There's a new term out there: UNIPARTY.

I would generally agree with you here, but for a few little things:

The FTX thing seems to be getting pretty extensive coverage everywhere.

You might want to avoid the word "Globalism". It's developed some rather unsavory connotations. Perhaps corporatism or corporate capitalism would be better.

Nationalism has a tendency to lead to a lot of negative things, such as bigotry, racism, jingoism, and fascism. It's nothing to be praised.

Excuse me but do you think someone in another country should have power in your country?

Never said that, did I?

Ok, so who are the racists?
You understand the assumption of racism is a bigoted term?
Are the people yelling out about racism talking about their own ethnic group?

I'm just saying that nationalism has a way of breeding racism, as well as other types of bigotry.

Well isn't that what people say when they want disunity?
If I don't do a 180 in my morality in regards to other countries then I am free to show concern for what goes on in my country.

I'm not sure I'm getting your logic here.

Which "People say" what? And who are "They"?

Is not every movie about racism about racist whites?

Kinda like how the "Stop Asian Hate" movmenet died off very quickly once we saw the primary demographic attacking them were black racists. Didn't fit the narrative.

But today's hardline left wingers tend to turn a blind eye to BIPOC folks who are racists themselves. The times they don't they will even make excuses for it. Kinda crazy.

The media bias is very real given the near nonstop news coverage of the white dude who plowed his car through protesters and was immediately labeled a Neo-Nazi yet a black man in a clearly racially motivated attack does the same with a van against people just having a good time... very little overall coverage, his race not really mentioned like the other dude and just was kept overall low key. I think at one point they were playing the mental health angle for him as well.

The media is clearly on the side of the Progressives and as another commenter pointed out that when the media is on your side you are not "the resistance." The media is known for sensationalism...its how they make their money. Right now as it stands its pretty easy for Progressives to be riled up as they tend to be ruled by emotion than logic (many are in denial of this) but all they need to do is a little race baiting and engagement goes through the roof every time.

The Media is paid propagandists and nothing more.

Alex, why is it that every time we have a discussion you always get off topic, and we end up drifting through a bunch of issues and getting nowhere?

We were talking about "Globalism" and nationalism. I asked you what you were talking about when you said "People say" what they were saying, and who you were referring to with "They".

Please answer those things first, at least. Perhaps after we're finished with that we could discuss what I think regarding movies about racism.

Just show me who are the racists.

We can talk about that later if you like. I'd like to keep on topic, please.

I'd appreciate it if you could just answer my questions to clarify what you said first.

Non whites preaching how whites are racist or privileged while never holding their elected leaders to account! Groups that do not allow diversity among themselves but insist others must have diversity.

But what does that have to do with "Globalism" or nationalism?

Look and see who wants mass migration everywhere but in their own country! I could spell it out but I might be oppressing some multi millionaires!

Dude. You mentioned nothing about racism in your original post. Unless you mean by referring to The Lotus Eaters, noted extreme right racists.

Exactly how does racism as you've mentioned it here, in films, etc., as you've claimed, relate to "Globalism" or nationalism. Please be specific and explicitly explain what you mean, using the terms "Globalism" and nationalism.

Still waiting, Alex...

Did you not see my latest journal??

Ya, responded to it, even.

Wasn't thinking of that. Take your time.

How are you guys doing there?

Crickets...

No.
But I want people from my country have power in another country.
Some of the largest car manufacturers from Germany here have their largest factories in the USA. I want them to do well, which means them having power in the US.
That's just one example.
And it's not like the US haven't been doing the same around the globe for decades.
It's one of the dirty details that makes the system we have work. And as few to no countries are self-sufficient, that's going to stay that way.

Do I like it that it is that way? No.

No, I like trade!
Trade is great!
We should trade with our allies.
What I mean is influence peddling.

Sorta like the EU, a trading bloc, that has so much influence over domestic policy that the EU is practically a super state. They tie everything they can to trade to justify meddling in the affairs of member states.

I like trade as well but the amount of power trade unions like the EU have is far too much.

He said he likes Trade, he said nothing about over regulation. o_O

I admit I don't know about regulations. I would imagine there is a lot of bullshit.

The regulations are straight up absurd to say the least. They take a great concept: trade and then run to the extreme wanting too much control. Its sort of like a home owner's association. Great concept to keep the neighborhood from turning into a slum but you get busybodies who have their own absurd expectations and will regulate crap like what kind of wood you have to use for your fence and when your Christmas lights have to come down.

Picky shit basically. I'm definitely all for global trade but Globalism itself can gtfo. It puts too many of our jobs in competition with others across the planet. Big reason why so many customer service jobs to go places like central America, India and the Philippines. Dirt cheap labor and the rich sure as shit aren't passing those savings onto us. If anyone benefits other than them its their largest shareholders.

Shareholders which in many cases are mostly just other companies.

Home Owner's Association is a fair comparison. Take the worst cases of this, and super charge it, then you'll be 10% of what the EU has accomplished. To be fair, the EU has a bigger staff dedicated to the cause.

If you look into the scale of Regulations the EU enforces on Countries, it's a rabbit hole that makes rabbits cringe at. In the U.S. the Dems are very much the sort to create regulatory madness, just look at California. But that pales in comparison to what they've accomplished in the EU.

Preach it, brother!

Bravo!
Bravo!!
BRAVO!!!

If you find that both governments and major global corporations completely agree with your world view you are not part of the "resistance"

Wait, are you saying Google isn't the resistance?

i will not! have you seen dat alien booty! i get to grop it- oh you meant a different type of elite. nevermind.

Yes, the Sangheili do have the junk in the trunk.

^^^

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2022.....nd-journalists

Let's see: one of the Media's darlings tried very hard to corner the market on funny money and failed spectacularly. In other news extremely wealthy and powerful people who aren't even in the U.S. keep throwing money at socialist causes in America. They're buying influence by helping to finance the political campaigns of other socialists. But wait, aren't these exactly the kind of people that Marx wanted overthrown? So confused (and it's 2:30 AM).

Smack me when this starts making sense.

*holds up a shot of.... err... water.... and drinks!*

Do you like Pina Coladas?
Gettin' caught in the rain?

Nah, just needing more water right now. Haven't been drinking enough of it lately :P

And it gets better when you consider that Sam Bankman-Fried was the second largest single donor to the Democratic Party this election cycle. Just shy of forty million dollars to blue candidates?

Remember when the dems used to say they were against Big Business? It's been a while.

Edit: And he gave 10 million to Biden in 2020. And he's visited the White House several times this year.

Typical rich capitalists and grifters tying to buy influence.

We need to get the money out of politics. It's destroying what little Democracy we have, costing lives, and endangering the future of the planet.

Agreed.

But there are little things here and there to find hope in. Beto O'Rourke and Stacey Abrams pulled in a collective $150 million, mostly from out of state donors, and yet were defeated by rivals with substantially less funding. Albeit, they were up against incumbents, but it does show that money does not necessitate a victory (though it does help.)

Fair point. To be clear, I'd say that there ought to be caps on the amount allowed in each person or organization's donations. I'm really referring to the big time corporate, lobbying, and hidden donor PACs, etc.

O'Rourke and Abrams have both had to contend with long term concerted vote suppression as well. Georgia is particularly egregious on that front, and they're not slowing down. They're pretty much the testing ground for it.

First: I agree that donation limits should be implemented for national elections, and they certainly should exist for state elections when the money comes from out of state sources. I can name at least one Republican senator in Alaska who has abused this tremendously.

However, I will disagree with the voter suppression myth.

This election cycle saw record-high turnouts for voters in Georgia, particularly amongst African American voters. Specifically, the highest percentage of black men and woman in the state's history voted in the 2020 midterm. So whose vote was being suppressed?

And one might argue the *possibility* of voter suppression affecting an election if the winner was ahead by half a point, maybe one at the most. But Stacy lost by 10 percent of the vote. Statistically, you would have to prevent around one million legitimate Georgian voters from getting to a voting booth, or just shy of half the adult black population of the state. Good luck trying that in a state-wide election with electronic verification of mail-in ballots.

As for Beto, the man ran three times for office in four years, first for Senate, then for president, then for governor. He lost every time. Given the evidence at hand, it's entirely possible that he's just a bad candidate.

Vote suppression is no myth. It's a well documented campaign by right wing Republicans and racists over decades and more.

Georgia Republicans, specifically Kemp and Raffensperger in particular, may well have suppressed that many votes. They've certainly tried. The voter suppression there is very real, and quite extensive. And vote suppression isn't even the only factor. Just look at the campaign between Warnock vs Walker contest as an example of even more ways that these things are manipulated. I won't bother going into details on vote suppression there, the list is WAY too long.

A really good resource on this is investigative reporter Greg Palast:
https://www.gregpalast.com/, who has been doing a deep dive into this specific topic for years. Additional articles here: https://truthout.org/authors/greg-palast/page/2/

His most recent film, Vigilante: Georgia's Vote Suppression Hitman:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hj.....ZRebo&t=5s Is a really good look into this which focuses on Kemp. It's showing online for free for the next couple of weeks, and is well worth seeing. It's not a slog. it's humorous, informative, and touching, just a little over an hour long, and drops a lot of crucial information as well as insights into the suppression in Georgia, which is a testing ground for suppression nationwide.

The link for the film: https://www.gregpalast.com/vigilantefilm/

Regarding Beto, he's a good guy, and as much as he's had the deck stacked against him, he may have legitimately lost in a state where white supremacy and racism remain deeply entrenched, as much as that might be changing.

Yeah, because ballets with bad signatures brought in weeks later is perfectly OK.

Signatures on ballots and fake votes, etc. have never been a real issue. It simply doesn't happen to any significant extent. And in the EXTREMELY rare cases where it does, there are already laws and penalties to deal with it.

That crap is just an excuse for the Reps to suppress votes.

Your Right verses Left arguments is a joke to people in power. You have Republican and Democrat children all involved in Ukranian energy companies.

That's largely true.

The super wealthy and large corporations have obviously outsized power. But that doesn't really have much to do with the matter of ballots or elections, etc., other than the fact that the Reps, who are even more in the pocket of the super wealthy than the Dems as a whole, are making a concerted effort to manipulate the outcome of elections through voter suppression, as mentioned above.

I consider illegal ballots to be suppressing my vote.

But...

Illegal ballots don't exist. Just look it up.

And once again, you've got nothing to say about this.

The Democrats' biggest donors are a Nazi collaborator (Soros) and a bitcoin fraud (SBF).

Liberals can claim many things, but they can never say they weren't aware.

Oh, I think they simply have no standards at all.

They believe themselves immune to standards and consequences, and as long as the Republicans continue to have no spines they're not exactly wrong.

Well it’s not like there are journalists to call them out either.

But yeah, the republicans are pussies!

Journalists? Most of us watch alt-tech anymore. The major networks (including Fox Gnus) are unreliable or on life support. Decentralized information distribution is the last viable source--and no, I don't mean Alex Jones and other such crackpots.

Alex Jones has the guts to call shit out which is why they went after him.

Ever notice how we get hundreds of hours of information on serial killers but mass shootings we don’t know dick about?

Y'ever notice white mass shooters are national front page news for days, but a typical Chicago or Detroit weekend is local only?

Yeah, well that’s what civilization calls acceptable barbarism.

Of course some manufacture jobs might help reduce crime but what do I know?

Jones is not a reliable source on ANYTHING, and he's continually proved this.

I still want a full description of every shooting incident.

They're all exhaustively documented. Look them up?

Or do you prefer to believe outlandish conspiracy theories?

Outlandish to the people who were there?

Examples please. Haven't seen them myself.

Seek out gun experts regarding gun shootings.

A specious argument.

Examples please, if you actually have any. If I knew any to search for, I'd do it myself.

Ok!

Still waiting...

And... Crickets.

Move on already…

Actually answer a pertinent question for once.

If you can elect John Fetterman to Senate, there is no limit.

Maybe they wouldn't elect a dead person...Oh wait, Missouri already did that.

At least the people of Pennsylvania had the common sense, (If barely) to actually vote for a good and intelligent guy who is a real politician with good ideas as opposed to a carpet bagging snake oil salesman without a clue about politics who was only in the race because some brilliant right wing Reps thought his name recognition would get him through.

You mean the recovering stroke victim who, quite literally, spoke gibberish during the senate debate? Who, before his illness, advocated for the release of second-degree murderers from prison?

And "real politician?" He was a lieutenant governor for two years. Yeah, real resume building there. And I thought the whole point of this discourse was how "real" politicians are corrupt ones.

I don't know what you're putting in your morning coffee, but it's gotta be some strong stuff.

Don't drink coffee.

I've known people who've had strokes or other traumatic brain injuries. Problems with language are a frequent result, as Fetterman himself has acknowledged. That doesn't in itself indicate any significant mental incapacity beyond that. I'd still take him by his proven record over Oz any day.

Oz's attack ads against Fetterman, as well as his cowardly debate challenge, were really low moves, and Fetterman was smart and brave to take him up on it. His language issues were completely excusable, given the circumstance.

Being a politician doesn't necessarily prove that someone is on the take. Correlation is not causation. Fetterman has a record to stand on. Oz does not. As a matter of fact, he came into the race with numerous marks against him.

You know that a senator's job is to communicate, right? If you need a teleprompter to understand your opponent, how can you engage in discourse on the senate floor? He's not physically or mentally fit for the job. Our leaders should be the best we have to offer. It's like you're asking a paraplegic to be a firefighter.

And what is Fetterman's proven record from two years as LG of a state? He said over the summer "I will ban fracking!" Then in the debate he said "I will...[unintelligible utterance]...Not ban fracking!"

Did you even watch the debate? Dr. Oz never once called into play Fetterman's illness. He was not a "bully" as The View called him. Funny you claim not to watch the show, but you sure speak the same tropes. You're reciting liberal rhetoric, despite claiming not to believe it.

As an aside, it's too bad about Dr. Oz. It would have been nice to have the first Muslim in the Senate. The faith gotta represent, yo.

If you actually understood how these things often play out, you'd be able to acknowledge that Fetterman's command of his verbal abilities has obviously been rapidly improving, and is likely to continue to do so. This has no necessary bearing on his mental abilities. His future will play out as it will, won't it?.

The state dodged a bullet by his winning over Oz in any case.

I'm no liberal, but perhaps The View is just speaking things commonly perceived by reasonable people. Once again, I've never watched it. Causation vs. correlation once again.

And once again, someone having problems with their language is a common consequence of a stroke, etc. It doesn't indicate any impairment to their actual intellectual ability.

Anyone in the public eye will end up with moments where they misspeak or stumble, and their opponents will often attempt to exploit those, exactly as Oz did.

And I'm not talking about the debate itself, I'm talking about Oz calling for one when he knew precisely that Fetterman's language issue would likely play to his advantage with an unsympathetic or uninformed public. It wasn't necessary for him to explicitly bully him during the debate in order for it to be a cowardly and bullying move in the first place.

Re: Fracking: I happen to be against it, as well as any further fossil fuel development at this point.

But hey, people do change their minds, and politicians make political decisions. Politics are a game of compromise. Once one gets into politics it becomes awfully hard to maintain one's ideology without making concessions based on practical realities. This is always a dilemma.

I'm all for more Muslim representation. Is Mr. Oz actually a Muslim? I don't really know. I've never looked into it. It might just be his heritage, for all I know. His being Muslim or not gives him no automatic qualification, in any case.

Electric cars don't work.
I need a car.

Of course they work. They wouldn't be selling so many of them if they didn't. They work great for many people. It depends on your situation. They're certainly more efficient, cheaper, and better for the planet in the long run.

At least you don't have to buy one yet, and there will be other viable alternatives soon. We're in the middle of a transition.

I drive a 4WD truck and like to go out to the desert, etc. There's nothing that's a good alternative to that at the moment. But it will be coming soon. Hydrogen will soon be a viable alternative, as one example.

And WTF do electric cars and your needing a new vehicle have to do with the above discussion?

I can't afford a electric car!
People who are anti-oil are screwing with the basics of life. We need diesel to grow food.

And nobody's forcing you to buy one. In a few years there'll be enough used ones that you can if you want.

The simple fact is that we need to get away from a carbon based economy as soon as we can. It's literally costing far more than the alternatives at this point, in dollars as well as the costs of the resultant destruction to the environment. There are already cheaper and more efficient alternatives.

And, once again, we're in the middle of the transition. We just need to stop being slaves to big oil and spend our efforts and money on a green future instead. The sooner we apply ourselves to this the better off we'll all be. We're literally already decades behind where we should be, largely due to the efforts of big oil. The more we put this off the farther behind we are and the harder it gets.

Your post here is claiming to be anti elite. What do you think the oil companies are?

Oil companies are providing energy we need. I have no problem with rich people who provide a product or service. I do have a problem with people who manipulate the system for their personal gain.

The days of carbon based economy and fuels are over. Get with it or get left in the dust.

That's why I consider people who stand with elites to be rather silly.
China will increase it's carbon emissions and the middle class and poor in America suffer.

And that's a justification for ignoring the climate crisis and continuing to engage in wasteful and ignorant use of carbon based fuels, etc.?

China is actually making efforts to reduce their carbon use.

Could certainly be quicker though.

We need to continue to engage with them, cooperate, and pressure them to speed up their transition. Not to mention leading by example.

You are insane.

Not impossible.

But that doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Waiting for someone else to deal with the climate crisis is just suicide for humans, as well as the assured extinction of even more species here.

Get your head out of the sand and do something. You're just playing into the hands of those "Elites" you claim to oppose.

Not to mention that you never explained WTF electric cars have to do with the above discussion.

Seriously, why do you keep doing this? Why can't you stay on topic?

Is it because you don't actually have anything to back up your claims? It sure seems that way.

You almost always either deflect to another topic or just drop the subject at hand. have you ever noticed that?

In all honesty I have other things to think about…

How convenient.

Don't ever mistake me for some great lover of the Dems, but your parroting the extreme right wing conspiracy theory anti Soros looniness just makes it seem like you've drunk their Flavor Aid.

And you're parroting The View, so tit for tat.

I've never once seen The View, so that's sort of silly. And facts are facts.

I'm still waiting for you state one. You're just giving opinions and rhetoric.

Oh ferchrissakes.

For one thing, you never even asked, and, beyond that, it's easy enough to look up and differentiate between right wing propaganda and documented facts.

If you can't even apply critical media literacy and discern between obviously biased right wing propaganda and facts, there's nothing I can do for you.

Soros is the biggest Democrat contributor and believes in open borders. Which is now happening all over the Western world.

I doubt that that's exactly true. And those wouldn't necessarily be negative things in any case.

And I'll bet you I'm much more for open borders than he is. There are a lot of really good arguments for that.

I don't think you know much about FTL or other Democrat backers.

What does FTL stand for?

My bad I meant FTX.

As I mentioned above, I'm against big money in politics. It clearly distorts the process and is anti Democratic.

Good.
Because it's come out that Friedman spoke all the pretty words and the woke bought it.

Friedman was neither completely right nor completely wrong. Economics is more than a little complex.

I'm largely against the neoliberal model, as well as capitalism in general.

And "Woke" is a really lameass term. It really has no meaning at this point beyond being an embarrassment to the right because of it's co option and misuse.

Wokeness is a psyop that makes everything boring!

Heh.

Scarcely compares to American conservatism or Trumpism.

*Yawn*

i've been reading your responses and i just wanted to say:

you, sir, are a godsdamn champion!

mad respect for you

keep doing what you're doing

Thanks.

Might well ultimately be a waste of time, but eh.

You do pretty well yourself.

Nice to see someone else that doesn't just suck up whatever The Lotus Eaters or other right wing idealogues and propagandists decide to spew.

i don't understand it either why anyone would give guys like them the time of day. after all, if you do just a little bit of research, you quickly realize that the stuff they talk about are a lot of really bad ideas that come from very mean spirited places and they would actually make the world a much worse place... but here we are, i guess

Yup.

An awful lot of folks don't take the trouble to do any real research.

I keep bringing up critical media literacy, but fat chance Alex would ever apply that. It's much easier to just believe what some yobs pushing lame outrage on teh interwebz on their podcast serve up to you rather than to question or research their lies and deceptions or why they might be spreading them.

In answer to questions I asked him, Alex has even referred me to them as "Proof" before.

*smh*

Nice speech you wrote here.