Replies (11)
The US is not a democracy
And Robert Reich is an idiot
Why you think Robert Reich is an idiot? I really do Not agree with people who try to infamize people and institutions without constructive critique.
This is very lame from you.
fair enough - I was rushing and I should have been more precise: he is a partisan hack, so his takes are idiotic
If you want to get a sense of what is happening in the US, I wouldn't follow someone who is so deeply committed to his party that he only advocates for free speech when it's speech that he agrees with, or for media independence when it's media he likes ... I could go on almost endlessly.
And ideally it should be someone who knows what his own system of government is.
[I'm sure I've said something like this before, but those suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome are almost exactly like die-hard Trump supporters. Both groups are so focused on one man that they are oblivious to the creeping surveillance, the endless wars, the dangers of fiat and inflation. They fight totalitarianism when their side is out power and revel in it when their side is in of power. It's deeply hypocritical, and Reich is a classic example.]
I have to say your take seems like blackmailing to me. Take your stance. But stop blaming people. Start blaming the story they tell, when it is flawed. Bring up, whatever you are not ok with. But when I bring up whatever note of nostr:nprofile1qyt8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kytcqyp52cre8cp29xalvde79ee4294h032s7mtwx4rp0lt5wmgrly6hlc9syr7p, it is far from fair, to discredit his words for whatever other thing he should have said.
Please respont to the statements, not to the person, which sais it. A statement is not dependent of who is saying it. A statement is true or false depending on what facts and feelings say about the statement. Not about the sender of the statement.
Do you agree or disagree, that Trump is dismanteling checks and balances? This is a quiet factual statement, independent in what party you are.
To explain to you what I mean by factual: When I say that water evaporates at about 100°C at sea level, this is factual. If this statement is true does not depend on my religion, my sex or having certain age. It is a fact whatever person can test by experiment. The same way, one can check, if Trump supports checks and balances or not. This does not depend on political preference.
Gaslighting? I definitely was not trying to gaslight you, but otherwise I actually agree with you on most of this.
My only reason for focusing on Reich in this case was that you seemed to be using him as your source of information about US news, so the most relevant thing was to point out how poor a source of information he is.
Trump supporting checks and balances is not verifiable data like the other facts you mentioned. I would say that Trump supports checks and balances probably about as much as other US presidents have supported checks and balances. Both of the last two administrations (Trump and Biden) have weaponized the justice dept against political opponents, and Obama's administration created a false case against Trump (Russiagate); both of the last two administrations have violated the first amendment by trying to control speech that they didn't like; both of the last two administrations have used executive orders as if they could just bypass Congress's responsibility for writing laws. It's a really long list.
If Reich were actually opposed to unconstitutional actions, he would have been criticizing all of this regardless of what party is behind it. If I'm mistaken on that count, please let me know, but I don't recall him being a strong voice against the Biden admin coercion of the media, for instance, or any of the other anti-constitutional actions of that administration.
Look. I really think it does not have any importance at all what he said before this.
Why would it matter, when other presidents did violate the law and dismiss checks and balances as well?
It is a part of the current political lendscape, that Trump is investing hardly in taking over powers, where he has no say.
Reich is pushing against this. Stop about this whataboutism. Eighter you support Trump in what he is doing or not. It really is of no importance what other governments did. The US has one government and that is trumps government.
All the competition you try to build up is nonexisting and does not pose a problem nor solve a problem.
I think it does matter, and it's not a question of competition. In fact, it's specifically not about competition.
When pundits get folks outraged about Trump (or Biden) and then stay quiet when their side is in power, they're keeping the public in the US (and abroad, clearly) focused on tribalism rather than on the issues themselves.
I follow a very smart lawyer on Substack who was fantastic during the pandemic. He could clearly see the abuses of power from the federal government, the violation of freedom of speech, the disturbing collaborations between govt and corporations, etc. As soon as Trump won, he suddenly turned a blind eye to all of it. It's been incredible to see. Does it matter? Yes, it matters! He has a large, faithful following who trust his take on things and simply do not notice the encroaching surveillance, the first amendment issues, etc because they think that their side is in power.
The problem I would like to solve (cannot solve, so I don't know why I obsess about it) is basically distraction: Robert Reich and my lawyer follow and so many other pundits are distracting people with tribalism.
I think now I get your point. But I would argue we are all free individuals. No one can distract you, without your permission.
This is totally a choice of the individueal, from whom one allows distraction.
I really think problems alway are in the here and now. In the here and now there is one US Government. Not several.
So I do not see why anyone would overcomplicate things. A government is here to hear the problems of the public and try to find solutions to it. So I think it is always correct to critizise the current government, when one sees something going wrong.
But also one can not expect, that someone gets vocal when I want it to happen. I am an individual. Therefore I have different conclusions than others. So why should it be reasonable to think that others should stand up for my oppinion?
Absolutely, one should criticize the government - all the layers of it. Trump is one (temporary) layer.
And of course, we are all free as individuals to focus where we want to focus.
I wanted you - my Nostr friend - to know that from my perspective as someone in the US, Reich is not a good source of information. From what I can see, he is more interested in stirring up partisan outrage than he is in the actual issues that he claims to champion (freedom of speech). But admittedly I don't know his work well - I've only seen some recent snippets - so it's time for me to sign off on this thread!
Best to you!
