Moore said people are seeing Trump as "maybe their messenger": "Even though they don't necessarily like him or agree with him so much, I think that... they love the idea of blowing up the system.... [F]or some strange reason, see Donald Trump as their, as their means to get back at, at, at this system."
Beck — who said Moore had correctly "diagnosed the problem in the country" — drifted into a more spiritual realm:
Everybody feels like there's a play going on, and we're just watching it and looking at each other and shaking our heads in disbelief. And nobody's listening to the hardworking American who doesn't feel like they belong to anything anymore. In fact, it's almost as if we're being, we're standing outside and we're not being invited to this party at all....I couldn't decide if Beck sounded more like a bland minister or a stoned college roommate. He turned to history, which, he said, he's been "looking through":
And the only thing I can come back to is Gandhi and Martin Luther King. What we're going through right now is more of a Malcolm X attitude, where we don't understand reconciliation, we just want to win. We have to stop winning.We have to stop winning. Donald Trump, of course, is always saying "We don't win anymore." Beck, oddly, is saying it's wrong to want to win. We ought to stop winning! What this has to do with the American people turning against the elite, I don't really know.
And we have to start reconciling with each other. And, and realize, we're not going to lose our houses or our jobs or our country. We're losing something much more important.Now, I'm hearing echoes of the words of Jesus: "For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" Beck continues up to and beyond the edge of coherence:
We're losing ourselves. We're losing our civility. We're losing our decency. We're, we're losing our neighbors and our family. How high of a price are we willing to pay before we say the idea that Martin-- that, that Malcolm X had, which was, "Get 'em" is not the path that we should go on? We have to start reconciling with each other. And unfortunately, right now, there's no leader to do that nationally. It's going to require each of us, in our own communities to stand and, and, and be shamed, and be, and be pilloried for it but actually stand and do it.Be shamed? What is Beck asking people to do?
Posts
93 comments:
"What this has to do with the American people turning against the elite, I don't really know. "
Speaking very generally, a while back, winning was something the American populace was engaged in together and was less questioned as an end in and of itself. Nowadays, winning may mean cheap labor, "innovation," automation, temp work and no more full time jobs.
I can see where you saw the ghost of a stoned college roommate in Beck's musing.
But from the left and the right, Moore and Beck see something that my friends in the professional clerisy just can't see. Trump is the only thing that stands between them and the pitchforks carried by the Deplorables, and Hillary is the only thing that stands between them and the anarchists.
But what the heck--so long as they can't, don't or refuse to see what's out there, it may all blow over. Or so they hope.
Beck is asking you to surrender.
[F]or some strange reason, see Donald Trump as their, as their means to get back at, at, at this system."
Isn't it because he's been the only viable alternative to the establishment dominant in both major parties?
We're losing ourselves. We're losing our civility. We're losing our decency. We're, we're losing our neighbors and our family
What the elites say when they feel it slipping away.
If Gandhi had gone up against totalitarians rather than the British (who actually had consciences), he wouldn't have succeeded. King was non-violent and was assassinated.
The Democrats have set the rules for the confrontation over the past eight years, ramming abominations like Obamacare down the nation's throat on partisan votes, using the IRS and other regulatory agencies to punish their political enemies, etc. Now is no time for turning the other cheek.
"Maybe Jesus was right when he said the meek shall inherit the earth -- but they inherit very small plots, about six by three." - Robert A. Heinlein
I have never really understood who makes up Beck's audience. I would have thought that they were Trump supporters but he obviously doesn't think so given his attacks on Trump.
I have much the same question about Mark Levin, other than angry right wing NY Jews, which is not a large demographic, who is his audience?
The "system" has not been kind to the middle class at any age. Obamacare is designed to take advantage of the young, Federal Reserve policy is designed to take care of Wall Streeters while hammering those in retirement, trade policy is designed to take care of big corporations at the expense of " working men and women"; those who cry and whine the most are favored by our incumbent; government welfare policy has destroyed a large portion of the black population; etc., etc, ad nauseum.
Trump is certainly the primal scream candidate, while Clinton, her policies, and campaign tactics, is right out of the elite system playbook.
We, the people, know it is time for a major change in the way the country has been governed the last 30 years. The question is:are we brave enough to take a chance on the change maker?
Some "people" are feeling that way now, but not enough people. Plenty of people will happily vote for more of the same with Hill.
"I couldn't decide if Beck sounded more like a bland minister or a stoned college roommate." Isn't that always the problem, with ministers and roommates?
I don't know Beck's shtick well enough to speak for him. But in the passage quoted he seems to call for civility and reconciliation. He may mean it, but keep that reconciliation bullshit tag handy.
He's asking people to stop going at each other's throats over politics.
Moore [whom I loathe] has always had a better grasp of the mood of the country and the issues facing us than does Beck. Which is probably one reason why Beck was stunned by the Trump phenomenon.
How you treat your neighbor is more important than being victorious in your political debates with him.
One major issue with the elites vs the "masses" that neither Beck nor Moore discuss but that I think is very much at the heart of the problem is that the elites are so bad at running things! They've got these degrees from these hi-falutin schools, they've networked out the wazoo, & they think they shit chocolate mousse. But they're awful at actually getting anything done!
Quick! Name a world leader you admire. The closest I can come is Abe in Japan & Modi in India, but neither of them is anything to write home about, & they have some glaring weaknesses.
Sadly, if I had to find a historical comparable for the level of bad governance we're seeing it would be Europe on the cusp of WWI.
When everything is on the line, when the stakes are so high, there is no substitute for victory.
"I have much the same question about Mark Levin, other than angry right wing NY Jews, which is not a large demographic, who is his audience?"
Dog lovers.
It fun to tune into Levin early February. That's when he has to quickly switch from some angry, disgusted rant against politicians to selling valentines day flowers or chocolates.
Terry said...
It fun to tune into Levin early February. That's when he has to quickly switch from some angry, disgusted rant against politicians to selling valentines day flowers or chocolates.
I will look out for that.
buwaya puti said...
When everything is on the line, when the stakes are so high,
This doesn't seem to be an especially important election. The importance of any given election can only be judged in retrospect. How did the president respond to an unprecedented crisis, such as 9/11? If there are no major crises Clinton/Trump are unlikely to go down as particularly important or pivotal presidents. Trump is a more likely to be pivotal but his now almost certain inability to get anything done in collaboration with congress means he will most likely achieve very little.
Beck has long been a Constitutionalist. I think what he's seeing is that the American Constitutional order and the neoethnic American people built out of assimilation rather than 1000 years of shared blood is slipping away.
And I think he's correct.
The rule in America is no longer e pluribus unum; it is now e unum pluribus. The united people our ancestors struggled to forge is being balkanized into vapor, and half of our "fellow Americans" cheer on this process. Because Diversity.
"Conservatives" are to the point where they, we, have lost the culture war for so long that we don't really care about the niceties of small government and the Order of the Founders anymore. We want to win. If that wrecks the Constitutional order, well, what Constitutional order is that? Its dead already. To quote Nancy Pelosi from a few years back: "Are you serious? Are you serious?"
You become what you fight.
ARM
Why would a man who has negotiated with the bankrupt Penn Central RR to acquire the bankrupt Commodore Hotel and with Hyatt to run the hotel and with NY trades to build the hotel have trouble negotiating with Congress? Dozens of real estate deals later he has demonstrated an ability to bridge differences. It is an absurd contention that he cannot collaborate.
Freeman Hunt at 7:06 has it. Of course putting it that way loses the crazed seer cachet.
Given the age of the justices, the next president could shape the Supreme Court for a generation -- that's especially important.
Michael said...
It is an absurd contention that he cannot collaborate.
I don't see him receiving an especially warm welcome by either side of the aisle in congress at this point. And, just my opinion, he hasn't shown a lot of flexibility in dealing with conflicts as they have arisen during this campaign.
Given that Clinton is the opposition, the question he should be asking right now is, why aren't I fifty points ahead? Even if asked I doubt he would look in the mirror to find the answer.
Fabi said...
Given the age of the justices, the next president could shape the Supreme Court for a generation -- that's especially important.
Given how we saw the most recent court twist itself in knots in order to accommodate public opinion on both Obamacare and gay marriage, I kind of doubt this. The court is apparently now so concerned about its legitimacy in the eyes of the public that it is unlikely to play the kind of ground-breaking role it has played at times in the past. Not impossible, but unlikely.
The liberal media says that Trump is crazy and wicked because he suggested that Cruz's father had some involvement in the JFK assassination. Yet, if Cruz was the GOP nominee instead of Trump, I believe we would have the crazy, wicked 'Cruz's father was involved in the JFK assassination' story pushed by all the 'respectable' media outlets.
Do even Hillary supporters doubt this? Remember how crappy the Rather & Mapes "Bush was AWOL from the TANG" was sourced?
"How you treat your neighbor is more important than being victorious in your political debates with him."
The political elites and the Left (but i repeat myself) love this. Yeah, quit getting upset at what we do! Chill, and if we or your left-wing opponent gets nasty or wants to win, just let him.
Yep. That's why Beck is now the liberals favorite "right-winger".
AReasonableMan said...
This doesn't seem to be an especially important election. The importance of any given election can only be judged in retrospect. How did the president respond to an unprecedented crisis, such as 9/11?
As to the importance of the present moment:
1) The Middle East has been burning for five years.
2) Russia is on the march in Syria and the Ukraine, but has maybe five years of functional economy left to it.
3) China is on the march in the South China Sea, building island firebases.
4) Europe is being overrun by the largest volkswanderung since the Goths.
5) America is tearing itself apart domestically.
6) The Obama Precedents, if allowed to stand, will greatly expand the powers of the Imperial Presidency. The various debt limit crises have in fact offered Obama an option to eliminate the Congress' power of the purse, tho he's never used it yet. Odd.
7) The great geopolitical powers of the world are backed into corners and eyeing each other warily in a 3-way Clint Eastwood Mexican standoff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YnryHbJqC4
8) Oh, and lest we forget, the global economy has books so cooked they're liquefied and the weakness of 2008 were never addressed, just patched over with second rate paper mache. An economic reckoning is overdue.
But yeah, no worries, this is just another year.
No, this is 1913, or 1938, or 1788, or 1860. Après le déluge. I'm surprised China and Russia haven't moved already. The guaranteed surrender that is Obama is almost at an end.
Who is Glenn Beck's audience?
Basically, social conservatives who don't care about things like illegal immigration, border security, globalization, economic issues or PC. If the Left "wins" in those areas its OK with them.
They just want to reverse Roe v. Wade, or get rid of Gay marriage. Or support Israel. And they want everyone to just all get along. And they have a sort of vague, incoherent patriotism based "the constitution".
Isn't it because he's been the only viable alternative to the establishment dominant in both major parties?
Yes.
No, this is 1913, or 1938, or 1788, or 1860. Après le déluge. I'm surprised China and Russia haven't moved already. The guaranteed surrender that is Obama is almost at an end.
Yes. I think Hillary is more likely to stumble into war. Trump will keep his counsel and rebuild the military.
The Supreme Court is supremely important.
Its the only thing in the way of complete executive/bureaucratic rule by fiat. The bureaucracy/executive agencies are the greatest power in the land, bigger than their figurehead chief, better integrated with the biggest money in politics than any politician, and each with its own agenda that has nothing to do with the public interest.
And that huge machine owns the Democratic Party, its not the other way around.
The Supreme Court is purely partisan. All the analysis of creative arguments and the wit within decisions is hobbyist stuff, you all might as well be WWF fans; all you need to know for practical purposes is what side a justice is on, these days, who appointed them. Its more predictable than Congressional votes. The next President will either reinforce its power vs the bureaucracy or entirely remove the entire system of checks and balances. If the Supreme Court calls sows ears silk purses, then it is so, there is no recourse.
Congress is utterly useless, it can't stop the executive or the bureaucrats. They have had a dozen sneering department chiefs openly defying them since 2011. Now with the most blatant offender as President I bet they will never again show up.
The moment Clinton is elected, it will be bureaucratic Christmas, and for everyone else the witching hour. They will war on all US industry because it is their internal goal to destroy it all, they get insider points for wrecking.
Everything else is also on the line, because they will be able to make any rule they like.
They can regulate Althouse blog out of business for instance, why not.
No recourse.
Beck continues up to and beyond the edge of coherence...
Just noticed, eh?
Be shamed? What is Beck asking people to do?
Beck is a loon.
Glenn Beck as mild-mannered small town minister or stoned college roommate? As I recall in the 60s, the early hippy movement attracted some mild-mannered young ministers. They probably justified it as outreach to the alienated rebels, but I seem to recollect they tended to bogart the joint more than anyone.
Beck is asking people to pay attention to him -- and buy whatever he's selling. But I repeat myself.
Fuck Glen Beck. He doesn't know shit. He just wants everyone to get along.
Either Hillary Clinton loses or we are completely fucked as a country.
I don't use this language lightly.
duane oldsen said...
1) The Middle East has been burning for five years.
I can't recall a time when the ME was especially stable, and thanks to fracking and increased efficiency we are now better insulated from the drama than we have been in decades.
2) Russia is on the march in Syria and the Ukraine, but has maybe five years of functional economy left to it.
This seems a self-limiting problem, it is already a zombie economy.
3) China is on the march in the South China Sea, building island firebases.
This is a legitimate problem. But the damage was done decades ago when our manufacturing quislings decided to build the Chinese economy at the expense of our own people. Now we just have to manage the consequences of our own stupidity.
4) Europe is being overrun by the largest volkswanderung since the Goths.
This is BS. The Europeans are perfectly capable of running their own countries without input from the US.
5) America is tearing itself apart domestically.
About the same as usual.
6) The Obama Precedents, if allowed to stand, will greatly expand the powers of the Imperial Presidency. The various debt limit crises have in fact offered Obama an option to eliminate the Congress' power of the purse, tho he's never used it yet. Odd.
Overstated.
7) The great geopolitical powers of the world are backed into corners and eyeing each other warily in a 3-way Clint Eastwood Mexican standoff.
As ever. You should read Orwell.
8) Oh, and lest we forget, the global economy has books so cooked they're liquefied and the weakness of 2008 were never addressed, just patched over with second rate paper mache. An economic reckoning is overdue.
This is a legitimate concern. It is clearly not going to be an easy time economically for the West or increasingly the East. All the advanced economies are being overrun with geriatrics. The only good news is that this limits the chance of war.
None of these seems to be a great crisis in the making, except possibly for the excess of geriatrics. As Japan and Italy have shown, western style economies do not function well in these circumstances but they don't seem to respond with radical social upheaval either.
If HRC gets to nominate the next two to three judges, there will no longer be a Second Amendment in the blue states. Let's assume the GOP continues to hold one or both Houses of Congress, so there's nothing crippling at the Fed level - yet. The blue states will go nuts eviscerating the 2nd, and Hillary's Supreme Court will rubber-stamp it all the way.
The result? Two rapidly diverging countries with totally different gun laws. The blue states will continue to blame the murderous predations of their feral urban populations on the loose gun laws of the red states. At some point there will be a break - maybe the GOP loses both Houses and the presidency - and at that point it's game on for Civil War II.
Far fetched? There's an old saying: When it's time to bury your guns, it's really time to dig them up and load them. There are millions, maybe even tens of millions, of Americans who understand that their RKBA is the last practical (as opposed to legal, political or constitutional) bulwark against a tyranny of a leftist majority - and if they don't make a stand there, there won't be a stand later.
With the Supreme court, appointing two-three justices, they can simply dictate to the States, wreck the US Gas and Petroleum industries, exterminate whats left of US manufacturing, declare all aliens, or however many they want, to be citizens with voting rights, admit any aliens they like and overwhelm local electorates, impose any business licensing and franchise rules, financial reporting rules, ownership rules and anything else at all to favor their friends and squeeze out their enemies.
They will probably do everything to economically raze the South, especially Texas, much as they have razed Californias Central Valley.
I have seen the future, here in California. If you do the favored things, serve as a courtier to those in favor, live on licenses, taxes and rents, in a favored place, and keep your mouth shut, then you will do well. Otherwise, not.
The future is going to be much like "The Hunger Games" in other words. Its odd to think that such a second-rate book is so likely to be so prophetic.
we saw the most recent court twist itself in knots in order to accommodate public opinion on both Obamacare and gay marriage,
both of these were strongly opposed by large majorities of the public at all times. The court made up definitions to uphold these to keep the 'elite' stranglehold.
Buwya puti wrote, "The Supreme Court is supremely important.
Its the only thing in the way of complete executive/bureaucratic rule by fiat. The bureaucracy/executive agencies are the greatest power in the land, bigger than their figurehead chief, better integrated with the biggest money in politics than any politician, and each with its own agenda that has nothing to do with the public interest."
I'm involved in a patent law debate. SCOTUS may soon accept for decision one case that deals with the constitutionality of the American Invents Act and the Executive Branch agency (PTAB) that accepts or rejects patents. Sounds wonky but it is the elite getting ahold of the wealth of patents. Apple and its buddies don't like getting hit with $302m verdicts in Tyler, Texas. I was there. The Founders got it right.
Beck is very ashamed of being exposed as a superficial imitator of a niche Conservative Guru. But it has become clear that he was only in it for the big loot he thought he would get like Rush Limbaugh does.
Beck's base trouble has always been that he has no self discipline. But he appeals to people as honest because he continually confesses his faults for which he demands the Repentant Act Oscar.
But all the while, the real slimey con man has had an easy belief that his ability to slander others with made up crap and faux history is all that he will ever need to fool ideology only Conservatives.
The blue states will continue to blame the murderous predations of their feral urban populations on the loose gun laws of the red states. At some point there will be a break - maybe the GOP loses both Houses and the presidency - and at that point it's game on for Civil War II.
Yes, I think so. Getting out of California is first. Texas has seen so many middle class refugees from blue America that housing prices are almost at California level in Austin.
Arizona is still viable and that is where we are headed, Utah and Idaho have winter and I am too old for that.
The Feds can easily make rules such that gun ownership and use even in "Red" states is functionally impossible. They can simply declare primer compounds explosive materials in miniscule quantities, creating massive transaction and reporting burdens. No primers no ammo. Thats just one.
They already tried to do this sort of thing, this year, with nitro feedstocks for firearms powder, but gave in. Next year?
There are a huge number of such games they can play, and a compliant Supreme Court can declare anything constitutional.
They can do this sort of thing for any matter, at all. No recourse.
Tim said...
both of these were strongly opposed by large majorities of the public at all times
Not sure this is really true on gay marriage. Although Obamacare isn't all that popular Obama is and there was a clear majority who opposed overturning the law. In retrospect it was a poor choice to call it Obamacare, the Repbulicans should have stuck with HillaryCare or maybe even RomneyCare.
In both cases the Court mirrored public opinion.
Young Hegelian: One major issue with the elites vs the "masses" that neither Beck nor Moore discuss but that I think is very much at the heart of the problem is that the elites are so bad at running things!
Bingo. I guess it's a feature in any Decline and Fall that the elite loses sight of the fact that it has to deliver on its side of the social contract with the lower orders - if not prosperity then at least some measure of stability and security. An elite has to prove its claim to elite status, which involves rather more than "fuck you, prole, you answer to me, I don't answer to you".
You'd think this would be obvious, but I guess decaying elite castes always reach the point where the lord remembers only the serf's duty to kiss his ass, and forgets completely his reciprocal obligation to fight for his serf's security.
They've got these degrees from these hi-falutin schools, they've networked out the wazoo, & they think they shit chocolate mousse. But they're awful at actually getting anything done!
Oh, they get things done, all right, just not anything that protects or improves the lives of the people over whom they claim the right to govern.
@Dr K - see you there in AZ. Or, at least part of the year. You really don't want to be there in the summer, except maybe Flagstaff. Did that for maybe 5 years, and even my partner, a self-described desert rat, wont do summers there. So, we go north for half the year.
Holdfast said: Far fetched? There's an old saying: When it's time to bury your guns, it's really time to dig them up and load them. There are millions, maybe even tens of millions, of Americans who understand that their RKBA is the last practical (as opposed to legal, political or constitutional) bulwark against a tyranny of a leftist majority - and if they don't make a stand there, there won't be a stand later.
But, would our measly weapons be any match for the US armed forces? Or would the armed forces be on 'our' side? With the people running the military today, I'm not optimistic.
@Begley - Apple may be there, but i think the big player is Google, which has been spending tens of millions lobbying Congress every year, for patent and immigration issues in particular, and managed to get their gal as USPTO Director (after IBM got theirs in order to pass the AIA)
David Begley: Either Hillary Clinton loses or we are completely fucked as a country.
I don't use this language lightly.
Oh, but it will be interesting. If Hillary wins the hubris of the proglodytes will be a wonder to behold. Think they lack any sense of prudence and restraint now? Just wait. They will lose their minds. They won't be able to help themselves.
@Dr K - see you there in AZ. Or, at least part of the year. You really don't want to be there in the summer, except maybe Flagstaff. Did that for maybe 5 years, and even my partner, a self-described desert rat, wont do summers there. So, we go north for half the year.
I spend half the year in AZ, as my late husband and I did for about 12 years. I would LIKE to be able to spend every summer in AK but the cost would be prohibitive. That said, I'm planning another summer up there next year. SD is also a red state with possibilities. While I love TX, it's gotten too crowded. Wyoming is nice. And very red.
And TX has more mosques than any other state besides CA & NY. A fact I find a bit strange and somewhat disturbing.
Another consideration should be: Where would you want to live in a post-technology era?
@Holdfast - they are already burying guns and ammo. Nice thing about rural America is that you can bury things and it is hard to find them. Also, buying guns that don't go through FFLs. Expect that if Crooked Hillary is elected, it will just accelerate.
Bruce Hayden. You are correct. Another example is this idiotic Green agenda. Who benefits? Hillary's donors. Google, Apple, GE, Elon Musk.
I just got back from Texas. I say cheap American energy is best for .America. Not the failed and expensive Euro model. I couldn'5 believe it in Spain when I saw everyone hanging their clothes to dry on balconies. Nat gas for dryers is too expensive.
Its an ugly subject, the form a US revolt would take. But it bears thinking about, and wargaming. The nature of such a war, like most real, modern guerilla wars, is not the sort of thing a high tech, heavily armed military can easily suppress, as it is nearly impossible to protect their loyal civilians, dispersed and vulnerable as they are. These will be the targets of the revolutionaries.
I think it will be much more like Iraq, and Oklahoma City and the various mass shooting incidents will be models, especially Anders Breivik. The American version of the suicide bomber will be the mass shooter that massacres a large number of the other sides civilians, such as government workers in their offices. There will also be a constant rate of asassinations of government employees and public officials, much as the Iraqi rebels an the Viet Cong did, to control the population. There will be a corresponding campaign of repression, with informers, etc., with murder and counter-murder.
Of course, this will have a disastrous effect on the economy and general public order.
This will not be a clean matter of a self-organizing militia marching in Washington, with banners unfurled, to sort thing out one fine summer.
"They will lose their minds. They won't be able to help themselves."
The last time the Dems controlled the presidency and both branches of congress, all the problems of the country were subordinated to passing Obamacare.
talk about Obamacare to a working person who does not have a gold-plated plan. You will hear a string of cursewords, $1000/month family plans with a $6000 deductible + 20% liability once the $6000 threshold is reached.
Liberals still think Obamacare is a great example of the government helping working people.
They are insane.
Anglelyne said...
If Hillary wins the hubris of the proglodytes will be a wonder to behold. Think they lack any sense of prudence and restraint now? Just wait. They will lose their minds. They won't be able to help themselves.
To be fair, if they get Hillary elected, they should then confirm whether or not they can now walk on water or feed the multitude.
buwaya puti said...
I think it will be much more like Iraq, and Oklahoma City and the various mass shooting incidents will be models, especially Anders Breivik. The American version of the suicide bomber will be the mass shooter that massacres a large number of the other sides civilians, such as government workers in their offices. There will also be a constant rate of asassinations of government employees and public officials, much as the Iraqi rebels an the Viet Cong did, to control the population.
Other than this, I'm guessing things will turn out OK?
With the Presidency, Congress, and the bureaucracy, Obama was able to spend a tremendous amount of money and effectively repress the economy into zero growth for most of a decade, saved only partly by US gas and oil, which he tried his best to repress.
The only reason he could not do his worst were Thomas, Scalia, Alito, Kennedy and Roberts.
Take them away, trade Congress for the Supreme Court, and Clinton will be in a far stronger position.
Congress is nearly useless as a check. The Supreme Court is far more important.
My preference for the warmer half the year is MT, or maybe ID. We are in NW MT this time of year, and love it. Not too far from N ID, which we also like. As a native Coloradoan, have long looked down on WY. Much of it is pretty desolate, and maybe even further from Walmarts than we are in MT. Look at it like NM - a state to drive through between CO and MT (or between CO and AZ). Each to his own.
If you are worried about when SHTF, rural is better. In MT, we have electric power, gasoline, and food. Lots of food. Beef, bison, pork, elk, venison, all in quantity (one friend's wife takes her elk every year shooting from her bedroom). Need ammo, but everyone seems to reload. Most anything else you should be able to trade for.
ARM,
It bears thinking about. What such a war will look like, how it could start, how it would be fought.
ARM@8:09 -- That's a really good point.
"Be shamed? What is Beck asking people to do?"
He's asking us to come together, of course. To take a step back from the Trumpian hatred for everything that doesn't bow before Cheeto Jesus, if you're on the right. Or to take a step back from the hatemongering of Black Lives Matter and other "-ist" or "-phobe" throwers, if you're on the left.
In this environment, that's the sort of thing that's likely to get you pilloried.
@Terry - you forgot Porkulus. A welfare program for the Dems' biggest contributors, families, and friends. Pelops I essentially justified it by noting that if federal spending is what is important (my memory is that she was claiming a 5-6x Keynesian multiplier), then they might as well spend the money on their pet projects (cronies, contributors, families, and friends). Much of it baked into the baseline by Reid forcing Congress to budget by continuing resolutions.
"Blogger Bruce Hayden said...
@Terry - you forgot Porkulus."
Ah, yes. The economists who advised Obama on porkulus were wildly wrong about its effects, and they put their predictions on the record.
Alan Krueger was one of those economists. He now advises Hillary.
Another Hillary economics adviser is Stiglitz. Here is what he said about porkulus, back in the day:
Joseph Stiglitz, professor at Columbia Business School and Nobel laureate: “Right now there’s going to be a major shortfall in revenues for states on the order of a magnitude of $100 or $150 billion per year. This means they may cut back on expenditures, which would be like a negative multiplier and lead to a contraction in the economy. The first priority is making sure to fill in the hole, that shortfall in state and local money …
“The second thing I would do is that we need stronger unemployment insurance. Unemployment is growing more long-term again, and we don’t know the magnitude of that. I’d put that at the top of the priorities, including help for those who would otherwise lose their home because they’re unemployed, and health insurance for the unemployed. That’s my second priority.
“The third, I think, obviously is spending money to try to prevent foreclosures, whether that’s part of TARP, or a successor to TARP. That would be foreclosures among lower-middle-income people … which would help stem the financial crisis.
“Then fourth is the remaining part needs to be divided among several categories. One of the critical issues here is how quickly you can gear up various kinds of spending categories. There are two important criteria: The first is the bang for the buck, how much stimulus we get for every dollar we spend. The second is consistency with our long-run vision. That means supporting R.&D., including green R.&D. as well as basic research. That also means infrastructure, and restructuring the economy for higher energy prices. That also means schools. There are a lot of decrepit schools. That means a broad infrastructure deficit.
“I would actually scale back military expenditures which do not stimulate the economy as much as some of these other kinds of expenditures. Given the high deficit, we have to be careful how we spend money, given our various financial problems. We should restructure our health care system, our energy system, and our military system.”
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/16/the-ideal-stimulus-package/#stiglitz
Stiglitz got everything he asked for, and the economy turned to shit. Shouldn't they revoke his Nobel?
Bruce, my sister and her family lived in Kalispell for over 20 years. Very pretty there but winters a tad too severe in our old age. My parents are both from Colorado [Boulder County] which has evolved into an unrecognizable mass of expansion out into the foothills where my grandparents had a cattle ranch. Colorado may be red but it's turning blue. Wyoming has it's bleak stretches, for sure, but the Teton area and the Wind River canyon are very scenic. It has a very low population density and, to me, that's vital.
"We're losing ourselves. We're losing our civility. We're losing our decency."
This from the guy who recorded a television show in which he took a little bobble-head Obama doll and submerged it in what he claimed was a jar of piss.
Don't get me wrong, I thought it was hilarious. But Glenn Beck isn't out to lunch, he's still not back from breakfast.
Blogger Freeman Hunt said...
"How you treat your neighbor is more important than being victorious in your political debates with him."
This is so true. Put a couple of rounds through his worthless hide and the fucker will never vote again.
@mockturtle
Will an AR-15 take down an F-22? Of course not. But at first the Feds would be deploying Fed Law Enforcement and their myriad of SWAT teams. Can disgruntled citizens, including umpteen vets of Iraq and Afstan, take on those federal mall ninjas? Damn right.
Even once it escalates to use of the Armed Forces, it's not a matter of beating them in Air-Land Battle - rather, the patriots/insurgents just need to cause enough pain to make the Feds look stupid and hurt. That will lead to over-reactions (i.e. civilian casualties), which will lead to defections and "go slow" tactics among member of the military. Remember, we took Fallujah block by block - we didn't just flatten it with B-52 strikes, though in theory we could have.
The American military is pretty diverse BUT, the infantry, armor and special forces - the guys you need to take and hold ground - draw disproportionately from white, rural working and middle class. Maybe they won't turn - but will they fight against their own?
ARM,
Beck's audience is more solidly conservative/evangelical Christian than Levin's is NY Jews.
It's a pretty rare occasion when Levin mention his Judaism...often melding it into the Judeo-Christian cultural tradition of the majority of US.
Beck seems to be struggling to manage "compassionate Christian" teachings vs the imperative to enforce law.
And..he drinks a LOT of Diet Coke...reportedly sleeping very little. There's a fine line between passionate and maxxed out loopy:
http://www.glennbeck.com/2016/06/15/glenn-beck-falls-asleep-in-the-middle-of-his-monologue-keeps-on-talking/
"even my partner, a self-described desert rat, wont do summers there. So, we go north for half the year."
I have spent summers in Tucson. Hot but not as hot as Phoenix. My daughter went to U of A and I had a house there for a while.
Going north might be an option for summer. I lived a year in New Hampshire when I went to Dartmouth after retiring. I didn't mind the cold but February and March are awfully long. They say New England has five seasons, one of which is "Mud."
Without A/C, I would not be that interested in Tucson and I once knew some people who had a motor home that they drove to Alaska every summer. We were there last month which is a bit late in the season. Oregon might be nice in summer. My wife's son lives there. He is in a rural area and the people are like Arizona people.
I am just about done with California. I feel a tottering economy and CA is very very dependent on high salary tech workers to pay taxes. If Tech catches cold, CA will have pneumonia. There is a huge pension debt hanging over everything. California is Illinois with nice weather.
Oregon might be nice in summer.
Very hot on the east side of the mountains and ridiculously blue on the west side. [Think Portlandia]. And, as in WA, my home, the western, urban areas define policy and politics. My vote for President never counts.
There arent enough soldiers and police in the US, nor could it enlist enough of them, for it to protect its government employees and civilian sympathisers from dispersed rebels.
There will have to be truly enormous "green zones", and even then the government would be unable to protect the population outside them, the majority, against even a large minority of armed rebel sympathisers. The bulk of the population will be under the control of the rebels, enforced, very likely, by nightly murders of those suspected of government sympathies.
The West has seen such movements among only very small cliques like the Red Brigades, Baader Meinhof, SLA, Weathermen, etc. Thats why they were more or less easily suppressed. The IRA and the FLN were far worse, but were mainly active in places peripheral to their respective states. A movement with hundreds of thousands (just a small fraction of the potential size of such a revolt in the US), would have a disastrous effect, with the entire country vulnerable.
Ref for the nature of this at a gut level - "The Village" - Bing West.
Buwaya, I don't really see that type of rebellion here in the US. And I think it would more likely break according to urban vs. rural. People in the cities have most of the power but are also the most vulnerable and would be most helpless in the face of technology failure. The prospect is interesting--albeit dangerous--to consider. I pray it would never become necessary.
@Mockturtle - was up in the PRB (People's Republic of Boulder) today to see my kid, who is in grad school there. Came up the road from Golden, and that is still mostly open space (except for the old Rocky Flats), but US 36 to Denver seems to extend pretty much all the way down now. All filled in with suburbia. But, Boulder itself is still as it has been for most of the last half century - grossly overpriced old houses and the like. Had lunch at a brew pub next to Neptune Mountaineering. Pretty good, but no real ice tea, just something that mixed lemonade with tea. Only in Boulder.Kid seems interested in a post-doc there though, if they can get on with one of the federal labs or agencies. Apparently, Boulder is addictive. But they were also talking Bozeman, which has high tech, and ag, which is where their SO is involved.
Blogger buwaya puti said...
"ARM,
It bears thinking about. What such a war will look like, how it could start, how it would be fought."
Blogger mockturtle said...
"Buwaya, I don't really see that type of rebellion here in the US. And I think it would more likely break according to urban vs. rural. People in the cities have most of the power but are also the most vulnerable and would be most helpless in the face of technology failure. "
The "blue" side is very concentrated. Places like short stretches of the I5 corridor on the west coast, DC to Boston on the east coast, Austin, TX. A few others. Most states have a small blue dot around their state capital surrounded by mostly red counties.
This is the issue that would dominate such a conflict. That and the old saying "Everyone makes fun of the redkneck until the zombie apocalypse." The only people on the left that have combat skills would be throwing rocks through windows and looting during a breakdown of order.
Beck is asking you to surrender Dorothy
Althouse,
"What is Beck asking people to do?"
We. Don't. Care.
Even though they don't necessarily like him or agree with him so much, I think that... they love the idea of blowing up the system.... [F]or some strange reason, see Donald Trump as their, as their means to get back at, at, at this system.
They can see and describe what is happening but are always either coy or badly off the mark over the question of why Trump is happening.
The answer is that Trump is happening because of Michael Moore – and the NYT – and the National Review – all of academia – all of the entertainment industry - all of the “intelligentsia” - and Lester Holt – and CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC and last but not least, FoxNews. And that’s why they cannot comprehend the why of Trump.
Beck is a loon.
Yes.
Trump is a more likely to be pivotal but his now almost certain inability to get anything done in collaboration with congress means he will most likely achieve very little.
The GOP Congress, which has alternated between hopelessness and haplessness in their time in office so far, will be putty in the hands of President Trump. The Republicans in Congress can’t even effectively cope with the Democrat minority, much less a President Trump with a bully pulpit to sell his legislative initiatives.
The great geopolitical powers of the world are backed into corners and eyeing each other warily in a 3-way Clint Eastwood Mexican standoff.
The same as it ever was.
Thinking armed revolt could be a solution to a political problem is insane. Here's one reason why (spoiler alert, there are others.) I firmly believe that the military would remain on the sidelines in the event of a widespread, polpular revolt. I don't believe they would have a choice because thinking that a US rebellion would remain an internal affair is equally insane. Just as the Soviets encouraged the Warsaw uprising, then waited across the Vistual River for the Nazis to destroy the Polish right before marching in, Russia or China would sit by and allow our "patriots" to destroy the ability of the country to wage war, then take the opportunity to go through the US like shit through a goose. So, the military would be forced to keep its eye on the wolf at the door rather than joining the dogs yapping around the inside of the house. When things degenerate to the point that an appropriate national security posture against external threats cannot be maintained due to the internal chaos (a near certainty,) I would think a coupe would be the fall back position, followed by a quick alliance with the most suitable internal faction and then whatever it took to neutralize the remaining faction(s). In short, before people talk about revolution it would be useful to carefully consider the potential havoc associated with what Rumsfield called the "known unknowns" and "unknown unknowns" waiting in Pandora's box, because no plan survives the first shot and no one knows what's waiting in that box. Hence the reason it's insane.
AReasonableMan said...
duane oldsen said...
1) The Middle East has been burning for five years.
I can't recall a time when the ME was especially stable, and thanks to fracking and increased efficiency we are now better insulated from the drama than we have been in decades.
The Middle East is still exporter of large portions of the world's oil, and geopolitical pivot point of the World-Island that is Afro-Eurasia. Anything shipping or moving East-West on the World-Island passes either through or near the MENA regions.
2) Russia is on the march in Syria and the Ukraine, but has maybe five years of functional economy left to it.
This seems a self-limiting problem, it is already a zombie economy.
Nope. Its exacerbating. Russia is junior partner is the Sino-Russian attempt to build a replacement for the post-WW2 world order via the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), replacements for the G-20 and WTO/IMF systems.
China isn't in great shape either, but both partners are on the march and the junior partner desperately needs a short victorious war sooner rather than later to grab some loot and prop up its regime.
That can only promote global instability.
4) Europe is being overrun by the largest volkswanderung since the Goths.
This is BS. The Europeans are perfectly capable of running their own countries without input from the US.
The competence or incompetence of Europe's leadership is irrelevant. The EU zone is destabilizing due to migration, potentially violently.
7) The great geopolitical powers of the world are backed into corners and eyeing each other warily in a 3-way Clint Eastwood Mexican standoff.
As ever. You should read Orwell.
You should read Norman Angell. We live in yet another age of Great Illusion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Illusion
911 was another Tangier Crisis, prequel and harbinger to WW1, but not the real deal.
None of these seems to be a great crisis in the making, except possibly for the excess of geriatrics. As Japan and Italy have shown, western style economies do not function well in these circumstances but they don't seem to respond with radical social upheaval either.
Western societies do not respond with social upheaval?
ROFLMAO.
On the contrary, they do so like clockwork. Every 80 to 100 years or so.
How long has it been since the last round started up? 77 years, counting from 1939. 102 years, counting from 1914 if you treat WW1-2 as a single conflict with a timeout. A treatment that is quite sensible, as the previous European conflicts lasted about 25-30 years each (The French Revolution, 1789-1815, The 30 Year's War, 1618-1648).
Together, the circumstances I have outlined are recipe for a meltdown of the antebellum global order into a new period of mass conflict. Did you note that the years I listed upthread were all one year before previous rounds began?
"In both cases the Court mirrored public opinion."
What a horrifying, yet accurate, thing to say.
A most fascinating and chilling comment thread. Althouse has some serious, smart and well informed readers/commenters. I am in awe.
Two things.
One, Glenn Beck has been raising the 'can't we all get along' banner now for a while. The insane thing is that this only fills in the edges around his brutal attacks on Trump. He uses his position of influence to vilify and mock Trump. And he holds that his never Trump position in no way helps Clinton. Curiously, Beck himself is quite similar to the man he despises so. He is a successful but erratic businessman with very thin skin and a devoted following.
But, two, as far as a revolt against the ruling elite here in America, can we see, other than armed insurrection, any other way? Do we see a Trump victory as restoring the government by the people? One that hears our voice as Trump says on the campaign trail? (Which I have to watch on C-Span or Trumptube TV as the media is bent upon distorting him)
I couldn'5 believe it in Spain when I saw everyone hanging their clothes to dry on balconies. Nat gas for dryers is too expensive.
I hang my clothes outside to dry too, it has nothing to do with natural gas prices! I like the smell of clothes after they come in off the line. (Things didn't dry very well yesterday here, so I ended up putting the clothes on racks inside in our spare room. We also have a line in the basement.)
I've enjoyed reading about places to retire. I think northern WI on a lake would be nice -- with a trip to FL in early March to escape the too-long transition to Spring. Or the Arrowhead of Minnesota. The problem would be bugs in Spring. But everywhere has problems. I've never been to northern Idaho, so maybe I should consider that. Depends on what the kids end up doing, I guess.
duane oldsen said...
Western societies do not respond with social upheaval?
You misread what I wrote. I said specifically that societies filled with geriatrics like Italy and Japan have not responded with social unrest to their somewhat dire economic circumstances. They are too old and tired. This is a fact, not some fantasy of rebellion against the gubmint. Most western and eastern societies look increasingly like current day Italy and Japan rather than any society from the past. Not a tinderbox for rebellion.
Your other arguments are not entirely convincing. The fact that countries are jostling for power and there is not peace and light in the world is business as usual, not some sign of the apocalypse.
aydub said...
Thinking armed revolt could be a solution to a political problem is insane. ... thinking that a US rebellion would remain an internal affair is equally insane.
There is a tendency on this site to confuse the views of the everyday soldier with those of the command.
mockturtle said...
And TX has more mosques than any other state besides CA & NY. A fact I find a bit strange and somewhat disturbing
It is oil industry, anyone who has anything to do with it makes their way to Houston or Dallas eventually. A lot of Iranians on the wrong side of the Revolution and Arabs. A lot of kids come over to go to UT or A&M, finish school and decide to stay in paradise.
The secular kids go to UT and become hippies the rest end up in the aggie cult at A&M.
Thinking armed revolt could be a solution to a political problem is insane
It's not that most people would think that, it's just that events spiral out of control, at first so slowly that nobody really notices (or if they notice, they don't understand), and then so quickly that it's too late to stop it. Everyone thinks that when push comes to shove, the other side will back down.
I am certainly no advocate for the scenario I described above - at best it would result in a poorer and more uncertain future for my kids; at worst, we'd end up dead.
As someone else noted, the template for American Civil War II won't be the original US Civil War, it will be Bosnia-Herzegovina, with one side holding the cities and the other the countryside.
Andrew Pardue explained: It is oil industry, anyone who has anything to do with it makes their way to Houston or Dallas eventually. A lot of Iranians on the wrong side of the Revolution and Arabs. A lot of kids come over to go to UT or A&M, finish school and decide to stay in paradise.
The secular kids go to UT and become hippies the rest end up in the aggie cult at A&M.
Ah, yes. It's all perfectly innocent.
Madison Man, I live in Spain and you're right it has nothing to do with natural gas prices. I hang my clothes out to dry because they dry so fast, i don't know anyone who uses a dryer.
I was thinking of how an armed revolution could occur, and had a thought. Obama and Crooked Hillary support BLM, which essentially means that they support black race riots and black on white violence. What happens when whites start shooting back, when faced with reasonable threats of death or great bodily injury (I.e in legally sanctioned self-defense)? While the race riots are expanding in scope and violence, the Obama/Lynch DoJ is sending its people around the country to train police departments to not racially profile (regardless of merit) and to apparently view things from the point of view of young black thugs. Pretty clear that the Administration has taken sides here, investigating the self-defense death of violent black thugs as if they were civil rights violations. Crooked Hillary seems willing to continue this. Their solution seems to be gun control, which means taking guns away from law abiding citizens, but not young black male thugs. And starting this with Assault Weapons, which are almost never used to commit murder. The possible instigating cause of an armed revolt may well be a Crooked Administration trying to disarm the law abiding middle class, while protecting the BLM movement and the black thugs it attempts to glorify. Along with turning a blind eye to the black on white violence being seen with BLM riots. It is one thing to disarm people who feel secure, and a much different thing when they are facing increased violence, with the federal govt aiding and abetting the people committing the violence. It is that rising security and stress that might just trigger armed resistance. We shall see - esp if she wins.
buwaya puti said...
Its an ugly subject, the form a US revolt would take. But it bears thinking about, and wargaming. The nature of such a war, like most real, modern guerilla wars, is not the sort of thing a high tech, heavily armed military can easily suppress, as it is nearly impossible to protect their loyal civilians, dispersed and vulnerable as they are. These will be the targets of the revolutionaries.
I think it will be much more like Iraq, and Oklahoma City and the various mass shooting incidents will be models, especially Anders Breivik. The American version of the suicide bomber will be the mass shooter that massacres a large number of the other sides civilians, such as government workers in their offices. There will also be a constant rate of asassinations of government employees and public officials, much as the Iraqi rebels an the Viet Cong did, to control the population. There will be a corresponding campaign of repression, with informers, etc., with murder and counter-murder.
Of course, this will have a disastrous effect on the economy and general public order.
This will not be a clean matter of a self-organizing militia marching in Washington, with banners unfurled, to sort thing out one fine summer.
I doubt it would ever get that far, Local people would take over those areas that they politically object to, No public worker wants to die for his job. Once it's understood that the local uprising is much greater than Waco and involves the middle class the feds will try and negotiate a peace rather than risk and all out revolution. We are a well armed society, Not a very violent society.
Of course a lot of the left want to disarm the vast majority of Americans so that only the state has recourse to armed violence. The fact that an armed citizenry frightens the left is proof that an armed citizenry is effective.
Rusty said...
The fact that an armed citizenry frightens the left is proof that an armed citizenry is effective.
Effective at killing themselves and innocent bystanders.
We aren't Glenn Beck so we don't see his problem - what does a Christian leader say to his followers in times like this? We can say what we like - no one will follow. But Christians as such will be persecuted if Hillary is elected - the cake makers were just the first. So what does Glenn Beck say to do?
And he sincerely asks himself - what would Jesus do? Some say that there are two parallel orders - religious and political. The religious has nothing to do with the political so even if the political attacks religion that is not a reason to disobey - this was the position of the Jesuit English martyrs like Edmund Campion. This might be like "Render to Caesar that which is Caesar's and to God that which is God's." Or you might say that the political cannot order the religious to break God's law. This was the abolitionist position in the US. I have no doubt that Hillary will order Christians to break God's law - that there will not be a religious exemption or a conscience clause. Beck is saying resist but non-violently - let your neighbors call you names - "Racist, Sexist, Anti-gay, born-again bigots, go away." That's what they used to shout at prolife pickets. But will it just be name calling, Christian-shaming?
AReasonableMan said...
Rusty said...
"The fact that an armed citizenry frightens the left is proof that an armed citizenry is effective.
Effective at killing themselves and innocent bystanders."
I'm going to have to squat down here so I can look you in the eye. 100 million of your fellow citizens are not criminals. However your concern trolling is duly noted.
Post a Comment