Politics 2020

[Geo]

I wonder whether he is planning on shutting down the postal service before the election.

Is that a Federal or State affair?

[Elok]

Very much federal; IIRC the Constitution expressly gives the feds authority over the post, but I could be wrong.

Incidentally, Justin Amash says he's going to try to be the Libertarian candidate this year.  After perusing his wiki entry, I'm inclined to vote for him even though I'm 99.5% confident he won't win.  Just to signal-boost.

[E_T]

Looks like a possible someone for the Libertarian Run.  He voted to Impeach [Sleezebag] as well. 
Justin Amash (/əˈmɑːʃ/; born April 18, 1980) is an American lawyer, activist and politician who has served as the U.S. Representative for Michigan's 3rd congressional district since 2011. Originally a member of the Republican Party, Amash became an independent in July 2019 before joining the Libertarian Party in April 2020.

[Lorizael]

Very much federal; IIRC the Constitution expressly gives the feds authority over the post, but I could be wrong.

Incidentally, Justin Amash says he's going to try to be the Libertarian candidate this year.  After perusing his wiki entry, I'm inclined to vote for him even though I'm 99.5% confident he won't win.  Just to signal-boost.

If polls indicate that Florida is in contention, would that change your voting strategy?

[Elok]

Honestly, it'd have to be hella close, and I'd have to be a good deal more impressed with Biden than I am so far.  It's fair to say that Biden is a better person than [Sleezebag], but so are most non-felons.  I don't know how this whole mad circus will unfold if he gets power, and it looks like I agree entirely with Amash on basically every policy I've seen listed.  Plus he's not senile.  Sometimes I disagree with the rationale for his positions--I always thought the case for Russiagate was silly on the merits, for example--but the end result is the same.  Yes, impeach him if you can.  Just for being [Sleezebag]!

I view [Sleezebag] as basically a prank caller in the oval office, little different than leaving it vacant.  He's never going to (himself) become a dictator.  Aside from the US not being in crummy enough shape for that, he hasn't got the brains or fortitude or anything else worth having.  This is a dismal holding pattern.  If Biden takes over, the ship of state will still be damn near rudderless.  I don't know how his more moderate wing of the party will interact with the impatient radicals.  He might get something done if they manage to get total control of congress.  But that something will probably not be productive or helpful, and [Sleezebag]'s base will be intransigent.  [Sleezebag]'s base is 40% of the country, and very good at being intransigent.  They'll be fighting mad, the hard left will be in a punitive mood, and frankly Biden isn't clever enough to actually solve problems like healthcare.  Obama couldn't solve healthcare, and he had brains and charisma, and was working in an era when the GOP nominated gentleman-plutocrats like Romney.  Biden will be an addled old man trying to navigate trench-knife politics.

I suppose the biggest risk I see here is that, if [Sleezebag] loses in '20, the GOP will have four years to find someone who can inherit his mantle.  This person will almost certainly have to channel the same frustrations as [Sleezebag] to have a chance--and do it convincingly--but will be extremely unlikely to have the character flaws that make [Sleezebag] so impotent.  You really have to work at being that worthless a human being.  So what happens if '24 rolls around and there's a competent Trumpist running against Uncle Joe, after four years of increasingly hot tensions?  It might be better to leave [Sleezebag] in to slowly exhaust Trumpism.  He's the devil we know.

I don't know how things would go with Biden in charge, of course.  He could surprise me.  All this is to say that, for me, the choice isn't all that clear-cut.

[Elok]

There's also the part where not all the horrible authoritarians are on [Sleezebag]'s side.  Not that Biden has come out in favor of Chinese-style censorship, but he doesn't have a history of good judgment where aggressive interventions are concerned, and there seems to be a worrisomely large amount of support on the Left for protecting the little people from unapproved opinions.

[Bearu]

There's also the part where not all the horrible authoritarians are on [Sleezebag]'s side.  Not that Biden has come out in favor of Chinese-style censorship, but he doesn't have a history of good judgment where aggressive interventions are concerned, and there seems to be a worrisomely large amount of support on the Left for protecting the little people from unapproved opinions.

I sense you possess a bias against authoritarianism.

Political candidates like Biden and [Sleezebag] in the effete American collegial system promote decadence and global capitalism, and, in short, lack the political will for radical changes. Failures from politicains like Biden and [Sleezebag] enabled the politics of transformation from the capitalist reformer Gorbachev, revolutionary vision of Mao, and the failures of an entrenched bureaucracy of the Soviet Union in the 1980s under Andropov and Chernenko depending on particular political  conditions.

I also believe many people in American society supportive of [Sleezebag] and Biden would benefit from the strong handed social and political guidance of an educated and effective group of leadership under people's democratic dictatorship and democratic centralism. Without the social rejuvenation from violence and the training of American children for war, the proletariat will suffer from [Sleezebag]'s and Biden's promotion of the social and economic decay in the Western culture of material desire. Materialist desires from advertising quickly mutates into a culture of greed.

[E_T]

* E_T groans

[Geo]

* E_T groans

[Bearu]

* E_T groans

I have over the last few years made a public speech in front of more than 50 people on the practicality of communist features in American society, the benefits of those features against the current American system, and held private discussions on the matter multiple times. You can laugh or groan about my positions, but I have influenced people with my rhetoric. I intend to influence more people.
People groan or laugh about my political position on a regular basis. Several people have praised me on the strength of my arguments, one sent me a death threat in person, and the majority grilled me on the details of my proposals. *shrugs*

[Elok]

Well, I'm not going to tell you not to write, but you may have to work at polishing your writing a great deal to get us to overlook all the corpses.  And torture chambers.  And show trials.  And famines.  And prison camps.

[Lorizael]

First rule of persuasive writing/speaking: know your audience. When the majority of your posts come across as keyword-triggered propaganda pamphlets, don't expect much from people engaged in actual conversations.

[Bearu]

Well, I'm not going to tell you not to write, but you may have to work at polishing your writing a great deal to get us to overlook all the corpses.  And torture chambers.  And show trials.  And famines.  And prison camps.

A leader does not need the mass support of the subjects because the majority of the people in the society need only fear the ruling group and not necessarily love the group. Good rulers need only the avoidance of hate from their subjects.
A Paraphrase from Niccolo Machiavelli's "The Qualities of a Prince" in The Prince

The ends justify the means.

I would normally avoid these admissions because I would want to elicit the audience's emotions of euphoria, indignation, or guilt.

I promote the abolition of modern prisons in the United States of America. The prison system remains racist and horrible at the reintegration of people. Socialist prisons promote rehabilitation instead of punishment through the application of thought reform on most dissenters. Thought reform continues today in China and China possesses a lower recidivism rate than the United States of America for inmates and more productive rates of employment after reintegration in Chinese society.

The Chinese Communist Party applies thought reform, aka reeducation or brainwashing, on the Chinese Muslims, Falun Gong, and Chinese Buddhists. I support the imprisonment of religious leaders for their hooliganism and the reeducation of religious followers because the majority of religious followers suffer from misguided sentiments on morality from ancient scriptures, more modern advertising, and superstitious attitudes instead of science and reason.

I could not care less about the application of torture on heinous prisoners as long the process produces useful reintegration. My studies for my History degree indicates torture remains useful for the elicitation of compliance and horrible for the extraction of accurate information.

[Buster's Uncle]

First rule of persuasive writing/speaking: know your audience. When the majority of your posts come across as keyword-triggered propaganda pamphlets, don't expect much from people engaged in actual conversations.

Furthermore, the lame book-communism has mutated from Marx -who had a couple of good points, for all of the colossal naivete on human nature making it unworkable- to Lenin, who ended up hopelessly and forever mired in Bossman thuggery difficult to distinguish from fascism.

-Even worse, it's boring to read.  And unlike Elok, I can and have told you to cool it with this crap.  When you participate in the on-topic areas, as you have of late, the management smiles; when you escalate with your repulsive advocation of religious repression and torture, the Management considers banning you from OT permanently.

[Elok]

I assume that means we should not engage, BU?