Kemal Ergenekon Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 Another group, who I would generally categorize as impressionable, find themselves facing little to no sociology-economic mobility. They also come from a background that is often mono-culture - typically rural homogeneous settings. Many are far from unintelligent but lack the opportunity that many rural citizens can find (and hence fulfill their American Dream). A small subset are actually fundamentally racist and bigots. The true bigots present a hypothesis that the "they" is the cause of "our" (this group's) troubles. Such a convenient excuse offered with zero real science but lots of fake science persuades the impressionable youth. This narrative describes the rise of subgroups that are allowed a voice in the public square. Most reasonable people avoid the corner of the square they are speaking on. Stormfront, 4chan /pol/, some of reddit are examples of this. The movement talks to itself and invents its own norms and mores. This is the alt-right. Not every member is a racist bigot however the norms of the group became a platform for racism and bigotry. Enter Trump. Trump gained traction among the alt-right for forwarding the idiocy of birtherism that the early alt-right embraced. Birtherism did not require open racism - it was enough to be accepted by the group as a champion. Having gained a foothold there he expanded his base steadily over time until we reach our current state. The fundamental underlying problem is a lack of the promised American Dream. Your solution may be technically correct but is an anathema to the alt-right and unacceptable to the 30ish% that they can, ultimately, influence. Yeah I agree with this part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 Sorry lads but if we're in competition with the Third world then we beat the third world, be it by not offshoring to them to begin with or with sweet mechanization. The West is not a charity and it may sound nice some have been uplifted slightly (though bigger winners exist yes) but it ain't our burden and what relevance it has to me and others is all of zero. We have our family, our friends, our neighborhood, our town, our county, our region, our country, but we do not have our world. Nationalism is the largest unifying force that exists, and for those who believe in some fantasy global unity sorry but it doesn't exist and never will. Even the poor lads in Congo or whatever have no global unity with say the people of another third world country... it's a competition, they don't care about the others too. If they don't care then really why should we? Because our burden is to care? Nah. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beatrix Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 The underlying anger has some justification. Many members of the middle and lower classes in the "1st world" have seen their real income stagnate (at best) for a long time. I feel as though the quality of life is at an all time high, and is only going to improve in the future given we won't sparkle international/wordwide wars , nuclear fallouts or face dire climate change reprecussions. Even if it "could be better", which is true, rejecting "globalism" as it is defined here is nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Avalanche Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 "Redistribution does not fit into that model" sounds hollow when the golden age of the American Dream happened between 1945-1970 when the policies were much more socialist even though they weren't called as such. Define what the "American Dream" is. Quote Beer. Damn Good Beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 Define what the "American Dream" is. Let's c/p wiki: The American Dream is a national ethos of the United States, the set of ideals (democracy, rights, liberty, opportunity, and equality) in which freedom includes the opportunity for prosperity and success, and an upward social mobility for the family and children, achieved through hard work in a society with few barriers. In the definition of the American Dream by James Truslow Adams in 1931, "life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement" regardless of social class or circumstances of birth. Your point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted October 7, 2016 Author Share Posted October 7, 2016 (edited) Sorry lads but if we're in competition with the Third world then we beat the third world, be it by not offshoring to them to begin with or with sweet mechanization. The West is not a charity and it may sound nice some have been uplifted slightly (though bigger winners exist yes) but it ain't our burden and what relevance it has to me and others is all of zero. We have our family, our friends, our neighborhood, our town, our county, our region, our country, but we do not have our world. Nationalism is the largest unifying force that exists, and for those who believe in some fantasy global unity sorry but it doesn't exist and never will. Even the poor lads in Congo or whatever have no global unity with say the people of another third world country... it's a competition, they don't care about the others too. If they don't care then really why should we? Because our burden is to care? Nah. We are NOT in competition with the third world. If we were then we won. Hundreds of !@#$ years ago. Free trade is not a "burden" we bear. It is a thing that makes 'Murica richer, hence winning - the opposite of losing. That it also has a very nice knock on effect of keeping hundreds of millions of babies from dying each year is a bonus. So now lets pick policies that make us all richer. The policy that has that potential is called "globalization"(the terror of the alt-right). The policy that will make you, Roz and other members of the alt-right, personally poorer is called "isolationism" and is favored by your wannabe prezident (not because he is dumb but because the alt-right is highly impressionable). Now for many low skilled/poorly educated folks in the 1st world to personally benefit from globalization requires redistribution. No matter how bad those words makes you feel it is the truth. Think of these policies like making a child eat their vegetables. Its the right thing to do even if they dislike it and squirm around in their chairs. Edit: Please note that isolation will not make our family, our friends, our neighborhood, our town, our county, our region, our country richer. It will make it poorer. Edited October 7, 2016 by LordRahl2 Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted October 7, 2016 Author Share Posted October 7, 2016 Egads! Please do not associate any libertarian ideology to the Alt-Right because it does not exist. Sure, saying you want freedom and a free market sounds libertarian, but how the plan to achieve it is by no means libertarian at all. Actually, part of the core group of the alt-right that currently supports Trump is the very same group of people that supported the Pauls - aka libertarians. The alt-right's ideology is a fluid sort of thing. It will probably move back to the libs if the Repubs pick a sane candidate next cycle. I feel as though the quality of life is at an all time high, and is only going to improve in the future given we won't sparkle international/wordwide wars , nuclear fallouts or face dire climate change reprecussions. Even if it "could be better", which is true, rejecting "globalism" as it is defined here is nonsense. Quality of life (both in the first and third world) is in fact and objectively at an all time high. Yes, rejecting globalization will most likely reverse that for everyone. Reread what I wrote to you though. Many people do not "feel" like it is better because they perceive the benefits going to people who are not them. Read what Roz wrote. He honestly feels like he is in competition with a textile worker in Bangladesh. He would like those jobs in Bangladesh to come back to jolly old England. When you describe why that will not happen his eyes glaze over and he replies with "nu-uh". "Redistribution does not fit into that model" sounds hollow when the golden age of the American Dream happened between 1945-1970 when the policies were much more socialist even though they weren't called as such. It may indeed sound hollow but that is not the point. I chose the "American Dream" for the same reason I would talk about the "Mandate of Heaven" if I were to discuss China. These concepts are not actual things. They are mores that ultimately impact normative behavior, however, they are based on perception. Reality is, or at least can be, entirely different. So the battle is to educate people about the reality of the world in order to demonstrate how the American Dream is not some global competition over workers with Bangladesh. Do note that education has emerged as a MAJOR demographic line compared to previous years. White males with a degree reject Trump in far higher numbers. I know that a degree does not make people "smarter" so ask yourself why that demographic truth is true? (For further research listen to a speech by Mr. Trump. Listen to his actual words - substitute Bangladesh for China and Mexico. I realize this is painful.) Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Avalanche Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 Actually, part of the core group of the alt-right that currently supports Trump is the very same group of people that supported the Pauls - aka libertarians. The alt-right's ideology is a fluid sort of thing. It will probably move back to the libs if the Repubs pick a sane candidate next cycle. Paulbots are more Paleo-Conservatives and LPer Right-Wing types. However I can understand the association of the libertarian with Paulbots and such. The libertarian left is definitely not backing Trump. Quote Beer. Damn Good Beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 It may indeed sound hollow but that is not the point. I chose the "American Dream" for the same reason I would talk about the "Mandate of Heaven" if I were to discuss China. These concepts are not actual things. They are mores that ultimately impact normative behavior, however, they are based on perception. Reality is, or at least can be, entirely different. So the battle is to educate people about the reality of the world in order to demonstrate how the American Dream is not some global competition over workers with Bangladesh. Do note that education has emerged as a MAJOR demographic line compared to previous years. White males with a degree reject Trump in far higher numbers. I know that a degree does not make people "smarter" so ask yourself why that demographic truth is true? (For further research listen to a speech by Mr. Trump. Listen to his actual words - substitute Bangladesh for China and Mexico. I realize this is painful.) We don't disagree. But it is a fact that the unprecedented improvements in social mobility and the welfare of the median household are no longer a thing in the US. And funnily enough, the right-wing Reagan policies and what came after are to blame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Avalanche Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 Let's c/p wiki: The American Dream is a national ethos of the United States, the set of ideals (democracy, rights, liberty, opportunity, and equality) in which freedom includes the opportunity for prosperity and success, and an upward social mobility for the family and children, achieved through hard work in a society with few barriers. In the definition of the American Dream by James Truslow Adams in 1931, "life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement" regardless of social class or circumstances of birth. Your point? My point is you had to wiki up the answer instead of just answering it on your own. The American Dream is an illusion. It always has been. The answer will change with each passing decade. Your summary of it being the "Golden Age" between the years when Social Security and Socialized policies came into effect and the ending of the Gold Standard is only one perspective, an opinion- an opinion that comes from only one segment of society. One segment out of thousands. basically, a subjective statement. Quote Beer. Damn Good Beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted October 7, 2016 Author Share Posted October 7, 2016 Paulbots are more Paleo-Conservatives and LPer Right-Wing types. However I can understand the association of the libertarian with Paulbots and such. The libertarian left is definitely not backing Trump. The libertarian left. You mean libertarian socialism? That is not the ideological foundation of the libertarian party in the US. The libertarian left as you call it should not be backing Johnson. Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted October 7, 2016 Author Share Posted October 7, 2016 We don't disagree. But it is a fact that the unprecedented improvements in social mobility and the welfare of the median household are no longer a thing in the US. And funnily enough, the right-wing Reagan policies and what came after are to blame. Well the US does have some economic mobility (so does the UK fwiw). You are looking at the aggregate middle class and its real purchasing power? The American dream is that I can move from the 2nd to the 5th quintile - personally. That necessitates that some other sod gets pushed into the 4th quintile but that does not factor into the merican dream as an intellectual concept. 1 Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Jerry Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 So the Federal government provided you 20 years of experience and multiple training opportunities. "Kids these days" would love to get their hands dirty for 6 figures. But they cannot. Yes....they can. They have to work for it though, and it will probably take a long, long time like it did me, but they can get there. When I first joined the Navy just after I graduated H.S. back in....cough, cough.....'89.....cough, cough, I was taking in/netting about $350-$400 on the 1st and 15th of the month (standard military paydays). Over the course of that 20 years, I was promoted several times and moved up the pay scale do to the amount of time I served. The government provided me with the training because I volunteered to join but it comes at a cost. The cost is having long separations from your family and friends, missing a lot of things like birthdays, anniversaries, births of your kids, etc, it wasn't handed to me one morning. Here is the military pay chart for those who are interested: http://militarybenefits.info/2016-military-pay-charts/. Plus since I retired from the Navy with an "Honorable Discharge", I receive a monthly retirement check which started month 1 after I retired and I'll keep getting them until I die. Granted though I wasn't that high up rank wise so my military retirement isn't something I can fully retire on....I wasn't an Admiral or even an officer for that matter, but that retirement check pays for my mortgage and one of my cars so there is that at least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 Well the US does have some economic mobility (so does the UK fwiw). You are looking at the aggregate middle class and its real purchasing power? The American dream is that I can move from the 2nd to the 5th quintile - personally. That necessitates that some other sod gets pushed into the 4th quintile but that does not factor into the merican dream as an intellectual concept. I have the mobility stats, they stopped getting better. Your great-grandparent's income and education still have extremely high predictive power regarding how you do today. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 I have the mobility stats, they stopped getting better. Your great-grandparent's income and education still have extremely high predictive power regarding how you do today. How much does it affect us? (Just curious) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 How much does it affect us? (Just curious) Depends on the dimensions, but the persistence is around 40-70% from parent to child. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted October 8, 2016 Author Share Posted October 8, 2016 Which is much "better" than many places. Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted October 8, 2016 Author Share Posted October 8, 2016 (edited) Yes....they can. No....they cannot. Go do a job search for no education, no skills, and no experience. McDonalds part time - maybe. My scoutmaster used to say that the world needs ditch diggers too. That is becoming less and less true. Many do join the Armed Forces but even for your basic light wheel mechanic there are entry requirements that over 50% of our youth cannot pass. I strongly recommend your path for those that qualify. You don't really need to preach at me about service Jerry. I am at 15+ years of service as of today. I will not be home for Christmas. I have been at war, deployed, for longer than either of my grandfathers were during WWII. That being said, I also recognize that my parents would have been unable to pay for my education, particularly at the institutions I was qualified for, so I found a way for the Federal Government to pay for it - and here I am. Similar to you in fact. However, this simply cannot apply for a vast percent of our youth. Many are not lazy and they would love a job that puts them on a path for a middle class life like you and I enjoy. Those doors are simply not open to them. The current "fix" to this problem provided by Mr. Trump is to raise tariffs. What he fails to mention, assuming he understands, is that when the USA starts producing shoes (at the cost of producing more valuable stuff) unskilled labor will not find employment at the shoe factory. Robotics mechanics (so folks with, roughly, your experience and skill set) and programmers will. However, those people are ALREADY employed and their outlook is good. Edited October 8, 2016 by LordRahl2 2 Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Avalanche Posted October 8, 2016 Share Posted October 8, 2016 The libertarian left. You mean libertarian socialism? That is not the ideological foundation of the libertarian party in the US. The libertarian left as you call it should not be backing Johnson. They do not. And no, they are not the foundation for the LP, as you said. However the libertarian left is also not socialist, at least the ones here in the US. Left does not always mean or associate as Socialist either. Quote Beer. Damn Good Beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted October 8, 2016 Author Share Posted October 8, 2016 They do not. And no, they are not the foundation for the LP, as you said. However the libertarian left is also not socialist, at least the ones here in the US. Left does not always mean or associate as Socialist either. I did not mean to imply they do. I would call them annoyed Democrats. 1 Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Avalanche Posted October 8, 2016 Share Posted October 8, 2016 I did not mean to imply they do. I would call them annoyed Democrats. More like Anarchists, but meh. Quote Beer. Damn Good Beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted October 8, 2016 Author Share Posted October 8, 2016 More like Anarchists, but meh. Yeah. Anarchy does not work - human nature and such. It would be neat if it did I guess. Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted October 8, 2016 Share Posted October 8, 2016 Which is much "better" than many places. We actually don't know that. Research on social mobility is much more scarce for shitty countries compared to economic inequality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted October 8, 2016 Author Share Posted October 8, 2016 We actually don't know that. Research on social mobility is much more scarce for shitty countries compared to economic inequality. How about Europe? Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted October 8, 2016 Share Posted October 8, 2016 How about Europe? Europe's better on average. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.