• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

The vein of nihilism that runs through the modern far-right runs real deep.

As an example, PF, absent 47's bluster and subsequent actions the EU and Canada would not be shifting their defence efforts in any meaningful way.
 
That sounds more like justification for anarchy rather than an administration...
That hasn't happened. What has happened is that some self-described conservatives have adopted progressive political tactics.

Many people struggle to characterize "MAGA" (other than "I know it when it see it"). A major factor which sets "MAGA" apart from, say, "Reagan conservative" and "neo-con" (which are also different from each other) is what sets the latter two apart from "American liberalism".

Traditionally (the past few decades) US conservatives have set process (means) above outcomes (ends), and US progressives vice-versa. What antagonizes some conservatives about Trump's administration is that ends are being put ahead of means, the latter being ignored or perverted. What antagonizes progressives about Trump's administration is not that they disagree with putting ends ahead of means (which they do themselves whenever they hold power), but that they disagree with the ends. They complain about breaches of order because speaking the language of the other conservatives might help to form a temporary alliance. But they will go right back to pushing down or at least pressing very hard against every inconvenient fence when they regain power.
 
Interesting
Replacing your favoured people with our favoured people.

Reminds me of my dad says that back in the day in Ontario, whenever the government changed, a lot of the civil service did as well, right down to the worker-bee level at local highway yards, etc. Long before public service unions.
 
Replacing your favoured people with our favoured people.
Active measures might not be necessary. Simply not blacklisting conservatives or people who report perceived right-wing views on applications and during interviews ("litmus test") will shift the percentages.

There's some self-selection ("people interested in academics tend to be progressive" is a common survey finding) which is where - go figure - defenders of status quo like to point, but in the US there are also outright thumb-on-the-scale barriers.
 
As an example, PF, absent 47's bluster and subsequent actions the EU and Canada would not be shifting their defence efforts in any meaningful way.
That’s objectively false, European Degrnce spending was on the rise as of 2022z look at Polish and Baltic resenting.
 
Active measures might not be necessary. Simply not blacklisting conservatives or people who report perceived right-wing views on applications and during interviews ("litmus test") will shift the percentages.

There's some self-selection ("people interested in academics tend to be progressive" is a common survey finding) which is where - go figure - defenders of status quo like to point, but in the US there are also outright thumb-on-the-scale barriers.
Canada has similar issues. I have witnessed it in person. I also got the privilege of watching our self proclaimed morally superior academics sell out their values in exchange for quick cash with the international students.

These groups seek diversity of appearance rather than diversity of opinion.

That’s objectively false, European Degrnce spending was on the rise as of 2022z look at Polish and Baltic resenting.
You’re saying Canada has been rearming? We still aren’t acting seriously and we haven’t since 87. Do more with less has been the mantra for decades and now it’s at the point where maintaining a brigade deployed overseas is a serious struggle for us.

As to the rest of Europe, yes Poland and the Baltics were arming, but Germany and the rest of the West were content to sit in the background.
 
You’re saying Canada has been rearming? We still aren’t acting seriously and we haven’t since 87. Do more with less has been the mantra for decades and now it’s at the point where maintaining a brigade deployed overseas is a serious struggle for us.

As to the rest of Europe, yes Poland and the Baltics were arming, but Germany and the rest of the West were content to sit in the background.

I was responded to the statement that the EU and Canada didn’t start rearming until the election. Which is objectively false. Canada has yet to begin rearming at scale, while Germany did announcing its budget increase in 2022. The countries in Europe that have actually begun the rearming process did so well before Trumps second term. Its expansion with anew brigade in Lithuania is a result of that - not the election.
 
A partial embargo might not be the answer, but those journals - along with several other organs for publishing what is mostly peer-reviewed research - are dealing with a replication problem that extends back through at least a couple of decades of work, and all the attendant causes (eg. flaws in methodology, data, and applied math; politicization and policy advocacy).

Until the underlying problems are corrected, I don't see how wiping the slate and starting new journals will succeed, unless there is some kind of disinterested review (which itself could be undermined by bad incentives). Potentially, it's a "quis custodiet ipsos custodes" problem.
 
Plague Inc.?
John Cusack movie title RIGHT there :)

Meanwhile, priorities ....
 
I was responded to the statement that the EU and Canada didn’t start rearming until the election. Which is objectively false. Canada has yet to begin rearming at scale, while Germany did announcing its budget increase in 2022. The countries in Europe that have actually begun the rearming process did so well before Trumps second term. Its expansion with anew brigade in Lithuania is a result of that - not the election.
You cannot deny that since 47 took office there has now been a major new emphasis on defence spending for the EU and Canada. That it hasn't been completed yet or that some EU countries did increase already isn't the point. Canada wouldn't be talking about and making plans to hit 3.5% right away if it wasn't for 47. Everyone knows this, even if it's hard to admit due to their allergy to Trump.
 
You cannot deny that since 47 took office there has now been a major new emphasis on defence spending for the EU and Canada. That it hasn't been completed yet or that some EU countries did increase already isn't the point. Canada wouldn't be talking about and making plans to hit 3.5% right away if it wasn't for 47. Everyone knows this, even if it's hard to admit due to their allergy to Trump.

He is certainly a cause. As much as Russian aggression is a cause.

47 having the US abandoning its allies and self appointed responsibilities of the world order his country created is what is causing the world to seek less reliance on an unstable unreliable world leader.

Carney moving closer to Europe is a great step in establishing the new reality the next generation will live in.
 
He is certainly a cause. As much as Russian aggression is a cause.

47 having the US abandoning its allies and self appointed responsibilities of the world order his country created is what is causing the world to seek less reliance on an unstable unreliable world leader.

Carney moving closer to Europe is a great step in establishing the new reality the next generation will live in.

Have you considered the US recognizes it can no longer fight a two front war (Rus and China) and win and is now trying to compel the rest of the free world to anti-up?

The US isn't abandoning it's allies, it's forcing them to pull their weight and stop free-loading. The EU alone should be able to handle Russia but until now they've sat on their haunches. Moreover, the US is trying to get control of it's spending (defence being a huge part of that) and transfer some of the defence responsibility to those who should be paying and therefore reducing what the US spends.

Shifting our military alliance to a farther and more complicated supply chain is silly. It is the "elbows up" of the defence world, an emotional response designed for public consumption.
 
Except that isn't how it works.
It isn't assault to attempt to move into a building you are legally permitted to enter. They have the full force of the law on their side, as would LEO's serving a warrant etc.

You are looking at it through the wrong lens.
They are not LEO serving a warrant. Even if legally permitted to enter a building it doesn't mean you are legally allowed to make bodily contact. I am legally allowed to enter my office but if someone is in the doorway I am not legally allowed to push or strike them.

I am looking through the lens that in some cases each side may be wrong, some both are wrong, 2 wrongs don't make a right and sometimes it is best to withdraw to regroup and try again. Sometimes ICE have provided reasonable reasons and sometimes not. From what I have seen NJ is a good example. Protestors were on site and as a bus with detainees start to enter they rush the entrance so ICE blocked everyone. That is fully reasonable as a security concern and the politicians should have withdrawn until things were cleared up. Instead they appeared to join the mob in trying to push their way in. Both sides are making claims that may or may not be true that include making bodily contact with the guards. The ironic part is the congress members were supposedly concerned about improper security at the facility so did get a good demonstration of it. After things were calmed down and the prisoners secured they were given the grand tour and found nothing wrong. They are upset they weren't treated like royals and their court jester the mayor was arrested.

Waiting on the video evidence they supposedly have. I suspect it was more a case of people in back pushing the people in front into the guards resulting in the non-aggressive body contact from the video I have seen today (which didn't show any assault but was only a short clip).
 
Back
Top