The Chinahate that is going on now, like the parallel Russiahate, is just a rhetorical trick the system is using to deflect attention from its own incompetence and malevolence. Not only is China a province in global capitalism that provides cheap labor and cheap loans for Western governments and corporations, China is also being used as a test market for the techno-fascist surveillance state.
Privacy activists say we should be alarmed by the rise of automated facial recognition surveillance. But transhumanist Zoltan Istvan says it’s time to embrace the end of privacy as we know it.
“We don’t need no stinkin’ 13th Amendment!”
The good news is that the ruling class is digging its own grave by offering bailouts to debt collectors and lobbyists while ordinary folks go without food.
Krystal and Saagar discuss Saagar’s appearance on Tucker Carlson, where he blasted House Democrats over a provision in the stimulus bill that bails out corporate lobbyists, as first reported by the Intercept’s Lee Fang.
Big Tech brings back the censorship boards that existed before the civil rights revolution of the 1960s and 1970s, and which still exist in some places.
Research Director of the American Economic Liberties Project Matt Stoller explains why Facebook decided to elect their own independent appeals board to censor speech on the social media platform.
Krystal Ball discusses the $3 trillion coronavirus relief bill House Democrats unveiled that adds no funding for additional healthcare, no paycheck guarantee, and blasts progressives for relying on the “next time” narrative to get their provisions included in relief bills.
Saagar Enjeti rails against the coronavirus relief bill House Democrats proposed that appeals SALT deductions and fails to keep Americans on payroll, but includes funding for female-owned marijuana companies and bailouts for debt collectors, lobbyists.
This Sandernista third-party idea isn’t going to work. It will be torn apart by SJW fruitbats. An economic-populist/progressive party like these folks are advocating would be fighting a three-front war against the neoliberal center, Trumpian right, and SJW left.
The positions that Ilhan Omar takes on foreign policy generally lead me to conclude that she is a tool of the Muslim Brotherhood (right-wing Sunnis who strategically play the Shia-led axis of resistance and pro-imperialist Wahhabi/Zionist block against each other). Her positions line up almost perfectly with theirs.
The neocons, led by Bill Kristol, are using the Biden campaign to colonize the Democrats, while Trump has an 80% approval rating among the Republicans. If the neocons are successful at this, it means the US will have a neocon party and a faux-populist right-wing plutocratic party. Imagine if the two major parties in the US were Israel’s Likud Party and El Salvador’s ARENA, which the former lurching leftward on social questions and the latter appropriating LenPenist rhetoric, and you get an idea of what US politics would look like.
Kulinski talks about a video from 2013 where Obama admitted he and the Republicans agreed 70% of the time, and that the differences between the two parties were more about procedure than substance. Obama also pointed out something I have also pointed out many times, which is that in most countries there are much greater ideological divisions than in the US. Despite the “divisiveness” of US politics, it’s more about aesthetics, personalities, and team affiliations (like sports or music subcultures) than existential differences.
This is quite interesting. Disaffected Sandernistas are seeking to build a populist-left mass people’s party that crosses over to the populist-right and disaffected Trump voters, and seeks to become a major party by 2024. Kim correctly points out that substantial sectors of the Left will be adamantly opposed to such an effort (“no platform” and all that). They point out that for this to work they need to focus on populist economic concerns and a non-interventionist foreign policy and leave the moral, cultural, identity, etc issues to the side.
Her comments about 30 minutes into this are on the money. She points out that US politics has become divided into competing coalitions of “tribes” who think they are oppressed and under attack, but who regard “the other side’s” claims of being oppressed as ridiculous. She also points out that the “intra-white” political conflict is just as divisive as the conflict between whites and minorities, that class is as divisive as race and culture, and that affluent, urban liberals and leftists have formed an ironic “cosmopolitan tribe” (which transcends political party boundaries) that is very exclusionary toward outsiders.
Having dealt with nutbag “extremists” (left, right, religious, countercultural) my entire life, I generally agree with the arguments of this article. But a major qualification involves the need to reject the view that holding “centrist” views reflect psychological “normality,” while holding “extremist” views reflects abnormality. As Caitlin Johnstone has pointed out, the true “extremists” are the “centrist” empire apologists who think that the millions of deaths caused by the US empire are just another policy issue (or no issue at all), with the Communists who want to nationalize the entire economy, or militiamen/sovereign citizens who wage armed struggle against drivers’ licensing laws and who want to strip government down to the county level, being “moderates” in comparison.
By Sara Chodosh
Radical political views of all sorts seem to shape our lives to an almost unprecedented extent. But what attracts people to the fringes? A study from researchers at University College London offers some insight into one characteristic of those who hold extreme beliefs—their metacognition, or ability to evaluate whether or not they might be wrong.
The social science research that Brooks (another neocon dumbass former Bush apologist) cites in this article confirms what I have long suspected, which is that issues like race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, culture, religion, immigration status, etc. as not nearly as divisive as beliefs that people hold ABOUT these particular topics. Many white leftists are to the left of many minorities on race issues (for example, Virginia Governor Ralph Northam’s “blackface” incident), many Latinos are immigration restrictionists, African-Americans are the most socially conservative voting block among the Democrats, plenty of women are conservative Republicans, a substantial minority of gays are also Republicans, many minorities are religious fundamentalists, affluent and wealthy people are more socially “liberal” than the poor and working-class, white Democrats are more concerned about cultural issues while minority Democrats are more concerned about bread and butter issues, etc. etc. etc.
By David Brooks
New York Times
People are always changing their minds, day to day. But over the past 20-odd years one group has shifted to an astounding degree: highly educated white Democrats. I’m not sure I understand why this group has undergone such a transformation, but it has, and the effects are reshaping our politics.
The easiest way to describe the shift is to say that educated Democrats have moved steadily to the left. In 1994, only about a sixth of Democrats who had gone to graduate school said they were consistently liberal. In 2015, more than 50 percent did. In 1994, only 12 percent of Democrats with college degrees said they were consistently liberal. Twenty-one years later, 47 percent did, according to the Pew Research Center.
The author of this piece, Jonah Goldberg, is a neocon dumbass who was a Bush cheerleader in the 2000s. His wife, Jessica Savora, is a former aid to uber-police statist John Ashcroft (Asscrack). But the political science research he’s citing is correct. White liberal and left opinions have moved way to the left of conventional minority opinions on many issues, even racially-charged issues.
By Jonah Goldberg
“No Democrat is going to win the nomination for president of the United States without African American support. Nor should they,” Kate Bedingfield, Joe Biden’s deputy campaign manager, told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell last week.
Ms. Bedingfield was pushing back on a single bad poll for Mr. Biden (from Monmouth University) that had the media and the other Democratic campaigns smelling blood in the water. The poll now seems to be the outlier that the Biden people say it is. But Ms. Bedingfield’s argument has a longer shelf life both for the Democratic primary and the country.
Let’s start with the big picture. For decades, African Americans have been an outsize segment of the Democratic base, all but defining the leftmost ideology of the party. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, the Congressional Black Caucus et al. may have been to the left of the average black voter (depending on the state), but at the national level they were the anchor of what constituted the most liberal major constituency of the Democratic coalition.
Now, that has changed. The most liberal flank of the Democratic Party is far whiter than it used to be, and decidedly to the left of many of the party’s blacks and other racial minorities on a wide range of issues.
A 2017 study breaks down the US electorate into 4 basic categories (really 3, because libertarians are barely on the radar). The gist is that Americans lean leftward on economic issues by a 3 to 1 margin, but are divided 50/50 on social/cultural/identity issues.
- Liberal (44.6 percent): Lower left, liberal on both economic and identity issues
- Populist (28.9 percent): Upper left, liberal on economic issues, conservative on identity issues
- Conservative (22.7 percent): Upper right, conservative on both economic and identity issues
- Libertarian (3.8 percent): Lower right, conservative on economics, liberal on identity issues
By Lee Drutman
Voter Study Group
It is a truism of modern American politics that the United States is a deeply divided nation. By almost all measures, the two parties are further apart from each other, both at the elite level, and in the electorate, than in the past. There are more and more politically lopsided counties,(i) and only a small percentage of states and congressional districts swing from one party to another.(ii) Partisan unity scores in Congress are very high.
When different tribes create their own realities.
By Luke Conway
Although both groups live in the same country, conservatives and liberals in the U.S. do not seem to be experiencing the same COVID-19 pandemic. Liberals are very concerned about the disease; conservatives are comparatively apathetic.
This fact is puzzling because a long history of research in social psychology suggests that conservatives ought to be more worried than liberals about threatening diseases. Indeed, decades of research ties conservatism to threat sensitivity more broadly, and meta-analyses of dozens of studies reveal that conservatism is higher in societies with greater levels of disease threat.
My respect for Kyle Kulinski has gone way up since he adopted a “boycott the major parties” stance on this election. “Vote blue, no matter” (or “vote red, no matter who”) is the stupidest position possible. It means you are telling your supposed leaders and rulers that you will hold them to no standards whatsoever and you will support them no matter how badly they screw up or how much of scumbag they are.