The New World Order

[geordief]

Have we taken our eyes off the ball as we come to terms with our repulsive new overlords?

 

It seems to me that we may be in for a reallocation of zones of influence (and the political regimes ) in each zone.

 

Francois Filllon vs Marine LePen is looking like the runoff for the French Presidential election coming up soon .

 

I think both these candidates share the view that sanctions against Russia should be dropped.

 

If this comes to pass and Trump 's USA is added to the pack then does this bring about some kind of a stable(ish) realignment of power in the world?

 

Russia will reestablish its "near Russia" zone ,the USA will retreat and allow China to expand its zone of influence in the South China Sea (and Africa?)

 

This may happen very quickly and Trump will just be a small player as everyone is carried along as events unfurl.

 

Is this a likely scenario?

 

Will the hideous political regimes in all 3 zones of influence be "baked in" and will democracy in Europe survive?

Edited November 22, 2016 by geordief

[iNow]

All good questions. My sense is that Britain, France, and US all moving in this direction will surely open opportunity for increased power and control by nations like China and India. Economically and environmentallly, some decisions are being made that will be irreversible for decades.

[geordief]

I see Trump is today perhaps destabilizing the US/UK relationship by his attempt to get one of his supporters into the ambassador role in Washington .

 

Straws in the wind?

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38064664

Edited November 22, 2016 by geordief

[dimreepr]

I see Trump is today perhaps destabilizing the IS/UK relationship by his attempt to get one of his supporters into the ambassador role in Washington .

 

Straws in the wind?

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38064664

 

 

We may have failed the brexit test, but we're not that stupid.

[iNow]

I'm no longer quite so sure

[Phi for All]

we're not that stupid.

 

OK, NOBODY gets to use these words for the next four years!

[geordief]

 

 

We may have failed the brexit test, but we're not that stupid.

Not quite sure what you mean.

[dimreepr]

Not quite sure what you mean.

 

 

It means we I understand a bad idea when we I see it; so yes (Phi and iNow), I realise my mistake.

[zapatos]

I found this philosopher's prescient warning interesting and rather spot-on.

 

 

 

...for late philosopher Richard Rorty, the writing was on the wall.

In 1998, Rorty, who most recently taught at Stanford University, argued in “Achieving Our Country: Leftist Thought in Twentieth-Century America” that “old industrialized democracies” are heading toward a period “in which populist movements are likely to overturn constitutional governments.”

He said the left had embraced identity politics at the expense of economic justice. Resentment would fester among the working class as they realized that the powers that be were not fighting to stop wages from shrinking or jobs from being sent overseas.

He suggested that many would turn to a “strongman” to flip the script on the smug, overpaid and deceitful who had long neglected their suffering. The author said the progress made on behalf of ethnic minorities, homosexuals and women would then run the risk of being rolled back.

One reason Rorty perceived something many other left-leaning academics missed might have to do with his chosen philosophical tradition: pragmatism, which emphasizes practical consequences.

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/philosopher-predicted-rise-of-trump-like-figure-in-98-book-215658929.html

[CharonY]

The ability to project a larger sphere of influence is going to make East Europe quite nervous. Also, it basically leaves Germany as the counterpoint in Europe which for many reasons also makes people rather unhappy.

[dimreepr]

I found this philosopher's prescient warning interesting and rather spot-on.

 

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/philosopher-predicted-rise-of-trump-like-figure-in-98-book-215658929.html

 

 

Because it rebounds throughout history; whenever a society is threatened with losing what little they have, fear of that threat create's monsters.

[geordief]

 

 

It means we I understand a bad idea when we I see it; so yes (Phi and iNow), I realise my mistake.

Still don't get it. I wrote (since amended) IS/UK instead of US/UK. Did that throw you?

 

I am suggesting the relationship between the US and the UK may be about to be damaged as he seems to be "throwing his weight around" in the UK's direction and the UK is rather sensitive on that issue (either being a poodle or being "independent")

 

The creature Farage is a figure of fun and antipathy that Trump seems to think he is entitled to foist upon the country-or at least to "get his own back" and put manners on the Brits.

I found this philosopher's prescient warning interesting and rather spot-on.

 

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/philosopher-predicted-rise-of-trump-like-figure-in-98-book-215658929.html

Yes rather interesting.

[CharonY]

 

 

Because it rebounds throughout history; whenever a society is threatened with losing what little they have, fear of that threat create's monsters.

 

I think there are two qualifiers that go with it. 1) it is about perceived threat, people far easier convinced by fear than by fact. 2) people are also afraid to lose out, i.e. the perception that someone else is getting more than their fair share drives people bonkers.

 

For some reason I think that sometimes people can only be happy if they know that someone else is worse off.

[geordief]

The ability to project a larger sphere of influence is going to make East Europe quite nervous. Also, it basically leaves Germany as the counterpoint in Europe which for many reasons also makes people rather unhappy.

And unfairly so ,perhaps. The German people were Nazism's first victims and Nazism could have happened anywhere.

 

Anti Germanism is surely as disgraceful as any xenophobia but Germany is understandably reluctant to play "leading roles" now. (and to attract support perhaps)

[dimreepr]

 

I think there are two qualifiers that go with it. 1) it is about perceived threat, people far easier convinced by fear than by fact.

For some reason I think that sometimes people can only be happy if they know that someone else is worse off.

 

 

That only happens when one imagines one's worth is in another's eyes.

Look in a mirror, accept what you see and enjoy it...

[zapatos]

 

 

For some reason I think that sometimes people can only be happy if they know that someone else is worse off.

 

I think you are correct. Only tangentially related, but that statement reminded me of what I found to be a very powerful quote from the movie "Mississippi Burning".

 

 

 

 

 

Anderson: You know, when I was a little boy, there was an old Negro farmer lived down the road from us, name of Monroe. And he was, uh, - well, I guess he was just a little luckier than my Daddy was. He bought himself a mule. That was a big deal around that town. Now, my Daddy hated that mule, 'cause his friends were always kiddin' him about oh, they saw Monroe out plowin' with his new mule, and Monroe was gonna rent another field now they had a mule. And one morning that mule just showed up dead. They poisoned the water. And after that there was never any mention about that mule around my Daddy. It just never came up. So one time, we were drivin' down the road and we passed Monroe's place and we saw it was empty. He'd just packed up and left, I guess. Gone up North, or somethin'. I looked over at my Daddy's face - and I knew he'd done it. And he saw that I knew. He was ashamed. I guess he was ashamed. He looked at me and he said: 'If you ain't better than a nigger, son, who are you better than?'...He was an old man just so full of hate that he didn't know that bein' poor was what was killin' him.

 

 

[geordief]

 

I think you are correct. Only tangentially related, but that statement reminded me of what I found to be a very powerful quote from the movie "Mississippi Burning".

 

 

http://bobdylan.com/songs/only-pawn-their-game/

[Phi for All]

For some reason I think that sometimes people can only be happy if they know that someone else is worse off.

 

I don't believe this. I would like to test it out sometime, but first we'd need to start from a point of general overall prosperity, as a baseline. I think if people have enough to participate in their own society, so they can afford to buy the things they help make, and participate in tourism, and educate their children, and save for old age, and splurge on a nice meal out every now and then, they don't bother as much with envy.

[CharonY]

I will have to think about whether there are data pools to draw from. However, I have heard plenty of middle and upper-middle class people complaining about welfare parasites and how those that do not work are too lazy and do not deserve benefits etc. There is also the weird desire to control those on benefits. I.e. to make sure that they spend it the way they are supposed to and not splurge on luxury items.

It is hard not to see a trace of envy in seeing those that supposedly do not work as hard as you getting benefits that you didn't get.

[zapatos]

 

I don't believe this. I would like to test it out sometime, but first we'd need to start from a point of general overall prosperity, as a baseline. I think if people have enough to participate in their own society, so they can afford to buy the things they help make, and participate in tourism, and educate their children, and save for old age, and splurge on a nice meal out every now and then, they don't bother as much with envy.

Of course we are all just speculating, but I don't think people like being the worst, even if 'the worst' is not that bad. It is the knowledge that every social class is better than you and the feeling that you are not getting a fair shake. I personally find it discomforting to come in last place, even if competing at a high level. No one wants to graduate last in their medical class, even though that is a higher achievement than the bulk of the population manages.

 

I think everyone in the pool of people you describe have someone to point to who is worse off.

Edited November 22, 2016 by zapatos

[Phi for All]

I will have to think about whether there are data pools to draw from. However, I have heard plenty of middle and upper-middle class people complaining about welfare parasites and how those that do not work are too lazy and do not deserve benefits etc. There is also the weird desire to control those on benefits. I.e. to make sure that they spend it the way they are supposed to and not splurge on luxury items.

It is hard not to see a trace of envy in seeing those that supposedly do not work as hard as you getting benefits that you didn't get.

 

This seems different from wanting someone else to be worse off than you. This seems more like having a friend borrow money for rent, then you run into them later at a bar where they're smoking and having drinks. As long as the loan is repaid, it shouldn't matter what it's spent on. But it seems wrong that help was needed with a necessity when luxuries are still being purchased, doesn't it?

 

In the case of welfare, the system seems destined for eternal arguments on what are necessities and what are luxuries. And nobody is publishing figures on how welfare gets repaid when a person gets back on their feet and helps the economy thrive, so people assume it's a handout instead of a loan, and think they can control the way the money is spent.

 

Of course we are all just speculating, but I don't think people like being the worst, even if 'the worst' is not that bad. It is the knowledge that every social class is better than you and the feeling that you are not getting a fair shake. I personally find it discomforting to come in last place, even if competing at a high level. No one wants to graduate last in their medical class, even though that is a higher achievement than the bulk of the population manages.

 

I think everyone in the pool of people you describe have someone to point to who is worse off.

 

This is why it's so detrimental to have so much wealth concentrated at the top. All the benefits that have been slowly siphoned off over the years are very visible now in our emasculated middle class. We now know the tricks used to fool us, and some folks are waiting for someone to come along and make it right. These same folks helped vote in the clowns who took away consumer and worker protections, so it's going to be a long wait.

 

I don't disagree with the whole not-wanting-to-be-last argument, but I think it becomes a very diminished problem if we have far fewer uber-rich and uber poor. This disparity seems to be at the heart of so many of our problems.

[Memammal]

Paris - Francois Fillon won France's first-ever conservative presidential primary on Sunday after promising drastic free-market reforms and a crackdown on immigration and Islamic extremism, beating a more moderate rival who had warned of encroaching populism. Polls suggest the 62-year-old Fillon, prime minister from 2007-2012 under ex-President Nicolas Sarkozy, would have a good chance of winning the French presidency in the April-May election. Fillon campaigned on promises of slashing public spending, capping immigration, support for traditional family values and friendlier ties with Russian President Vladimir Putin. (Source: Associated Press)

 

Sounds familiar..?

[Delta1212]

Paris - Francois Fillon won France's first-ever conservative presidential primary on Sunday after promising drastic free-market reforms and a crackdown on immigration and Islamic extremism, beating a more moderate rival who had warned of encroaching populism. Polls suggest the 62-year-old Fillon, prime minister from 2007-2012 under ex-President Nicolas Sarkozy, would have a good chance of winning the French presidency in the April-May election. Fillon campaigned on promises of slashing public spending, capping immigration, support for traditional family values and friendlier ties with Russian President Vladimir Putin. (Source: Associated Press)

 

Sounds familiar..?

Do you know who he's running against?

[Memammal]

^ Incumbent president François Hollande (Socialist Party) is eligible to run for a second term. The Socialist Party will formally nominate their candidate in January.​

 

PS. Marine Le Pen (far-right National Front) is the third frontrunner in the presidential race.

Edited November 28, 2016 by Memammal

[geordief]

^ Incumbent president François Hollande (Socialist Party) is eligible to run for a second term. The Socialist Party will formally nominate their candidate in January.​

 

PS. Marine Le Pen (far-right National Front) is the third frontrunner in the presidential race.

 

 

It is sadly a two horse race by all accounts. The socialist will have a candidate but ,as things stand he or she has no hope of progressing to the run-off.