The people must be built. They must be constituted. And we do that by engagement...
...I do think its naive to say that race was not a factor - perhaps and likely the most important factor - in what's been going on. But even racism is differential - that it mattered here does not mean it has to matter in the future. But the only way to bring out that result is, again, engagement. I qualify this by saying that 'engagement' is not a solution but itself a problem: engage how, where, and in what manner? These are tactical questions. — StreetlightX

Following questions by Krishnan Guru-Murthy on how people feeling helpless about Brexit can engage,Timothy Snyder made a few practical suggestions as to a 'kit of tools'.
Bsically, decide what you care about, small actions on a daily basis, eye contact, avoid inflammatory language...
It is all about attitude of citizens towards authoritarianism. To move beyond the apathy on which it depends. And not to be willing to adjust to a new 'normal' as in the boiled frog scenario.

From 7mins in...
https://www.channel4.com/news/some-of-todays-politicians-have-learned-propaganda-tricks-from-1930s-fascists-says-yale-professor

I think it interesting Snyder mentions face to face "look them in the eye".
This means that there would be no anonymity as per online forums. Perhaps more care in use of language. Even Parliament is now having to tone it down a bit. I can't remember him mentioning social media...

Hillary's "Basket of Deplorables" comment was correct, actually.

That might be so. It still wasn't clever...

Thanks for the information. While I think that the data tells us a more complex story than you're suggesting, it does look like I was wrong about Trump voters. I didn't know the issues had been so racialized. But I'm still going to defend my basic points--later some time.

Watch this cringe-worthy MSNBC video trying to paint Trump and his supporters as racists. This sort of propaganda lasted the entirety of his campaign.

I think what a lot of people are suggesting is that this continued branding is self-defeating. Moving forward, a narrative that extends some dignity across the aisle may be a better plan.

So no, we likely never going to see any exact repetition of these movements and events, but that does not mean that we should discard these otherwise politically salient terms, especially when we seem them echo again so clearly in modernity. — Maw

Sure, we can exclude the fact that Hitler was a genocidal manic, but he did have two legs, so he was in fact like Trump in a really important way.

Like I said, I don't take your comments seriously. You can keep trying to draw these parallels all you want, but it only better makes the point of the OP, which is that the scorn the left heaps upon the right by calling them Nazi-like does nothing but strengthen their resolve and increase their loyalty to their political leaders.

That is to say, how might you get Trump re-elected? Keep doing what you're doing.

the undemocratic bullshit that is the electoral college — StreetlightX

More democracy, not less. — StreetlightX

I'm tempted to start a new thread - "What is democracy?" (apart from distilled political niceness and legitimacy that is). But in the meantime, what is it you want more of and what would that look like? It's not the Dictatorship of the Deploriat, I assume?

That is to say, how might you get Trump re-elected? Keep doing what you're doing. — Hanover

I have a hard time understanding this. Obama was apparently the reincarnation of Chairman Mao and the Antichrist, all at the same time. I never thought to say to a conservative: "Keep it up and we'll re-elect him!"

I kind of do want to know where this is coming from on your side. Who is it specifically that makes you feel like you're under attack? Friends? Family? Surely not CNN? The New England Elite? Real question.

Or does it have to do with Trump in particular? Your party was hi-jacked and now that's supposed to reflect on all conservatives?

I'm trying to imagine that. A complete wacko takes over the Democratic party and we have a clown-slug for president, who has the NRA backing him. And David Duke.

Wait. What is the democratic version of the NRA? I don't think there is one. It's much more than the Republican party that was hi-jacked. I just realized that.

Like the video said, really, only leftists equate wanting border control with racism, the argument is absolutely ridiculous. Maw has already equated Trump to Hitler and this next argument of his is equally stupid.

I truly hope that the people in the center will get fed up with the Hillary voting Trump haters and the Trump voting Hillary-haters, who both have seem to have stayed in the trenches of the last election and will continue from there during the next election their war against the other.

One side believes that neonazis will take over (or are now in power) and the other side that Cultural-Marxists will take over (or are now in power...not perhaps in the White House, but still).

only leftists equate wanting border control with racism — Judaka

I equate what might be described as ‘excessive or inefficient’ border control with an effort to mobilize political support by exploiting a natural conservative tendency. The racism adds fuel to the fire, so to speak, and is expressed in imbuing the target of racism with inherent negative qualities. Observe the video that I posted earlier:



The snake can’t help itself, it’s its nature to bite. Maybe poetic license excuses blatant racism.

only leftists equate wanting border control with racism
— Judaka

I equate what might be described as ‘excessive or inefficient’ border control with an effort to mobilize political support by exploiting a natural conservative tendency. — praxis

I haven't read any of this thread and only looked at this one post. I happen to have an interest in the US/Mexico border, being a Californian who's made many trips to Mexico and followed border politics for decades. The excessive and inefficient border control you speak of is the result of decades of bipartisan hypocrisy. Indeed, Obama built the cages that he kept kids in as he separated them from families or turned them over to traffickers. It's all a matter of public record.

What the left does that's very disingenuous is to call Trump a bad person for enforcing the laws that Democrats have made. Look up the actual immigration policies of Hillary and DiFi and all the Clinton and Obama era Dem legislators and administrations. The Dems passed the Secure Fence act of 2006 giving Trump the legal authority to build his wall (which for the record I strongly oppose). Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were the ones who militarized the border and took a bad situation and made it worse.

If the Dems want open borders, let them pass a bill op;ening the borders. Or abolishing ICE (which they all voted for at the time). Or abolishing detaining kids in cages. And where would you keep them while their relationship to the adults who CLAIM to be their parents is sorted out? The cages are to keep violent sexual predators out. Separating the kids from their ALLEGED parents is how you prevent turning kids over to traffickers. What do you propose instead? What solutions have the Dem politicians proposed? NONE. Just insults that Trump's a bad person.

To be clear about where I'm coming from: In general I'm more of an open borders type. I favor good relations between the US and our friend, neighbor, and third largest trading partner Mexico. I think funds spent on the wall would be better spent staffing up the official border stations so that legitimate crossers can pass more quickly.

But I abhor the awful hypocrisy of the left when they say that Trump is a bad person for enforcing the laws that they passed and for doing exactly the same things on the border that Obama did when he had a massive refugee crisis in 2014. I've watched the Dems steadily make the border crisis worse decade by decade from Clinton onward and now trying to blame the whole mess on Trump. That's hypocritical and totally counterproductive. The Dems have no interest in solutions on the border. They never have. Neither have the GOP of course. The ongoing hypocrisy and humanitarian disaster on the southern border serves both their interests.

Most of you clearly don't read any relevant political material, and it shows in your comments.

the left heaps upon the right by calling them Nazi-like does nothing but strengthen their resolve and increase their loyalty to their political leaders. — Hanover

Just evergreen commentary from you

Not sure how your rant relates to what I wrote, fishfry, but there's one point I'd like to clarify.

Obama built the cages that he kept kids in as he separated them from families or turned them over to traffickers. It's all a matter of public record. — fishfry

Politifact [gotta love politifact!] claims:

Obama and Biden in 2014 saw an influx of children arriving at the border without a parent or guardian, and reporting from 2014 by the Arizona Republic referred to a chain-link enclosure holding children as cages.

Trump’s administration implemented a policy that led to the separation of thousands of children from their parents. Obama did not have that policy.

Can you point out public records that help to substantiate your version? Most curiously, the part about Obama turning kids over to human traffickers.

I think that racism has lost all meaning to some people, I wonder what people would think a world where only a single race existed. There'd be no borders, nobody would be worried about illegal immigration, nobody would discriminate against other cultures, nobody would discriminate against poorer and less educated nations.

Forgetting that, what I said still stands true, a desire for strict border control is not indicative of a racist mentality. Why would voting transcend what people care about - that's exactly what it should be about.I don't think that what you've posted actually demonstrates racism. It certainly demonstrates an extremely prejudiced view towards illegal immigrants but is it race, is it because Mexico is a poor country, is it because the media misconstrues the reality of the situation and people do not know the facts?

Do people like Trump because he's a "racist" or because they care about border control and they're willing to overlook that he's a 'racist"? There are repercussions economically, culturally, politically, societally and on many different scales and areas to the topic of border control. There's the truth of the matter and the fearmongering and misinformation that people will react to if they don't can't discern fiction from fact.

I'm not really making any claims about what percentage of people favour Trump for what reason but leftists certainly can't help themselves. Trump supporters are racist, the desire to control borders is indicative of racism, a simplistic analysis that is convienient for them.


No, you're just unable to separate fact from interpretation and the role of your insidious views from your interpretations. Every post you've made in this thread stems from your ignorance about these two things.

Your conclusions to the statistics you're providing require a particular bias, you sacrificed nuance for stronger condemnation. Of all the fallen democracies, Nazi Germany and Hitler are the worst to draw parralels to, because it's overused as a method to do the most damage to your "political opponents". Caring about immigration ≠ racism either, pretending to be orientated around facts while utilising these overdone interpretations which clearly only seek to maximise impact, it's been done too much to have even the slightest chance of people failing to recognising what you're doing.

Oh no, these young people will destroy the world! That's totally a new thing. It's not like the ancient Greeks said the same thing about younger generations... — Echarmion

Did I say it's a "totally new thing"? Of course it's never been a good idea. But then being ruled by crusty old farts isn't a good idea either; seems there is nothing much about politics which is a good idea.

Did you feel like Clinton's comment about deplorabless was directed at you?

Like the video said, really, only leftists equate wanting border control with racism, the argument is absolutely ridiculous. Maw has already equated Trump to Hitler and this next argument of his is equally stupid. — Judaka

Whether he's racist or not, what we've observed is that he seems to court racists. Have you not seen that at all?

Nazi Germany and Hitler are the worst to draw parralels to, because it's overused as a method to do the most damage to your "political opponents". — Judaka

Yes, when I see families separated and placed in camps that historians, including historians of concentration camps call them concentration camps, in sinister and inhumane conditions that I've outlined here and elsewhere, approved by a president who calls immigrants "vermin", who "infest our countries", which, uh yeah, very much has Nazi precedence, or spreading conspiracy theories that lead the the worst massacre of Jews in America (and continues to do so), then yes, I will continue to draw parallels between Nazism and Trumpism, and give fuck-all to how my political opponents feel about this when they shrug it off, enable it, or outright support it. Conservatives are the biggest fucking crybabies I swear.

Literally the only thing that would convince some of you that drawing an analogy between Nazi Germany is when the US Government starts shoving people into gas chambers, and the point is to ensure that it doesn't get to that point.

Caring about immigration ≠ racism either — Judaka

Except I didn't say that concern with immigration is tantamount to being racist. What I actually wrote was that the documentary's main focus was that the primary concern and motivation of Trump voters was the economy. It offered no stats to bulwark that. Just some talking heads and some Trump voters they interviewed. The stats pulled from the exit poll show otherwise. The thesis of the video is incorrect.


Once again, some of you don't read, and it really shows.

I know a number of people who voted for trump. I'll channel them for you:

Q: Did you think Clinton referred to you as deplorable?"

A: What did she say?

Q: Um. Why did you vote for trump? Was it an economic thing? Or what?

A: There weren't any good choices. I thought maybe Trump would shake things up.

Q: Are you going to vote for him again?

A: Probably.

Oh and by the way, I just realized that one of the woman "experts" in the video is Saleno Zito, who infamously lied in her book, The Great Revolt, about interviewing swing voters, when in fact they were Republican officials or long-time GOP voters, or simply made up quotes that supported GOP talking points from uncertain voters. What a complete joke.

I think that racism has lost all meaning to some people, I wonder what people would think a world where only a single race existed. There'd be no borders, nobody would be worried about illegal immigration, nobody would discriminate against other cultures, nobody would discriminate against poorer and less educated nations.

Forgetting that,... — Judaka

Good, I have no idea what your point is there. Bigotry would be alive and well in a world with only one race, given sufficient ignorance. You just couldn't call it racism.

what I said still stands true, a desire for strict border control is not indicative of a racist mentality. — Judaka

100% agree. Did I indicate otherwise?

I don't think that what you've posted actually demonstrates racism. — Judaka

Did you watch the video of Trump poetically suggesting to his devout followers that people crossing the border from Mexico are inherently evil? He got a fucking standing ovation for that.

It certainly demonstrates an extremely prejudiced view towards illegal immigrants but is it race — Judaka

What does your intuition honestly tell you?

leftists certainly can't help themselves. Trump supporters are racist, the desire to control borders is indicative of racism, a simplistic analysis that is convienient for them. — Judaka

My personal belief is that there can be an element of racism in right-wing populism because the group experiencing a loss of status can resent their status dropping below that of minorities or the perceived underclass, and this anxiety can be harnessed by an unscrupulous leader. Trump and his followers are notoriously against affirmative action, for instance. I don’t think this would be so concerning unless you were anxious about your own status.

The bigoty he tries to inspire around the border issue is more incidental, in my opinion.

Can you point out public records that help to substantiate your version? — praxis

Won't waste my time. Go look it up. Jeh Johnson, Obama's immigration guy, admitted a few months ago to reporters that Obama built the cages. This is exactly the kind of denial I mean.

But you're picking at the margins, the fine points of who caged kids and why. On the larger point of Dem complicity in the ongoing 30-year program of militarizing the border and creating the current humanitarian disaster, you're conspicuously silent.

↪fishfry Did you feel like Clinton's comment about deplorabless was directed at you? — frank

Oh no! Thank you for asking. I agree with Hillary that HALF of Trump's supporters are a basket of deplorables. She's entirely right. I'm in the half that aren't. If the Dems would ever stop to ask who these people are, they'd understand the country better. I'm sick of the hypocrisy and corruption, sick of the endless wars (Hillary's vote for the Iraq war was the moment I finally left the Dem plantation), sick of the neocon/neoliberal consensus that's wrecking the country.

Trump ain't no great savior in this regard but he was the alternative to what Hillary represented, which is business as usual. The candidate I actually liked in 2016 was Jim Webb. He didn't last long in the Dem primaries. This time around I like Tulsi. You see what kind of disaffected Democrat I am. I like the candidates who make sense but who have no chance in the Dem primaries.

Dems would ever stop to ask who these people are, they'd understand the country better. — fishfry

Who are they?

sick of the neocon/neoliberal consensus that's wrecking the country. — fishfry

Like which kind of policies? Ones that lead to greater wealth disparity?

Obama's immigration guy, admitted a few months ago to reporters that Obama built the cages. — fishfry

That’s not disputed.

But you're picking at the margins, the fine points...

Separating thousands of children from their parents is not a fine point, my unsympathetic friend.

On the larger point of Dem complicity in the ongoing 30-year program of militarizing the border and creating the current humanitarian disaster, you're conspicuously silent.

I explicitly stated that I wanted to clarify one point. This larger point is far beyond the specific issue we’ve addressed. Without being sufficiently informed on such matters I can easily acknowledge ‘Dem’ involvement in South
American affairs spanning decades, if that makes you feel better for some reason.

I dunno if you edited your post or if I misread it but I remember distinctly a setence from you using concerns about immigration racism. I can't find it now, I'll assume that I misread and drop that point.
As for Nazi Germany, I don't feel like taking this seriously, many things happened between Hitler debasing the Jews and killing them, I don't need to address that comment.


My point is pretty redundant if you think racism and biogtry are insignificantly different. Racism is indefensible, there's no racist beliefs that are reasonable, it's fair to say it's ignorant to be racist. Biogtry is a term which makes a whole lot of sense from the perspective of a leftist but it's usually a matter of perspective. I think most leftists are bigots, they have a "with me or against me" attitude, they describe those they disagree with in the most vile terms they can find and they refuse to compromise. Leftists aren't going to call themselves bigots though, they're going to call all the people who refuse to embrace their ideas bigots. They'll call it "to stand firm on important issues" and that's how they'll brand it.

I am not complimenting Trump's voters, I am not willing to condemn them either. They're a large number of people, with different circumstances and ideas and any simplistic, overarching characterisations will draw my criticism. An incomprehensible number of people voted for Trump, I can't even imagine a million people, let alone 63 million. What voting for Trump says about someone is complicated and we cannot even begin to approach this issue objectively. It's also a separate issue from any appraisal of Trump, voters on Trump don't only interpret things differently, but they also aren't experts on Trump, they may be willing to overlook what they know is bad because they care so much about the other issues - or one single other issue.

So people say why they vote for Trump, they say why they care about border control and they don't cite racism or sexism but that's what Hillary says it is anyway. Illegal immigrants get demonized by Trump, people don't like illegal immigrants - oh they're Mexican - we must be racists. Trump is basically calling Mexicans deplorables right? What's the difference between him and Hillary? You just assume it's race because there's a race difference, even if no actual racial differences are talked about. You may be convinced it's racism but I'm convinced that if Mexicans were white, this would still be a huge issue that people were angry about and Mexico isn't just a country of people of a different race, people know about the crime rates, the poverty and the political situation. It's no different than a bunch of poor people from a bad neighbourhood and different entire being discriminated in an affluent neighbourhood even when the race is the same. I think the level of precision necessary to avoid simplifying the issue according to one's biases is incompatible with what can be done while talking about a group of 63 million voters.

My point is pretty redundant if you think racism and biogtry are insignificantly different. — Judaka

I don’t think bigotry and racism are synonymous. The latter is a specific form of bigotry. If I’m missing some subtly or entire concept here I hope someone will point it out.

any simplistic, overarching characterisations will draw my criticism. — Judaka

I just had to say how charming this is in relation to the paragraph that preceded it.

Sometimes it is better to ignore some people’s comments when you know they’re dug in and looking to disrupt sensible discourse.

I guess we have to keep trying to communicate though, just set boundaries and rules beyond which you’re simply not going to engage rather than giving the nutcases fuel for their flames ;)