'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrity

[JohnD]

There has been much coverage in the media for the past 12 months about the need for some change, added to this people can see from what is happening that the way things are done is about to change they just don't know how that change will manifest. This affects people from all beliefs and political leanings. The right, even the far right, isn't as unilateral as you may believe. The establishment knows and understands that change is to happen, what they're wanting is to control the change as they have always done. The disparate charge for profit is a sure sign of acceptance that there is change happening with the uncertainty of what direction it is heading. For certain the establishment had wanted, and to some extent still wants, everything to be the same as it once was, however, for those wishing to take advantage of changing times, change is important. Those on the streets are the foot soldiers, they're stuck in a time that never was. They will always be where they are, waiting for someone to give them back what they believe they once had.

[Serpent]

There has been much coverage in the media

Which media? That makes a whole world of difference.

for the past 12 months about the need for some change, added to this people can see from what is happening that the way things are done is about to change they just don't know how that change will manifest.

That's not the Trump brigades.
The changes that must take place are precisely to those institutions and traditions which sustain the right-wing policy-makers: penal reform, police restructuring, health care, housing, public safety, racial parity....

This affects people from all beliefs and political leanings.

Affects, yes, but not in the same way, and it's most emphatically not presented in the same way to all political leanings.

The right, even the far right, isn't as unilateral as you may believe.

Do I think that? Have I not mentioned several different factions on the right fringe, uniting temporarily on a few key issues? I'm aware of more and larger conservative blocs: the fundamentalists, big business, the political dynasties, imperialists, Cuban expatriates....

The establishment knows and understands that change is to happen, what they're wanting is to control the change as they have always done.

Of whom does this establishment consist?

The disparate charge for profit is a sure sign of acceptance that there is change happening with the uncertainty of what direction it is heading.

Otherwise known as a feeding frenzy. There is a shiver of money-changers intent on acquiring all the wealth before the collapse.

For certain the establishment had wanted, and to some extent still wants, everything to be the same as it once was, however, for those wishing to take advantage of changing times, change is important.

OK. What change do they want in governance?

[charon]

Sort of. A group of respected psychiatrists/psychologists got together and examined footage, noting changes in his speech patterns and ideation over the past several decades and finding strong indicators of cognitive decline. And I would agree with them that it appears to accelerate in the past few years.

I've seen this kind of thing. Of course, nobody'll do anything about it unless he goes seriously bananas.

https://tinyurl.com/y4dzvoh6

[JohnD]

Serpent, the right or the left doesn't matter to the establishment, it isn't so much who is in power. It's about the control. Change is required by the general public, which makes it dangerous for large investors. While there is control then investing is much easier but with disarray comes panic. In the market, this means large changes that affect Industry. Trump offered a 'free' market for them so they supported him for a while however, he's too erratic. They changed to Biden because he presents a more stable older style government. I haven't studied the American establishment but I can tell you a little about their Australian counterparts.
In Australia, the banks and insurance companies form the greater part of the establishment. At times they are highly corrupt but no one can ever prosecute them. In the 80's the then Prime Minister Bob Hawke's first action was to hold a seminar with the banks to get them onside. In more recent times, there was an inquiry into corrupt practices of banks and insurance companies and although there were faults found there were no prosecutions and there never will be.

[Serpent]

Got it!
You should read this: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/722086.Flying_Dutch but you probably won't.
I always give very good book recommendations and nobody ever heeds them.

[JohnD]

Sorry, book isn't available at local library.

[Serpent]

Pity. You're doomed never to understand the Wall Street Casino.

[charon]

English pubs have that effect.

[JohnD]

Currently watching a documentary on the suppression of voters during the election and the senate runoff. It seems the Civil War isn't over not just for some extreme groups but the judiciary and state governments. One of the members of the extremist groups has just stated the group is preparing for a new civil war sometime in the near future.

[Serpent]

Of course the civil war never ended! The entire reconstruction was a sham; Jim Crow was allowed to reign unchecked for a century; education has lagged and dragged behind militarism; the lapse of anti-trust regulation has allowed a propagandist communication network to dominate the south and mid-west; economic and legal disparity has made it easy for political opportunists to exploit the insecurity of the lowest classes. Americans have long considered the Civil War (and the antebellum south) the romantic high-point of their history, and kept it alive in song, cinema, art, literature, memorabilia, re-enactment games and all those damned public statues.

I hope you're noting who has suppressed which voters, for how long, by what methods and how systematically. Form an accurate picture of the actual number of Republican Faithful (who would vote R, even if the candidate were a two-headed warthog) vs the number that votes Democrat, sane Republican, independent or nothing, because they're not allowed to, afraid to, or fed up with the whole charade. Keeping in mind that many of the Republican Faithful are elderly church-ladies, that will give you an idea of how big the Rebel Army is likely to be.
You've seen how disciplined and organized it is.
What d'you give for its odds of winning?

[JohnD]

The chances of them winning are great. In order to defeat them, you need to rout them out of their hiding places in the Supreme court as well as the judiciary and be able to bring about charges of sedition against them.
It seems that our good friends the Americans are still living in the 1800s with the most modern technology. That's an extremely dangerous situation. The most troublesome outcome for the world is the splitting up of the union.
Yes, we have our own problems here in Australia with racism and a fascist government that ignores human rights but not to the extent of the US.

[Serpent]

The chances of them winning are great. In order to defeat them, you need to rout them out of their hiding places in the Supreme court as well as the judiciary and be able to bring about charges of sedition against them.
It seems that our good friends the Americans are still living in the 1800s with the most modern technology. That's an extremely dangerous situation. The most troublesome outcome for the world is the splitting up of the union.
Yes, we have our own problems here in Australia with racism and a fascist government that ignores human rights but not to the extent of the US.

I can't see how you envision a civil war - I can't see the composition or leadership of the sides, or where the border would be in case of a split.

[JohnD]

As you said Serpent the war never actually ended, the combatants just moved it to a new level. That new level is where the fight is now.
This isn't about how I would envision a civil war, the statement was made by a leader of one of the groups, a person they call 'the general'. Personally, I would hope that people that belong to such groups have enough sense to walk away and let it all fizzle out. At present tensions appear very high and this may be because of Trump. I hope so.
Where the borders would be is a terrifying proposition. The coasts are mostly not a problem, however, the middle is contentious. The terrifying part is where all the nukes are located. I think come the time it would be a matter of how fast the protagonists can move and what territories they are able to claim. It must be remembered they have had a hundred years to not only consolidate their stronghold states but to influence neighboring states. Certainly, the politics is moving towards a distinctive difference between the unionists and the southerners (to quote 1800s paraphrasing).

[Serpent]

As you said Serpent the war never actually ended,

In the minds of the people. Technically, it was not a civil war at all; it was a war of independence, like the American revolution. Today's war, if it came to pass, would be more like the Russian revolution.

You could probably line up the Confederate and Unionist adherents on two sides of an imaginary line - but geographically, that line no longer exists. For example, in the actual war, Georgia was solidly stacked behind Gen. Johnston. Illinois was an invaluable source of supplies and men for Gen. Grant. Now, they wouldn't be so easy to classify: https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/results/state/georgia

the combatants just moved it to a new level.

What level? Aerial warfare? The Confederate air force would bomb Southern cities and the Union air force would strafe the midwestern countryside? Hurl missiles between Florida and Washington?
Civil war is all on one level: the combatants are the people themselves.

That new level is where the fight is now.

Yes - that's the bit I can't picture. Where? How are they to fight? Who is to shoot at whom, if they're all in hiding?

This isn't about how I would envision a civil war, the statement was made by a leader of one of the groups, a person they call 'the general'.

The lunatic yahoo.... or one of the Supreme Court Justices?
And this is definitely by you:

The chances of them winning are great.

It must be remembered they have had a hundred years to not only consolidate their stronghold states

The exact opposite has happened. What would have been staunch confederate states are now split in half on political affiliation. Moreover, a very substantial Black population in the South has recently found its voice, its will, its representatives and its power - those people are not going to lie down again. The Hispanic populations are still in flux - in a process of development - regarding American political alignments, but even the Cuban expatriate bloc in Florida is dying off - expect change.

Look at the maps I linked above. Here are two more presumed confederate states: https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/results/state/north-carolina https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/texas/ The concentration of resources, wealth and population is in the blue parts.

No, the past made the present mess and supplied the rhetoric and imagery - but it tells us very little about the future.

[JohnD]

There's more than one kind of war. The war on the streets with guns and people dying is one but not the only. Another is winning the hearts and minds of the people, propaganda. But the one that matters most and can be fought before or after any of the others involves the running of the country. The lawmakers, judiciary, police, and yes armed forces. The latter is the one I talk about, and mostly they have won, or at least they're on their way to winning. Of course, you can't convince everyone to follow you, that's what the hearts and minds campaign is about however in the meantime they have been making sure that the law favors them and subjugates those they feel have hurt them the most.
The hard work, the effort that has been used to shape the legal system isn't about any one person or president. This is a concerted effort to make sure that while the unionists may celebrate their win in the civil war the laws and the lawmakers are theirs. That's as good as having won the war. As has been said here before to change some of those laws is going to require enormous effort and will.
Sure, Trump didn't make it past the last election but the damage he left behind, some of the acts that were passed along with the judiciary that has been appointed... it is going to be difficult to topple it all. Biden is doing his best but even for him, the superman he is showing himself to be, some things cannot be undone.
When I say it will be a long time before the people of the US know true democracy... have a look around you, do you really want to call what you have democracy? When a small group of people can get together and if it is their will can decide the next president regardless of the will of the people? It's a long road ahead.
I believe in the will and tenacity of the American people and goodness knows the way things are happening way over here in Australia we want the Americans on our side.

[Serpent]

There's more than one kind of war.

Not for the yahoos who swarmed over the capitol! These are not nuanced thinkers.

But the one that matters most and can be fought before or after any of the others involves the running of the country.

That's politics as usual - always, everywhere.

Sure, Trump didn't make it past the last election but the damage he left behind, some of the acts that were passed along with the judiciary that has been appointed... it is going to be difficult to topple it all.

Not topple. Erode. That's how the ebb and flow of governance works.

When I say it will be a long time before the people of the US know true democracy... have a look around you, do you really want to call what you have democracy?

I never once claimed anything of the kind. True democracy may have been practiced at some times, in some parts of the world, in some parts of the US - it's hard to tell. Most places, most of the time, it's an approximation of democracy we strive to achieve or thwart or redirect.

When a small group of people can get together and if it is their will can decide the next president regardless of the will of the people?

Who do you think decided the first president? In hard cold reality, all control is in the hands of a small elite of some kind. The people are, variously, a loose collection of interest bloc, a rabble, hungry sheep looking up, a polity, a resource, an abstract ideal.... Societies more or less work, because humans are social and interdependent: some degree of co-opertion is necessary to survival.

It's a long road ahead.

We can but hope.
I foresee more conflict, acts of terrorism (nothing new there!) acts of reconciliation, legislation and resistance - but not civil war.

I believe in the will and tenacity of the American people

Good ones, tenacious ones, bad ones, lazy ones, smart ones, generous ones, stupid ones, crazy ones.... Americans are wonderfully representative of all the people in the world.

[Mossling]

He's saying 'peacefully and patriotically' and they say he was encouraging lawless action resulting in violence and loss of life. I'm saying there's a disconnect there, that's all.

That aspect irritated me also - it's like he was already tried and convicted in the 'court of journalism,' by impassioned 'journalists.'

Unfortunately I believe the word passion to be rooted in the concept of 'passivity to one's animal impulses,' and it seems they just couldn't summon the rational spirit to not try to go for the jugular with their framing there.

[Mossling]

Latest in the Socrates Vs The Sophists post-Truth Drumpfian debacle:

The Socratics say:

Because at Charlottesville, for example:

But the Sophists say:

Socratic response:

So this is 1-0 to the Socratics at this point in the fray, but who knows how impassioned the weaker members of the 'academy' might become, and what grey areas they might try to pass off as black - in other words, succumb to the Sophists' own disease.

A nice point that a Socratic pointed out on that same Twitter thread was how QAnon see non-coincidence in much, much less, but decry this considerable overlap in imagery and political sympathies as yet another "nothing burger"....

You can't have it both ways. Still, that doesn't matter, because for the Sophists, logic is an ass to be kicked, remember - as Zeno of Elea pointed out - Achilles can never actually pass the turtle if the distance between them can always be cut in half - there's always that extra half left to run.

No wonder Socrates retreated into his inner deity, lol!

[Mossling]

'Oh what a tangled web we weave/When first we practice to deceive'

The sophistry engines on full tilt here:

Pro-Trump lawyer says ‘no reasonable person’ would believe her election lies
The Guardian, 23 Mar 2021

Powell faced the cameras and claimed to have identified “massive influence of communist money through Venezuela, Cuba and likely China in the interference with our elections here in the United States”.

Aides reportedly told Trump that Powell was not helping, and Giuliani and Ellis issued a subsequent statement announcing, “Sidney Powell is practicing law on her own. She is not a member of the Trump legal team. She is also not a lawyer for the president in his personal capacity.”

But that did not prevent Powell from filing lawsuits the next week on Trump’s behalf in Georgia, Michigan, Arizona and Wisconsin.

In her defense against the Dominion defamation lawsuit, Powell argued that whatever “reasonable persons” thought of her wild claims, Dominion had failed to demonstrate that she herself thought them to be false as she spoke them – a key distinction in defamation cases.

“In fact,” Powell’s motion reads, “she believed the allegations then and she believes them now.”

Dizzying - as was the plan all along, most likely.