President Trump

I know calling somebody or something fascist is pretty edgy these days, but for a country to be fascist you don't need another Third Reich, Mussolini's Italy, or Franco's Spain. You can do it with much less. Let's take a look at Poland:

PiS (Law and Justice), the ultra-conservative, nationalist, populist party (I guess you'd call them far-right in the US) that rules Poland right now:
- used economic problems of the country to gain power (radicalized many people by whataboutism politics of condemning the previously ruling party - PO)
- informs about an "enemy" and influences of "foreign" people, makes up enemies that have to be fought (vilifying and/or making up/exaggerating the threat of EU, immigrants, Jews, Ukrainians, LGBTQ people, Russia...)
- pseudo social political programme that consolidates the electorate (the ideas are passable, but it's all done terribly)
- nationalism (Poland is the messiah of all nations, any critique of Poland or anything Polish makes you an enemy and not worthy of being Polish)
- cult of death, cult of questionable (or downright criminal) "patriotic" Polish "heroes"
- huge importance of the Church that controls people's minds (and unoficially supports PiS), the country is dependent on the Church
- shady businesses of PiS politicians (banks, scams, swindles)
- overt take-over of law enforcement services (the police licks government's shoes and serves PiS - you can see this during some protestations)
- the control of media - the public TV broadcaster Telewizja Polska is basically one giant propaganda tube trying to control public opinion. It promulgates propaganda on all stations it controls. Older people compare it to Communist television. Even PiS advocates admit it's all propaganda, but believe it's necessary evil. That's not all, because:
- attempts to nationalize private media in various ways (including penalties for broadcasting content the party doesn't like)
- lies and manipulations, sexism, bribery, the narration of punishment instead of rehabilitation, militarism
- it's basically an open secret that the chairman Jarosław Kaczyński is de facto the ruler of Poland right now

But above all:

The dismantling and subordination of institutions that provided protection of (oh irony) law and justice. Ignoring the decisions of and then taking over Constitutional Tribunal and Supreme Court, Filling them with PiS-chosen (and PiS serving) people. Full control over the judiciary, open and insolent repeated violation of constitution. All of this without any consequences. Opposition can't do anything. PiS has the majority in Sejm and Senat, any statute is unanimously forced.

PiS took over the organ that decides whether elections were lawful, so theoretically they can either pronounce them unlawful in case they don't win next elections, or (even worse) rig the votes.

Let's see:

- corporatism, or the combination of a strong state that sets market standards with humongous business corporations that wield monopoly on the market
- one-party state
- no freedom of media
- no freedom of speech
- strong nationalism, fearmongering, traditionalism, ultra-militarism
- the ubiquity of the state in everyday life
- people are controled by the police state
- cult of strength
- cult of personality

All of these are features of fascism.

__________________
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.

__________________
letterboxd

I bet you had a lot to say about Bill Clinton though.

__________________
"You, me, everyone...we are all made of star stuff." - Neil Degrasse Tyson

https://shawnsmovienight.blogspot.com/

I agree, journalism has sunk to a new low. Do actors advocate murder if they murder in a movie? Idiots. Then of course the same buffoons bring up Trump and try to blame him for children being separated from their families lol. Don't they watch their senators and see how dumb they sound?

Well I voted for Clinton but I don't remember those days too well haha. While I didn't vote for Trump, it certainly wasn't because of the rumors or his reputation with women. If I had to guess, I'd say they're both dogs who have a weakness for women. I know Clinton lied about it right to the country's face, but I don't like to judge as long as they're not criminals. I think calling either one of them a rapist is pretty rotten and slanderous. From the outside, it looks like they've both been unfaithful to their wives, and that's as good as criminal in my book. Yet, with guys like that, you don't really know what the details are within their relationships, so it's a little unbecoming to judge. If I do judge anyone, it's people who support one and condemn the other for their relations with women. I simply judge those as hypocrites, although that's not the worst thing a person can be.

The funny thing about your post though is the conclusion you can come to just by guessing. I guess that was my point about your other post as well. I mean we all do it, but there should be limits.

India likely to be sanctioned by Trump for buying Russian long range surface to Air missiles---

https://m.timesofindia.com/india/ind...w/66157531.cms

This got 5 upvotes. I am disappointed in you, MoFo.

__________________
Movie Reviews | Anime Reviews
Top 100 Action Movie Countdown (2015): List | Thread
"Well, at least your intentions behind the UTTERLY DEVASTATING FAULTS IN YOUR LOGIC are good." - Captain Steel

I mean, it's pretty obvious in almost every debate that people reflexively rep people from their side.

Not just that, but I am disappointed in my state in general. Democrats have been at the wheel for years and homelessness has only grown, there are now literal colonies of poor homeless people where I live now and what have the Democrats done to solve the problem? They passed a $15 minimum wage hike of course, which is more money than most people I know make. They have literally made it more expensive to employ people like me, and they're the one's who claim to fight income inequality and put our poorest people first? Yesterday were our midterm elections and who did the people in their all encompassing wisdom vote for? Not the small government Republican who was totally transparent about wanting to cut taxes, abolish unelected government bodies, and eliminate costly regulatory programs, but the Democrat who, when put on the spot about how he would fund his multivarious promises including his belief that "healthcare is a human right", just filibustered and turned the question back on his opponent who would merely reiterate his platform.

My state didn't vote for a liberal, they voted for a Democrat. And it should come as no surprise, if Powdered Water can be consistently dishonest and ignore my numerous mile-long posts with point-by-point deconstructions of his various fallacious arguments and get more likes than me, why shouldn't the politician with blatantly inferior policies from the political party which has done the most harm to the state get the popular vote?

How is it that, in the most literal sense of the term, given a question between a Democracy or a Republic; I'm a Democrat, but given a choice between a "new deal liberal" or a fiscal conservative, I'd vote Republican? I don't want to vote Republican, I don't want to elect people into a seat of power who believe in a god, I don't want social conservatives in charge of anything to do with my life, I'm not a traditionalist, but I'd elect @Yoda in a heartbeat over literally any Democrat I know of because at the very least he understands how the market economy is supposed to work and that government imposing costs on it is what makes people poorer and puts them out of work.

I've never heard of a small-government Democrat. If you can show me one I'll consider voting for them, but as far as I'm aware, actual liberals are either Republican or Libertarian. And pitifully few people vote Libertarian

Omni - you're disappointed in YOUR state?

My state astounds me.
Those on the left have (somewhat rightfully) been outraged over Trump's several-years-old bit of "locker room talk" that was spoken in private with another male, but caught on an open mic... then they flipped out over Trump's SC nominee, Kavanaugh, painting him as a serial rapist despite a handful of vague, uncorroborated or outright false claims orchestrated by the Democrats to destroy the man and taint him for life with a smear they will bring up at every election in the future.

And then those same people who tout themselves as the champions of women's rights, re-elect an indicted pedophile who trafficked in underage female prostitutes in other countries along with a laundry list of other crimes! They elected this man to the same Senate whose Democrat members tried to destroy Kavanaugh over sexual misconduct!!!


What gets me is the hypocrisy!

Not to mention that through the whole Kavanaugh fiasco, Dems literally ignored the claims of the woman who accused their Chairman Keith Ellisson of the DNC of abuse.

To add insult to injury, they had a Democrat committee investigate the accusations against Ellison (while demanding that the FBI investigate Kavanaugh and saying that if he didn't call for an FBI investigation of himself it PROVED he was guilty! Then saying the FBI investigation was inadequate after they interviewed 150 people over an incident that allegedly took place 36 years ago!)

Then they dismissed the accusations against Ellison saying his victim didn't provide enough evidence of abuse that occurred less than a year ago (despite Dr's reports and witnesses) - meanwhile they said the Kavanaugh accusers had a "right" to be believed despite absolutely no evidence, no corroboration and no facts - not even a date or place!

To me it is more than hypocrisy, it goes deeper than that, to the very core of some. The thing is they honestly do not think of themselves as liars, embellishers, hypocrates, hysterical (both men and women); these "means to an end" .groups are dangerous to the country, hell to the world. The pie in the sky attitude and behavior astonishes me and this really is not anything new, but it is definitely more intense than I have ever seen it. It can happen for either side (Dems or Reps, Libs or conservatives) and does, but lately the Liberals are in the lead. I am speaking of the politicians mostly and not the general public, but it definitely does have a lot of carryover.

It seems so many are willing to vote on party lines no matter who the candidate is. We need to stop following the media's lead and yes that includes Fox and do our own research and make up our own minds. Stop "overlooking" ones history while we condemn another for theirs.

__________________

“The gladdest moment in human life, methinks, is a departure into unknown lands.” – Sir Richard Burton

There should be a law that people who deliberately take decision not to have children inspite of having no health problems should be barred from voting . Lazy and selfish people who contribute nothing to society should not have voting rights . That will effectively break the back of the democrats !!

...le what.

I have no intention of having kids, so you must be including me under this banner, and to cast that as "lazy and selfish" and "contributing nothing to society" is just... baffling. In what way does having children contribute to society? I know many people who have kids specifically because they are lazy and selfish and use them to leech off of society. Society across the globe is not organized in a way which can accommodate unchecked population growth, and so I choose not to contribute to the problem out of moral principle.

The only way I can conceive of this making any sort of sense is by suggesting that if you intend to spread your political ideals, an effective way to do so is to procreate and indoctrinate your children into the voting bloc, which is a strategy employed by political Islam.

The thought that good ideas can only hope to survive by outbreeding their political opponents is quite frankly disgusting to me and accusing others of being "selfish" for resisting a natural temptation out of consideration for society is bass-ackwards.

I'd hate to think that this is a popular sphere of thought in India.

I'm sure you could get more people to agree with you if you'd be willing to be a little less of a d*ck. You talk down to everyone here from what I've seen. How's that workin out for ya? That's another reason why I won't respond to any more of your "posts" by the way.

__________________
We are both the source of the problem and the solution, yet we do not see ourselves in this light...

I don't bother with drama. The Kavanaugh thing is just one more needle in a metal haystack of "scandals" partisans of all stripes have seen fit to build up over the years and point to at any time they want to slime the competition. I'm sick of hearing conservatives bring up Hillary Clinton and her emails like they're still relevant. Even when they were relevant, their contents were unilaterally secondary to her platform.

A platform which, by the way, I heard virtually no criticism of (and to this day still know nothing about). If there was anything wrong with Hillary Clinton it was always something to do with her emails or Benghazi (which was bad, admittedly, but still wildly blown out of proportion). The media will shriek it's mouth off accusing the other side of lying, or being psychopathic, or just straight up evil, but relatively few words are spoken about their platform. It's always spoken in ways that suggest the policy is implicitly wrong, but rarely are the details of why a particular idea is objectively bad come up except in interviews with politicians, both the left and right-wing do this.

It's the sorry state of politics that more words are spoken about Hillary Clinton's blackberry and the size of Trump's hands than of actual policy.

I don't know why I am accused of promoting 'outbreeding' . I never promoted breeding in excessive numbers . But consider the state of the white people . They are dwindling to the point of being reduced to minority in 15-20 years . They need to produce 2 children per couple just to maintain numbers not outbreed .

To survive you will have to produce some children in order to counter those who believe in procreating and indoctrinating children into a voting bloc . This is especially relevant in Europe where political islam will make powerful impact in some years .

I refuse.

That's because you only pretend to read the posts responding to you.

I won't lose any sleep over it. Fewer posts from Powdered Water is more time I can spend doing something productive.

But fear not, that won't stop me from pointing out your bull****, like how your framing of "posts" in quotations is just another uncharitable escalation of your denial that I've made "rebuttals".

Cover your eyes, stick your head in the dirt, and throw shade, I'd expect nothing less.

"Outbreeding" does not mean breeding in excessive numbers, it means breeding one breed greater than another breed.

This also just invites the question of what you think constitutes "excessive numbers", because I think we're well past that, India especially.

Must we?

I... don't care.

That again presupposes that that is a winning strategy. It also presupposes a conflation of "white people" and certain beliefs.

It's already made quite an impact. What can be said other than that Europe has consistently failed to maintain it's borders and stand by secularism?

This is a shameful period in history.

I would like to think that at some point in the distant future Sarah Sanders will look back and regret defending this pig of an excuse for a human being, and that she will realise it is just a job, and her actions, lies and misrepresentation did so much damage to those watching on.

Shame on anybody that doesn't chastise Trump, his administration and his reprehensible, moronic words. Shame on you.

Yep. I think only white heterosexual Christian males with at least 3 kids should be allowed to vote. /s

Seriously, though. This would be an attack on personal freedom. You can't impose your worldview on other people. You can't force a couple to have children under the threat of losing voting rights, and you can't punish a person for making a personal choice that doesn't hurt anybody.

But yeah, I'm interested in Asian women. I really don't want to have children, and chances this is going to change are very low. So, you see, even if I change my mind, I'll still be contributing to the extinction of the white race. Quick, take my voting rights away ASAP!