MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Trump Timeline ... Trumpocalypse
- Thread starter CdnGuy
- Start date
For 20 years, Hungary was a functioning democracy; today, it’s a corrupt oligarchy.
In nine short years since he was elected in 2010, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, now fabulously wealthy by Hungarian standards and an oligarch himself, succeeded in transforming his nation’s government from a functioning European democracy into an autocratic and oligarchic regime of single-party rule.
Orbán took over the Fidesz Party, once a conventional “conservative” political party, with the theme of restoring “Christian” purity and making “Hungary great again.” His rallies regularly draw tens of thousands.
He campaigned on building a wall across the entirety of Hungary’s southern border, a promise he has largely kept.
He altered the nation’s Constitution to do what we’d call gerrymandering and voter suppression, ensuring that his party, Fidesz, would win more than two-thirds of the votes in pretty much every federal election well into the future.
He’s now packed the courts so thoroughly that legal challenges against him and his party go nowhere.
...
In May, the same month Rudy Giuliani said he had a former Ukrainian prosecutor willing to testify that Joe Biden was corrupt, Donald Trump invited Orbán to the White House for a state visit; Orbán has been one of Trump’s two primary sources of information about how Ukraine opposed or tried to sabotage the U.S. president.
In a rally three months before his White House meeting, Orbán said that countries that accept refugees are producing “mixed-race nations.”
Orbán is now back in Hungary, ruthlessly using his own nation’s diplomatic and criminal justice systems to aid foreign criminal oligarchs, having hired his own local versions of Bill Barr and Mike Pompeo.
Before you say, “It can’t happen here,” you may want to make a trip to Budapest.
Basing his first question on Chomsky’s immense body of work, Scheer focuses on the well-known texts by Aldous Huxley and George Orwell—“Brave New World” and “1984,” positing that there is “an amalgam of these two totalitarian, dystopian models emerging.”
“I think we can start with the assumption [that] we have to be concerned about a dystopian future. Which model do you see emerging?” Scheer asks.
Chomsky offers a detailed response based on the novel “We,” by Yevgeny Zamyatin, and Shoshana Zuboff’s “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism,” which, in his view, best predict and outline the techno-surveillance system that has already begun to take hold in the U.S. and beyond, as companies such as Google, Amazon and others find novel ways to exert control over humankind.
“The kind of model toward which society is moving is already illustrated to a substantial extent in China, where they have very heavy surveillance systems and … what they call a social credit system,” Chomsky says. “You get a certain number of points, and if you, say, jaywalk, violate a traffic rule, you lose points. If you help an old lady across the street, you gain points. Pretty soon, all this gets internalized, and your life is dedicated to making sure you follow the rules that are established. This is going to expand enormously as we move to what’s called the internet of things, meaning every device around you—your refrigerator, your toothbrush and so on—is picking up information about what you’re doing, predicting what you’re going to do next, trying to control what you’re going to do next, advise what you do next.”
Perhaps most alarmingly, Chomsky asserts that “Huxley was kind of right” in positing that “people may not see [this form of surveillance] as intrusive; they just see it as that’s the way life is, the way the sun rises in the morning.”
In perhaps the most harrowing portion of the interview, Scheer asks Chomsky a question on many people’s minds nowadays as a variety of human caused factors threaten humanity’s very existence. “Is this the end of time for our species?” he asks. “I reread your book, ‘Hegemony or Survival,’ [and firstly,] you mentioned there that the typical life of a species is 100,000 years [and] that we may be coming to the end of this disfavor. And secondly, it’s an open question whether being smart, as we define smart, is an important way of averting disaster and preventing the disintegration of the species.
It’s not every day that the White House press secretary is offered $200,000 to appear on camera and explain the president’s decisions — any of them — to the public.
But as one of the most consequential weeks in President Trump’s tenure draws to a close, the world beyond the Beltway is beginning to notice that Stephanie Grisham — unlike her predecessors, colleagues and boss — does not appear to relish the talking-to-the-public part of her job.
In six months as press secretary, Ms. Grisham has held zero briefings for reporters. When she does give interviews, she prefers to leave the West Wing via a side exit and is driven to a studio, rather than walk toward the cameras outside the White House and risk encountering a journalist along the way.
Outside of appearances on Fox News, the One America News Network and the Sinclair Broadcast Group, she rarely goes on TV. Throughout her time in the job, Mr. Trump has wondered why she does not appear on television more often, according to two people familiar with his thinking.
AnTabolic73
Well-known Member
Trump pulls troops from syria, he gets criticized. How dare he abandon the Kurds.
Trump drone strikes iran general, sends troops to reinforce our Iraq embassy after it was attacked. How dare he send troops, how dare he use military action, how dare he drag us into a never ending regime change war.
Recently some liberals accused trump with his rhetoric of inciting hate. Anti semetic attacks in NY, some how trump gets blamed for it. Trump is an anti semite.
Trump recognizes Jerusalem as capital of Israel, makes the decision to move our embassy to Jerusalem, how dare he take stance with Israel, how dare he pick one side over the other.
I guess the point I'm trying to make, no matter what he does, the liberals will try to use it against him. Even if it seems to contradict past stances against trump.
You cant listen to cnn and MSNBC and then make up your mind about trump.
Fox news is conservative news. They have conservative views, they dont pretend not to be. Where as cnn and MSNBC are essentially liberal propaganda mills, posing as news outlet.
Trump drone strikes iran general, sends troops to reinforce our Iraq embassy after it was attacked. How dare he send troops, how dare he use military action, how dare he drag us into a never ending regime change war.
Recently some liberals accused trump with his rhetoric of inciting hate. Anti semetic attacks in NY, some how trump gets blamed for it. Trump is an anti semite.
Trump recognizes Jerusalem as capital of Israel, makes the decision to move our embassy to Jerusalem, how dare he take stance with Israel, how dare he pick one side over the other.
I guess the point I'm trying to make, no matter what he does, the liberals will try to use it against him. Even if it seems to contradict past stances against trump.
You cant listen to cnn and MSNBC and then make up your mind about trump.
Fox news is conservative news. They have conservative views, they dont pretend not to be. Where as cnn and MSNBC are essentially liberal propaganda mills, posing as news outlet.
What a bunch of bullshit
AnTabolic73
Well-known Member
What are you referring to?
staynattybruh
Member
Lmfao what in the hell, how could you even equate pulling out us troops out of Syria and trump drone striking an military force general??
And wtf is your point about Israel?? You’re clearly clueless if you don’t see the complications of him doing what he did.
If you do just an ounce of research you’d realize how anti semitic he really is. Trying to make being a Jewish as a nationality lmao. Can’t believe he’s literally trying to legitimize the dual loyalty trope these bigots spew.
Not a word you just said says anything about a “double standard”.
Oh and before you bring up Obama drone striking people, yeah it was fucked up then just as it is now, but at least under Obama we didn’t have some complete moron handling our foreign relations.
AnTabolic73
Well-known Member
The point I was making wasnt pro trump or against trump. It solely points to the fact no matter what trump does, the left will try and spin it against him, even at the risk of sounding hypocritical.
