Capitol building overrun by protesters

[Secret Chief]

as a progressive

You started doing stand-up?

 

[Colt]

As a generalisation, Faux is simply a propaganda rag.
eg
"Under oath following lawsuits regarding Fox News' coverage of the 2020 presidential election, Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch testified that Fox anchors endorsed conservative conspiracy theories about the election."

- Fox News - Wikipedia

It’s understandable, from the beginning of Trumps presidency the RESIST movement conspired to overturn the first election of Trump with a fake Russian collusion claim.

 

[Secret Chief]

It’s understandable, from the beginning of Trumps presidency the RESIST movement conspired to overturn the first election of Trump with a fake Russian collusion claim.

Anyone that thinks fox is a reliable news source is not in any position to start casting aspersions as to the objectivity of actual news sources, imo.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Based upon your overly pessimistic posts.

I don't see them as overly pessimistic, but I suspect we'll disagree again because, from our previous exchanges, it seems to me that we fundamentally disagree on the soundness of the US' neoliberal system to begin with. We don't even fully agree on what the issues are.

 

[Revoltingest]

You started doing stand-up?

I like tweaking the noses of liberals by pointing
out that I'm more progressive than they are.
They think they own the term. But they're
actually weaker on civil liberties.
Liberals just ain't so "liberal" in the permissive
sense of the word.

Thank you for prompting my addressing this.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't see them as overly pessimistic...

Of course not.
Bear in mind that you...
- Have no experience actually living here.
(Things are better than items blared in the news.)
- Are too young to have seen what things were
like half a century ago. (Much has since improved.)
- Are rather hostile to USA. (This is understandable
because its awful foreign policy affects you more
than its domestic policies. And this colors your lens
differently from mine.)

I predict that Ameristan will still be around & going
strong long after you or I merge with the infinite.

 

[Nakosis]

Why do you assume so? Is no one capable of minimizing such cognitive biases to the point where they don't noticeably take over their views, in your opinion?

You can find what you want to see. Of course you find the opposing view as well but are left to decide which source to trust. There are multiple sources supporting opposing views. Most news sources provide opinion over fact.

If I separate out the opinion I find most stories have been sensationalized. IOW, not really worth commenting on.

 

[Stevicus]

Of course not.
Bear in mind that you...
- Have no experience actually living here.
(Things are better than items blared in the news.)

Depends on where you live and what things you see in the news. There are some things that happen that get very little attention in the media.

- Are too young to have seen what things were
like half a century ago. (Much has since improved.)

I was around a half century ago. In some ways we've improved, though in other ways, we've degraded. In most other things, we've been pretty much the same. Granted, things aren't necessarily that bad on a surface level, but when one considers what we could have been if not for Reagan and his ilk, it is disappointing to find ourselves in our present state of affairs. None of this ever had to happen.

- Are rather hostile to USA. (This is understandable
because its awful foreign policy affects you more
than its domestic policies. And this colors your lens
differently from mine.)

It depends on how you would define "hostile" and "USA." Some people might view the USA as the "US government," or maybe the ruling class of the US, while others support the common people of the USA. To me, the heart and soul of the USA rests in the common people, not in the government or the ruling class. Anyone who speaks negatively or supports policies which are harmful to the working classes in America is hostile to the USA.

I predict that Ameristan will still be around & going
strong long after you or I merge with the infinite.

America will still be around for a while. But change is inevitable, and nothing lasts forever. I just wish we had tried harder.

 

[Revoltingest]

Depends on where you live and what things you see in the news. There are some things that happen that get very little attention in the media.

There are some bad areas.
We don't judge the survivability of a country by its problems here & there.

Are you arguing that USA will soon fall (as was claimed) because of this?
(If so, I'll address the rest of your post.)
Or are you just picking nits?
(I suspect the affirmative.)

 

[Stevicus]

There are some bad areas.
We don't judge the survivability of a country by its problems here & there.

Are you arguing that USA will soon fall (as was claimed) because of this?
(If so, I'll address the rest of your post.)
Or are you just picking nits?
(I suspect the affirmative.)

All countries eventually fall. It's only a matter of time. How long it may take is unknown, whether "soon" or not soon. The factors which could lead up to it are also varied. I don't think there's any reliable way to predict, one way or the other. We can look at trends and indicators relating to economic well-being, quality of life, the environment, availability and quantity of vital resources and perhaps note declines and deficiencies, but nowhere near the breaking point.

However, it may not be so much a question of how close we might be to the brink, but whether or not we would be able to recognize it if we do get close.

I would also point out that the "Chicken Little" syndrome is evident among all political factions, in one form or another. The only thing they differ on is which part of the sky is falling - or will fall if we don't do X.

 

[Revoltingest]

All countries eventually fall.

Trite truisms are irrelevant.
Are you arguing for DS's claim of USA's imminent fall?
I think you're just arguing for its own sake.

 

[Stevicus]

Trite truisms are irrelevant.
Are you arguing for DS's claim of USA's imminent fall?
I think you're just arguing for its own sake.

I'm arguing that it's impossible to predict either way. DS could be right, and you could be wrong - and the only way to prove it would be for the USA to actually fall. I disagree with the claim of "imminent" fall, but I also disagree with your suggestion that everything is great and that there's no danger at all - or that it's very far remote. You used the euphemism "Chicken Little" to ridicule DS's position, and I didn't really see any basis for such an opinion.

 

[Alien826]

Nah, I bet they're aliens paid by George Soros! They were beamed here from the mother ship!

Don't you start blaming it on us. If you'd upset us enough there would be a smoking hole where the Capitol building was, not a few people shouting and pushing.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Of course not.
Bear in mind that you...
- Have no experience actually living here.
(Things are better than items blared in the news.)
- Are too young to have seen what things were
like half a century ago. (Much has since improved.)
- Are rather hostile to USA. (This is understandable
because its awful foreign policy affects you more
than its domestic policies. And this colors your lens
differently from mine.)

I predict that Ameristan will still be around & going
strong long after you or I merge with the infinite.

You can find what you want to see. Of course you find the opposing view as well but are left to decide which source to trust. There are multiple sources supporting opposing views. Most news sources provide opinion over fact.

If I separate out the opinion I find most stories have been sensationalized. IOW, not really worth commenting on.

Trite truisms are irrelevant.
Are you arguing for DS's claim of USA's imminent fall?
I think you're just arguing for its own sake.

I can't post a full response at the moment, so I will clarify three things about my position in the meantime:

• I don't regard the news as a reliable source of forming a comprehensive, evidence-based perspective on any country. It only offers a glimpse into a subset of events at any given time. The most a news outlet can do is back up their claims with evidence, in which case directly accessing said evidence (e.g., statistics, studies, etc.) is a more robust way of forming positions than listening to how the news interprets or spins the available information.
  
  Statistics, studies, scholarly or academic analyses, historical sources, and exposure to diverse and differing viewpoints all seem to me better sources of forming an opinion than merely reading the news.

• I'm not claiming that the US will collapse—in the sense of disappearing or becoming irrelevant—imminently or even within decades. I believe the US, and most countries in the world today, will most likely still be here within the next few decades (if not longer), unless climate change drastically upends current geographical borders. Perhaps my word choice wasn't the clearest there. When I mention that the US "is seriously close to collapsing under the weight of its domestic issues," I mean that its geopolitical, economic, and cultural influence may wane in no small part, but not exclusively, due to the internal fissures and cracks caused by its domestic problems and deep polarization.
  
  I believe we can already see some indicators of this when examining China's growing global influence and the US' diminished ability to imprint its geopolitical will on other countries (e.g., OPEC and India) compared to previous decades, especially the period of 1991-2003. That was when the US had become completely free of the competition with the USSR and had no real peer on the global stage in terms of influence and military as well as economic power. This has changed and is still changing.
  
  This may be relevant here, but as an extension of my point about the news, I would ignore any opinionated or emotional language in the article and focus only on the linked surveys (which are not necessarily foolproof, but they can be useful, among other indicators, as a sign of a larger trend):
  
  
  

  America's global image is in tatters

  2020 was a bad year for America's image. 2021 is off to a rough start.

  www.axios.com

• I don't doubt that some things are better now than they were half a century ago, and this applies not just to the US but to many other countries. However, comparing the current status quo to that 50 years ago sets a very low bar considering the pace of progress in today's world. Furthermore, in some areas, there has been regression: Roe v. Wade, for example, was decided in January 1973, around 50 years ago. Now about half of the states in the US severely limit or ban abortion.
  
  Multiple metrics of quality of life also remain at lower levels in the US than in much of the developed world, especially concerning economic and civil-rights issues. Determining what is better or worse now or in past eras can sometimes involve a lot of subjectivity and depend on which parts of the system one is most affected by: where they live, what their economic status is, whether they direly need free or reproductive health care, etc. I have multiple American friends, including a few I met where I live. The reasons they all came here (and then moved elsewhere but still outside of the US) all had to do with a few specific issues: gun violence (the family of one of them was ruined by that), abortion rights, healthcare costs, and a perception of growing political animosity back home (but two of them are from the Bible Belt, so make of that what you will).

Does all of the above mean that the US will collapse and vanish into the ether next year or even within this century? Highly unlikely. Does it mean that the country's influence, global image, and progress have taken major hits and may continue to do so for years? I would say yes, almost surely so.

 

[Colt]

Anyone that thinks fox is a reliable news source is not in any position to start casting aspersions as to the objectivity of actual news sources, imo.

It’s not that the Left often finds factual errors in Fox’s news reporting, they just don’t like hearing additional facts that often get omitted in the (D) dominated media. Leftist media tends to overemphasize stories that buttress their agenda and deemphasize or ignore things that undermine their cause.

 

[Stevicus]

Don't you start blaming it on us. If you'd upset us enough there would be a smoking hole where the Capitol building was, not a few people shouting and pushing.

That would be a violation of the Prime Directive.

On the other hand, if we've already been assimilated by the Borg, then it may be too late. People will be on their phones and one day get a message "Execute Order 66," at which point they'll mindlessly carry out pre-programmed orders embedded in their subconscious.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm arguing that it's impossible to predict either way.

Oh, so just arguing for its own sake.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I'm arguing that it's impossible to predict either way. DS could be right, and you could be wrong - and the only way to prove it would be for the USA to actually fall. I disagree with the claim of "imminent" fall, but I also disagree with your suggestion that everything is great and that there's no danger at all - or that it's very far remote. You used the euphemism "Chicken Little" to ridicule DS's position, and I didn't really see any basis for such an opinion.

Add the climate crisis into the equation and the question becomes even more stochastic. We can try to extrapolate future conditions based on current circumstances, but this becomes highly unreliable when current circumstances may drastically change or become especially unstable due to climate change. I think climate migration may end up being a particularly salient example of this instability.

 

[Stevicus]

Oh, so just arguing for its own sake.

 

[Revoltingest]

• When I mention that the US "is seriously close to collapsing under the weight of its domestic issues," I mean that its geopolitical, economic, and cultural influence may wane in no small part, but not exclusively, due to the internal fissures and cracks caused by its domestic problems and deep polarization.
  

Now we're getting somewhere.