5 ms·

> What still baffles me is how people act like this was some kind of thoughtful decision. I'm afraid it is. An unholy coalition of capitalist-anarchists and ul

by tgv 2y ago

> What still baffles me is how people act like this was some kind of thoughtful decision. I'm afraid it is. An unholy coalition of capitalist-anarchists and ultra-conservatives is the driving force behind it. They both want to reduce the influence of the government to a level as small as possible. That can only be done by dismantling the current federal government.

DSingularity 2y ago
[flagged]
- SirFatty 2y ago
  You spend too much time listening to "experts" on TikTok.
- SkipperCat 2y ago
  Fair point, but America is getting rid of the parts of government that provide stability across the country and world. I don't see any major changes to the US war machine. Shutting down USAID, cutting education, health benefits and dismantling the checks on executive power do nothing to curb what criticize. These actions actually destabilize and only give greater chance that what you dislike becomes more prevalent.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - bigyabai 2y ago
      A front for destabilization operations by whom? By the NSA, FBI and CIA is who. And no, none of those organizations will be held accountable for their abuses of international aid. Instead, we'll throw the baby out with the bathwater and blame the second-degree manslaughter on "state department" operations. USAID is not a shadowy cabal, it is not an element of the deep state. It can be corrected, even isolated from harm, by reorganizing their leadership to a board instead a administrative seat. You're just not arguing in good faith, and I really have to wonder why you're falling for talking points aimed at the lowest-intelligence voting bloc.
      - rayiner 2y ago
        Don’t accuse me of “not arguing in good faith.” My family has vastly more investment in and knowledge of USAID than most of the people reflexively defending “the institutions.” And finding out about its political activities has been red pilling. It’s naive to think we can clean out the NSA, FBI, and CIA. I’ll take what I can get.
        bigyabai 2y ago
        > It’s naive to think we can clean out the NSA, FBI, and CIA. It's naive to shoot the messenger and think you've killed the message. If USAID is a conduit for the FBI and CIA's wrongdoing, then we haven't actually punished anyone responsible. We're cheering on our own ineptitude, patting ourselves on the back for dismantling a "deep state" on paper, one that still exists with the exact same motives. If you have any privileged knowledge of USAID that proves me wrong, I welcome you to share it. It sounds like we both agree that the real problem is intelligence agencies that would disguise themselves in a Red Cross truck if given the opportunity. But sure, let's demonize the Red Cross instead of the people ignoring the conventions of lawful warfare. They are the issue.
      - oa335 2y ago
        USAID absolutely is an element of the "deep state" in the countries in which it operates. Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZunZuneo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZunZuneo Even if without cover CIA involvement, they operates parallel social services that don't answer to a foreign government to advance a foreign governments priorities. Every Pakistani I talked to (living in Pakistan) has a negative view USAID and foreign NGOs. Why do you think that would be?
        rayiner 2y ago
        And that was after the US supported Pakistan against Bangladesh. Now you know why my Bangladeshi family isn’t torn up about USAID closing even though we immigrated to America thanks to USAID. India doesn’t seem upset either.
- Xunjin 2y ago
  That's why the public should demand their politicians to choose a better path for them and not fall for “we need to destroy the enemy”. When you close your eyes to your country's foreign “misbehaviours” (put it lightly) don't feel shocked when that comes back to you. When you dismantle a government, which does include judiciary/legislative powers, who is gonna counterweight the executive branch?
FrustratedMonky 2y ago
That's what really blows my mind. Growing up as Reagan Republican. When did Republicans go from law-and-order, to anarchists? Traditionally anarchism is a left-liberal idea. Now the far-right is same as far-left. Left-Right is now a circle.
- giraffe_lady 2y ago
  This is a very strange view of it. Anarchism is extremely far from liberalism. "Anarcho-capitalists" are more or less just extreme libertarians, they share no history or ideology with any other anarchist movements, no other anarchist movements recognize them as anarchists. The far left and the far right are not the same either where do you even get that! A far left party in the american context is something like democratic socialism, or sure why not actual marxist-leninism. While the far right is proud boys, groypers, literal neonazis, christian integrationists. You may have equal distaste for both but that doesn't mean they share anything else.
  - FrustratedMonky 2y ago
    "no other anarchist movements recognize them as anarchists." Once you go down the rabbit whole of trying to define 'anarchist' , there are actually dozens of definitions, and they all argue about who is really anarchist. So, that they don't agree that some other group isn't 'really anarchist', I take it with grain of salt . These extreme Republicans want to get rid of government. I'm using the highest level gloss over, that No-Government is Anarchism. I'm sure in reality, humans would re-coalesce up in communes/tribes/feudal groupings, and thus re-form local groups, and is that still Anarchism? At what point of organization do we stop saying something is 'anarchism'. I'm just saying, when the US breaks up because there is no government, it will be anarchy, and that seems to be what Republicans are shooting for..
    - giraffe_lady 2y ago
      > Once you go down the rabbit whole of trying to define 'anarchist' , there are actually dozens of definitions Which is why I avoided providing or using any definition of anarchism, instead describing the actions of people who consider themselves anarchists. > and they all argue about who is really anarchist. Yes, but there is only one group who consistently considers themselves anarchists but who exactly zero other anarchist groups recognize as anarchists. All other anarchist movements have at least one mutually-recognized peer movement. I'm not saying this is an absolute or the only definition, but it's very useful in this context. There is something different about ancaps. > These extreme Republicans want to get rid of government. They do not! They are not proposing an elimination of the military or police departments or prisons, for example. They are using the DoJ to pursue political enemies, the executive branch to enact and enforce tariffs. In fact exactly the parts of the state that are used to create and enforce hierarchy. I do not know any anarchist movements, other than anarcho-capitalism, that has this goal. I understand why your view of it is alluring, I find it to be so as well. But I have found that it simply has very little explanatory power for this situation. The only thing the far left and right truly share I think, is radicalism. By which I mean an intention or acceptance of rapid and comprehensive change to the dynamics of daily life for the whole population. But the actual changes they want have virtually no overlap.
kaashif 2y ago
Dismantling the federal government by massively increasing the role of government in trade and imposing the biggest tax increase in a century? That doesn't sound right...
- giantrobot 2y ago
  The GP didn't say the people pushing this were smart or intellectually honest.
- Workaccount2 2y ago
  The next step is to cut income tax for under $150k/yr earners. Tariffs raise prices by 20%, tax cuts let you keep 20% more earnings. This would make the federal government dependent on tariff income, and, as the theory goes, diminish the funds the government has as American industry grows to avoid tariffs. Probably not going to work out as it is only a first order effect view, but that is the idea they are chasing.
  - thefreeman 2y ago
    Except they aren't cutting taxes by 20% for people under 150k. They are pushing a tax cut which disproportionately affects the top 1%.
    - Workaccount2 2y ago
      Trump has explicitly stated he wants to eliminate income taxes for people earning under $150k. Ironically (but not really if you can clearly understand his platform, any why so many bernie bros became trumpets), Trump is doing a lot of ostensibly good things for the uneducated working class at the expense of American "elite" class. The autoworkers union president literally spoke yesterday at Trumps event cheering the tariffs. A union, cheering Trump. The stock market is off a cliff, but how many factory workers actually have an appreciable amount of stocks? Poor middle America doesn't give a fuck about that. They give a fuck about having a place to go to work and make a good living. Trump is doing what he was elected to do. Whether or not it is possible without making things much worse seems like a long shot, but his core base has a "I don't care if we destroy the system, the system sucks!" attitude, awfully similar to Bernie bros.
belter 2y ago
> An unholy coalition of capitalist-anarchists and ultra-conservatives is the driving force behind it. It's called Oligarchy.
olalonde 2y ago
Capitalist-anarchists are certainly opposed to tariffs - after all, tariffs are just taxes that expand government influence. Protectionism is a left-wing, big-government policy.
- tgv 2y ago
  The goal would be dismantling the state, and hence (national) tariffs, for good. The people behind it are quite well off, and can bear the tariffs for now. And it's not just capitalist-anarchists. This is a cabal of spiteful people with different goals, but some shared ideas about the scale of government, prepared to use as much force as necessary. > Protectionism is a left-wing, big-government policy. It isn't left-wing. Just check the US history of protectionism. Or Germany's. Or the France's. Even the UK's. Or even simpler: look at what happened just now. How can you call Trump left-wing?

by tgv 2y ago

DSingularity 2y ago

[flagged]

SirFatty 2y ago
You spend too much time listening to "experts" on TikTok.
SkipperCat 2y ago
Fair point, but America is getting rid of the parts of government that provide stability across the country and world. I don't see any major changes to the US war machine. Shutting down USAID, cutting education, health benefits and dismantling the checks on executive power do nothing to curb what criticize. These actions actually destabilize and only give greater chance that what you dislike becomes more prevalent.
- rayiner 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - bigyabai 2y ago
    A front for destabilization operations by whom? By the NSA, FBI and CIA is who. And no, none of those organizations will be held accountable for their abuses of international aid. Instead, we'll throw the baby out with the bathwater and blame the second-degree manslaughter on "state department" operations. USAID is not a shadowy cabal, it is not an element of the deep state. It can be corrected, even isolated from harm, by reorganizing their leadership to a board instead a administrative seat. You're just not arguing in good faith, and I really have to wonder why you're falling for talking points aimed at the lowest-intelligence voting bloc.
    - rayiner 2y ago
      Don’t accuse me of “not arguing in good faith.” My family has vastly more investment in and knowledge of USAID than most of the people reflexively defending “the institutions.” And finding out about its political activities has been red pilling. It’s naive to think we can clean out the NSA, FBI, and CIA. I’ll take what I can get.
      - bigyabai 2y ago
        > It’s naive to think we can clean out the NSA, FBI, and CIA. It's naive to shoot the messenger and think you've killed the message. If USAID is a conduit for the FBI and CIA's wrongdoing, then we haven't actually punished anyone responsible. We're cheering on our own ineptitude, patting ourselves on the back for dismantling a "deep state" on paper, one that still exists with the exact same motives. If you have any privileged knowledge of USAID that proves me wrong, I welcome you to share it. It sounds like we both agree that the real problem is intelligence agencies that would disguise themselves in a Red Cross truck if given the opportunity. But sure, let's demonize the Red Cross instead of the people ignoring the conventions of lawful warfare. They are the issue.
    - oa335 2y ago
      USAID absolutely is an element of the "deep state" in the countries in which it operates. Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZunZuneo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZunZuneo Even if without cover CIA involvement, they operates parallel social services that don't answer to a foreign government to advance a foreign governments priorities. Every Pakistani I talked to (living in Pakistan) has a negative view USAID and foreign NGOs. Why do you think that would be?
      - rayiner 2y ago
        And that was after the US supported Pakistan against Bangladesh. Now you know why my Bangladeshi family isn’t torn up about USAID closing even though we immigrated to America thanks to USAID. India doesn’t seem upset either.
Xunjin 2y ago
That's why the public should demand their politicians to choose a better path for them and not fall for “we need to destroy the enemy”. When you close your eyes to your country's foreign “misbehaviours” (put it lightly) don't feel shocked when that comes back to you. When you dismantle a government, which does include judiciary/legislative powers, who is gonna counterweight the executive branch?

FrustratedMonky 2y ago

That's what really blows my mind. Growing up as Reagan Republican. When did Republicans go from law-and-order, to anarchists? Traditionally anarchism is a left-liberal idea. Now the far-right is same as far-left. Left-Right is now a circle.

giraffe_lady 2y ago
This is a very strange view of it. Anarchism is extremely far from liberalism. "Anarcho-capitalists" are more or less just extreme libertarians, they share no history or ideology with any other anarchist movements, no other anarchist movements recognize them as anarchists. The far left and the far right are not the same either where do you even get that! A far left party in the american context is something like democratic socialism, or sure why not actual marxist-leninism. While the far right is proud boys, groypers, literal neonazis, christian integrationists. You may have equal distaste for both but that doesn't mean they share anything else.
- FrustratedMonky 2y ago
  "no other anarchist movements recognize them as anarchists." Once you go down the rabbit whole of trying to define 'anarchist' , there are actually dozens of definitions, and they all argue about who is really anarchist. So, that they don't agree that some other group isn't 'really anarchist', I take it with grain of salt . These extreme Republicans want to get rid of government. I'm using the highest level gloss over, that No-Government is Anarchism. I'm sure in reality, humans would re-coalesce up in communes/tribes/feudal groupings, and thus re-form local groups, and is that still Anarchism? At what point of organization do we stop saying something is 'anarchism'. I'm just saying, when the US breaks up because there is no government, it will be anarchy, and that seems to be what Republicans are shooting for..
  - giraffe_lady 2y ago
    > Once you go down the rabbit whole of trying to define 'anarchist' , there are actually dozens of definitions Which is why I avoided providing or using any definition of anarchism, instead describing the actions of people who consider themselves anarchists. > and they all argue about who is really anarchist. Yes, but there is only one group who consistently considers themselves anarchists but who exactly zero other anarchist groups recognize as anarchists. All other anarchist movements have at least one mutually-recognized peer movement. I'm not saying this is an absolute or the only definition, but it's very useful in this context. There is something different about ancaps. > These extreme Republicans want to get rid of government. They do not! They are not proposing an elimination of the military or police departments or prisons, for example. They are using the DoJ to pursue political enemies, the executive branch to enact and enforce tariffs. In fact exactly the parts of the state that are used to create and enforce hierarchy. I do not know any anarchist movements, other than anarcho-capitalism, that has this goal. I understand why your view of it is alluring, I find it to be so as well. But I have found that it simply has very little explanatory power for this situation. The only thing the far left and right truly share I think, is radicalism. By which I mean an intention or acceptance of rapid and comprehensive change to the dynamics of daily life for the whole population. But the actual changes they want have virtually no overlap.

kaashif 2y ago

Dismantling the federal government by massively increasing the role of government in trade and imposing the biggest tax increase in a century? That doesn't sound right...

giantrobot 2y ago
The GP didn't say the people pushing this were smart or intellectually honest.
Workaccount2 2y ago
The next step is to cut income tax for under $150k/yr earners. Tariffs raise prices by 20%, tax cuts let you keep 20% more earnings. This would make the federal government dependent on tariff income, and, as the theory goes, diminish the funds the government has as American industry grows to avoid tariffs. Probably not going to work out as it is only a first order effect view, but that is the idea they are chasing.
- thefreeman 2y ago
  Except they aren't cutting taxes by 20% for people under 150k. They are pushing a tax cut which disproportionately affects the top 1%.
  - Workaccount2 2y ago
    Trump has explicitly stated he wants to eliminate income taxes for people earning under $150k. Ironically (but not really if you can clearly understand his platform, any why so many bernie bros became trumpets), Trump is doing a lot of ostensibly good things for the uneducated working class at the expense of American "elite" class. The autoworkers union president literally spoke yesterday at Trumps event cheering the tariffs. A union, cheering Trump. The stock market is off a cliff, but how many factory workers actually have an appreciable amount of stocks? Poor middle America doesn't give a fuck about that. They give a fuck about having a place to go to work and make a good living. Trump is doing what he was elected to do. Whether or not it is possible without making things much worse seems like a long shot, but his core base has a "I don't care if we destroy the system, the system sucks!" attitude, awfully similar to Bernie bros.

belter 2y ago

> An unholy coalition of capitalist-anarchists and ultra-conservatives is the driving force behind it. It's called Oligarchy.

olalonde 2y ago

Capitalist-anarchists are certainly opposed to tariffs - after all, tariffs are just taxes that expand government influence. Protectionism is a left-wing, big-government policy.

tgv 2y ago
The goal would be dismantling the state, and hence (national) tariffs, for good. The people behind it are quite well off, and can bear the tariffs for now. And it's not just capitalist-anarchists. This is a cabal of spiteful people with different goals, but some shared ideas about the scale of government, prepared to use as much force as necessary. > Protectionism is a left-wing, big-government policy. It isn't left-wing. Just check the US history of protectionism. Or Germany's. Or the France's. Even the UK's. Or even simpler: look at what happened just now. How can you call Trump left-wing?