All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Séb]

To put it simply...finally.

[Joker]

More like too late.

Here's a question: Do you think, given Trump's presidency, that the office should require prior time spent serving in public office or should we continue to allow literally anyone born in the US to run?

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

Took twitter long enough, Facebook and instagram did it almost immediately after his awful initial response to what happened on the 6th.

[babyblob]

The fact that so many GOP lawmakers are tonight speaking so strongly against impeachment or the 25th being invoked should tell everyone just how real and how long their new reasonable stance in the wake of what happened has lasted.

[worstblogever]

Twitter has permanently suspended Trump’s account.



Better late than never, I guess...

[Joker]

The fact that so many GOP lawmakers are tonight speaking so strongly against impeachment or the 25th being invoked should tell everyone just how real and how long their new reasonable stance in the wake of what happened has lasted.

When have Republicans ever had a reasonable stance in the wake of anything major or horrific happening? Genuine question.

[master of read]

Twitter has permanently suspended Trump’s account.



Better late than never, I guess...

[babyblob]

When have Republicans ever had a reasonable stance in the wake of anything major or horrific happening? Genuine question.

Never. Which amazes me that so many people talked about how what happened left a bad feeling for many GOP members, and this time they would see reason and people like Cruz and Howley will go away. Yet now that they have a real chance to make a statement they are all going on about how Impeachment is going to far, it is dumb because there is not enough time left etc...

The New reasonable GOP. Born Jan 6 2021 Died Jan 8rth 2021

[DrNewGod]

Some of the participants in this seem to be veterans or ex-military, and the poor treatment of veterans and their concomitant political radicalization is a concerning thing. Babbitt is one of them.

Note I said some of them...not all of them. The terrorists seem to be a motley collection -- rich private-jet owning adventurers who think the proletariat travels first class, CEOs of small businesses, state-level lawmakers, and others. It's a real fringe collection of white extremists of all classes across a breath. Many of them were out of state (since DC is a predominantly blue city).

Of the lot, I wouldn't say Babbitt was the most deserving. She was a real soldier in that sense, cannon fodder for her cause.

There is a real problem in the US Services' ranks. Folks at The War College call it "Pretorianism."

It refers to the trend since the end of the draft for the services to be increasingly made up of children of service veterans, essentially, breeding a soldier caste. It's dangerous.

Another factor is that liberals are less likely to serve than conservatives. That contributes to an insular culture, boiling like a cauldron of narrow opinion.

Yes, the stresses soldiers have to endured these last near-20 years have contributed to real emotional struggles that too few are willing to address. Yes, soldiers (and I was one), are instruments of the mighty, rather than servants of the people they would like to - need to - believe themselves to be. Yes, liberals have a quite reasonable dislike for almost everything about the military, starting with its distain of intellectualism (outside a few corners) running through its propensity for homophobia.

All that said, the US needs more liberals enlisting in its services if it is to break Pretorianism.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

More like too late.

Trump was allowed by twitter because he brought them eyes, users, subscribers and made them valuable. Now he has outlived his usefulness.

Here's a question: Do you think, given Trump's presidency, that the office should require prior time spent serving in public office or should we continue to allow literally anyone born in the US to run?

I would say no. IF we want to Trump-proof the office of Presidency to make it immune from another candidate like him doing what he does, there are other things that can be implemented such as mandatory tax disclosures, encouraging a less die-hard partisan government so that he can be held accountable, i.e. strengthening the Inspectors General and so on. Impeachment should be made easier. And even that isn't a guarantee because I don't think you can completely Trump-Proof the system without compromising the fundamentals of democracy.

I don't think barring someone to run for Presidency unless they served public office is the right call. Internationally many great politicians never served public office until they came to power...Nelson Mandela for instance, in Indian history, their constitution and first ever congresses and Prime Ministers never had political office (owing to colonialism and all) until they came to power. What made Trump worse was Trump, not that he never held public office.

And the assumption is that we can't have Trump unless someone serves public office as if public service is some kind of vaccine against Trump-like tendencies ignores Nixon, ignores Reagan, or in places like Brazil, Bolsonaro who all violate, trample in norms, and deny reality just like Trump does.

[Mister Mets]

More like too late.

Here's a question: Do you think, given Trump's presidency, that the office should require prior time spent serving in public office or should we continue to allow literally anyone born in the US to run?

I don't think this would make a difference.

Someone who really wants to be President would be able to get elected to minor office to meet the standard.

Trump is quite different from previous Presidents, but it's also likely that the next terrible President will have a completely different resume.

If we look at other terrible world leaders, Bolsanaro of Brazil was a parliamentary backbencher, Rodrigo Duterte of the Phillipines spent decades as mayor, and every crappy Prime Minister has to be member of a legislature.

[DrNewGod]

Trump was allowed by twitter because he brought them eyes, users, subscribers and made them valuable. Now he has outlived his usefulness.



I would say no. IF we want to Trump-proof the office of Presidency to make it immune from another candidate like him doing what he does, there are other things that can be implemented such as mandatory tax disclosures, encouraging a less die-hard partisan government so that he can be held accountable, i.e. strengthening the Inspectors General and so on. Impeachment should be made easier. And even that isn't a guarantee because I don't think you can completely Trump-Proof the system without compromising the fundamentals of democracy.

I don't think barring someone to run for Presidency unless they served public office is the right call. Internationally many great politicians never served public office until they came to power...Nelson Mandela for instance, in Indian history, their constitution and first ever congresses and Prime Ministers never had political office (owing to colonialism and all) until they came to power. What made Trump worse was Trump, not that he never held public office.

And the assumption is that we can't have Trump unless someone serves public office as if public service is some kind of vaccine against Trump-like tendencies ignores Nixon, ignores Reagan, or in places like Brazil, Bolsonaro who all violate, trample in norms, and deny reality just like Trump does.

Jack is about as right as it can get. A couple of posts up, I wrote of Pretorianism: we sure as hell don't want that in our civilian government.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

There is a real problem in the US Services' ranks. Folks at The War College call it "Pretorianism."

It refers to the trend since the end of the draft for the services to be increasingly made up of children of service veterans, essentially, breeding a soldier caste. It's dangerous.

That's interesting and troubling.

Yes, the stresses soldiers have to endured these last near-20 years have contributed to real emotional struggles that too few are willing to address. Yes, soldiers (and I was one), are instruments of the mighty, rather than servants of the people they would like to - need to - believe themselves to be. Yes, liberals have a quite reasonable dislike for almost everything about the military, starting with its distain of intellectualism (outside a few corners) running through its propensity for homophobia.

All that said, the US needs more liberals enlisting in its services if it is to break Pretorianism.

I think there are other ways or other paths to consider. Bringing back the draft, or insisting on mandatory military service as in Israel doesn't mean you don't have political polarization anymore.

The presence of the military in American culture and society is definitely worth addressing. Obviously the idea of America as Republic and Empire at the same time, coupled with the military not having a consensual good war or consensually approved intervention since World War 2 is a cultural problem. The last big consensual moment for the military was Seal Team 6 whacking Bin Laden on Obama's command. People approved of that far more than Afghanistan and Iraq, or for that matter the whacking of Soleimani.

So the role of the military in American society and culture has changed. Americans don't like to see themselves as an Empire, and they like to think of themselves as good guys, whereas the job of the military is indeed to uphold the Empire abroad and spread American interests and uphold American values as the best.

[AnakinFlair]

Apple has threatened to pull Parler from the App Store unless they institute full moderation.

[Powerboy]

Heard it was not just Washington, DC. Similar attacks took place in several states with some warnings that it was just a practice run.

These people are the most moronic in our society except for some Republican officials riding it for votes but they have the advantage of being white so the police won't just open fire.