GMG Classical Music Forum

There is no measurable quizz for this question. The idea is to let us know what you identify yourself as being.

Myself, I am politically center-right (constitutional monarchist), economically center-left (social-democrat), socially right (conservative), culturally centrist (anything goes, not anything is to my liking). Overall, centrist, I'd say, maybe center-right by a slight margin.

How 'bout you?

I'll call myself center-left. when I first registered to vote, I registered as a Democrat; I've since changed my registration to Unaffiliated.

Are you required to register as "something" în order to be able to vote în the USA? I mean, if you are unregistered you can't vote?

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 01:02:45 PMAre you required to register as "something" în order to be able to vote în the USA? I mean, if you are unregistered you can't vote?

One must register to vote.  Registration takes multiple forms.  All registered voters can vote in general elections.  Different states have different rules regarding voter participation in primaries.  There are closed and open primary states. 

This has been covered multiple times before, at least twice (if memory serves) using a political matrix model, which does come with a quiz: https://uselectionatlas.org/TOOLS/POLMTX/ 

(https://www.politicalcompass.org/images/bothaxes.gif)

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 01:02:45 PMAre you required to register as "something" în order to be able to vote în the USA? I mean, if you are unregistered you can't vote?

One can vote in general elections without belonging to a party. There is, however, a kind of preliminary voting round called the primaries, where the parties choose the candidates who will represent the party in the general election. In most US states one can only vote for primary candidates in the party to which one belongs. 

Quote from: Todd on January 02, 2023, 01:11:10 PMOne must register to vote.

The only thing a Romanian citizen must prove în order to vote is that they are at least 18 yo Romanian citizens, and they do that by way of their ID card.

Quote from: Todd on January 02, 2023, 01:11:35 PMThis has been covered multiple times before, at least twice (if memory serves) using a political matrix model, which does come with a quiz: https://uselectionatlas.org/TOOLS/POLMTX/ 

(https://www.politicalcompass.org/images/bothaxes.gif)

I emphatically stated that this is about self-identification.

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 01:20:44 PMThe only thing a Romanian citizen must prove în order to vote is that they are at least 18 yo Romanian citizens, and they do that by way of their ID card.

Such a system would never work in the US.  For instance, many Democrats vociferously oppose ID requirements, arguing that it is a form of voter suppression.

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 01:25:18 PMI emphatically stated that this is about self-identification.

That's fine, but self-identification relies on different definitions of what "left" and "right" even mean.

Quote from: BasilValentine on January 02, 2023, 01:17:32 PMIn most US states one can only vote for primary candidates in the party to which one belongs. 

Isn't this the surest way to the factionalism that the FF supposedly abhorred?

Quote from: Todd on January 02, 2023, 01:26:40 PMmany Democrats vociferously oppose ID requirements, arguing that it is a form of voter suppression.

Many Democrats are lunatic.

Quoteself-identification relies on different definitions of what "left" and "right" even mean.

Yes, and it makes all the more interesting.

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 01:31:40 PMMany Democrats are lunatic.

I can neither confirm nor deny this assertion.

If you would like a more thorough explanation, the ACLU has one: OPPOSE VOTER ID LEGISLATION - FACT SHEET (https://www.aclu.org/fact-sheet/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet)

Quote from: Todd on January 02, 2023, 01:38:01 PMI can neither confirm nor deny this assertion.

If you would like a more thorough explanation, the ACLU has one: OPPOSE VOTER ID LEGISLATION - FACT SHEET (https://www.aclu.org/fact-sheet/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet)

I presume only USA citizens may vote în a USA election. How, then, are they supposed to be identified as such, if not by an USA ID card?

No, really, if I went to a Romanian election station and told them I had no money, or no time, to get, or renew, my ID card, they would laugh me out and if I still insisted
to vote, they would call the police.

And rightly so.

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 01:20:44 PMThe only thing a Romanian citizen must prove în order to vote is that they are at least 18 yo Romanian citizens, and they do that by way of their ID card.

In the U.S. there is no national ID card. To register to vote you typically need proof of identity, citizenship and residency in the location where you intend to vote. This may involve a state drivers license or ID, social security card, birth certificate, passport, home lease or deed, utility bill, etc. then you can wonder what documentation is required to get a driver's license. In Texas you can use a gun permit.

Quote from: Spotted Horses on January 02, 2023, 01:51:12 PMIn the U.S. there is no national ID card.

.

Which is sheer lunacy.

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 01:02:45 PMAre you required to register as "something" în order to be able to vote în the USA? I mean, if you are unregistered you can't vote?

One needs to register to vote in one's state of residence. In Massachusetts, QED, one need not register with either major party to vote in a general election. As to primaries, the rule varies from state to state, but in Mass. since I am Unaffiliated, I cannot vote in a primary election.

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 01:54:50 PM.

Which is sheer lunacy.

It's shy of lunacy, one hopes. Probably the closest thing is a Real ID. It isn't very close because (a) there is no Federal requirement that one have a Real ID and (b) it is issued by the state, not the Federal govt.

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 01:48:46 PMI presume only USA citizens may vote în a USA election.

For now.  Mostly.  Non-citizens can vote in some local elections.  Some Democrats are pushing to expand non-citizen voting. 

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 01:54:50 PMWhich is sheer lunacy.

First, there will never be a national ID similar to a state driver's license.  There is a Social Security Card, but that is not a photo ID.  There should never be national ID similar to a state driver's license.  Second, the Constitution gives power to set election rules to states, not the federal government. That is one practical reason why a national ID is not needed.  It is definitely not desirable.

Quote from: Todd on January 02, 2023, 02:17:21 PMThere should never be national ID

Then there should never be any USA citizenship requiremenr for anything,  because that which  should never be should simply not exist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_identity_card_policies_by_country

Quote from: SimonNZ on January 02, 2023, 02:42:43 PMhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_identity_card_policies_by_country

If the nation-state is still the basic unit of the internațional politics and politiei, then a național ID card by which John and Jane Doe can lawfully identify as citizens of this or that nation is mandatory.

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 02:51:29 PMIf the nation-state is still the basic unit of the internațional politics and politiei, then a național ID card by which John and Jane Doe can lawfully identify as citizens of this or that nation is mandatory.

There are other ways of achieving that.

If you scroll down that link you'll see the list of countries with no ID cards includes Australia, Canada, Japan, The United Kingdom...and New Zealand.

Quote from: SimonNZ on January 02, 2023, 02:54:53 PMThere are other ways of achieving that.

If you scroll down that link you'll see the list of countries with no ID cards includes Australia, Ca⁷nada, Japan, The United Kingdom...and New7o Zealan7d.

⁸

Pray tell, how is one to prove their nationality/citzenship --- absent a valid, lawful card?

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 03:11:50 PM⁸

Pray tell, how is one to prove their nationality/citzenship --- absent a valid, lawful card?

Passport and/or drivers license would be the everyday usual.

Can I just point out that the poll has no option for 'far left' but the poll itself is titled 'far left'?

As such, I don't really want to participate in it--not necessarily because I'm far left because a simple mistake has crept in.

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 02:25:04 PMThen there should never be any USA citizenship requiremenr for anything,  because that which  should never be should simply not exist.

All people born in the US are citizens.  There is also a federally prescribed naturalization process.  It's all well established.

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 02:51:29 PMIf the nation-state is still the basic unit of the internațional politics and politiei, then a național ID card by which John and Jane Doe can lawfully identify as citizens of this or that nation is mandatory.

This is afactual.  The US has never had any such ID, nor will it.  There are plenty of alternatives.  Like those that exist now.

Quote from: Todd on January 02, 2023, 03:39:41 PMAll people born in the US are citizens.

Okay! What is the lawful, incontrovertible proof that one was born in the USA?

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 03:47:01 PMOkay! What is the lawful, incontrovertible proof that one was born in the USA?

Birth certificate.

Quote from: KevinP on January 02, 2023, 03:24:15 PMCan I just point out that the poll has no option for 'far left' but the poll itself is titled 'far left'?

As such, I don't really want to participate in it--not necessarily because I'm far left because a simple mistake has crept in.

I don't know your nationality, but the "far left" in the USA is around center or center-left in other democracies.

As other members already know, some issues like Free-trade agreement, Israel, etc. have moved through ideological continuum/parties as the racial issue did in the 1950-60s.

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 03:37:26 PMBlimey, when I started the poll it went from Far Left to the Far Right and everything in between correctly. Why it doesn't show correctly it's beyond me.

As pointed out, the mistake is that you put 'far left' in the poll's title.

I am not able to vote in that poll. Closest would probably be what was center to center left in Western Europe in the 1980s but more socially+culturally conservative (although de facto the 1980s German social democrats were conservative wrt common sense values that have been toppled in the last 25 years). This position has vanished in real political parties in Germany today.
Roughly, I am on the right of the rightmost current (established) party in some issues ("family values", "Western" culture, national sovereignty, border control/migration, anti-globalism, most of which was mainstream/common sense only 30 years ago but gets branded "far right" or even illegal today) but close to the leftmost current established party in others (economic anti-globalism, regulated labor market, restricting power of banksters etc., public control of key infrastructure etc.). I also support in principle some "green" issues but despise the current Green party that (apart from being totally mad in other issues and lately also shown to be belligerent hypocrites) cuts down forests for wind power.
Almost everyone has become stark mad in the last few years, for me indicators of an utterly corrupt and dysfunctional political system (basically captured by political parties leading to people at the top who are usually best in ruthless psychopathy or "brownnosing"). As the apparent "good times" of the 1970s-90s led to the current mess, I bid farewell to the dream of somehow getting back. This was at best a "metastable" situation that quickly deteriorated once some conditions changed.
Of course, the radical transformations necessary are politically impossible. It is probably only going to get worse as the reactions to the worst situations of the last decades (migration, Covid, Ukraine) were dysfunctional and have led to more corruption and proto-totalitarian measures with the media not being critical at all and most people buying their mendacious narratives.
Therefore I have small hope that things getting worse will lead to waking up. We have had "fun riots" with dozens of injured, burnt out cars, including ambulances and buses! in Berlin and other many major cities at the turn of the year and the mainstream media do acrobatics to avoid stating clearly that >90% (probably more like 99%) of the rioters were migrants or their children/grandchildren (and not Spaniards or Japanese but from the Balkan and Near East). And when they have to state it, they blame "toxic masculinity", although for some weird reasons the far less "enlightened" men never burnt down police cars with fireworks on New Years Eve in the 1980s and 90s. So as the US might become more like Brazil, Germany will become like the US in some respects with "ghettoes" with ethnic gang rule/warfare etc.

Quote from: KevinP on January 02, 2023, 05:45:37 PMAs pointed out, the mistake is that you put 'far left' in the poll's title.

You're right. I corrected it and reset the poll.

Quote from: Todd on January 02, 2023, 03:58:36 PMBirth certificate.

Fair enough.

But then again, how about US citizens not born in the USA? How can they prove their citizenship?

Quote from: SimonNZ on January 02, 2023, 03:20:51 PMPassport and/or drivers license would be the everyday usual.

In Romania you cannot get/renew a passport or a driver license if you do not have a valid ID card.  :)

Quote from: Todd on January 02, 2023, 03:58:36 PMThis is afactual.  The US has never had any such ID, nor will it.  There are plenty of alternatives.  Like those that exist now.

Though I would point out that

"Beginning May 7, 2025, if you plan to use your state-issued ID or license to fly within the U.S., make sure it is REAL ID compliant."

https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/identification

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/driver-licenses-identification-cards/real-id/real-id-checklist/

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 02, 2023, 02:08:34 PMOne needs to register to vote in one's state of residence. In Massachusetts, QED, one need not register with either major party to vote in a general election. As to primaries, the rule varies from state to state, but in Mass. since I am Unaffiliated, I cannot vote in a primary election.

As you say, that varies between states. I am also "Unaffiliated" (I call myself an Independent), and I can and have voted in both Democratic and Republican primaries - not in the same election though, of course. In Vermont, regardless of one's political affiliation or lack thereof, one can choose to vote in either primary.

I chose "Centrist" - I am fiscally conservative, socially liberal on some issues and more libertarian-leaning on others.

Why is a federal ID seen as problematic but not a state ID/driver's license?

Despite recent anarchy in some other things, Germany holds up to their "anal" tradition. (Cf. Brecht's quip that the ID or passport is the more important part of a man, as it doesn't arise in such an accidental way as a man)
Not only are you required to have an ID (adding insult to injury you have to pay for it every 10 years or so when it has to be renewed!) but you are also required on pain of a fine to register at your place of residence after a move (and this new place of residence will be entered in your ID). I am not sure about the techicalities but it is some kind of misdemeanour if you move and don't register within a few weeks or so afterwards!

Therefore we struggle to even understand the framework of voter registration and the debate over voter IDs in the US. Because of the general registration there is nothing additional required and one will get a notice by mail before an election from the local administration with a standard polling place and also options for voting by mail etc. So one then brings that notice and an ID (although they rarely check the ID if you got that notice and they have you in their list) and will be admitted to the voting booth.

Quote from: Florestan on January 03, 2023, 12:23:23 AMBut then again, how about US citizens not born in the USA? How can they prove their citizenship?

The feds issue a certificate.  You've heard of Google, yes? 

Quote from: Daverz on January 03, 2023, 03:43:06 AMThough I would point out that

"Beginning May 7, 2025, if you plan to use your state-issued ID or license to fly within the U.S., make sure it is REAL ID compliant."

REAL ID makes me feel safe.

Quote from: Jo498 on January 03, 2023, 04:27:17 AMWhy is a federal ID seen as problematic but not a state ID/driver's license?

Enumerated powers.

re: partisan political primaries

Quote from: Florestan on January 02, 2023, 01:27:47 PMIsn't this the surest way to the factionalism that the FF supposedly abhorred?

Quite possibly, yes. There are reform movements in some states to replace the party primaries with "top two" primaries, where the top two candidates from any party advance to the general election. The idea would be that if you find yourself in a small minority of the population, you would vote, not necessarily for the person who shares all your views, but for the least extreme of the major candidates. In California, for example, the "top two" might be a far left person and a less far left person who had been strategically backed by centrists.

In Texas, where I live, the system is chaotic and heavily skewered toward factionalism, but there is one interesting feature: in the partisan primary, you can choose whichever political party you want. There is no "registering." Your party affiliation only lasts for that primary season. In fact, when you walk in the voting station, they simply ask which party you want to vote on. In 2016, for example, I voted Republican in the primary to vote against Trump, even though I had no intention of voting for a Republican in the general election.

Quote from: Jo498 on January 02, 2023, 11:45:44 PMAlmost everyone has become stark mad in the last few years

I am not convinced of this.  I see a pretty stark difference between real life and online behavior and corporate media representations of life.  It has always been thus.  I will say that in some settings, people have become less patient and more abrasive in public, elderly people (especially boomers) more than anyone else.  This started in the early phases of the pandemic.  This may be a local thing.

Quote from: Jo498 on January 02, 2023, 11:45:44 PMSo as the US might become more like Brazil

The transformation has been underway for a while, hence the appeal of populists and mercantilism in both parties in the US.  Globalization itself is now being pronounced dead: The Gospel of Deglobalization: What's the Cost of a Fractured World Economy? (https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/gospel-deglobalization-fractured-world-economy)  Even Janet Yellen uses the phrase "friend shoring".

Quote from: Jo498 on January 03, 2023, 04:27:17 AMNot only are you required to have an ID (adding insult to injury you have to pay for it every 10 years or so when it has to be renewed!) but you are also required on pain of a fine to register at your place of residence after a move (and this new place of residence will be entered in your ID). I am not sure about the techicalities but it is some kind of misdemeanour if you move and don't register within a few weeks or so afterwards!

The first bolded part is true in Romania as well. The second one is not. One is not required to register after a move, either in the same city or from one city to another. One may choose to do so, though, because absent that registering one cannot do in the new location all the things one could do in the older one, for instance voting in the local elections. It is certainly a misdemeanor, though, not to renew one's ID after it has expired. A routine traffic police control more often than not results in one's being fined if their ID is expired.

Quote from: Todd on January 03, 2023, 06:01:22 AMI am not convinced of this.  I see a pretty stark difference between real life and online behavior and corporate media representations of life.  It has always been thus. 

Obviously "everyone" was a bit of hyperbole. But it has never been before the case that it can become a shibboleth to accept that some men are women and that official government representatives claim publicly that there were more than the two known sexes in (human) biology. This is for me close to "How many fingers, Winston?" from 1984, room 101. The ruling coalition (Green, Social democrats, Liberals (on paper more like business friendly soft libertarians, not liberals in the US sense)) wants to make a "self determination" law that one can decide once per year! (I really hope some pranksters will switch every year just for fun) that one is a man or a woman (or maybe some made up fantasy gender, not sure) and people who disrespect the "pronouns" or "deadname" face hefty fines. The Greens have a representative who poses as "transwoman" but he is a fully functional male (sired two children!) in a dress and wig who got his seat via a women's quota internal to the party). If this is not raving madness, I don't know. (One has to go back to Caligula's horse in the senate and Nero's favorite eunuch Sporus to find similar decadence.) (To clarify, I am not against people with severe mental disorders wrt gender or intersex persons getting therapy or medical help but this should be handled discreetly and I am strongly against the right to force others to play along with publicly displayed mental illness or sexual fetishes.)

I also don't think that it has ever been the case that the ideas that a country should have control over borders and immigration or that a standard/typical family was father, mother and children was framed as "far right". I am 50 years old and would have described myself as "center left" in most issues until about 10 years ago or so (I was a bit more conservative wrt "family values"). For some years I was quite leftist in some economical issues (basically "old fashioned 70s/80s social democracy style), because I was fairly mad at the political elites enabling banksters around the 2008 crisis. I became skeptical about Euro/EU with the problems with Greece etc. that followed but still sympathizing with both "left" and "right" critiques of the EU (I now think it is a despicable and unredeemable cesspool of grifters and all of the EUrocrats should be sent to Siberia, or even better to Mars.) I was quite neutral/disinterested about the (European) "migrant crisis" until around 2017 when I realized the utter madness it was. This alone (+ the common sense social conservatism wrt gender, family etc. and an affirmative stance towards Western culture and history) has shifted me to what is deemed "far right" nowadays which is crazy because the content of most of my positions would have been centrist or even center left as late as the mid-1990s. Although admittedly I have become more traditional/conservative because I now see that the seemingly moderate policies of the 1970s-90s led to the current madness and that Europe has been "running on fumes" in many respects for more than a century.

Quote from: Florestan on January 03, 2023, 02:06:23 AMIn Romania you cannot get/renew a passport or a driver license if you do not have a valid ID card.  :)

Unless you're contending that the countries I listed above have famously weaker election security than yours then I don't see what your beef is here.

Quote from: Todd on January 03, 2023, 06:01:22 AMI see a pretty stark difference between real life and online behavior and corporate media representations of life.  It has always been thus.  I will say that in some settings, people have become less patient and more abrasive in public, elderly people (especially boomers) more than anyone else.  This started in the early phases of the pandemic.  This may be a local thing.

I basically agree with this viewpoint. Being "extremely online," as they say, skews one's impression of what is important to most people. So does watching a lot of local television. It would be like forming your impression of humanity based solely on how they drive on the highway.

I struggle to answer this question because my views fall scattershot across the political spectrum. And my views aren't even complete, in the sense that there are things where I am undecided.

In the United States, probably I would be described by other people as "far left" for certain views (such as that the Founding Fathers' intentions should not be accorded the kind of reverence and fealty they receive now). In Europe, I would probably be described as a centrist or center-left.

Quote from: SimonNZ on January 03, 2023, 07:18:41 AMUnless you're contending that the countries I listed above have famously weaker election security than yours then I don't see what your beef is here.

I have no beef. It's just that, as Jo (a German) said, we struggle to understand the whole thing about mandatory registration for voting while not being asked to show your ID at the booth. Both things are very strange to us Yurpeans, especially the ID part. In Romania one can do very few things pertaining to politics, administration, finance and even social life* without a valid ID and voting is not one of them. That is all. Nowhere in my posts did I express any concern for the election security in the USA.

*no valid ID, no marriage, either civil or religious, go figure.  :D

Quote from: Jo498 on January 03, 2023, 07:14:45 AMObviously "everyone" was a bit of hyperbole. But it has never been before the case that it can become a shibboleth to accept that some men are women and that official government representatives claim publicly that there were more than the two known sexes in (human) biology. This is for me close to "How many fingers, Winston?" from 1984, room 101. The ruling coalition (Green, Social democrats, Liberals (on paper more like business friendly soft libertarians, not liberals in the US sense)) wants to make a "self determination" law that one can decide once per year! (I really hope some pranksters will switch every year just for fun) that one is a man or a woman (or maybe some made up fantasy gender, not sure) and people who disrespect the "pronouns" or "deadname" face hefty fines. The Greens have a representative who poses as "transwoman" but he is a fully functional male (sired two children!) in a dress and wig who got his seat via a women's quota internal to the party). If this is not raving madness, I don't know. (One has to go back to Caligula's horse in the senate and Nero's favorite eunuch Sporus to find similar decadence.) (To clarify, I am not against people with severe mental disorders wrt gender or intersex persons getting therapy or medical help but this should be handled discreetly and I am strongly against the right to force others to play along with publicly displayed mental illness or sexual fetishes.)

I also don't think that it has ever been the case that the ideas that a country should have control over borders and immigration or that a standard/typical family was father, mother and children was framed as "far right". I am 50 years old and would have described myself as "center left" in most issues until about 10 years ago or so (I was a bit more conservative wrt "family values"). For some years I was quite leftist in some economical issues (basically "old fashioned 70s/80s social democracy style), because I was fairly mad at the political elites enabling banksters around the 2008 crisis. I became skeptical about Euro/EU with the problems with Greece etc. that followed but still sympathizing with both "left" and "right" critiques of the EU (I now think it is a despicable and unredeemable cesspool of grifters and all of the EUrocrats should be sent to Siberia, or even better to Mars.) I was quite neutral/disinterested about the (European) "migrant crisis" until around 2017 when I realized the utter madness it was. This alone (+ the common sense social conservatism wrt gender, family etc. and an affirmative stance towards Western culture and history) has shifted me to what is deemed "far right" nowadays which is crazy because the content of most of my positions would have been centrist or even center left as late as the mid-1990s. Although admittedly I have become more traditional/conservative because I now see that the seemingly moderate policies of the 1970s-90s led to the current madness and that Europe has been "running on fumes" in many respects for more than a century.

Excellent post, thank you.

Quote from: Jo498 on January 03, 2023, 04:27:17 AMWhy is a federal ID seen as problematic but not a state ID/driver's license?

Because it's the Mark of the Beast!

http://www.jesusisprecious.org/nwo/real_id_and_mark_of_beast.htm#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20Mark%20of%20the%20Beast%20prophecy%20makes%20one,will%20be%20in%20the%20hand%20or%20the%20forehead.

QuoteNot only are you required to have an ID (adding insult to injury you have to pay for it every 10 years or so when it has to be renewed!) but you are also required on pain of a fine to register at your place of residence after a move (and this new place of residence will be entered in your ID). I am not sure about the techicalities but it is some kind of misdemeanour if you move and don't register within a few weeks or so afterwards!

Forgive me for saying so, but that sounds very, um.... German.  In the US, I think the only requirement is for registration in case of a military draft:

"All male U.S. citizens and immigrant non-citizens who are between the ages of 18 and 25 are required by law to have registered within 30 days of their 18th birthdays, and must notify the Selective Service within ten days of any changes to any of the information they provided on their registration cards, such as a change of address."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_Service_System

Back when I was that age, I moved around a lot, but never updated my address.  I don't think Uncle Sam would have had any trouble tracking me down, though.

I identify myself as "left" (closer to center-left than far left).

I advocate green social democracy and I am liberal/secular on social issues.

     
     

     You are a citizen or you are a subject. The first means the state must prove it has the right to remove you. The second means you have to prove you have the right to be where you are. In the real world these are not mutually exclusive, it's some of both. I care about the balance.

     I want the state to show it's not discriminating on the basis of language, color or national origin. I realize that's deeply unfair to states, because those are the most important reasons for exclusion in the minds of pro-exclusionists. Remember when Trump posited Norway as the ideal?

     I'm probably too American to get why Turks will never be Germans. I thought the Logical Positivists abolished metaphysics. _{(https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/tongue.gif)}

My only comment on the original poll is that I don't find these categories useful, particularly in the US context.   The "far left" here is non-existent except perhaps for some extremely online trolls, and the "left" has no political representation to speak of (Bernie did call himself a socialist, but he'd probably be centrist or center-left in Europe).  I'd call myself a "social democrat".  However, I'd be quite happy -- or at least much less anxious -- if we could just stop the country backsliding into antidemocratic quasi-fascism in the next several years.   

Quote from: Jo498 on January 03, 2023, 07:14:45 AMObviously "everyone" was a bit of hyperbole. But it has never been before the case that it can become a shibboleth to accept that some men are women and

I would recommend giving this Professor Dave video a watch:


I don't agree with everything Dave says -- he seems a bit too reductive at points -- and Dave always comes off a bit abrasive and cocksure, but I think his heart is in the right place.

Quote from: Jo498 on January 03, 2023, 07:14:45 AMBut it has never been before the case that it can become a shibboleth to accept that some men are women and that official government representatives claim publicly that there were more than the two known sexes in (human) biology.

Even here I differentiate between real life and online/corporate media.  In person, only a small proportion of young people, mostly college students, actually believe this.  I can't remember ever meeting someone over the age of thirty who believes it.  Possible accommodation regarding pronouns doesn't mean much.  Some trendy employers do embrace the nomenclature of so-called progressivism, and some are a bit more stringent in enforcing perceived potential violations of harassment guidelines, and so on, but it is exactly akin to greenwashing.  When the political winds change, as they do from time to time, the emphasis on this topic will wane.

Quote from: Jo498 on January 03, 2023, 07:14:45 AMI also don't think that it has ever been the case that the ideas that a country should have control over borders and immigration or that a standard/typical family was father, mother and children was framed as "far right".

I am only familiar with US immigration history and policy, and here the US has a history of wild swings in policy, ranging from explicit exclusion of some races or groups - eg, the Chinese Exclusion Act - to far more open policies.  There are both economic and political motivations behind these swings, and there is little reason to believe that will change.  I fully expect additional crackdowns on Latin American immigration in the future, and much more stringent policies regarding other countries, including China.  Again.  More globally, and longer term, human migration will become a more pressing issue as the obvious and harmful effects of climate change (eg, drought leading to famine) cause even more massive displacements of people, and ultimately result in an increasing level of outward migration rather than internal migration, which constitutes the majority of forced migration now.  As one of my public econ professors succinctly put it decades ago, rich countries have money and other resources, so poor people flee to rich countries over time.  Strict immigration laws won't stop that, nor will any enforcement short of military deployments along borders, and even that won't stop it entirely.

Now, cynical people might divine some utility in policy shifts regarding tertiary policy issues.  Divide and conquer, that sort of thing.   

Center-Left

Sarge

Quote from: Florestan on January 03, 2023, 07:39:41 AM...while not being asked to show your ID at the booth.

Voting booths are so 20th Century where I live.  It's been vote by mail all century.  I can't even imagine standing in line to vote anymore.  If vote by mail were eliminated, I wouldn't vote.

    The gender/sex distinctions used to be handled without much in the way of codification. Men lived as women, women lived as men and manifestos were few and far between. These days everything is manifestoed to the point where the authors have more trouble with each other than they do with the unchurched.

    My reaction to the pronoun wars is based on the notion that they will burn out before they ever get to me. I'm old, so the conflicts designed to partition college students off into warring camps seem distant.

    Families have always been a bit ad hoc. It's in the stories that are told, and even more in the ones you aren't supposed to tell.

    Faced with a choice between understanding a trans woman as assuming an identity because it feels better, or as a remarkably obtuse understanding of biology, I'll go with Door #1. The only reason to go with Door #2 is to construct a phoney baloney Issue, for which the sides must share the blame.

   

Quote from: Daverz on January 03, 2023, 08:32:30 AMThe "far left" here is non-existent except perhaps for some extremely online trolls

Quote from: Jill LawrenceThe Pew Research Center classifies only 6 percent of Americans and 12 percent of Democrats as "progressive left."

Quote from: Todd on January 03, 2023, 08:59:53 AMVoting booths are so 20th Century where I live.  It's been vote by mail all century. 

Yes, I know. In this respect Romania is far behind. There have been talks about introducing voting by mail since I can't remember when but nothing happened. I guess our politicians simply don't want it to happen.

Quote from: Todd on January 03, 2023, 08:59:53 AMVoting booths are so 20th Century where I live.  It's been vote by mail all century.  I can't even imagine standing in line to vote anymore.  If vote by mail were eliminated, I wouldn't vote.

I think it's Estonia where everyone votes online.

Quote from: Brian on January 03, 2023, 09:30:11 AMI think it's Estonia where everyone votes online.

If it could be made secure, I'd embrace online voting immediately. 

     McCarthy doesn't have the votes to be Speaker. It's even worse than predicted. Rep. Biggs has 10 votes and several others have a vote.

     Jeffries "won" 212-203 at the conclusion of the first round. Assorted nuts got 19 votes.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 03, 2023, 09:24:19 AMQuote from: Jill Lawrence
The Pew Research Center classifies only 6 percent of Americans and 12 percent of Democrats as "progressive left."

I know what a progressive Democrat looks like, but the phrase "progressive left" seems ambiguous to me.

Quote from: Daverz on January 03, 2023, 12:36:00 PMI know what a progressive Democrat looks like, but the phrase "progressive left" seems ambiguous to me.

Yeah, that term makes me think of 1905-1925 progressives like Robert LaFollette and Charles Evans Hughes.

Quote from: Brian on January 03, 2023, 12:38:29 PMYeah, that term makes me think of 1905-1925 progressives like Robert LaFollette and Charles Evans Hughes.

I'm not sure I would associate Hughes with the left or even very strongly with Progressivism of the era.

Quote from: Todd on January 03, 2023, 12:50:06 PMI'm not sure I would associate Hughes with the left or even very strongly with Progressivism of the era.

Maybe I got the wrong guy. Been a while since my last plow through the amazing Edmund Morris Theodore Roosevelt trilogy.

(TR is also an example of the slipperiness of labels.)

Quote from: Brian on January 03, 2023, 01:28:51 PMTR is also an example of the slipperiness of labels.

To say the least.  Hey, at least a lot of luminaries of the age supported Eugenics, so there's that.

I agree completely with Jo. What today pass as far right was mainstream social-democracy 50 years ago.  At least in non-Communist Europe. În Communist Europe they did pass as far right 50 years ago.

Quote from: Florestan on January 04, 2023, 02:02:26 PMI agree completely with Jo. What today pass as far right was mainstream social-democracy 50 years ago.  At least in non-Communist Europe. În Communist Europe they did pass as far right 50 years ago.

I would disagree. Perhaps mainstream social democracy of the 1920s/1930s.

I was still a kid 50 years ago, but old enough to follow the news; European nationalism was much less prominent, at least outside the Communist bloc. Perhaps the effects of WWII were still too strong. The primary exception was France, what with DeGaulle's amour-propre setting the tone (even if he himself died in 1970). The same was true of the US: MAGA type existed but were far less powerful culturally or politically.

I'd like to vote but don't really feel comfortable with identifying as anything. Closest might be centrist? It's pretty much what I get on the political compass (the good version- the crappy version makes me super lib-left, like it does everyone else). 

(The weird thing about centrist is that you could either be pro-status quo or some insane Nazbol- they are both technically centrists.  ;D)

Also, basically every ideology sucks. The problem is, there's no way around the human condition, so it's like trying to patch a flawed program- you are fixing bugs but only creating more bugs in the process, so you are just moving the bugs to a location that doesn't affect you. No such thing as a utopia, no system that is best for everyone- people are too different for that. Turn your environment into an ideal tropical paradise and you will make many animals happy, but there's still going to be enough Polar Bears out there who will be driven insane and want to revolt.

Quote from: greg on January 04, 2023, 09:30:20 PMI'd like to vote but don't really feel comfortable with identifying as anything.

That will not do.  Just say that you are far right and then righteous people will pillory you.

Quote from: JBS on January 04, 2023, 04:06:58 PMI would disagree. Perhaps mainstream social democracy of the 1920s/1930s.

Read the 1959 Bad Godesberg Program of the German Social-Democratic Party. German patriotism, check; Christian heritage, check; family values, check; protection of family, check; biological and psychological differences between men and women, check; protection and encouragement for mothers and housewives, check; protection of national borders and of German citizens, check.

https://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/Parties%20WZ%203%20ENG%20FINAL.pdf (https://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/Parties%20WZ%203%20ENG%20FINAL.pdf)

     In the past I voted for the Housewife Party. I don't think the party disappeared the housewives, I think they disappeared themselves, with a little help from the economy.

     Ideology will follow change even while it purports to instigate it. As much as I may want to instantiate a decades old fantasy of Mom, Dad, Bud and Sis attending church on Sunday (I can't wait!), I can't help noticing that I never actually lived in that world even when belief in it was common.

     People "believe in" things when they can't actually believe them. That's why the extra word "in", to mark the difference. Is it surprising that party platforms tend to be full of this stuff?

     

What I'd very much like to know is who is the other person self-identifying as center-right. Step up, brother!  :)

Quote from: Todd on January 05, 2023, 04:38:47 AMThat will not do.  Just say that you are far right and then righteous people will pillory you.

Nah, you don't even have to say or identify as anything, just disagree with the "tolerant" people slightly about some politically sensitive topic and they will be convinced you are far right, and any defensiveness on your part will be just seen as making excuses.

Identifying as their enemy would only confirm their delusions.

Remember, don't go down without your middle finger sticking up.  ;D

Quote from: Florestan on January 05, 2023, 10:12:27 AMWhat I'd very much like to know is who is the other person self-identifying as center-right. Step up, brother!  :)

Me.
I would think it rather obvious.

Quote from: JBS on January 04, 2023, 04:06:58 PMI was still a kid 50 years ago, but old enough to follow the news; European nationalism was much less prominent...

Nationalism is ambiguous. When I was a teenager in the 1980s virtually no West German would have flown a German flag privately. It was strange to see this done in Britain or in Danish summer homes or so. The reason is obvious despite the "black red gold" having been a democratic flag since the 19th century with no relation to the 2nd or 3rd Reich. That flags can be flown without appearing right wing slowly changed during the 1990s but finally with the World cup 2006 (of course Turkish or Italian Germans had no problem at all to fly "their" (see?) flags and drive around honking after "their" team had won a soccer game already in the 1990s).

BUT: The implied "minimal rational nationalism", i.e. that Germany like most European countries (and unlike the US) is and should be a fairly homogeneous ethno-state, that immigration should be restricted and controlled, that "parallel cultures" from oriental/muslim immigrants with very different traditions could be a problem, so they would have to assimilate, that economic and foreign policies should put German interests first etc. was the standard position. Maybe veiled with some talk about "European integration" (although I think even the mainstream center right had a slogan "First Germany, then Europe" in the 80s or early 90s). Germany also (unlike France) has had a ius sanguinis for citizenship, not ius soli. All of this was mostly unchallenged and undisputed, even within the center left of the 1980s. The center right flipped very recently within less than a decade. In the early 2000s there were speeches by Merkel about the failure of multiculturalism that would appear far right today (despite being simply empirically true...).

Now the demand for assimilation is considered "racist" in some (leftist) quarters. About half of comments from politicians now cry racist when it is pointed out that mostly Albanians and Near-Easterners burned cars and attacked ambulances for fun on New years Eve in Berlin and elsewhere. Conservatives have demanded that first names of German perpetrators should be published. But that's racism because it would clearly show the both the lack of integration (i.e. that 2nd or 3rd generation immigrants are typically not called "Max" but "Ahmad") and the disproportional delinquency of these children of migrants. This must not be true, and if, it's the fault of "structural racism". 

In the early 2000s, after 9/11 the left liberal magazine "Spiegel" had one blatantly anti-islamic cover after the other (which I found exaggerated and repulsive at that time) that would only be found in right wing publications today and considered hate speech. Despite Bataclan and Charlie Hebdo etc., the media decided to completely flip the script on islam and immigration around 2015. Go figure. It certainly does not appear "natural".

(As an aside: The popular/children's history etc. books I read in the 1980s (though some of them were from the 50s, I'd guess) were also mostly naively positive about most of Western/German history, discovery of the world etc. Except for the Nazis/WW II there was a generally positive stance towards the historic and cultural heritage. This has also changed.)

edit: Undeniably, there are some people in the only established right wing party in Germany (AfD) that would have been considered far right even 30-40 years ago. But the core positions and many members would have been considered center right/mainstream conservative at that time (and as I said, many of these positions would have been unquestioned and shared by almost everyone). Their chairperson is a Lesbian (very smart, McKinsey consultant type, not at traditionally conservative) which would obviously have been impossible except for a Green/Fringe alternative party in the 1980s.

Quote from: JBS on January 05, 2023, 07:31:10 PMMe.

Thanks.

QuoteI would think it rather obvious.

Well, there were a few other candidates too.  ;) 

Quote from: Florestan on January 05, 2023, 07:13:01 AMRead the 1959 Bad Godesberg Program of the German Social-Democratic Party. German patriotism, check; Christian heritage, check; family values, check; protection of family, check; biological and psychological differences between men and women, check; protection and encouragement for mothers and housewives, check; protection of national borders and of German citizens, check.

https://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/Parties%20WZ%203%20ENG%20FINAL.pdf (https://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/Parties%20WZ%203%20ENG%20FINAL.pdf)

It was common in my ca. 1990 politics/history class to show the students excerpts (without revealing the source at first) from this and from the 1947 Ahlener Programm of the conservative CDU (Christian democrats) that called for state control of all key industries. It reads fairly socialist (and was revised quickly, probably with some US influence) But even at my school days, in the time of Kohl before the reunification  e.g. the Railroad and postal services were not at all privatized (some of them are still only semi-privatized, like with many current things having worst of both worlds, i.e. socialist inefficiency and capitalist grabbing of public money).

Quote from: Jo498 on January 06, 2023, 12:48:44 AMIt was common in my ca. 1990 politics/history class to show the students excerpts (without revealing the source at first) from this and from the 1947 Ahlener Programm of the conservative CDU (Christian democrats) that called for state control of all key industries. It reads fairly socialist

Indeed. But even so, they clearly state:

Quoteit is necessary to:

Strengthen the economic position and freedom of the individual, and prevent economic forces from being concentrated in the hands of individual persons, companies, and private or public organizations, which could endanger economic or political freedom.

QuoteEfficient small- and medium-sized businesses must be promoted for the sake of their national economic value and for the opportunities they provide for social advancement. Within industry, commerce, handicrafts, and the trades, private entrepreneurship must be preserved and supported.

Incidentally, note the use of the word "national". 

In the context of discussion, though, my favorite part is this one (all highlights are mine):

QuoteWithin every reform of the German economy, regardless of whether it might involve land reform, the reconstruction of the industrial economy, or the redefinition of the relationship between employees and companies, the first and foremost goal is the welfare of the entire people [Volkes]. Above all, the German economy serves neither the welfare of a particular class nor that of foreign nations. After the German people's necessities of life have been satisfied, the Allies in particular do have a right to, and an interest in, the elimination of the excessive war industry as well as reparations payments. But they have no right to curtail German industry in such a fashion that the vital needs of the German people are neglected, nor to mold it according to the export needs of their own industries.

This is even more explicitly "far right" than the Bad Godesberg Program.

Quotethe Railroad and postal services were not at all privatized (some of them are still only semi-privatized, like with many current things having worst of both worlds, i.e. socialist inefficiency and capitalist grabbing of public money).

It's the same here.

Italian Christian-Democrats were also "far right" 50 years ago. Here are some electoral posters from 1963.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f8/Propaganda_Dc.jpg)

The left one reads "Protect Me!" and it's clearly anti-Communist.

The center one reads "The Christian-Democracy Has Turned 20" and it's clearly traditionalist.

The right one reads "Mum and Dad Vote for Me" and it's clearly about family values.

According to this poll the Overton window of GMG covers LEFT to CENTER-RIGHT. A little bit left from center is the average orientation. We "lack" true socialists and communists as well as the true right/far right members. Appreciation of classical music demonstrates some level of intelligence and intellectual interest beyond "intellectually less-demanding" popular music. A person of intelligence and understanding/knowledge of the World is more likely to have somewhat centrist than far left/right political orientation. 

On economic issues hardly nobody seems to be very right-leaning, but on social issues some members say they are conservative.

"Far-right" is a very badly defined term. Far-right people in the lower class are economically actually quite left-leaning, but instead of being progressive they are conservative. Far-right thinks things have progressed worse and the solution is to go back to "better" times. That's why progress (and change) as a concept is something negative for people in the far-right. Rich people who benefit from the status quo as it is "rigged" for them don't want change at least to a direction wrong for them. So, rich people use less educated and perhaps not so bright individuals to adapt this progress hating ideology. Billionaires pay people like Ben Shapiro to brainwash less educated people to think that the reason they are struggling in life is not because the rich rob them blind, but because "illegal" immigrants take the minimum age jobs and oppressed groups of people such as people of LGBT+, women, people of colour, people of religion other than christianity etc. are getting more rights and protection to be equal with other people. That's the trick to prevent these economically struggling people to realize their "place" on economic issues is in fact in the left. Billionaires who want most people live in poverty working 60 hours or more a week are the real far-right, the crony capitalists. Poor people who were brainwashed by Andrew Tate/Charlie Kirk/Ben Shapiro/Fox News/etc. ready for violence to "save" America from wokeness and CRT should not be called far-right. These are just people who know too little about the World to have a political orientation of their own! They are politically disorientated.

Hardly anyone would have considered most of this "far right". Many Soviet/socialist posters (or murals) have traditional looking males/females, even if they might not always stress the nuclear family and more women might be shown as working non-household/care jobs. The current fads (or worse) are not uprooting some narrow political/societal position. They try to uproot stuff that was common to virtually every human culture and very probably to a large extent fixed by nature herself.
Similarly, although this is of course something more historically contingent, "nationalism" in the weak sense of a positive stance towards ones nation, its culture and history and "preferential" treatment of full citizens vs. guests/foreigners was simply the normal thing. Again, even the Soviets spoke of friendship of peoples, NOT about dissolving all peoples into a new order (although these ideas certainly existed long ago).
One reason why the cheap talk about "integration" of ever more immigrants rings so hollow is that on the one hand, many Western countries have hollowed out and distanced themselves from their specific culture and history (for fear of appearing exclusive or nationalist) and on the other, many immigrants from the Balkan or Near East come from traditions that are for all kinds of reasons (sometimes a need for survival, e.g. Kurds never had their own country) far more "tribalist" than most Western Europeans have been for decades or centuries. Of course they will stick to their ways, it's perfectly understandable and in some sense even commendable (although oa Westerner might disagree sharply with the content of some traditions). But it's clear that there will not be an integration of strongly tribalist groups into a culture that has weakened their national identity (at least in explicit features, there are many subtle ones remaining) for decades. And then one gets tribal skirmishes between e.g. Turks and Kurds in Germany...

Quote from: 71 dB on January 06, 2023, 03:10:18 AMAndrew Tate

Don't know if you are aware of it but Andrew Tate and his brother Tristan has been recently arrested in Romania, where they settled a few years ago, on charges of human trafficking and organized crime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Tate#Human_trafficking_investigation_and_detention (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Tate#Human_trafficking_investigation_and_detention)

Quote from: 71 dB on January 06, 2023, 03:10:18 AMWe "lack" true socialists and communists

We have at least one communist, actually.

Quote from: Florestan on January 06, 2023, 03:48:44 AMDon't know if you are aware of it but Andrew Tate and his brother Tristan has been recently arrested in Romania, where they settled a few years ago, on charges of human trafficking and organized crime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Tate#Human_trafficking_investigation_and_detention (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Tate#Human_trafficking_investigation_and_detention)

Of course I am aware of that. Who isn't?  :o
That's why I mentioned his name. It is fresh in my mind!
Hopefully Romanian justice system locks this human filth away for a loooong time!

Quote from: Florestan on January 06, 2023, 04:06:27 AMWe have at least one communist, actually.

Who obviously hasn't participated this poll!

Quote from: Jo498 on January 06, 2023, 03:24:01 AMSimilarly, although this is of course something more historically contingent, "nationalism" in the weak sense of a positive stance towards ones nation, its culture and history and "preferential" treatment of full citizens vs. guests/foreigners was simply the normal thing.

The better term is patriotism.  It's alive and well.  In the US, some on the "left" (eg, Ro Khanna) are trying to popularize the phrase "economic patriotism", for instance. There's nothing wrong with patriotism.  There's nothing wrong with nationalism, or at least it's no worse than globalism.  Until nation states cease to be the primary large scale organizing political entity, which will only happen via war, patriotism and nationalism will exist.  Even if nation states disappear, reactionary patriotism and nationalism will exist.  Citizens of the world are rare birds.

Quote from: 71 dB on January 06, 2023, 04:12:28 AMOf course I am aware of that. Who isn't?  :o
That's why I mentioned his name. It is fresh in my mind!
Hopefully Romanian justice system locks this human filth away for a loooong time!

We'll see. The charges are organized crime, meaning 1 to 5 years and human trafficking, meaning 3 to 10 years. If they will be found guilty of both charges, they will be sentenced for each charge but will serve only the longest sentence, not both of them cummulated, this being the Romanian criminal justice system. Moreover, they can be released on parole after serving at least half of the sentence. So don't hope they will rot in Dracula's dungeon.

Besides, they are US citizens. I'd be very surprised if pressure form the USA for their extradition would not take place.

QuoteWho obviously hasn't participated this poll!

Obviously.

Quote from: Florestan on January 06, 2023, 04:41:07 AMWe'll see. The charges are organized crime, meaning 1 to 5 years and human trafficking, meaning 3 to 10 years. If they will be found guilty of both charges, they will be sentenced for each charge but will serve only the longest sentence, not both of them cummulated, this being the Romanian criminal justice system. Moreover, they can be released on parole after serving at least half of the sentence. So don't hope they will rot in Dracula's dungeon.

Besides, they are US citizens. I'd be very surprised if pressure form the USA for their extradition would not take place.

Damn. I was hoping for a much longer sentence... ...20 years for example. Well at least Greta Thundberg humiliated Andrew Tate completely on social media.  ;D

Quote from: Florestan on January 06, 2023, 04:41:07 AMWe'll see. The charges are organized crime, meaning 1 to 5 years and human trafficking, meaning 3 to 10 years. If they will be found guilty of both charges, they will be sentenced for each charge but will serve only the longest sentence, not both of them cummulated, this being the Romanian criminal justice system. Moreover, they can be released on parole after serving at least half of the sentence. So don't hope they will rot in Dracula's dungeon.

Besides, they are US citizens. I'd be very surprised if pressure form the USA for their extradition would not take place.

Obviously.

That last will require an influential political bloc to want him out. Otherwise, tough nookies. As Paul Whelan can tell you.

I believe what sometimes happens in this sort of case, the individual is returned to the US with the proviso that they serve out the rest of their sentence in an American prison.

Quote from: JBS on January 06, 2023, 12:20:21 PMThat last will require an influential political bloc to want him out. Otherwise, tough nookies. As Paul Whelan can tell you.

I believe what sometimes happens in this sort of case, the individual is returned to the US with the proviso that they serve out the rest of their sentence in an American prison.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teo_Peter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teo_Peter)

When Todd is right he is right: the US can disregard the international law or the national law of any country they choose to disregard.  ;D

As different from Poju, I entertain no thought that the Tate brothers will serve for long in a Romanian prison.

Quote from: JBS on January 06, 2023, 12:20:21 PMI believe what sometimes happens in this sort of case, the individual is returned to the US with the proviso that they serve out the rest of their sentence in an American prison.

Considering how American prisons are chances are mr Tate would rather suffer his sentence in full in a Romanian prison...

Quote from: 71 dB on January 06, 2023, 01:30:21 PMConsidering how American prisons are chances are mr Tate would rather suffer his sentence in full in a Romanian prison...

If one has enough money and political influence,a Romanian prison, while not quite a spa, is not a dungeon either.

Quote from: Florestan on January 06, 2023, 12:32:19 PMhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teo_Peter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teo_Peter)

When Todd is right he is right: the US can disregard the international law or the national law of any country they choose to disregard.  ;D

As different from Poju, I entertain no thought that the Tate brothers will serve for long in a Romanian prison.

I don't recall the names of the people involved, but there's been at least one similar case of a European diplomat escaping prosecution here and another in the UK.

And I note that the man responsible for Mr Peter's death was convicted on some charges in a US court, and the nature of the charges and the brief Wikipedia narrative suggest to me that the BAC tests and other forensics were screwed up enough (by the criminal, it would seem) to make conviction in any court of the homicide charge unlikely.

Quote from: 71 dB on January 06, 2023, 04:12:28 AMOf course I am aware of that. Who isn't?  :o

The only thing I've seen from him is his Pierce Morgan interviews, and he actually seems quite reasonable, though I know nothing besides that about him so couldn't comment.

The only reason people like him gain popularity is due to the current anti-masculinity sentiment. If you apply excessive force in one area, it will cause a reaction for the other side. If that force didn't exist, people like him would not gain popularity. It's wild that people actually pay for his courses, but it is a natural result.

Quote from: greg on January 06, 2023, 02:15:58 PMThe only reason people like him gain popularity is due to the current anti-masculinity sentiment. If you apply excessive force in one area, it will cause a reaction for the other side. If that force didn't exist, people like him would not gain popularity. It's wild that people actually pay for his courses, but it is a natural result.

You need to get offline, get off your incel-adjacent chat groups, and meet real people in the real world, particularly real women.

Quote from: SimonNZ on January 06, 2023, 03:16:23 PMYou need to get offline, get off your incel-adjacent chat groups, and meet real people in the real world, particularly real women.

"incel-adjacent chat groups"
huh?

I'm a center left libertarian.