BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Feb 17 - 11:29 AM

But I think there are a lot more Trump supporters who believe they've gotten raw deals because they've been told they have

Agreed, BW- but I think you have the percentages of the two groups reversed.

Part of the "Make Amerika Great" campaign's appeal was a longing for a return to ther past - a MYTHICAL past that never existed. Like the folks waiting for the railroad to come back thru town or the closed mines to re-open. The railroad ain't coming back, folks- and that economic hole you're in? You've just put into office a cadre of the very people that dug that hole for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Feb 17 - 10:54 AM

I don't really think a federal tax officer/expert will add to the gaiety of nations. I think Trump has correctly recognised that they are part of the problem. Having a general view of taxation, finance, etc doesn't seem to work. most working musicians can tell you that. we haven't all got 2.3 kids, and some businesses don't fit into the net yield nonsense. We need more flexibility in financial institutions and taxation.

What Trump has promised to do is cut a swathe through the laws of the land and screw the bastards who are screwing America.

I'm not sure he can do this. His attempt with the anti immigration law shows that the lawmakers aren't just going to fold in terror and respect in front of the President. But then again - i didn't think he could win an election.

the term Maverick could have been invented for guys like Trump. like you say watch and be afraid...he doesn't seem to get on with anybody very much.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Feb 17 - 10:36 AM

Jim using words like schlock I'd swear you were American. Fun post or its accuracy.

Mr. Red you may have an insight. Proving it takes time and research.
On a TV call in show I suggested that Reagan had Alzheimer's a full five years before we were told. The TV panel of psychiatrist and doctors had a good laugh and ran from any real response.

Big Al, TODAY Trump meets with the Canada PM Trudeau. T wants to get rid of NAFTA.
We have an export value added tax. Some car parts go back and forth 7 times and would be made too expensive to survive a value added tax each time it crosses the border with Canada. If we asked Trmp about this I am sure he is unaware of the coat benefits of his crazy repeal plans. H does not even know about the benefits o a weak dollar vs a strong dollar. Your plan can work with enough codicils and changes to the tax code but then the Trump plan is no better than what we have as far s simplicity goes.

I can ask a senior Federal Economist about this complex issue for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Feb 17 - 09:29 AM

Interesting piece of insight from The Irish Times's American correspondent this morning
Jim Carroll

TRUMP HAS ALREADY MADE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN BY INSPIRING HIS OPPOSITION
Listen up, haters. The brief reign of Donald the First has been completely head-spinningly nuts so far. But let's stay calm and look for the silver lining, or in this case, the garishly gold lining. Trump has indeed already made some of America Great Again. Just not the aspects he intended. He has breathed new zest into a wide range of things: feminism, liberalism, student activism, newspapers, cable news, protesters, bartenders, shrinks, Twitter, the American Civil Liberties Union, Saturday Night Live, town halls, George Orwell, Margaret Atwood, Hannah Arendt, TV presenter Stephen Colbert, and the separation of powers among them.
As Trump blusters about repealing Obamacare, many Americans have come to appreciate the benefits of the law more. Lena Dunham credited the "soul-crushing pain and devastation and hopelessness" of Trump with helping her get a svelte new figure. Trump may even have pierced the millennial malaise, as we see more millennials showing interest in running for office.
Every time our daft new president tweets about the "failing" New York Times, our digital subscriptions and stock price jump, driven by readers eager for help negotiating the disorienting Trumpeana Oceana Upside Down dimension rife with gaslighting, trolling, leaking, lying and conflicts.
Similarly, whenever Trump rants about Alec Baldwin's portrayal of him and tweets that Saturday Night Live is "not funny," "always a complete hit job" and "really bad television!," the show's ratings go up. They are now at a 20-year high. Trump was roundly mocked for turning his Supreme Court announcement into an episode of The Bache-lor, but it must be said that the president has more talent for devising cliffhangers than anyone since Charles Dickens.

Unbelievably schtocky
Administration officials told The Times that the White House even got Judge Thomas Hardiman, the runner-up to Neil Gorsuch, to play along and help make the final rose ceremony suspenseful by feinting a drive toward Washington. It was unbelievably schlocky, and yet the end result was a national civics lesson, with a whopping 33 mil¬lion-plus people tuning in.
Ordinarily staid senate hearings for cabinet choices are now destination TV. As Trump puts forth people who want to plant Acme dynamite in the agencies they will head and as Republicans at the federal and state levels push their conservative agenda, Americans have a refreshed vigour for debating what's at stake for the environment, education, civil rights and health insurance - and a new taste for passionate, cacophonous town halls.
Trump has made facts great again. By distorting reality so relentlessly, he has put every¬one on alert for alternative facts. "With great assurity," as Trump likes to say, the president has also made White House press briefings relevant again by raising the stakes. The 'Time's Michael Grynbaum calls Sean Spicer's live briefings "daytime television's new big hit" - outdrawing soap operas such as General Hospital and The Bold and the Beautiful.
As he alarms and exhausts, the Short-Fingered Vulgarian deserves this credit at least: We're all on our toes now. The pink pussyhats are at the barricades, on the watch for any curtailment of women's rights and any mansplaining by older white Southern men.

Misery of staffers
The president loves his pat-and-yank handshakes and hugs and blown kisses with m ale VIPs. "I grabbed him and hugged him because that's the way we feel," he said of greeting Japan's prime minister. But The Times's Maggie Haberman reports that the White House radiates with the misery of staffers.
The riled-up art scene has taken to trolling the Troller in Chief. The Museum of Modern Art dropped its customary detachment on politics to protest Trump's ban on refugees from seven predomi¬nantly Muslim countries by replacing artwork on display by Cézanne, Picasso and Matisse with contemporary works from Iran, Iraq and Sudan.
The Public Theater an¬nounced it would open Shake¬speare in the Park in May with Julius Caesar, a play about a populist seeking absolute power. The play, the theatre said, has "never felt more contemporary".
Still, the main way that Trump is proving that America is great is that the affronted and angered are rising up to take him on. Institutions designed to check a president's power and expose his scandals, from the courts to the comics to the press - are all at Defcon 5 a state of military alertness - except for the Republican Congress, which seems to be deaf.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 13 Feb 17 - 08:13 AM

I don't think economic disenfranchisement is as central an issue as it's made out to be. Yes, there are some people who've gotten raw deals from globalization, and I understand their anger. But I think there are a lot more Trump supporters who believe they've gotten raw deals because they've been told they have. They accept the premise while ignoring the fact that they're actually doing quite well.

There's a housing development near where I live that I drive through occasionally. House prices start at $450,000, every house has a two-car garage with two almost new cars in it, and almost all of their professionally maintained lawns had Trump-Pence campaign signs on them during election season. The only economic hardship most of those folks will face this year is having to decide whether to buy a new boat or a new motor home because they can't afford to do both.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Feb 17 - 07:59 AM

That's not the point - whether it works or not.

The point is that he's opened up a dialogue on an issue none of the others won't face. And they won't face it, because by and large they're not from a class that is affected - yet.

Of course - neither is Trump from that class. His comittment to succeeding is hugely suspect of course.

But that's why he's won an election.

Badmouthing him about being what we can all see is a strange and uncultured man, is not germane to to anything.

People will be looking for him to deliver, and my feeling is that he won't have to deliver very much, because no one else has started to engage with the plight of workers displaced by the policies of multi nationals.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Feb 17 - 05:43 AM

Linking dementia to lack of sleep is a conclusion way too far from what little evidence there is.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Mr Red
Date: 13 Feb 17 - 04:46 AM

Trump admits he only sleeps for four hours.

Thatcher famously only got half normal sleep. She ended with Alzheimer's. It is not automatically a correlation, given the vagaries of "current medical understanding on the subject", but:

There is a blood brain barrier, and veins in the brain differ by being concentric tubes. Inner caries blood, the outer is constricted during waking hours, but during sleep it expands and carries fluid to flush out all the by-products of the burning of fat/sugars etc with oxygen. Principle of that detritus are prions. Now you may make the connection.

Not a given, but a gamble. Reagan? Wilson?

you heard it here- One more reason to get a good night's sleep TED talk.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: DMcG
Date: 13 Feb 17 - 02:22 AM

I don't think there is the remotest chance Trump's plan will work. However, let's have a think about a way it could (however unlikely).

Import taxes have been anathema for years - every trade deal and economist (maybe) has argued against them. And the reason is pretty basic. For most products the size of the international market is many times the size of the national market, so the ease of selling internationally is a key factor in how big your company can become.

But the costs of this are that smaller local competitors are squeezed out or taken over and, in the fight for competitiveness, the jobs move to the lowest cost, which is typically abroad.

So imagine we now have steep tax barriers. The big firms are hit, and hit hard. Job losses are inevitable. But along with this, the scope for the smaller business focused on local markets could pick up. Over a period of a few years, many of the lost jobs could be picked up elsewhere. Then, why concentrate on goods we can sell internationally? If your product line is, for example, locally raised/grown food, the international market is not too interesting to you. Equally, if the tariffs on imported food are high, it stimulates your local market.

And there is also a possible environmental benefit - losing all those air miles transporting goods everywhere. And then finally there is all that money raised from the tariffs. Trump would put those in lowering taxation; other would prefer to invest it in education and other social goods.

Can it work? As I said, not a chance in my opinion. But it is self evidently crazy? No, it is not. It is just at odds with everything we have done for decades. That does not mean it is crazy.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Feb 17 - 12:55 AM

you know what they used to say. its the economy - stupid!

in a way i guess it is.

forget the weirdness of this man's behaviour, the xenophobia a distressing side issue, but not really the central point.

the point of his appeal is that he has an explanation and a proposed solution for America haemoraging manufacturing jobs to countries to the east and south.

he is proposing import taxes on foreign goods, consequences for firms who relocate outside the USA. he saying if you want a stake in America's wealth , it costs. there are responsibilities

Can it work? Can it stop or even slow down the apparently inevitable?

the point is he's recognised a major problem. and he's having a bash at it. and that recommends him to an awful lot of people.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 08:29 PM

Well I imagine it could be the same in the US as it is here (going from results of polls). There is a total lack of political education. If you ever bring up the topic you're in danger of being suspected of being a revolutionary commie. Keeping people ignorant is vital to the right. Ignorance leave you vulnerable to specious arguments, prejudice spouted with authority from on high and downright lies. You won't question those things unless you have at least some knowledge of politics and the wherewithal to ask questions sceptically. You talk about democratic deficits, disenfranchisement and the like. The biggest defect of democracy by a country mile is the ignorance of those who are entitled to vote. Politics is by far the most important thing that affects people's lives. Yet we really don't want the inconvenience of people actually understanding it.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Greg F.
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 08:10 PM

"Underfunded" by itself has little to do with underlying reasons

I don't recall blaming underfuding "by itself" ;>)

The end product of uneducated/undereducated individuals who cannot think critically or logically & thus can't tell fantasy from reality is also a cultural factor of some moment.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 08:02 PM

Congratulations Bill. I felt bad a thread started by you was too easily dismissed. It was sort of like Elizabeth Warren being told to sit down.

Half a dozen times I've put out some fires and left some embedded suggestions which has changed behavior significantly.

As a vulgar populism sweeps the country I have witnessed the audacity of an established old bigotry is causing fist fights in strip Mall Parking lots and belligerent pick up truck drivers.

As Colbert and John Stewart asked for a return to sanity we should preserve the golden strings of musicians opinions to gather, soothe and educate instead of adding hate. Folk music may be the panacea of these times.

As a classical musician I know the unique brother and sisterhood among musicians in concert together and separately. It is a powerful source that can change emotions like no other expression. Music surpasses partisanship. It doesn't always work but it is beautiful when Bernstein accomplished this in both Israel and Berlin.

Admin gradually set up verbal metal detectors until we were all reminded of a kind of security that became the focus and a game to be waged and challenged. Old habits gradually fade.

Bill pass along my sentiments if they are concordant in any way.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 07:00 PM

"Underfunded" by itself has little to do with underlying reasons. Attitudes about funding levels in competition with military and other **important** goals need a kick in the rear. And the overwhelming insistence on 'states rights' in determining educational priorities IS a cultural/psychological factor.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Greg F.
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 06:43 PM

the basic cultural/psychological reasons for his popular appeal

The miserable state of underfunded U.S. education has a great deal to do with it. Remember Trump "love[es] the poorly educated" - and with good reason.

But if you think it's bad NOW, wait 'til DeVos gets thru with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 05:58 PM

The CIA is not happy with him... but that's a side issue. My hoped for discussion was about the basic cultural/psychological reasons for his popular appeal... not just your predictions. I am not a betting man... I was not sure Nixon would get re-elected, and I was surprised DT 'won'... and I see various ways he could wear out his welcome early, given his astounding 1st 2 weeks.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 05:16 PM

i bet you - even if they found bodies in oildrums in the garage- the cia would sort it out for him.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 03:49 PM

This guy's going to go the course. When Maggie got in in '79 we all said she'd be gone within months. Days of false hope. He's staying unless someone, somewhere, can pin something terrible on him that we haven't yet heard about. And he may win a second term. Be very afraid.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 02:18 PM

I can't really see what people have got to complain about with Trump.
before the election he went round acting weird and saying he was going to do mad shit.
now he's going round acting weird and doing mad shit.
as for not lasting four years - that tactic worked pretty well for Thatcher.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 01:40 PM

I'm doing pretty well, thank you. Surgery was laproscopic and minimally invasive.... they had to go thru one area of abdominal muscle they hoped to avoid, so it's no lifting 'heavy' (20 lb +) stuff for 3-4 weeks instead of the promised 1... but I can manage that.

As to names... I treat 'Ake' as a simple short form rather than a nick. I forget that he spells Akenaton differently....I also never bothered to type out "The Right Reverend Sir joHn from Hull"

I know that some of what *I* do is affected by time and slow typing skills, but Jeri does have a point about how insulting names lose their effect when the target doesn't react. Still... others do react in various ways to obvious 'insulting nomenclature'. It's just an extra bit of fuel on a fire that is already burning quite well.

-----------------

But to reply to DMcG, who added something to the topic:"
I wonder to what extent the checks and balances made it easier to elect Trump, even though they were designed to prevent any one person getting too much power. I can imagine a cohort who are so anti government they would vote for anyone making that claim..."

Yes... there was much of that happening. The standard remark was "He speaks plainly and *stands up for what he believes". And THAT was often code for "Obama was too intellectual."
   Did they really assume that he would behave 'better' since he'd be watched so closely? I suppose so... but it hardly negates all the offensive earlier behavior. I'd bet that 30% of his base would have voted for him if he'd been publicly groping women all thru the campaign... just to be voting against "Clinton".
   Now... I mentioned pragmatism as a possible attitude. Remember... when Nixon was shown to be a 'crook', a large % of his based washed their hands of him... though a few just HATED to be 'wrong'. I suspect that if the Russian connection and losing health care and a general increase in obvious mental instability become daily issues, both Republicans in Congress and in the electorate will be willing to see him go... after he gives them tax cuts and the SCOTUS add-on they want.
   Smarter people than me claim that he will never last 4 years.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 12:34 PM

Affectionate shortenings and things like that are one thing. It's easy enough to spot when someone is modifying someone's name in order to be aggressive. The point I was trying to make is that it's the kind of behaviour that invites aggression back. I don't often see the mods stamping down on deliberate misuse of chosen or real names (and I reiterate that I'm not innocent). It's a sign of a less than perfect ethos and we'd be better off without it.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 12:24 PM

Me too, Bill.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Senoufou
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 12:22 PM

Forgot to add, hope you're recovering well Bill. Best wishes.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Senoufou
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 12:21 PM

I quite like being 'Sen' on here. I certainly wouldn't scream about it if it became a 'thing'. (I also like Bercow's nickname The Squeaker)
There is far more devastating stuff going on in the world than people calling other people a name.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 11:19 AM

Well, Joe, if you use a nickname for a politician or other individual not on this forum, there isn't much scope for objection as long as the nickname is not racist, sexist, etc. Politicians in particular are time-honoured targets for ridicule and long may it be so. It tells us that we live in a free country, for one thing. And, while it's not exactly a nickname, I've typed "Jaysus" here hundreds of times and no-one has objected. There may be those who are silently bored by it I suppose. John Major was lampooned by the cartoonist Steve Bell hundreds of times in a particular way, namely as wearing his spotted Y-front underpants outside his trousers à la Superman manqué, and Cameron was depicted hundreds of times with a pink condom on his head. I don't think it made people scream enough to stop buying the Guardian. I'm guilty of occasionally distorting people's pseudonyms here (I'm trying to cut it out), but at least it's not their real names I'm changing for the worse. We all seem to accept "ake" and "Raggy" though if it's someone I dislike that I'm addressing I will do what my mum always did and revert to formality. I knew I was in trouble if she called me "Stephen." I never call akenaton "ake." There are some people I just don't want to get that cosy with. You may have noted that two of us who unashamedly post under our real names are routine targets for aggressive name-distorters. Jim Carroll is Jim, not Jom, Christmas or Mr Carroll. My name is Steve. Not Shaw, Stevie or Mr Shaw (with ot without initial capitals). If you don't want to be friendly, Steve Shaw will do nicely. People have managed to be very stern with me here whilst still calling me Steve, including you. I don't see you mods picking up people for abusing our real names. Here's a little exercise for you. Look at people such as yourself, Acme, DMcG, McGrath and Bill who always address me civilly and always as "Steve." Despite occasional profound areas of disagreement, I find it next impossible to get into mud-wrestling with you. When you target Greg for lampooning Trump's name, just get bored by it and recognise that he's the wrong target.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Jeri
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 10:02 AM

This bully's tactic backfires when the person targeted doesn't give a shit and everybody else thinks the person's a jerk. Joe's right - it makes me want to scream, but I really, really hate intentional stupidity.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Greg F.
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 09:33 AM

10-4 Joe, but may I draw your attention to "Jom"?

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: DMcG
Date: 12 Feb 17 - 02:52 AM

I wonder to what extent the checks and balances made it easier to elect Trump, even though they were designed to prevent any one person getting too much power. I can imagine a cohort who are so anti government they would vote for anyone making that claim - and to be fair Obama and many others have done well on the "I am change" ticket. For others the idea of a businessman in charge held attraction so that is a second group. But I suspect the knowlege he would be under near constant observation together with the belief the checks and balances would stop any really outragious actions make him seems a much less risky bet than the utterances alone would suggest. For example the Bill Clinton saga might temper any inclination to grab women.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Joe Offer
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 09:28 PM

Greg, I think the deal is that if you use a nickname once, the humo(u)r comes across. If you use it ALL the time, it becomes overwhelming. You have a tendency to use derogatory nicknames to the point where it makes people scream.
Just sayin'.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 09:24 PM

well whatever his shortcomings, at least he hasn't settled for being a 'principled opposition'.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 09:22 PM

He stated himself that "All press is good press." The whole campaign was like a slow-motion car wreck with everyone in the Press unable to resist watching and 'reporting' his every remark, no matter how trivial.

"passing one text over another, of comparing stories from different authors and different times.." is a way to sort out language with serious content from vague promises & generalizations. Compare an Obama speech on topic A with what Trump said on the same general topic....

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 08:16 PM

I'm finishing reading a book that came out in 2016 called The Nix. It's set in 2011, so there is no mention, that I can recall, of Trump. There isn't mention of Obama, either, and much of the action in a flashback features the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago. The book was probably finished and in the editing and publishing process before Trump declared he was running - there are interesting observations about how news and publishing see events as fresh, having a short shelf-life (and there will be standard newspaper editorials that say the same thing, if you look for them). Thing is, the novel was trying to create what appears to be an outlandish situation with a politically powerful yet emotionally volatile character. Who knew someone even worse would come along and make the events in the novel pale in comparison.

The process of passing one text over another, of comparing stories from different authors and different times to bring into focus similarities could give remarkable insight into this modern power broker who was given so much free publicity by all of the media outlets. They no longer need to give equal time and the carnival aspect (going back to the wrestling vs boxing analogy) seemed always to be promoted because in a few weeks this particular event would be stale. Only to have more and more outlandish statements or revelations happen and keep that juggernaut moving.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 07:18 PM

I haven't even opened that one...

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 06:22 PM

just the use of "Hump" is excessive and provocative..

OK, but Gee whiz, Bill - he was called a great deal worse in the "nicknames" thread........ just sayin'.......

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 06:14 PM

A medical explanation may also include thyroid problems


Adrenal fatigue can cause a rise in evening cortisol levels that interfere in sleep. Undiagnosed thyroid issues very often lead to adrenal issues. The early stages of adrenal fatigue/insufficiency is usually high cortisol as the body reacts to stress.

Trump admits he only sleeps for four hours.

An irrationality can result from sleep deprivation.

The problem with this diagnosis is, I have never thought Trump was rational.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 06:08 PM

I have debated Ake also... as well as several other stalwarts- on guns, evolution, astrology, music genres, American culture, language usage, logic, gender and its variations... and no doubt on silly minor themes.... but I try always to debate the reasoning, the facts and the basic conceptual differences.... NOT the character of the person. I discovered that it makes no sense to go at it really hard with those you don't feel are intelligent enough to comprehend your reasoning... all you can do is state- fairly briefly- YOUR point and let it drop. It did take me awhile to get this thru my own head... :>(

Even if you never convince them of anything, it is possible to reach a 'certain respectful tolerance' of your opponent(s).

Now... IF anyone has more to add on the OP article or its relevance, I look forward to it... but not to debate about the rules of debate or to the character flaws of our fellow posters... ok?

(I know... I shouldn't have said this much, but I'm kinda drawing on my 'good guy' credits.)

If we have exhausted the original topic, someone can close it down... but I am currently thinking about other philosophical themes that might bear on the chaotic state of our (the USA) circumstances... pragmatism, utilitarianism... etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 05:02 PM

Since January I wrote two anti Ake posts. I regret them both.
He has made us think. There are times he has been a backstop for the left. We are actually fortunate to have a wall to practice against.
I bet we are similar when it comes to separation of church and state, equality of the sexes, one person one vote, free speech, respect for different races, Magna Carta and a round Earth.

We need mutual respect or we can radicalize each other. Trump feels good bullying people. I need to resist that temptation as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 03:58 PM

Some posts are now restored...others I'm aware of are merely arguing about the rules ...or contain personal insults... or are not relevant once the flow was changed.

IF the article could lead to positive discussions about how to approach this new administration in this society, we might all learn something.

   I have posted on Mudcat since Nov. 1996, and started... relatively.. very few threads... but I am kinda protective of the few under my byline.. ☺

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 11:40 AM

I can do the same, ACME... I will peruse the original essay later. My brain & body are in restricted mode right now...

for those who care... I am... *tending* toward asking for (almost) all posts to be restored, with a warning about possible closure, rather than deletions. It ain't easy, and I might get outvoted...

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 11:24 AM

The way Google has the preview set up you can't download that book or just the essay, but I captured screen shots of each page to turn it into a pdf. (Different browsers might have more access to capture it, I'm using Chrome.) If someone wants a copy of that pdf, PM me your email address and I'll attach it.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 11:08 AM

You are making my point, Greg... just the use of "Hump" is excessive and provocative... hold off for awhile..

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 11:04 AM

You should perhaps instead post links to the four other presidental-themed running posts where the same exact fights have been waging for weeks. This topic was different and interesting. IMHO.

When I was in high school I played a lot of chess, and was in the habit of viewing events as they might have taken place in the context of the game. Too many good discussions lately fall into a messy version of 52 pickup.

Here is a link to an English translation of the original essay. Pages 15-25 via Google books, you can read it all right there.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 10:46 AM

sanity has appeared to triumphed for the time being

Sanity from the Hump administration? - if nothing else, that's a bit premature. Overall, its a contradiction in terms

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Feb 17 - 10:32 AM

Well.... I am recovering from surgery..(doing fine, thanks).. and am not at the computer all day long, so have missed some of the ...ummmm... 'discussion'.


I have been sent a basic list of the deletions by a mod, and I see why an attempt was made to steer the thread in a useful direction.... but I also see why it always resembles "herding cats" to get Mudcatters with strong opinions...(are there any other kind left here?).. to stick to a point.

This is one of the awkward situations where almost everyone is sorta 'right', but many are also just using the thread to tout personal views and losing track of what is claimed by the article I referenced.
I am considering asking for ALL posts to be restored, but reserving the option of just flatly closing it if it continues to deteriorate into another "us versus them" thread creep.

Stay tuned... and please refrain from the usual ^metacomplaints while I decide what to request.... please?

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Feb 17 - 07:26 PM

Trump appears to be backing down from his racist ban and has suggested he will revise it next week - sanity has appeared to triumphed fort the time being
For crying out loud - leave Ake to he goose-stepping - he's laid his cards on the table
Who would bother reasoning with Nick Griffin?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Donuel
Date: 10 Feb 17 - 04:21 PM

Guys in overalls who watch wrestling and NASCAR are unemployed in the rustbelt. There, life is a whole lot of nothing with little hope. Many have tried the prosperity Christianity and lost even more.

They are Nihilists in Christian clothing.

Their one point of bigoted pride is at least they aren't black.
They are the perfect no nothings for the Trump base.

The only polls Trump wins is among existing Trump supporters.
Every National poll he loses.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: robomatic
Date: 10 Feb 17 - 03:06 PM

I'm minded of one of the most under-rated movies of all time:

"From this day on, the official language of San Marcos will be Swedish. Silence! In addition to that, all citizens will be required to change their underwear every half-hour. Underwear will be worn on the outside so we can check. Furthermore, all children under 16 years old are now... 16 years old!"

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Feb 17 - 02:56 PM

More to the point regarding President Hump, let's hear from Lord Mountararat:

I don't want to say a thing against brains - I've a great respect for brains - I often wish I had some myself!

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: robomatic
Date: 10 Feb 17 - 02:45 PM

Let's hear from Private Willis:

When all night long a chap remains
On sentry-go, to chase monotony
He exercises of his brains,
That is, assuming that he's got any.
Though never nurtured in the lap
Of luxury, yet I admonish you,
I am an intellectual chap,
And think of things that would astonish you.
I often think it's comical – Fal, lal, la!
How Nature always does contrive – Fal, lal, la!
That every boy and every gal
That's born into the world alive
Is either a little Liberal
Or else a little Conservative!
Fal, lal, la!

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: robomatic
Date: 10 Feb 17 - 01:03 PM

I'm puzzled that some posts are deleted as off-topic when I've been through many threads that wander extensively- and sometimes well-intentionedly into fields that are still reflective of what the OP meant. I am not aware of having any posts deleted for cause with or without explanation, and while I am a liberal (for Alaska), I am not one by comparison with many of the posters in these BS forums. Which is why I find 'em interesting and worth participating in.

I take DMcGs comments as expansive of what I was saying in my post preceding. At the risk of going 'off' topic I'll add my general feelings that there is no perfect system. When a system is applied to government it inevitably involves constraints, and it follows that some people will experience those constraints more than others. Some of those people are murderers, others are jaywalkers, and some don't want to pay taxes. Any system of government has inherent strengths and weaknesses relative to others. The democratic-republican form of government is bound by the weaknesses of its electorate. Often the weaknesses are like plywood, one subsection of the voters is not as weak as most of the others, so the body politic as a whole is strong. Other times the cracks in the system align among groups. Fear is a great source of alignment, and my opinion is that unfortunately in this past election that is exactly what happened.

Another thought going through my mind is that maybe systems of government, or peoples, have lifetimes just as individuals do. The Chinese Dynasties ran through lifetimes. I'm by no means convinced that's the case with the USA, it's just another fear to throw on the fire.