Political Randomness Thread

[K-Box]

Aug 13, 2009 9:44:02 GMT -8 jarddavis said:

I think you'll see China go through a huge cultural change before it takes over the world.

The groundwork has been there since Hong Kong came back and Tianamen(?) Square. Capitalism is gaining ground more and more as time goes by.

I'll actually endorse this, but on a more conditional level.

See, the reason I don't think China will overtake the U.S. is because China actually seems almost WILLFULLY intent on recreating all of our country's MISTAKES, WITHOUT similarly replicating our successes.

As an example, at a time when the U.S. is finally starting to get the idea that, hey, you know, maybe transportation should be more fuel-efficient and environmentally conscious, China is in the process of making it LEGALLY MANDATORY for all of its citizens to own and use gas-guzzling cars, in spite of the fact that bicycles are actually a BETTER mode of transport for many of them, because they're ASHAMED of people seeing them riding bicycles rather than driving cars.

China wants to show that it can "live large" on capitalism even more than the U.S. has done, and when it's been pointed out to them that the U.S. is scaling back from such lifestyles, the Chinese see it as a sign of WEAKNESS on our part.

In effect, China is literally becoming the WORST of BOTH worlds - all the boorish, short-sighted, self-destructive chauvinism of ugly Americans, combined with the maddening Asian cultural need to SAVE FACE at all costs.

Everybody keeps talking about how America will stop being the "number one" nation on Earth, and either China or India or whomever will replace it in that regard, but they're only half-right, in my opinion - I agree that the U.S. will get bumped down to a "number two" or second-world status, but in defiance of the laws of mathematics, I don't think there WILL be a "number one" nation to replace us, because all the viable candidates for the job are already emulating our worst behaviors. In 50 years from now, what we currently think of as first-world nations will no longer EXIST, because EVERYONE will be bumped down to the level of a second-rate nation.

Unless the EU finally makes it official and becomes a country in its own right, reducing all of its member nations to the level of ... well, united states.

[Anders]

Aug 13, 2009 10:13:57 GMT -8 K-Box said:

Unless the EU finally makes it official and becomes a country in its own right

I think that's pretty much inevitable at this point. It just won't happen with a grand gesture; it will be through a hundred stumbling, bureaucratic steps, a process so slow and grinding that nobody will really know when we went from being a bunch of separate countries working (kind of) together to a single country with separate parts working (kind of) against each other.

[jensaltmann]

Aug 13, 2009 10:54:11 GMT -8 Anders said:

Aug 13, 2009 10:13:57 GMT -8 K-Box said:

Unless the EU finally makes it official and becomes a country in its own right

I think that's pretty much inevitable at this point. It just won't happen with a grand gesture; it will be through a hundred stumbling, bureaucratic steps, a process so slow and grinding that nobody will really know when we went from being a bunch of separate countries working (kind of) together to a single country with separate parts working (kind of) against each other.

If only because, if they tried to officially make it official, Ireland, Denmark and Poland would vote against it. (And the Germans would complain about not getting to vote, because our government would just decide because they are afraid/expect that the people would not vote for what the government wants. See EU constitution for precedent.)

[Anders]

Aug 14, 2009 1:21:11 GMT -8 jensaltmann said:

Aug 13, 2009 10:54:11 GMT -8 Anders said:

I think that's pretty much inevitable at this point. It just won't happen with a grand gesture; it will be through a hundred stumbling, bureaucratic steps, a process so slow and grinding that nobody will really know when we went from being a bunch of separate countries working (kind of) together to a single country with separate parts working (kind of) against each other.

If only because, if they tried to officially make it official, Ireland, Denmark and Poland would vote against it. (And the Germans would complain about not getting to vote, because our government would just decide because they are afraid/expect that the people would not vote for what the government wants. See EU constitution for precedent.)

Same thing here.

[jarddavis]

And all of this is also subject to the efffect Russia will have on the world in the years to come. Last weeks Akula's showing up off the coast of the US was an interesting message to the world.

Anyone know how well, or how badly they're doing at the moment? Don't have the time to look it up at work.

[Anders]

I think Russia's biggest single problem right now is Putin, and the risk that he will drag the country even further down the road to authoritarianism.

Then there's the risk of complete government breakdown, but I think that's getting smaller. I think there are enough of the righ and powerful who would lose too much if that happened that the government will be propped up in some form (barring fullscale revolt by the military or something on a similar scale, but as long as they don't have serious objections to the people in charge that can be staved off by pumping in money).

However, I think it will be many years before Russia has a healthy economy outside the grasp of the crime bosses and oligarchs, and it will take decades before they have a healthy democracy (if that ever happens). Until they get their house in order they won't be a threat to anyone but their closest neighbours (barring nuclear craziness).

According to a slightly out-of-date Wikipedia article (link at the end) they have had a solid GDP growth over the past decade and their national debt is down.

They're certainly not afraid of throwing their weight around and I can't imagine they're too happy about all their former puppets scrambling to join the EU and/or NATO.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Russia

[michaelpaciocco]

There needs to be a Godwin's Law for Real Life that goes something like: If your political arguement is based on any piece of dramatic fiction, you lose.

[K-Box]

Aug 19, 2009 20:43:43 GMT -8 michaelpaciocco said:

There needs to be a Godwin's Law for Real Life that goes something like: If your political arguement is based on any piece of dramatic fiction, you lose.

I'd almost agree with this, if not for the fact that The Onion has gone from PARODYING news headlines to PREDICTING them.

[michaelpaciocco]

I'm talking about politicians and pundits primarily

[K-Box]

OF COURSE!!! IT ALL FINALLY MAKES SENSE TO ME NOW!!!

WHY DIDN'T I SEE IT BEFORE



PRAISE SATAN

[K-Box]

Poe's Law in action ...

Afterbirthers Demand To See Obama's Placenta

WASHINGTON–In the continuing controversy surrounding the president's U.S. citizenship, a new fringe group informally known as "Afterbirthers" demanded Monday the authentication of Barack Obama's placenta from his time inside his mother's womb. "All we are asking is that the president produce a sample of his fetal membranes and vessels—preferably along with a photo of the crowning and delivery—and this will all be over," said former presidential candidate and Afterbirthers spokesman Alan Keyes, later adding that his organization would be willing to settle for a half-liter of maternal cord plasma. "To this day, the American people have not seen a cervical mucus plug, let alone one that has been signed and notarized by a state-certified Hawaiian health official. If the president was indeed born in the manner in which he claims, then where is his gestation sac?" Keyes said that if Obama did not soon produce at least a bloody bedsheet from his conception, Afterbirthers would push forward with efforts to exhume the president's deceased mother and inspect the corpse's pelvic bone and birth canal.

[michaelpaciocco]

OK...this link won't work for people outside the States and I haven't found a Youtube or other link just yet (Help?)

www.beaucoupkevin.com/blog/jon-stewarts-amazing-glenn-beck-rant/2009/11/06/

Jon Stewart is many things, but as an impressionist? yeah, it's not usually his strong suit. But here, he take's Beck's entire schtick and proceeds to not only perfectly ape it, but to deconstruct it like it was made of over sized legos.

[michaelpaciocco]

OK, I'm no fan of Fox News or Sarah Palin, but I'm starting to feel sorry for the way some of the other big name Fox guys are acting like creepy stalkers around her during the interviews she's had since announcing her new position with the network.

I mean, Glenn Beck was practically reading her his diary, and the look on her face was that of a deer in the headlights. You can imagine she was flashing back to when she was in beauty pageants and had to deal with creepy people like this...

Of course, at the rate it's going, I fully expect that by the time she gets to Hannity, he'll be showing her how he carved her name into his chest.

Weird stuff....

Michael

[michaelpaciocco]

Two quick hits on this score:

1) the US Gov't is going after Goldman Sachs in Court: 'Bout Damned Time.
2) On Sarah Palin - I'm think she's figured it out - regardless of what your feelings on her politics, she's figured out how to capitialize on her image in a way I don't think any politician has before. And here's the thing; I'm not even that sure she would want to run for President in 2012, but she knows that if she said that, she'd lose out on the massive money she's making.

So in conclusion, Sarah Palin isn't necessarily as dumb as even the far left would have you believe.

[jensaltmann]

Sarah Palin = the Mark Millar of politics.