When the country falls apart, what comes next you may like even less than what we have now. Especially under the rule of what might be Trump's cult. Only minus the constitution.

(April 9, 2020 at 12:04 pm)Cecelia Wrote: When the country falls apart, what comes next you may like even less than what we have now.  Especially under the rule of what might be Trump's cult.  Only minus the constitution.

I thought we had pretty much already eliminated the constitution.  <sigh>

Yeah, I think if the constitution was really being followed, we wouldn't be this bad off.

(April 9, 2020 at 12:04 pm)Cecelia Wrote: When the country falls apart, what comes next you may like even less than what we have now.  Especially under the rule of what might be Trump's cult.  Only minus the constitution.

The Weimar Republic is a good object-lesson here. After World War I, Germany went from being an monarchy to a republic, and while there was a huge cultural boom (indeed, I strongly believe that it was in the Weimar Republic that film truly came into its own as an art form, and not just an extension of theater), it was also an extremely chaotic time to live in. Almost immediately upon the abdication of Kaiser Wilhelm, TWO groups proclaimed a republic, the moderates who formed the Weimar Republic and communists who formed a Soviet Republic. While this particular conflict ended in August 1919, throughout the next 13 years, there would be constant power struggles between the moderates, the communists, and the increasingly visible nationalist groups who were convinced that the only reason that Germany lost the war was because civilians (particularly the moderates in the Weimar Republic and also the Jews) fucked the army over (when I took a course on it about a decade ago, the teacher noted the German media kept proclaiming that victory was imminent for four years, at least until the war finally ended and they lost). Things became worse after the economy managed to tank TWICE in the span of six years. At one point, inflation rose so quickly that people had to be paid three times per day just so they could afford to eat. Also, Article 48 the constitution allowed the President to rule Germany by decree in a state of emergency, and, naturally, they did, particularly Paul von Hindenburg.

Eventually, in 1932, the republic's third presidential election happened, and by this point, people were so fed up with this that it essentially became a question of: do we keep trying to make it work and keep Hindenburg in office, or do we let some fresh blood in with this new party that promises to shake things up? The new party in question became so popular and so threatening that conservatives, centrists, and leftists joined together to try and make sure the new guy didn't win. Eventually, Hindenburg won, but the new guy managed to get into power anyway, after political machinations led to Hindenburg appointing him chancellor anyway. Four weeks after being sworn in as chancellor, someone burned the Reichstag down, the new chancellor invoked Article 48 and wound up breaking down all the remnants of the old Weimar Republic and created something new.

Was it any better than the old system that had fallen apart? I'll just let this picture of the new chancellor say it all:

Sanders endorsed Biden. Now, we’ll see if he means it.

Boru

(April 13, 2020 at 6:33 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Sanders endorsed Biden. Now, we’ll see if he means it.

Boru

I'm sure Sanders would prefer to see Joe Biden elected President over Donald Trump.

The crucial question is whether or not the 10% or so of his insane supporters will care.

I think most of Bernie's supporters are pragmatic enough to vote for Joe Biden but there might be enough of the shrill, nut-jobs staying home to throw it to Trump.

I just hope he is able to sway Joe Biden to get on board with Medicare for all

Whose bust are we talking about?

I'm sure Joe would LIKE Medicare for all if it were practical. But is it? How much additional tax burden would that require? Is that something it is realistic both parties will get on board with?

That's pragmatism and realism.

There is going to have to be a cultural shift where most people feel that the moral imperative of universal healthcare is more important than their feeling that taxation is bad.

You can't force it. People need to WANT it.

(April 13, 2020 at 9:43 pm)AFTT47 Wrote: I'm sure Joe would LIKE Medicare for all if it were practical. But is it? How much additional tax burden would that require? Is that something it is realistic both parties will get on board with?

That's pragmatism and realism.

There is going to have to be a cultural shift where most people feel that the moral imperative of universal healthcare is more important than their feeling that taxation is bad.

You can't force it. People need to WANT it.

We have NO problem finding money to engage in half wars whenever we want to and even when we DON'T want to. Fuck the cost; we should just afford paying for people's health because THAT is why we have a social structure. It is there to make things better for people.