The Neo-Liberals ...

You could say the same about Trump, he was an outsider who got in to the Republican Party and they chose him, which in the end was a smart move by the Republicans. But Trump is not a Republican and he has the lowest rating any President ever had since they started to rate them.

Bernie had a lot of support, particularly from young people and the progressives.

In my opinion, Bernie should have been the candiate for the Democratic Party, but he lost because the US has become an oligarchy, and this got Trump in to office.

But of course, that is all just opinion.

What is not opinion however, is the fact how Trumps cabinet is the 'richest' cabinet in US history. And those people are now supposed to represent the people of america.
Good luck. You will need it.
 
CrniVuk said:
Trump is not a Republican and he has the lowest rating any President ever had since they started to rate them.

He still had the votes though, something Bernie didn't have. Trump might have been an outsider but he at least had SOME elites behind him.

CrniVuk said:
Bernie had a lot of support, particularly from young people and the progressives.

That was ALL he had, that was the problem.

CrniVuk said:
What is not opinion however, is the fact how Trumps cabinet is the 'richest' cabinet in US history.

Rich people have always had an inordinate amount of influence in power, in ANY type of government system. Kings, Chiefs, PMs, Chairmen, etc. If they didn't start out wealthy then they at least had wealthy benefactors that they owed favors to. I think I already addressed this in an earlier post.
 
The worst enemy of humanity is capitalism. That is what provokes uprisings like our own, a rebellion against a system, against a neo-liberal model, which is the representation of a savage capitalism. If the entire world doesn't acknowledge this reality, that the national states are not providing even minimally for health, education and nourishment, then each day the most fundamental human rights are being violated.

– Evo Morales
 
The hatred of capitalism is born from the view it exists entirely as a system of labor generating wealth for the wealthy which is not an unfair statement. However, the problem with a Marxist view of the world is that it is possible for people to force the government and corporations to give them a portion of that wealth. Which throws the entirety of the idea to shit that some people would be okay with some getting more if the many get some. Of course, the happiest and most prosperous of America is when that being forced is at its most fierce which isn't happening any time soon.

The Republicans proposed health care plan, for example, is a enormous tax cut for the rich.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/03/acha-tax-cut/518889/

Rich doesn't automatically mean evil, I know it hurts to say, but we need less Dick Cheneys and more Bill Gates.

He still had the votes though, something Bernie didn't have. Trump might have been an outsider but he at least had SOME elites behind him.

There's a good argument to be made Trump didn't actually have any more support in the halls of power than Bernie but that the GOP was disorganized and demoralized, so they weren't unable to close ranks enough to make sure Trump wasn't on the ticket anywhere. Whereas Hillary had her supporters neutralize Bernie Sanders as a contender with illegal anti-democratic means.
 
Last edited:
hey man, say what you want but has anyone ELSE given away 28 billion dollars and saved 6 million lives?

Who was using his own money?
 
MutantScalper said:
There's a good argument to be made Trump didn't actually have any more support in the halls of power than Bernie but that the GOP was disorganized and demoralized, so they weren't unable to close ranks enough to make sure Trump wasn't on the ticket anywhere. Whereas Hillary had her supporters neutralize Bernie Sanders as a contender with illegal anti-democratic means.

Are you buying into the whole election rigging thing? It couldn't be because Hillary had the minority vote. It couldn't be because she had the woman vote, or the blue collar vote, or the Latino vote, or the hollywood vote, etc, etc, Why is it that when it comes to foreigners calling Americans stupid, it only applies to the right? I mean SERIOUSLY.

And Trump did have his supporters in the halls of power. Simply google the amount of endorsements each had and the numbers are incredible. Not only does Trump have more backing from people but those people had and STILL have much more power.

AGAIN, Bernie Panders failed because not only was he unwilling to compromise, but he used the cheapest fucking tactic in the book, 'free shit'. That might work with naïve young hipsters but not against adults who have gotten hit with the realities of life, full force. His other campaign promises were either vague as fuck or outright impossible to act on, due to either his outsider status or being completely unrealistic.

I mean, I dislike Shillary just as much as the next GOP voter but at least, she had experience and the insiders to back her up, along with the vast majority of democratic plebes.
 
Last edited:
*Shrugs*

40% Of the americans are close to the poverty line.
Wealth inequality was never as large like today in the US.
A lot of your budged goes to the military. And a lot of that money ends up in private business.
Your prison system is privatized, and the US is one of the nations with the most people spending time in Prison - even more than China.
Now some people are even demanding a 'privatized' school system.
American infrastructure, is shit.
Banks have been bail-out with billions (was it 700? No clue), most of it ended up in the hands of the so called 1%.

Bernie represtended a plan, that was more sound than what both Hillary and Trump had - particularly Trump, I mean tax cuts while increasing the military budged and not touching on any social programs. And now, as he has won, it might even looks like the tax cuts will only happen for the 'rich', what considence.

And yet ... all you're saying about Bernie is " he will give free shit to everyone". But even if he did, I would rather want to see free education and health care, than seeing that stuff wasted on some new but useless Pentagon project.
http://www.dailywire.com/news/11396/pentagon-uncovered-massive-waste-and-fraud-so-they-hank-berrien

Seriously, what is that Americans 'fear' so much about socialism?

'Timmy, tell us on this doll, where has socialism touched you?'


He still had the votes though, something Bernie didn't have. Trump might have been an outsider but he at least had SOME elites behind him.
Yes, and that is the problem. And it looks like it won't take long before it will fall apart and blow right in the faces of those elites, considering this ongoing question about Trumps ties to Russia.


That was ALL he had, that was the problem.
Sadly, we will never know what a Bernie vs Trump situation would have looked like. But consider this. Trump was an outsider and Bernie was an outsider too. Trump managed to take over the Republican party, because people are fucked up of seeing the same old faces, many people voted Trump because they hate the known political establishment, according to some survey most people made the choice for Trump in the toll both, because they didn't 'knew' him, while Hillary represents the establishment in every possible way.

You can say a lot about Bernie, but he was NOT like Hillary, and he managed to get in to the democratic party NOT as a typical democrat, he managed to finance his campaign as an rather unknown political figure, not unlike Trump, without the backing of the big donnors - but sadly this is ALL(!) the democratic party cares about these days.

Now imagine if he had the WHOLE support of the democratic party. This is just speculation, but I think he would have destroyed Trump.

And even a Bernie that fails, might be still a better president then a succeeding Trump.

The hatred of capitalism is born from the view it exists entirely as a system of labor generating wealth for the wealthy which is not an unfair statement.
The reason to 'fight' our current economical system, has less to do with ideology at this point though. I mean I don't make a secret about my leftists and almost 'socialist' views, and I actually think that marxism has many good points - but also many flaws. But despite of this, I do not 'hate' capitalism.
But everything from a simply neutral and scientific perspective says, that our current resource consumption, exceeds Earth's capacity to regenerate those resources and we can not sustain this for much longer. We already spend the resources of 1,5 planets, and there will be simply a tipping point where things go down the gutter if we continue with our current behaviour.
 
Last edited:
hey man, say what you want but has anyone ELSE given away 28 billion dollars and saved 6 million lives?

Who was using his own money?

Much of the 'aid' given by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation is in the form of stuff like free Windows licenses to schools etc. More like a curse if you ask me. Plus they're not actually "giving away money", as in giving away interests on the total sum that hasn't decreased.

One of the reason Bill Gates started the foundation was to make the criticism of being a evil monopolist oligarg who makes a bad product go away. It's the oldest trick in the book.

More criticism of B & M Gates foundation.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ities-by-promoting-big-business-a6822036.html

Far from a “neutral charitable strategy”, the Gates Foundation is about benefiting big business, especially in agriculture and health, through its “ideological commitment to promote neoliberal economic policies and corporate globalisation,” according to the report published by the campaign group Global Justice Now. Its influence is “dangerously skewing” aid priorities, the group says.
 
Besides, you don't have to be 'evil' to be a part of an evil system, albeit I really don't like to declare it as evil, but it's simply a very rigged system where a very small minority holds most of the wealth and also earns most of the wealth. You don't call necessarily the feudal system or the caste stystem evil, but no one would really want to be a peasant in the 12th century either or born as the lowest caste in India. Same as with the oligarchy we experience on a global level right now and which has to be one way or another overcome. I would like to see a peacefull transition with reforms and such, but I actually expect it to become at some point violent.
 
Besides, you don't have to be 'evil' to be a part of an evil system, albeit I really don't like to declare it as evil, but it's simply a very rigged system where a very small minority holds most of the wealth and also earns most of the wealth. You don't call necessarily the feudal system or the caste stystem evil, but no one would really want to be a peasant in the 12th century either or born as the lowest caste in India. Same as with the oligarchy we experience on a global level right now and which has to be one way or another overcome. I would like to see a peacefull transition with reforms and such, but I actually expect it to become at some point violent.

http://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gates-infographic-2012-1

Just saying.
 
Mark 12:41-44New International Version (NIV)
The Widow’s Offering

41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.

43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.”
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+12:41-44

You were saying? :Phttps://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+12:41-44
 
CrniVuk said:
American infrastructure, is shit.

It really isn't all that bad TBH. I mean, we are not Europe but our population difference speaks for itself.

CrniVuk said:
Seriously, what is that Americans 'fear' so much about socialism?

Because, to this date, not one single politician has figured out how to sell 'Socialism with American characteristics'. Every single champion of socialism we have had so far has been an extremist. We have had this discussion Crni.

CrniVuk said:
he managed to finance his campaign as an rather unknown political figure,

You do know that can also be a liability right?

CrniVuk said:
Bernie represtended a plan, that was more sound than what both Hillary and Trump had

No his plan sucked. In order to make it happen, he would neuter us militarily and politically while introducing MASSIVE tax hikes to pay for his social programs. Why can't progressives face it? He did not get the black, latino, woman, blue collar workers, etc, votes. He did not get those votes because people saw what his plans were, which was pie in the sky bullshit. If he had a feasible plan, more people would have voted for him. If he was willing to compromise, more elites would have backed him.

CrniVuk said:
Now imagine if he had the WHOLE support of the democratic party

That would mean he was politically savvy enough to have support from within the party and had more reasonable plans for the country. He would be more of a maverick politician that would owe, and be owed, favors. This would essentially mean he would have compromised, much to the chagrin of the young progressives.

TBH, had Bernie moderated his speech, compromised, and presented a plan more acceptable by everyone instead of the young and naïve, he most likely would have beat both Hillary and Trump.

Again, it is better to have some of what you want than nothing at all.
 
Last edited:
Yeah ... we had this discussion, and I still say that Bernie would be a moderate liberal/social democrat for Germany, Bernie wouldn't even qualify as a leftist here. I mean our real 'leftists' would be communists in the US.

He was 'extreme' for US standards, which I classify as full blown oligarchy since Trump got 'ellected' - we shouldn't forget that Putin was also ellected.

I mean look at health care, every other nation can do it. Just the US can't.

However, I have to give you a fair point. Bernie, has no real plans for the future either - automation for example. But, he has a logical stance on climate change, he doesn't denny it. Bernie wants the US to become a 1970s Germany, but that would be still a major improvement for your society.
 
@CrniVuk

It doesn't matter what Bernie would be classified in Germany because he is not running for office THERE.

He is running for office in the UNITED STATES.

AGAIN, Socialism with American characteristics. You can scream all you want about how 'other nations', can do it. Other nations IS NOT, the United States. Cultural, population, health differences, etc.

Yeah, he has a good outlook on climate change. Too bad he was so busy not compromising that he would never get an opportunity to at least, sneak/railroad some climate change legislation through, had be been elected into office.
 
@CrniVuk

It doesn't matter what Bernie would be classified in Germany because he is not running for office THERE.

He is running for office in the UNITED STATES.

AGAIN, Socialism with American characteristics. You can scream all you want about how 'other nations', can do it. Other nations IS NOT, the United States. Cultural, population, health differences, etc.

Yeah, he has a good outlook on climate change. Too bad he was so busy not compromising that he would never get an opportunity to at least, sneak/railroad some climate change legislation through, had be been elected into office.

That's kind of....silly.

No, seriously, you kind of missed the fact Bernie is a Senator. One of the highest and most influential positions in the United States. A figure who was dangerously close to being the primary candidate in a situation which was largely viewed as a sure thing.

How many other Senators can you name? That have major policy influence over their party and the United States?

Oh right, the guy who has been massively influential his entire career and is sinecure in his seat plus put his spot on countless bills and positions is apparently too radical and silly to have any influence because he didn't tow the line to the Democrats' neo-con bullshit.

Dude...no. Just no.

Mark 12:41-44New International Version (NIV)
The Widow’s Offering

41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.

43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.”
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+12:41-44
You were saying? :P

7 All the people saw this and began to mutter, “He has gone to be the guest of a sinner.”

8 But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”

9 Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham. 10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”
 
Last edited:
@CrniVuk

It doesn't matter what Bernie would be classified in Germany because he is not running for office THERE.

He is running for office in the UNITED STATES.

AGAIN, Socialism with American characteristics. You can scream all you want about how 'other nations', can do it. Other nations IS NOT, the United States. Cultural, population, health differences, etc.

Yeah, he has a good outlook on climate change. Too bad he was so busy not compromising that he would never get an opportunity to at least, sneak/railroad some climate change legislation through, had be been elected into office.
I believeit matters, because many Americans have a very strange relationship to anything that is called 'social', or 'socialism' and often confusing things with marxism and straight communism, which is strange when you consider how much the American culture is rooted in 'christian traditions' which usually contain also social aspects, but Americans are libertarians at heart, with all the good aspects (freedom of expression, free speech, free press etc.) but also all the bad stuff that comes with it, making the American very susceptible to extreme neo-conservative views. Tell an american that he shouldn't help a homeless, and he will call you heart less. But tell him that it's about choice, and he will follow you even in to the abyss.

Maybe other nations are not the United States, but that doesn't mean you still can't learn from it or that you shouldn't learn from it, like Sweden, Norway, Finnland etc. You're humans after all and on a very basic level humans are very similar. It's not like american soccer moms cares less about her children compared to the Bavarian house wive or the American worker worriees less about his job compared to the German worker. And right now we're talking about behaviour and the American society has seen a very huge shift in the last years to very neo-liberal and neo-conservative politics which started at the very least under Clinton in the 90s but probably much sooner and we can see how the effect of globalisation, opening the global market not only to american products - which was very beneficial for the americans, creating a 'true' middle class, with the manufacturing, giant corporations and blue collar workers, but also to jobs had a very devastating effect on the American society.

And I think the only way to actually get the US in to a better position is with more 'socialist' ideas in politics and society, more 'big government', more regulations for corporations, more taxes, better health care, les privatisation particularly the prison system in the US is an absolute mess, better laws against corruption - particularly in politics, geting those millionairs and billionairs out of politics, with the big donnors and super pacs. Or I believe the US will experience even more and severe poverty over the next few decades, maybe even up to a point where it might lead to a massive civil unrest - who knows?

That's kind of....silly.
Bernie was an independed and represented the people from Vermont which isn't really the standard signal bearer of special interests, that's what I am saying. He was am 'outsider' to what people 'think' politics is about, the big games in Washington and the corruption and lobbying that happens there. And he still manged to stir up the Democratic Party.
And most importantly, he is really not a registered Democrat nor Republican, he never was running as a democrat in his whole political career before the ellection and always remained an independed, which makes him at least a bit similar like Trump in that sense.

And this is a remarkable evolution, when you consider the political system of the US that is basically a two-party system, or hast it been for a very long time at least.
 
@CT Phipps

There are plenty of senators. If that is your high water mark for Bernie then the bar is terribly low. As a POLITICIAN, being a state rep is only the FIRST step in moving up the ranks.

John McCain for example, who has much more power than Bernie as Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. John Kerry became Secretary of State.

There is a reason why Bernie was the only politician at Standing Rock, as other politicians actually had an image to maintain.

Just because YOU and the progressives think he is a hotshot doesn't mean he is one. Like I said, Bernie Panders wasn't the candidate that got the minority vote, that was Clinton, although I have to give him points for trying by shamelessly pandering to BLM. Bernie also didn't have the backing of Democrats although he sold out to join the party.

I will give you this, Bernies 'free shit', tactic did bring a fuck ton of young people and progressives out of the woodwork. This scared the Democrats, not so much that he might win the nomination, but that these folks are some of the most rabid, anti-establishment people and if THEIR choice didn't win, you can rest assured they would rather go down with the ship then actually compromise and get SOMETHING, rather than NOTHING. True to form, Bernie Or Bust would rather stay home or vote Stein then actually put a democrat in the white house.

And Bernie Sanders DID NOT have the support of the D.C. elite like Trump did.

@Crni Vuk

Just something I missed before. Like it or not Crni, in order to have power, the ability to make REAL change, one MUST get ones hands dirty. It is a fact of life that your average snowflake simply cannot wrap his/her/gender neutral, head around. I mean, you would think that a college educated student, well versed in history, would understand politics is not a black and white affair.

It is not the TITLE of socialist that matters to Joe Plebe. It IS the type of socialist POLICIES people try to institute. AGAIN, Socialism with American characteristics. Like I said, Reagan promised tax cuts and then did a total 180 when he realized that wouldn't work. He implemented a lot of socialist policies before and some after he became president. It is all about how you SELL socialism to Joe Plebe.

So yea, Bernie is seen as an extremist here because he is certainly NOT, attempting to sell socialism to Joe Plebe. Bernie Sanders certainly is NOT, trying to implement, 'Socialism with American characteristics'. Bernie is more like, 'Please smile while I shove euro socialism up your ass'. TBH, I don't think the average Plebe here knows or even cares how Bernie is seen in Europe.

Lastly, why is it so hard to understand that we do have socialist policies in the states like I have brought up AGAIN AND AGAIN. The issue here is like it always is, the lefties are not simply satisfied with slowly building it up, we have to have, REVOLUTION!
 
Last edited:
Yeah, slowly building up, since when? The early 1980s :P. When will you get there? YOu have some plan? 2050? Or maybe 2070.
We will have to stay tuned I guess!

In the mean time you have Trumpcare to take care of everything ;).
 
Well, that's the only way we have so far. Maybe we can get another president down the line that can compromise and get more done while making both sides happy. Guess we will have to stay tuned in.
 
Back
Top