Posts by Dennis Frank
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Looks like support for HC's candidacy is ebbing at the UN...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11688342The Maori Party critique of her past performance seems totally valid to me. Her handling of the foreshore & seabed issue seemed incompetent at the time and nothing has happened since to validate it.
The woman is merely a mainstreamer. Good enough to be a semi-plausible prime minister on some issues while out of her depth on others. I suspect those participating in the UN votes have sussed her out.
-
In terms of group psychodynamics, the campaign is driven by the interplay between perception & reality. I take Simon's point (re politics 1.01) that perception normally prevails. However perception that Hillary Clinton is merely the latest in a long line of Bilderberger glove puppets is sufficiently widespread now to motivate voters who don't like being controlled by a global elite.
Sanders is an authentic socialist wearing a democrat flag of convenience. His support base is solid due to his authenticity. The other democrats are spooked by the socialist invader in sheep's clothing. His tactical switch to solidarity with Hillary is pragmatic, but will only persuade those in his support base who are likewise pragmatic - the principled folk will stay home in disgust. Thus the schism in the Democrat Party is likely to persist sufficiently to defeat Hillary. She has lacked authenticity since she was on the far right of the Republican Party in her youth.
People are entertained by political smoke & mirrors but yearn for substance, because it's only the latter they can rely on. Cynics are realistic too, but more superficial than authentic folk. Humanity is a stream - most go with the flow but they all draw collective strength from those boulders that shape the flow...
-
Hard News: DNC 2016: Beyond weird, most…, in reply to Russell Brown,
So how many ways can we split this particular hair? You think the DNC chairwoman resigned because didn't try to subvert their internal democratic process? Or she resigned because her suggestions could be interpreted as attempted subversion by the Sanders supporters? Or do you think she resigned because the emails indicated she was suggesting subversion instead of actually doing it??
Yeah Putin's a bad guy alright. The radiation poisoning is circumstantial evidence (technically) but the background on that & Putin's rise to power given us from hedge-fund entrepreneur Bill Browder's personal experience there is a must-read: http://books.simonandschuster.com/Red-Notice/Bill-Browder/9781476755748
-
So the hierarchy of the Democrat Party has been proven to have been actively subverting their pseudo-democratic electoral process. I suppose the left feels obliged to prove that they can do moral corruption as well as the right, because that's the new normal and they feel they must compete accordingly?
If Vladimir really did get his hackers into the DNC email server & send the result to Wikileaks, he's becoming quite a player on the global stage, huh?
Vlad: "British diplomatic expertise was exhibited by their new government fronting with a guy called Boris. Now, if soul brother Donald changes his name to Igor, we'll all get on really well!"
Polls now indicate a resurgence for the soul brother - and look what this leftist comic is predicting... http://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/
-
Presuming nobody here has the answers to bad global trends, the behaviour of the control system & inadequacies of economics & democracy, is only natural because blogs are created by commentators - not solution providers!
It's still possible that the interweb may produce an arena designed to foster collaboration in evolving positive alternatives. Switching from a stance of perpetual cluelessness, cowardice & subservience to one of enterprise, expertise & lateral-thinking is the way to start that shift in blogosphere culture.
Since mainstreamers are driven by the market, and democracy is designed to produce lowest-common-denominator outputs, the political left & right are driven to compete in a race to the bottom. To catalyse a shift away from this status quo of mediocrity, folks dedicated to creating a better culture are required.
So long as individualism & narcissism prevail, people will prefer to do their own thing rather than work together on a solution trajectory. Only those ready, willing & able to co-create a better way forward for all are likely to shift our political & economic paradigms: they also need a social context in which to operate. Recruiting a philanthropist to fund such teamwork and venue seems the best strategy to get started.
-
A British citizen & academic living here has been disconcerted by folks here being puzzled by his support for brexit, and explains it as our media bias portraying the separatist majority as being sick in the head.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11672585
He goes on to explain his concerns about the EU, citing lack of democratic accountability, laws made by bureaucrats, lack of a social contract, diplomacy by threats, and an organised attempt to misrepresent opponents of immigration as racists.
All entirely sensible. He hasn't pointed out that our media are merely doing what they are told in support of the globalist neoliberal agenda. Their retention of their jobs depends on conforming to the wishes of their corporate owners. Even TVNZ now makes no pretence whatsoever about performing a public service, ensuring their dwinding viewers are force-fed increasingly puerile drivel as pretend news & current afffairs.
-
Well, a politician will only provide moral leadership if there's a societal reward for doing so, right? Since mainstreamers re-elect Nat/Lab leaders regardless, there's no incentive for the establishment parties to select leaders who tell the truth. Call it failure of the political market, call it failure of democracy to live up to it's (illusory) promise, both apply.
You can understand why a political leader would be reluctant to inform the public that he was obliged to tell the truth because his conscience requires it. People would fall about laughing, many would fall on hard objects and hurt themselves, and we can't afford another public health crisis.
Telling stories instead of telling the truth is much more rewarding. Media need to recycle interesting stories to entertain readers. Truth-value is irrelevant to this public need - in fact, a lot of people are bored by the truth. Hitler understood this well: his stories became myths that inspired many, inducing mass psychosis.
If society is not to degenerate into a relativistic morass of competing interpretations, a body of public opinion must remain grounded in what is real. Kiwi pragmatists look askance at prominent folk who display a self-indulgent tendency to mislead the public. Politicians who seem to believe their own spin risk their reputations whenever their interpretation makes it seem as if they are telling lies. Notwithstanding any teflon factor, our court of public opinion will eventually drift toward a harsh verdict.
-
Speaker: A Disorderly Brexit, in reply to andin,
Indeed, and I don't disagree with anything you wrote. Although social darwinism didn't stick as ideology, it often appears to be working out in real life in various social contexts. Most obviously, as driven by market forces. You could also cite team sports, eh?
Memetics has achieved considerable traction. There is some merit in the semiotic critique, but thought contagion is evident through vast arenas of human activity. It's why advertising works, and propaganda. Not to mention education...
-
Speaker: A Disorderly Brexit, in reply to Rich of Observationz,
Give it a try. There'd be a tad less chance we all die of boredom.
-
The nations where people evolved sufficiently are those that adopted democracy. The definition google offers for racism: the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
As you can see, John, you are misapplying the term. I referred to nations, not races.