcapitalist.com/currency-and-the-collapse-of-the-roman-empire/<br /><br />Tom Crowlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04444476865484424912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-43001697172863863002016-02-18T11:31:42.837-08:002016-02-18T11:31:42.837-08:00David,
"a moon base. But it should be a priva...David,<br /><i>"a moon base. But it should be a privately funded tourist destination that also does a little science. There is in fact very little useful science to be done there in the near term"</i><br /><br />If the estimates of the scale of volatiles in the lunar cold-traps is correct, then it will have likely been deposited in layers over a billion years or so. That provides you with a chronological record of every major lunar impact for a billion years, along with effective samples of millions of comets. (Non-volatile dust from large stony and metallic asteroid impacts will also settle in the polar regions (as everywhere else) in thinner layers separated by the thicker volatile deposits from comet and wet-asteroid impacts.)<br /><br />I can barely imagine the science you could do with such a resource. But "very little" seems unlikely.Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-44283732041629035412016-02-18T11:21:52.861-08:002016-02-18T11:21:52.861-08:00AF Rey,
"Which means more of the same as in t...AF Rey,<br /><i>"Which means more of the same as in the last 8 years. Sanders will be attacked as harshly as Obama has been. Little or nothing will move through the Legislature. Judicial appointments will continue to be vacant. They may even not fill the Supreme Court seat until maybe 2018 or later!"</i><br /><br />It took time for the hate-machine to build up traction against Obama. His early failure was an own-goal by the conservative wing of the Congressional Democrats before the 2010 midterm, not the strength of Republican hatred.<br /><br />IMO, the Senate is more likely to swing to the Dems under Sanders (at least at first). That means hundreds of vacancies can be filled, including that Supreme Court vacancy. Yes the Republicans will obfuscate and even filibuster, but unlike 2008-2010, the Dems in this round will understand that playing nice will not win them any votes in the 2018 mid-term.<br /><br />Changing the balance of the Supreme Court may see a reversal of the recent trend in anti-democracy rulings. Which may see a chance of changing the House in the 2020 election.<br /><br /><i>"My only hope is that Clinton, being experienced with a hostile Congress, will be able to play them better than anyone else."</i><br /><br />Senator Clinton has some insight that Senator Sanders doesn't? Her 8 years in the Senate, versus his 16 years in the House and 10 years in the Senate?<br /><br /><i>"remember that nominating Bernie would lose some of Hillary supporters"</i><br /><br />No. Clinton supporters are, by definition, pragmatic moderates. For example, female supporters of Clinton didn't stay at home or switch parties after Obama won the nomination in 2008.<br /><br />Douglas Fenton,<br /><i>"We are paying for the errors made by the British and the French when they took over the remains of the Ottoman Empire and set up artificial countries that <b>ignored</b> ethic, cultural and religious divides."</i><br /><br />They didn't ignore them, in each case they very carefully balanced the forces against each other. A western-allied minority rule, an oligarchy made to depend on that rule, and a poor majority from a different faction which the ruling-minority fears.<br /><br />Horrible, but not a "mistake" of "ignoring". A mistake of very deliberately putting Realpolitik ahead of progress.Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-59359160242590560622016-02-18T11:21:42.401-08:002016-02-18T11:21:42.401-08:00As a human we know Cruz on sight. He is Joe McCart...As a human we know Cruz on sight. He is Joe McCarthy (whom he physically resembles) moderated by a little Richard Nixon cunning and with some Nehemia Scudder mixed in. <br /><br />Donald OTOH is a totally different phenomenon. He is – I believe – LYING about nearly all of his most odious views. Which is utterly bizarre because that makes him a sociopath… yet probably more pragmatic and moderate by far, in policy. I do know this. I do not want to see a real world experiment in what kind of presidency that would bring.<br /><br />A.F. “My only hope is that Clinton, being experienced with a hostile Congress, will be able to play them better than anyone else.”<br /><br />Um, how about the “hope” of trouncing the GOP so badly that statehouses change hands and gerrymanders cured and science restored and Tacitus-style conservatives rise up en masse and yank their party back to adult sanity?<br /><br />J Roth I too would love to see a moon base. But it should be a privately funded tourist destination that also does a little science. There is in fact very little useful science to be done there in the near term, but rich tourists might pay the freight.. The thing about asteroids – especially if they are disassembled in Lunar orbit – that they might become profitable enough to sustain themselves as an industry.<br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-4347209453450281172016-02-18T11:18:02.505-08:002016-02-18T11:18:02.505-08:00Tacitus2 said: "So there you have it. A more ...Tacitus2 said: <i>"So there you have it. A more or less establishment conservative looking at the Presidency of an avowed Socialist and saying..."eh, we could do worse". "</i><br /><br />To David and LarryHart, this is what I (and others) have been talking about. The hate-word "socialism" is actually much less effective these days than the hate-word "Hillary". Even on conservatives themselves.<br /><br />But note that T2 still harbours the belief that Clinton is facing possible "legal entanglements" over the email thing. Even though he's a smart sane conservative, even though he doesn't dwell in the House of Madness that is "conservative media", he still has so internalised the anti-Clinton propaganda that he can't accept its falseness, no matter how many people here try to tell him that not only was there no crime, the practice wasn't even considered unusual. The slander is against the person, and that's much harder to overcome than a generic not-our-team hate-word.<br /><br />Eventually the hate machine will work up similar personal attacks against Sanders. But they are starting from scratch. They need new events, new Whitewaters and Benghazis and Teh Emailz, to hang their anti-Sanders propaganda on. That takes time. More time than the months until the election. With Obama, they didn't really get traction until after his first year in office.<br /><br />With Clinton, they have 24 <i>years</i> of accumulated memes to call upon, most invoked with just a word. With Sanders all they have is "socialist", and all that means these days is "ageing hippy", "well-meaning but naive eccentric". Hardly anger-provoking for people attracted to Trump.<br /><br />[IMO, the ineffectiveness of the word "socialist" is because of the House of Madness's own overuse of the word to describe... well... <i>anything</i> they don't like. They've diluted it to meaninglessness. It's just become a generic swear-word. When a corporatist, rightwing-designed health-insurance program like ObamaCare is "socialist", that doesn't leave you anywhere to go when someone suggests universal healthcare. "It's socialism!" Yeah, so. "Uh... <i>more</i> socialist!" Ooo scary.]<br /><br />From the article proper,<br /><i>"I have some perplexities about Bernie Sanders, and especially the way some of his fiercest adherents are getting overly emotional"</i><br /><br />David,<br />I think you're reversing causation. You see a few particularly hateful Clinton-attacking Sanders supporters, but it's not that they support Sanders and therefore hate Clinton, it's because they already hated Clinton that they support Sanders. The hate preceded the support. Berating "Sanders supporters" for hating Clinton is pointless, while berating actual Sanders supporters over those Clinton-haters is just silly.<br /><br />You'd be much better served taking to task the Clinton camp for their very organised, very deliberate, and so very skilful venom directed against anyone who doesn't support Hillary.Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-80963290035119514172016-02-18T11:13:50.565-08:002016-02-18T11:13:50.565-08:00Just in case anyone wants to see how Bernie well i...Just in case anyone wants to see how Bernie well is tracking toward a nomination (or not), FiveThirtyEight has an interesting chart on Bernie Sander's Path To The Nomination:<br /><br />http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bernie-sanderss-path-to-the-nomination/A.F. Reynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-41184623056036857952016-02-18T10:57:29.152-08:002016-02-18T10:57:29.152-08:00"We need authority for fear of anarchy. So we..."We need authority for fear of anarchy. So we rely on the Constitution, or pretend to, more or less as “Star Wars” fans rely on the imagination of George Lucas—or at least on the idea that there is a consistent imagination there."<br />"There is no Force—no divine text, no inspired reading, no Jedi Council. Justice Scalia, like many another Justice, was a passionate politician fighting political battles for his religious and ideological views with all the words and arguments at his disposal. To pretend otherwise is to participate in a galactic humbug."<br /><br />Thought you'd find this both fun and interesting.<br />http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/lessons-for-the-supreme-court-from-the-jedi-councilJumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-52299273672344958732016-02-18T08:43:59.158-08:002016-02-18T08:43:59.158-08:00I read this article awhile back, and thought our h...I read this article awhile back, and thought our host would appreciate it http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20160105-the-man-who-studies-the-spread-of-ignorance.<br /><br />Also, I really want to see a moon colony. I'm just fine with space stations, asteroid colonies, and Mars colonies as well. I think a moon colony would be a good first run, with Earth and space stations not as far away in case of emergencies requiring assistance and rescue. I believe the information gained would be well worth it, though I admit it mostly just has a huge emotional appeal as well.Jonathan Rothnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-16679907480170487222016-02-18T08:34:09.657-08:002016-02-18T08:34:09.657-08:00Sanders is an old white man, which is one of the f...<i>Sanders is an old white man, which is one of the favorite things among Republicans, and while he's running on the Democratic Ticket, he's not a Democrat. As such, you may very well find Republicans in Congress end up being more likely to work with him - especially if he denies Clinton her coronation. Because they hate the Clintons with a passion.</i><br /><br />While Congress may be "more likely" to work with Sanders than Clinton, I question how much more they would work. I doubt it would be measurable.<br /><br />The Republicans have spent 8 years slandering Obama and opposing practically all his initiatives. He, also, beat Hillary in the election. And although he is not an old, white man, I doubt the lack of cooperation, or even compromise, is purely based on race or class.<br /><br />Republicans gain political support by showing solidarity against the Democrats. And that will not change if there is a new Democrat President. It will be a continuation of the gridlock we've seen with the Obama's Presidency.<br /><br />My only hope is that Clinton, being experienced with a hostile Congress, will be able to play them better than anyone else. Yes, there will be a lot of "investigations" and hearings. Yes, there will be "scandals." But Hillary might be able to broker some deals with certain members of Congress, and might be able to get something done. Might.<br /><br />I don't see much chance with Bernie, since his cooperation depends on the good-will of the Republicans. Something that they have been very good at suppressing these last 8 years.<br /><br />(And while nominating Hillary would lose some Bernie supporters, and energize the Right, remember that nominating Bernie would lose some of Hillary supporters, especially among the minority voters (if reports can be believed). The upcoming primaries will help clarify just how strong Hillary's support is.)A.F. Reynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-78368248563116779812016-02-18T07:34:57.285-08:002016-02-18T07:34:57.285-08:00While it's true that the US Republican Party i...<br /><br />While it's true that the US Republican Party is in its 'death throes', as evidenced by the Trump's populist success, the very same could be said about the US Democrats with the near identical populist success of Sanders.<br /><br />Also in its 'death throes', the European Union proceeds us on the same path, as evidenced by Germany's suppression of a free press, France's ongoing repudiation of democracy (Etat d'Urgence), the rise of militant tribalism & the slow collapse of its common currency.<br /><br />The news from Turkey is similarly depressing as the Ankara Bombing could lead to more overt Turkish confrontation with Syria, Russia & its covert trading-partner ISIS but, more likely, it signals the subsequent collapse of Turkey's covert military dictatorship into an overt Civil War.<br /><br />How are you liking the Arab, European & North American Spring now ??<br /><br /><br />Bestlocumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-38715688484150674152016-02-18T04:15:52.504-08:002016-02-18T04:15:52.504-08:00Apologies, Tacitus! I was guessing the Libertarian...Apologies, Tacitus! I was guessing the Libertarian ticket (Koch ran for VP) and guessed very much wrong.Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-61714935003051031682016-02-18T03:05:40.662-08:002016-02-18T03:05:40.662-08:00Because too many people can't work out how to ... Because too many people can't work out how to use the lessons of history, saying "that was then.", shrug and walk away. Mostly they also have difficulty associating the karmic kick in the pants with the prior warnings of history.Tim H.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-68541451216557468692016-02-18T02:48:38.254-08:002016-02-18T02:48:38.254-08:00Duncan,
"History repeats itself, first as tr...Duncan,<br /><br />"History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce."DPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07087941506162882852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-14648107059501519002016-02-18T02:36:47.373-08:002016-02-18T02:36:47.373-08:00Hi Daniel
I don't think either of those compa...Hi Daniel<br /><br />I don't think either of those comparisons are anything like valid,<br /><br />The Donald is not like Hitler <br />Cruz worries me more!<br /><br />and Bernie is definitely NOT like Thalmann<br /><br />But they are not the final product - <br />if you go through another election cycle with no change then the new Hitler is more likely to emerge duncan cairncrosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14153725128216947145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-20165121253854577462016-02-18T02:23:53.254-08:002016-02-18T02:23:53.254-08:00Duncan:
"I mean, say what you want about the...Duncan:<br /><br />"I mean, say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos."<br /><br />And I'm not just makeing a Trump-Hitler comparison.<br /><br />Bernie also fits the role of Ernst Thalmann.<br /><br />P.S. The thugs who protect Trumps rallies are modern Brownshirts.DPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07087941506162882852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-77501663120813236362016-02-17T22:55:13.844-08:002016-02-17T22:55:13.844-08:00Yeah - Hitler was a monster loonie
BUT he was sti...Yeah - Hitler was a monster loonie<br /><br />BUT he was still the only German politician who was correct on "Austerity"<br /><br />If some of the other guys had stopped pandering to the elites and looked at what would actually have worked Hitler would not have had his chance at power and the world would have been differentduncan cairncrosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14153725128216947145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-842893811296248182016-02-17T20:59:17.888-08:002016-02-17T20:59:17.888-08:00Duncan, Mein Kampff was filled with mad ravings an...Duncan, Mein Kampff was filled with mad ravings and hate. That would have survived the road accident. Indeed, his admirers like Lindbergh might have gained power in other lands.<br /><br />Rob H your scenario, may it be so. I am less sure. David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.com