I think an important difference between left and right re: the line "freedom to fail" is that generally speaking the left looks at government as a safety net which provides the ability to try and fail on one's terms, e.g. go try to make your way, and if you fail then here's some basic support so you can regather and try again - if you choose (I considered excluding the non-Democrat left as there are specific policy approaches that are incompatible with Democrats and the rest of Sane America, but as I was addressing generalities I decided not to).
I think it's safe to state the desire for big government from the right comes from the non-sane side of things (though the non-sane side is in control of the right's political party, unlike the non-Democrat Left - which thus far has been sidelined and kept out of power). It is both something like a desire for a single-party system (where anyone or anything could find itself in the crosshairs depending on who the party views as an enemy of the day) and a reactionary response to anything the left adopts, e.g. if the left adopts a position the right once espoused then the right will switch positions on a dime (though this latter item predates MAGA).
The question in my mind is "Which is more restrictive/less free than the other?" and "Which will directly affect my life negatively?" The answer for me is the right/Christian Nationalism as they themselves state they will be violently forcing everyone - including other Christian sects that believe differently - to follow their rules.
The best thing we can do is to ensure they are rejected from power, and join together to ensure the non-Democrat left is kept from power - allowing us to work together to craft policies and rules that do not infringe on our personal liberties at home and in public.
I'll refer you to Trump, Stephen Miller, Steve Bannon, Mike Flynn, and the rest of the MAGA "intelligentsia" (bit of an oxymoron). I'd have to do some searching, but the other week there was a MAGA intelligentsia that targeted Jews (not of any particular political belief, just Jews as a whole) upon Trump's election.
We understand that the only way to enforce this is to use the state's monopoly on violence. Be honest about it.
As i read the article David, all i could think about was how close this sounded to Sharia Law. Then for added shits and giggles i saw the love fest between Victor Orban and trump and it all came together like a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle.
Through it all and adding in yesterday's excellent piece by Steve, the circle was completed; at least for me. The past several years, i have noted my move closer to the middle. Once a bleeding heart liberal who wore it on his sleeve, i've come to grips with the belief the fringes on both the left and the right are far removed from where the majority of American's want to be.
The bad news is, the fringes are growing. The good news is, those of us in the middle are far greater in number than either fringe. The question is simply, can we all be comfortable and compatible in the same boat to right the ship? We'll see come this November.
I was in a hurry this morning and raced through a response; damn. Much like Steve and SGman, the irony of my mistake is that i can almost always tell who wrote the column. In this case i couldn't and it was a seamless transition from one to the other. ROFL indeed.
The question to ask is "Which is more restrictive/less free than the other?" Which one will directly affect your life compared to the other?
Addendum: I just had the thought that Christian Nationalism (as well as MAGA and the non-Democrat Left) are very much like a Communist Party - in that anyone that does not go with whatever the Party dictates will be rendered an enemy.
Absolutely on the addendum. IMO, it's that rigid ideological purity that makes both of them insufferable (and reveals both for what they truly are... totalitarians). I remember feeling vertigo during the Trump years; one by one MAGA's greatest heroes became enemies of the state as soon as they expressed any disagreement with the Don. On the left, all of us have been in meetings/conversations where we have not felt safe sharing our true feelings because we were worried how we might be shamed or ostracized from the group. Both camps demand a cultish conformity that I personally cannot stomach.
So there I am, on the libertarian left, unable to sympathize strongly with either side because both harbor a strong authoritarian impulse. I think you're right that the Christian nationalists are more dangerous, but the choice gets more nauseating with each passing year.
As I said in my other post, we need to keep the non-Democrat Left sidelined and out of power - 'cause they're just Left MAGA.
I understand not sharing true feelings due to the fear of being shamed or ostracized - but something to consider there is that that is something that always has and probably will always exist (human behavior based), and is ultimately part of freedom for all (freedom to associate and speak against people). The question is whether you find yourself on the wrong side of the government for it.
Oh, but speech is just the tip of the iceberg. The activist left -- with considerable support at the state and federal level -- would have us "Just Stop Oil," an effort whose end goal would cause the rapid annihilation of entire civilizations. Liberal leaders are closing nuclear plants, and replacing coal with intermittent solar and wind.
Well-meaning? Perhaps, but the result will be unreliable grids that fail at critical times, falling short of the task of maintaining an economy that feeds and clothes 8 billion people. They are leading us straight into a scarcity economy, with all of the potential social and political destabilization that scarcity historically entails. Combined with divisive rhetoric that causes us to identify with various in-groups and reject all out-groups, and you have a recipe for total meltdown as belligerent subgroups compete for a dwindling pool of resources.
Of course the right will take us to scarcity in different ways: monopolization, ecological destruction, social austerity, etc. There is no winning. Just alternative paths to losing.
After reading your article and looking up what the heck Eschatology is I only have one thing to say: How Christian of you! I can agree with your descriptions of Jesus as you know him. I also do not follow almost any of the Christian dogma and feel the same about every other religion on earth. I choose MAGA as the closest thing to the principles I wish to live with, not under, with. I don't know if Donald J. Trump is, or has, the solutions needed but he is the best we have for the path we need to go.
I am MAGA. Make America Great Again.
We believe in an omnipotent power higher than ourselves.
We believe in the United States Constitution as written.
We believe America may not always do right but always strives to find right.
We believe truth is the only basis for establishing facts.
We are more impressed with Character than Wealth or Fame.
We believe the American Economic Model makes the world a far better place.
We believe your deeds are more important than your words.
We know Truth and Justice are the real American Way.
The one thing you definitely have right is America has lost her way. You seem to want to blame someone or something for the problems you see and I can appreciate you state your case pretty well. I just don't buy into what your are selling.
It’s probably the opposite of how they understand themselves, but objectively MAGA is a Big Government movement. They’re becoming more and more like the left.
I'm interested. Please explain your position. I do not attack people I disagree with. It is the only way we both can gain understanding. I represent the real MAGA. Not what someone tries to paint me to be. Tired of PSYOP's and Narratives yet?
Taking care of my husband who had a quadruple heart bypass a week ago. And I had a bad fall and nearly amputated my toe yesterday. When I get a few minutes later I am more than happy to chat. I was not attacking you. I made a simple statement.
"We believe in an omnipotent power higher than ourselves." Not all of us do, and this statement is a contradiction to the next statement - which explicitly states we each have freedom of religious belief.
"We believe in the United States Constitution as written." Gonna need to clarify this: do you mean with or without amendments? And if with amendments - then you acknowledge that "as written" can change.
"We believe truth is the only basis for establishing facts." Who determines truth? What if truths are conflicting, because truth is subjective/dependent on perspective? Is it not better to rely on facts to establish truth?
"We are more impressed with Character than Wealth or Fame." No, because otherwise you'd reject MAGA.
1. Most MAGA have faith. We don't care if others do or not. Faith is a building block for a society. Morality helps too but how is it established? America today shows what happens without this foundation.
2. Amendments can be added but as you know it is difficult. (example balance budget) An Amendment is the only true way to establish a consensus but even then banning alcohol did not exactly turn out well.
3. Truth can only be determined through the scientific method. It is the same thing as discovering what is truth and what is lies. America does this better than anyone ever has but we are off the tracks today.
4. I think most of MAGA are not impressed by Donald J. Trump as the person. Even though we don't know him. We know his persona and that is not the same thing. You obviously think him 20% good (maybe less) 80% bad. MAGA sees President Trump as minimum 51% good. Like my old icon friend used to say "The rest of the story". You really did not read the book, you looked at the cover.
On the contrary: yes, you do care what others believe, and want to force your beliefs upon everyone else - which is a direct conflict with the Constitution. The foundation of America isn't religious faith: it is the agreement that we each have rights and will protect each other's rights in the interest of protecting our own.
Truth is subjective, facts are objective. You are mangling this.
Donald Trump has been a public figure since the 70s. We have plenty of evidence that he is nowhere near 51% good: you simply view him as a means to an end, which as discussed in the other comments is a form of consequentialism. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
It was an interesting read until i came across this line Terry and then you lost me rolling around on the floor in gut-wrenching laughter: "We are more impressed with Character than Wealth or Fame."
I am not impressed with Donald J. Trump. He is my ends to a means. I have a lot of MAGA friends and have talked to many others. The principles above are simple and fit with what us hated MAGA people agree upon. No movement ever started with everything exactly right, even the USA. e.g. slavery. But we can grow, and the only way do it correctly, is honest conversations and let the facts speak for themselves.
I think an important difference between left and right re: the line "freedom to fail" is that generally speaking the left looks at government as a safety net which provides the ability to try and fail on one's terms, e.g. go try to make your way, and if you fail then here's some basic support so you can regather and try again - if you choose (I considered excluding the non-Democrat left as there are specific policy approaches that are incompatible with Democrats and the rest of Sane America, but as I was addressing generalities I decided not to).
I think it's safe to state the desire for big government from the right comes from the non-sane side of things (though the non-sane side is in control of the right's political party, unlike the non-Democrat Left - which thus far has been sidelined and kept out of power). It is both something like a desire for a single-party system (where anyone or anything could find itself in the crosshairs depending on who the party views as an enemy of the day) and a reactionary response to anything the left adopts, e.g. if the left adopts a position the right once espoused then the right will switch positions on a dime (though this latter item predates MAGA).
The question in my mind is "Which is more restrictive/less free than the other?" and "Which will directly affect my life negatively?" The answer for me is the right/Christian Nationalism as they themselves state they will be violently forcing everyone - including other Christian sects that believe differently - to follow their rules.
The best thing we can do is to ensure they are rejected from power, and join together to ensure the non-Democrat left is kept from power - allowing us to work together to craft policies and rules that do not infringe on our personal liberties at home and in public.
"...the right/Christian Nationalism as they themselves state they will be VIOLENTLY [emphasis added] forcing everyone...to follow their rules."
Source?
Human history of religious supremacist movements.
Oh, ok.
?
But you wrote, "...as they themselves state..."
WHO...stated?
I'll refer you to Trump, Stephen Miller, Steve Bannon, Mike Flynn, and the rest of the MAGA "intelligentsia" (bit of an oxymoron). I'd have to do some searching, but the other week there was a MAGA intelligentsia that targeted Jews (not of any particular political belief, just Jews as a whole) upon Trump's election.
We understand that the only way to enforce this is to use the state's monopoly on violence. Be honest about it.
As i read the article David, all i could think about was how close this sounded to Sharia Law. Then for added shits and giggles i saw the love fest between Victor Orban and trump and it all came together like a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle.
Through it all and adding in yesterday's excellent piece by Steve, the circle was completed; at least for me. The past several years, i have noted my move closer to the middle. Once a bleeding heart liberal who wore it on his sleeve, i've come to grips with the belief the fringes on both the left and the right are far removed from where the majority of American's want to be.
The bad news is, the fringes are growing. The good news is, those of us in the middle are far greater in number than either fringe. The question is simply, can we all be comfortable and compatible in the same boat to right the ship? We'll see come this November.
David*
David successfully wrote a post that could have come from me. Most impressive, though lowering his standards so far must have been hard.
I was in a hurry this morning and raced through a response; damn. Much like Steve and SGman, the irony of my mistake is that i can almost always tell who wrote the column. In this case i couldn't and it was a seamless transition from one to the other. ROFL indeed.
ROFL
In a choice between Christian nationalism and delusional moral crusades that serve no one, I choose...
...uh...
"Freedom". The answer is "freedom".
Easier said than done.
Maybe the most critical example of "easier said than done" in all human history.
The question to ask is "Which is more restrictive/less free than the other?" Which one will directly affect your life compared to the other?
Addendum: I just had the thought that Christian Nationalism (as well as MAGA and the non-Democrat Left) are very much like a Communist Party - in that anyone that does not go with whatever the Party dictates will be rendered an enemy.
Absolutely on the addendum. IMO, it's that rigid ideological purity that makes both of them insufferable (and reveals both for what they truly are... totalitarians). I remember feeling vertigo during the Trump years; one by one MAGA's greatest heroes became enemies of the state as soon as they expressed any disagreement with the Don. On the left, all of us have been in meetings/conversations where we have not felt safe sharing our true feelings because we were worried how we might be shamed or ostracized from the group. Both camps demand a cultish conformity that I personally cannot stomach.
So there I am, on the libertarian left, unable to sympathize strongly with either side because both harbor a strong authoritarian impulse. I think you're right that the Christian nationalists are more dangerous, but the choice gets more nauseating with each passing year.
As I said in my other post, we need to keep the non-Democrat Left sidelined and out of power - 'cause they're just Left MAGA.
I understand not sharing true feelings due to the fear of being shamed or ostracized - but something to consider there is that that is something that always has and probably will always exist (human behavior based), and is ultimately part of freedom for all (freedom to associate and speak against people). The question is whether you find yourself on the wrong side of the government for it.
Oh, but speech is just the tip of the iceberg. The activist left -- with considerable support at the state and federal level -- would have us "Just Stop Oil," an effort whose end goal would cause the rapid annihilation of entire civilizations. Liberal leaders are closing nuclear plants, and replacing coal with intermittent solar and wind.
Well-meaning? Perhaps, but the result will be unreliable grids that fail at critical times, falling short of the task of maintaining an economy that feeds and clothes 8 billion people. They are leading us straight into a scarcity economy, with all of the potential social and political destabilization that scarcity historically entails. Combined with divisive rhetoric that causes us to identify with various in-groups and reject all out-groups, and you have a recipe for total meltdown as belligerent subgroups compete for a dwindling pool of resources.
Of course the right will take us to scarcity in different ways: monopolization, ecological destruction, social austerity, etc. There is no winning. Just alternative paths to losing.
David, have you gotten caught up in conspiracy theories?
After reading your article and looking up what the heck Eschatology is I only have one thing to say: How Christian of you! I can agree with your descriptions of Jesus as you know him. I also do not follow almost any of the Christian dogma and feel the same about every other religion on earth. I choose MAGA as the closest thing to the principles I wish to live with, not under, with. I don't know if Donald J. Trump is, or has, the solutions needed but he is the best we have for the path we need to go.
I am MAGA. Make America Great Again.
We believe in an omnipotent power higher than ourselves.
We believe in the United States Constitution as written.
We believe America may not always do right but always strives to find right.
We believe truth is the only basis for establishing facts.
We are more impressed with Character than Wealth or Fame.
We believe the American Economic Model makes the world a far better place.
We believe your deeds are more important than your words.
We know Truth and Justice are the real American Way.
The one thing you definitely have right is America has lost her way. You seem to want to blame someone or something for the problems you see and I can appreciate you state your case pretty well. I just don't buy into what your are selling.
That is the exact opposite of my understanding of Maga.
It’s probably the opposite of how they understand themselves, but objectively MAGA is a Big Government movement. They’re becoming more and more like the left.
I'm interested. Please explain your position. I do not attack people I disagree with. It is the only way we both can gain understanding. I represent the real MAGA. Not what someone tries to paint me to be. Tired of PSYOP's and Narratives yet?
Taking care of my husband who had a quadruple heart bypass a week ago. And I had a bad fall and nearly amputated my toe yesterday. When I get a few minutes later I am more than happy to chat. I was not attacking you. I made a simple statement.
"We believe in an omnipotent power higher than ourselves." Not all of us do, and this statement is a contradiction to the next statement - which explicitly states we each have freedom of religious belief.
"We believe in the United States Constitution as written." Gonna need to clarify this: do you mean with or without amendments? And if with amendments - then you acknowledge that "as written" can change.
"We believe truth is the only basis for establishing facts." Who determines truth? What if truths are conflicting, because truth is subjective/dependent on perspective? Is it not better to rely on facts to establish truth?
"We are more impressed with Character than Wealth or Fame." No, because otherwise you'd reject MAGA.
1. Most MAGA have faith. We don't care if others do or not. Faith is a building block for a society. Morality helps too but how is it established? America today shows what happens without this foundation.
2. Amendments can be added but as you know it is difficult. (example balance budget) An Amendment is the only true way to establish a consensus but even then banning alcohol did not exactly turn out well.
3. Truth can only be determined through the scientific method. It is the same thing as discovering what is truth and what is lies. America does this better than anyone ever has but we are off the tracks today.
4. I think most of MAGA are not impressed by Donald J. Trump as the person. Even though we don't know him. We know his persona and that is not the same thing. You obviously think him 20% good (maybe less) 80% bad. MAGA sees President Trump as minimum 51% good. Like my old icon friend used to say "The rest of the story". You really did not read the book, you looked at the cover.
On the contrary: yes, you do care what others believe, and want to force your beliefs upon everyone else - which is a direct conflict with the Constitution. The foundation of America isn't religious faith: it is the agreement that we each have rights and will protect each other's rights in the interest of protecting our own.
Truth is subjective, facts are objective. You are mangling this.
Donald Trump has been a public figure since the 70s. We have plenty of evidence that he is nowhere near 51% good: you simply view him as a means to an end, which as discussed in the other comments is a form of consequentialism. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
It was an interesting read until i came across this line Terry and then you lost me rolling around on the floor in gut-wrenching laughter: "We are more impressed with Character than Wealth or Fame."
I am not impressed with Donald J. Trump. He is my ends to a means. I have a lot of MAGA friends and have talked to many others. The principles above are simple and fit with what us hated MAGA people agree upon. No movement ever started with everything exactly right, even the USA. e.g. slavery. But we can grow, and the only way do it correctly, is honest conversations and let the facts speak for themselves.
You mean means to an end. And it was never conservative to state "The ends justify the means".
That's consequentialism, and it enables tyrants to commit horrible acts in the name of reaching a goal.
A simple saying to get the point across. Yes, I jumbled it.
Yes, and it shows your moral decline.
Sorry if you are disappointed. This is how America is supposed to work. WHILE IT LASTS, of which, I am no longer confident.