Authoritarian cult formerly known as the Republican party

[User]

7 hours ago, August1991 said:

Mais au Québec, que pensez-vous ?

Are you OK? 

[User]

41 minutes ago, myata said:

Republicans failed to pass the border security bill they agreed to.

- Senate Democrats and Republicans agreed on the assistance and border combined bill.

- Then the Republicans reneged on the commitment

- More than a half of House Republicans voted against the assistance to Ukraine. In fact, it is not just assistance but a commitment to assure security and territorial integrity given in exchange for abandoning the third largest stock of nukes at the time.

These are the facts before our eyes. Anyone with eyes and a bit of intelligence will see it for what it is: the party is falling under an authoritarian spell, becoming a cult. It is not about the reality anymore, border or standing up to totalitarian thugs: it's about the loyalty to cult and its Idol. Mostly, and for some, only.

So yours has to be a fantasy world or just lies.

Where did the Republicans in the House ever agree to the Border Security Bill in the Senate?

It was well known before Trump ever opened his mouth that whatever the Senate compromise produced was almost certainly going to be garbage most in the House would oppose. 

You are ignoring this context and merely saying "Republican" as if it is some monolithic block. 

The idea that politicians of either party will protect the party and be... politicians is not unique to the Republicans. You need look no farther than how Democrats sycophantly support Biden and pretend like we can't all obviously see he is too old and not all there anymore or that they don't cheer on authoritarianism when it suits them *cough* Student loans...

The only fantasy world here is the one where you act like this is just Republicans or something unique now. 

[Nationalist]

*giggle*

The Libbies think that their lawfare and lies can win the Whitehouse. But...

With the overall polling even, the deciding factor will be the toss-up states...and they lean for Trump.

Edited April 24 by Nationalist

[myata]

49 minutes ago, User said:

did the Republicans in the House ever agree

Are they different Republicans? The logical link between the assistance (see above for completeness of the issue) to Ukraine and the border measures is non existent. Both have direct and strong relevance to the medium and long term security of the United States. The Republican leaders first created this connection by hands then reneged on it.

The question in the OP is very clear: in 2022 Republicans supported Ukraine almost unanimously. It's less than a half of the representatives now. What has changed? Has anything changed about Putin, his dictatorship; his war and its consequences if Ukraine does not win?

No, the reality has not changed. Its the party, that has.

Edited April 24 by myata

[User]

1 minute ago, myata said:

Are they different Republicans? The logical link between the assistance (see above for completeness of the issue) to Ukraine and the border measures is not existent. Both have direct and strong relevance to the medium and long term security of the United States. The Republican leaders created this connection by hands then reneged on it.

The question in the OP is very clear: in 2022 Republicans supported Ukraine almost unanimously. It's less than a half of the representatives now. What has changed? Has anything changed about Putin, his dictatorship; his war and its consequences if Ukraine does not win?

No, the reality has not changed. Its the party, that has.

I do not wish to presume anything here, but are you American? This is not meant to be insulting, but you don't seem to understand the nuances of our Congress. 

It is divided into the Senate and the House. Senators are elected every 6 years, 2 from each state. Representatives in the House every 2 years and are proportional to their States populations. 

Basically, yes, they are different Republicans. The Senate has historically been much more stalwart and have completely different internal political negotiations and power dynamics than those that go on in the House. 

So again... where do you get that the House reneged on anything?

What changed is that Biden has allowed our own border to become even more of a crisis than it has ever been. As I already pointed out, Republicans want to see change there and the notion that we can provide 100 Billion in Aid to other countries to fight their wars and protect their borders does not sit well with many Republicans when we can't do anything to improve our own border problems. 

 

[myata]

3 minutes ago, User said:

Basically, yes, they are different Republicans.

But comes the elections time, you want to pretend that they are one and the same?.. wait, which one: if their views and policies are so different? A simple mind trick. Shouldn't fool anyone.

5 minutes ago, User said:

Republicans want to see change there and the notion that we can provide 100 Billion in Aid to other countries to fight their wars

The context of this issue is available to a ten-year old within a few clicks. That so many Republicans seems to be unable to grasp it, after years of immediate and direct evidence speaks only for their intelligence. Or personal integrity. Or/and.

How can it be anything else?

[User]

6 minutes ago, myata said:

But comes the elections time, you want to pretend that they are one and the same?.. wait, which one: if their views and policies are so different? A simple mind trick. Shouldn't fool anyone.

The context of this issue is available to a ten-year old within a few clicks. That so many Republicans seems to be unable to grasp it, after years of immediate and direct evidence speaks only for their intelligence. Or personal integrity. Or/and.

How can it be anything else?

Who are you talking to?

You don't answer my questions and then accuse me of wanting to pretend something I have never said here. You completely ignored my response. 

The way that the House and Senate function, their power dynamics, and internal politics doesn't change that there is a general party position on things, but even then, party politics is not some monolithic block where all Republicans are mindless robots locked in on what the party in general has said. Republicans, just like Democrats and other politicians, all have a wide array of views on any number of issues and how they may impact their local districts. 

Seriously, are you American? You do not seem to grasp the nuances of party politics or how Congress functions. 
 

[Deluge]

On 4/22/2024 at 12:03 AM, myata said:

First of all, one has to give their due to the reasonable and courageous representatives, on both sides of the political and social now, divide for attending to an important matter thanks to who the freedom and a safe and peaceful future of the world - that includes the United States, will have a chance. Including, in a surprise to me, the Speaker of the House. Respect is due where it belongs.

But one cannot ignore this side of reality too: more than a half of the Republicans: 112 versus 101, with 5 standing by voted against the Ukraine assistance bill.

Earlier in 2022, just after Putin's brutal invasion was unleashed, the support for Ukraine assistance was unanimous.

How can one explain this? What has changed about the nature of Putin's war and its significance, should he and his rising Totalitarian axis be allowed to prevail, for the future of the world, including the U.S.? The answer is obvious: the reality of the world has not changed; what has changed is the (formerly) party.

Is there a logical explanation why 90 Republicans: nearly a half of the caucus, voted for the aid to Israel but against that for Ukraine? Is Putin with his totalitarian buddies any less dangerous for the long term interests of the U.S. than Hamas and Iran? There's no logical explanation because it does not lie in the domain of logic but in the psychology and anatomy of emerging authoritarian cults.

It is not about reason, logic, integrity and the morals. It's about getting the cue from the Idol and following it blindly. Can overshoot in the zeal a bit but not by too much: only the Idol decides on the next target and strategy. It played out so many times in history that the future can be read like a music sheet.

The hundred or so inviduals who made the decision based on their own reasoning and integrity have been recorded and will be pushed out by the cult, quetly or not, with time but certainly. Only the zealots will be allowed to remain, genuine jerks or those who decided to comply and fit in. This is how it happened and the stencil for every new authoritarian cult. The explanation is simple too: to orchestrate the cult, the demands of the Idol will become progressively less sane and more outrageous so even a grain of sane thought and dissent cannot be allowed. The excitement, on different levels all the way to ridiculous bizarrity is the only reaction that is still allowed. Check North Korea - it's coming to your (formerly) party one way or the other.

Just as Reagan and Bush's conservatives were ostracised and pushed out, you are the next ones in line. Not heeding the cue of the Master, showing independence and the ability to think for yourself is the most serious transgression in the cult. You knew it.

And to the other party, a piece of advice - not from me but only because it happened so many boring times in the history. You cannot stand by and hope to extract little and temporary advantages from these things because they have a tendency to consume: even the entire society. You have to fight them here and now, with all the force and vigor. Don't give the cult even small gains, but face and defeat it at every and each encounter.

The job of the Speaker can be one of such skirmishes coming up. Leave partisan plays for better times and remember what's at stake: here and now.

I never can get over how stupid you people sound when you talk about Republicans being "authoritative" or "fascist" or "cultists" or "racist" when it's you degenerates who are guilty of all of that and more. lol

Now, you do have an argument when you talk about Neocons, but true American conservatives throw those traitors out with the democrats. 

Trump is nowhere near perfect, but he is better than any piece of shit you leftoids can produce. YOU are communists; YOU are socialists; YOU are marxists, and YOU are also neo-nazis, so there's really no point in this stupid pursuit of gaslighting everyone, don't you agree? 

 

Edited April 24 by Deluge

[User]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

*giggle*

The Libbies think that their lawfare and lies can win the Whitehouse. But...

With the overall polling even, the deciding factor will be the toss-up states...and they lean for Trump.

It is going to be wild to see Trump get elected and then pardon himself from all Federal charges that are ongoing... 
 

[Nationalist]

7 minutes ago, User said:

It is going to be wild to see Trump get elected and then pardon himself from all Federal charges that are ongoing... 
 

It will be wild. After everything these Libbies have done to Trump, other Republicans, not to mention the legal system, my advice to Trump on the first day would be to reinstate Flynn, March all the Brandon administration including the doj, fbi and nsa, into the oval office and fire their crooked arses. Then let Flynn escort them all out with only what they can carry in a box.

Edited April 24 by Nationalist

[WestCanMan]

On 4/21/2024 at 11:03 PM, myata said:

First of all, one has to give their due to the reasonable and courageous representatives, on both sides of the political and social now, divide for attending to an important matter thanks to who the freedom and a safe and peaceful future of the world - that includes the United States, will have a chance. Including, in a surprise to me, the Speaker of the House. Respect is due where it belongs.

But one cannot ignore this side of reality too: more than a half of the Republicans: 112 versus 101, with 5 standing by voted against the Ukraine assistance bill.

Earlier in 2022, just after Putin's brutal invasion was unleashed, the support for Ukraine assistance was unanimous.

How can one explain this? What has changed about the nature of Putin's war and its significance, should he and his rising Totalitarian axis be allowed to prevail, for the future of the world, including the U.S.? The answer is obvious: the reality of the world has not changed; what has changed is the (formerly) party.

Is there a logical explanation why 90 Republicans: nearly a half of the caucus, voted for the aid to Israel but against that for Ukraine? Is Putin with his totalitarian buddies any less dangerous for the long term interests of the U.S. than Hamas and Iran? There's no logical explanation because it does not lie in the domain of logic but in the psychology and anatomy of emerging authoritarian cults.

It is not about reason, logic, integrity and the morals. It's about getting the cue from the Idol and following it blindly. Can overshoot in the zeal a bit but not by too much: only the Idol decides on the next target and strategy. It played out so many times in history that the future can be read like a music sheet.

The hundred or so inviduals who made the decision based on their own reasoning and integrity have been recorded and will be pushed out by the cult, quetly or not, with time but certainly. Only the zealots will be allowed to remain, genuine jerks or those who decided to comply and fit in. This is how it happened and the stencil for every new authoritarian cult. The explanation is simple too: to orchestrate the cult, the demands of the Idol will become progressively less sane and more outrageous so even a grain of sane thought and dissent cannot be allowed. The excitement, on different levels all the way to ridiculous bizarrity is the only reaction that is still allowed. Check North Korea - it's coming to your (formerly) party one way or the other.

Just as Reagan and Bush's conservatives were ostracised and pushed out, you are the next ones in line. Not heeding the cue of the Master, showing independence and the ability to think for yourself is the most serious transgression in the cult. You knew it.

And to the other party, a piece of advice - not from me but only because it happened so many boring times in the history. You cannot stand by and hope to extract little and temporary advantages from these things because they have a tendency to consume: even the entire society. You have to fight them here and now, with all the force and vigor. Don't give the cult even small gains, but face and defeat it at every and each encounter.

The job of the Speaker can be one of such skirmishes coming up. Leave partisan plays for better times and remember what's at stake: here and now.

What a load of drivel that is. 

FYI there's zero connection between voting for funding and cultism. When people are free to change their mind on a topic like funding Ukraine, that's the opposite of cultism.

Ukraine is NOT facing certain genocide, myata. Israel is. Whichever way the Ukraine border shifts, life will go on for everyone, just under a different flag. 

ME countries have been attacking Israel for decades with the express intent of committing genocide. The PLO and Hamas and other terrorist orgs in that region win hearts and minds by promising a genocide. The Israelis will face certain genocide if they lose.

[myata]

2 hours ago, User said:

You don't answer my questions

I can say the same. You are either ignoring very clear and direct points or cannot comprehend them. What can be not clear in "assurances of security given in exchange for voluntarily abandoning the third largest stockpile of nukes at the time"?

After Ukraine, if Putin is allowed to prevail, who in their right mind would let go of the nukes as opposed to getting them at the first opportunity? In the world where thuggish banditry runs free and amok, where and with who will the countries seek their security? Supporting Ukraine is a) a matter of long standing principles and b) a commitment and c) a no-brainer, no a must in the current geopolitical layout. Who wouldn't get it?

No this is a wrong question: not who but why? Because the cult mentality requires a total and complete abandonment of any reasoning and principles. Only the loyalty to the cult matters. Factual.

[User]

9 minutes ago, myata said:

I can say the same. You are either ignoring very clear and direct points or cannot comprehend them. What can be not clear in "assurances of security given in exchange for voluntarily abandoning the third largest stockpile of nukes at the time"?

After Ukraine, if Putin is allowed to prevail, who in their right mind would let go of the nukes as opposed to getting them at the first opportunity? In the world where thuggish banditry runs free and amok, where and with who will the countries seek their security? Supporting Ukraine is a) a matter of long standing principles and b) a commitment and c) a no-brainer, no a must in the current geopolitical layout. Who wouldn't get it?

No this is a wrong question: not who but why? Because the cult mentality requires a total and complete abandonment of any reasoning and principles. Only the loyalty to the cult matters. Factual.

No, you can't say the same, at least not with any validity. I have no interest in playing your 1,000 rhetorical questions game now that has nothing to do with what we were talking about. 

We were not arguing the merits of aid to Ukraine, but your characterizations of Republicans in Congress for why they did not support the aid. 

So, what are you rambling on about now as if we were discussing the merits of supporting Ukraine in general? Are you not able to stay focused?

 

[myata]

26 minutes ago, User said:

playing your 1,000 rhetorical questions

WTH? A commitment of this scale and magnitude is "rhetorical"? OK. Maybe you are sure that your position is and will be stable for as long as you can see or care. But if not, if something happens who will take your word after this kind of experience? Who would stand with you? I wouldn't bet.

As to why, the facts are the answer and you only choose what you see and understand. They supported it two years back, unanimously. What has changed about the reality, the aggression? Nothing. It's them who have changed.

Edited April 24 by myata

[User]

9 minutes ago, myata said:

WTH? A commitment of this scale and magnitude is "rhetorical"? OK. Maybe you are sure that your position is and will be stable for as long as you can see or care. But if not, if something happens who will take your word after this kind of experience? Who would stand with you? I wouldn't bet.

As to why, the facts are the answer and you only choose what you see and understand. They supported it two years back, unanimously. What has changed about the reality, the aggression? Nothing. It's them who have changed.

No, your paragraph of irrelevant rhetorical questions regarding Ukraine was just that.  Our discussion was not on the merits of supporting Ukraine or not, it was on your absurdly wrong characterization of all Republicans who did not vote for the latest round of funding. 

I have already responded to your "what has changed" comment before, which you clearly ignored:

"What changed is that Biden has allowed our own border to become even more of a crisis than it has ever been. As I already pointed out, Republicans want to see change there and the notion that we can provide 100 Billion in Aid to other countries to fight their wars and protect their borders does not sit well with many Republicans when we can't do anything to improve our own border problems. "

[myata]

13 minutes ago, User said:

Our discussion was not on the merits of supporting Ukraine or not,

No: it was on the people, supposedly of reason and integrity, who demonstrated neither. Because their alliance is to the cult of the lying Idol as opposed to their people; the principles and traditions of their nation. So fully within the scope of the OP.

To remind, we are talking here about a solemn commitment of the United States and a critical issue of national security, of the United States and the free world. Your playing "oh look a rabbit just went by - the red, fat and lying one, so let's forget everything at once" speaks only for your intelligence and integrity. You can try to fool simple-minded with cheap distraction tricks. But would they fool the dictator thugs of the rising Axis? Will they be convinced by cheap word games?

This is the scale of irresponsibility you're playing with. And of course, you know.

Edited April 24 by myata

[User]

6 minutes ago, myata said:

No: it was on the people, supposedly of reason and integrity, who demonstrated neither. Because their alliance is to the cult of the lying Idol as opposed to their people; the principles and traditions of their nation. So fully within the scope of the OP.

To remind, we are talking here about a solemn commitment of the United States and a critical issue of national security, of the United States and the free world. Your playing "oh look a rabbit just went by - the red, fat and lying one, so let's forget everything at once" speaks only for your intelligence and integrity. You can try to fool simple-minded with cheap distraction tricks. But would they fool the dictator thugs of the rising Axis? Will they be convinced by cheap word games?

This is the scale of irresponsibility you're playing with. And of course, you know.

Speaking of reason and integrity... you continue to ignore my comments and arguments and just keep making the same assertion repeatedly. 

The same folks who voted no also believe there is a solemn commitment to the United States own security, our own border, and this is our own national security at stake. 

That is not my playing anything... that is my directly responding to the claims you are making here giving you a valid reason for why many of those Republicans were no votes. 

My intelligence and integrity are fully intact here. 

[myata]

10 minutes ago, User said:

The same folks who voted no also believe there is a solemn commitment to the United States own security, our own border, and this is our own national security at stake. 

A dumb distraction trick and you can't add anything new to it. Who said that it's one or the other? That one cannot take responsibility for the border now, and the security tomorrow? Only your lying buffoon Idol full of stinky hot air lies. And you're either dumb to check it, or already converted and wouldn't see anything.

What would be other options? I'm curious, honestly.

[User]

4 minutes ago, myata said:

A dumb distraction trick and you can't add anything new to it. Who said that it's one or the other? That one cannot take responsibility for the border now, and the security tomorrow? Only your lying buffoon Idol full of stinky hot air lies. And you're either dumb to check it, or already converted and wouldn't see anything.

What would be other options? I'm curious, honestly.

You started this discussion regarding your characterization of why they voted the way they did. It is not a distraction to point out that their reasoning is not what you assert it to be by offering not only a plausible alternative but the actual alternative as stated by many of them and supported by their past actions and comments. 

What is this "lying buffoon idol" you are accusing me of having? I started posting here this week and somehow you think you already know me enough to make such outlandish claims? Give me a break. 

 

[myata]

8 minutes ago, User said:

I started posting here this week and somehow you think you already know me enough to make such outlandish claims?

I know it by observation for example, the frequency of using standard cliches (originating where? right) over reasoning based on facts and logic. I'm not going to repeat, because they were made clearly and not once. Intelligence and integrity are not a universal gift, blessing. They are not given but earned and maintained. Yes one can assign away one's intelligence and freedom to make own decisions and choices. Yes, it happened countless times in history. No there isn't a valid reason: it's only a choice.

[User]

3 minutes ago, myata said:

I know it by observation for example, the frequency of using standard cliches (originating where? right) over reasoning based on facts and logic. I'm not going to repeat, because they were made clearly and not once. Intelligence and integrity are not a universal gift, blessing. They are not given but earned and maintained. Yes one can assign away one's intelligence and freedom to make own decisions and choices. Yes, it happened countless times in history. No there isn't a valid reason: it's only a choice.

What specifically have you observed? What is this "lying buffoon idol" you are accusing me of having? 

[myata]

As commented somewhere, and looks quite plausible these days is that the buffoon and his close ring of associates realized that his admiration for the bloodthirsty thug Vlad that he expressed publicly on several occasions is and will cost him support comes November. And so, he's trying to pedal back on it. Makes sense not that it changes his pathologically lying nature one bit.

The party that is turning into a cult right before our eyes is not homogeneous, that is true. It comprises, roughly, 30-40% traditionalist, Reagan conservatives; a smaller but much louder MAGA cult, 20-30%; and the silent majority in between.

It's fascinating to watch 1984 unfolding live these days, no need for the book. MAGA throats who just yesterday shouted love to Vlad are now "Reagan republicans" wow; but that's how it works, just another brave new day in 1984.

Two things are important here: first, it is interesting to study, live, how the majority of the Republicans converted already after Jan 6 events. In my opinion, what contributed most are 1) the extreme partisanship of the U.S. politics that effectively shut down for a large part of the party the information, part of reality that does not agree with the message promoted by the cult core. It is confirmed by the studies and long practice that drumming propaganda while shutting all alternative channels of information is effective on a great majority of the targeted group. In that case, it's the traditionalists who failed to provide a viable alternative to the cult, or at times sought to gain with and through it, that lead to the spread of the authoritarian messages and the conversion of the silent majority.

The second part of the truth is that without the support of the traditionalists Trump cannot win. That explains all serenades and dances from here and to November but: no, you cannot pretend to not know what, and who is behind it. For this, there's no rational explanation; no reconciliation; and nothing good can come out of it. You already know it because you can watch it in the documentaries about the cults past. And then it'll push you down and kick you out because it will remember. It will happen if you help it rise. It already happened.

Remember the Republican elections official who refused to follow the unlawful order to not certify the results? Remember what happened to him, only for following his lawful, Constitutional duty? What was the message here: it was delivered by the cult, with the silent majority standing by? Constitution over loyalty to the cult and its Idol, or the other way? You know what it means because there's only one way to read it.

There will be no explanations, for this. It will happen. And you have seen it. And you knew.

Edited April 25 by myata