Liberal Democrat

Liberal Democrat
Individual Freedom For Everyone

Tuesday, August 28, 2018

The Rubin Report: Dave Rubin- Interviewing Jeffrey Tucker: Alt-Right and Right-Wing Collectivism

Source: The Rubin Report- Author Jeffrey Tucker, on The Rubin Report talking about the Alt-Right and right-wing collectivism 
Source: The New Democrat

As Dave Rubin said, we know about left-wing collectivism or people who understand and follow political philosophy do. Which is the two branches of socialism meaning democratic socialism and communism. Not progressivism which is a different philosophy all together and a lot less collectivist where you have both a Left progressivism like the Franklin Roosevelt's of the world. And a Right progressivism the Nelson Rockefeller's of the world, Richard Nixon would be another one and Harry Truman would also be a Left-Progressive. But there's also a right-wing form of collectivism in America and they have several branches and none of them are very conservative.

Source: Amazon- Jeffrey Tucker's book about the Alt-Right and right-wing collectivism 
The three branches of right-wing collectivism at least as I see it are the Christian-Right, the Alt-Right and Nationalists. There not Conservatives at least in a political and constitutional sense as people who believe in conserving the Constitution and all of our individual rights.

Christian-Right

As Christian -Right Alabama U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore said himself last year, the book he goes by that defines his politics is the Bible, not the U.S. Constitution. That's a paraphrase, but that's pretty close to exactly what he's saying there. Christian-Conservatives ( or Christian-Nationalists, as I call them ) use their fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible to define their politics. That their religious beliefs should be what governs the country. And that everyone should be forced to live by their Christian moral values.

Nationalists

Similar to Christian-Nationalists are people who believe their national values and how they see their country trumps everyone else's and that their country should really have nothing to do with what goes on with the rest of the world short of having trade deals that benefit their country. Nationalists, tend to view themselves as the real Patriots in the country and everyone who disagrees with them as un-patriototic or in an American sense as the Un-Americans. That they the real Patriots as Nationalists, are deserving of our constitutional rights and protections and people who oppose them politically as Un-American and traitors who are not deserving of those same individual rights.

Alt-Right

Not all Nationalists are racists, sexists, homophobes, and people who hate other Europeans like Jews, Italians, Slavs, Latinos, or people of Spanish background, and others. But when I think of the Alt-Right at least I think of Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan and other European-American predominately Anglo-Saxon racist political and even political terrorist groups. Similar to Nationalists they see themselves as the true American Patriots and the real Americans, but not just people who disagree with them as being Un-American, but people who don't look like them as Un-American. And not just Non-European-Americans like African and Asian-Americans, but other European-Americans like Italians, Jews, Spaniards, Slavs, and other Europeans who have dark hair and olive complexion. And that these people should not just be disallowed to live freely, but in many cases shouldn't be allowed to live at all.

Collectivism, whether it's right-wing or left-wing is this belief that individualism and personal freedom and in the Far-Left's case economic freedom as well are dangerous things. That the world is a complicated place and therefor you need a big centralized government to set people straight so they live moral productive lives and are taken care of. Both right-wing collectivism and left-wing collectivism, are illiberal ( meaning anti-liberal ) because they oppose individualism and individual rights and that individual freedom needs to be severely constricted if not eliminated so we can have a moral productive society. That's what collectivism is whether it comes from the Far-Left or Far-Right.
The Rubin Report: Dave Rubin- Interviewing Jeffrey Tucker: Alt-Right and Right-Wing Collectivism 

Tuesday, August 21, 2018

Consensus 44: Oliver Wilson- Social Media: ‘Addictive, Frustrating But Here To Stay’

Source: Library Technology Launchpad- The big three on social media? 
Source: The New Democrat Plus

“Social media: addictive, frustrating but here to stay.” I could leave it at what Oliver Wilson said in his blog post, but as a blogger myself I feel a duty to explain to my readers at least why I agree with that, but Oliver Wilson nails his piece with just the title of it.

As a blogger myself who has been blogging since 2009 or so I almost have to not just be online ( the only way to operate a blog ) but on social media. I mean if the blogger them self is not willing to share online what they wrote, why would anyone else. Doesn’t mean you have to officially like your own blog posts and hit the like button, but I do believe you have a duty to not only allow for people to subscribe to your blog, but then share it as well and allow for others to share your blog. Share options are critical for any blogger.

I have to be on social media as a blogger. A blogger without social media when you’re talking about a blog that you not only write for but personally own and manage, would be like a race car driver without access to a car. And I’m not just talking about race cars, but any cars in general not even a 1978 Ford Pinto. ( Sorry Millennials, for that history reference. I’m aware you’re not fans of history. ) Which means to be a blogger there a lot of benefits to that like people knowing what you’re thinking, at least your thoughts that you make public. As well as letting people know what you know, again your knowledge that you make public. But like with anything in life there’s pluses and minuses to anything you get involved with and social media might be poster child for plusses and minuses in life like the nonsense ( to keep it clean ) that comes to being a social media member.

Narcissism, is not new in America and has been around probably as long as we’ve been a country and I’ve been guilty of it myself. I could be watching a movie at home and I get a Twitter or Google+ notification on my I-phone that I’m really interested in looking at. Because someone just re-sahred, commented, or liked one of my posts. Or perhaps I just got a new follower on Twitter or Google+. With Facebook, which is my least favorite of the big three ( as I call them ) when I get a notification on the Facebook app unlike with Twitter and Google+ ( to paraphrase Oliver Wilson ) it’s generally someone posting in some group that I have very little interest in. And that’s when my Facebook app is working at all, the Twitter and Google+ apps are more reliable at least on my phone.

When I was brand new to Facebook about ten years ago a friend and I were talking on the phone and he was talking about his brother and saying that his brother has like only 5 friends or something like that on Facebook and making a big deal of that. Well, if you’re familiar with my friend’s brother you know the guy is rarely if ever on Facebook. Almost never posts. Facebook might be to him right now what sunny day to the rest of us. Something we see almost everyday ( unless you live in the Northwest ) and not that big of a deal.

As I told my friend several years ago social media to everyone is what everyone makes it to be for themselves. If it’s something you really like regardless of the network and you post a lot of interesting things like status updates, photos, links, etc and you do that daily, you’re going to be popular on that network even if you don’t personally know a lot of people and don’t have a lot of personal friends.

By the way, personal friends and Facebook friends aren’t the same thing. Personal friends are people that you actually know and have not just met in person, but hangout with in person and talk to on the phone. Facebook friends, are people you meet, well on Facebook. But to sound nasty here, if you have a life outside of social media and have plenty of things that keep you busy like work, family, your personal friends even, or are just someone who is fairly private and only want to share your news with people you personally know and trust, you’re probably not going to be very popular on your social media networks, unless you have a lot of personal friends on those networks.

The other thing that  agree with Oliver Wilson here has to do with smartphones. My point earlier being that narcissism isn’t anything knew in America. Donald Trump, is not the inventor of narcissism, but perhaps just the king of it. What social network have done for narcissism has exploded it to the point that it’s everywhere now. If you go to a coffee house today and you’re not staring at your I-phone, you’re the outsider and the stranger at that coffee house, bus stop, train station, grocery store, whatever place you want to use as an example, bar would be another one. Social media and smartphones, both came out at about the same time which is the early and middle 2000s, unless you count blackberry’s as smartphone because people have internet access on their blackberry.

And because of this smartphones and social media have  made high school teenagers out of people in their 40s now and have given a lot of middle age Americans the need to be popular. Except high school, is over for most of those people ( you would think anyway ) and now they’re teenagers in their 40s with social media and a smartphone. Gaining 10 new friends on Facebook ( or whatever the big number is ) is like their OMG moment of the day that they just have to share that or won’t be able to get through the rest of the day. Even if they’ve never even met a single one of their new FB friends and don’t even live in the same country with any of them, let alone short flight away from them. But being de-freiended by one person on FB during that day, is something that sends that person to their shrink or pouring a bottle of pills down their throat because they simply can’t deal with it. Or they go into a swearing rant on FB, to try to look cool again.

As I told my friend, social media regardless of what network or networks you prefer is what you personally make of it. For me Facebook, is just a place to posts my blog posts and to follow my favorite entertainers, as well as the real news, sports, etc. Especially since Facebook no longer allows their members to connect their Twitter with their Facebook page. Just another one of my annoyances with Facebook. If you really want to know what I’m up to online follow my blog, or my Twitter or Google+ pages. Where I also post my blog posts.

I just prefer Twitter and Google+, because they don’t have as many rules and you don’t have to friend request someone you personally don’t know just to follow them. With Twitter and Google+, you can follow anyone you want until they block you. Unless you’re an asshole or follow assholes, you’re probably not going to get blocked on Twitter or Google+. Plus ( no pun intended ) the communities on Google+ are great and are very active and is a great way to post your blog and get real reaction about what you’re writing with the GP communities. But for too many other people social media perhaps especially Facebook, has become a way of life. They can’t go to bed without knowing about everything that their so-called friends are doing and what they said on one of their own posts and it’s very sad to see people become so addictive to things that are just supposed to be hobbies and places where people can meet and talk.
Source: Austin Evans: Twitter vs Facebook vs Google+- Social media junkies?

Tuesday, August 14, 2018

The Daily Beast: Simon & Schuster- Rick Wilson- 'Everything That Donald Trump Touches Dies Today'

Source: The Daily Beast- Republican strategist, as well as contributor for The Daily Beast and CNN Rick Wilson, with a new book about President Donald Trump. 
Source: The New Democrat

I'm going to take you down my memory lane and talk about the Republican Party that I grew up with as a kid in the 1980s and early 90s and see if anyone remembers that GOP ( when they were the GOP ) and if that party makes sense to anyone and then I'll go from there.

The Republican Party that I grew up with, was a party that was about limited government especially at the Federal level.

A party that believed in fiscal responsibility and that deficits and debt were bad, except for Ronald Reagan of course and the other father's of supply side economics who are a big part of the Donald Trump Republican Party today.

A party that opposed both right-wing and left-wing authoritarians and authoritarianism. Whether it was Communist Russia and their supporters in Europe, Communist Cuba just to the south of us. Or right-wing authoritarians like the theocratic regime in Iran and the monarchies in Arabia.

The GOP use to be a party that believed in immigration and even cultural and racial diversity. Ronald Reagan, the man who coined the phrase that America is the city on a shining hill and that we welcome immigrants from everywhere. Not just from Britain and Scandinavia. Because they believed that immigration was a plus to our economy because immigrants from third-world countries would do the work that Americans wouldn't do and would also bring skills to the high-wage jobs that Americans don't have the skills for like in new technology.

The GOP that I grew up with wasn't just a party that believed in a strong but limited national defense, but who also trusted our defense and intelligence communities. Unlike I don't know, let's say the current President who takes the word over President Vladimir Putin ( the dictator or Russia ) over his own intelligence community and national security officials.

The Republican Party today is a party that believes deficits don't matter. How do I know that? The Trump Administration inherited an economy that was growing at 3% with a 4.5% unemployment rate that created 12 million jobs during the previous 8 years and a budget deficit that was cut in half during that same period, so what do they decide to do with that?

The GOP tried to pass a plan to fund a southern border wall that no one who didn't vote for Donald Trump wants and even some Donald Trump voters don't want and after Mexico of course said they wouldn't pay for it announced they would borrow 50 billion dollars from other countries to try to pay for the wall that almost no one wants. And then passed a trillion-dollar tax cut again on the backs of American taxpayers who are going to have to pay for that tax cut even if they received any of it from interest payments to the national debt, because the tax cut wasn't paid for. It's George W. Bush borrow and spend economics all over again, but this time coming from the self-proclaimed king of debt Donald Trump.

A party that once called America the city on a shining hill and is open to immigrants from around the world, that America is a country of immigrants, now calls Latinos animals, insects, yes shitholes coming from the President of the United States. And complains about America not looking the way it use to and not being the America that they grew up with because it's now less Anglo and even European. And of course they blame that even on legal immigration because we're no longer seeing high rates of immigration from Britain and even Europe in general, because those countries are developed countries and don't have people trying to escape those countries because they can't find work, get an education, or fear for their safety, unlike Central America and parts of Mexico.

The GOP that was once a party that was hawkish towards authoritarian regimes even Russia post-Soviet Russia, now call Kim-Jung Un ( the dictator of North Korea ) an honorable man. That takes the word of right-wing Nationalist dictator President Vladimir Putin of Russia, word over the American intelligence community when he said his government didn't interfere in the 2016 American elections and didn't want Donald Trump to become President of the United States. With President Trump saying that President Putin is fine and is someone we can work with. And now views our European allies like Britain, Germany, and even Canada, as the opposition, while they view Russia and China as allies.

The title of this piece is "Everything that Donald Trump Touches Dies", which of course is Rick Wilson's title from his book and I'm going to get to that, but everything that I've written here Rick Wilson agrees with just from his own commentating on CNN. And I'm going to get to that by saying just looked at the people who use to work for President Donald Trump and where they are now.

Sean Spicer, just two years ago was a well-respected GOP Washington insider who ran the communications department for the Republican National Committee. Now he's trying to sell the book he wrote about being President Trump's Press Secretary, because he can't get a job with a major news devision or network or another job working for another Republican politician  or official, because he shot to death his own credibility working for President Trump.

Tom Price, who before he became President Trump's Secretary of Health and Human Services was a well-respected U.S. Representative from Georgia, as well as doctor who chaired the House Budget Committee before he became Secretary of HHS. Was asked to resign as HHS Secretary because of his bad traveling habits and taking overly expensive travel flights at taxpayers expense.

There's a whole book that will be written about Scott Pruitt who again just two years ago was a well-respected as Attorney General for Oklahoma and is now accurately viewed as a crook who used his job and power to make his own personal life more comfortable, as well for his family.

And then you could talk about people who had credibility and characters flaws before Donald Trump becomes President and yet found themselves working for President Trump, because they fit in perfectly with Trump's lack of character and credibility. Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, Manigault-Newman and unfortunately many others. These people will probably never work in government again at least at the Federal level, unless they're elected by very forgiving or factually ignorant people, or people who simply don't care about character and credibility, if they like that person's politics.

Every government job that anyone could take comes with a lot of sacrifice and even risks. You're underpaid at least for what you're expected to do and the hours you put in. Your personal and family life suffers, because you put in so many hours just at the office and you're traveling a lot. But when you work for someone like Donald Trump, you put the rest of your life at risk ( not physically ) and you're ability to financially support yourself, because you're constantly put into positions where you either have to deny the obvious or act like you're simply out of the loop and don't know what's going on even in areas where you work in and have jurisdiction over. Take Secretary Kirstjen Nielson, who struggles to answer basic questions about immigration. And anyone with any self-respect and dignity, honesty at all, has to know those things even when they're considering working for someone like Donald Trump.
Source: James Wilson: CNN Tonight With Don Lemon- Rick Wilson: 'Everything That Donald Trump Touches Dies'- CNN Tonight with Don Lemon, is one of the best shows on CNN.

Tuesday, August 7, 2018

AlterNet: Opinion- Bob Hennelly: 'Watching Reality Luxury TV Is Killing America's Economic Drive & Maybe Its Soul'

Source: AlterNet- Keeping up with The Kardashian's on the I-phone 
Source: The New Democrat

In the last 15-20 years or so with Generation X full coming of age and now with the Millennials coming of age as well, we're seeing less religion and church going in America ( except deep in the Bible Belt where that's all they have, it seems ) but more emphasis on economic wealth and becoming successful and wealthy, and famous in America.

Except for Millennials, who seem to believe that they're entitled to live in their parents basements or off of government. In that generation the people who aren't driven to be the next "OMG reality TV pop star with their own reality show and entourage" are driven to move America to Scandinavia and building a socialist welfare state so big that no one would have to work in America. The two biggest social movements in America, are celebrity/reality TV obsession and socialism.

And in some cases Millennials try to combine both social movements. The Millennials who claim to hate American capitalism, personal freedom and choice, free speech the most, are the Americans who take full advantage of those American liberal values the most. Who are always up to date on the latest fashion trends and always have those things as far as clothes, new technology, lingo, while using those tools to bash what they claim to hate about America which is American capitalism, personal freedom, and free speech.

Apparently unaware because their i-phone didn't teach them this that American capitalism, personal freedom, our individualism is what created those fashionable items and products that they claim to love and can't live without. People who claim that eating meat is somehow animal cruelty, tend to be people who wear leather jackets and denim jeans, boots wherever they go and generally wear leather, denim, and boots together apparently unaware it's animals that gave us those fashion trends and  what those fashion staples are made from. You ever heard of lambskin, snakeskin, which is where leather jackets and boots come from.

And since we've become a country not all of us, I'm sure as hell not none of those people and I still love individualism, personal freedom, etc, but we're coming a nation where thinking and individualism, learning about things that have nothing to do with the latest celebrity or smartphone, has become unfashionable. Even things like human decency have become unfashionable. The biggest asshole whether they're a professional celebrity or not will have the most the most followers on Twitter, Google+, Facebook, whatever social network that you prefer will be the most popular on your social network of choice. Or a new technology developer, or the latest so-called reality TV star, not people who get people to think and to learn, because thinking for yourself, learning, human decency are "like so old school" with a lot of young people in America today.

Some of the most financially wealthy and successful people in America, are also some of the dumbest and least talented. Seriously, where would Paris Hilton and Khloe Kardashian be today without their wealthy father's? If not waiting on or cleaning tables, sleeping with wealthy men to pay their bills. With their current educational levels, that's what they would have to do in order to survive in America if their father's were truck drivers and their mother's were teachers. And I'm sure there's a list of dumb untalented male celebrities as well, but you get the point. If you come off as dumb, but say things that become pop catch phrases, are a little wild at least and have a dirty mouth and know how to use it, you'll be famous and wealthy in America. While responsible intelligent people who got themselves a good education, spend their lives working very hard and have to be very productive to live well in America.
Source: Alox: Top 10 Richest Reality TV Stars With Salaries - O.M.G they're, awesome!!! LOL 

Saturday, August 4, 2018

The Lip TV: Allison Hope Weiner- Interviewing Dr. James Fallon: The Brains of Serial Killers

Source: The Lip TV- The brain of a serial killer, on Crime Talk 
Source: FRS Daily Journal

I would love to go in the mind of a serial murderer ( as I call them ) to see how can someone be either so sick or evil which is different that would drive them to take the lives of innocent people and in some cases enjoy murdering people. As a lay person here I would say that you would have to be a person who lacks a conscience to put it simply. Someone who simply doesn't give a damn about anyone other than perhaps them self who gets off on hurting people because they don't care and get pleasure from that. People like Ted Bundy who was a famous serial killer as well as rapist from the mid and late 1970s who enjoyed raping women to the point it was the only kind of sex that he enjoyed. And he enjoyed killing them as well.

Source: Psychodocs- Dr. James Fallon, on Crime Talk 
So, when you have someone who perhaps doesn't fit in well in mainstream society for whatever reasons, who perhaps has a temper and low tolerance for negativity and criticism and has an out of the world view of them self that they don't believe they have any flaws and there also psychopathic, someone like a Charles Manson from the late 1960s and his Manson Family cult and his young soldiers who murdered the people he wanted them to murder, you have a very dangerous person who a normal person has no business being near, because their life can be in jeopardy from this person as a result.

Source: Skalan- Dr. James Fallon, on Crime Talk 
Psychopaths and psychopathic killers, can seem normal on the outside and even have positive characteristics like intelligence, charm, physical attractiveness as well. Ted Bundy, from the 1970s was someone with all of these characteristics and they use these characteristics to bring them in so they can make their moves on theory victims and eventually murder them. Charlie Manson, who wasn't physically attractive. Very short and slightly built, but who was very smart even though he didn't have much of a formal education, but had a pretty good idea of how the real world worked and spoke to people in a way ( his followers ) that got those young people to not just follow him, but to do for him whatever he wanted. The Manson Family, could be responsible for up to a 100 murders or more in the Los Angeles area and we only know about 10-20 of them.

The serial killers ( or serial murderers, a term that I prefer ) that I mentioned are people who murdered in private life as private citizens and as horrible as a Ted Bundy, Charlie Manson, Richard Ramirez from the 1980s were, they're almost minor players compared with dictators who ran countries with their regimes around the world who've simply murdered people because they saw them as threats to their political power. People like Saddam Hussein, Joesph Stalin, Mao, and other dictators around the world. Serial murderers, aren't reserved just for people you hear about on crime reports or the local news, but for people in government who run countries and use their power to eliminate people they see as threats to their regime.
The Lip TV: Allison Hope Weiner- Interviewing Dr. James Fallon: The Brains of Serial Killers