BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 02:21 PM

"Are you a mod now, Bill? "
Perhaps he sould be - as long as he is even handed
I'sd be more than happy to be moderated if Teribus's serial insulting was brought into check
If there were Oscars bor ill mannered rudeness...... but I suppose that's what we get when insecurity goes untreated
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Vashta Nerada
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 03:34 PM

Look again at the essay from the first post:

But why can't voters see that what Trump offers is just an act? As Barthes illustrates, that's asking the wrong question.

It is obvious that at such a pitch, it no longer matters whether the passion is genuine or not. What the public wants
is the image of passion, not passion itself. There is no more a problem of truth in wrestling than in the theater.

This analogy reveals why the attacks on Trump are so ineffective. Recently, Rand Paul and others have taken to calling out Trump
as an "entertainer," rather than a legitimate candidate. This is as effective to running into the middle of the ring during
Wrestlemania and yelling: "This is all fake!" You are correct, but you will not be received well.

This is describing a downward spiral of the American political society. Under this lens, with "normal" politics and Trump politics being equal, "traditional punditry [was] incapable of understanding his appeal." The article was written before he became a candidate. Trump simulacrum as a political statesman was misunderstood by many voters to be real. More than a few French philosophers are turning in their graves at this moment.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: akenaton
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 03:59 PM

The problem with Barthes proposition of course, is that the movement against the establishment is not confined to those who voted for Donal-John, the whole of Western Europe has had enough of being lectured by a well off elite on how to conduct themselves socially and politically while their jobs a standard of living go down the pan.

Barthes considers politics to be a showground in which victory in elections compensates for an ever falling standard of living and political incursions into traditional social values, I consider that he has made an accurate assessment of the situation which pertains at the moment, but do not believe for a minute that "ordinary people" as opposed to the political and social elite are stupid. They vote with their bellies, not by the influence of highbrow psychology.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 05:46 PM

Vashta.."a downward spiral of the American political society." may only be one of many eddies in a larger current. I'm not sure that this is any worse than the mid-60s when the Dixiecrats reversed the party names and ideologies.... or any worse than the hateful mess of 'reconstruction' after the Civil War.
   There are many problems today, but we simply cannot lump both major parties and all the minor ones into the same clogged pile of &#$%*.
They are not simple mirror images of one another... they function on different levels with different goals and different methods. It is useless to chant "Throw them all out! Term limits!" Any serious change will require working from within... from various angles... to create a genuine concern for some sort of Utilitarian view that allows **fair** treatment for everyone... rich AND poor. Right now we have the Golden Rule... "He who has the gold makes the rules.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 05:50 PM

the hateful mess of 'reconstruction'

????? Are you talking "Birth of a Nation" or Eric Foner here?

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Vashta Nerada
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 05:53 PM

Jed Legum wrote the piece and excerpted from Barthes' essay in which Barthes wrote about wrestling vs boxing. Barthes was a philosopher and culture critic who died in 1980, about the time that Trump was palling around with Roy Cohn, so if he had written about Trump, it would probably have been in the context of choosing a better quality of mentor.

The "well-off elite" - you don't even know who that is. You don't seem to recognize that the western middle class white male, when compared to the rest of the world, IS the well-off elite, even though he thinks his standard of living is being diminished because women and minorities are FINALLY rising as far as income and fair treatment. A crass over-simplification of a shifting society where for centuries conservative white men (and some of their women) have had the upper hand, now comes down to those individuals deciding that everything can be solved (for them) if a clown is put in office instead of someone with drive and intellect. From another essay about Barthes:

"Mythologies" is often an angry book, and what angered Barthes more than anything was "common sense," which he identified as the philosophy of the bourgeoisie, a mode of thought that systematically pretends that complex things are simple, that puzzling things are obvious, that local things are universal — in short, that cultural fantasies shaped by all the dirty contingencies of power and money and history are in fact just the natural order of the universe. The critic's job, in Barthes's view, was not to revel in these common-sensical myths but to expose them as fraudulent. The critic had to side with history, not with culture. And history, Barthes insisted, "is not a good bourgeois." ¹

The altruistic political movement today is multicultural, has educated men in conjunction with lots of women and previously marginalized minorities; it is educated, and I suspect you're as dismissive of education as you are liberal politics.

"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." --Isaac Asimov

Bread and circuses.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 05:55 PM

Ake...in one sentence you use a silly 'name' that no one else uses... Donal-John... and slip sideways into a pronouncement about "the whole of Western Europe" and " a well off elite".

Then you expound on what Barthes 'means'. I'm not at all sure that's his view and I have no time right now to re-read it and decide... it's Valentines Day here and I have a good lady to celebrate with.

We'll see how this progresses overnight.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 06:15 PM

I did try to tell you, Bill.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 06:39 PM

Half[sic] the Republican establishment briefing against their own Presidential candidate

What that actually demonstrates, Ake is that (tho a critically endangered species due to the rise of the alt-right, anti-government "Tea Party" bozos) there are still a few Republicans who retain at least the rudiments of intelligence and of a sense of decency and who recognize the clown now in the White House for what he is and has always been.

It would be even better for the country if at the end of the day they weren't such gutless wonders.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 06:43 PM

Oh, and Vashta: good job!

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 07:54 PM

They vote with their bellies, not by the influence of highbrow psychology.

The aim of psychology is not to influence, but to analyze. Psychologists who study voting behavior aren't trying to get people to vote in a certain way (unless they're working for a political campaign). They're trying to determine why people vote the way they do.

And claiming that people "vote with their bellies" is simplistic. Yes, there are some for whom economic disenfranchisement is a bitter reality. They do vote with their bellies. But they're not most people. Trump received the votes of about 63 million people. If there were that many people in the US "voting with their bellies" we'd be in a depression that would make the 1930s look like a boom decade.

People are complex. They behave the way they do for a multiplicity of reasons, some good, some bad. And voting is as complex as any human behavior.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 08:39 PM

Term limits are the idea of those who think politicians get too fat in office. I happen to think that they defeat the benefits of having experienced politicians who know how the government works stay in office and train others as they arrive. The Tea Party made such a dent in the Congress and Senate when Bush was in office that they didn't really know what they were doing, they just tried to push through what they wanted. A third to a half of them have already left office, now that they have an idea of what is involved. The most satisfactory way to get rid of politicians is to unelect them, but you need to convince those who vote for that party that change is needed. It does eventually happen.

Gerrymandering and the Electoral College need to be removed, today we need one person one vote, and every vote needs to count. The GOP has managed to lock down so many congressional seats because of their artful dilution of Democratic voters in "safe" districts that one day that may be a case before the Supreme Court - if someone can figure out how to bring it forward.

Trump doesn't understand all of that, and the GOP is reaping the rewards of an undisciplined administration that frankly doesn't seem to care if they look presidential or even legal. This conversation is about how Trump fooled enough people into voting for him, voters who hope that some crumbs will fall their way during this administration so that they personally will benefit, to hell with everyone else who has to live with the low pay or pollution or deportations or financial chicanery, they are conservative voters who don't want consumer protections in place.

That other essay linked to above looks at various French philosophers:

(Foucault was the tough one, Derrida was the dreamy one, Lacan was the mysterious one — I like to imagine them sometimes as a black-turtlenecked, clove-smoking boy band called Hors de Texte, with the hit album "Discipline 'n' Punish.") Instead of constructing multivolume monuments of systematic thought, Barthes wrote short books built out of fragments. He was less interested in traditional coherence than in what he called jouissance: joy, surprise, adventure, pleasure — tantric orgasms of critical insight rolling from fragment to fragment. He proclaimed the death of the author and advocated a style of reading he referred to as "writerly," in which readers work as active creators of a text.

I have read these authors, and I also like Lyotard, who has written about archetypes and narrators. I detested Ronald Reagan as a president, but recognized his actor's ability to tell a story. Bill Clinton could mesmerize listeners as he described clearly how things work. Obama was an excellent speaker, tying all of the threads of a story together in what we recognize as presidential speech.

Trump just can't do it. He doesn't understand how to focus on others, he can't tell a good story, he can't stay on script because his thoughts always come racing back to himself. He's still trying to re-write the result of election night, galled by the idea that he didn't win the popular vote and therefore must erase Hillary and her supporters by suggesting millions of illegal voters cast those three million votes that put her ahead.

Trump is an archetype, and I'd like to see this conversation identify what that archetype is. A petty apologist from Scotland would like to shut down discussion that accomplishes this: I would ask that people simply ignore his uninformed remarks, and proceed with the conversation as if he isn't in the room. In other words, don't feed the troll.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 08:47 PM

Voting may be a complex matter but, because of voter ignorance, a very simple factor comes into play, namely ruthless manipulation. Sixty-three million people voting for a misogynistic, bigoted bully were not voting rationally with a full knowledge and understanding of the complexity of the issues and challenges facing the country and the wider world. Seventeen million people who were swayed by the lies of little Englanders were not voting rationally to get the UK out of the EU. The Dutch are going to give a far-right candidate the highest number of votes and the French are in danger of electing a fascist. If the EU collapses, which it may well, Europe, freed of its EU obligations to be democratic, abide by the rule of law and observe human rights, may start to face the same kinds of political turmoil that led us into two world wars. After all, there is the fuel economic turmoil just round the corner I demur totally from the received wisdom that all these people voting for dangerous solutions are doing it because they feel "disenfranchised." That is made-up shit, to coin a cliché, innocent of evidence bar that derived from vox pops instigated by tendentious-minded men-with-mics. Jesus, even in the finest democracies a very large minority are "disenfranchised" at every election. The kind of democracy we brag about in our western civilised countries is a sham that relies on the electorate being ignorant of what is really at stake and being far too easily satisfied that, once every few years, they "get to have a say." Ignorant people are very easy to manipulate. Western democracy dictates that we make people happy because they think they can choose, then carry on acting like a near-dictatorship. Thank God for the courts, but even they are now threatened and vilified on both sides of the Atlantic. Be very afraid.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Feb 17 - 08:58 PM

Jaysus, my watery eyes failed me at the proofreading stage. You can probably work it out, but here's what it should have read:

"After all, there is the fuel of economic turmoil just round the corner. I demur totally from the received wisdom that all these people..."

And I agree about akenaton, who I don't hesitate to name, and I'd counsel against trying to play the role of his wise uncle. That merely gives him precisely the succour he needs to carry on, fortified. Keep him at disdainful arm's length. He's poison.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 03:19 AM

Bill, the name is not meant as an insult, I am sure it reflects the background of Mr Trump's mother Maryanne MacLeod.
As I explain before it is a Lewis Tradition to use linked Christian names.
I agreed with you to embark on a civil discussion, as it is your thread would you please put an end to the personal remarks from others here.....as a liberal and a democrat, I'm sure you will see that as fair.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 03:39 AM

"The altruistic political movement today is multicultural, has educated men in conjunction with lots of women and previously marginalized minorities; it is educated, and I suspect you're as dismissive of education as you are liberal politics."

You suspect wrongly again Vashta, education is vitally important in the construction of a new type of society, Unfortunately "Education" is often used as a cover for propaganda.

I have never seen such a clear example in my life, of the political elite banding together to protect their privileged position, it is utterly shameless and will lead to absolute outrage.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 04:06 AM

B W L...After an election the losing side always looks for an excuse as to why they lost. Barthes' proposition is IMO a sort of excuse, as DMcG said ..an "easy" answer. I agree the situation is extremely complicated, but the populist movement in Western society....the reaction to Neo-liberalism AND to social "liberalism" is the main reason the political elite are being rejected.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 05:34 AM

This has become little more than a series of adverts on behalf of an extremist right wing President who has used a foreign power to gain office
Ake refuses to respond to the facts of Trump's extremely dangerous rule, instead he describes education as "propaganda"
The world has been here before - hence the flags
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Stu
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 06:35 AM

"Unfortunately "Education" is often used as a cover for propaganda."

This is a bold assertion, and I'd like to:

a) See it refined to be more specific.

b) Provide proven examples of that show education being used as propaganda.

I've never come across education being used as propaganda, so want to know where this is happening.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 07:15 AM

Propaganda works best when education is in deficit. That's exactly what the power-hungry prefer.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 09:08 AM

The topic has again (as he wished) returned to Ake's world view. Another thread trashed.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Donuel
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 09:10 AM

Stu, Ake has improved his rhetorical game. I knew he could.

I can give innumerable examples of education morphed into propaganda from ancient times right up to the moment of now.

Be that as it may I would like to clear up the conceptual interplay of psychology in society and politics. It can be used for any damn thing. It can be a tool of fear, it can be used predictively, it can be used forensically, it can be high or low brow. The paradigm of psychology is that it is a descriptive tool for the motivation, manipulation and categorical understanding of the mind of man.

With few exceptions psychology is closer to philosophy than it is to neural science.

If Trump has an appeal I would assume it is with like minded individuals who see a benefit in bullying, strategic lying, narcissism and unbound greed. In their mind those same traits would be called, forceful, spinning, self confidence and great financial ambition.

I think most of the folks here assume Trump has great appeal when in fact he does not.

.....................

I give a heartfelt like for the ideas of Vasta, Stu, Red, Bill, Greg, dmcG, acme, Jim and even Ake, but for different reasons.
Al, if you knew more civil servants you would know more about their moral rectitude, which is not part of the problem.


The real game changer to come is the selling out to Mr. Putin by Donald Trump for $. Ideas of 'appeal' will be seen by all in a new light. There will be back peddling, running for cover, changing of stripes, walking back and lots of egg on faces.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 09:14 AM

Education morphed into propaganda is not the same thing as education used as propaganda. In fact, true education can't be used as propaganda. Half-truths, bigotry, misrepresentations and downright lies are the sine qua non of propaganda. Never the truth that real education seeks to elicit.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 09:16 AM

Used as a cover for propaganda is what I meant.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 09:21 AM

Ireland's media catching up here.
It has been announced that Trump was fully aware of the negotiations between his supporters and Russia prior to his inauguration - Don the don's tweets have gone ballistic denying the charges and denigrating the Security Services
If Flynn has gone can Trump be far behind?
Wishful thinking maybe
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 09:59 AM

One doesn't need old-style "propaganda" in the brave new Trumpist world of "alternative facts", outright lies & fact-averse BS eagerly lapped up by a brain-dead electorate.

See also

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/15/conspiracy-laden-blog-no-place-white-house-press-corps

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 10:12 AM

This in an analyisis of Trump's take on truth
HOW TRUMP CREATES HIS OWN REALITY
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Stu
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 10:21 AM

"I can give innumerable examples of education morphed into propaganda from ancient times right up to the moment of now."

Of course, but Ake's post is inferring this is happening now, in the UK and US. This might well be true, but I am not sure what he means by 'education' for instance, which could mean anything from teaching pre-school kids to leaflets in the doctors to a zillion other things. I'm trying to get past the sweeping generalisation to see if there is any substance to such a claim, and if so let's see it.

There's no doubt about one thing, we're loosing our way in the west for sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Donuel
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 10:51 AM

The General Flynn thing is just a crack that in time will become a crevasse and then a canyon for traitors.

When listening to Senators who are briefed by our intelligence agencies, listen for the admission that General Flynn's crime is only the beginning, only the tip of the iceberg. This is not just about Russian Hacking the DNC to corrupt an election, it is not just about a plot to eliminate sanctions quid quo pro. I have told you what it is but it seems no one believed me. (which is fine by me)

Trump has lived by the deal and will die by the deal.

Then as Mr. Red revealed, The Pence Party will ensue, to the distress of the country and my personal dismay.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Donuel
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 11:00 AM

Jim, "In Trump's case, he has a troubling tendency to launch attacks at targets that are actually veiled criticisms of himself. It's a genius strategy, really: a preemptive strike that not only removes the card from his opponent's deck, but also accuses them of the very thing that he is guilty of." I have pointed out this strategy here for 10 years.

This political tactic goes back hundreds of years.
If anything Trump overdoes the perverse prevarication of the bigger the lie the more believable it becomes. His whoppers are so huge they don't work except for misdirection and distraction.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Vashta Nerada
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 11:39 AM

Excellent points, Jim and Donuel. From Jim's link:

A few examples: After a photo emerged of Hillary Clinton being escorted up some steps, Trump spent weeks on the campaign trail taking shots at the Democrat's perceived health woes, even though he himself is said to suffer from bathmophobia, or a crippling fear of steps and slopes. His childish nicknames for his political foes—"Little" Marco Rubio, "Lyin'" Ted Cruz,' "Crooked" Hillary"—are words that have been used to describe Trump for decades, while his narrative of a corrupt Clinton Foundation more closely resembled his own. Even his continued assault on CNN, which President Trump has labeled "fake news," appears remarkably disingenuous when you consider that CNN chief Jeff Zucker and Trump are longtime friends (Zucker hired him for The Apprentice, and he reportedly keeps a framed Trump tweet in his office), and the cable news network played a substantial role in helping Trump get elected POTUS—from round-the-clock coverage of his rallies, at times airing just an empty podium, to its army of pro-Trump campaign propagandists, including: Kellyanne Conway, Scottie Nell Hughes, Kayleigh McEnany, Jeffrey Lord, and Corey Lewandowski, who remained on Trump's payroll for the lion's share of his CNN tenure.

It's like my dog, who telegraphs any time he did something wrong. Sometimes he meets me at the door with that behavior before I even see the destruction, but Trump's tweets are meant to hide his weakness by accusing others instead and try to deflect anything that might come his way later. In this way, my dog has more moral fibre and character than Donald Trump.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 11:50 AM

We are supposed to be interpreting Barthes proposition, not indulging in a weepfest over the result of the election.
Your or my opinion of Donal-John is of no interest to Bill who sees these matters from a higher level.
Please stick to the subject.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 11:57 AM

"We are supposed to be interpreting Barthes proposition, not indulging in a weepfest over the result of the election."
As you refuse to respond to anything that is said it is none of your business what we are supposed to be discussions.
If you wish to manipulate this discussion have the good grace to participate in it - or is this another glimpse of Trump's 'Big Brother' Brave New World, censored from above?
In other words, put up or shut up
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 12:48 PM

Passing by... for the moment... 'most' of the posts since I gave up last night, I want to expand on Acme':

"Trump just can't do it. He doesn't understand how to focus on others, he can't tell a good story, he can't stay on script because his thoughts always come racing back to himself. "

I read many years ago an article in Esquire magazine from Oct. 1962. It referenced an apocryphal professor..."It purports to describe six breakthroughs in behavioral science by a (fictitious) Professor Herschel McLandress, including McLandress's discovery of the McLandress Coefficient, the average time that a person goes without thinking of himself or herself, which (he wrote) reflects the intensity of the person's identification with his own personality."

This was measured by statistics from their writing, speeches, conversations... etc.
Some people got 'ratings' of 1-4 hours...(I think the article rated Ghandi at a couple of hours) actors, often in minutes. Nixon supposedly was about 3 seconds. Reviews of Galbraith's book were not always sure how seriously he took his own creation... but it seems to me it was a semi-humorous attempt to make a serious point about how to evaluate the basic ways 'important' people present themselves to the world. I'd bet McLandress/Galbraith would have had some fun with Trump.

Read articles here:

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1963/12/4/prof-mclandress-ptake-an-ibm-machine/

http://isaac.blogs.com/isaac_laquedem/2006/04/john_kenneth_ga.html

https://books.google.com/books?id=cTvLmq8GSw0C&pg=PA160&lpg=PA160&dq=mcClandress+coefficient&source=bl&ots=Kc2GXpfArM&sig=lCi2Iu3cQV23AhHyzXdFw-wL2Dk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiq4POFzZLSAhVDzFQKHbPRB24Q6AEISTAJ#v=onepage&q=mcClandress%20coefficient&f=false

That last one is a link to a couple of paragraphs in Google Books.

A search for "McLandress coefficient will find others.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 12:59 PM

akenaton ... are you channeling Kellyanne Conway? I just saw a video by a champion debater who explained her system of confusing the public by beginning to answer a question, then deftly changing the subject.

You rehash some of your themes above:
From: akenaton -
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 03:39 AM

Then later plead with OTHERS to follow MY wishes.

This is not a topic where anyone can be 'right' about reading motives or pontificating on historical truths... it is just an attempt to relate various news items to their conceptual relevance.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Donuel
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 04:15 PM

Bathmophobia , Really?

The next time you see Trump walk down the steps from Air Force one note the death grip on the railing.

Obama used to make a point of not touching the railings and sprinted down the steps.

Since I disavow such a thing as Trump appeal I can not comment on Barthes' explanation but there is a WWE Trump connection.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Mr Red
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 05:00 PM

McLandress Coefficient a phrase for what we all know in the back of our minds - a description that could achieve critical mass in the glaring light of modern trumpery

and the coefficient for Obama - must be at least an hour.

politics - poly meaning many, ticks are bloodsucking insects. And we dun gotta a lotta politicks right now, y'all.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Feb 17 - 08:49 PM

...as in Political experts..

An 'ex' is a has-been, and a spurt is a drip under pressure.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Feb 17 - 05:38 AM

"akenaton ... are you channeling Kellyanne Conway? I just saw a video by a champion debater who explained her system of confusing the public by beginning to answer a question, then deftly changing the subject.

Then later plead with OTHERS to follow MY wishes"

Bill, if you really desire an adult discussion, is unhelpful to impugn the motives of your debating partners, surely in such a situation trust should be a priority?

I notice a distinct bias in your stance in which you ignore all attempts to make this discussion a personal vendetta "Nazi insignia," "non person" "anti education" etc, yet take me to task over semantics.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Feb 17 - 05:47 AM

And at this point, Bill...

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Feb 17 - 06:41 AM

Barthes speculates that many "ordinary people" view political elections as "theatre", entertainment.....but during my pretty long life I have seen and taken part in many such elections...the vast majority were won by the most boring and conventional candidate.
There are a few people who enjoy it when the political mask slips and the real self serving, unscrupulous, money grubber is exposed, but not a lot. Most are concerned about their lives, their jobs, their healthcare, the education of their children and other basic issues.

At the present time added to these worrisome issues are unregulated immigration, a decaying infrastructure, housing problems, drug abuse,
the demise of the Church in society, and a general familial and societal decline.

Perhaps the wisest thing would be to turn off the TV and examine real life.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Feb 17 - 06:47 AM

Listening to an interesting discussion on radio this morning
Trump's team have now lost three leading members thanks to their Russian connection.
His support in the Republican Party appears to be crumbling and talk of him being impeached is in the air - it's even been suggested that his dealings with Russia are an imprisonable offence.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Feb 17 - 07:01 AM

Bill, I suppose you will assume that my last post is an example of my "changing the subject" half way through my post , but in reality it is still on topic as I am simply trying to give my opinion as to why Barthes is wrong in claiming that a need for "political theatre" explains Donal-John's appeal.

Additionally my concentration is being interrupted by a strange buzzing sound?.....Can you hear it?

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 16 Feb 17 - 07:12 AM

no...stop being crytic

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Raggytash
Date: 16 Feb 17 - 07:14 AM

Interesting that you include this Akenaton:- "the demise of the Church in society"

Would this be the same churches that have covered up the widespread abuse of young children over the course of many decades and are still doing so.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Feb 17 - 07:54 AM

THE CHURCH AND TRUMP
I very much doubt if the buzzing in your ears is your conscience or humanity Ake
You are still not defending your support of Trump - none of you are.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Stu
Date: 16 Feb 17 - 08:52 AM

"the demise of the Church in society"

Thank god. The church is just another way of exerting control and influence over people and acts in it's own self-interest.

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Feb 17 - 09:49 AM

Sorry Al ......no flies on you ....eh? :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Feb 17 - 09:55 AM

Ake
Why do you refuse to defend Trump rather than prozletizing for him?
You have the facts - they are there for you to knock down
This is totally mindless cowardice
For that matter, why do none of his supportes defend his behaviour - perhaps because it is indefensible, maybe?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Barthes: explanation of Trump's appeal
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Feb 17 - 10:09 AM

Ahrrrgh!!! my ear drums are bustin'.....every things gone RED....