Trump Elected Again?

[jb116]

It’s all nuts. Biden is no leftist, no socialist and no commie. He is a pawn of the oligarchy that strives for totalitarian rule. Call it as you like. It has fascist aspects, authoritarian necessarily, maybe the best denominator would be neo- or hyper-feudal.

They have brainwashed some of the hard-left extremist elements to help bring about their rule, the deluded fools.

It might be that their total rule would feature elements that could be regarded „socialistic“ - like handing out universal basic income in exchange for obedience and to prevent uprisings caused by poverty or famine - but that’s only means to an end, not born out of a socialist ideology.
They are everything but egalitarian.

Exactly right. There's ZERO financial equality in their ultimate goals. The term commie is starting to remind me that it's most likely carry-over from american propaganda. It's at the tip of everybody's tongue and they don't even know why they're saying it. They should be saying fascist or oligarchy or globalist. Remember, the elite use ironic programming. Notice we have Antifa? We don't have like Anticom that they push in our faces. Because they want your attention on what they want you to believe fascism is and so it can't possibly be them then. Fascist then becomes this other thing, ambiguous elusive idea. Cell phones and social media were also ironic elements. Rather than in draconian fashion demand you submit your personal details, inner thoughts, political ideas and so on, they give you pretty packages and "cool tech" to simply do it yourself voluntarily. The irony.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Interesting! Yeah I think that there have been many problems with the lockdown in the USA, but I dont see anything socialist about that

From my perspective, socialism/communism and such (as well as fascism) are all just layers for more totalitarian control. I don't see how lockdown is anything more that tyrannical totalitarian policy. In that respect, they are purely socialistic.

I support a lockdown, but I think the are better examples of handling it other than USA, If they tell you to lockdown they should at least give you the resources to do so.

Why do you support a lockdown? You support FORCING people into Medical Experimentation?

Honestly, I am baffled by anyone on this board that thinks any authority (but especially government) should be forcing/coercing them into medical interventions. It's this sort of direct and indirect control that we are really fighting against in the first place.

Beyond that, can you cite me a single study done in 2019 or prior where more than 1 million plus people were locked down and prevented from going to work for at least one month in response to ANY disease? If you can't, your support certainly isn't based on anything remotely close to science.

And how do they know what your resources would be? Mine would be 1,000 ounces of gold bullion, a private luxury casino, 10 years worth of food, quality food or my choosing, supplements, a spare castle, 1,000 acres of farmland, 100 acres of costal land, a private jet, a truck, a jeep, a regular car, a luxury car, and 50,000 of gas/fuel. For starters. Give me all that, and I might agree to a lockdown.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I reckon you are a libertarian so I I can respect for being against lockdown since it enforces clear viliations of liberty. But I dont think the Republicans are a party of liberty whatsoever. And I think this is a decent example

In 'nasty parting shot,' HHS finalizes rule axing LGBTQ nondiscrimination protections

Under the new Health Department rule, taxpayer-funded adoption agencies can refuse to acknowledge same-sex marriages and turn away qualified LGBTQ parents.

www.nbcnews.com

I do lean fairly libertarian, and I am not a fan of most republicans. Although I don't see any glints of hope in the democrat party.

As far as the example...... what?

You realize that Libertarians don't believe that there should be a Department of Health and Human Services in the first place. That the government shouldn't be involved in your relationships, especially marriage. Marriage should be between you and your partner, and your church and God, if you so choose. If adoption agencies truly cared about the welfare of children (which should be the primary focus), they should be able to make their own rules, and they should be incredibly stringent. They shouldn't be taxpayer funded, they should be charities. Really, all of that is more a return to how the United States of America was set up prior to the Federal Reserve and the New Deal.

Nothing in the article you posted has anything to do with "liberty," or rights and freedoms. It's just about some rule changes from a large entity that makes a lot of rules. If anything, it deals with benefits and privileges. I don't think it's a very good example at all.

 

[Lee Simeon]

From my perspective, socialism/communism and such (as well as fascism) are all just layers for more totalitarian control. I don't see how lockdown is anything more that tyrannical totalitarian policy. In that respect, they are purely socialistic.


Why do you support a lockdown? You support FORCING people into Medical Experimentation?

Honestly, I am baffled by anyone on this board that thinks any authority (but especially government) should be forcing/coercing them into medical interventions. It's this sort of direct and indirect control that we are really fighting against in the first place.

Beyond that, can you cite me a single study done in 2019 or prior where more than 1 million plus people were locked down and prevented from going to work for at least one month in response to ANY disease? If you can't, your support certainly isn't based on anything remotely close to science.

And how do they know what your resources would be? Mine would be 1,000 ounces of gold bullion, a private luxury casino, 10 years worth of food, quality food or my choosing, supplements, a spare castle, 1,000 acres of farmland, 100 acres of costal land, a private jet, a truck, a jeep, a regular car, a luxury car, and 50,000 of gas/fuel. For starters. Give me all that, and I might agree to a lockdown.


I do lean fairly libertarian, and I am not a fan of most republicans. Although I don't see any glints of hope in the democrat party.

As far as the example...... what?

You realize that Libertarians don't believe that there should be a Department of Health and Human Services in the first place. That the government shouldn't be involved in your relationships, especially marriage. Marriage should be between you and your partner, and your church and God, if you so choose. If adoption agencies truly cared about the welfare of children (which should be the primary focus), they should be able to make their own rules, and they should be incredibly stringent. They shouldn't be taxpayer funded, they should be charities. Really, all of that is more a return to how the United States of America was set up prior to the Federal Reserve and the New Deal.

Nothing in the article you posted has anything to do with "liberty." It's just about some rule changes from a large entity that makes a lot of rules. I don't think it's a very good example at all.

Oh yes, thats clear to me. It was more of an example of how I dont see Trump can be seen as Libertarian. I guess my reasons for supporting lockdown is that I live in Norway and we still have had kept a lot of our freedom while getting cash reliefs so most people are not that opposed to it.

 

[tankasnowgod]

I guess my reasons for supporting lockdown is that I live in Norway and we still have had kept a lot of our freedom while getting cash reliefs so most people are not that opposed to it.

So, you don't oppose it because they paid you? That's it?

Isn't it a weird thing to say you "kept a lot of our freedom" while under house arrest?

Nothing about effectiveness, nothing about scientific validity, nothing about how dangerous (or not) the supposed disease might be?

 

[Homo Consumericus]

Oh yes, thats clear to me. It was more of an example of how I dont see Trump can be seen as Libertarian. I guess my reasons for supporting lockdown is that I live in Norway and we still have had kept a lot of our freedom while getting cash reliefs so most people are not that opposed to it.

You accepted 30 pieces of silver in exchange for betraying your countrymen.

 

[nomoreketones]

It’s all nuts. Biden is no leftist, no socialist and no commie. He is a pawn of the oligarchy that strives for totalitarian rule. Call it as you like. It has fascist aspects, authoritarian necessarily, maybe the best denominator would be neo- or hyper-feudal.

I call what we have in the United States now "Fascism" because the ideology of Fascism comes from the Italian word "fascio" meaning a bundle of rods. The idea is to have all the political forces and business forces to unify together as one political power.

Fascio - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

We now have the executive branch, the legislative branch, the judicial branch, big tech corporations, the media, large banks, and the major universities all unified together as one political power. This pollical entity is controlled by an oligarchy composed of a few super rich and powerful people behind the scenes.

Because all these powerful organizations are unified together as one political unit that is willing to sacrifice civil rights in order to maintain power, I call our system "Fascism". Like it or not, for all practical purposes we are ruled by corporations now - democracy is now just an illusion to placate the masses.

 

[tankasnowgod]

You accepted 30 pieces of silver in exchange for betraying your countrymen.

Ha! I'm sure it wasn't silver. At least that would have real value. It was likely fiat paper money. Or even more likely...... digits in a computer.

 

[LeeLemonoil]

I call what we have in the United States now "Fascism" because the ideology of Fascism comes from the Italian word "fascio" meaning a bundle of rods. The idea is to have all the political forces and business forces to unify together as one political power.

Fascio - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

We now have the executive branch, the legislative branch, the judicial branch, big tech corporations, the media, large banks, and the major universities all unified together as one political power. This pollical entity is controlled by an oligarchy composed of a few super rich and powerful people behind the scenes.

Because all these powerful organizations are unified together as one political unit that is willing to sacrifice civil rights in order to maintain power, I call our system "Fascism". Like it or not, for all practical purposes we are ruled by corporations now - democracy is now just an illusion to placate the masses.

I‘m familiar with the definition(s) of fascism and all you write is absolutely correct.
In the end, new fascets and elements will be added by the anticipated Techno-fascist-rule, but yes, for all intents and purposes they are fascist. Absolute rule by a self-recruiting, absolute and sacrosant ruling elite or caste.

 

[Lee Simeon]

So, you don't oppose it because they paid you? That's it?

Isn't it a weird thing to say you "kept a lot of our freedom" while under house arrest?

Nothing about effectiveness, nothing about scientific validity, nothing about how dangerous (or not) the supposed disease might be?

No not really because it was always fluid. Vey few people got fined for breaking rules and when they were it was because they had covid themselves or were supossed to be in quarantine. Only other cases with punishment were when there were parties involving a lot of people. During our national day in May there were only like 20 national cases daily and we could hold parties with 20 people. The majority of people have been pleased and the government have gotten more critisism for being to liberal with it rather than too strict.

 

[Lee Simeon]

You accepted 30 pieces of silver in exchange for betraying your countrymen.

Betraying my countrymen? Its not a bribe, its a safety net for when there is not enough jobs available. Our government have gotten critisicm for being to liberal rather than too authoritarian.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Betraying my countrymen? Its not a bribe, its a safety net for when there is not enough jobs available. Our government have gotten critisicm for being to liberal rather than too authoritarian.

"Criticism" is actually a verb masquerading a noun.

Who criticized your government for being "too liberal?" Was it people like Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos, who profited off of lockdown policies?

 

[tankasnowgod]

No not really because it was always fluid. Vey few people got fined for breaking rules and when they were it was because they had covid themselves or were supossed to be in quarantine. Only other cases with punishment were when there were parties involving a lot of people. During our national day in May there were only like 20 national cases daily and we could hold parties with 20 people. The majority of people have been pleased and the government have gotten more critisism for being to liberal with it rather than too strict.

But you said you "support the lockdown." Again.... why?

There is no proof that lockdowns stop or even slow down the spread of ANY virus or disease. And by now, there is data that suggests it makes things WORSE, specifically in regards to so called COVID 19.

There are absolutely disastrous health effects from lockdowns, such as deteriorating mental conditions, blood shortages, potential famine, and suicide. Are you actually pro suicide? Do you want more people to take their own lives?

In addition to being vehemently against the outright attack on small business, industries like travel and hospitality, and individual freedoms, I am anti-lockdown because they are DESTRUCTIVE to people's health. I have held this view since the beginning. As proof, look at the date that I started the following thread-

The Health Cost Of Lockdowns- Death Tolls From Increased Suicide, Blood Shortages, And Other Effects

I wanted to create this thread specifically about the Health Costs of Lockdowns. A lot of people who think these lockdowns are justified in any way completely disregard financial cost, the idea being that no amount of money is worth even a single life, and therefore, financial effects suffered...

raypeatforum.com

 

[Lee Simeon]

But you said you "support the lockdown." Again.... why?

There is no proof that lockdowns stop or even slow down the spread of ANY virus or disease. And by now, there is data that suggests it makes things WORSE, specifically in regards to so called COVID 19.

There are absolutely disastrous health effects from lockdowns, such as deteriorating mental conditions, blood shortages, potential famine, and suicide. Are you actually pro suicide? Do you want more people to take their own lives?

In addition to being vehemently against the outright attack on small business, industries like travel and hospitality, and individual freedoms, I am anti-lockdown because they are DESTRUCTIVE to people's health. I have held this view since the beginning. As proof, look at the date that I started the following thread-

The Health Cost Of Lockdowns- Death Tolls From Increased Suicide, Blood Shortages, And Other Effects

I wanted to create this thread specifically about the Health Costs of Lockdowns. A lot of people who think these lockdowns are justified in any way completely disregard financial cost, the idea being that no amount of money is worth even a single life, and therefore, financial effects suffered...

raypeatforum.com

Oh yeah I totally believe you and you have without a doubt looked more into the topic than me. I dont have any numbers on me, but I think the suicide rates from last year is pretty similar for all the years previously. There is a balance I think and Norway is much better at getting that balance over than USA. If we were only talking about USA than I dont think I would disagree with you.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Oh yeah I totally believe you and you have without a doubt looked more into the topic than me. I dont have any numbers on me, but I think the suicide rates from last year is pretty similar for all the years previously. There is a balance I think and Norway is much better at getting that balance over than USA. If we were only talking about USA than I dont think I would disagree with you.

Look, I'd agree that a looser lockdown is better than a stricter one. But I am against the concept in every form. One of the prime reasons being is that there is no proof that it works for the stated goal of "slowing the spread." Just like it's better to have a toe amputated than a leg. But I still wouldn't support a mandatory toe amputation program of healthy people.

I don't think there needs to be any "balance" on the issue. They don't work for their stated purpose, and they certainly have negative consequences. The idea behind the Hippocratic Oath was "First, do no harm." Any lockdown does harm. So it's guaranteed harm for zero benefit. So why would you support it?

 

[Lee Simeon]

I get your point and I respect you for being pincipled, but I am not sure what you mean by that it dont work to slow the spread. How can isolating infected people and their close contacts not help to slow spread? Non-infected people can do a lot of things except for throwing parties and drink in restaurants and overall just seeing less people.

 

[LeeLemonoil]

@tankasnowgod seems to lack the understanding that the States of Norway and the US can’t be compared.
Norways State is so fundamentally more benign and functional than the US, I don’t think Americans who haven’t been there or in somewhat similar European states deeply influenced by social-democratic principles can even begin to understand, feel the difference.

Also, the society and the people in Norway are fundamentally more homogenous than the US.

I don’t claim that Norway is paradise or that there aren’t corrupted or authoritarian elements within its highest ranks of the state and other elites - it’s a nato member after all - but still, no comparison to the deeply divided, deeply shitholeish aspects of the USA

 

[tankasnowgod]

I get your point and I respect you for being pincipled, but I am not sure what you mean by that it dont work to slow the spread. How can isolating infected people and their close contacts not help to slow spread? Non-infected people can do a lot of things except for throwing parties and drink in restaurants and overall just seeing less people.

Lockdown isn't about isolating infected people. It's about locking down the ENTIRE population, or restricting their movement or activities.

In fact, you even hit on this were you talk about restrictions on healthy people (or "non-infected," to use your words).

 

[tankasnowgod]

@tankasnowgod seems to lack the understanding that the States of Norway and the US can’t be compared.
Norways State is so fundamentally more benign and functional than the US, I don’t think Americans who haven’t been there or in somewhat similar European states deeply influenced by social-democratic principles can even begin to understand, feel the difference.

Also, the society and the people in Norway are fundamentally more homogenous than the US.

I don’t claim that Norway is paradise or that there aren’t corrupted or authoritarian elements within its highest ranks of the state and other elites - it’s a nato member after all - but still, no comparison to the deeply divided, deeply shitholeish aspects of the USA

Being Anti-Lockdown doesn't have anything to do with which government is doing the lockdown. Bottom line, it doesn't work, they were all a radical medical experiment (in violation of the Nuremberg Code), and it has negative consequences.

Going back to the toe amputation analogy, one surgeon may have a very low post operation infection rate, and another surgeon's might be much higher. Obviously, the first surgeon is better, but it doesn't change the fact that healthy people shouldn't have their toes amputated.

Also, it's pretty clear from your "Norway vs. US" comparison that you don't understand how it worked here. Some states and cities, like New York, had draconian policies. Others, like Texas and Arizona, had lighter ones. Some, like Florida, had lockdowns initially, but reversed course when they realized they were doing harm and had a Governor (in Ron DeSantis) who took the media to task several times for predicting disaster and outright lying. It was a joy to see. And some states, like South Dakota, had no lockdown at all (Kristi Noem deserves a lot of credit for knowing both constitutional principles, and not subjecting her state to dangerous medical experiments).

But bottom line, I don't care what state or country is doing it.... Lockdowns do not work for their stated purpose. And you can't point to an example from 2019 or earlier where 1 million+ people were locked down for a month or more, in any shape or form, to prevent a disease or virus. The data doesn't exist.

 

[nomoreketones]

I think the major distinction we need to look at is the difference between a government mandated lock down and a voluntary lockdown. It is appropriate for a government to ask it's people to lock down voluntarily. It is okay for the government to offer compensation for those who lock down voluntarily to further encourage a lockdown. It is not okay for a government to institute a mandatory lockdown and punish citizens for not locking down.

Can't believe citizens of the United States are being punished by the government for not locking down. But here we are.

 

[tankasnowgod]

I think the major distinction we need to look at is the difference between a government mandated lock down and a voluntary lockdown. It is appropriate for a government to ask it's people to lock down voluntarily. It is okay for the government to offer compensation for those who lock down voluntarily to further encourage a lockdown. It is not okay for a government to institute a mandatory lockdown and punish citizens for not locking down.

Can't believe citizens of the United States are being punished by the government for not locking down. But here we are.

But a "voluntary lockdown" isn't a lockdown. That used to be called "Sick people staying home from work or school." No one even used the term "quarantine," except maybe as a joke.

The term "lockdown" itself implies that someone or something is being restrained, and not voluntarily. And it was never used in relation to disease prior to 2020 (well, except for in that one episode of "The Dead Zone" from 2003.) It's more of a term you might use in a prison, maybe to during a riot or jailbreak.

Just like "healthy person" has been rebranded as "asymptomatic patient."