2020 Election Commentary

[GameDaddy]

What the fuck.

Wow. Just... wow. I cannot wait to see how the left tries to spin this. There is no sane, rational reason for us to use a goddamn election system with ties to fucking Venezuela of all places.

Stolen elections. That's what we get. Hope everyone bought enough ammo.

Not at all surprised. I find it quite ironic though, that a CIA funded company that was used to create a process to rig elections, was also the same company that designed the polling systems used by Dominion. There is something to this evidently. Sharks video from the other day of the affidavit from the poll worker specifically mentions she worked for Dominion and had received specific instructions to  boost the Democrat vote and supress the Republican vote. I'm going to look into this further.

Sharks Video from the other day featuring Melissa Carone, who filed an affidavit regarding rigged voting processes in Detroit
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/798796260

Rudy Guliani seems to be batting about a hundred in 2020. I was quite surprised to Independently and so easily verify that the Biden family has been paid off by the Red Chinese, in advance. His problem it would seem, is he keeps hitching himself to other totally dysfunctional and incompetent leaders that create far more problems than they solve.

[Elfdart]

What the fuck.

Wow. Just... wow. I cannot wait to see how the left tries to spin this. There is no sane, rational reason for us to use a goddamn election system with ties to fucking Venezuela of all places.

Stolen elections. That's what we get. Hope everyone bought enough ammo.

Where to begin? You cite The American Spectator, a publication best known for hiring cranks to spread rumors of the Clinton Body Count (which for some reason, never included the names of people the Clintons did kill off -like Iraqi children), and for using its status as a "charity" to fund the high-on-the-hog lifestyle of its editor-in-chief.

Using the proceeds from the sale of his house in Bloomington, The American Spectator Educational Foundation paid for a significant portion of the new house: about $200,000. The foundation also bought a big black Mercedes for Tyrrell's use; gave him a generous entertainment budget and paid for a membership in the Cosmos Club, on Embassy Row; and continued to pay for his trips to New York and London.

In any event, it's hard to take seriously an article that refers to the late Hugo Chavez as a "dictator" when he was legitimately elected and made it a point not to crush his enemies -even after they tried at least one putsch against him. But this is the crux of the matter: many right-wingers simply do not accept election results when they lose. When Bill Clinton was elected, the Looney Tunes right began forming militias, flying the flag upside down, and finally set off a bomb in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people. When Obama, like Clinton, won back-to-back landslides the nutty Right made up the racist lie that he wasn't really the President because he wasn't an American. And now a bunch of fuckwits who realize the end is near for their white supremacist game show-host demi-god, think buying weapons, starting brawls and crashing motor vehicles into pedestrians will salve the welts on their asses from the last election.

Here's a hint:

Hanns Johst, the Nazi playwright had the hero in his play Schlageter utter the infamous line: "When I hear the word 'culture' ..., I release the safety on my Browning!"

So if your candidate loses and your first instinct is to talk about getting a gun, then you are a fascist.

[Ghostmaker]

What the fuck.

Wow. Just... wow. I cannot wait to see how the left tries to spin this. There is no sane, rational reason for us to use a goddamn election system with ties to fucking Venezuela of all places.

Stolen elections. That's what we get. Hope everyone bought enough ammo.

Where to begin? You cite The American Spectator, a publication best known for hiring cranks to spread rumors of the Clinton Body Count (which for some reason, never included the names of people the Clintons did kill off -like Iraqi children), and for using its status as a "charity" to fund the high-on-the-hog lifestyle of its editor-in-chief.

Using the proceeds from the sale of his house in Bloomington, The American Spectator Educational Foundation paid for a significant portion of the new house: about $200,000. The foundation also bought a big black Mercedes for Tyrrell's use; gave him a generous entertainment budget and paid for a membership in the Cosmos Club, on Embassy Row; and continued to pay for his trips to New York and London.

In any event, it's hard to take seriously an article that refers to the late Hugo Chavez as a "dictator" when he was legitimately elected and made it a point not to crush his enemies -even after they tried at least one putsch against him. But this is the crux of the matter: many right-wingers simply do not accept election results when they lose. When Bill Clinton was elected, the Looney Tunes right began forming militias, flying the flag upside down, and finally set off a bomb in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people. When Obama, like Clinton, won back-to-back landslides the nutty Right made up the racist lie that he wasn't really the President because he wasn't an American. And now a bunch of fuckwits who realize the end is near for their white supremacist game show-host demi-god, think buying weapons, starting brawls and crashing motor vehicles into pedestrians will salve the welts on their asses from the last election.

Here's a hint:

Hanns Johst, the Nazi playwright had the hero in his play Schlageter utter the infamous line: "When I hear the word 'culture' ..., I release the safety on my Browning!"

So if your candidate loses and your first instinct is to talk about getting a gun, then you are a fascist.

Lulz. Well, you and yours have spent four years:

> calling anyone to the right of Stalin a 'fascist'
> referring to anyone who even vaguely supports Trump a 'fascist'
> when you're not calling them racists, bigots, misogynists, etc.

So I will take your disdain and wear it like a badge of honor, and dare you to do something about it, bitch. Because neither I, nor 70 million other 'fascists', aren't going away just because you say so.

[Pat]

In any event, it's hard to take seriously an article that refers to the late Hugo Chavez as a "dictator" when he was legitimately elected and made it a point not to crush his enemies -even after they tried at least one putsch against him.

That's not a very good argument. Hitler, of all people, rose to power in a legitimate election. Plenty of dictators use democratic means to acquire power; the defining characteristic is how they change rules or use extralegal means to ensure they stay in power. And Chavez not only changed the Constitution and packed the courts to maintain his hold, he even started his career as part of a failed military coup. Venezuela never became fully authoritarian under his rule, but it was on the border.

[GameDaddy]

In any event, it's hard to take seriously an article that refers to the late Hugo Chavez as a "dictator" when he was legitimately elected and made it a point not to crush his enemies -even after they tried at least one putsch against him. But this is the crux of the matter: many right-wingers simply do not accept election results when they lose. When Bill Clinton was elected, the Looney Tunes right began forming militias, flying the flag upside down, and finally set off a bomb in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people. When Obama, like Clinton, won back-to-back landslides the nutty Right made up the racist lie that he wasn't really the President because he wasn't an American. And now a bunch of fuckwits who realize the end is near for their white supremacist game show-host demi-god, think buying weapons, starting brawls and crashing motor vehicles into pedestrians will salve the welts on their asses from the last election.

Well, Nicholas Maduro is a Dictator, and one of the worst. Typical Old World 'Strongman". He was legitimately elected using voting machines designed by a CIA backed company to finagle the vote. And let's just take a close look at those national elections in Venezuela, shall we?

From a Quartz article from May 21st, 2018

To no one's surprise, incumbent Nicolás Maduro won Venezuela's presidential election yesterday. This gives him another six years in power, amid devastating hyperinflation, food and medicine shortages, charges of corruption, and an all-round broken economy. The election was the latest move by Maduro, 55, to consolidate power in the face of increasing opposition, which have included fatal protests. The country's main opposition coalition called for a boycott of the vote, suspecting that it would be manipulated. The effect of the boycott can be seen in turnout figures, which the electoral commission—staffed with Maduro loyalists—put at 46%.

Even if these numbers were inflated, as the opposition claims, it would be the lowest turnout for a presidential election going back to 1958, when a military dictatorship ended in Venezuela. Historically, Venezuelans have been enthusiastic voters. In the four presidential elections between 1958 and 1973, turnout exceed 90%. Since then, it's regularly been over 80%. It was 80% at the previous presidential election, in 2013, when Maduro succeeded Hugo Chávez in a close-run vote that he won by a margin of less than two percentage points. (Notice the razor thin margin for this election... What do you suppose are the actual odds that so many votes are this close?...)

Before the election, Colombian president Juan Manuel Santos said Colombians were being given Venezuelan IDs as part of a plan to transport them over the border to vote for Maduro. Santos said he wouldn't recognize the outcome of the election. The US is considering sanctions against Venezuela's oil sector, the nation's main source of income, even though its already reeling and output is falling.

Last year, Maduro held a controversial election to form a constituent assembly, stacked with allies, that was charged with rewriting Venezuela's constitution and, in practice, overriding the opposition-led National Assembly. Ahead of this latest presidential election, key opposition leaders were barred, in exile, or under house arrest. Last night, a triumphant Maduro happily told a crowd that "the revolution is here to stay!"

Whenever your President has barred members of the opposition from having an opportunity to be elected, forced them into exile (...becuase they are afraid of being assassinated), or otherwise placed them under house arrest  you can be 100% certain said President is a De Facto Banana Republic Dictator. Nicholas Maduro made his business fortune from Drug Trafficking, and there is an oustanding arrest warrant for him, and fifteen million dollar bounty for his capture on his head.

From a Bloomberg Article from march 26th;
The U.S. indicted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro for drug trafficking on Thursday, offering a $15 million reward for information leading to his arrest, as the Trump administration ramps up pressure on an adversary it has sought to push aside. The U.S. also indicted 14 key Maduro associates, including former Vice President Diosdado Cabello, offering $10 million for information leading to their arrests. Charges were filed against the country's defense minister, chief justice, and superintendent of cryptocurrency.

"The Maduro regime is awash in corruption and criminality," Attorney General William Barr said at a news conference in Washington, held remotely because of the coronavirus. "While the Venezuelan people suffer, this cabal lines their pockets with drug money and the proceeds of corruption."

The charges allege a conspiracy involving the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, a terrorist group that Barr said was determined to "flood the U.S. with cocaine." He said that Maduro's regime gives the FARC, as the group is known, authority to fly drug-filled planes over Venezuelan airspace and safely manufacture cocaine on its territory.

Some $2 billion worth of cocaine, about a quarter of what was produced in Colombia last year, passed through Venezuela before making its way to other countries, according to Jeremy McDermott, co-founder of Insight Crime, a research group that studies organized crime. He called it a fairly typical year for the traffic.

There is your hero, Elfdart, right there.

From ABC news back in September

GENEVA -- Independent experts for the U.N.'s top human rights body accused the government of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on Wednesday of crimes against humanity, highlighting grisly cases of torture and killings allegedly carried out by security forces who used techniques like electric shocks, genital mutilation and asphyxiation.

In a scathing, in-depth report commissioned by theHuman Rights Council, the experts said the people responsible for extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, arbitrary detentions and other crimes must be held to account to provide justice for untold thousands of victims and to ensure such crimes don't happen again.

The findings of the report are likely to ratchet up pressure on Maduro's government, which has overseen a country in tatters with runaway inflation, a violent crackdown and an exodus of millions of Venezuelans who have fled to neighboring countries to escape the turmoil since he took power in 2013.

Venezuelan Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza lashed out saying the report written by an alleged fact-finding mission was actually led by a group of nations set on attacking Venezuela.

"This report plagued by falsehoods was drawn up from afar without relying on rigorous methodology by a phantom mission directed against Venezuela by governments subordinate to Washington," Arreaza said on Twitter.

The experts say they delved into nearly 3,000 cases, looked at more than 5,000 killings and concluded that Maduro and his defense and interior ministers were aware of the crimes committed by Venezuelan security forces and intelligence agencies.

They further alleged that high-level authorities had both power and oversight over the forces and agencies, making the top officials responsible. Venezuelan authorities were not immediately available for comment.
 
In the last Venezuela election, the opposition Boycotted the election. Only 46% of the eligible voters showed up to vote. I wonder how many of them showed up because they were afraid not to.

[Ghostmaker]

That's not a very good argument. Hitler, of all people, rose to power in a legitimate election. Plenty of dictators use democratic means to acquire power; the defining characteristic is how they change rules or use extralegal means to ensure they stay in power. And Chavez not only changed the Constitution and packed the courts to maintain his hold, he even started his career as part of a failed military coup. Venezuela never became fully authoritarian under his rule, but it was on the border.

Point well made, Pat, but I have to wonder what would actually constitute 'authoritarian' rule in your opinion then. Because it sure wasn't like Chavez was sharing power with anyone outside his little coterie.

[Pat]

Point well made, Pat, but I have to wonder what would actually constitute 'authoritarian' rule in your opinion then. Because it sure wasn't like Chavez was sharing power with anyone outside his little coterie.

Chavez was a populist, who retained wide support because of his charisma and public works. So while he did increase his power, suppressed the judiciary, censored his opponents, restricted human rights, and effectively made himself president for life (bye bye term limits), he never had to blatantly seize power to the same degree as less popular leaders (like his successor, Maduro), so elections were fair (he accepted at least one major loss). Human Rights Watch and Freedom House documented this quite well.

[Mercurius]

Nice little narrative there, but...is your implication that Righties have better respect for Reason? Certainly, many libertarians tend to fetishize Reason, but most on the Right aren't really libertarian, at least ideologically.

You must have missed the closer of my follow up post responding to the last question I received about the post you quoted.

The quoted post is the philosophical underpinnings of broad movements. Specific attitudes of right vs left are discussed about two posts above yours.  From a purely analytical position, I make no moral judgement about the correctness of the Counter Enlightenment movement, all the way up to Postmodernism. I disagree with them, fundamentally, and see myself as more in the Enlightenment 'branch' of modern philosophy, if you will, but I accept, among other things, that Kant's Critique of Pure Reason makes a valid argument, though I would suggest that Descartes's Demon makes an interesting counter-argument, though I don't believe it was intended as such.   

So when you ask if "The Right" has a better respect for Reason, not only are you asking about the wrong side of the political divide (you should be asking the obverse question: Do I believe the Left doesn't respect Reason?), to answer it I have to ask: Do You mean the European Traditionalist Right, the American Individualist Right, or the Counter-Enlightenment Nationalist Socialist Right?

In general I believe most people don't actually concern themselves with the foundations and intellectual underpinnings of their political beliefs, and left to their own devices most people default to 'magical thinking' over rational or, alternatively, counter-Enlightenment Irrationalist Thinking, so asking about 'most people' is a fools errand' by any metric.


Of course, we can also make the argument that none of this is particularly new.  Nietzche is rehashing the tired old arguments of Heracletius (I think... this was someone elses thesis, and I might have forgotten which discredited ancient greek philosopher they tied him too...), the Post-moderists are largely relying on argument techniques demonstrated by teh Sophists back in the day. Revolutionary movements (such as Socialism) have always bowlderized language until they are in power, or alternatively destroyed by those in power, at which point the near first order of business is always to re-assert the propriety of language, as documented by Thucydides.

We've been here before, and no matter what happens between now and January 20, and beyond, we will be here again. The big question is just how bloody it will get in the meantime.  I, for one, hope that our inevitable dark age... call it the Atomic Age Collapse... doesn't happen during my lifetime.  I'd like to think we have a few more centuries, but if I could tell the future I wouldn't be posting here, I'd be playing the lotto and living it up on some tropical beach with dancing girls.

Thanks for bringing philosophical depth to the conversation - as well as tinges of humor interspersed throughout.

I think my main objection to your narrative is that it seems too dualistic, too simplistic. This is not to say that I think you are simplistic--clearly, you are not--but that there are many other factors involved, many roots that have grown the tree that we currently experience (or streams that feed the river), and you're singling out a specific root or stream (whichever metaphor you prefer), which leads to ignoring other roots and streams.

For instance, a major aspect of American politics centers around the question of American empire and the nature and use of power, and how that is spun. Some feel that America should be the dominant force in global politics, and should wield their military might to keep the order (while also protecting corporate interests), while others feel that we shouldn't be as involved in other nations and be more focused on domestic concerns and/or peace efforts globally. This isn't a right-left split, as progressives and libertarians come close to agreement on the latter, and are in opposition to the establishment narrative, whether left-leaning or right-leaning.

There's also the nature of identity - are we first and foremost Americans, or are we members of a global community? Are we defined by our nation (or our gender, sexuality, ethnicity, etc), or are we individuals? And as individuals, does our sphere of concern extend beyond ourselves and to what degree? Does it only extend to our ethnicity, our sub-culture, our political party, our nation, or the world?

Another relevant stream is the twin ideals of liberty and equality, and how that has played out in American history. In a very crude way, conservatism focused more on liberty, leftism more on equality. The American experiment has a lot to do with this dialectic, but unfortunately we end up with a clash between the two, rather than an integration, finding a synthesis (to touch upon Hegel). So we find ourselves in a situation where many feel that the two are opposed, and it becomes exacerbated by dualistic thinking on both sides. People on the right say, "individual responsibility - and if you can't hack it in our system, it's your fault." People on the left say, "it is the system that oppresses and is not your fault." So we're left with two very partial, damaging, and ultimately erroneous underlying assumptions.

There's also the question of priorities: where we, as a culture, put our priorities, and how we view "the good life." The left, or at least elements of the left, is basically an objection to the idea that our priorities are focused on economics, on personal gain, on the profit motive - and yes, on individual wealth accumulation, at least when it is at the expense of others (e.g. Jeff Bezos' 200 billion, while his employees work in an untenable environment, with poor pay and benefits). Progressive platforms such as the Green New Deal, UBI, MfA, etc, aren't intended as means to control individual liberty, but increasing quality of life - so that more people (equality) can live "the good life." And perhaps more importantly, that the "good life" should not be defined by finances, but by health, happiness, human relationships, creative fulfillment, etc.

I agree regarding magical thinking, and connected to that, most people vote more affectively - who they like, connect with, feel like is "one of them." Most people also vote for self-interest.

[Mercurius]

Lulz. Well, you and yours have spent four years:

> calling anyone to the right of Stalin a 'fascist'
> referring to anyone who even vaguely supports Trump a 'fascist'
> when you're not calling them racists, bigots, misogynists, etc.

So I will take your disdain and wear it like a badge of honor, and dare you to do something about it, bitch. Because neither I, nor 70 million other 'fascists', aren't going away just because you say so.

I wish people would stop painting with such a broad brush. All you're really doing here is creating a caricature of everyone to the left of you, as if they (we) are all Marxists, all hate conservatives, all think the same. In other words, you're being an instant of your own complaint.

Certainly, this type of viewpoint exists and is promulgated by much of the media, as well as in sub-cultural pockets like TBP, but it isn't shared by all.

So if you want people to stop calling you a fascist, maybe do the same.

[Ghostmaker]

I wish people would stop painting with such a broad brush. All you're really doing here is creating a caricature of everyone to the left of you, as if they (we) are all Marxists, all hate conservatives, all think the same. In other words, you're being an instant of your own complaint.

Certainly, this type of viewpoint exists and is promulgated by much of the media, as well as in sub-cultural pockets like TBP, but it isn't shared by all.

So if you want people to stop calling you a fascist, maybe do the same.

Awww, did someone's precious fee-fees get hurt? Get fucked, buddy. This is the future you chose.

Nice gaslighting attempt though. What's your encore gonna be?

[Mercurius]

What the fuck.

Wow. Just... wow. I cannot wait to see how the left tries to spin this. There is no sane, rational reason for us to use a goddamn election system with ties to fucking Venezuela of all places.

Stolen elections. That's what we get. Hope everyone bought enough ammo.

Well if Rudy says it, it must be true!

Anyhow, who do you think is coming to get you in a Biden presidency? And how does a Biden presidency help the defunct administration of a dead Venezuelan politician?

[Pat]

I wish people would stop painting with such a broad brush. All you're really doing here is creating a caricature of everyone to the left of you, as if they (we) are all Marxists, all hate conservatives, all think the same. In other words, you're being an instant of your own complaint.

Agreed. Though it applies to both sides. I wish people would go back to addressing what someone says, instead of using their comments as a launchpad to make an attack an some abstract Other that only really exists in their head.

[Mercurius]

I wish people would stop painting with such a broad brush. All you're really doing here is creating a caricature of everyone to the left of you, as if they (we) are all Marxists, all hate conservatives, all think the same. In other words, you're being an instant of your own complaint.

Certainly, this type of viewpoint exists and is promulgated by much of the media, as well as in sub-cultural pockets like TBP, but it isn't shared by all.

So if you want people to stop calling you a fascist, maybe do the same.

Awww, did someone's precious fee-fees get hurt? Get fucked, buddy. This is the future you chose.

Nice gaslighting attempt though. What's your encore gonna be?

Master of Projection! My feelings aren't hurt - sorry, but your opinion doesn't really hold any weight to me.

But please address what I said. You're whining about something you're actually doing. That isn't gaslighting - it is pointing out your hypocrisy and projection.

[Mercurius]

I wish people would stop painting with such a broad brush. All you're really doing here is creating a caricature of everyone to the left of you, as if they (we) are all Marxists, all hate conservatives, all think the same. In other words, you're being an instant of your own complaint.

Agreed. Though it applies to both sides. I wish people would go back to addressing what someone says, instead of using their comments as a launchpad to make an attack an some abstract Other that only really exists in their head.

Agreed.

[GameDaddy]

Well if Rudy says it, it must be true!

Anyhow, who do you think is coming to get you in a Biden presidency? And how does a Biden presidency help the defunct administration of a dead Venezuelan politician?

As your friend Nikolai Lenin, ...you know it is not patriotic to ask that question of me, comrade.