Not too late to save yourself: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/02/11/mass-radicalization-trump-insurrection-468746 The Problem Isn’t Just One Insurrection. It’s Mass Radicalization. Extremism is faster, more collaborative and happening at a far wider scale than it used to, says Michael Jensen. Does that mean more January 6th-type incidents in the future? This week’s impeachment trial of Donald Trump for inciting an insurrection refreshed many Americans’ sense of shock at what took place on January 6, when thousands of pro-Trump extremists surrounded the U.S. Capitol, stormed into the building, bludgeoned police officers and sent congressional leadership into hiding. But experts say the attack is hugely worrying for reasons beyond what the Senate is debating. Unlike other recent spasms of American violence, this was not the work of a lone wolf nor of a small cell of radicals. The pathway to an attempted government overthrow unfolded in public, out loud on the internet, in a process that experts call mass radicalization. The protest was likely just the tip of an iceberg; nobody knows how many Americans—tens of thousands? more?—would willingly have joined them if they’d been in Washington that day. It’s a new challenge for America, and a serious one: At times and places when large groups of people have been inspired to embrace violence, it often leads to long-term unrest, if not outright civil war. And right now, experts think, it’s happening faster than ever.
Here's an analogy and I don't think this applies to just Trumpers: Let's say you know someone and after getting to know this person you come to find out they lie a lot. And after getting to know them more, not only do they lie a lot, they also like to tell you they're someone they're not. Obviously, people's responses to this situation are going to be different from person to person, but the majority of people aren't going to have that person in their life and some people are going to call them out right to their face.
There are several factors behind the “Radicalization” of US citizens concerning politics. The result of this radicalization has both positive and negative possibilities. The following is a list of sources behind radicalization: 1. The traditional US news media - Ever since the media discovered that sensational and shocking stories increased their audience, important for maximizing revenues, the media has focused more of it’s time covering those types of stories. While such stories are relatively rare, the media realized realized the underlying component of these widely watched stories was the strong emotions it generated. After this realization, the media increasingly focused on content, such as politics and religion, that tended to draw in and keep audiences, especially when applying gaslighting techniques. 2. CNN and FOX - I list these networks separately because at least until recently, it seemed profitably was not their primary objective. Rather, CNN and FOX managements appeared to have clear goals in changing US society and politics to benefit the relatively small groups they truly represent. 3. Political parties - In their never ending effort to increase their influence which is then amplified in the media, including movies and books, the political parties do what they can to get their base to vote. Whether it is sales, convincing someone to volunteer to join the military, or vote, you must engage your audience’s emotions. In other words, create outrage that our “Enemy” did this to us and you now have an opportunity to do something about it. 4. Social media - Massively Increasing real time connectivity people with each other has the effect of amplifying the distribution of sensational events, whether completely accurate or not. More directly, as information is disseminated through social media, the most memorable parts are naturally retained, especially among those with preconceived notions. As an alternative, people accept only what fits their views and the steady stream information acts “Confirmation bias” which increases evidence in most receiver’s minds their views reflect reality. The positive aspects of radicalization: 1. Increased participation of people into politics, potentially creating a foundation for a more representative government. 2. The more people participating on a issue, the more ideas and solutions potentially generated, possibly leading to more effective legislation. 3. Accountability of our government tends to increase to the people when it becomes difficult for the government to hide their screwups. Rhetorical question: Who benefits from censorship? Who is ultimately harmed by censorship? An obvious downside of the radicalization of our population is the increased potential for civil unrest. The solution to reducing risk of radicalization becoming a national emergency involves leadership that both delivers inclusive policies and communicates effectively to most of the population. Not easy, for sure, but an necessary adaptation to the world we now live in.
Think like a crazy plutocrat. The states should be the sole tax collector, giving the feds just enough to defend the constitution or the federal gov't could just go bankrupt and we would have 50 new country states. Each state could buy their own nuclear submarine.
That would be a great plan,for democrats.Republicans not so much as they need blue state tax dollars to survive.
It should be noted that most red state economic activity come from democrat cities like Houston,Dallas,San Antonio,Atlanta,Nashville ,Memphis,Phoenix etc. Alongside considerable political and geographic divides, this year's presidential election was also notable for a vast economic divide, the scale of which was analyzed by the Brookings Institution. The rift is nothing new and it was already glaring in 2016. When Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in that election, he won 2,584 counties that generated 36% of total U.S. economic output, compared to his opponent's 472 counties that accounted for 64% of the country's aggregate economy. Even though the political outcome of this month's election is different, the economic voting chasm is still in place and it has widened. The Brookings Institution found that Joe Biden carried five more counties than Hillary Clinton with his 477 total accounting for a 70% aggregate share of U.S. GDP. This time around, Trump-voting counties, of which there were 2,497, only generated a mere 29% of total U.S. economic output. Those findings are based on unofficial results from 96% of U.S. counties with votes still outstanding in a further 110 mostly low-output counties. Biden won virtually all of the counties with the biggest economies in the country including the likes of Los Angeles (CA), New York (NY), Cook (IL), Harris (TX) and Santa Clara (CA). On the other hand, Trump was the most popular candidate in thousands of small-town and rural communities with correspondingly smaller economies. The largest were Nassau (NY), Suffolk (NY), Collins (TX) and Oklahoma (OK). Brookings also point out that Biden's counties tend to be far more diverse, educated and white-collar professional.
Red states wouldn't be able to buy Subs after replacing Democrat local governments with republican ones.
An old, (2004-2005) manipulation of statistics (Methodology not disclosed, but certainly leaves out major elements), created by author Jesse Erlbaum (Who has New York Magazine and the United Nations as clients), and reported by CNN, (A biased and discredited news source). In other words, another propaganda piece created by Leftist Organizations in an attempt to obscure the inherent superior productivity of Conservatives. An analysis of respective state budgets, including taxes, would show the whole truth. I actually did briefly review some state budgets, especially California, and found taxes and huge regulatory fines for the most minor non-compliance on business with a large proportion of revenue going towards Democrat pet projects. In Oregon, state taxes on diesel are six times the average of Red states, effectively making all roads toll roads for drivers of diesel vehicles. While Washington state does not have a personal income tax, they have high sales taxes rates, high fees on many business activities, and high real estate transaction fees. Washington state is notorious for kickback laden, unnecessary infrastructure projects with city councils illegal and or unethically over-riding public voting on certain projects, without subsequent prosecution or other remedies applied. If Conservatives actually spent some time doing research, we certainly don’t seem to hear about it. Maybe Conservatives are too busy running businesses and helping keep people employed instead of busily manipulating statistics and disseminating propaganda as those on the Left always seem to be doing.