Conservative or liberal (politics)

[dmgtz96]

this is not you but propaganda talking, a republican opponent will counter this, with either COVID lockdown restrictions in democrat controlled states or cities 2021 and/or attempts at curtailing 2a and he or she’d be right

bottom line: both parties will, if they can, take peoples rights away if it’s in line with their desire for power or ideology.

Fair point, and I did see that from the right back when the COVID lock downs and mask and vaccine mandates happened. I guess the more accurate perspective is, Republicans would take the rights away of the people who I would care about.

On that we agree


Not dismantle at its core but they do have a different (democratic) system in mind with less “rich men north of richmond”/ washington swamp if you will.

personally i have to admit I’m conflicted on this, though to a degree sympathetic.

I don’t think you should toy to much with how your country was set up, left way or right.

I'll agree with your last sentence. The country was set up this way for a reason. Replacing all those government employees who favor only one side will have terrible consequences.

 

[dmgtz96]

The term democracy is anno now, much like the term fascist, a misused one I’ll grant you but in @dmgtz96 s defence I don’t think he uses it like that In this convo (we’ve been there, trust me )

Yeah, I wouldn't use it that way. Democracy, for me, is people being able to vote for their next presidential candidate. With Trump (and, by extension, lots of far-right candidates around the world), it's possible that this will be the last election we all vote in. Because Trump, and people like Trump won't stop at just getting power. They'll push to become dictators. We already have Trump saying that he will "become a dictator." Unless you think he's just joking, that should be a pretty concerning statement.


We won't know if this will be the last election until it happens and Trump wins. The threat against democracy is definitely there. We also don't know if Republicans will try to limit voting rights for women and minorities. We will enter a dark time if he wins this election.

 

[Jetflag]

Yeah, I wouldn't use it that way. Democracy, for me, is people being able to vote for their next presidential candidate. With Trump (and, by extension, lots of far-right candidates around the world), it's possible that this will be the last election we all vote in. Because Trump, and people like Trump won't stop at just getting power. They'll push to become dictators. We already have Trump saying that he will "become a dictator." Unless you think he's just joking, that should be a pretty concerning statement.


We won't know if this will be the last election until it happens and Trump wins. The threat against democracy is definitely there. We also don't know if Republicans will try to limit voting rights for women and minorities. We will enter a dark time if he wins this election.

Look, concerning trump..just to cull your fear a bit.. the man did pretty much the polar opposite of what a genuine dictator would do during his presidency.. he predominantly gave freedoms back and by extend power (in the form of money/taxes) back. Pretty odd behaviour for a dictator

I think Trump is way too invested in the (old) American Dream and the emphasis on freedom to become a dictator (not speaking for future rep candidates here)

Youve had 4 years of him before.. you can perfectly take 4 years of him once more..

don’t be too frightened of the orange man, he simply doesn’t t have enough time

 

[LostLegend]

Look, concerning trump..just to cull your fear a bit.. the man did pretty much the polar opposite of what a genuine dictator would do during his presidency.. he predominantly gave freedoms back and by extend power (in the form of money/taxes) back. Pretty odd behaviour for a dictator

I think Trump is way too invested in the (old) American Dream and the emphasis on freedom to become a dictator (not speaking for future rep candidates here)

Youve had 4 years of him before.. you can perfectly take 4 years of him once more..

don’t be too frightened of the orange man, he simply doesn’t t have enough time

I’m still think it’s depressing that out of a country of over 300 million people, that it’s likely going to be between these two walking cadavers to fight it out for the presidency again.
Surely as a country they can do better than this?

 

[Jetflag]

I’m still think it’s depressing that out of a country of over 300 million people, that it’s likely going to be between these two walking cadavers to fight it out for the presidency again.
Surely as a country they can do better than this?

well, they have on many occasions in the past.. so its certainly possible.

 

[dmgtz96]

I’m still think it’s depressing that out of a country of over 300 million people, that it’s likely going to be between these two walking cadavers to fight it out for the presidency again.
Surely as a country they can do better than this?

The younger generations don't vote anywhere other than in general elections, so it's mostly old geezers choosing the candidates at their parties' respective primaries.
On the democrat side, candidates like Bernie Sanders and (in the future) Alexandria Ocasio Cortez are too idealistic and unpopular. Their ideals are popular among the young, but the young don't show up to vote....

On the republican side, the entire party is all MAGA. That side is too far gone. They're not going to vote for a smart, moderate-leaning conservative like Mitt Romney, but instead for dumb nutjobs like Trump, Nikki Haley, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, and Matt Gaetz. Heck, republicans are too racist to select a smart nutjob like Vivek. Their party is screwed.

 

[Progrez]

The younger generations don't vote anywhere other than in general elections, so it's mostly old geezers choosing the candidates at their parties' respective primaries.
On the democrat side, candidates like Bernie Sanders and (in the future) Alexandria Ocasio Cortez are too idealistic and unpopular. Their ideals are popular among the young, but the young don't show up to vote....

On the republican side, the entire party is all MAGA. That side is too far gone. They're not going to vote for a smart, moderate-leaning conservative like Mitt Romney, but instead for dumb nutjobs like Trump, Nikki Haley, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, and Matt Gaetz. Heck, republicans are too racist to select a smart nutjob like Vivek. Their party is screwed.

At least you are country voting is not compulsory just like how the Dutch people removed compulsory voting since the 1970's. Over here it's a fine or a jail time if you don't vote and when you turn 16 years old it becomes compulsory. They have celebration days of when the Europeans invaded Australia and stole the land from the Aboriginals. It's divided the nation and people have vandalised statues of Captain Cook. I wouldn't consider Trump to a dumb person I mean he may sound dumb and he has made some dumb mistakes but he is a smart person. Sporting venues like Cricket are no longer calling the cricket match as Australia day match which has been a tradition for the past 40 years. Woolworths/Safeway have removed merchandise related to Australia Day Celebration because they are not generating enough revenue.

Melbourne Captain Cook statue sawn off at ankles, Queen Victoria monument defaced

Police in Melbourne investigate after a metal statue of Captain Cook was sawn off at the ankles and red paint was daubed over a monument to Queen Victoria.

www.abc.net.au

Captain Cook Statue toppled in Melbourne

A monument to Captain Cook has been cut at the ankles and toppled in Melbourne ahead of Australia Day.Police are now investigating criminal damage to the sta...

www.youtube.com

 

[Jetflag]

republicans are too racist to select a smart nutjob like Vivek

nice..

 

[dmgtz96]

nice..

pretty good line, right?

warning, long rant ahead. And this isn't specific to Vivek, or something specific you said (or something that has been said in this thread).

US minorities supporting Republicans is always so interesting. It seems like people vote based on shared values (personal/social/economic) and a shared vision of the future. So, voting for a Republican makes sense if you approve of their plans for the future. That is largely why Cuban American voters support Republicans, since they (presumably) want the hyper capitalistic society offered by Republicans and reject the "socialist" society that they think Democrats will create. Minority support for Republicans goes all the way up to the wealthy and powerful: corporate execs like Vivec, Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas, and "influencer" Candace Owens (that's kind of what she is IMO).

I would say there's a third important criterium that can also influence how you vote for one or the other: how the party actually treats you (or your demographic). Despite having shared values and a shared vision of the future, you might not want to vote for that party anyways if they treat you like crap. In my case, I have some values that align with conservative Republicans: I think personal responsibility and accountability are going to shit, and people can't just blame "the system" or stand around complaining how life is shit when they themselves are doing nothing to improve it. I think women who consistently dunk on men need to be better at selecting the men whom they date and sleep with, instead of just choosing fuckboy #69. I think Israel is correct in defending itself from Hamas, and all the college students who support #freepalestine are delusional even if they are aware that you can support Palestinian people but not Hamas because their protests are just another venue for real antisemitism to pop up. However...

I still disapprove of the Republicans' values and shared vision of the future. I reject the state-level abortion bans that were passed when Roe v Wade was overturned. I don't want a country that is beholden to Christianity, or any kind of religion, really. I don't approve that Republicans insist on keeping gas (petrol) vehicles longer than humanity needs them. I don't like that Republicans consistently deny climate change, even though it's real and is happening right now. I don't like the fear, uncertainty, and doubt media messaging around electric vehicles that keeps getting pushed by Republicans and their oil lobby. I don't believe that their tax cuts for businesses and the wealthy are good for society. I don't like how they all rally against objectively awful human beings like Trump and people like him (everyone I mentioned in my earlier post), instead of a more moderate candidate. I don't like that they approved of Trump's messaging, that Mexico wasn't bringing their best (to the US), but instead violent "rapists." I don't like that Republicans have an eternal fight against academia, where they curtail diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. I don't like that they engage in culture wars, fear, and misinformation, while also having no real platform to help those outside of the top 1%.

So I have no reason to vote for them despite our agreement in certain values.

 

[Manofearth]

The interview between Carlson and Putin was fascinating. Never before have we had an interview like this, where a powerful leader, and arguably dictator, who is actively engaged in global conflict decides to have amicable discussion with a figure from the opposition. Refreshing to leave the bullshit at the door and hear the statements from the man himself, who I thought came across well and even had some good points worth noting when it comes to US involvement in the escalation of the events.

 

[Uplifted]

The interview between Carlson and Putin was fascinating. Never before have we had an interview like this, where a powerful leader, and arguably dictator, who is actively engaged in global conflict decides to have amicable discussion with a figure from the opposition. Refreshing to leave the bullshit at the door and hear the statements from the man himself, who I thought came across well and even had some good points worth noting when it comes to US involvement in the escalation of the events.

The only thing that propagandist Tucker Carlson has made history by spreading this stream of idiocy and lies from putin, a neo-Nazi with an International Criminal Court arrest warrant, - is that no American journalist has interviewed the Nazi criminal Hitler after the outbreak of World War II.
Freedom of speech and freedom to lie should not be confused.

 

[Jetflag]

The only thing that propagandist Tucker Carlson has made history by spreading this stream of idiocy and lies from putin, a neo-Nazi with an International Criminal Court arrest warrant, - is that no American journalist has interviewed the Nazi criminal Hitler after the outbreak of World War II.
Freedom of speech and freedom to lie should not be confused.

This is purely your anger talking m8. Not your Logos

 

[Uplifted]

This is purely your anger talking m8. Not your Logos

Tucker didn't press putin hard enough. The problem with putin is that he essentially speaks the truth, but either omits important facts or uses isolated examples.

For example, what he says about Poland or how Ukraine was formed - maybe, yes, it was formed from different parts. But if you look at it that way, then all of Europe should have been fighting each other now, because all European countries are formed from different parts that once belonged to other countries, and other nationalities live on their territories.

Another interesting point is how he talks about the events in Ukraine in 2013-2014, when the second Maidan happened. Putin appeals to the idea that after Yanukovych turned Ukraine's course from the EU to russia, the opposition decided to seize power unlawfully. Although I remember these events well and was a participant myself - in reality, the opposition managed to overthrow the president because there was TREMENDOUS outrage among the people. The Ukrainian population didn't want to deal with russia purely out of pragmatic reasons because we saw that Europe lives better, with less corruption, more citizen rights, freedom of speech, and that's what we aspired to. So his words about Yanukovych being overthrown illegally and that essentially all current power is illegal - it's complete nonsense. We have democracy, and that's what the people really wanted. As for denazification, in my opinion, it has been explained many times already - like in any country, we have a certain group of marginalized individuals who essentially are neo-Nazis, but they are a minority and they don't have any real power - there's no one to denazify here.

These are probably just a few main issues I noticed with this interview, and in reality, there are many nuances - he lies about the Hungarian population (I myself live in the region he was talking about and interact with Hungarians), and about the third round of presidential elections in 2005, etc.

Tucker does try to push him on some points (like why he didn't start the war 24 years ago and there was no answer), but regarding historical data and political events of the last 30 years in Ukraine, Tucker seemed somewhat underprepared to contradict him.

 

[Jetflag]

Tucker didn't press putin hard enough. The problem with putin is that he essentially speaks the truth, but either omits important facts or uses isolated examples.

That doesn’t make tucker a propagandist. It makes him (as) neutral (as). He is a journalist, not a debater in this context.

propaganda by definition is singular messaging sponsored or enforced by government fiat.

regardless of where you or I mutually stand on this conflict, we (the west) have so far only had one narrative/side served. That of Ukraine/ Zelenski (which tucker also requested to interview).

this interview (in which tucker could have been harsher but also didn’t approach putin with kitten glove questions) is categorically anti-propaganda, given he’s a western journalist.

if one must be uncharitable to him, you could make a case that Tucker is an opportunist. Not a propagandist or lie-peddler. As he will probably use this/these interviews to further his own reputation and business.

 

[Jetflag]

On top of that.

One should, even from a strategic perspective..never forgo the opportunity to look into the mind of one’s enemy.

Tucker just gave you, and us by extend, a 2 hour window, where the likes of cnn/ bbc/fox where either to afraid or too stupid.

 

[dmgtz96]

The interview between Carlson and Putin was fascinating. Never before have we had an interview like this, where a powerful leader, and arguably dictator, who is actively engaged in global conflict decides to have amicable discussion with a figure from the opposition. Refreshing to leave the bullshit at the door and hear the statements from the man himself, who I thought came across well and even had some good points worth noting when it comes to US involvement in the escalation of the events.

FYI, Tucker Carlson isn't a representative of the United States, and this interview was not some friendly chat between Putin and "the opposition." The American right *likes* Putin [1]. Tucker Carlson is probably the most pro-Trump media personality, and Trump himself is buddies with Putin. So this is more like two people with very similar ideologies meeting.

I haven't watched the actual interview, but from the usatoday article, it seems like this interview accomplished nothing new, Putin just more or less spread lies and misinformation, and Carlson failed to call out Putin on his shit [2]. To be frank, Putin isn't even worth listening to. The world isn't somehow better because of this interview between a Putin fanboy and Putin.

[1] How the American Right Came to Love Putin

[2] In Tucker Carlson interview, Putin's plans for Ukraine appear to echo Trump's

 

[dmgtz96]

That doesn’t make tucker a propagandist. It makes him (as) neutral (as). He is a journalist, not a debater in this context.

Tucker Carlson is a disgrace to journalism as a profession. He technically is no longer a journalist, and hasn't been one ever since his employment at Fox News ended. He was too crazy, too racist, and too misogynistic for them. *For Fox News.*

Propagandist is apt to describe who he is now, but if you don't feel comfortable calling him a propagandist, at least be mindful that he is *not* a journalist.

And journalists are absolutely expected to call out their interviewees on their bullshit, like in the Axios interview with Trump. *That* is real journalism.

if one must be uncharitable to him, you could make a case that Tucker is an opportunist. Not a propagandist or lie-peddler. As he will probably use this/these interviews to further his own reputation and business.

Whatever he is, this interview is probably worse for his reputation and business. He's been criticized left and right for doing this.

 

[Jetflag]

Tucker Carlson is a disgrace to journalism as a profession.

this is purely your anger talking m8, not your logos.

He technically is no longer a journalist, and hasn't been one ever since his employment at Fox News ended. He was too crazy, too racist, and too misogynistic for them. *For Fox News.*

Regardless of how you personally hate the man and his stances, tucker is a registered journalist under his own company. Legacy media like fox *does not* decide who or what is a journalist in the professional sense.

Propagandist is apt to describe who he is now, but if you don't feel comfortable calling him a propagandist, at least be mindful that he is *not* a journalist.

no, he is categorically, demonstrably >not< a propagandist, see: explainer to @Uplifted above

yes, what he did in the interview was proper journalism/ he is a journalist.

And journalists are absolutely expected to call out their interviewees on their bullshit, like in the Axios interview with Trump. *That* is real journalism.

you mistake “real activism” for “real journalism” which given the political ecosystem you’re in might be understandable..

no, they are not. Journalist are expected to ask questions to try to get to the bottom of things. They are not expected to be debaters trying to “pwn” the opponent by “calling them out”

a journalist *can* do it, but is not *expected* too

Whatever he is, this interview is probably worse for his reputation and business. He's been criticized left and right for doing this.

Only by legacy media outlets and entities toeing the line.

this interview is pretty much the biggest bombshell in its archetype in ages.. and EVERY one of his “critics” is using his material to give their own take.

ill leave you to calculate the revenue of the (copyrighted) image material used left right & center

 

[Jetflag]

I haven't watched the actual interview, but Trump! Trump! Trump! And this left-leaning media article..

Figures

Seriously dude? You really had to pull this, an interview with the enemy of a hellish war on the other side of the planet to your own USA Orange Man Bad woes didn’t you?

come on..

 

[TJY001]

am about as Liberal as you can get and my girlfriend is Conservative. Go figure