Walkabout Thoughts #97c

Got on Facebook the other day and saw a meme posted by someone about taxation that I thought was typical of a far-right misinterpretation of things as they are today. 

OK so a couple of posts on the creative stuff, today on politics. Sorry for being so graphics-heavy this time.

First, give America our motto back. In God We Trust has diluted (and deluded) who and what we are as America. "Out of Many, One" is important, actually far more important to all of us as a collective whole than "In God We Trust", which has played into a sick Christian Nationalism, White Authoritarianism.

So tired of these alt- and sub-culture delusions I've heard about since I was a kid, that has now evolved into insanity from Tea Party to MAGA and Donald Trump, and the whole mess we're now in because the GOP won't stand up to their nonsense and now it's evolved into, authoritarianism and criminals. 

The GOP did this to us, to themselves. This goes back to the early 1990s, the early 1980s and they, the two disruptions converged to make their "grounds" fertiel for a criminal and autocrat to overtake us.

It's now up to use to correct this. Thanks GOP. all because you were tired of being a minority, you supported a minority with bad ideas. We have to stop this delusion, these bad feelings, this division, this hatred, especially from the right.

We are America, the greatest nation in history and we've got to stop trying to tear ourselves apart, for our enemies, surely not for ourselves. Why would we? Unless we've been indoctrinated to do our enemies work for them. Which is brilliant, but, let's not do that.

This Pod Save America podcast episode is different. 

Why No One’s Winning Young Voters (Ep. 5)

I found this episode enlightening about our situation with Gen X, Gen Z & Millenials on voting, orientation, politics, etc. They have some good direct info and insight. Definitely worth a listen, especially if you're confused about some of the political orientations today. I know a bit about all this but I still found this episode enlightening. Description:

"Jon is joined by youth polling experts John Della Volpe and Kristen Soltis Anderson to talk about apathy among young voters this election cycle. Why are they so disengaged? Are some truly defecting to Trump? And what message, if any, can get them out for the polls? Jon, John, and Kristen dive into the focus group tape to unpack Gen Z’s opinions of our octogenarian presidential candidates, their top economic issues, and the war in Gaza. And Anderson Clayton, the 26-year-old Chair of the North Carolina Democratic Party, joins to talk about Gen Z’s faith in their own ability to improve democracy."

OK then. Democrats have good ideas they're poor at selling, Republicans have bad ideas they're good at selling...like con artists. And here we are. A criminal exPOTUS running again, the GOP, the MAGA GOP incapable of seeing what they are doing to us anymore. 

Marco Rubio on STOU Sunday delusionally claimed things about Trump that were utter nonsense. Actually saying, "I know NOTHING." 

Yeah, anyway, I had to say...something to that post on Facebook. I did my best to put it here and it was a problem. Finally went with cleaned-up screenshots.

Anyway here's what was said. 

In fact, these aren't the brightest bulbs in the pack. But then, neither am I. I have no illusions about that. So I'm taking the entire thread and posting it here so you can make up your own mind. At least to be familiarized with this kind of thinking.

It's not like I whipped them, or I "won" them, or triggered them. Or them me. I thought they were pretty rational and decent. Just a bit lost. It's hard to maintain and not just let the annoyance shine through, I did my best. I think they did too.

When you take decades of that kind of indoctrination, generations of it, and do little or nothing to stop, or correct it, you end up with the mess we have today in politics and America fantasizing about tearing either into "the Other" or simply, apart. I see some of this starting with the additions we once thought good, maybe were for a while. But have led us into weirdness.

We can start with the "Pledge of Allegiance". Subverting...yes, subverting our national motto from "E Pluribus Unum" ("Out of Many, One") to "In God We Trust". Which, while it may seem harmless and I wish it was, it's been weaponized against non-Christian-nationalist-Christians, our other religions and our non-theists.

It's ended us up with an authoritarian who follows the playbook of autocrats. Want to know more? Look up, Timothy Snyder.

Timothy Snyder's Key Tactics of Autocrats should seem familiar in what Trump and his people have been doing to US:

1. Control the Press: Undermine independent media to limit critical reporting.
2. Rewrite History: Manipulate or fabricate historical narratives to legitimize the regime and discredit opponents.
3. Undermine Institutions: Attack and weaken democratic institutions to reduce checks and balances.
4. Establish a Cult of Personality: Promote the leader as an indispensable and almost divine figure.
5. Target Minorities: Use scapegoating and discrimination to unify the majority and distract from real issues.
6. Undermine Truth: Spread misinformation and discredit factual reporting to create confusion and distrust.
7. Manipulate Elections: Rig electoral processes to ensure the regime remains in power.
8. Rule by Emergency: Declare states of emergency to bypass legal constraints and consolidate power.
9. Foster Corruption: Use patronage and corruption to ensure loyalty from key figures and institutions.
10. Suppress Dissent: Use intimidation, imprisonment, and violence to silence opposition.

These tactics create an environment where democratic norms erode, and the autocrat's power becomes increasingly unchallengeable.

So here's how that Facebook thread went. The following is for educational purposes. 

First the meme:

Late addition:

B: Jean Z Murdock your whole premise ignores the fact that people will and do pay for things they want and need that government isn't providing. Any necessary services that can be provided by government can be provided by market means without extortion as the business model. Taxes are what allow the people running the system to spend other people's money the way they want since their revenue chattel have no means to divorce themselves from unsatisfactory services that are monopolized by government rackets that just use them as a front for recurring extortion payments.
They don't want people to be able to "vote" with their money tho because that would expose the true lack of support these "representatives" and their ideas truly have.
That's it. Did I make any headway? Did anyone on that thread, or reading it, reconsider things? Or just dig in deeper.

JZ Murdock:

This argument is a typical libertarian perspective on taxation and government services, emphasizing the belief that market-based solutions can replace government-provided services without the coercion implied by taxation. Better known as pipe dreams.

As a political philosophy advocating for minimal government intervention and maximum individual freedom, can sometimes be seen as an immature orientation for several reasons. These reasons are not universally accepted, but they are often cited by critics of libertarianism:

1. Idealistic Simplification: Libertarianism can be perceived as overly idealistic and simplistic in its assumptions about human nature and society. Critics argue that it assumes people will always act rationally and ethically in a free market, which may not account for complexities such as greed, inequality, and the potential for exploitation.

2. Overreliance on Market Solutions: Libertarians often advocate for market solutions to social problems, assuming that markets will efficiently allocate resources and services. Critics contend that this ignores market failures, such as monopolies, externalities, and the underprovision of public goods, which require government intervention to correct.

3. Neglect of Social Responsibilities: Libertarianism emphasizes individual rights and freedoms, sometimes at the expense of collective responsibilities and social welfare. Critics argue that this perspective can lead to a lack of support for social safety nets and public services, which are essential for addressing inequality and protecting vulnerable populations.

4. Historical Oversights: Critics argue that libertarianism can ignore historical and systemic inequalities that require proactive measures to address. For example, simply removing government intervention without addressing past injustices may not lead to a fair and equitable society.

5. Practical Challenges: Implementing libertarian principles can be challenging in practice, as it requires dismantling established institutions and regulatory frameworks. Critics claim that this can lead to chaos and instability, as well as unintended consequences that may worsen social problems.

6. Conflict with Collective Action Needs: Libertarianism often underestimates the importance of collective action for addressing large-scale problems such as climate change, pandemics, and national defense. Critics argue that these issues require coordinated efforts that individual actions and market mechanisms alone cannot effectively manage.

7. Perceived Selfishness: Libertarianism's strong emphasis on individualism can be seen as promoting selfishness and a lack of concern for community and societal well-being. Critics argue that this focus on personal freedom can undermine social cohesion and collective efforts to improve public welfare.

It's important to note that these criticisms are not definitive judgments but rather perspectives that highlight potential weaknesses in libertarian thought. Proponents of libertarianism offer counterarguments emphasizing personal responsibility, the dangers of government overreach, and the moral imperative of individual freedom. 

What this perspective might be overlooking:

Public Goods and Externalities: Certain goods and services, known as public goods (like national defense, clean air, and public parks), are not easily provided by the market because they are non-excludable and non-rivalrous. This means that once provided, it's difficult to exclude anyone from using them, and one person's use does not reduce availability to others. Markets tend to underprovide these goods because they can't easily charge users directly.

Free Rider Problem: Related to public goods, the free rider problem occurs when individuals have an incentive to avoid paying for a good because they can still benefit without paying. This leads to underfunding and underprovision of essential services like public infrastructure, education, and emergency services.

Inequality and Access: Market solutions often fail to address the needs of the poor and vulnerable, as they might not be able to afford essential services like healthcare, education, or housing. Government intervention through taxation and public spending aims to ensure a minimum standard of living and equal access to necessary services.

Regulation and Standards: Government regulation is often necessary to ensure safety, fairness, and environmental protection. Without government oversight, market-driven solutions might prioritize profit over public welfare, leading to issues like exploitation, pollution, and unsafe products.

Collective Action: Some challenges, such as pandemics, climate change, and natural disasters, require coordinated efforts that are difficult to achieve through decentralized market mechanisms. Government plays a crucial role in organizing and funding these collective actions.

Monopoly and Market Failures: The argument assumes that markets always function efficiently and fairly. However, markets can fail, and monopolies or oligopolies can emerge, leading to higher prices and reduced choices for consumers. Government intervention is often necessary to correct these market failures and promote competition.

Democratic Accountability: While the argument claims that taxes are a form of extortion, it overlooks the democratic processes through which tax policies and public spending are decided. Citizens can vote for representatives who align with their views on taxation and government services, ensuring a degree of accountability and representation.

The argument raises valid concerns about efficiency, accountability, and the role of government, but it might underestimate the complexity of providing public goods, addressing market failures, and ensuring equitable access to essential services.

The debate between libertarianism and other political philosophies often hinges on differing views about the role of government, the nature of freedom, and the best ways to achieve a just and prosperous society.

That's it and this is a problem. 

This is a tip of an "iceberg" where the bulk of it is Donald Trump at titular head of a moronic movement of authoritarianism steeped in a generations long simmering of delusion and misinterpretations of our US Constitution and how government works, how it's relationship to citizens is, a monitor that is victim morning themselves into a fever.

We can do better. We must do better. ASAP.

And we have to protect ourselves from unforeseen groups, at times vastly disinformed...

Rachel Maddow's Podcast Ultra Spectacle.
Been saying this before Rachel's Ultra podcast. 

If you're supporting Repugnant MAGA Trump might as well've supported McCarthy. Sen. Joe McCarthy's "red scare" of the 1950s started in the 40s trying to get Nazis off for their crimes. GOP? Gone unAmerican.

Much of the lies and propaganda of Joe McCarthy we're seeing again, today with Trump's MAGA disinformation, which has infected (easily as usual) Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio even who I thought years ago, many now, might be an okay guy but now, he's decided how you do politics. Like Trump. Ends justify the means, damn the country, full speed ahead with your career, no matter how later on history, or justice will view you.

Wising us all the very best. Certainly better than this nonsense. 

Cheers! Sláinte!