US Erection 12 *AND* 16 *AND* 20 *AND* 22 *AND* 24 *AND* Beyond

[Per]

It would definitely increase the chances of a Canadian team winning Stanley Cup!

Should California, Oregon and Washington join Canada?
#Calexit talk envelops West Coast

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-new ... e_left_1.1

[Cornuck]

[Per]

(has Russia gone from spreading communist propaganda to spreading "right-wing" propaganda lofl)

We've talked about this. Communism and fascism are basically the same, just using different catch phrases. The one thing they both loathe is liberalism. Liberalism is all about the individual, and in fascism/communism the individual is completely insignificant; all power lies with the government, and the rest should just shut up and obey. I'd say Putin is more of a fascist, talking more about god and nation than the working class, but the modum operandum is still the same as he learnt at the KGB.

... how do you explain the fact your stupid fucking polls predicted a landslide win for Hillary?

There are many possible explanations:
a) Poor stratification by the pollers. There was a huge difference between metropolitan and rural areas. If they had not taken this into account, their results could get way off.
b) Focusing on the total rather than state by state. Hillary won the popular vote by a landslide, as expected, but she won big in the states she won and lost the swing states more narrowly.
c) That the FBI director would intervene in the election just one week before election day was quite unexpected and may have caused voters to change their mind, or just refrain from voting, in the last minute.
d) Trump voters may just be less likely to answer polls.
e) The election could be rigged. When eg the UN monitors election in third world countries, one of the indications of voter fraud is when the official result is clearly different from what the polls show. In Winsconsin Clinton got 7% more votes in districts using paper ballots than in districts using voting machines. Could the machines have been hacked? Or were they mainly used in rural districts?

[Topper]

Similar to all the polls predicting a landslide for Adrian Dix.

Shitty methodology.

[Mickey107]

Per, I think maybe you idolize Gene Roddenberry. Gotta be it.

[Per]

Per, I think maybe you idolize Gene Roddenberry. Gotta be it.

Huh?

But that reminds me.... whatever happened to Spock?

[Strangelove]

(has Russia gone from spreading communist propaganda to spreading "right-wing" propaganda lofl)

We've talked about this. Communism and fascism are basically the same, just using different catch phrases.

So Hitler was a Commie.

You should write a book.

Spreading communist propaganda is the same thing as spreading "right-wing" propaganda!

Per, speaking of “fake news”

... how do you explain the fact your stupid fucking polls predicted a landslide win for Hillary?

There are many possible explanations:
a) Poor stratification by the pollers. There was a huge difference between metropolitan and rural areas. If they had not taken this into account, their results could get way off.
b) Focusing on the total rather than state by state. Hillary won the popular vote by a landslide, as expected, but she won big in the states she won and lost the swing states more narrowly.
c) That the FBI director would intervene in the election just one week before election day was quite unexpected and may have caused voters to change their mind, or just refrain from voting, in the last minute.
d) Trump voters may just be less likely to answer polls.
e) The election could be rigged. When eg the UN monitors election in third world countries, one of the indications of voter fraud is when the official result is clearly different from what the polls show. In Winsconsin Clinton got 7% more votes in districts using paper ballots than in districts using voting machines. Could the machines have been hacked? Or were they mainly used in rural districts?

Yeahno, those polls were “fake news”.

[Per]

So Hitler was a Commie.

No, not really. But Mussolini was. Originally.
Then he created fascism, using much of the communist playbook.
Then Hitler, Franco and Perón were influenced by Mussolini. Well, and in Hitler's case Henry Ford as well.
Then Castro stole a page or two from Perón.

You yourself have been talking about the socialism part of national socialism.

Fascism/nazism/communism. It's the same totalitarianist BS, but with different toppings.
They all rail on about the liberal elite and that democracy doesn't work. It's just for show.
But here is this great demagogue who is going to set everything right. Yada yada yada.
We just need to get rid of the Jews/niggers/Muslims/immigrants/capitalists/bankers/nobility (or whatever external group might seem apt at the moment), because they are conspiring against us! It's all their fault. It's a global conspiracy! And the media lies about it!
But our great leader will do away with all these lies and lead us to the promised land. Yada yada yada.

Spreading communist propaganda is the same thing as spreading "right-wing" propaganda!

Basically yes. It is all about desinformation and spreading confusion and doubt.
You just use different catch phrases. Commies talk about the proletariat, the working class, the class struggle.
Fascists talk about nation, god, family. But underneath that varnish, the main structures are shockingly similar.

Oh, but let's not confuse right wing and "right-wing".
Conservatism is a whole different baby. But the alt-right crap is basically fascism with a new coat of paint.

[Strangelove]

So Hitler was a Commie.

No, not really. But Mussolini was. Originally.
Then he created fascism, using much of the communist playbook.
Then Hitler, Franco and Perón were influenced by Mussolini. Well, and in Hitler's case Henry Ford as well.
Then Castro stole a page or two from Perón.

You yourself have been talking about the socialism part of national socialism.

Yes, in fact twas I who brought the debate to our forum (at Central).

The argument that Hitler and Mussolini started out running with a slightly altered communist playbook.

Twas in 2008 I brought said argument, after just having read "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg.

I argued long and hard on that one!!

Glad to see that eventually some of the seeds sown took root!

Spreading communist propaganda is the same thing as spreading "right-wing" propaganda!

Basically yes. It is all about desinformation and spreading confusion and doubt.

Yeahno, we're talking about pushing a more-towards-the-centre democracy in one of two directions.

(with propaganda)

Towards the left... or towards the right.

Two different directions, so back to my original question:

Russia once spread communist propaganda and is now spreading "right-wing" propaganda?

Russia once pushed to the left and now pushes to the right?

Perhaps some other time we can talk about how similar the two extremes may actually be.

But for now I'd like to address this Evil Russia Conspiracy Theory of yours.

(because I think you may be losing your mind good buddy)

Oh, but let's not confuse right wing and "right-wing".
Conservatism is a whole different baby. But the alt-right crap is basically fascism with a new coat of paint.

Speaking of a tough animal to nail down, oh yes do tell us all about this "Alt-right".

What is their stated ideology, when/where do they meet, how many members... is Putin one?

How about Donald Trump, who has condemned certain groups that identified with the "Alt-right"

... is Donald Trump a secret member, do they wear robes and drink lamb's blood and stuff?

Secret handshake??

Help me help you brother.

[Per]

Spreading communist propaganda is the same thing as spreading "right-wing" propaganda!

Basically yes. It is all about desinformation and spreading confusion and doubt.

Yeahno, we're talking about pushing a more-towards-the-centre democracy in one of two directions.
(with propaganda)
Towards the left... or towards the right.
Two different directions, so back to my original question:
Russia once spread communist propaganda and is now spreading "right-wing" propaganda?
Russia once pushed to the left and now pushes to the right?

The problem is you are stuck in a one dimensional view of politics. "It's either left or right."
In my opinion the more important dimension is the one that goes from authoritarian to individual freedom.

Here, let me help you:


I consider myself a social liberal, with traits of classical liberalism, which means I'm close to the centre of the grid on the left-right scale, but fairly extreme on the individual vs government scale.

I don't think nationality is very important. I don't think a government should have the right to kill its citizens or intervene in their reproductive choices. A governnment should also not intervene in trade; anyone should be allowed to buy products from whatever company/country they want, with no quotas of tarifs disturbing the free market. We do need some kind of judiciary to prevent crime, and we need the government to provide necessary infrastructure to facilitate the workings of society, including healthcare. But the basic tenets of liberalism is that the rights of the individual are generally more important than the rights of the government. This is true whether you are a hardcore left wing liberal, aka anarchist, or a hardcore right wing liberal, aka libertarian.

Likewise, what unites Putin and the right wing groups he supports around the world, is the view that the nation is more important than the individual. They are at the other extreme end of the scale. And at this extreme end, right and left really starts losing their meaning, because the only thing that matters is the will of the government. It must never be questioned or criticised.

Anyway, to lend a phrase from the Beatles - Back to the USSR.

The now defunct Soviet Union, and the КПСС, spread communist propaganda (workers of the world unite, kill the capitalist pigs, etc)
The current Russian regime is spreading right wing propaganda (nation, god, homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, kill the muslims, etc).

Two different nations, two different eras.

The one constant is that they loathe liberal democracy and embrace the cult of the strong leader that will bring glory to the nation if we all just bend over and sing the national anthem.

Russia is not pushing to the left or the right. They are pushing away from individual rights and toward authoritarianism. In the Soviet days they used left wing catch phrases to do that, today they use right wing catch phrases; there's more than one way to skin a mule. But they are not interested in going left or right. They are going toward a life time presidency for Putin and harsh sentences for anyone who has the guts to challenge him and his god given right to reign supreme.

And the Russians love him. Of course they do. There is no independent media any more, and thus you will only find praise for him in all papers, all radio broadcast and all TV programmes. There is some opposition among the educated elite in the cities, but in the countryside he is god incarnate. Just like Stalin was.

[Topper]

That graphic should be wrapped on a tube.

Looks like it would fit a toilet paper roll.

[Strangelove]

The problem is you are stuck in a one dimensional view of politics. "It's either left or right."

Yeahno, shit (<- see wot!) I can remember seeing similar toilet paper roll graphs in junior high.

I'm merely asking how... in your mind... Russia gets America from here to there.

I'm trying to help ya big guy.

The now defunct Soviet Union, and the КПСС, spread communist propaganda

The current Russian regime is spreading right wing propaganda

Two different nations, two different eras.

I see, so... they used to push towards the left, now they push to the right, okay got it!

Russia is not pushing to the left or the right.

Wait... wuuuuuuuuut

Yeahno, Russia isn't evil Per, it's all in your mind I'm afraid.

Speaking of things in your mind

... did you want to address the last part of my post... about this "Alt-right" of which you speak?

[Per]

Yeahno, Russia isn't evil Per, it's all in your mind I'm afraid.

Right... Go tell this to the Chechens, Georgians, Ukrainians, Estonians, Latvians... or even the Finns!

Or the Russian opposition.

As is well known, Putin’s domestic political adversaries have a distressing tendency to end up dead, often from exotic radiological poisons like polonium-210, and even living in exile abroad does not always keep them safe, as Alexander Litvinenko found out.

Used extensively in the Soviet era, political murders are again playing a prominent role in the Kremlin’s foreign policy, the most brutal instrument in an expanding repertoire of intimidation tactics intended to silence or otherwise intimidate critics at home and abroad.

One victim whose death preceded Mr. Magnitsky’s, Valery Kurochkin, a potential witness whose name appeared on documents related to the fraud, fled Russia for Ukraine but died there of liver failure at the age of 43.
The other, Oktai Gasanov, a low-level figure in the fraud case but one who might have shed light on the group’s modus operandi, died of heart failure at 53.
Then, after Mr. Magnitsky’s death in prison, a fourth insider met an untimely end in a plunge from a balcony. A fifth, a banker linked to the scheme, Alexander Perepilichny, made it to London in 2009 and passed wire-transfer records to Swiss investigators. In 2012, however, at the age of 44 and in apparently excellent health, he suffered a heart attack while jogging. The police were left scratching their heads over the body found crumpled on a road in a well-guarded housing development, home to Kate Winslet and Elton John. An autopsy initially did nothing to clear up the questions.
It was not until 2015 that a botanist was able to identify the presumptive cause of Mr. Perepilichny’s death: His stomach held traces of gelsemium, a rare, poisonous plant grown in the Himalayas and known to have been used in Chinese assassinations. A coroner’s inquest is scheduled for September.
“All of this sounds like paranoid conspiracy theories,” Mr. Browder said in a telephone interview. “But there are too many of these happening to important people. Captains of industry and lawyers are not dying left, right and center like this in the West.”

In 2004, an opposition journalist, Anna Politkovskaya, drank poisoned tea on a Karat flight and survived. She was shot and killed in her apartment elevator two years later, and her funeral was held in Moscow in October 2006.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/world ... .html?_r=0

... did you want to address the last part of my post... about this "Alt-right" of which you speak?

Not particularly, I have better things to do, but I'll supply you with some reading material:

The amusing irony is that leaders of the nationalist-authoritarian right in Europe campaign on a platform of national sovereignty while rubles jingle in their pockets. Marine Le Pen’s National Front requested a 27-million euro loan from Russia, according to the party’s own treasurer. Nigel Farage, the former UK Independence Party leader and Brexit engineer, has appeared on RT, the Russian government-subsidized media empire (it spends more on foreign broadcasting than any other entity except the BBC). Farage may be better known to American political junkies for speaking at a Trump rally in Mississippi.

There is a fascinating historical parallel here: Throughout the Cold War, Moscow subsidized the leftist fringe in Western Europe. Now it does the same with right-wing parties there—same tactics, different ideological players.

* * *

One massive difference is this: If Trump’s own words are anything to go by, not to mention the activities of some of his former advisers like Paul Manafort and Carter Page, Moscow may have made inroads in the United States (Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, once mooted to become Trump’s vice-presidential candidate, remains an adviser; he has been a regular contributor to the Russian-funded news channel RT and was a paid guest at an RT gala where he was seated next to Putin—odd behavior for a former Defense Intelligence Agency director with the highest security clearances). Never in its wildest dreams could the old Soviet politburo have imagined it would get a U.S. major party candidate so congenial to its interests.

We are now witnessing a curious phenomenon: The resurgent far-right parties in numerous Western countries, which harp incessantly on the sovereignty, independence, and world-historical uniqueness of whichever country they happen to live in, have self-organized into a transnational alt-right “comintern” that appears to be more effective than the leftist comintern of the Soviet era. No doubt this development was inevitable in the age of digital communication, but it has undeniably received a boost from the Kremlin. It also bears emphasis not only that Russia is attempting to influence politics in Western nations, but that this influence comes prepackaged with a specific ideological content.

http://www.theatlantic.com/internationa ... rn/506015/

Yet from the quack ideologues to the out-and-proud neo-Nazis, some Alt-Right tenets are clear and constant. It repudiates feminism with misogynistic gusto. It embraces isolationism and protectionism. Above all, it champions white nationalism, or a neo-segregationist “race realism”, giving apocalyptic warning of an impending “white genocide”. Which, of course, is really just old-fashioned white supremacism in skimpy camouflage.

That is why the term Alt (short for “alternative”) Right is misleading. Mr Taylor—whom Heidi Beirich of the Southern Poverty Law Centre, a watchdog, describes as the movement’s “intellectual leader”—says it represents an alternative to “egalitarian orthodoxy and to neutered ‘conservatives’.” That characterisation elevates a racist fixation into a coherent platform. And, if the Alt-Right is not a viable political right, nor, in the scope of American history, is it really an alternative. Rather it is the latest iteration in an old, poisonous strain of American thought, albeit with new enemies, such as Muslims, enlisted alongside the old ones. “Fifty years ago these people were burning crosses,” says Jonathan Greenblatt of the Anti-Defamation League, a venerable anti-racist group. “Today they’re burning up Twitter.”

http://www.economist.com/news/united-st ... m-pepe-and

Finally, here's a good (and rather humourous) primer from Russia Insider:
http://russia-insider.com/en/definitive ... ht/ri16587

Enjoy!

[Strangelove]

^ All hearsay and vagueness, typical wall of words from Per when cornered...

You seem to be trying to link the American "Alt-right" with some kind of international movement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right

I asked you: What is their stated ideology, when/where do they meet, how many members?

You are trying to tie The Donald in with this fictitious "Alt-right movement".

Well Lord Trump has condemned every group that has identified-with/claimed-to-be the "Alt-right".

(various unorganized/small groups have popped up a few times claiming to be "Alt-right")

Wake up you paranoid ninny, Trump isn't part of any "Alt-right"!

There is no "Alt-right movement"!!

Putin isn't secretly controlling the world, you've merely gone stark raving mad my dear friend...

It's getting kind of scary. First Brexit, then Trump. I bet Putin will attempt to help Marine LePen win in France too.
All steps toward a fractured Europe and an inward-looking US, which means no one will be able to stop Putin from imposing Russian rule over neighbouring countries.

Listen to yourself!

[Cornuck]

There is no "Alt-right movement"!!

Gotta agree with you there....

It's just the same old racist, white supremacist, klansmen idiots finding a louder voice.