The Democrat Party Hates America

[FlashDangerpants]

I do not myself know what to think of the term “activist judges” nor am I adept enough with American politics to understand the profound factionalism in the Establishment. (Like those writing here my viewvis “surface”).

Here is the Youtube channel LegalEagle explaining how Trump's tariffs came to be struck down the court. It's the same general story I have already told but with a lot more detail. It is clearly easy to show how the case went against the administration on the merits and the law and thus there is no need to invoke this notion of "activist judges" to explain it.

This should end that facile discussion if you have any regard for the rule of law in a democratic nation. I hate that I have to keep making this point in thread after thread, but a civilised nation under rule of law is one where the state can go before the courts, lose, and be bound by the decision of the court anyway. That is what the Trump administration is really taking away from America today, that single basic hallmark of civilisation.

[Dubious]

So let us suppose that the program of the MAGA Movement, if seen as Steve Bannon presents it as ‘genuine populism’, is legitimate and even desirable. That is, geared toward better outcomes for the masses of the under-represented, the non-powerful, the frustrated and the super-angry who have had their stable world ripped out from under them (see here). But, powerful interests interpose themselves, distort the program, make it unrealizable, and take advantage of it to achieve their own ends

Here's the extended version which counters the ending shown as if Moore were in favor of a Trump victory...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hsi-qvFE4M

[Immanuel Can]

All I am saying is that I don't know. Nor do you.

Here's what we both DO know: physics cannot (yet, let us say) do those things. And that also means that, at least for now, you have absolutely no reason to believe physics ever can. To think it will be able to eventually is totally suppositional on your part, and unsupportable by any evidence, and contrary to what you recognize as true of present physics knowledge.

Does that work for you?

No, it is based on your misinterpretation.

No interpretation. I'm just pointing out that you know there are things physics does not (presently) explain. But whereas you hope, wish and want to believe that physics may one day cover those things, there is no evidence physics ever can...and physics doesn't even try right now. Physics has no compartment of psychology, or morality, or logic and rationality, or sociology, or anything that implicates non-physical elements. If you think it does, point it out.

Again, all I am saying is that I don't know whether there are phenomena that will never be explicable in terms of the function of the universe, nobody does.

Well, that much is true. But then, if that's so, physics cannot be believed to be the total explanation of things, can it? There's no justification for such a belief, at present, anyway, just as you accidentally admit here -- that you know there are , currently, "phenomena," as you put it, that are not "explicable" in such terms. Indeed there are. I've listed some.

What gives anybody hope that these same "phenomena" might one day turn out to be "explicable" in physical terms, then?

[Alexis Jacobi]

This should end that facile discussion if you have any regard for the rule of law in a democratic nation. I hate that I have to keep making this point in thread after thread, but a civilised nation under rule of law is one where the state can go before the courts, lose, and be bound by the decision of the court anyway. That is what the Trump administration is really taking away from America today, that single basic hallmark of civilisation.

The so-called “rule of law”, as I mentioned previously (my suffering, plagued, head of rotted lettuce) was severely violated during the George Floyd Summer of Riots. In my view, when a culture of people descends so far down and away from personal morality, the social and political adhesive begins to come undone. A corrupt society cannot maintain its necessary political institutions. And we all saw this when people went on rampages, set fire to inner-cities, and in various ways succumbed to hysteria.

To have ‘civilization’ you must have a civilized individual. And if the individual becomes corrupted the force that holds him in line will be an external (police) force. But if even that representative of civilization is not respected, well things really break down.

I can only report to you that there are some who believe, sincerely I have gathered, that the state of the nation is not in a good place. They trace its corruption in varying ways. And they propose the need of various sorts of radical action. And these actions provoke reactions in different sectors. All this being symptomatic of extreme divisions, and quite likely irreconcilable ones.

The raid on the Capitol was also evidence of lawlessness and, too, a sort of manifestation of “righteous indignation” (about many things) but often “the direction of the country”.

We must face the facts: cultural decadence and the loss of the inner stance that allows “responsible freedom”.

Alexis Jacobi teaches toleration and understanding. That is, stepping back and viewing things and people from a distance. That’s my policy which I take when I consider your slobberings and outbursts. You are as riled up as anyone and you have no idea — none! — about what is going on and why. You don’t really care either. Bickering here gives you a dopamine hit.

I think you missed including the legal eagles report? Please include it. I will certainly give it consideration.

[Alexis Jacobi]

So let us suppose that the program of the MAGA Movement, if seen as Steve Bannon presents it as ‘genuine populism’, is legitimate and even desirable. That is, geared toward better outcomes for the masses of the under-represented, the non-powerful, the frustrated and the super-angry who have had their stable world ripped out from under them (see here). But, powerful interests interpose themselves, distort the program, make it unrealizable, and take advantage of it to achieve their own ends

Here's the extended version which counters the ending shown as if Moore were in favor of a Trump victory...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hsi-qvFE4M

Yes, I was aware of that. But this is Michael Moore of course. Still, his analysis of the background of Trump/MAGA movement was not off the mark.

[FlashDangerpants]

I think you missed including the legal eagles report? Please include it. I will certainly give it consideration.

My bad, here's the missing link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtAELWJjCB0

[Alexis Jacobi]

You’re not bad! Never, ever believe such self-enforced lies. You are very very good and it is only that you have been submerged in gutter goop for so long it has discolored your soul.

I watched 1/3 of the video. I would have to agree with you (though it gives me agony) that too radical tariff imposition, unless it is a bona fide emergency (he pushed the envelope on this one), should be countermanded by the court system.

Since I cannot be sure that Trump et al has a rational and thought-through long-range plan to “bring jobs and industry back to the US” it is likely necessary to push back against them.

However, if there were a sensible long-range plan that did benefit American working people, to get there the legal limits of executive action should be pushed.

Should the Commie Chinks be kept out of Harvard though?

[FlashDangerpants]

You’re not bad! Never, ever believe such self-enforced lies. You are very very good and it is only that you have been submerged in gutter goop for so long it has discolored your soul.

I watched 1/3 of the video. I would have to agree with you (though it gives me agony) that too radical tariff imposition, unless it is a bona fide emergency (he pushed the envelope on this one), should be countermanded by the court system.

Since I cannot be sure that Trump et al has a rational and thought-through long-range plan to “bring jobs and industry back to the US” it is likely necessary to push back against them.

However, if there were a sensible long-range plan that did benefit American working people, to get there the legal limits of executive action should be pushed.

If there is a sensible long range plan, the house and senate should be able to work up sensible legislation and then each branch of government can excercise the powers assigned to it by the constitution instead of attemting to unify those intentionally divided powers under a tyrannical god-king.

But tariffs for import substitution aren't a new invention. India, Argentina and Brazil have used that policy for decades. Have you ever bought anything manufactured by those goliaths of industry? There's a reason why capitalist economies aren't built on import substitution and those reasons are understood widely within Washington, even if they are not understood by anyone in the White House.

Should the Commie Chinks be kept out of Harvard though?

I would recommend not using racial slurs. No they shouldn't exclude the Chinese from Harvard, one day there will be serious problems and it will be to America's advantage that all the top leaders in China were schooled at Harvard, MIT, Stanford etc. Assuming America still has a diplomatic corps by then.

But it's also probably the case that the most liberal people in China are the ones who were educated abroad, and it is to be hoped that they will determine the future direction of that country.

[promethean75]

"Should the Commie Chinks be kept out of Harvard though?"

There will be no Commie chinks going to Harvard. Simply because there are no Commie chinks.

What about that Indian kid i saw the other day on the CNN cam interview with the anchor... the kid with the feathered long hair he's very careful about who looks like Aladdin and The Crow were genetically crossed? Should he be refused enrollment at Harvard because he's too concerned with his hair... or is that a normal thing for Harvard students? I thought they were so smart they were beyond the petty concerns of ordinary people. Your boy Albert. Hair was a mess.

Or are you tellin' me this is just some bourgeois rich boy with an above average IQ who's set his designs on NOT becoming one of those lower class chandala that his daddy worked to the bone to send his kid to Harvard?

Seriously what is the deal with dude's hair. Sure, young adults wanna look good and wear Axe body spray because what did chinese dude say in the old commercial: will this increase my chances to mate?

I've never been to Harvard but something tells me it's now filled with a gen z big bang theory cast that will end up making vast amounts of money at desks working on ways to make capitalism even more rutheless and efficient. No?

Dude's hair. Go google em. Perfectly feathered like he's on the back of a Pegasus riding in the wind. Boy toy lookin type. Wants to get one of those american hottie raver chicks and send selfies with her to dad back in Bangladesh.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Should he be refused enrollment at Harvard because he's too concerned with his hair...

Hell yeah. HELL YEAH. I mean if you feel that strongly about it I’ll back you on this.

As to no “Commie C-words” at Harvard, are you assholes going to condemn me for one loving slur?! Are you people so damned politically correct?!

The word has a Wiki page! And though I haven’t checked the N-word likely does not. Make of that what you will.

No Commies at Harvard, eh? None with doctrine pure enough eh?

Oh man this is good!

[promethean75]

"As to no “Commie C-words” at Harvard, are you assholes going to condemn me for one loving slur?! Are you people so damned politically correct?!"

I would do no such thing. I am hard but I am fair, AJ. There is no racial bigotry here. Here you are all equally worthless

[Alexis Jacobi]

Thank you. I feel pretty redeemed.

[Will Bouwman]

Here's what we both DO know: physics cannot (yet, let us say) do those things. And that also means that, at least for now, you have absolutely no reason to believe physics ever can. To think it will be able to eventually is totally suppositional on your part, and unsupportable by any evidence, and contrary to what you recognize as true of present physics knowledge.

Does that work for you?

No, it is based on your misinterpretation.

No interpretation.

If it doesn't represent my view, it is misinterpretation.

I'm just pointing out that you know there are things physics does not (presently) explain. But whereas you hope, wish and want to believe that physics may one day cover those things...

So is this. I have no such hope, want nor wish. You are making lazy or stupid assumptions.

[Immanuel Can]

I'm just pointing out that you know there are things physics does not (presently) explain. But whereas you hope, wish and want to believe that physics may one day cover those things...

I have no such hope, want nor wish.

Oh. So now that you realize that physics does not cover everything, and you don't even aspire that it should? Well, that's good, since it doesn't. You won't be disappointed.

[Will Bouwman]

I'm just pointing out that you know there are things physics does not (presently) explain. But whereas you hope, wish and want to believe that physics may one day cover those things...

I have no such hope, want nor wish.

Oh. So now that you realize that physics does not cover everything, and you don't even aspire that it should?

Well, repeating the same lazy or stupid assumptions doesn't make them any less either, rather it increases the odds that they are both.

Well, that's good, since it doesn't.

That's another assumption. I'll chalk this one down to aesthetics. Correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand your ontology, you believe that mind and matter are distinct creations of a transcendent god; Cartesian dualism in essence. That is a choice based on your preference; you like the idea, and unwittingly give much greater credence to data that supports it, which is bog standard confirmation bias. Your wont to misconstrue what others say, the better to challenge them is a variation that morphs into straw manning. All that is typical of armchair philosophers and nutters. Again, I am not expressing any conviction nor hope that physics will one day explain mind and any human sentiment you care to list, I am simply admitting that I don't know. As Bertrand Russell put it:
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts."