ilmdge posted:

i found a copy of vonneguts Hocus Pocus in one of those free library box things and read it this weekend. it's an easy read and pretty typical vonnegut but maybe more political and cynical than most stuff he writes. it's got a narrator named eugene debs hartke that grew up and went into the army and vietnam, so it's set with a background of our actual history but as it goes on you see the future is set in a hypothetical history where things are really bad and sort of all too realistic, huge populations of unnecessary people in prisons and all kinds of public or private property being sold off to benefit the idle rich and whatever. fairly good book

hocus pocus has the story about the october revolution in it & its good. i always wondered if vonnegut gave it a letter grade like he did all his other books

glomper_stomper posted:

which trial? link?

also, i read michael burleigh's third reich book a few years ago and there's this part where he talks about how the freikorps were completely justified in slaughtering peasants because the communists were roaming the countryside and trying to expropriate aristocrats. then i read behemoth and apparently it was a joint political campaign between the spd and the kpd to push for legal expropriation.

the "stammheim" trial, the one where meins starved himself to death in custody to protest the treatment of the accused (assuming he wasn't murdered, although afaik that's a rumor unsupported by the people who actually worked with him). the accused attempted to enter into the record statements & evidence that West Germany was complicit in CIA war crimes in east asia to advance the argument that RAF's actions were retaliatory. although all of that turned out to be true, it's bafflingly still advanced as evidence that RAF were crazy people. they also did some monster trolls like trying to get the court to subpoena nixon.

as for a solid source i guess it's going to depend on your german or your willingness to feed something into a translation program... one of the reasons that i ludicrously decided to study that language in college was to struggle through jutta ditfurth's bio of meinhof, which is pretty bourgeois but also pretty damning to the West German courts.

burleigh, yeah... lately he spends his time saying that Winston Churchill was justified in trying to reestablish British empire after WWII because of communism, he's pretty much a softcore nazi at this point and at the forefront of Red-baiting revisionism, again pretty goddamn mysteriously since he severed ties to actual history circles over a decade ago.

cars posted:

as for a solid source i guess it's going to depend on your german or your willingness to feed something into a translation program... one of the reasons that i ludicrously decided to study that language in college was to struggle through jutta ditfurth's bio of meinhof, which is pretty bourgeois but also pretty damning to the West German courts.

Julian Assange's internet link has been intentionally severed by a state party. We have activated the appropriate contingency plans.

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) October 17, 2016

Confidential Message Ideas from Bill Ivey
February 9th, 2016


None of these ideas have been pounded by consultants; nor have the messages been injected into Nubian goats to see if the texts turn their blood green. No expert consulting here. While my thoughts are to some degree extensions of my argument in my 2012 book, Handmaking America, they should be taken as the present-day musings of a regular guy who lives in the middle of the country, talks to lots of different people and watches too much MSNBC.

My sense is that there exist three or four challenges for any presidential candidate this year. First, many regular people have real financial problems but in response have pretty much heard processed messaging from Washington-based leadership – arguments that feel old, stiff, crafted for pundits but not for the public. Second, there’s an unsettled undercurrent of fear driven by terrorist attacks. President Obama’s efforts to ease what are in many ways irrational concerns, while sincere, have fallen flat. A nuanced, believable approach to terrorism hasn’t yet been offered by anybody. Third, there is a general feeling that professional politicians are programmed, controlled by special interests, scripted by manipulative consultants, and incapable of speaking the truth using regular words and clear arguments to directly, calmly, and sincerely engage the American people. Outsider candidates like Trump who eschew talking points and teleprompters seem to satisfy this longing and this fact should be noted. And fourth, Americans are seeking inspiration, not policies. Where are we going; what does the future hold; what is the 21st-century American dream? Smart, public-purpose policies on immigration, student debt, and health care mean little if they’re not arrayed beneath a positive theme or vision that captures the American imagination while moving citizens to commitment and action.

Some possible answers to questions:



Why do you want to be president?

“I’ve always been interested in service. Even when I was in college it was important to me to find ways to help my fellow citizens. Back then I had ideas, but never dreamed of becoming a public official, certainly not president of the United States. Experiences and opportunities came along, and as First Lady and as a US Senator and as our Secretary of State I saw firsthand how public service – working with teams of citizens, experienced officials and leaders around the world…the way public service can be the arena in which ideas can help shape action. The US presidency is a tough job – I’ve looked at it up close from more angles than just about anybody – but it’s a job where I believe my ideas, my experience, my willingness to work with others can really make a difference as America rises to the challenges and promise of this century.”



Your husband was impeached during his second term. At its most fundamental his impeachment was about an inappropriate relationship with a junior staff member. He’s out campaigning for you today. What does this say about what will be your presidential leadership style?

{To me this question has been a hanging fastball for 15 years; time to swing.}


{Pause, look around the room: slow delivery, low voice}

“This is a personal matter…but I’ll comment just this once.

Marital disloyalty is a huge, huge problem. It affects millions of American homes every year; it challenges couples and spreads to infect entire families. I guarantee…guarantee, that there are people here in this room and thousands watching around the country caught up tonight in this very, very difficult situation.

Sometimes in this circumstance marriages and families come apart. {Look over at Trump, or whomever…} We can never know, and should never ask…{pause} just how others cope.

Bill and Chelsea and I worked on it together…and it was work, and it involved counseling and conversation and time. In the end it made our family stronger, and frankly the experience made me more aware of just how life and human nature can try at every turn to trip you up. And I guess I learned that if you work hard with people and move toward an important goal, even serious, serious differences can be resolved.

So today I am proud to have my husband, and my daughter, with me as I seek the presidency…

And that is all I will say about this, and if anybody in the future wants to ask again, just roll the tape from tonight…”



{The above will work because it’s warm, intimate, embracing of the everyday experience of millions, self-revelatory, and absolutely true.}



What will you do to keep us safe from ISIS and other terrorist threats?

“This is an entirely new kind of threat and I understand why Americans are worried. Now, President Obama is right in one regard…ISIS does not have aircraft carriers and bombers and nuclear weapons: this isn’t the Cold War. But it’s real and we have to take this threat very, very seriously.

We have to defeat them in the territory they claim as their own, and that means supporting allies and others who will carry the fight to ISIS on the ground and it means using superior intelligence and technology and teams of special force advisors to seek out key ISIS leaders where they operate…I saw how this can work in hunt for Bin Laden and we must…we must, continue.

Here at home the threat is different. America has always been protected by vast oceans and peaceful borders, so enemy attacks in our cities and public spaces are something new and it will take time for all Americans to understand this new threat and place new risks in perspective.

This is a job for law enforcement at every level. We know that our federal agencies and state and local police forces have become much, much better at identifying threats when they can be nipped in the planning stage. Shared intelligence remains a key, as does increased knowledge about just who is entering the country.

Americans have always risen to new challenges; terrorism here at home is a new threat. We can never be 100% safe, but by remaining alert while giving our government agencies the tools needed to track and short-circuit even rogue terrorist threats, we can restore our sense of security and protect the values of our open society.



Mr. Trump has suggested that he will “make America great again;” what is your view of America’s future?

{Slow and steady} “America faces many challenges, but those who say we are no longer great are just wrong. As Secretary of State I walked into hundreds of meetings, all over the world, and in many, many of those settings, when the American Secretary walked in all eyes turned in my direction – with expectation and hope -- because America is great…even indispensable…as the world seeks peace, justice, prosperity and equality.

And when I toured my state as a US Senator and as I have now campaigned in primaries across the country, I felt behind every handshake the quiet confidence that we are a people who can face and overcome any challenge. Together we have risen to challenges before, and we know how to seize the promise of the future and make it our own. We have done it before and we will again.




Your opponent says he’s a better deal maker; that he can stare down Xi Jinping or Putin; that he can get our adversaries to the table and negotiate new deals that will make us secure and help our economy. Can you close these deals?

“Ok, I guess sometimes it’s about staring somebody down or pounding the table or threatening… And I guess my opponent has made some deals – approval for a few more floors on a hotel project or maybe a loan extension – but international relations is not just deal making.

Russia is our adversary in the Ukraine, an untrustworthy partner in Syria, and Russia flies our astronauts to the International Space Station; China is a threat in the South China Sea, a reluctant ally in keeping North Korea in check, and a partner in the struggle against global warming.

We don’t just need threats and intimidation by itself won’t work; it’s often counterproductive. In my experience we need real diplomacy – push as hard as we can when we can advance our interests, ease up a bit to maintain areas of cooperation…It’s not like making a business deal and in the presidency of the United States hands-on experience in the complicated real world of international affairs is what it will take to make America a safer, happier place.”



You’ve been paid very significant money for speeches in front of all kinds of groups, some with issues that the presidency might in some way address. Is this a problem?

“It is really pretty amazing…I’m sure many in this room and at home are amazed…that former government leaders can be paid very well to give talks. There are actually businesses set up to make the arrangements. Usually the talk takes place at some kind of convention and while we will never fully understand their motivation, my guess is organizers feel that former officials bring prestige to an event and this makes a company or organization more important to its members or employees or clients. There’s probably also a feeling that a former Senator or Cabinet official will provide insight into issues that can’t be acquired anywhere else.

Business leaders, authors and so on also are retained to give speeches, and while I haven’t made a study of it, there seems to be at least some relationship between the position held and level of payment. Highly visible Cabinet positions like Treasury or State are more in demand than some others, and former small agency heads might only be paid a small honorarium. It’s a long, long-standing opportunity for former officials and business leaders…



Did you learn anything in your debates with Senator Sanders?

“Well, I’ve learned to my relief that good hair isn’t everything!... And I’ve been reminded that I’m not a socialist – I don’t believe the government should control everything and simply tax and tax…And I don’t think Wall Street is a “fraud…”

But I am a Progressive, and I do believe that government is a space in which Americans can do big, important things together, whether the task is national security or educational security for young citizens – it’s a place to achieve objectives that no individual and no company could accomplish alone.

And I don’t believe Wall Street is a fraud. Our markets are admired around the world and have been a powerful engine driving America’s economic success…But markets do need to be regulated, because without regulation public purposes can be pushed aside and not just some, but far too much of Wall Street flows in only one direction…to the top.”




Now {this is me again}, how about the positive, forward looking message…In Handmaking America I put forward, “You are not alone; you can live with purpose through work, family, and community, America is still a Beacon on a Hill.”

It’s tough this year, as Republicans have staked out the negative – America has lost its greatness; Barack Obama has seized (or just ruined) the country and it’s time to take it back…

I’m still attached to “You are not alone!”, but this year I like “It’s time for America to rise!” Time to rise to new challenges, rise to address the needs of young and old, rise to shape a new kind of leadership role in the world, etc., etc.

“Rise” acknowledges that something needs to be done, but it’s not about having lost our strength, influence, or capacity. Rather it is a call to action to revisit and revitalize what is and always has been right there.

In addition, RISE with the Hillary “H-arrow” logo to the right would make a nifty bumper sticker. It’s like HOPE but I think actually better…

Note for forums noobs that square brackets are still disallowed characters interpreted as mangled bbcode lol

Petrol posted:

yeah uh internet teens are allowed to get taken in by libertarianism but greenwald was already a grown ass man and a lawyer lol

true but theres no denying his political perspective has undergone a drastic change within the past five years