The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Category: Electoral Politics Page 21 of 31

Hillary Clinton Is a Monstrous Politician

Ok.  I’ve had enough. Let’s speak truthfully about Hillary Clinton:

She voted for the Iraq war and defended that vote for years.

She was a primary driver behind the Libyan war.

She was involved in the cluster-fuck that is Syria.

She was for the “welfare reform” and three strikes laws during her husband’s administration. She actively spoke for them, thus, she is culpable.

She opposes the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall.

She has blamed homeowners for the financial crisis.

Henry Kissinger, a man who has a great deal of responsibility for two genocides was her adviser while she was Secretary of State, and he is her personal friend.

Hillary Clinton supported the Iraq sanctions which killed half a million Iraqi children or so.

She has compared Putin to Hitler.

It is a fact that Clinton is a bad person, who has championed policies which have killed a lot of people, and which have impoverished many others.

No Realpolitik case can be made for these policies: They have clearly made the world a more dangerous place, vastly increasing failed states and terrorism. These policies were unethical both in and of themselves, and massive suffering have been direct results.

I have been told by people who know her that she is a wonderful, concerned friend, and very warm in small groups.

I care about that as much as I do about the fact that Americans thought that George W. Bush was “someone who they wanted to have a beer with.”

Clinton, as a politician, has supported terrible policies. Moreover, she has not learned from these policy failures. For example, after Iraq, she supported Libya.

I am tired of the “lesser evil” argument; but it is not clear to me that Clinton is the lesser evil.


If you enjoyed this article, and want me to write more, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Trump Hysteria

So, yeah, I oppose Trump. (I oppose Clinton, too.)

But let’s get real, here.

America is already ruled by monsters. Bill Clinton killed 500k Iraqi children for no particularly good reason (is there a good reason to kill half a million children?). George Bush invaded Iraq. Obama green-lit the destruction of Libya. Hillary Clinton voted for the war on Iraq and pushed hard for the destruction of Libya.

These people have crippled the economy for ordinary people, immunized bankers, destroyed safeguards put in to protect us from another Depression, and so on. They have deliberately made sure the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the middle class becomes the poor.

They have been completely inadequate on climate change. They have gutted civil liberties (remember, Obama is worse than Bush on civil liberties). They all torture. Obama deported more Hispanics than Bush, by a significant margin.

Clinton has been there for all of it and demurred for very little of it.

They are all monsters.

Every time you are offered someone better, you refuse. If someone truly decent runs, like, say, Kucinich you think that’s hilarious and would never consider voting for him because he’s not viable. Of course he wasn’t viable, because you wouldn’t consider voting for someone who’s not a monster.

So, yeah, Trump may turn out to be worse. But he’s just a greater evil, and Americans are used to voting for evil.

Heck, if Trump means what he says about foreign affairs, he may turn out to be the lesser evil. Oh sure, he’ll be horrible for people with melanin inside the US, but if he doesn’t attack any countries while President, the net math will be in his favor.

So calm down. All that’s happening is that more of the violence America has so casually exported to the rest of the world might be coming home. If you didn’t mind it for other people, on what ethical grounds do you now object to it in your own country?

Trump will probably be bad, if he’s President. But net worse than your other Presidents? That’s yet to be seen.


If you enjoyed this article, and want me to write more, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Trump and Clinton Win

Sigh.

It’s not over until it’s over, but something needs to change fast if it isn’t to be Trump v. Clinton.

I know polls show Clinton beating Trump, and demographics are a powerful thing, but I think Trump’s campaign is almost tailor-made to defeat an elitist associated with practically every economic and political failure of the past 30 years.

We shall see.

If You Want to Beat the Right, Call the Left

So, the protestors who stopped Trump’s Chicago rally were mostly Bernie supporters.

The wishy-right like Mitt Romney, and the neo-Liberal right (Clinton) are worthless against someone like Trump because they represent the status quo, which has been discredited.

And because they won’t actually fight.

I don’t know if Trump will win the election, but I do know that if he doesn’t, he’s only the first to try. As the US economy gets worse and worse for ordinary people, which it will under Hillary Clinton (she is neo-liberal to the core), the followers available will soar and those available to status quo pols will dwindle.

But they will keep increasing–for candidates like Bernie as well.

Only someone who has a platform and personae which is a radical break from politics as usual can compete for these clusters of supporters. And yes, there is some overlap, but it is not complete (are unhappy Latinos going to vote for Trump?).

When I was a boy, in 1970s Vancouver, I told my father “I don’t see much racism.”

My father, a child of the Great Depression said, “Wait till times get bad. You’ll see plenty.”

I see plenty. Most countries are going to have to choose between someone like Trump or someone like Bernie; and that choice will keep being presented till they make the fateful choice.

Once it is made, in many cases, there will be no going back.

You can have your hate and change; or you can have your change with someone like Sanders or Corbyn, who at least makes a real try to help most people.

So far Britain is failing this test. Let’s see how the US goes.

And, again, if you get Clinton, all you’ve done is push back the day of reckoning, and made it worse.

This WILL happen. It is close to inevitable now, because our elites cannot and will not either create a fair economy which works for enough people; nor can they manage climate change.

This only a hair from social physics at this point.

You were warned. And warned. And warned. You were offered people like Dean and Edwards and so on. You refused to take the road away from hell.

Now reap what was sowed.


If you enjoyed this article, and want me to write more, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

A Kinder Logan’s Run?

Should older people have their vote weighted less than younger people?

The case is simple enough. The older you are, the less time you have, the less stake you have in the future and the more you are likely to make short-sighted decisions which favor yourself.

As I’ve discussed before, this is the death bet: “I’ll be dead before the bad shit happens.” It makes total sense not to care about Climate Change in 1980 when you’re 40: You aren’t going to be around to experience it. Voting for policies which increase house prices faster than wages is great for older people who own homes, and so on.

I’ve heard the suggestion that parents should have more say, because they have kids and a stake in the future world. But the way global warming and university tuition and loans have been handled teaches us that parents don’t actually give a shit what happens to their kids, or, at least, not enough to matter. Not in America, probably not in the West.

It’s worth thinking about this. I wouldn’t actually do it, but it cuts to important questions about who should be allowed to have power in general. People who don’t have a stake in a good future, or who don’t have a stake in other people having good lives, probably aren’t going to make good decisions.

To the extent businessmen think that high wages overall are to their advantage, for example, you have a good economy. Bear in mind that the entire New Deal apparatus was designed to do two main things: Increase wages and increase prices. This was the world we lived in for forty years, and twenty-five or so of them were the best economy the US and the Western world ever had.

When you start believing that your prosperity is opposed to other people’s prosperity, or you start believing, “There is no such thing as society,” well, then you get what has happened to us.


If you enjoyed this article, and want me to write more, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Trump Wins, Sanders Wins Michigan

Most of Detroit hasn’t reported in and Detroit leans heavily Clinton. Even so, this is amazing; polls were showing Bernie down 20 percent to Clinton.

I’m assuming this is based on trade. “Free” trade has destroyed Michigan.

As for Trump, well, no surprise.

Update: Note that a win here only keeps Bernie in the running. He needs to start defeating Clinton by significant margins in order to win. Still, I couldn’t see how Bernie could win if he couldn’t win a state like Michigan, which is almost tailor-made for his message, so this is good news. A couple polls off by 20 percent in his favor in big states and Bernie could still pull it out.

Second Update: Looks like a win for Bernie in Michigan, but note that Clinton won Mississippi with 86 percent. In other words, she won the most delegates today. Bernie MUST start knocking some out of the park soon.

African Americans voted 30 percent for Sanders–that’s his best showing yet.

19- 30-year olds showed up as much as retirees. Can’t remember the last time that happened.

Who is the Feminist Candidate?

This sort of thing is why feminists keep losing effective abortion access.

Abortion

And by “this sort of thing” I mean preferring the “identity” candidate over the one whose policies are actually good for the group in question.

“She is one of us, so she must be better for us.”

No.


(I am fundraising to determine how much I’ll write this year. If you value my writing, and want more of it, please consider donating.)

Trump Is a Consistent Right-Wing, Nativist Populist

Donald TrumpAre they trying to convince people to vote for him?

So, yes, a letter signed by NeoCons talking about what a disaster Trump would be.

I mean, it’s grand that they are against torture now, and I prefer the stance that demonizing Muslims is bad, ‘kay, but these are the the people who lied the US into the Iraq war and caused the rise of ISIL (among other things).

As Crowley writes:

Donald Trump calls the Iraq War a lie-fueled fiasco, admires Vladimir Putin and says he would be a “neutral” arbiter between Israel and the Palestinians.

So—cooling the conflicts between the US and Russia, acknowledging the truth about Iraq, and not taking Israel’s side.

Trump mixes up ideological certainties for elites. He’s not consistent with any elite consensus, he’s all over the place. Boot Muslims out, but be neutral between Israel and Palestinians?


(I am fundraising to determine how much I’ll write this year. If you value my writing, and want more of it, please consider donating.)


This is nativism. America is for Americans, and Americans aren’t Muslim. The constitution may disagree, but nativist sentiment agrees.

The Neocons bewail Trump saying he’d charge Japan for protection (which I disagree with), and while that’s inconsistent with elite ideology, it is consistent with nativism. Japan’s problems with its neighbours, including North Korea, are not America’s problems. Why should America protect them, or anyone else, if America isn’t receiving anything for it?

(As Japan, I’d negotiate based on use of the Okinawa base, and so on. Japan actually gives the US a lot already.)

Trump is not inconsistent. He is a populist nativist, and his policies track that pretty well. Because he is right-wing, he wants lower taxes on “good rich” (but not hedge funds), but populism has always been able to be both right- and left-wing.

The other populist in the race is Sanders. Note that while Sanders believes in a road to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and certainly wouldn’t be kicking large numbers out, Sanders voted against the 2007 immigration bill because it would have expanded guest-workers by 200K.

Current Americans, citizens or not, come first for Sanders. He’s not a nativist, but he is a populist.

 

 

Page 21 of 31

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén