Does America’s next civil war begin in Oregon?

[Mayacaman]

Today's Democratic party is not the party of old. Heck, it isn't even the party of Clinton and Obama. The days of Mediterraneum Cafe are long gone and so it is with the old Democrats. Are there any Democratic moderates left? Very few I believe.

Can't disagree with this; though I would have preferred Bernie to either Hillary or Donald. That's just me expressing my preference. The problem with the so-called "left" Democrats of the present, is that from Bernie on down they refuse to address the issue of nationalizing Credit (i.e., the Federal Reserve Bank) & holding a Year of Jubilee in which the national debts of all nations are wiped clean.

That is the only way they could facilitate all of the Socialist programs that they advocate. It can not be done on the permanent war economy - or with the burden of Debt that currently saddles the nation and the world. Ironically, it is in the camp of the pro-Trump folks that you will find cadre like Robert David Steele who understand that the Federal Reserve Bank should be nationalized.

That was pure old-left doctrine: A plank to nationalize the Fed was in the Progressive Party Platform of 1924; the Socialist Party Platform of 1932; & the Farmer-Labor Party platforms of 1932 & 1934. -But no more. Bernie shies away from the issue; big-time. -Perhaps because he knows that Kennedy's foray into issuing non-interest-bearing T-Bills was one of the factors that led to Dealy Plaza.

I disagree with you about the bias of the mainstream media. In fact I disagree so strongly that I won't bother to debate you on the subject.

CNN is an exception. It does have a distinct Democrat Party bias. -Though once again, I would not call that a "left" bias; it depends on how one defines the term. But look at ABC - the host of your beloved Coast-to-Coast. Their programming is pretty evenly balanced between right-wing talk jocks & your so-called "leftist progressives." That is the balancing act that all of the major media cartels perform.

[Mayacaman]

Today's Democratic party is not the party of old. Heck, it isn't even the party of Clinton and Obama. The days of Mediterraneum Cafe are long gone and so it is with the old Democrats. Are there any Democratic moderates left? Very few I believe.

Upon further reflection, I find that I must quibble with the second sentence, and then qualify my agreement with the rest of the passage. -Because the Democrat Party still is the party of Clinton & Obama. -And there is no way the DNC & the Party Bosses will ever allow a leftist like Bernie to be the candidate in 2020. -And that is for the simple reason that the DNC has not moved to the "left" along with the gatecrashers who have joined the DP.

The Democrat Party Bosses want Biden - and if Biden is still hale in 2020, he's the one whom they will run. The present left-wing complexion of the democrat party is deceiving in this regard: the System is rigged so that no other third party will ever supplant the two old war-horses, the Demos & the Repubs.

That is why they let the Party-crashers in, between election years - to allow the dreamers to dream their dreams. But it is all a vicious game with the folks at the top - the "bi-partisan party bosses" - who still meet, I am certain, in the smoke-filled room in the Men's Club in Mid-town Manhattan to work out who will actually run, place & show. - And they call it Democracy !

-It is a Duopoly. There is no other name more suitable for it.

[cyberanvil]

...-It is a Duopoly. There is no other name more suitable for it.

What's this?? I'm actually agreeing with you, but with one caveat. They never saw Trump coming.

[cyberanvil]

...What's political is to distort the knowledge you gain from these systems. Despite the claims of AGW deniers, it's pretty apparent that the political interpretations aren't coming from the scientists.

I'm not saying that scientists are tweaking results to match political agendas. I'm saying that political agenda's are driving which scientists get the bull horn.

Cato.org: Are Climate Models Overpredicting Global Warming?

[Mayacaman]

Mayacaman wrote:
...-It is a Duopoly. There is no other name more suitable for it.


cyberanvil wrote:

What's this?? I'm actually agreeing with you, but with one caveat. They never saw Trump coming.

You may be right on that score. I can't say. I tend to hold the view that the Republican Party Bosses wanted Jeb to be the candidate in 2016; but would have settled for Cruz, perhaps. Trump certainly did upset the apple cart.

I tend to think that Trump himself did not expect to win; he was running because he enjoyed stirring things up, and wanted to put the candidacy into his resume as another chapter in the "Donald Trump Story."

[cyberanvil]

You may be right on that score. I can't say. I tend to hold the view that the Republican Party Bosses wanted Jeb to be the candidate in 2016; but would have settled for Cruz, perhaps. Trump certainly did upset the apple cart.

I tend to think that Trump himself did not expect to win; he was running because he enjoyed stirring things up, and wanted to put the candidacy into his resume as another chapter in the "Donald Trump Story."

Like Hillary, Jeb was the chosen one. When Trump showed that he was a fool, he didn't make too many friends. Actually, Trump got a target painted on his back.

[Mayacaman]

cyberanvil wrote:

Like Hillary, Jeb was the chosen one. When Trump showed that he was a fool, he didn't make too many friends. Actually, Trump got a target painted on his back.

No doubt. But bringing the subject {hopefully} back to the title of the thread: There is also no doubt that, since the ascension of Trump to the White House, the Nation has been polarized to a degree that we have not seen since the administration of Nixon, when C,S,N, &Y sang their seminal anthem about the "Four Dead in Ohio."

I do not think that this alienation is altogether the fault of Donald Trump. I think it is being orchestrated by forces that are bigger than that little man. It takes {more than} two to Tango. Trump may actually have misgivings about where the ship of state is heading, under his "leadership" - but it seems we are headed towards a Civil War.

One of the things that isn't happening -And that should definitely be happening- if we are to avert a Civil War, is dialog between the pro-Trump & anti-Trump forces. Instead, we see crazies on the right and the left arming themselves, and not talking to each other about the issues that divide us as a People.

And We are a People, are we not? That was my understanding, at least. We are the American People, a Nation.

[cyberanvil]

...One of the things that isn't happening -And that should definitely be happening- if we are to avert a Civil War, is dialog between the pro-Trump & anti-Trump forces. Instead, we see crazies on the right and the left arming themselves, and not talking to each other about the issues that divide us as a People...

I agree. Just too many Pods in the mix. I don't see things changing anytime soon.

[Mayacaman]

I wrote:

One of the things that isn't happening -And that should definitely be happening- if we are to avert a Civil War, is dialog between the pro-Trump & anti-Trump forces. Instead, we see crazies on the right and the left arming themselves, and not talking to each other about the issues that divide us as a People.

The thread that Ken Burgess initiated, "Discussions with Trump Supporters" is a positive move in this direction, but I was saddened by a conversation that I had up in Upper Lake last Saturday with a woman who has a radio show on KPFZ in Lakeport.

We met in a small storefront in Upper Lake. She was with two of her friends, and I simply knocked on the door and said hello. They were very friendly at first. About ten minutes into our conversation, I mentioned how we seem to be drifting towards a Civil War. The radio show lady abruptly changed her attitude towards me, and said, acerbically, "That is a conversation I will not allow in my shop." -And, to clarify her meaning, she added "I will not allow his name [Trump] to be mentioned in my presence."

Well, I apologized for the intrusion, genuflected, bowed excessively, and made a polite retreat. But I really think that this refusal of the so-called "left" to deal with the issues that divide us, is a serious component & contributing element to the problem that we all face in the Civil War that is looming in the near-future. Surely we need to be able to talk to our "fellow Americans" & to C-O-M-M-U-N-I-C-A-T-E...

That, in my book, is a very important thing, and the so-called "left" needs to realize - seriously - that they are capable of being reactionaries just as much as the old so-called "reactionary" right wing.

[podfish]

... a woman who has a radio show on KPFZ in Lakeport....."

and what makes you choose her as the canonical lefty? sounds to me that you met a woman who's decided that she doesn't want to engage, which makes her a singularly poor choice as a representative of a political movement.

[Mayacaman]

and what makes you choose her as the canonical lefty? sounds to me that you met a woman who's decided that she doesn't want to engage, which makes her a singularly poor choice as a representative of a political movement.

The woman I am referring to, whom I met in Upper Lake last Saturday, was all about engagement until I mentioned the fact that a potential Civil War is looming. -One aspect of the great divide that we are facing. She was exceedingly "engaging" and outgoing, in fact.

We talked for ten minutes, in a friendly manner, until I steered the conversation into the fatal direction it took - at which point she went into her own, personal reactionary mode. I might have even secured a radio interview out of our meeting, had I not mentioned the poisoned name.

It was my mention of the name "Trump" - and my observation that he has polarized the American people to the point that we are facing trouble, big time, that triggered her reaction. I realize that her reaction was partly a function of fear. "Civil War" in the near future, on the ground, here in America, is an unpleasant subject - and I understand why some folks would rather that the subject itself "go away."

...the problem is, it won't...

But it is a fact that the "left" has become reactionary. That insight was not originally mine. I heard the truth of that back in 1993, from Wilson Ogg, a member of my mother's Mensa group, who lived in the Berkeley Hills. He was, needless to say, a genius, and also an old hand in the Berkeley Left.

The staff of Ramparts magazine used to live in his rental adjacent to his main house on Keith Avenue back in the '60's. As their landlord, he would sit in on all of their meetings. This was back in the days before David Horowitz & Peter Collier became Zionists & "right-wing" reactionaries...

It shouldn't be seen as a contradiction in terms to say that self-proclaimed "progressives" can also be "reactionaries." It might be an unpleasant truth, but the idea itself does merit consideration, Peter.

Wilson Ogg, as part of his observation on this score, said that the Left no longer has a progressive platform - such as nationalizing the Fed - which was part & parcel of the old left agenda. -And, rudderless, without a platform, he had watched the "left" lurch through the Reagan 'eighties in a reactionary mode. He was correct.

[Mayacaman]

20 Preppers Speculate What Civil War 2.0 Would Look Like in America

[ Click on Link (above) ]

[Mayacaman]

The following is more indication that 2020 will be a hot year. Are state legislators in Virginia intending to provoke a Civil War between the State of Virginia & Gun owners/Second Amendment Rights advocates?

https://www.facebook.com/steve.huff....9940557160553/