this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2024
842 points (98.6% liked)

News

23651 readers
3472 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Did... did I just slide to a parallel universe? Do I get to meet Jerry O'Connell? What the hell is going on?!

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 29 points 3 days ago

steve bannon says something he knows will never happen because that's what populists do.

[–] TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 20 points 3 days ago

People realize that he's just a propagandist saving face by playing both sides and now playing with the short attention span and memory of the idiots on the other side, right?

[–] laserm@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago

Props to the outlet for showing the picture of Bannon in criminal court.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 158 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Bannon is an anger salesmen. Anger salesmen don't sell you somene else's anger, though -- they can't. Instead, they package up your own anger, and sell it back to you.

Bannon sees the the reaction people are habing to CEOs right now, slapping a big ol' bow on it, and selling it back to people.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 199 points 5 days ago (13 children)

"This is a 1932-type realignment, if we do this right,” Bannon explained. “Look at the demographics that got us here – black, Hispanic, white, working class, all of it. If we deliver for these people, and I mean deliver in a big way economically, then this is a coalition that could last for 50 years.”

He added that loyalty to “crony capitalism” and “tax breaks for the corporations” could “squander” a unique moment in history.

Making the economy better is how Hitler got into power too. The irony in saying this could be a 1932 style realignment is not lost on me. Trump has also said he wants to go after his political opponents and put them in prison. Also something Hitler did.

[–] timmy_dean_sausage@lemmy.world 117 points 5 days ago (12 children)

To expand on this for the unaware: Hitler came back into power for his second term in 1932. His first term, similar to trumps, was rife with turmoil and political/administrative blunders. One of the first things he did, upon returning to power, was a German version of The New Deal. They massively invested in their country's infrastructure and provided tens of millions of jobs for the young working class, who had been suffering the worst unemployment crisis in an age. For the first time in their lives, young Germans had good jobs (with great benefits) and were contributing towards building a better, cleaner, safer Germany, all facilitated by "the national socialist party". This was the part of nazi history that actually included socialism, and it's how the nazi party duped an entire generation into becoming their foot soldiers. They actually delivered substantive, positive change for the people, allowed people to get comfortable with the new status quo while they further built propaganda machines, then turned that status quo into a carrot on a stick. Young nazi's were very fearful of a backslide, so when nazi propaganda started saying all these bad people were trying to take away their newfound financial freedom, it was very easy to convince these young, relatively ignorant, working class people to "defend" the country they proudly built with their own hands.

If the GOP did a 180° on all of their economic policy, of the last 60+ years, to follow a similar story arc, I would be extremely concerned. With how down-trodden our 3 youngest generations are, the conditions for an American copy of nazi Germany couldn't be more perfect than they are right now.

I'm not a historian. I just read a book on this subject recently. Feel free to correct or add to anything I got wrong/missed!

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 32 points 5 days ago

And just like that, Steve Bannon learned about all the structures of liberal democracy that have thus far been stopping crony capitalism from squishing him like a worm on the sidewalk.

There’s a reason he isn’t hosting his little podcast in Russia or Algeria. He’s not 1% of strong enough to survive without the cushy protection afforded to white men in America who are broadly aligned with the rich people.

[–] astrsk@fedia.io 23 points 5 days ago

Thank you, this is the real lesson to take away from this, not some bass-ackwards universe shift again.

Edit: Stray thought about this again, this is why right wing populism is both effective at getting elected and devastating on countries as it shifts to fascism. Appeal to the masses while conspiring to retain power and increase wealth accumulation at the top.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] icecreamtaco@lemmy.world 28 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

I'm wondering if we're in the process of seeing the parties flip tbh. It seems like D's are becoming more conservative and R's are now trying to make systemic changes. Granted it's not a perfect flip and R-progressiveness is more like going backwards at times (abortion) but things feel weird now.

  • D: Trying to maintain (aka conserve) the status quo. Haven't been truly progressive for decades. Doesn't seem to have learned anything from losing in 2024.
  • R: Got suddenly forced into populism by Trump's surprise win and staying power. Their status quo rich politicians are all being forced out. "Anti-Elites" and big chaotic changes are now their calling cards.

If R's realize that voters will strongly support them for attacking the rich, it might happen imo.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

One key thing is that the Republican party has very much now become the party of the working class. In 2024, Kamala won those making less than $30k, and more than $100k. She won the poor and the professional class, but Trump won the working class, (and I assume) the extremely wealthy.

The Democrat's real base right now is the professional class. Those with college degrees working white collar jobs. The poor also vote more for Dems, but they vote in fewer numbers based both on their poverty and their lower than average age.

We always assumed it was the rich vs everyone else, but it need not be that way. It could easily turn out to be the rich and the working class vs. the professional class and the poor. When someone like Bannon suggests raising taxes on the "rich," he may not mean the actual ultra-wealthy, but the professional class.

And there is a form of taxation that could be implemented to fall on the professional class the hardest - targeting the tax advantages of 401ks and IRAs. That seems the most obvious target. Just raising income taxes would have to also hit the rich, but taking away a lot of the tax benefits of retirement accounts would mostly hurt the professional class, the white collar workers with bachelors and graduate degrees. The doctors, the lawyers, the engineers, the college professors, etc. The truly wealthy don't really rely on these accounts much, as they have limits on them that make them useless for storing tens of millions or more in. And the working class? Well if you have a household income of $60k, odds are pretty low you're going to be maxing out your 401k contribution.

The retirement accounts seem the most likely targets of this. The poor and working class don't usually make enough to put substantial money away in these accounts, while their asset protections are a rounding error to the wealthy. Raiding 401ks and IRAs would be a way for them to raise taxes in a way that zeros in on the Democratic electorate and hurts them the most.

We could even see a very weird political landscape where 401ks and IRAs were raided to pay for social programs like health insurance subsidies, expanded subsidies for new parents, subsidized daycare, and other social spending meant to increase birth rates. They would sell it as "raising taxes on the wealthy to give to the working class," while they would really be raising taxes on the professional class to pay for subsidies for the working class and tax cuts for the wealthy.

The white collar college educated workers are the heart of the Democrat's current power base. They are the most likely targets of any Republican tax increases "on the rich." And the easiest way to raise taxes on the professional class without also taxing the wealthy is to come after the retirement accounts.

And while some might say, "that would never happen, people wouldn't stand for it. It would be the government going back on its word, people would be infuriated!" Well, I just come back to the end of Roe v. Wade. Republicans stripped civil rights from half the country, and the electorate responded by giving them full control of government. If you can strip the civil rights from half the population, stripping retirement account benefits, which far fewer people are actually able to really take advantage of, is minor in comparison.

401k and IRA protections are just tax policy. They can be changed at any time. A law could be passed tomorrow that said, "401k accounts are being wound down. All 401k accounts must be liquidated within the next five years and transferred to regular taxable brokerage accounts. This liquidation will be taxed like any other 401k or IRA withdrawal." Then, everyone has to liquidate their accounts, and the full balance would be taxed as regular income. Not only would this give the government more long term revenue, but it would represent a massive short-term windfall. The treasury would bring in trillions as the government effectively seizes 20-30% of every 401k account in the nation. It would be a temporary windfall, but in the years of this one-time liquidation, it would likely even allow Trump to claim he actually balanced the budget. Anyone with sense would know it was a short-term stunt, but his base isn't known for having a lot of sense.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

trump's core voting bloc was those making 70,000 and up. that's not the working class.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 3 days ago (2 children)

republicans aren't for systemic change.. they're literally about the status quo.

[–] kava@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Trump took over GOP. It's not the same party as before.

Tariffs and deporting millions of people are both quite radical changes of the status quo. Illegals have been a fundamental part of our labor market for decades. GOP historically has been pro-illegal immigrants even if they've kept mostly quiet about it. It's good for business. Reagan, the GOP quasi-religious symbol, legalized millions of illegals.

Tariffs fly in the face of established free market capitalism economics. Milton Friedman would be turning in his grave. You are artificially repressing the market through strong government regulation. Again, a radical reshaping of American policy.

I think Trump actually has a short window of action for very dramatic change. For example, if he comes out and says he believes we need universal healthcare because of the corrupt elites and whatnot, I think people will rally behind him. His popularity would jump up 20 points overnight. I think his voters are actually expecting some type of radical change.

The country is hurting and when people elect populists, it means they're at the end of their ropes. Some of the class consciousness needs to be released with a pressure valve otherwise we're headed for some murky and potentially ugly consequences.

People like Bannon understand this. I think they see the way the winds are blowing and want to be in a position to benefit

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Trump took over GOP. It’s not the same party as before.

yeah it is; it's still the same party of billionaires and tax cuts

Tariffs and deporting millions of people are both quite radical changes of the status quo.

lol what? tariffs and protectionism have been the policies of the republican party and conservatism forever

. For example, if he comes out and says he believes we need universal healthcare because of the corrupt elites and whatnot

And I have a bridge to sell you

[–] kava@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

lol what? tariffs and protectionism have been the policies of the republican party and conservatism forever

since Reagan it's been the party of pro-business and free market capitalism. it wasn't until the right wind populism that slowly started during the tea party and eventually led to Trump that we started seeing protectionism

And I have a bridge to sell you

I'm not claiming he is going to do this, I'm saying I think he has an opportunity to do it. The fundamental question is what Trump has in mind. Is his goal to just extract as much money as possible for him and his friends while keeping everything else more or less the same? Or does he have a more radical vision?

Certain individuals connected with the new Trump administration (looking at Vance and his financier Peter Thiel) have some radical beliefs in a new sort of technocratic authoritarian state. If this is really their goal, I think universal healthcare is a useful stepping stone to popular support for more radical items.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RamenJunkie@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

Party of hate wants to become the progressive party.

Yeah, fuck that, fuck those people.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 55 points 4 days ago

This is a 1932-type realignment, if we do this right

Guys, he's not talking about the re-alignment in America in 1932...

[–] Veneroso@lemmy.world 26 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] GhiLA@sh.itjust.works 21 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Bannon is the cackling villain.

He knows the system is fucked. He knows he's fucked. He knows you know it's fucked and there's no reason to hide anything.

If Starscream slicked his hair back and had a thing for Johnny Cash's wardrobe, you'd have something close to Bannon.

[–] Veneroso@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I hate how accurate your besmirchment of Starscream is.

Carry on.

[–] GhiLA@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Bannon always looks at the camera with this "lmfao, can you believe this shit?" look on his face.

No, man. I can't!

I really can't!

[–] logos@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 days ago

...some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.

[–] BaumGeist@lemmy.ml 62 points 4 days ago (7 children)

This reminds me of a manifesto I was reading for a proposed proletarian-run state. Comes from early 1900s, before the world went to shit because of the rise of fadcism. Particularly a few key points from their 25-point plan stood out to me:

  1. Abolition of unearned incomes [passive income, in today's terms]. Breaking of debt (interest)-slavery.
  1. In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice of life and property that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment due to a war must be regarded as a crime against the nation. Therefore, we demand ruthless confiscation of all war profits.
  1. We demand nationalization of all businesses which have been up to the present formed into companies (trusts).
  1. We demand that the profits from wholesale trade shall be shared out.
  1. We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.
  1. We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms, the utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State, county or municipality.
  1. We demand a land reform suitable to our needs, provision of a law for the free expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility, abolition of land rent and prevention of all speculation in land.
  1. We demand struggle without consideration against those whose activity is injurious to the general interest. Common national criminals, usurers, profiteers and so forth are to be punished with death, without consideration of confession or race.

[...]

  1. The state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program, to enable every capable and industrious citizen to obtain higher education and subsequently introduction into leading positions. The plans of instruction of all educational institutions are to conform with the experiences of practical life. [...] We demand the education at the expense of the state of outstanding intellectually gifted children of poor parents without consideration of position or profession.
  1. The state is to care for the elevating national health by protecting the mother and child, by outlawing child-labor, [...]

Oops, wait, that's excerpted from The National Socialist Program

Yeah, it turns out Nazis have always been willing to use socialist rhetoric to appeal to the working class. They know what they're doing, but it's only a matter of time before what's determined to be for "the good of the workers" is coincidentally aligned with genocide and war and the greed of the ruling class..

TL;DR Nazis were always on board with taxing the rich... Until they didn't have any more competition, at which point it's back to oligarchy (and genocide, lots and lots of genocide).

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 16 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I was wondering with a few of those. Particularly number 18 is dropping fucking anvil sized hints. And knowing what to look for the rest fall neatly into line with their position against reparations and American government loans; their stance on veteran's care; and their conspiracy that corporations cost them world war 1, (this handily turned into Jews the second they needed corporate money).

So yeah I guess what I'm saying is you should definitely look the gift horse in the mouth. I learned this lesson as a kid in the 90's watching Newt Gingrich talk about how we need to do more to help poverty stricken and homeless children. I was nodding right along and then he got to his solution, workhouses. He even used an updated "Dignity of Work" line about how they'll learn useful skills and be proud of themselves.

[–] Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Except in the US it will be the corporations calling the shots. In Nazi Germany the corporations got whatever they wanted as long as they were in-line with the government. Otherwise the government would take over. In the US that wouldn't happen.

Edit: I find it rich that they wanted to outlaw child labor when they literally sent children to fight in the front lines. As young as 10 fucking years old.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] rational_lib@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago

This just in: Trump just un-pardoned Steve Bannon (SCOTUS immediately says that's allowed now).

[–] kmartburrito@lemmy.world 112 points 5 days ago (12 children)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] MaxPow3r11@lemmy.world 23 points 4 days ago

Exept Musk I assume. Or Trump. Or any other fascist fuck.

[–] JWBananas@lemmy.world 68 points 5 days ago
[–] Etterra@discuss.online 42 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Oh snap the broken clock was right for once.

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 23 points 4 days ago (1 children)

He's talking about rich Dems / libs

[–] BaumGeist@lemmy.ml 14 points 4 days ago

he's talking about The Jews

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 57 points 4 days ago

I’ll tell you wants going on. He is saying the quiet part out loud.

He is admitting that conservatives have always known what would make the country better but refused to admit it, instead have always played “dumb” by claiming their free market and deregulation approach is what they honestly believe is best for the country.

I might be reading too much into it but imo this shows that decades of democrats playing fair and true to the process is why we got here. Because selfish people realized that they can take advantage of the benefit of the doubt and just ruin the government while pretending they don’t know any better.

Pretty evil, more than I actually expected from him tbh.

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 43 points 4 days ago (3 children)

He's just talking nonsense though. There is zero chance Trump will tax the billionaires overall. They paid him off, they own him.

But possibly of he's feeling particularly pesky, he might target people he doesn't like and target only them and pretend he did something meritorious.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 45 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Rule of Acquisition #76: Every once in a while, declare peace. It confuses the hell out of your enemies.

[–] ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world 42 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (7 children)

What the fuck is going on?

edit: this question was not literal

[–] wildncrazyguy138@fedia.io 29 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It's the fiscally liberal but socially conservative strategy. Produce a coalition of christofascists, conservative leaning unions, religious minded immigrants, the subset of naturalized immigrants who want to pull the ladder up behind them, socially conservative elites, and low SES voters.

And he's right, that combination is a powerhouse of voters that would give them the south, the mountain west and most of the midwest. It leaves out a class that could easily be pigeonholed as "elites" in the big cities on the coasts - and would align our political structure more like Turkey or India's.

In other words, DT peeled off a layer of disenfranchized democratic voters that were ripe for the taking, Bannon wants to build a strategy that keeps them.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 41 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

"four months in prison and he's already starting to sound like a god damn liberal. we should ban prisons before more people are indoctrinated by the left."

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world 36 points 5 days ago
[–] Geobloke@lemm.ee 18 points 4 days ago (9 children)

I've been hate listening to his podcast. A lot of what he says would be considered pretty eft leaning. But then a lot of it is conspiracy minded. Honestly Lauren to his podcast, it's pretty unbearable, but he hates the elites as much as anyone here. It probably goes some way to understanding why trump won

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee 25 points 5 days ago

They have no principles. They believe nothing except what is politically expedient. They will say this, do the opposite, and insist their plan worked. Don’t play along, consistency is only relevant for people acting in good faith.

[–] turbulentMagma@lemm.ee 13 points 4 days ago

You can increase the taxes. The hard part is making them pay it

load more comments
view more: next ›