ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
You are right. Gore did win that election but chose not to pursue the matter further before the US Supreme Court because he knew there was a majority of his political opponents on it. Another example of the “democratic deficit” in the US. The only good thing about the US constitution is that it enshrines the right to “free speech” probably more than any other state.
This story illustrates two things:
First, just how corrupt the Ukraine regime still is after 18 months of being propped up by NATO.
Second, that there are quite a few men in Ukraine who don’t swallow the crap about needing to die for the motherland and want to avoid being cannon fodder for those ruling Ukraine. Good luck to them.
No. Just because the courts are used against political opponents doesn’t mean that the charges are simply invented. Prosecutors need to find something to go on and generally can. They would be stupid to mount a case against someone unless they had some evidence that could seem credible to a jury or judge.
My point was that recourse to the law, rather than an appeal to voters, to deal with opponents was a new step in US politics, a further widening of the already wide “democratic deficit” there.
Nothing to do with conspiracy theories, only evidence of a deterioration of political democracy in the US.
”The new trend is to remove political opponents thru the legal system.”
Seems to have spread to North America too.
“ unless of course you believe that the judicial system in the US is utterly corrupt”
An item for the dossier:
https://www.npr.org/2023/08/10/1193162713/clarence-thomas-supreme-court-gifts-disclosure
The “ban” (or, rather, discouragement) only applies to new poems offered by Party members, not of course to the classics, Shelley, DH Lawrence, etc whose poems have been quoted from time to time.
For instance:
What was wrong with OZ?
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/culture/56737/swindling-the-muse
But I agree. No poetry please. We have a ban on it in the Socialist Standard as every time we have published a poem, lots of budding McGonagles sent in theirs.
The one about hairdressers seems to be a variation of the one about the professor of logic who wouldn’t get on an escalator because it said “dogs must be carried” and he didn’t have a dog with him.
I don’t think so! Actually, what we are talking about is the principle of the party in power bringing politically-motivated charges against their opponents. I know it’s difficult, perhaps it’s even impossible, to separate this principle from the Trump case since most decent-minded people can see what an obnoxious character he is and wouldn’t mind seeing him behind bars.
The “Democrats” like to think that they are occupying the moral high ground but they are not. They are down in the swamp with Trump and the rest of the professional politician who all believe that the end of holding and keeping political office justifirs the means.
Those are how the charges are presented and that’s the counter-argument but, given that politics in the US is utterly corrupt and anything goes, I don’t for one moment believe in the sincerity of the “Democrats”. They have found a stick to beat an opponent and are using it for all its worth.
Ok forget the Russia comparison (but see below) but you don’t see any parallel with the treatment of Lula and Rousseff in Brazil?
As to Navalny, the US has an almost exactly parallel case in the prosecution of the leaders of the “African People’s Socialist Party” for being foreign agents and spreading misinformation:
Those are how the charges are presented and that’s the counter-argument but, given that politics in the US is utterly corrupt and anything goes, I don’t for one moment believe in the sincerity of the “Democrats”. They have found a stick to beat an opponent and are using it for all its worth.
Ok forget the Russia comparison (but see below) but you don’t see any parallel with the treatment of Lula and Rousseff in Brazil?
As to Navalny, the US has an almost exactly parallel case in the prosecution of the leaders of the “African People’s Socialist Party” for being foreign agents and spreading misinformation:
Yes, I could be wrong. The “Democrats” strategy could be not to prevent Trump
standing for president again but to ensure that the Republicans choose him again as their candidate — who Biden can be expected to easily defeat.In any event, leaving aside the charges of sexual and financial irregularities, to charge someone with refusing to accept the result of an election is a political and politically-motivated charge. And that’s the sort of thing they do in the rest of the Americas. Look what happened to Lula and Rousseff in Brazil. Was that democratic?
I am talking about a political practice that goes against the principles of political democracy.
Ok, I know that Trump is a horrible person with obnoxious views but there’s a point of principle involved here — it is not democratic to prosecute an opposition politician with a view to maintaining the ruling party in power. As for instance in Pakistan:
Is the Biden regime trying to do anything different?
There’s also this:
https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/crisis-in-niger-west-africa-at-the-cusp-of-a-proxy-war/?amp
There are uranium mines there that supply the French nuclear power stations.
