Bill Moyers says he fears for America for 'first time'

[Stevicus]

I did listen. He is strawmanning

I'm not clear on what you're referring to.

 

[Stevicus]

I voted other. There is a near zero chance that a major course change happens and the crisis resolves. But, that doesn't mean America is doomed; it, we, could come out stronger in the end.


People forgot that western liberalism is an unnatural state. Everyone wants liberty for themselves and what they want to do, but other people's liberty? That is scary, liberty for others is cruel, hateful, and dangerous. Our instincts fight against it.

I'm not sure what would constitute a "natural" vs. "unnatural" state in regards to human societies and the politics within them. My sense is that a lot of what might be natural in terms of early society would be those comprised of families, extended families, clans - where each member would have an interest in the well-being of those in their own tribe. They'd look after each other, take care of each other, while still allowing some measure of liberty.

I guess there's a question of whether such principles should be applied to the modern concept of the "nation-state," which itself might be considered "unnatural" compared to earlier periods in history.

Some Western liberals might still believe that society should still look after people and take care of them, as if we're all part of the same family or tribe.

 

[Shad]

I'm not clear on what you're referring to.

He is assuming Trump supporters do not listen to C-span

 

[shmogie]

'Gulag' -- 'a system of labor camps maintained in the Soviet Union from 1930 to 1955 in which many people died.'

The closest we have gotten so far is kids in cages, right? But this is America, not Russia, so it's not really exactly the same starting conditions.

Every situation is unique, different, right? Not a perfect parallel, but from the first attempts at power for extreme right in Germany in the early 1920s, it took until 1933 before they could overturn the democracy and replace it. So that was about a dozen years. This only illustrates how unpredictable a time frame is between the goal of a group and their possible achievement of their goal (or their removal). It could be faster, or slower.

Perhaps better than me for a close-up view of Trump would be to read in one of the books that have come out in the last couple of years with inside views.

KIds in cages, no, in facilities designed and built for children by the Obama administration.

A tyrant would have shut down the critical media, suspended the power of congress to investigate or impeach him, a tyrant would punish critics, like you.

Your comparison to 1930's Germany is interesting. Why did the Germans elect Hitler and support him in the first place ? Their economy was destroyed, their military was extremely limited both in numbers and in equipment it could use. The Germans felt that they had been treated extremely poorly after WW 1 at Versailles(sp?) and the treaty agreed to there.

Do any of these conditions exist in the USA? Is the country in such terrible shape that it would welcome one who promised to correct these problems ? No.

Trump will not, and cannot, become a dictator, or tyrant. The people will not stand for it, the military will not participate and it could not occur.

With respect, this is hyperbole on steroids is associated with Trump Derangement Syndrome.

There are Democrats who will believe it, and most Conservatives will not. It is based upon political beliefs and fantasies. It is not based in objective reality. It's just politics as practiced today.

 

[shmogie]

Eliminate RW fake news and the problem is solved. Those are the people in social media, TV, etc intentionally disinforming the Republic. All for some corporate freebies.

A typo here, you no doubt meant LW.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

We will never grow unless we address the growing poverty and wealth hoarding in this country, imo.

 

[halbhh]

A tyrant would have shut down the critical media

Actual physical control of non-favorable media/news would be impossible/unsustainable to try to do in the U.S., even in a "State of Emergency" I think.

I could be wrong. Maybe with a "State of Emergency" a tyrant could shut down American freedom of speech in the press/news for a time, a few weeks or even more?

So, a tyrant here in the U.S. would instead need to discredit the press generally, broadly.

Example: call most all of the press/media "Fake News" as a routine, programming wording.

Mind control is the method then for a modern tyrant, here in the U.S.

Here's the scary thing -- it can work, partly. Many are perfectly willing to have their information and thoughts controlled by a political leader.

 

[shmogie]

Actual physical control of non-favorable media/news would be impossible/unsustainable to try to do in the U.S., even in a "State of Emergency" I think.

I could be wrong. Maybe with a "State of Emergency" a tyrant could shut down American freedom of speech in the press/news for a time, a few weeks or even more?

So, a tyrant here in the U.S. would instead need to discredit the press generally, broadly.

Example: call most all of the press/media "Fake News" as a routine, programming wording.

Mind control is the method then for a modern tyrant, here in the U.S.

Here's the scary thing -- it can work, partly. Many are perfectly willing to have their information and thoughts controlled by a political leader.

The press has been ravaged in a much worse way in the 19th century, when there were fewer outlets, and no TV or radio, thus making the rancor much more concentrated, so again, this is not new.

FDR was worshiped as a god by many people. If he said it, they believed it. Criticism by the press or radio was practically non existent. They even conspired with the white house to perpetuate the myth to the people, no reporter would report that he was wheelchair bound, though they knew it.

Is that what you mean by mind control?