USA 2024 US Presidential Election: Trump vs Harris (pt II)

[JB1975]

At least you're a little more civil this time.

Whether or not you think a Marxist analysis of future tendencies is "interesting", these tendencies are objective (they exist independently of your subjective preferences).

Comparing history to a Netflix series is lightminded. Because right now, at stake is not a movie twist but the fate of humanity.

I think I'm always civil, but I don't feel the need to clothe every discussion of the dark past, present or future in a shroud of mourning.

I'm still surprised at the speed of our degeneration and the sort of madness which passes as normal nowadays, and humour is a reflexive way of dealing with it. Nothing of importance is diminished.

Any analysis of the future is subjective, because no analysis exists independently of someone's preferences. Some analyses are more cogent and considered than others.

 

[Rotayjay]

I'm for an independent Palestine and against Netanyahu's war of genocide. But for those wanting to vote independent to punish the Biden Administration, keep in mind that it's Netanyahu bombing children, even if it's with American bombs.

Remember the movie Oppenheimer, when President Truman says to Oppenheimer, 'Do you think the people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki give a shit who built the bomb? They care who dropped it. I did.'

If you vote independent, you're helping to hand the White House to a man who will encourage Netanyahu to drop more. Think before you vote.

 

[QuietB]

They also defeated the Nazis so let’s be reasonable.

Trotsky argued that if 1917 had been unsuccessful then Russia would’ve ended up the country of Nazism. Certainly the German crushing of its socialist revolution was a major part of empowering what became the Nazis.

At the moment the world’s facing a radicalised and emboldened right, with the Bidens/Scholzes/Starmers/Macrons/Trudeaus/Albaneses of the world offering holding pattern blandness in response - there’s no project there, just a promise to plug as many of the holes in the dam wall as they can. There desperately does need to be an alternative program for people to buy into, and it’s unfortunate that the threat of Trump means we can only continue the holding pattern with Harris.

Capital always gets what it wants

 

[Maggie5]

At this point, she really needs to have a think about the campaign finances and whether she can bring Beyonce to every rally

120 Democrats. Hillary Clinton delivered a 17-minute speech to local party members, many of whom were poised to campaign for Kamala Harris later in the day.

That tweet is a little bit misleading as I don't believe it was meant to be a big crowd.

 

[GreyCrow]

President Donald Trump

President Donald J. Trump has completely upended traditional ideas about leadership and politics. In doing so, he has sparked tremendous psychological interest—from the traits of his character, to the emotions he elicits from the public, to the point at which mental health becomes a question of...

www.psychologytoday.com

Some mental health professionals have publicly stated their view that Trump’s behavior aligns with the criteria for narcissistic personality disorder, antisocial personality disorder, and paranoid personality disorder, according to the DSM-5

 

[Maggie5]

A lot of peeps putting out something to point to 'I was right' knowing full well they will ghost these views if it goes the other way.

I don't think so as have only seen a couple declare Harris.

Most are like me hoping Trump loses (which doesn't mean we are Harris fans either).

 

[Magruder]

It was a well balanced article articulating why the poll is so revered yet explaining the complexities of the data.

I don't get the hate for Nate, but each to their own.

Has more than a slight financial reliance on Peter Theil

 

[Crankyhawk]

Thread moving at breakneck speed today. Wednesday may see new records broken. Might need to move some work meetings around to keep it as free as possible

wont be as fast as the sack hinkley thread

 

[IlovethePies]

I think I'm always civil, but I don't feel the need to clothe every discussion of the dark past, present or future in a shroud of mourning.

I'm still surprised at the speed of our degeneration and the sort of madness which passes as normal nowadays, and humour is a reflexive way of dealing with it. Nothing of importance is diminished. (1)

Any analysis of the future is subjective, because no analysis exists independently of someone's preferences. (2) Some analyses are more cogent and considered than others.

(1) If you consider ridiculing Trotsky's assassination as "humour", then your sense of humour is way off.

(2) Glad you posted this because it is the clearest expression of why you and I will ultimately always disagree on issues of fundamental importance.

You belong to the idealist camp of philosophy. For you, the opinions of the individual, his/her thoughts, ideas, preferences determine reality. When taken to its extremes, (as it is nowadays in postmodernist philosophy) it leads to the conclusion that there is no objective truth, every person has his/her own unique narrative which is "their truth", just as valid as any other individual's "personal story/truth".
This philosophical position leads to the destruction of any attachment to scientific thought, because the aim of scientific thought is to cognise reality objectively, independently of any individual's impressions or opinions.

On the contrary, I am a materialist, a dialectical materialist. My starting point is that matter is primary, the physical world is primary and our thoughts are an expression within our brains (which also consist of matter) of reality. What we perceive though and think are only a first approximation of an ever changing reality, and scientific concepts and thoughts are required to achieve a better approximation

Therefore, objective truth exists, independently of what one or another observer might think.

Hence, the tendencies of US capitalism towards fascism, extreme social inequality and the expansion of war are objective, regardless of whether anyone thinks of them as interesting, depressing etc

And the means of preventing the descent into barbarism is also present, in the current situation, in objective material reality. It lies in international working class and the fight to establish its political independence so that it can organise a struggle in its own class interests across the entire world.

 

[big_e]

Looking forward to JD Vance being a punchline in a few years.

 

[faible]

(1) That's your opinion. It isn't mine.

(2) All capitalist politicians will screw the working class, because world capitalism has entered a period of terminal economic decline, and the only way that profits can be extracted in sufficient amounts to placate world finance markets is by intensifying the exploitation of workers, and by gutting all previous social expenditure (on hospitals, schools etc). The Democrats under Biden are currently presiding over a wave of school closures by cutting off funding, and this is set to escalate under either Harris or Trump - up to 350 000 teachers. (This is just one example).
Finally expenditure on militarism is another significant factor in the drive to cut social spending that both Trump and Harris will carry out, whichever of them ends up in the presidency.

(3) And you accuse me of being impractical, unrealistic and myopic!!! This statement is one of the most unrealistic I have read here.
The entire spectrum of US politics is cascading to the right at a million km per hour. Harris has announced that she is happy to carry out most of Trump's own xenophobic anti-immigrant policies. She has openly declared her support for Israel's ongoing genocide and pledged that she will continue to fund it. Under Biden, social inequality in the US has greatly deepened, which is why Trump can win a hearing in some sections of the working class.
Harris' economic policies will continue and intensify this trend.

(4) This was the perspective of social reformism, which had its heyday from mid to late 40's to the mid 60's.
Since then, reformism has been a deadletter.
This is the same across the entire world.
No government in the world today is legislating socially progressive policies. Worldwide, we are witnessing a catastrophic fall in living standards and counterrevolutionary steps to dismantle all the gains in public health, public education etc.
"Incremental reforms" , "gradual social progress" are completely unrealistic in contemporary reality. You're the one peddling a chimera, not me.

Ok. I’ll eagerly await this global socialist revolution you’re convinced is coming shortly.

 

[OneGreatClub]

A lot of word salad happening, much in the style or Russell Brand and Jordan Peterson.

 

[Mick F]

I don't think so as have only seen a couple declare Harris.

Most are like me hoping Trump loses (which doesn't mean we are Harris fans either).

The timing of the decision, for Biden to withdraw from the the ‘race’, did not afford the Democrats the opportunity of a ‘primary’ in the normal sense. Those that are not disingenuous realise that Harris would not have emerged from such a primary as the Democrat candidate for President.

Trump is supported by the leading GOP donors and billionaires. The best Republican candidates do not have that luxury - they can’t even get support for gubernatorial races.

 

[JB1975]

(1) If you consider ridiculing Trotsky's assassination as "humour", then your sense of humour is way off.

(2) Glad you posted this because it is the clearest expression of why you and I will ultimately always disagree on issues of fundamental importance.

You belong to the idealist camp of philosophy. For you, the opinions of the individual, his/her thoughts, ideas, preferences determine reality. When taken to its extremes, (as it is nowadays in postmodernist philosophy) it leads to the conclusion that there is no objective truth, every person has his/her own unique narrative which is "their truth", just as valid as any other individual's "personal story/truth".
This philosophical position leads to the destruction of any attachment to scientific thought, because the aim of scientific thought is to cognise reality objectively, independently of any individual's impressions or opinions.

On the contrary, I am a materialist, a dialectical materialist. My starting point is that matter is primary, the physical world is primary and our thoughts are an expression within our brains (which also consist of matter) of reality. What we perceive though and think are only a first approximation of an ever changing reality, and scientific concepts and thoughts are required to achieve a better approximation

Therefore, objective truth exists, independently of what one or another partisan/biased observer might think.

Hence, the tendencies of US capitalism towards fascism, extreme social inequality and the expansion of war are objective, regardless of whether anyone thinks of them as interesting, depressing etc

And the means of preventing the descent into barbarism is also present, in the current situation, in objective material reality. It lies in international working class and the fight to establish its political independence so that it can organise a struggle in its own class interests across the entire world.

I come from a materialist school of analysis myself. The individual doesn't make history, doesn't make things happen: it's always the movement of deeper forces which shift the landscape.

My comment about the impossibility of objective analysis was directed to any consideration of the future, based on the principle that you cannot objectively analyse things which haven't yet happened.

 

[Crankyhawk]

I missed this so apologies if it's been covered up the thread but imagine getting fact checked by Rogan:

Joe Rogan pushes back on JD Vance's claim that women "celebrate" abortion

Vance purported to be unaware about laws subjecting women to arrest if they traveled out of state for an abortion

www.salon.com

I wonder if JD has gotten confused about women who have memoriam/ birthdays for miscarriages and stillbirths
Maybe a way too charitable interpretation though

 

[Royces Hart]

Looking forward to JD Vance being a punchline in a few years.

That skit will work even better with the amount of times Vance changes his name.

 

[Satan]

Looking forward to JD Vance being a punchline in a few years.

KANE , NOT THE WRESTLER

 

[Crankyhawk]

The time of small reforms is well and truly over. There's no juice any longer to squeeze from the capitalist lemon.

As this becomes clearer and clearer to millions of people world wide, they will seek out a different, anti-capitalist perspective.

Socialism wont come through elections, it will come through a mass, international revolutionary movement of the working class.

We won't see it happen on Nov 5.

But I am thinking more long term than that.

its not happening in your lifetime

 

[Chicago1]

I don't open the three US election threads for 12 hours, and I have a gazillion posts to catch up with? Ugh. Politics is so time-consuming.

I will be making one last donation to the Harris/Walz campaign tonight. I'm hoping for a new record of emails from them by election day.

On SM-A135F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Dazzler9]

I reckon this election is Harris' to lose at this point. Just don't offend Puerto Ricans or fellate any microphones, and she's got this.

 

[2 eazy]

I reckon this election is Harris' to lose at this point. Just don't offend Puerto Ricans or fellate any microphones, and she's got this.

Has what Trump done or said ever really affected him? The best pollster in 2020 has Trump up in all swing states

 

[IlovethePies]

I come from a materialist school of analysis myself. The individual doesn't make history, doesn't make things happen: it's always the movement of deeper forces which shift the landscape.

My comment about the impossibility of objective analysis was directed to any consideration of the future, based on the principle that you cannot objectively analyse things which haven't yet happened.

Well, if you belong to the materialist school of analysis, then you would not claim that objective analysis of the future is impossible.

You definitely cannot predict with certainty what will happen in the future. There is no crystal ball.

However, based on the current tendencies of the class struggle, and the political programs of the parties involved, one can base one place one's own actions in accordance with the general trajectory of events, and in this way at a certain point impact them.

This is what the Bolshevik party did in 1917. They could not predict the future after the Provisional Government came to power in 1917, but they understood that the ongoing war against Germany, and the inevitable collapse of social conditions would create the situation and the opportunity for a steeled political party that accurately articulated the interests of the working class to win its leadership, and behind that, win the loyalty of the peasantry as well.

But it could only occur if that party accurately cognised reality, and could from there anticipate the trajectory of future events so that it could intervene at a decisive moment and determine the course of history.

If it were impossible to analyse the tendency of events into the future, the Russian Revolution would never have occurred.

 

[Satan]

More snl

RFK Bear.mp4

cdn.jwplayer.com

 

[Crankyhawk]

Labeling something as 'Sanewashing' is just an excuse to not look at things or someone's individual actions on its merits. Not as intellectually honest a concept as you think it is.

sanewashing is where a third party is attempting to put the most charitable spin on someones actions even when the person involved has claimed or stated a more base or irrational motive.

 

[Blue1980]

All lies, he is doing this all to bring down the deep state and help the working class!