What motivates you politically?

The new deal was a giant ponzi scheme. It was going to collapse at some point.

I usually vote against the worst candidate.


Reaganomics is a ponzi scheme. The New Deal outperformed all other things the US has tried. And only minor changes are needed to make it work in perpetuity.
 
Reaganomics is a ponzi scheme. The New Deal outperformed all other things the US has tried. And only minor changes are needed to make it work in perpetuity.

Yet the New Deal itself was highly inconsistent. It isn't what most of its supporters or detractors think what it is. Many Libertarians consider the New Deal to be Keynesian, yet Roosevelt prioritized balanced budgets over crisis relief. Many changes were made as part of the New Deal and then reversed and which were billed as part of the New Deal as well. In fact, some elements of the New Deal were markedly supply-side and not demand-side (think of the farm subsidies that were enacted as part of the New Deal).

That said, trade protectionism was a major element of Reagonomics as well...
 
Yet the New Deal itself was highly inconsistent. It isn't what most of its supporters or detractors think what it is. Many Libertarians consider the New Deal to be Keynesian, yet Roosevelt prioritized balanced budgets over crisis relief. Many changes were made as part of the New Deal and then reversed and which were billed as part of the New Deal as well. In fact, some elements of the New Deal were markedly supply-side and not demand-side (think of the farm subsidies that were enacted as part of the New Deal).

That said, trade protectionism was a major element of Reagonomics as well...


I'm aware of the weaknesses of FDR's New Deal. But the basic framework took on a life of it's own after FDR's death. It was in general the consensus in American politics until the 1970s. And while not without flaws, it really worked extremely well. Far better than anything which proceeded it or came after once Reagan began the dismantling of it.
 
If they really believed abortion was murder, pro-lifers would be doing rather more about it than just voting and occasionally waving a sign. Look at the anti-fascist movement, the Civil Rights movement, the anti-war movement; all mobilised far more people to take far more action against what you would describe as far less. When was the last time anybody died to prevent an abortion?

So it would seem that either you're all basically terrible people, rendering all your bloviating on the subject a bit hollow, or "abortion is murder" is just another bit of heroic self-mythologising on the part of the Christian Right, something to turn your dreary reactionaryism into a real-life game of Superman.

Your choice.
 
If they really believed abortion was murder, pro-lifers would be doing rather more about it than just voting and occasionally waving a sign.
Well some did. I hope you don't want to encourage more of that?
 
Traitorfish seems to be ignoring the actual murders of abortion clinic workers and the large scale demonstrations in the USA. He also strawmans the anti-abortion movement as exclusively a Christian movement, which is simply incorrect when considering many athiests (like the late hitch) who were against it.

Also the parallels with the civil rights movement fail. The actual victims had a voice and that helped garner support with other sections of society; whilst with the abortion movement the supposed victims are basically invisible.
 
If they really believed abortion was murder, pro-lifers would be doing rather more about it than just voting and occasionally waving a sign. Look at the anti-fascist movement, the Civil Rights movement, the anti-war movement; all mobilised far more people to take far more action against what you would describe as far less. When was the last time anybody died to prevent an abortion?

So it would seem that either you're all basically terrible people, rendering all your bloviating on the subject a bit hollow, or "abortion is murder" is just another bit of heroic self-mythologising on the part of the Christian Right, something to turn your dreary reactionaryism into a real-life game of Superman.

Your choice.

In the fight for acceptance, who has lost more ground: anti-abortion or communism?

Last I heard in the US, abortion levels and teen pregnancy are on the decline. Educating people still works.


Spoiler :
Since the "intended" "victims" are helpless any way, they cannot fight the battle. It would be more on the lines why is Traitorfish not moving to a Communist country and fighting their battles. There are two theories on the "need" for abortion. It was used as populaion control. It was to erase the stigma of having a child out of wedlock. Now the latter has been erased since it was based on "christian" moral run amock. No one is going to admit that it is population control, but they have come up with nifty "choice to not further the population burden". Aborting one's offspring is as ridiculous as racism, but humans still practice both.


Quackers said it better than I did.
 
Traitorfish seems to be ignoring the actual murders of abortion clinic workers and the large scale demonstrations in the USA.
I'm not ignoring them at all, I'm simply suggesting that, on the one hand, the former do not represent the majority of the pro-life movement (and don't pretend you wouldn't react with suitably exaggerated stage-horror if I did :p), and the latter sort of activism is wholly inadequate as a protest against the "silent holocaust" that the uterine socialists are so keen to insist is actually occurring. Compared to the protests against the Vietnam War, a conflict which killed far less people than abortion is alleged to, these actions are of very little significance.

(Is it overly partisan to suggest that it may be just a little telling that conservatives can't seem to think of a middle ground between electoralism and terrorism?)

He also strawmans the anti-abortion movement as exclusively a Christian movement, which is simply incorrect when considering many athiests (like the late hitch) who were against it.
There's a distinction between being "against abortion" and being part of the organised American "Pro-Life" movement, and the latter is overwhelmingly Christian in membership, and something in which Christians and Christian organisations play a hegemonic role. (The fact that the whole enterprise relies on a basically Christian metaphysics will do that for you.)

Also the parallels with the civil rights movement fail. The actual victims had a voice and that helped garner support with other sections of society; whilst with the abortion movement the supposed victims are basically invisible.
I don't think you quite understand the purpose of my comparison, then.

In the fight for acceptance, who has lost more ground: anti-abortion or communism?

Last I heard in the US, abortion levels and teen pregnancy are on the decline. Educating people still works.


Spoiler :
Since the "intended" "victims" are helpless any way, they cannot fight the battle. It would be more on the lines why is Traitorfish not moving to a Communist country and fighting their battles. There are two theories on the "need" for abortion. It was used as populaion control. It was to erase the stigma of having a child out of wedlock. Now the latter has been erased since it was based on "christian" moral run amock. No one is going to admit that it is population control, but they have come up with nifty "choice to not further the population burden". Aborting one's offspring is as ridiculous as racism, but humans still practice both.


Quackers said it better than I did.
I'm not a capital-C Communist, so I don't really understand the comparison.
 
Top Bottom