I’ll be posting a piece either tonight or tomorrow, but in the meantime, if you’d like to listen to a conversation I had with Hal Ginsberg who runs a live stream broadcast called Halitics.
The hard Left is all about demonizing liberal democracy and capitalism. When it comes to supplying solutions to address the issues raised, the coffers of the Left is empty. They distinctly avoid engagement on matters dealing with finding alternatives. Ask a Leftist activist what solution they have for climate change, and they appear shocked that someone is expecting them to propose a solution. When pressed, they come up with some of the most asinine ideas that floats in their bubble and is taken as gospel. Prohibit fossil fuel based energy. Convert agricultural lands to forests. Stop cement, steel and aluminum production.
One of their favorite retorts is that socialism must replace capitalism in order to address all the ills. But when you ask them what is socialism and how does socialism work, invariable they are at a loss for words. Apparently they fervently believe in this socialism thing without knowing what it is. I have yet to hear a socialist coherently explain socialism and deal with its contradictions. Reminds me of religious fundamentalists who can't coherently explain their god, but fervently believe in that.
@pierce -- I am under no obligation to engage with you given your attitude and pattern of harassment. And I reserve the right to block you unilaterally. This said -
Regarding climate change, I think you are wrong that "The "left" has plenty of "solutions" to climate change." If the plan is impractical, such as to ban fossil fuels outright, then it is not a solution. If the plan is practical but only results in a 0.00001% reduction or neutralization of CO2 emissions, then it is not a solution. And if the plan is prohibitively costly then it's not a solution. I am happy the Left has come across a solution. May I ask what is it?
I will take a look at Freddie DeBoar. He seems to have an interesting substack journal. Now, after sounding out countless ideological (or revolutionary) socialist leftists, I observe that 90% of them are simple religious-like Believers, who know very little about socialism, but believe that it is the cure to all our ills. Generally neither can they explain the labour theory of value. Then there are academics who have attempted to explain how socialism works and have written "books". But they seem to be few and far in between, making no effort to educate the unwashed masses on social media.
On twitter I ran across some economics professor of a god-forbidden college who was an expert on this matter, and I asked him to explain that to me. His answer was, well from your other comments it is clear that you don't agree with LTV, so I have nothing to tell you!
As you have read the "books" and belong to the second subset, can you kindly explain socialism to me? Maybe I would take an educated liking to that.
Andrew Heaton has podcast ("Political Orphanage") interview with Freddie DeBoer that is only a few days old. Heaton let's DeBoer explain what is means to me a Marxist, including LTV, and including what socialism means to him, etc. DeBoer does a pretty nice job explaining. He also admits he has no idea what the future holds as to how us humans organize/govern ourselves, although he points out (I think correctly) that "Capitalism" at least as we have it today, is relatively new (think industrial revolution) but ultimately will go away just like every other system has throughout time. Hopefully, you can find it.
Again, unable to uphold a discussion in good faith, you fall back to personal attacks and insults. Sasha please take note of this individual with his/her long history of personal attacks and serial harassment of commenters. His belligerence was triggered when I associated Wokeism with the Left in general, which is obvious to all.
It is a well known fact that the ideological socialist Left (and the Woke Left for that matter) resort to denigration, racism, gaslighting, etc. when they ideologically disagree with someone and when unable to come up with an intelligent counter-argument.
On any decent social media group, e.pierce would have been removed a long time ago.
Last year, I heard from the son of a former professor of mine who died far too young. His son and siblings were gathered in San Diego to mark the 30th anniversary of their dad's passing. While going through his dad's correspondence, his son had come across letters between his dad - a far-left borderline socialist - and conservative colleagues and friends. He was struck by the warm banter, the queries about family and children, the obvious friendship across partisan lines. The son, in his 50s now and politically similar to his father, wondered how we lost all that - that simple human ability to listen to one another, to disagree without being disagreeable.
I told him that despite being in Air Force ROTC and fairly conservative, I had saved my correspondence with his father, and that when I was teaching a university course myself, I held his father up in my mind as a role model.
That his dad had been a mentor to me.
Reading the comments below makes me realize that the one truly bipartisan aspect of American culture today is that neither side wants anything to do with the other, and both blame the other side wholly for our divide.
We've got some work to do to repair our nation. While we fight, China builds, and if we don't get our act together we will lose this precious gift of freedom we were given by previous generations.
Good work, Sasha and Hal, and showing how Americans can disagree in a civil manner - and in so doing, inadvertently discover areas of commonality and agreement.
Thanks Jim! It helps that Hal is sort of a political outsider too so we do have common ground in that. People who are very much inside the bubble of the Left are difficult to talk to because they start melting down at the mere mention of things that challenge the official narrative. You're right, though. We have to start somewhere.
It's not just the bubble on the Left, though. Folks here on the right are saying they won't even watch because of Hal's politics, and others saying they only talk to fellow Trump supporters. We have mutually exclusive bubbles - THAT is the problem. Beijing has to love this crap ...
"Folks here on the right are saying they won't even watch because of Hal's politics, and others saying they only talk to fellow Trump supporters. We have mutually exclusive bubbles..."
Jim, like you, I remember a time when people with different political and philosophical views could still be friends. We had an underlying commitment to common values, and we understood that most people really wanted the same things, as JFK so eloquently expressed in his American University speech. So what changed?
Back then, we hadn't yet seen what happens to America when progressivism rules all our institutions. We hadn't experienced what happens when far-left zealots try to overturn every tenet of what we thought were American values. We didn't understand that people who call themselves liberal would act like tyrannical Puritans once they got a taste of power.
Now that we have seen and experienced these things, we cannot simply go back to the way it used to be. We no longer believe that everyone wants the same things. We now understand that some people will stop at nothing to impose their vision of utopia on everyone else, by force if necessary. The mask has dropped, and we cannot unsee what we have seen.
Now we understand that these ideas cannot be accommodated; they must be defeated.
For the purpose of full-disclosure I had a very different experience, have always found any idea contrary to the the identified affiliation of the company to sometimes go hostile very quickly. Imagine being for free speech and seeing life as spiritual and opposing abortion (i raised two daughters who I unfortunately put through universities) and being against nuclear power. Thing is, was, I'd read the Club of Rome: Limits to Growth ten times when it was still a white paper. The left and right getting along was all one big act. Jesuit theater in the 70's and 80's. No difference between Reagan, Bush, Clinton and O'Barry. All monsters. And so is 76 Trombones. This whole good cop versus bad cop nonsense has been Tavistocked into us and we've lost our way. Loving one's neighbor is challenging, especially when the neighbors post signs that preach tolerance and teach hate. Slogans and soundbites and supposed open-minded dialogue don't exist when "learning against learning," creating a false narrative and presenting it as the truth goes uncontested. I got labeled a bunch of different ways from the time I was 14 and neither the left or the right or the conservatives or the liberals were kind or open. Sadly, they already had drunk the kool-aid and prepared us for where we are now and all this nonsense about equality and equity and sustainability and resiliency and transparency is really we gotta destroy gia or giam to save gaim by embracing salvation by society which means we think so little, and so little of ourselves and others, that we embrace the nosferatu, who are likely spiritually so far gone that we need to reject everything they've ever been for. We're so eager to join, to virtue signal, but conversely, very unwilling to resist.
Another point I have to add is that Democrats (the Left) are quite ideological. This is not true for people on the right, unless you go to the extreme right where national socialism raises its head.
In your opinion, which network lies more about the other side: Fox News or MSNBC?
Which publication: Wall Street Journal or New York times?
Have you forgotten the mass hysteria directed at Trump while in office and now out of office?
A poll I have seen says that young Democrats will rarely befriend, date, or marry a young Republican. For a young Republican, ideology is secondary and will generally not stop them from socially associating with Democrats.
Again, unable to make an argument, you fall back to personal attacks and insults. Sasha please take note of this individual with his/her long history of personal attacks and serial harassment. It is a well known fact that the ideological socialist Left (and the Woke Left) resort to denigration, racism, gaslighting, etc. when they ideologically disagree with someone and when unable to come up with an intelligent counter-argument.
On any decent social media group, e.pierce would have been booted a long time ago.
ChiyoChan, I wasn't talking about which side is doing more name-calling. I was talking about real-world consequences of the policies put in place based on progressive ideas. The verbal insults (on both sides) are a reflection of the underlying real-world problems.
Western liberal democracy will not be shattered by Russia or China, India etc. The threat is internal to the West. The danger from internal radicals who are dominating our institutions and government is far greater than what Russia or China can present to us. Russia is on the brink of collapse and China will collapse if the west stops buying from and selling to them. Neither Russia or China are anti-capitalist. But the internal Marxists, anarchists, socialists, and communists will not stop until they bring down western civilization, by any means necessary.
"...one truly bipartisan aspect of American culture today is that neither side wants anything to do with the other, and both blame the other side wholly for our divide."
I completely disagree which is why we are on Sasha's page. In addition, your writings on here blame everyone but yourself as well.
Hey, I voted for Clinton once, Dubya twice, and McCain and Mittens - and I fucked up. They all gave us the government leviathan - both parties - which has been weaponized against us. If we can agree on that we have something to build upon; focus on uniting around our bill of rights which is under deep threat.
Regardless of the warts everyone uses against Trump - and they have spent seven years tearing him down to no avail except stealing his election - he did a great job overall. His 1st-point-of-sale-tarrifs-in-Asia were masterful; unfortunately it unleashed our own globalist assholes to unleash a sadistic response to a harsh flu which ruined us.
I watched the whole discussion and I found it interesting and rational. I think Jim you and Sasha were in agreement on most of what you discussed. Fine by me. At least you weren’t talking over each other. It felt like a “real” discussion; which is rarer and rarer these days. Not everything needs to be a cage match 😂
I used to be very liberal but got older, traveled the world, built a business, got married had kids...etc...and now find myself seeing things more and more from the conservative side. I’m always open minded and try to see things from as many sides as I can. Deep down inside I still think I’m liberal on most issues that matter (free speech, equal rights, equal justice under the law...to name a few). The old adage “if all you have is a hammer; all your problems tend to look like nails” is how I approach politics and life.
I love the early part of the exchange - I submit that most of your readers who are Trump supporters, Sasha, are subscribers who value the truth over anything else. At the moment, Trump represents truth. He's also the only one whose proven himself to be the champion of the values that the vast majority of the rest of the nation hold dear. Here's the thing: those values are available to all, they don't exclude by design, whereas the values of the left exclude all who aren't compliant.
Also, I am happy to engage with anyone who will also do so in good faith. If I know that the other guy already has judged me to be <insert your -ist, here>, there's no point. Folks like you, Greenwald, et al. refrain from the personal judgement.
I believe I speak for most who are like-minded, we want an America where it's okay to be a traditionalist - it's also okay to be different - as long as one or the other isn't imposed on the other. There's plenty of room for everyone.
Oh good grief…The Hill? They are so bias it’s laughable. Definitely don’t read WaPo—propaganda arm of DNC. Trump’s comment about bleach was taken completely out of context and they ran right it. Just like when he asked about hydroxychloroquine for treatment and suddenly after being a wonder drug it was outlawed to use. Now they admit it works along with zinc. But you keep reading the junk news and feel righteous. Most people know better.
One thing that never fails to fascinate me is people who are quite certain that the Washington Post has absolutely, positively accurately tabulated 30,573 lies. Are you sure it's not 30,574 (since it's an exact count and all)?
Yeah, it’s not lost on Trump supporters that he stretches the truth. The man is vain, a narcissist (as are many in positions of power) and doesn’t like to lose. Trump history was to fire back in press whenever attacked, learned from his mentor, Roy Cohn. It sucks it took a man like Trump to shake things up, but I’m very happy someone finally did. His lies I can stomach because his policies are not ones that result in my loss of personal liberty, promote cult of victimhood, or curtail of thought and speech. And that is the difference, for me. Would I like another defender of personal freedom as head of the GOP. Yes, I would. I’m interested in the health of a ‘Live and Let Live’ country above all else. Trump was a needed breath of fresh air, a validation that fly over states and the Dems deplorable de-humanization of its citizens, still matter. He still represents that. Neither party in my lifetime stood up to China (trade), until Trump. The tariffs were sorely needed and why they still remain. No wars while Trump in office either, and his approach to achieve, appalled neocons to no end. I remember Trump calling out Bush/Cheney for the folly of Iraq (and the respect I developed for Rep Barbara Lee who had it right all along)
Trump wasn’t supposed to win in ‘16. Rule changes and ballot harvesting in ‘20 made sure it didn’t happen again. And now the ‘machine’ is being mobilized again to try and continue the smear
Glad we can exchange views, coming from different sides of the same country. I’ve fallen for the trans boogie man a bit, I must admit, and trying to correct that. It was interesting watching Bill Maher this week. His wasn’t a show I could watch several years ago, and still don’t like his atheist-love, but I find his opposition to cancel culture refreshing. One guest was reporter/writer James Kirchick (wrote book on secret power of gays in DC) and basically stated that trans movement (and the many different spectrum of identities that now result) are likely to be long-term damaging to the traditional Gay & Lesbian rights movement. Basically stated that trans decision for adults is a-okay, that’s free will. But for kids, it’s no good. The example given is the boy who liked to wear dress/jewelry as a kid in past, maybe he grows out that or maybe he grows up to be homosexual, but either way he’s still a biological boy. But in todays world that same boy might have way more intervention (and social media encouraged) to ‘change sex/gender’ if he likes to play dress up. In fact, that is rewarded w/ attention and perhaps incentive to do so. But this continuing over time, equates to a smaller traditional Gay/Lesbian community and what does that mean
I have not listened to the pod cast yet, but I will. The reason is that before I voted for Trump and during the Hillary primaries, I had heard about a research project which said that Trump supporters were more like Bernie Sanders supporters than any other group. This really interested me and I wanted more detail, but didn’t find the study. So I will be listening.
I’ve always felt like the 2016 election was the year of the outsider candidate. People were sick of status quo politicians and that’s why Trump and Bernie were the leading candidates, until the DNC colluded against Bernie and got Hillary nominated. I think if Bernie had gotten the nomination that year there’s a good chance he would have won.
Omg you definitely are wrong. Bernie supporters are extreme leftists borderline fascists. No, he would not have won. He gladly took 5million from DNC to support HRC; bought him another home with the money 🤬🤬
Well, I know my sentiments are shared by many. I also have several Republicans in my family that were intrigued by Bernie as they were turned off by Trump, but they hated Hillary (for good reason) so stuck with the R’s. I was behind Bernie at first, but now that I know more about him I’m not a fan anymore.
I won’t listen to a far-left lunatic that thinks Bernie Sanders (who never had a job until past 40 then somehow got elected mayor then Senator) is someone to follow. Sanders is a true communist sucking gov money and payoffs from DNC while pretending to be for the little people. No thanks, I get enough bullshit from msm.
I will for sure listen. I subscribed in part to Sasha, because of her unique credentials to communicate and comment upon a bubble she once lived in. Plus, all the video clips are fun and informative. She is in my view, now a Truth seeker, and if I sense that virtue remains her highest aim then I hope she continues to engage with all spectrums of the political compass, and shares the thought exchage that results, with us.
I agree! Truth Seeker is a good descriptor. Sasha, I think you are in the unique position of being a bridge between sides and because of your rational and self-analytical writing, I’m interested and motivated to hear you speak with people who are think differently than I think. In a way, this type of dialog is socially and politically reparative for me. It’s good for all of us to hear civil discourse. Our society needs this civility and to be reminded that we CAN speak to those holding differing positions!
Just listened, it wasn’t left spew-age, but rather an exchange over common agreement that the Trump indictment is likely to be flimsy and weak. Hal points out misogyny of NY Times caricaturing Stormy as a ‘porn star’ (more left-approved speech) in opening of their lead article, de-humanizing too. Fascinating to learn that Stormy Daniels herself views the indictment against Trump as a witch hunt. Personally, I think Trump payoff was to bury any bad press in run up to Nov 4, 2016 (the hush $ to Daniels occurred in Oct 2016). Trump is Teflon man now, but maybe not as much at that time of his political birth, best to avoid embarrassment to Melania, or lose votes if viewed as unfaithful. That said, don’t think that it is court-provable the payoff was willful campaign violation, and perhaps why Bragg (and Feds before him) didn’t want to bring this forward. But are now doing so in response to political pressure, including resignation of a couple of Bragg lieutenants because he wouldn’t indict earlier. Sasha points out that all of the Dems crusades against Trump (access hollywood, dossier, Russia-gate, 1st and 2nd impeachments, Jan 6 and now likely this present case) — all fail to stick because ‘intent’ is never clearly proven.
Thanks. I think many on the left, right, and independent see this indictment exactly what it is...political assault on a political foe and a weaponization of our justice system.
Great discussion. Don’t believe you’re dehumanizing the democrats. Discussing facts, not people. Reminds me of friend who had t-shirts with Elizabeth Warren’s latest quote within one day.
1-Stormy was not Trumps girlfriend. 2-They didn't have a consensual relationship bc there was no relationship. 3-She asked for a pic with him on the golf course. 4-She wrote a letter in 2018 that the affair did not exist. Trump released that letter on Truth social.
For what it's worth we don't go much into progressive politics. We don't talk policy at all.
The hard Left is all about demonizing liberal democracy and capitalism. When it comes to supplying solutions to address the issues raised, the coffers of the Left is empty. They distinctly avoid engagement on matters dealing with finding alternatives. Ask a Leftist activist what solution they have for climate change, and they appear shocked that someone is expecting them to propose a solution. When pressed, they come up with some of the most asinine ideas that floats in their bubble and is taken as gospel. Prohibit fossil fuel based energy. Convert agricultural lands to forests. Stop cement, steel and aluminum production.
One of their favorite retorts is that socialism must replace capitalism in order to address all the ills. But when you ask them what is socialism and how does socialism work, invariable they are at a loss for words. Apparently they fervently believe in this socialism thing without knowing what it is. I have yet to hear a socialist coherently explain socialism and deal with its contradictions. Reminds me of religious fundamentalists who can't coherently explain their god, but fervently believe in that.
@pierce -- I am under no obligation to engage with you given your attitude and pattern of harassment. And I reserve the right to block you unilaterally. This said -
Regarding climate change, I think you are wrong that "The "left" has plenty of "solutions" to climate change." If the plan is impractical, such as to ban fossil fuels outright, then it is not a solution. If the plan is practical but only results in a 0.00001% reduction or neutralization of CO2 emissions, then it is not a solution. And if the plan is prohibitively costly then it's not a solution. I am happy the Left has come across a solution. May I ask what is it?
I will take a look at Freddie DeBoar. He seems to have an interesting substack journal. Now, after sounding out countless ideological (or revolutionary) socialist leftists, I observe that 90% of them are simple religious-like Believers, who know very little about socialism, but believe that it is the cure to all our ills. Generally neither can they explain the labour theory of value. Then there are academics who have attempted to explain how socialism works and have written "books". But they seem to be few and far in between, making no effort to educate the unwashed masses on social media.
On twitter I ran across some economics professor of a god-forbidden college who was an expert on this matter, and I asked him to explain that to me. His answer was, well from your other comments it is clear that you don't agree with LTV, so I have nothing to tell you!
As you have read the "books" and belong to the second subset, can you kindly explain socialism to me? Maybe I would take an educated liking to that.
Andrew Heaton has podcast ("Political Orphanage") interview with Freddie DeBoer that is only a few days old. Heaton let's DeBoer explain what is means to me a Marxist, including LTV, and including what socialism means to him, etc. DeBoer does a pretty nice job explaining. He also admits he has no idea what the future holds as to how us humans organize/govern ourselves, although he points out (I think correctly) that "Capitalism" at least as we have it today, is relatively new (think industrial revolution) but ultimately will go away just like every other system has throughout time. Hopefully, you can find it.
Again, unable to uphold a discussion in good faith, you fall back to personal attacks and insults. Sasha please take note of this individual with his/her long history of personal attacks and serial harassment of commenters. His belligerence was triggered when I associated Wokeism with the Left in general, which is obvious to all.
It is a well known fact that the ideological socialist Left (and the Woke Left for that matter) resort to denigration, racism, gaslighting, etc. when they ideologically disagree with someone and when unable to come up with an intelligent counter-argument.
On any decent social media group, e.pierce would have been removed a long time ago.
Last year, I heard from the son of a former professor of mine who died far too young. His son and siblings were gathered in San Diego to mark the 30th anniversary of their dad's passing. While going through his dad's correspondence, his son had come across letters between his dad - a far-left borderline socialist - and conservative colleagues and friends. He was struck by the warm banter, the queries about family and children, the obvious friendship across partisan lines. The son, in his 50s now and politically similar to his father, wondered how we lost all that - that simple human ability to listen to one another, to disagree without being disagreeable.
I told him that despite being in Air Force ROTC and fairly conservative, I had saved my correspondence with his father, and that when I was teaching a university course myself, I held his father up in my mind as a role model.
That his dad had been a mentor to me.
Reading the comments below makes me realize that the one truly bipartisan aspect of American culture today is that neither side wants anything to do with the other, and both blame the other side wholly for our divide.
We've got some work to do to repair our nation. While we fight, China builds, and if we don't get our act together we will lose this precious gift of freedom we were given by previous generations.
Good work, Sasha and Hal, and showing how Americans can disagree in a civil manner - and in so doing, inadvertently discover areas of commonality and agreement.
Thanks Jim! It helps that Hal is sort of a political outsider too so we do have common ground in that. People who are very much inside the bubble of the Left are difficult to talk to because they start melting down at the mere mention of things that challenge the official narrative. You're right, though. We have to start somewhere.
It's not just the bubble on the Left, though. Folks here on the right are saying they won't even watch because of Hal's politics, and others saying they only talk to fellow Trump supporters. We have mutually exclusive bubbles - THAT is the problem. Beijing has to love this crap ...
"Folks here on the right are saying they won't even watch because of Hal's politics, and others saying they only talk to fellow Trump supporters. We have mutually exclusive bubbles..."
That's quite the straw man you've created, there.
I’ll listen to moderates, but won’t waste my time with extreme leftists.
Nor will I - though, I'll listen to find out if my suspicions are correct.
Really? Who? I listened to the whole exchange. I'd listen, again.
I think you really are the alter-ego of the little TDS-addled tyrant, Jim Treacher.
You really can't get over him banning you for being an ass-hat, can you?
Tell you what: Subscribe to my Substack, I'll ban you too, and then he and I will have that in common.
In the meantime, would you like me to take a screen capture and circle what I'm talking about in crayon so you might understand? O r m a y b e I w i
l l t y p e r e a l s l o w l y f o r y o u ....
I appreciate the invite, but I'll respectfully decline on the advice of Mark Twain.
Geez, talk about being a real jerk...Jim T has it in spades. 😩🤦♀️
Jim, like you, I remember a time when people with different political and philosophical views could still be friends. We had an underlying commitment to common values, and we understood that most people really wanted the same things, as JFK so eloquently expressed in his American University speech. So what changed?
Back then, we hadn't yet seen what happens to America when progressivism rules all our institutions. We hadn't experienced what happens when far-left zealots try to overturn every tenet of what we thought were American values. We didn't understand that people who call themselves liberal would act like tyrannical Puritans once they got a taste of power.
Now that we have seen and experienced these things, we cannot simply go back to the way it used to be. We no longer believe that everyone wants the same things. We now understand that some people will stop at nothing to impose their vision of utopia on everyone else, by force if necessary. The mask has dropped, and we cannot unsee what we have seen.
Now we understand that these ideas cannot be accommodated; they must be defeated.
For the purpose of full-disclosure I had a very different experience, have always found any idea contrary to the the identified affiliation of the company to sometimes go hostile very quickly. Imagine being for free speech and seeing life as spiritual and opposing abortion (i raised two daughters who I unfortunately put through universities) and being against nuclear power. Thing is, was, I'd read the Club of Rome: Limits to Growth ten times when it was still a white paper. The left and right getting along was all one big act. Jesuit theater in the 70's and 80's. No difference between Reagan, Bush, Clinton and O'Barry. All monsters. And so is 76 Trombones. This whole good cop versus bad cop nonsense has been Tavistocked into us and we've lost our way. Loving one's neighbor is challenging, especially when the neighbors post signs that preach tolerance and teach hate. Slogans and soundbites and supposed open-minded dialogue don't exist when "learning against learning," creating a false narrative and presenting it as the truth goes uncontested. I got labeled a bunch of different ways from the time I was 14 and neither the left or the right or the conservatives or the liberals were kind or open. Sadly, they already had drunk the kool-aid and prepared us for where we are now and all this nonsense about equality and equity and sustainability and resiliency and transparency is really we gotta destroy gia or giam to save gaim by embracing salvation by society which means we think so little, and so little of ourselves and others, that we embrace the nosferatu, who are likely spiritually so far gone that we need to reject everything they've ever been for. We're so eager to join, to virtue signal, but conversely, very unwilling to resist.
Another point I have to add is that Democrats (the Left) are quite ideological. This is not true for people on the right, unless you go to the extreme right where national socialism raises its head.
Wrong. What is the ideology of a center-right, a center-left, or for that matter a centrist?
In your opinion, which network lies more about the other side: Fox News or MSNBC?
Which publication: Wall Street Journal or New York times?
Have you forgotten the mass hysteria directed at Trump while in office and now out of office?
A poll I have seen says that young Democrats will rarely befriend, date, or marry a young Republican. For a young Republican, ideology is secondary and will generally not stop them from socially associating with Democrats.
Again, unable to make an argument, you fall back to personal attacks and insults. Sasha please take note of this individual with his/her long history of personal attacks and serial harassment. It is a well known fact that the ideological socialist Left (and the Woke Left) resort to denigration, racism, gaslighting, etc. when they ideologically disagree with someone and when unable to come up with an intelligent counter-argument.
On any decent social media group, e.pierce would have been booted a long time ago.
ChiyoChan, I wasn't talking about which side is doing more name-calling. I was talking about real-world consequences of the policies put in place based on progressive ideas. The verbal insults (on both sides) are a reflection of the underlying real-world problems.
Western liberal democracy will not be shattered by Russia or China, India etc. The threat is internal to the West. The danger from internal radicals who are dominating our institutions and government is far greater than what Russia or China can present to us. Russia is on the brink of collapse and China will collapse if the west stops buying from and selling to them. Neither Russia or China are anti-capitalist. But the internal Marxists, anarchists, socialists, and communists will not stop until they bring down western civilization, by any means necessary.
"...one truly bipartisan aspect of American culture today is that neither side wants anything to do with the other, and both blame the other side wholly for our divide."
I completely disagree which is why we are on Sasha's page. In addition, your writings on here blame everyone but yourself as well.
Hey, I voted for Clinton once, Dubya twice, and McCain and Mittens - and I fucked up. They all gave us the government leviathan - both parties - which has been weaponized against us. If we can agree on that we have something to build upon; focus on uniting around our bill of rights which is under deep threat.
Regardless of the warts everyone uses against Trump - and they have spent seven years tearing him down to no avail except stealing his election - he did a great job overall. His 1st-point-of-sale-tarrifs-in-Asia were masterful; unfortunately it unleashed our own globalist assholes to unleash a sadistic response to a harsh flu which ruined us.
That’s a rather broad generalization consider there’s literally one commenter who says that.
Thanks Sasha. I thought it was a great discussion and we tended to agree quite a bit more than we disagreed.
Good job, Jim and Sasha!
I watched the whole discussion and I found it interesting and rational. I think Jim you and Sasha were in agreement on most of what you discussed. Fine by me. At least you weren’t talking over each other. It felt like a “real” discussion; which is rarer and rarer these days. Not everything needs to be a cage match 😂
I used to be very liberal but got older, traveled the world, built a business, got married had kids...etc...and now find myself seeing things more and more from the conservative side. I’m always open minded and try to see things from as many sides as I can. Deep down inside I still think I’m liberal on most issues that matter (free speech, equal rights, equal justice under the law...to name a few). The old adage “if all you have is a hammer; all your problems tend to look like nails” is how I approach politics and life.
Thank you both
Hi e.pierce. I am not soliciting for contributions. But thanks so much! I do have a website but I haven't been posting lately - www.halginsberg.com.
I love the early part of the exchange - I submit that most of your readers who are Trump supporters, Sasha, are subscribers who value the truth over anything else. At the moment, Trump represents truth. He's also the only one whose proven himself to be the champion of the values that the vast majority of the rest of the nation hold dear. Here's the thing: those values are available to all, they don't exclude by design, whereas the values of the left exclude all who aren't compliant.
Also, I am happy to engage with anyone who will also do so in good faith. If I know that the other guy already has judged me to be <insert your -ist, here>, there's no point. Folks like you, Greenwald, et al. refrain from the personal judgement.
I believe I speak for most who are like-minded, we want an America where it's okay to be a traditionalist - it's also okay to be different - as long as one or the other isn't imposed on the other. There's plenty of room for everyone.
👏👏👏well said
😂😂😂😂 what a ridiculous statement and utterly false
Oh good grief…The Hill? They are so bias it’s laughable. Definitely don’t read WaPo—propaganda arm of DNC. Trump’s comment about bleach was taken completely out of context and they ran right it. Just like when he asked about hydroxychloroquine for treatment and suddenly after being a wonder drug it was outlawed to use. Now they admit it works along with zinc. But you keep reading the junk news and feel righteous. Most people know better.
One thing that never fails to fascinate me is people who are quite certain that the Washington Post has absolutely, positively accurately tabulated 30,573 lies. Are you sure it's not 30,574 (since it's an exact count and all)?
Birtha, read this and then listen to Hal/Sasha have an adult conversation
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/13/podcasts/the-daily/steele-dossier-donald-trump-igor-danchenko.html
Yeah, it’s not lost on Trump supporters that he stretches the truth. The man is vain, a narcissist (as are many in positions of power) and doesn’t like to lose. Trump history was to fire back in press whenever attacked, learned from his mentor, Roy Cohn. It sucks it took a man like Trump to shake things up, but I’m very happy someone finally did. His lies I can stomach because his policies are not ones that result in my loss of personal liberty, promote cult of victimhood, or curtail of thought and speech. And that is the difference, for me. Would I like another defender of personal freedom as head of the GOP. Yes, I would. I’m interested in the health of a ‘Live and Let Live’ country above all else. Trump was a needed breath of fresh air, a validation that fly over states and the Dems deplorable de-humanization of its citizens, still matter. He still represents that. Neither party in my lifetime stood up to China (trade), until Trump. The tariffs were sorely needed and why they still remain. No wars while Trump in office either, and his approach to achieve, appalled neocons to no end. I remember Trump calling out Bush/Cheney for the folly of Iraq (and the respect I developed for Rep Barbara Lee who had it right all along)
Trump wasn’t supposed to win in ‘16. Rule changes and ballot harvesting in ‘20 made sure it didn’t happen again. And now the ‘machine’ is being mobilized again to try and continue the smear
Glad we can exchange views, coming from different sides of the same country. I’ve fallen for the trans boogie man a bit, I must admit, and trying to correct that. It was interesting watching Bill Maher this week. His wasn’t a show I could watch several years ago, and still don’t like his atheist-love, but I find his opposition to cancel culture refreshing. One guest was reporter/writer James Kirchick (wrote book on secret power of gays in DC) and basically stated that trans movement (and the many different spectrum of identities that now result) are likely to be long-term damaging to the traditional Gay & Lesbian rights movement. Basically stated that trans decision for adults is a-okay, that’s free will. But for kids, it’s no good. The example given is the boy who liked to wear dress/jewelry as a kid in past, maybe he grows out that or maybe he grows up to be homosexual, but either way he’s still a biological boy. But in todays world that same boy might have way more intervention (and social media encouraged) to ‘change sex/gender’ if he likes to play dress up. In fact, that is rewarded w/ attention and perhaps incentive to do so. But this continuing over time, equates to a smaller traditional Gay/Lesbian community and what does that mean
Not sure someone who says “Trump indicted, let the good times roll” is open minded and not a fanatic. Prove me wrong!!
All half dozen fair journalists are working on Twitter investigation.
I have not listened to the pod cast yet, but I will. The reason is that before I voted for Trump and during the Hillary primaries, I had heard about a research project which said that Trump supporters were more like Bernie Sanders supporters than any other group. This really interested me and I wanted more detail, but didn’t find the study. So I will be listening.
and maybe I will have a thought or two about it.
I’ve always felt like the 2016 election was the year of the outsider candidate. People were sick of status quo politicians and that’s why Trump and Bernie were the leading candidates, until the DNC colluded against Bernie and got Hillary nominated. I think if Bernie had gotten the nomination that year there’s a good chance he would have won.
Omg you definitely are wrong. Bernie supporters are extreme leftists borderline fascists. No, he would not have won. He gladly took 5million from DNC to support HRC; bought him another home with the money 🤬🤬
Well, I know my sentiments are shared by many. I also have several Republicans in my family that were intrigued by Bernie as they were turned off by Trump, but they hated Hillary (for good reason) so stuck with the R’s. I was behind Bernie at first, but now that I know more about him I’m not a fan anymore.
As a Trump supporter, I can tell you we are not in any way in agreement or resemble Bernie bros.
Agree with you ChiyoChan. Let this be a place where we don’t dehumanize each other
I won’t listen to a far-left lunatic that thinks Bernie Sanders (who never had a job until past 40 then somehow got elected mayor then Senator) is someone to follow. Sanders is a true communist sucking gov money and payoffs from DNC while pretending to be for the little people. No thanks, I get enough bullshit from msm.
I will for sure listen. I subscribed in part to Sasha, because of her unique credentials to communicate and comment upon a bubble she once lived in. Plus, all the video clips are fun and informative. She is in my view, now a Truth seeker, and if I sense that virtue remains her highest aim then I hope she continues to engage with all spectrums of the political compass, and shares the thought exchage that results, with us.
I agree! Truth Seeker is a good descriptor. Sasha, I think you are in the unique position of being a bridge between sides and because of your rational and self-analytical writing, I’m interested and motivated to hear you speak with people who are think differently than I think. In a way, this type of dialog is socially and politically reparative for me. It’s good for all of us to hear civil discourse. Our society needs this civility and to be reminded that we CAN speak to those holding differing positions!
That’s a very limited perspective
Keeps my head clear from the nonsense and fascism the left spews at every chance.
Just listened, it wasn’t left spew-age, but rather an exchange over common agreement that the Trump indictment is likely to be flimsy and weak. Hal points out misogyny of NY Times caricaturing Stormy as a ‘porn star’ (more left-approved speech) in opening of their lead article, de-humanizing too. Fascinating to learn that Stormy Daniels herself views the indictment against Trump as a witch hunt. Personally, I think Trump payoff was to bury any bad press in run up to Nov 4, 2016 (the hush $ to Daniels occurred in Oct 2016). Trump is Teflon man now, but maybe not as much at that time of his political birth, best to avoid embarrassment to Melania, or lose votes if viewed as unfaithful. That said, don’t think that it is court-provable the payoff was willful campaign violation, and perhaps why Bragg (and Feds before him) didn’t want to bring this forward. But are now doing so in response to political pressure, including resignation of a couple of Bragg lieutenants because he wouldn’t indict earlier. Sasha points out that all of the Dems crusades against Trump (access hollywood, dossier, Russia-gate, 1st and 2nd impeachments, Jan 6 and now likely this present case) — all fail to stick because ‘intent’ is never clearly proven.
Thanks. I think many on the left, right, and independent see this indictment exactly what it is...political assault on a political foe and a weaponization of our justice system.
Loved Sasha since reading and listening to her first Substack.
Thanks Sasha! I enjoyed listening.
Great discussion. Don’t believe you’re dehumanizing the democrats. Discussing facts, not people. Reminds me of friend who had t-shirts with Elizabeth Warren’s latest quote within one day.
1-Stormy was not Trumps girlfriend. 2-They didn't have a consensual relationship bc there was no relationship. 3-She asked for a pic with him on the golf course. 4-She wrote a letter in 2018 that the affair did not exist. Trump released that letter on Truth social.
I am extremely critical of the Trump prosecution.