RugbyRebels

This is starting to feel like another Stewart Lee bit.

Pretty sure the point of Vance is that Trump is so full of shit, he needs 2 arseholes!

So America is extorting mineral rights from Ukraine and weakening its bargaining position by the day with the intention of a virtual surrender to all of Putin's remained, plus some others he will think of en route to the negotiations.

Since the mineral deal will clearly by signed under duress, isn't it worthless? Hope every dollar's worth of minerals takes a dollar to extract.

Looks like we need to develop alternate systems to everything the US provides. They're not an ally any more. It's going to be a tough few years (although it'll be game over if Starmer can't get a grip of the UK soon as Farage will our own agent for the Kremlin).

Depressing stuff.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/202 ... periments/

The words "The Fake News losers at CNN immediately tried to fact check it, but President Trump was right (as usual)" are literally on the official White House website right now. What the fuck even is this timeline.

(I don't expect anyone really does need this confirming, but President Trump was in fact not right (as usual) and the proof claimed on that article are risible misinterpretations that should (but won't) embarrass the author)

Puja

I don’t know how anybody is still able to follow US/world events at the moment. I’m doing everything I can to not see the news at all. I just click on this thread out of habit.

It’s all over, right? The dream of any sort of unified face of the west, actually working to try and make normal people’s lives better? Trump has shown how effectively you can brainwash people whilst shitting all over them.

The nutters have won.

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 07, 2025 9:26 am I don’t know how anybody is still able to follow US/world events at the moment. I’m doing everything I can to not see the news at all. I just click on this thread out of habit.

It’s all over, right? The dream of any sort of unified face of the west, actually working to try and make normal people’s lives better? Trump has shown how effectively you can brainwash people whilst shitting all over them.

The nutters have won.

Honestly, I think there is a lot of good to come out of this.

It's caused Europe to actually start to stand up. It's caused the UK to move closer to the EU again. It's led to the EU actively finding ways to bypass Orban. It's led to a lot more unity across Europe.

Yes, that unity may be further to the right than many of us would like, but that's a damn sight better than right wing nutjobs.

I would much rather have 30 competent conservatives in charge than 10 socialists, 10 conservatives, and 10 nutters.

On following the news...I find myself far more capable nowadays than at any previous time. Because I know it doesn't "directly" impact me. I know that I cannot have any real impact on it. So I can either feel helpless, or I can take an interest in it academically, but zero interest emotionally.

And it's great. It's truly interesting from a sociological and political science PoV.

Yeah, pretty terrible for the world when taken in isolation. But I prefer to see the changes Europe are making to counter.

I would love to see Europe say "screw you guys" to Amazon, Meta, et al., and simply build their own versions of those services in Europe for Europeans. Build European data centres, get everything back. It would drastically change the world order for the better.

And then there is production. Open up Eastern and Central Europe for manufacturing. Produce as much as we can in Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, etc., to cut China out as much as possible.

And guess what that does? Massive improvements to global warming if supply chains don't include huge journeys to and from Asia.

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Tue Mar 04, 2025 5:08 pm

Stom wrote: ↑Mon Mar 03, 2025 8:03 am

Puja wrote: ↑Sun Mar 02, 2025 10:05 pm

You'd have to say that, if you were a time traveller trying to stop this future from coming to pass, the easiest inflection point would be going to the Democratic designer of the infamous Palm Springs butterfly ballots with a copy of the Wikipedia article about the 2000 election and persuading them to change the design (or, better, put Gore/Lieberman at the top of the ballot instead of Bush/Cheney!).

Gore in the White House might not've stopped 9/11, but it would've changed the response - no invasion of Iraq, no Homeland Security, no Patriot Act, no second Bush term meaning no Alito or Roberts on the Supreme Court (and thus no Citizens United allowing unlimited corporate money in politics). Plus, it's hard to argue that, even if he'd only got one term, it would've put the US in a better position for a green transition.

Puja

Nah.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to say that...it's all economic.

You want to put a stop to this, you need to have assassinated Reagan and Thatcher before they took office. And then done the same to every other plant that would have been put there in their place.

Without neo-capitalism (and its descent into techno-feudalism), none of this happens, INCLUDING the current wars in their current forms.

If we're looking for visible signs of disaster and decline, 9/11 and then the Financial Crisis of 2008 give us the political and economic hits, setting up the War on Terror, God knows what antidemocratic moves in the US, the tough economic conditions that are driving fascism, in particular giving the UK the Tories and their austerity, and Brexit.

But the seeds of these were obviously planted earlier - the 1979 and 80 elections of Thatcher and Reagan gave us the neoliberalism we just can't get rid of (because the only options considered are neoliberal options). Arguably we could have been saved from this in the 90s but Clinton (whose deregulation gave us the 2008 crisis) and Blair proved themselves to be nearly as conservative as their predecessors, so there have been no remotely leftwing governments in the UK or US since then.

Before all that, how about stopping the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and not having a WWI? WWI pretty directly led to WWII (with the help of the Treaty of Versailles, and good old US financial regulation - or the lack of - which gave us the Wall Street crash and the Great Depression).

Authoritarian regimes have come to power before the era of Reagan and Thatcher. The trigger here is a rising sense of grievance caused by economic issues primarily and to a lesser degree the cultural wars. There’s nothing new about people who feel life is treating them badly looking for alternatives.

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Fri Mar 07, 2025 5:55 pm

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Tue Mar 04, 2025 5:08 pm

Stom wrote: ↑Mon Mar 03, 2025 8:03 am

Nah.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to say that...it's all economic.

You want to put a stop to this, you need to have assassinated Reagan and Thatcher before they took office. And then done the same to every other plant that would have been put there in their place.

Without neo-capitalism (and its descent into techno-feudalism), none of this happens, INCLUDING the current wars in their current forms.

If we're looking for visible signs of disaster and decline, 9/11 and then the Financial Crisis of 2008 give us the political and economic hits, setting up the War on Terror, God knows what antidemocratic moves in the US, the tough economic conditions that are driving fascism, in particular giving the UK the Tories and their austerity, and Brexit.

But the seeds of these were obviously planted earlier - the 1979 and 80 elections of Thatcher and Reagan gave us the neoliberalism we just can't get rid of (because the only options considered are neoliberal options). Arguably we could have been saved from this in the 90s but Clinton (whose deregulation gave us the 2008 crisis) and Blair proved themselves to be nearly as conservative as their predecessors, so there have been no remotely leftwing governments in the UK or US since then.

Before all that, how about stopping the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and not having a WWI? WWI pretty directly led to WWII (with the help of the Treaty of Versailles, and good old US financial regulation - or the lack of - which gave us the Wall Street crash and the Great Depression).

Authoritarian regimes have come to power before the era of Reagan and Thatcher. The trigger here is a rising sense of grievance caused by economic issues primarily and to a lesser degree the cultural wars. There’s nothing new about people who feel life is treating them badly looking for alternatives.

It's not about authoritarianism. It's about changing the overriding economic system from one that enables "hard workers" to grow, to one that enables the rich to grow. As much as there may be push back, the truth is that the economic system was tweaked in such a way that the same people who benefitted from the "golden age" of capitalism didn't have to keep living under the same system, and could instead use the wealth they created to create more and more wealth.

It's not just generational, though, as those people who were unable to or unwilling to take advantage of the system find themselves also in abject poverty. And that is made worse when you go to other countries with weaker welfare states (looking at you, America).

So you get the MAJORITY of the population in a worse situation than they should be, and we wonder why there is so much backlash against "the way things have been". Because, to be honest, politics and economics over the past 40 years has sucked for the vast majority of people.

Just sayin'

https://boycottx.fr/


Oh, and of course it would be the French who have an app to help boycott companies!

Stom wrote: ↑Sat Mar 08, 2025 9:17 am

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Fri Mar 07, 2025 5:55 pm

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Tue Mar 04, 2025 5:08 pm
If we're looking for visible signs of disaster and decline, 9/11 and then the Financial Crisis of 2008 give us the political and economic hits, setting up the War on Terror, God knows what antidemocratic moves in the US, the tough economic conditions that are driving fascism, in particular giving the UK the Tories and their austerity, and Brexit.

But the seeds of these were obviously planted earlier - the 1979 and 80 elections of Thatcher and Reagan gave us the neoliberalism we just can't get rid of (because the only options considered are neoliberal options). Arguably we could have been saved from this in the 90s but Clinton (whose deregulation gave us the 2008 crisis) and Blair proved themselves to be nearly as conservative as their predecessors, so there have been no remotely leftwing governments in the UK or US since then.

Before all that, how about stopping the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and not having a WWI? WWI pretty directly led to WWII (with the help of the Treaty of Versailles, and good old US financial regulation - or the lack of - which gave us the Wall Street crash and the Great Depression).

Authoritarian regimes have come to power before the era of Reagan and Thatcher. The trigger here is a rising sense of grievance caused by economic issues primarily and to a lesser degree the cultural wars. There’s nothing new about people who feel life is treating them badly looking for alternatives.

It's not about authoritarianism. It's about changing the overriding economic system from one that enables "hard workers" to grow, to one that enables the rich to grow. As much as there may be push back, the truth is that the economic system was tweaked in such a way that the same people who benefitted from the "golden age" of capitalism didn't have to keep living under the same system, and could instead use the wealth they created to create more and more wealth.

It's not just generational, though, as those people who were unable to or unwilling to take advantage of the system find themselves also in abject poverty. And that is made worse when you go to other countries with weaker welfare states (looking at you, America).

So you get the MAJORITY of the population in a worse situation than they should be, and we wonder why there is so much backlash against "the way things have been". Because, to be honest, politics and economics over the past 40 years has sucked for the vast majority of people.

Exactly. Thatcher and Reagan weren't exceptionally authoritarian but they made society dramatically more unequal and set up the conditions for fascists to rise offering their snake oil solutions to the consequences of neoliberalism. For that to take place the main opposition parties needed to fall into the hands of neoliberals, and that's exactly what happened.

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 10:08 am

Stom wrote: ↑Sat Mar 08, 2025 9:17 am

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Fri Mar 07, 2025 5:55 pm
Authoritarian regimes have come to power before the era of Reagan and Thatcher. The trigger here is a rising sense of grievance caused by economic issues primarily and to a lesser degree the cultural wars. There’s nothing new about people who feel life is treating them badly looking for alternatives.

It's not about authoritarianism. It's about changing the overriding economic system from one that enables "hard workers" to grow, to one that enables the rich to grow. As much as there may be push back, the truth is that the economic system was tweaked in such a way that the same people who benefitted from the "golden age" of capitalism didn't have to keep living under the same system, and could instead use the wealth they created to create more and more wealth.

It's not just generational, though, as those people who were unable to or unwilling to take advantage of the system find themselves also in abject poverty. And that is made worse when you go to other countries with weaker welfare states (looking at you, America).

So you get the MAJORITY of the population in a worse situation than they should be, and we wonder why there is so much backlash against "the way things have been". Because, to be honest, politics and economics over the past 40 years has sucked for the vast majority of people.

Exactly. Thatcher and Reagan weren't exceptionally authoritarian but they made society dramatically more unequal and set up the conditions for fascists to rise offering their snake oil solutions to the consequences of neoliberalism. For that to take place the main opposition parties needed to fall into the hands of neoliberals, and that's exactly what happened.

Might be worth you comparing the American right wing politicians from early last century to Trump. This isn’t a recent phenomenon. I think you’re both ignoring the wider history here in both the UK and US

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 5:35 pm

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 10:08 am

Stom wrote: ↑Sat Mar 08, 2025 9:17 am

It's not about authoritarianism. It's about changing the overriding economic system from one that enables "hard workers" to grow, to one that enables the rich to grow. As much as there may be push back, the truth is that the economic system was tweaked in such a way that the same people who benefitted from the "golden age" of capitalism didn't have to keep living under the same system, and could instead use the wealth they created to create more and more wealth.

It's not just generational, though, as those people who were unable to or unwilling to take advantage of the system find themselves also in abject poverty. And that is made worse when you go to other countries with weaker welfare states (looking at you, America).

So you get the MAJORITY of the population in a worse situation than they should be, and we wonder why there is so much backlash against "the way things have been". Because, to be honest, politics and economics over the past 40 years has sucked for the vast majority of people.

Exactly. Thatcher and Reagan weren't exceptionally authoritarian but they made society dramatically more unequal and set up the conditions for fascists to rise offering their snake oil solutions to the consequences of neoliberalism. For that to take place the main opposition parties needed to fall into the hands of neoliberals, and that's exactly what happened.

Might be worth you comparing the American right wing politicians from early last century to Trump. This isn’t a recent phenomenon. I think you’re both ignoring the wider history here in both the UK and US

I think you need to give us some more detail to your argument here.

Staggering summary of Trump's corruption in the first 6 weeks:

Donald Trump shared an article today with an image of the Nazi symbol for the LGBTQ+ community.
This is not something you accidentally post or share. This is a choice.

It's Threads, reporting on a Trump "Truth Social" post - I'm not seeing it reported anywhere a bit more reputable; though it also looks like it's very new.

I am NOT going on to Truth Social to verify

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 5:35 pm

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 09, 2025 10:08 am

Stom wrote: ↑Sat Mar 08, 2025 9:17 am

It's not about authoritarianism. It's about changing the overriding economic system from one that enables "hard workers" to grow, to one that enables the rich to grow. As much as there may be push back, the truth is that the economic system was tweaked in such a way that the same people who benefitted from the "golden age" of capitalism didn't have to keep living under the same system, and could instead use the wealth they created to create more and more wealth.

It's not just generational, though, as those people who were unable to or unwilling to take advantage of the system find themselves also in abject poverty. And that is made worse when you go to other countries with weaker welfare states (looking at you, America).

So you get the MAJORITY of the population in a worse situation than they should be, and we wonder why there is so much backlash against "the way things have been". Because, to be honest, politics and economics over the past 40 years has sucked for the vast majority of people.

Exactly. Thatcher and Reagan weren't exceptionally authoritarian but they made society dramatically more unequal and set up the conditions for fascists to rise offering their snake oil solutions to the consequences of neoliberalism. For that to take place the main opposition parties needed to fall into the hands of neoliberals, and that's exactly what happened.

Might be worth you comparing the American right wing politicians from early last century to Trump. This isn’t a recent phenomenon. I think you’re both ignoring the wider history here in both the UK and US

Such as whom? Hitler, Mosley, Mao? Because there needs to be both a distinction between right and far right… and there needs to be a distinction between the 20th century and before…

Oh dear gods....

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 5:15 am Oh dear gods....

I'm not sure 90 minutes in the company of young, keen, MAGAites is good for me right now. Do they debate which period from US history they're aiming for because it was so 'great'?

No, but there's a fair bit of "what's wrong with being a xenophobic, white-christian nationalist?"

I'm taking it in bite-sized chunks - I doubt that I'll have the fortitude to finish it

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 11:53 am No, but there's a fair bit of "what's wrong with being a xenophobic, white-christian nationalist?"

I'm taking it in bite-sized chunks - I doubt that I'll have the fortitude to finish it

I watched the first couple of minutes. That could have done with facts and stats. Its:
MAGA - I don't like this sort of DEI (ie quotas and Kamala)
Progressive - DEI is actually all about making sure that everyone has access
MAGA - well I don't like the DEI I don't like
No one is convinced

But I'm trying to recover from the flu so have limited stamina.

Although if someone can get me an audience with Trump I'll breathe all over him for ya.

‘Boycott USA’ : Consumer revolt spreads across Europe

I'm in - wherever reasonably possible.
Mains one are Qwant instead of google as default search engine; using Amazon the way I used to - to find a product that I'd then buy elsewhere; and switching away from using Morrisons as supermarket-of-choice
I will also look at brands of stuff I regularly buy - but that's getting more intricate and will take a bit longer to enact.
Obviously, these all require sacrifices, mostly of convenience.

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 10:45 pm ‘Boycott USA’ : Consumer revolt spreads across Europe

I'm in - wherever reasonably possible.
Mains one are Qwant instead of google as default search engine; using Amazon the way I used to - to find a product that I'd then buy elsewhere; and switching away from using Morrisons as supermarket-of-choice
I will also look at brands of stuff I regularly buy - but that's getting more intricate and will take a bit longer to enact.
Obviously, these all require sacrifices, mostly of convenience.

Thanks for reminding me the Morrison's are US-owned now. An alternative-ish to Amazon might be Tesco Marketplace. I think Tesco is a fairly evil, massive corporate but, yeah, it's British and it's less evil than Amazon.

Comedy from Republicans in Congress:



Basically, Trump is allowed to impose and withdraw tariffs unilaterally because he declared a "National Emergency" on some bullshit grounds which gives him additional powers. Now, this is allowed by The National Emergencies Act, which also states that it can be ended with a simple majority vote in Congress and that anyone can call for this vote and then it must be voted on in 15 days, without anyone being able to block it.

So, the Democrats have called for a vote on ending the emergency, to give Republican Senators and Congressmen the choice between either voting No and taking ownership of the financial chaos and economic damage, or voting Yes and going against God-Emperor Trump, knowing that they want neither of those options.

To get out of it, the Republican party have successfully passed a measure that redefines time itself. The law says that a vote must be held within 15 days, but a new law has come in that defines a "day", as it relates to the National Emergency Act, to be the period of the current Congress, ie. a calendar year.

To reiterate, Republican politicians have chosen to change the definition of what "a day" is, rather than go on the record as to whether they support Trump's tariffs or not. How does The Onion even survive when this is real life?

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Mar 12, 2025 10:45 am Comedy from Republicans in Congress:



Basically, Trump is allowed to impose and withdraw tariffs unilaterally because he declared a "National Emergency" on some bullshit grounds which gives him additional powers. Now, this is allowed by The National Emergencies Act, which also states that it can be ended with a simple majority vote in Congress and that anyone can call for this vote and then it must be voted on in 15 days, without anyone being able to block it.

So, the Democrats have called for a vote on ending the emergency, to give Republican Senators and Congressmen the choice between either voting No and taking ownership of the financial chaos and economic damage, or voting Yes and going against God-Emperor Trump, knowing that they want neither of those options.

To get out of it, the Republican party have successfully passed a measure that redefines time itself. The law says that a vote must be held within 15 days, but a new law has come in that defines a "day", as it relates to the National Emergency Act, to be the period of the current Congress, ie. a calendar year.

To reiterate, Republican politicians have chosen to change the definition of what "a day" is, rather than go on the record as to whether they support Trump's tariffs or not. How does The Onion even survive when this is real life?

Puja

This reminds me of the legislation that defined Rwanda as a safe country regardless of any facts whatsoever. I'm no lawyer but I feel there ought to be some meta-law or principal that prevents this kind of obviously mendacious legislation.

Similar-ish to the way the Supreme Court decided that they didn't need to follow precedent in Roe vs Wade. Or the way climate activists in the UK are not allowed to truthfully answer questions in court about their motivations. It ought to be against the law.

This must be reassuring. More 4D chess from Trump I supppose.