a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by mk
mk  ·  2823 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Discussion Topic: Trump

I don't see our system as particularly ossified and unresponsive. I see our populous as particularly anxious and afraid. The middle class is diminishing, as is the ability for the uneducated to make a decent wage. For these reasons, there is much discontent, and the blame has fallen upon the system.

Much bureaucracy needs to be destroyed, but that is going to happen without Trump trying to rebuild his version of 1950. Silicon Valley is a byproduct of the computer and the internet. There exists a culture that has built up around the replacement of old technology with these new ones, and the creation of new economic models. It's a mistake to think the culture is the seed of what makes Silicon Valley what it is. Our politics are going to change, because our technology has changed our economics. In our anxious impatience, Trump might seem like one way to precipitate that revolution. Unfortunately, his thinking is mostly regressive, and his power base definitely has a regressive agenda.

Trump's politics aren't what worries me. His lack of character, his anti-intellectualism, his racism and misogyny, and his reactive nature worry me the most. Progress has been derailed for centuries in the past. He's more vociferously attacking the independence of the press and the electoral process as he is red tape.





blackbootz  ·  2823 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I don't view the "creative destruction" that Trump is wreaking as being the bureaucracies he's eliminating or the regulations he's dismantling. I mean more that he's violating the faith we place in our institutions as they exist today to fairly produce goods for society. Also, creative destruction has positive connotations, and I'm not endorsing or liking what he's doing (or undoing I should probably say).

    I don't see our system as particularly ossified and unresponsive.

This falls along a spectrum, but the fact the primary races are tantamount to victories in a large number of districts due to gerrymandering, and this number just keeps growing, means the system isn't moving towards a coalition that can get anything done. It's a solidification of business interests first and foremost.

    I see our populous as particularly anxious and afraid.

Agreed. What hope does collective action have against highly energized and motivated special interest?

kleinbl00  ·  2823 days ago  ·  link  ·  

If you unpack your complaints, it all comes down to gerrymandering and the noncompetitive nature of representation.

I suspect that will change. The whole argument for the electoral college was to prevent people like Trump from being elected. QED the electoral college is obsolete. Trump may be Republican but he sure ain't establishment; the Gray Men of Government are more likely to defend the parts of the system that work against the virus than they are to let populism destabilize their process.

But I haven't the foggiest how that's going to shake out.

mk  ·  2823 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    Agreed. What hope does collective action have against highly energized and motivated special interest?

Collective action can easily win. It can crush special interests overnight. It's just important that we fight for proper representation and good governance, not for political ideologies. That has been the disaster unfolding these last twenty years. These people that anger us so much are public servants, but we have allowed them to become ideological leaders that have little responsibility beyond fighting the opposition.

Trump is little more than a hand grenade.

am_Unition  ·  2823 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I'm advertising tonight, it's been a rough week:

OftenBen  ·  2823 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    Collective action can easily win.

Well, not at DAPL.

kcWDD  ·  2823 days ago  ·  link  ·  

The mainstream press is an inbreed obfuscation system, it should be attacked.

mk  ·  2823 days ago  ·  link  ·  

All press should be held to high journalistic standards. But that isn't Trump's argument.

kcWDD  ·  2823 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Trumps argument is those standards are outdated and toxic

*or at least the system they've created is such

mk  ·  2823 days ago  ·  link  ·  

No. His argument is that Fox and Friends is good media, whereas CNN is bad. His concern isn't for a change in standards, but whether or not the outlet is friendly to him.

kcWDD  ·  2823 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Yes, you would expect him to ascribe good intentions to media that slanders him? You've never been the center of a negative press piece

cgod  ·  2822 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Being slandered and being the center of negative press aren't necessarily the same things things.

kcWDD  ·  2822 days ago  ·  link  ·  

from inside the storm they are

cgod  ·  2822 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Well let's hope he can keep perspective when faced with criticisms from foreign leaders, or the courts, or civil rights institutions. He's the most powerful leader on the face of the planet, he owes it to every one to act with some degree of dignity and reserve. The most powerful man on earth is really doesn't need to be a vengeful prick, it's something beyond white or rich privilege to pretend that he's being persecuted by scrutiny

kcWDD  ·  2821 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Trump has been back and forth from bankruptcy, built major companies, major structures, runs a major enterprise, conducted a SUCCESSFUL major campaign AGAINST the establishment (who the media was in the corner for, undeniably). But you doubt his ability to conduct himself for the successful interests of the United States?

The public voted against decorum and dignity in 2016, Trump won, now he's acting like it, going about business the way he knows how.

cgod  ·  2821 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Of course I doubt him. Only a naive fan boy or mindless party drone is assured that a president will be good at his job before he's done it.

kcWDD  ·  2818 days ago  ·  link  ·  

:)

cgod  ·  2817 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I'm curious at your comments at the end of conversations.

We've got

    quiht
and
    :)
.

Neither mean anything at all. Are you just trolling?

Should I just block you?

I have no idea what quiht means and the internet didn't help.

kcWDD  ·  2811 days ago  ·  link  ·  

"I think enough intellectuals are hellbent on destroying this man's power that we can expect it to vanish in the near future."

that's a nonsense proposition, if it was true trump never would have won, so I told him to be quite.

I wrote :) to show that I am just the type of optimist you suggested

cgod  ·  2811 days ago  ·  link  ·  

are you getting quiht (a nonsense word), quiet (to be silent) and quite (to show agreement) confused. I know I'm confused at what you are trying to express.

am_Unition  ·  2823 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I think enough intellectuals are hellbent on destroying this man's power that we can expect it to vanish in the near future.

kcWDD  ·  2823 days ago  ·  link  ·  

quiht