Comments by "Jim Luebke" (@jimluebke3869) on "Bret Weinstein - We Can Stop a Civil War" video.

The solution to this problem is to disempower the court eunuchs (Ivy League Graduates with no sympathy for local American populations) that actually write our legislation.
29
23:17 -- THIS IS NOT TRUE. Special interest / corporations get their way against the interests of the common people (the Median Voter, the person who agrees with at least 50% of the population on a given issue) about 50% of the time. Sure, this is bad, and should be revised. But it is NOT the primary failure of our democracy. The primary failure of our system is that the Median Voter of 100% of our population is overshadowed by a different median voter -- the median voter of the top 10% of wage-earners. NOT the top 1%; many of these are self-interested (self-motivated) libertarians. The only time a median voter of 100% of the population sees legislation pass, is when that legislation is also in accord with the opinion of the 10% median voter. The Top 10% Median voter gets his or her way about 70% of the time, and unless the Full 100% Median Voter agrees with that, the Full 100% Median Voter NEVER sees his or her preferred legislation pass. THIS is the corrupt system that Trump was elected to overturn, and THIS is why the entire elite -- from academia to media to our bureaucracies -- is dead set against him.
8
@cinemar We have two choices: - We can have a pandemic and wreck our economy - We can have a pandemic and not wreck our economy There isn't an option here that doesn't include a pandemic, but there IS an option that involves not wrecking our economy.
5
Term limits wouldn't halt the power of Congressional staffers. The people who actually write the laws, and the Deep State, would actually benefit from a diminution of the power of their supposed masters.
3
@gzoechi They "handle the complexity our society causes" badly. Power should be taken out of their hands. Money doesn't buy elections. Look at the data for spending vs. winning. A candidate with policies that appeal to voters will beat a candidate with policies that don't appeal to voters, no matter how much money they pump in. The "corruption" comes from the bureaucrats that are never elected by anyone, making decisions (frequently wrong) that cannot be overturned democratically.
3
@gzoechi His immigration policies reduced unemployment rates significantly, to the point that wages were starting to rise for the first time in a generation. Even if you don't credit his immigration policies with that effect, he at least didn't screw things up, and allowed the American economy to move ahead much faster and farther than Obama's ideology allowed him to do. Trump is also philosophically equipped to see to American interests on the world stage, in a new geopolitical milieu that is neither post-WWII / Cold War nor War on Terror. I don't think he's anyone's first choice for being "diplomatic", but he's useful for two things: A) playing "bad cop" on the international stage, and taking sensible risks (like opposing Iran, which led to about as much retaliation as Iran is capable of). B) Challenging old assumptions (like, if we're not worried about Germany or Russia invading their neighbors again, why are we still treating Germany as a military protectorate? They can pay for their own defense now.) He's also willing to stand up to the new brand of authoritarianism -- Political Correctness. He hasn't yet been effective at destroying Cancel Culture, but he isn't going to allow it to semi-secretly take over the country, or even openly support it (as Obama did). I'm looking forward to his making some effective moves against it, as well as its violent street thug footsoldiers. A Biden presidency would lead to another Weimar (a government far too weak to police its own streets), and there are enough anticommunists in this country (and they are certainly well enough armed) to make the Weimar failcase recur, if push really came to shove.
2
@kg356 Nothing influences legislation so much as the worldview of the person who actually types it out. The fact that one very small faction of our population (the scribes that write all the laws) shares a philosophy that the majority does not share, does more to skew legislation away from the General Will (and the general good) than money does.
2
It's almost as if that's what it's all about. The Club of Rome is still influential these days. They've just changed their tactics to reach their anti-human goals.
2
@CptRetro Well, many of the political/social movements for the last couple of decades (environmentalism, anti-motherhood feminism, anti-family, anti-hetero, anti-tradition) make the most sense if you have an anti-human worldview -- "humans are a cancer on the planet and should be sterilized." The Club of Rome, with its seminal work "The Population Bomb", was totally wrong about mass starvation, but their policies seem to be gaining ground anyway. There's someone out there that just doesn't like the human race, (consciously or unconsciously) and they make policy.
2
@gzoechi Funny how critics of Trump have a tendency to resort to ad hominem attacks, and leave out substantive examples of his supposed wrongdoing. It's almost as if it's a personal grudge against Trump, rather than his policies.
1
@gzoechi As far as Trump's desire for personal gain, I suspect that does as much good as harm. If he could go down in history as the best-loved president of all time because he brought America back to hyperpower status in the world (and even in the Solar system), I think that has more appeal to him than just getting rich.
1
@gzoechi What news media are you listening to / watching? That probably determines how the US (or at least its president) appears from the outside. I'm basing my view of Trump from several decades of watching him in public life. He's a showman and a self-promoter, absolutely. But I've always gotten the impression he wants to be ... magnificent. Magnanimous. I think his style is tacky, but I never got the impression that he wanted to prosper at America's expense.
1
@gzoechi He certainly hasn't achieved as much as he's promised. But Biden loves the infestation, he's part of the infestation.
1
@TimBitts649 The man is old, older than Joe Biden. What happens when he finally lays his burdens down? (Aside from his personal descent into the inferno.)
1
@drlca6601 The British are buying us still? With what money?
1
@drlca6601 The foreign policy of the last 120 years has been basically the US taking over for the British, at least as I read it. Our hands are cleaner (most places), and we have more credibility in talking about decolonization (being a former colony ourselves.) What did you mean by "120 years"?
1
@drlca6601 The imperial possessions we took after that war (Cuba and the Philippines) were given their independence over time. It's a strange sort of "empire" that does that. We developed a deep-water navy to defend international trade, certainly, and the Cold War required us to maintain the most technologically advanced and powerful military in the world. Again, not your typical empire. The only reason other countries can support "more attention and finance" to internal issues is that we bear the burden on the military side. Could the US cut its military and increase its domestic spending? Maybe (although managing China's rise says maybe not.) The other side of that coin is that other industrial powers probably need to boost their military spending significantly (3x - 5x), which would necessitate those countries reducing their domestic spending, even as the US increased it.
1