Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - The American Politics Thread
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedThe American Politics Thread

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 153154155156157 434>
Author
Message
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 31 2019 at 21:04
Originally posted by ProfPanglos ProfPanglos wrote:

Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

Originally posted by ProfPanglos ProfPanglos wrote:

I like Trump well enough.
Well, let me qualify that.  I think Trump is an egotistical buffoon, and a bit of a clown, and I did not vote for him.  In 2016 I thought he was full of hot air and essentially just telling people what they wanted to hear.
After 2+ years into it, I've actually decided to vote for him in 2020.   I agree with several of his policy decisions, and I [mostly] like his trajectory for the country.

I'm happy to explain why, but only if it is amicable.  I know a lot of people dislike (hate, even) him, and that's fine.  I'm not out to change anyone's mind about him, and when political discussions get heated, I get turned off.   But yeah, unless he goes to prison anytime soon, I'll be voting for him in 2020.

Edited to add:  I still think he's a clown, but he doesn't bother me [like he bothers many].  There are things about him I don't like, for sure.  But he's gotten enough right (in my opinion) that I'll vote for his re-election
I admire your bravery.  

So basically if a clown ~ like, literally a clown in full makeup, red nose, orange hair... oh wait, sorry ~ if an actual clown were President and made the same policy decisions Trump has made, you'd be voting for him?   Fascinating.  I get it.
No, you're extrapolating something out of my written words that I didn't intend.  When I say I think Trump is a "clown," I mean that in the sense that I say the same thing to my best friend when he acts silly or foolish in public - "Stop being such a clown."  That kind of thing.

Look, I agree that poise isn't Trump's strong suit.  That's what I mean.  He can act and speak rudely.  He can be awfully petty.  He can be a terrible braggart.  All of that stuff - is why I call him a clown.

But his weird manner doesn't bother me like it bothers many people.  I don't care if he spray-tans and glows orange.  I don't care if his hair is weird.  (If we're talking about hair, look at ol' Bernie: what does that dude comb his hair with, an egg-beater?)  I don't care if Trump likes to brag.  Those things mean less to me than the man's (or the administration's) perspective and policies and trajectory.

I was being facetious about clowns, I get you meant it metaphorically.   Those things don't matter to me either--  why should they, they're irrelevant.   It's not his manner.   It's not his pettiness or bragging or rudeness, though that is being kind to Trump.   It's that there is something wrong psychologically with him.   Now, there may be something wrong with every human being on some level, but where I'm from, Trump just ain't quite right in the head.   And yes that concerns me, him being president and all.


"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy
Back to Top
Easy Money View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10676
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 31 2019 at 21:20
^ Interesting theory, wouldn't surprise me, meanwhile:   “When Iran, when they circle our beautiful destroyers with their little boats, and they make gestures at our people that they shouldn’t be allowed to make, they will be shot out of the water."
Apparently our "commander in chief" knows nothing about military procedure.

Edited by Easy Money - May 31 2019 at 21:26
Help the victims of the russian invasion:
http://www.jazzmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28523&PID=130446&title=various-ways-you-can-help-ukraine#130446
Back to Top
ProfPanglos View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 25 2017
Location: Austin, Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 624
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 31 2019 at 22:56
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

I was being facetious about clowns, I get you meant it metaphorically.   Those things don't matter to me either--  why should they, they're irrelevant.   It's not his manner.   It's not his pettiness or bragging or rudeness, though that is being kind to Trump.   It's that there is something wrong psychologically with him.   Now, there may be something wrong with every human being on some level, but where I'm from, Trump just ain't quite right in the head.   And yes that concerns me, him being president and all.

Hey, you may well be right.  (What, you don't think he's a stable genius, LOL?)

He's definitely a strange one.  I wouldn't want to hang out with him.

But I'll wait to comment further on things/perspectives/policies of his that I like, just in case someone wants to comment on my post about national sovereignty.
Back to Top
Tillerman88 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: October 31 2015
Location: Tomorrowland
Status: Offline
Points: 495
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 04:09
Originally posted by King of Loss King of Loss wrote:

More tariffs for the American consumer, yay! WackoOuchAngry

I can't believe he's using the average American as his own piggy bank so he can play hardball with foreign countries....


 
Something you didn't notice on this thread is some people's expertise in dodging actually relevant issues like these you started, so his or her lack of a strong counter argument keeps unnoticed......
.


Edited by Tillerman88 - June 01 2019 at 04:13
The overwhelming amount of information on a daily basis restrains people from rewinding the news record archives to refresh their memories...
Back to Top
ProfPanglos View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 25 2017
Location: Austin, Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 624
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 16:59
Anybody want to dispute my position that Trump (warts and all) has a good perspective when it comes to the issue of national sovereignty?

I'll give it a bit, before I post my next reason why I'm going to vote for his re-election in 2020, which will be the topic of his controversial method(s) to denuclearize North Korea.
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 17:09
Originally posted by ProfPanglos ProfPanglos wrote:

Anybody want to dispute my position that Trump (warts and all) has a good perspective when it comes to the issue of national sovereignty?

I'm sure many would like to but few would want to: according to your testimony Trump has an even better chance in 2020 than I had suspected, which is spectacularly absurd, and that foreign policy & immigration is considered one of his strong points, unexpectedly funny.  

Thank goodness the country pretty much runs itself.


"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 18:25
^ And by "spectacularly absurd" I didn't mean that your opinion is absurd.   I meant the astounding reality of it.


"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy
Back to Top
ProfPanglos View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 25 2017
Location: Austin, Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 624
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 18:33
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

Originally posted by ProfPanglos ProfPanglos wrote:

Anybody want to dispute my position that Trump (warts and all) has a good perspective when it comes to the issue of national sovereignty?

I'm sure many would like to but few would want to...

Well, I'd welcome a dissenting viewpoint on the issue, but if one is put forth, I'd appreciate it if the view was on the issue, and not the man.  The man is highly polarizing, there is no denying that.  I understand that many people don't like him, to say the least.  Many people seem to adore him.  I don't hate him, but neither do I adore him.  I see him as quite flawed in many ways, but I'm talking about the issue(s), not the man himself.

I guess my point is this:  Picture, instead of Trump, a professional, poised, respectable world leader with a completely different demeanor (than Trump) - making that same speech, saying those same words, in regard to national sovereignty.  The words themselves, and the perspective of looking out for America's interests first and foremost, is what I approve of.  I just can't find fault with the perspective.

Would I be glad if we had a more poised, serious adult in the Oval Office?  Sure.

But I think Trump is being up-front and active about it (the national sovereignty thing). so in that regard, he's not only right (in my opinion), he's also effective.

I don't see any flaws in the fundamental philosophy of what he's saying.  It makes perfect sense to me.  It's also a stance that I cannot say the previous administration took, so it's a welcome breath of fresh air to me - regardless of Trump's persona/personality.  I try to separate that from the political philosophy.

In the end, whether it is in 2020 or 2024, he's going to move on and someone else will take his place.  My concern is not so much with his weird personality as it is with the direction he is going, or trying to go, with America.

Having an "America First" doctrine works for me.

If there is anyone here who thinks it is smart to have an "America Second" or "America Third" philosophy, please don't be shy to make your case.


Edited by ProfPanglos - June 01 2019 at 18:45
Back to Top
ProfPanglos View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 25 2017
Location: Austin, Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 624
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 18:44
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

^ And by "spectacularly absurd" I didn't mean that your opinion is absurd.   I meant the astounding reality of it.

Thanks for the clarification.  I'm not thin-skinned, if it was aimed at my opinion, I wouldn't take offense.  But thank you all the same.

I get it; I have a friend or two who are staunchly anti-Trump.  The man makes them absolutely livid half the time.  Part of it (both the livid anti-Trump camp and the rabid adorers who think he does no wrong) is media influence.  This is another fundamental topic with which I actually agree with Trump as well - the idea of "fake news" -- because let's face it, we are overwhelmed with data which is not intended to inform, but to shape thought into a particular pattern.  Propaganda.  It is pervasive, and a very fascinating subject all on its own.

It does bother me that there is so little objective reporting of facts, and so much that is purposely crafted to shape thought.  And people eat it up, on both sides.  You have to be constantly vigilant for it too, not just because of the sophistication and subtlety of the mental bombardment, but also the frequency.

Trump is right to point it out.  But obviously he uses it to his advantage as well.  The influence of the media, entertainment industry, even academia - is fairly pervasive.  Almost a total encapsulation.  It's ultimately dehumanizing, in my opinion.

I don't even know if anything positive can be done about it, other than being aware that it not only exists (and trying to guard against regurgitating whatever it is we ingest), but trying to remain free-thinkers in spite of it. 


Edited by ProfPanglos - June 01 2019 at 18:46
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 18:44
Originally posted by ProfPanglos ProfPanglos wrote:

I guess my point is this:  Picture, instead of Trump, a professional, poised, respectable world leader with a completely different demeanor (than Trump) - making that same speech, saying those same words, in regard to national sovereignty.  The words themselves, and the perspective of looking out for America's interests first and foremost, is what I approve of.  I just can't find fault with the perspective.

Okay I'm picturing it and, yeah, not helping.   John Kennedy was a fiscal conservative and staunch Cold Warrior, but he was also highly intelligent, deeply insightful, and at the end of the day, a humanitarian.

America first?   A creepy idea in this time of global conductivity, and in the hands of an emotionally disturbed real estate swindler, ominous.   It's an unsophisticated perspective, but I know a lot of Americans don't trust sophisticated ideas.  So be it.  

We tend to vote in opposition to whomever has been in office.   Trump has either zero or four years left.   Here's hoping someone as smart & sensitive to the plight of man as Kennedy and Obama were is elected in the future.


"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy
Back to Top
ProfPanglos View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 25 2017
Location: Austin, Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 624
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 19:02
Why is America First a "creepy idea?"  Why is it "unsophisticated?"

What determines whether or not it is "sophisticated?"  It seems fairly unsophisticated to me, masochistic even, to allow oneself to be taken advantage of, or to allow oneself to be "under the thumb" of another.

"Peace through Strength," or, "Peace through Superior Firepower" (as I have seen it alternately translated) seems like a sound doctrine to me.  The world isn't an altruistic utopia, and it seems as foolish (to me) to allow one's self (individually or as a country) to be prey, as it is reprehensible to allow one's self (individually or as a country) to be a predator.  Being a protector is a third category, and a better one.  I think historically America has done a fairly good job of doing that, though occasionally we slip off that road one way or another.
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 19:06
I understand, and certainly appreciate what we have compared to other places in the world, no doubt about it.   Peace through strength is not a bad philosophy, I'm a martial artist so I've lived it.   It's just potentially dangerous and a little juvenile.





Edited by Atavachron - June 01 2019 at 19:07
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy
Back to Top
ProfPanglos View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 25 2017
Location: Austin, Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 624
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 19:19
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

I understand, and certainly appreciate what we have compared to other places in the world, no doubt about it.   Peace through strength is not a bad philosophy, I'm a martial artist so I've lived it.   It's just potentially dangerous and a little juvenile.

Agreed that it is potentially dangerous; but disagree that it is juvenile.  I feel it is the wisest choice.

Why do you think it is juvenile, or what alternative would you suggest?  If countries were just and equitable, maybe that would nullify my argument - but they aren't.  Some are, but some are hostile and some are weak and at the mercy of other, stronger nations.

Hence my support for national sovereignty - the idea that countries can pursue their own best interests, and work together (or try to) to find equity and fairness in their dealings with one another, as challenging and complicated as that may be.

But seriously now, why is it juvenile?  I see the "I'm tougher than you and can beat you up" mentality that could develop from it, but it isn't necessarily an inherent aspect, nor is it an inevitable consequence.

We can be responsible and peaceful, even if we are the strongest.  And frankly, it just seems wiser to me to be stronger (and risk becoming a bully or predatory), than to be weaker (and risk the threat of being beat-up or oppressed).

We must differ on that fundamental, but that's okay.  We both like prog-rock, so it's all good.  


Edited by ProfPanglos - June 01 2019 at 19:22
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 19:25
Oh I know, the world is an extremely volatile and dangerous place, and that's not our fault.  


"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy
Back to Top
ProfPanglos View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 25 2017
Location: Austin, Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 624
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 20:39
Additionally, one of the reasons I approve of the idea of national sovereignty is that it appeals to freedom (vs. control), and it doesn't have to be understood in the context of "American politics."  I'd feel exactly the same no matter what country I was from.

If I was from Poland, or Iran, or South Korea, or the United States, or the UK... I would still feel that my country had a right to look out for its own best interests, and work toward more peace, prosperity, and happiness for its people.
Back to Top
Easy Money View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10676
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 22:25
^ What would be the nature of elections in a truly sovereign nation?
Help the victims of the russian invasion:
http://www.jazzmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28523&PID=130446&title=various-ways-you-can-help-ukraine#130446
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2019 at 22:53
From an outsider's perspective, I think Trump has got some things right albeit Iran is not one of them.  Obama at least somewhat managed to upend the Haqqani network and see the game in the Middle East for what it is.  Unfortunately, Trump is now locked in a bear hug with Saudi which is easily the worst of the ME operators AND...America's biggest ally in that region.  Saudi spreads propaganda about Iran because Iran is a Shia majority state, period. And USA still hasn't forgiven the Ayatollah installed regime for overthrowing the despotic Shah back in the late 70s.  As Bush undid Clinton's efforts to bring peace to the ME, Trump has to Obama (though Obama does take the blame imo for both Syria and Libya, less so in the case of the former). 

But on China, it's more the fault of the earlier corporatist leadership that they handled China with kid gloves than Trump for doing what should have been done much before.  Yes, he is escalating it dangerously but this would not have been required had previous Presidents more realistic and less sunny about China.

In either event, I do not see the threat to USA's national sovereignty that he is supposed to be warding off.  It is almost laughable to hear that notion as an outsider.  Dear God, if the world's biggest power feels insecure and needs protection, then where does that leave other nations.  There is no military power today and not for the next ten-fifteen years in a position to dislodge USA.  If you invest in the very idea of a threat to national sovereignty of USA, you have been played by paranoid right wing media.
Back to Top
ProfPanglos View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 25 2017
Location: Austin, Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 624
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 02 2019 at 00:22
Originally posted by Easy Money Easy Money wrote:

^ What would be the nature of elections in a truly sovereign nation?

I don't understand your question.  The "nature" of elections?

Can you rephrase it for me?
Back to Top
omphaloskepsis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2011
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 6759
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 02 2019 at 01:11
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

From an outsider's perspective, I think Trump has got some things right albeit Iran is not one of them.  Obama at least somewhat managed to upend the Haqqani network and see the game in the Middle East for what it is.  Unfortunately, Trump is now locked in a bear hug with Saudi which is easily the worst of the ME operators AND...America's biggest ally in that region.  Saudi spreads propaganda about Iran because Iran is a Shia majority state, period. And USA still hasn't forgiven the Ayatollah installed regime for overthrowing the despotic Shah back in the late 70s.  As Bush undid Clinton's efforts to bring peace to the ME, Trump has to Obama (though Obama does take the blame imo for both Syria and Libya, less so in the case of the former). 

But on China, it's more the fault of the earlier corporatist leadership that they handled China with kid gloves than Trump for doing what should have been done much before.  Yes, he is escalating it dangerously but this would not have been required had previous Presidents more realistic and less sunny about China.

In either event, I do not see the threat to USA's national sovereignty that he is supposed to be warding off.  It is almost laughable to hear that notion as an outsider.  Dear God, if the world's biggest power feels insecure and needs protection, then where does that leave other nations.  There is no military power today and not for the next ten-fifteen years in a position to dislodge USA.  If you invest in the very idea of a threat to national sovereignty of USA, you have been played by paranoid right wing media.
 


Globalism poses the biggest threat to America's sovereignty.  Centralized, world government threatens everyone's sovereignty.   The threat arises from both sides of Congress.  From within American government,  globalist republicans and democrats pose a greater threat than any single country in the world.    That's why the Globalists hate Trump.  Trump took a dump on the globalist gravy train.   That's what Brexit's about.  EU globalists leaders like Mccron and Merkle despise national sovereignty and they hate Trump and they hate their own citizens.  While nationalists like Nigel Farage, Hungary's Orban, and Italy's Salvini befriend Trump.     

Old fashion globalists used World War in a vain attempt to rule the World.  The modern way is to flood countries with poor immigrants.   Globalist use the immigrants to throttle their own citizen's. The recent wave of Nationalist victories in EU elections is a reaction to a relentless flood of immigrants. If the French become a minority in France, than France isn't France anymore.  A country is more than a name. A country is their people.   That's the main reason France yellow-jackets protested for 6 months strait, while Mccron's approval rating tanks to 20%.  Trump's approval has risen to 48%, after 3 years of 90% negative media coverage on Trump.   Trump doesn't want to start a war.  Trump want's every country to be sovereign.  Nationalists want local rule... not One World government.   Let everyone mind their own business and rule themselves.   


Edited by omphaloskepsis - June 02 2019 at 01:18
Back to Top
ProfPanglos View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 25 2017
Location: Austin, Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 624
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 02 2019 at 01:12
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

From an outsider's perspective, I think Trump has got some things right albeit Iran is not one of them.  Obama at least somewhat managed to upend the Haqqani network and see the game in the Middle East for what it is.  Unfortunately, Trump is now locked in a bear hug with Saudi which is easily the worst of the ME operators AND...America's biggest ally in that region.  Saudi spreads propaganda about Iran because Iran is a Shia majority state, period. And USA still hasn't forgiven the Ayatollah installed regime for overthrowing the despotic Shah back in the late 70s.  As Bush undid Clinton's efforts to bring peace to the ME, Trump has to Obama (though Obama does take the blame imo for both Syria and Libya, less so in the case of the former). 

But on China, it's more the fault of the earlier corporatist leadership that they handled China with kid gloves than Trump for doing what should have been done much before.  Yes, he is escalating it dangerously but this would not have been required had previous Presidents more realistic and less sunny about China.

In either event, I do not see the threat to USA's national sovereignty that he is supposed to be warding off.  It is almost laughable to hear that notion as an outsider.  Dear God, if the world's biggest power feels insecure and needs protection, then where does that leave other nations.  There is no military power today and not for the next ten-fifteen years in a position to dislodge USA.  If you invest in the very idea of a threat to national sovereignty of USA, you have been played by paranoid right wing media.

I agree with much of what you wrote.

I have never personally been on-board with our alliance with Saudi Arabia.  Especially after 9/11.  And, I certainly did not agree with the way Trump handled that Khashoggi murder.  I understand why he didn't hold the Saudi's feet to the fire - he wanted his giant deal with them to go through.

Trump makes a lot of decisions based on $$.  But that Khashoggi thing didn't sit well with me.

I don't know that America feels insecure, so much as it feels a need to assert its individuality, or feels a need to "rebel" against perceived (rightly or wrongly) threats of being assimilated into some globalist conglomerate, or if not assimilated, forced to comply with...  

Granted, I've never felt threatened by the ICC; but I appreciate that Trump said Nope, the ICC isn't an authority for any American citizen.  I think that's cool, that works for me.

The Paris Agreement withdrawal was another example of Trump not following along with the crowd, and I approve.  Mainly because I am "pro" fossil fuel industries.  Maybe logistics need to be re-examined, but even the "green" movement is a dependent of the fossil fuel industry.  The "Green New Deal" wants to essentially eliminate the fossil fuel industry, and that seems unrealistic to me (to put it very mildly).  It actually seems downright naive.  We're not going back to making things out of wood and we're not going back to riding horses.  High-speed rail, electric cars, high-rise buildings, computers, cell phones, hi-fi systems that pump out rockin' prog-rock... our vinyl collections, our CDs, our cassettes... all that stuff depends on the fossil fuel industry.

What we need is more power generation, not less.  So I favor Trump's moves to deregulate this stuff.

I would rather be investing my own time, efforts and resources into production (vs. consumption).  Granted, there's got to be some kind of balance.  We were heavy polluters, back before we outsourced the vast majority of our industries to Asia.  If the Trump administration wants to point America back toward being more of a producing nation (which seems to me what he's doing, anyway), I'm okay with that.  The consumer is always dependent on the producer, and America has always prided itself on it's independence.  Independence isn't a bad word to me, it's a good one.  

Edited to add: You mentioned the military might of the USA (and I don't disagree with you, the USA is second-to-none in military might).  I don't think the "threat" from globalism is a military threat; it is a philosophical threat.  A purely globalist worldview has no place for national sovereignty.  The idea of a country acting unilaterally goes against the globalist worldview.  The threat seems more to be one of intellectual assimilation, an acquiescence to some higher authority.  America likes being its own authority.  And I concur, I don't want our country in some subservient position to some organization or convention.  I don't care if other nations want to willingly place themselves under the authority of others, but that idea doesn't sit too well with me.  


Edited by ProfPanglos - June 02 2019 at 01:24
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 153154155156157 434>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.969 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.