BTW:
Scenarios in which Americans deal with their own fascists is the optimistic minimal-damage option.
The darker alternative is that Americans don’t clean house, and eventually the rest of the world has to do it for you. Which will be achieved primarily via the mechanism of the People’s Liberation Army, and they’re unlikely to be gentle about it.
The really dark alternative is that the PLA isn’t up to the job, and the future is an American boot in the face of the world. Forever.
I think that the two go hand-in-hand at the moment. I realize that you disagree, but I’m sort of exhausted with the question and need to bow out now. If I seem piqued I apologize and hope that there are no hard feelings.
Those are both basically the same class warfare, not IMO separate things at all. Yes, the previous generation of lefties dropped a ball from by putting too many eggs in the “identity politics” basket while neglecting to stay organized in controlling the state and the economy. It was a trick to get the left to stop fighting and enjoy some gains in civil rights, and encouraging us to hope for more. Why this tactic worked is because recognizing rights and ending bigotry doesn’t cost anything. Hell, it makes and saves money to stop oppressing people and have them on board. We were entitled to this fair treatment anyway, but it was a devil’s bargain that came at the cost of the whole labor movement - the main way the average person had to keep business in check. This also for a time resisted the drain of local economies, and the further consolidation of capital.
People love to curse me - a fairly marginal person - for insisting that identity politics cannot be the whole leftist strategy, but it is not an either/or thing. The gains in civil rights are hugely important. But they risk being temporary when people’s influence is subsumed into corporatism. Because then we have lost our leverage, and lack the teeth to even keep what gains we’d had. From personal experience, celebrating our fringe sexualities, ethnicities, religions, etc is a lot more popular because it’s personal and charismatic and fun. Whereas trying to maintain political and economic influence is a chore, it’s abstract, it’s not sexy, it’s fucking dangerous. It is also the lasting key to justice, compared to petitioning the rich and powerful to ease up on our disenfranchisement. The reason it’s hard and dangerous is because it’s what the powers that be don’t want you to do. Because it’s a fundamental change with real direct costs to them in wealth and influence.
“People like us” having better representation in media, and not getting mocked and beaten is a great start. But that in itself will not give us a fair say in how things are run. We need to be willing to look behind the curtain at who uses economic systems to rationalize violence, and not sell out for a few nice concessions to liberalism.
Beware the false dichotomies! If identity politics is the carrot, then some of us others are the stick. Positive and negative reenforcement working together. Because when you are dealing with sociopathy, it is naive to assume that they will stop abuses and unfair practices when there are only good consequences to doing them. Some people need to firmly compassionately demonstrate that there are negative consequences which are very real, that they don’t act with impunity.
I suppose the first tactical question is:
Do you think that there is still a realistic possibility of a democratic solution to fascism? If so, how do you plan on overcoming the fascist control of the electoral process? If not, what is your alternative?
Which norms in particular were you thinking of, and why do you believe that they won’t be demolished or exploited by the GOP as soon as they become inconvenient?
I’m doing the best I can, but control of tone is not something that I am good at. Aspie and crazy; that isn’t an excuse, but it is an explanation.
Normally I deal with that issue by being hyper-conscious of criticism and defaulting to silence when in doubt. In this situation, that does not seem to be an acceptable solution. It’s too important for silence.
Your comments have had a significant effect on how I discuss this.
You asked me to try to find positive things to say; that is what started me thinking about potentially effective responses, and led me to my current advocacy. You told me that my ubiquitous gloominess was demoralising; that is why I started the Wanderthread, and added the warning caveat to my post upthread.
I am trying to focus on solutions instead of problems. I am trying to keep in mind the fact that people are stressed out already. But I am naturally a skinless person; I have never been able to conceal my thoughts and emotions. I’m not great at recognising them either, except post-facto.
I am sorry that some of my posts irritate you. I try not to address them to you directly unless you are responding to me first. But apart from entirely quarantining, censoring or silencing myself, I don’t see what else I can do.
It’s a mistake to think of capitalism as being in a superior position to fascism. The principles of capitalism, as promulgated by self-declared capitalists, they aren’t principles. The libertarian principles of liberty within the price system of a free market (the fountainhead of the movement, hurr hurr) bear no relation to the practice of capital accumulation and rent-seeking.
Fascism and rent-seeking aristocracy are part of the same liberty-hating, anti-social-democratic-republican totalitarian machine that has been developing since the first breakdown of French republicanism 200 years ago. It’s not an American empire, it’s been developing everywhere, Europe included.
It’s a soft totalitarianism in Germany, harder in the U.K. and France, on display as varying flavors of “competent” absolute control in the U.S. and Russia, and as bad as the Khmer Rouge in whatever free-fire zone either flavor chooses to destroy.
The death cult needs its priests of wealth, the priests of wealth needs its death cult.
The ship is leaking, the crew is mutinous, and we don’t have enough fresh water to reach land.
But we’re about to hit an iceberg.
And there is a major problem.
The US Constitution was advanced for its time. Although imperfect, it had some good and novel features. But that was hundreds of years ago. It hasn’t been significantly modernised since Reconstruction.
Constitutions are not scripture; they’re just laws. They do not represent eternal, infallible truth [1]. At best, they represent the limited, fallible wisdom of their day. The day of the US Constitution’s birth was a long time ago.
The US Constitution was written on the assumption that it could restrict tyranny by laws. But the tyrants have had centuries to work out how to bypass those laws.
The US Constitution has been hacked. It requires a security patch.
[1] Neither does scripture, but that’s a separate issue.
I’m not actually a revolutionary communist, BTW; I’m pretty much a Nordic-style democratic socialist.
Crush capitalism! …in a careful, gradual and restrained manner. While retaining as much personal liberty, including economic liberty, as is consistent with maintaining a reasonable standard of social justice for everyone.
But the rise of fascism makes radicals of us all.
Pollyanna [1] option: Putin has no relationship with Trump. Laughable.
Hyper-optimistic option: Trump used Putin to help get elected, but Putin has no influence on Trump. Highly implausible.
Optimistic option: Trump and Putin are voluntarily working together. Possible, but globally catastrophic.
Pessimistic option: Putin has partial control of Trump via blackmail. Almost certain.
Extra-pessimistic option: Putin has total control of Trump via blackmail. To me, this seems no less likely than the previous option.
[1] BTW: can anyone think of a less gender-laden term for that phenomenon?
I think you completely miss my point. If the Republican Party was rational and properly functional Putin could do what he liked and it would not matter.
Stalin always said that the greatest enemy was the enemy within. I hate to cite the paranoid psychopath, but on this subject he was surely correct. The Republicans are in a position to do far more damage to the US than is the RF. And they made that possible.
It’s the same in the UK. The DUP is a collection of utter fruitcakes who shouldn’t be let closer to a position of power than minding mice at a crossroads (to use an Irishism). It was May, the enemy within, that gave them power in the UK.
The Republicans failed to investigate allegations against Trump that could have removed him as their candidate. The American electorate voted for him regardless. That is where the finger should be pointed.
Of course the RF is going to try to influence the US government. It’s their low level enemy. It opposes them in the UN, it sets up sanctions against them. What do you expect them to do? Roll over?
If the GOP weren’t shite, he would never have been nominated. And, if he’d somehow snuck under the radar, he’d have been impeached.
But they are shite. They’re an old white supremacist party that is now a fascist party. I don’t think we disagree on that.
The GOP are well advanced on transforming the USA into a permanent fascist state. The RNC-GOP would prefer a stable theocratic/plutocratic fascism, the TrumpGOP are keen on autocratic/xenophobic fascism.
Putin, OTOH, is interested in Putin. He has some commitment to white fascism; Russian racism and sectarianism is extreme. But he’s primarily interested in Putin.
If he’s working with Trump, they’ll be looking to enslave the mudbloods. Devastate and conquer the Middle East, then move on.
OTOH, if he’s just working for himself…the old USA was one of the very few threats to his wealth and power. Neutralising it is strongly in his interest. So, crash and burn the USA as hard and fast as possible.
Current evidence suggests option #2. He’s well on track to manage that. Trashing China as collateral damage from a Korean conflagration is a bonus from Vlad’s POV.
None of that is possible without the collaboration of the GOP, but they aren’t the only factor.
Less than half of the American electorate. Which is less than a third of the American people.
The rise of American fascism didn’t happen overnight; it wasn’t a sudden burst of madness from the voters. The distortion of the American electoral system was deliberately manufactured. The right has been working up to this for a very long time.
Footnote, BTW:
Putin is not Russia. Vlad’s interests and desires are very different from those of the Russian people.
You’re reminding me a lot of Kevin Anderson (and that’s a good thing IMO). Have you heard his talks? (I’d bet you have.) He’s on YouTube, and he’s the person who best speaks to me and for me on climate change. Your directness and willingness to speak the truth of your conclusions as you see them remind me of him.
No, this is nonsense, I’m afraid.
You need to follow the Russian business news. The RF wants trade with China. They are co-operating on a railway up the East coast of Asia which will open up Siberia to China - both countries are building it. They’ve just relaxed visa requirements to get more Chinese, Vietnamese and Malaysian visitors to the Russian East and Putin just did a load of publicity photos of holidays in Siberia to be used to get the kind of well off Chinese tourists who might invest. This is no longer the Brezhnev era.
With sanctions, I suspect that Chinese engineering firms will be asked to supply things like the new power infrastructure for Crimea - which is going to be the poster boy for the benefits of co-operating with the RF as well as the next holiday destination for those Chinese businessmen.
Remember Nixon and China? I think that’s what Putin wants. His country has been partly depopulated owing to the collapse of Communism, inevitable as it was, and the US attempt to loot it between 1990 and 2000 - which people are conveniently forgetting. The RF has historically had friendly relations with India. Getting China onboard as well means that the balance of future world power shifts to Asia, and Putin wants the RF to be part of it. Erasing the humiliation of the Yeltsin years would be a bonus.
It is a regrettable thing that “what is the minimum action required to avoid this catastrophe?” and “what action is readily achievable in the present political reality?” are completely orthogonal questions.
For climate, and for this.
The China aspect is something that I haven’t looked at in detail (but should); I only mentioned it as a potential side issue. It may be an irrelevancy in the short term, depending on how Korea plays out.
However: once the US is neutralised, who is the next greatest threat to Vlad? He appears to be attempting to regain superpower status, and China is all that’s left after the US goes.
Incidentally, the final part of my doctoral thesis argued that the accelerating pace of development and distribution in novel psychedelics has us headed for a neurotoxic apocalypse if we don’t sort out the problem of prohibition ASAP.
Pissed off my supervisor hugely with that. But I wasn’t wrong. 
Well, the science is the science, and the logic is what it is. If they don’t like it, it doesn’t mean it’s wrong; it just means they don’t like it. Seems like there’s a Feynman quote for this situation. Substitute science-based public policy for technology; the principle still applies.
“For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled.”