Reading the 20th Century discussion
General
>
Welcome to The Midnight Bell (a virtual pub and general discussion thread) (2025)
Mod
https://www.google.com/search?client=...
Roman Clodia wrote: "Me too - and really loved the anti-Elon poster for Tesla, the 'swasticar' featuring Musk and his Nazi salute. Pleased to see sales of Teslas have dropped significantly.https://www.google.com/sear..."
That was brilliant! Felt like a very old school Adbusters/culture jamming move, maybe they've been reading Naomi Klein?
Alwynne wrote: "Does anyone know who made the AI Gaza video that Trump shared? I read it as a pisstake/satirical take on Trump's plans i.e. not supportive, that Trump then took as positive."That's an interesting take. I saw it on BlueSky, and all the folks whom I've seen interact with it there (who were all American) took it as T's output (that is, the output of someone on his team) since he posted it, but your take not only is very plausible, it makes sense of the tone of the video. I think things are so horrible here and there is so much disinformation and manipulation of the press, plus T's and the muskrat crew (whom one person I read calls Musk's Shitler Youth crew) that it's truly become difficult to tell what is real and what is satire, because just when you think that something has to be satire because it couldn't possibly be real, it turns out to be real. (I'm sure this is partly intentional, and where it isn't, the authoritarians are taking full advantage of what they see as happy accident.)
One reason why your comment made immediate sense to me is my vivid memory of my openly racist grandmother, who grew up working class and worked hard all her life to acquire bourgeois status and manners and, if not taste, at least a passable facsimile, was thrilled by the 1970's sitcom "All in the Family", because finally Hollywood recognized her people and gave them the respect she felt she and they deserved. She was long gone and I was in my 40's when I realized that the whole series was biting satire.
Oh, and I am loving the swasticar poster. One BlueSky contact was openly longing for some to put up on the bus stop shelters in her neighborhood. There's a Tesla Takedown protest scheduled an hour's drive from me that I wish I could attend on Saturday (prior commitment).
Mod
I've certainly seen the BDS people out leafleting (boycott, divestment, sanction) and re-energised - though conscious I'm saying that on a Amazon-owned platform!
G wrote: "Alwynne wrote: "Does anyone know who made the AI Gaza video that Trump shared? I read it as a pisstake/satirical take on Trump's plans i.e. not supportive, that Trump then took as positive."That'..."
My family loved All in the Family too, but for different reasons. My father had grown up in Baltimore and not such a different area than Queens. He got out of there and got his education. Bit his lip every time we went back.
Mod
www.theguardian.com/money/2025/feb/28...
Yes. Many of us are participating in a national “buy nothing” action today. I suppose that means I shouldn’t even be on GR, bc I’m not clear how Bezos profits from this platform, but I thought of that too late. There has been mixed guidance on shopping at locally owned businesses like the co-op where I buy my produce & groceries, but we are trying to use only cash and at least not engage with corporations in any way. I was wondering how effective this will be, but I read this morning in one of the well-researched newsletters I read that Republican leaders are still claiming their agenda is wildly popular. To preserve that narrative the are encouraging their member so Congress tonstop meeting with constituents p
G wrote: "Yes. Many of us are participating in a national “buy nothing” action today. I suppose that means I shouldn’t even be on GR, bc I’m not clear how Bezos profits from this platform, but I thought of t..."I read an article in the Guardian saying Republican politicians afraid to speak out because exposure on X etc has led to them - and their families - being targeted by fanatical Trump/Musk fans. Apparently some have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on security.
We are in a horrific situation, since these fanatics seem to have a stranglehold on the money, the platforms, and the people willing to do violence in their name. I think economic resistance is one power we can hopefully still use.
Mod
Alwynne wrote: "I read an article in the Guardian saying Republican politicians afraid to speak out because exposure on X etc has led to them - and their families - being targeted by fanatical Trump/Musk fans. Apparently some have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on security."I've seen the headline (or a similar one in a different publication) but not read the article about this. I admit to having mixed feelings, because the many of the current Republican senators were in immediate physical danger during the Trump-incited Jan 6 insurrection AND STILL VOTED TO ACQUIT Trump when he was impeached for inciting the insurrection. This is a problem they made with their own hands, and if they have to pay more steeply than they expected for that self-serving choice, I really cannot muster much sympathy. I am not saying I want them to be physically harmed, and I certainly do not want their families to be threatened, but they knew this was possible, they knew this is how would-be dictators work, they had a chance to put Trump out of office for his high crimes and misdemeanors, and most of them chose to give him a pass.
On the other hand, I don't want them to be physically harmed. Nor for their families to be. And I recognize that this kind of physical intimidation is a different order of threat than Musk promising to "primary" them next spring, or two years after that (depending on when their current terms end; for those in the UK the 100 senators' terms are staggered so that about 1/3 are up for election in every even year; a single term is 6 years). And above all, this is a very bad development for any democratic government, and is allowing our particular coup to proceed nearly unimpeded. So I am utterly horrified, even while I am unsurprised, and feel like the current crop of Republican senators brought it on themselves.
Quite of few of the senators are incredibly wealthy. My own state just regrettably elected a hedge fund billionaire to replace an honorable man who served in the Senate for 18 years (and many years before that in state government), and who always sought to do what was good for the ordinary people who make up his voters.
The hedge fund billionaire spent many millions of his own money buying his shiny new seat. He can certainly afford a few hundred thousand to protect himself, and as a West Point grad and Princeton PhD one would expect him to have sufficient intelligence and grasp of strategy to understand that if he does not stand up and defend the constitutional role of his shiny new toy, the toy will become utterly worthless very soon. So far he shows no sign of grasping that fact. He is also not responding to those of us who are pointing it out to him in phone calls and emails every day. (Well, I point it out about 3 times a week; the other days I focus on other crises.)
Bezos is awful, but to be honest, I'm far more concerned about the ways Trump is directly muzzling the press. There is an increasing migration of good journalism to Substack (including several former WPO journalists). What will happen if a billionaire captures that platform I don't know. I hope someone is thinking about that. It's not clear to me that individual endeavors on Substack will be able to mount the same kinds of extended investigative journalism that we've lost. Nor that they will be able to maintain the same kinds of professional ethics and fact-checking. But here we are.
A side note of interest: our coverage for the last 20-25 years has focused almost entirely on the horse race, not on substance. This frustrates me deeply. One of the analysts I follow on Substack is traveling in the UK at the moment, and he commented in last night's letter how news coverage he is finding there focuses on policies and issues, not on the horse race. I'm curious to hear from those of you who live there if this is a fair assessment. When travelling, one does not necessarily get a complete picture, no matter how hard one tries to.
Mod
I'd love to say that's true but UK media is unashamedly biased to the right, and has been now decades. Billionaire media owners like the Murdoch family have their own interest to serve. And the BBC as a public broadcaster was stuffed during the past 14 years with Tory supporters in both management and many - not all - journalists. Chris Mason, their political editor, is a fool. The Guardian, with no owner, is the only source I rely on.
So yes, we may get reporting on the issues, but in many cases it's prejudiced, biased, ideologically-driven and unbalanced (we have the unhinged papers too!)
It’s like Christmas everyday here in America. Today’s entertainment includes the White House list of ten productivity accomplishments and a foreign affairs smack down in the Oval office with Mr. Zelensky. I disagree that media reporting is limited. The transparency has frenzied media of all sides reporting everything.
Roman Clodia wrote: "G wrote: "...and he commented in last night's letter how news coverage he is finding there focuses on policies and issues,"I'd love to say that's true but UK media is unashamedly biased to the ri..."
Agree. I mostly go with The Guardian but dip in/out of other publications/sites from The Independent to the FT to the New Statesman to Novara Media - also ideologically driven but I understand the frameworks so can filter as necessary.
I also like El Pais in English, Wired, Politico, Salon, ProPublica. Can be useful to track various incarnations of a news piece across sites and piece things together that way.
Susan_MG wrote: "It’s like Christmas everyday here in America. Today’s entertainment includes the White House list of ten productivity accomplishments and a foreign affairs smack down in the Oval office with Mr. Ze..."Wow. I just read about the Trump/Vance meeting with Zelenskyy. What a cock up for the US. (No surprise there, with mob boss turned dictator Donnie) The death of an empire is always messy, but I'm not sure I can think of other instances in which the empire deliberately chose self-destruction.
Alwynne, thank you for mentioning Salon. I've assumed they, like Wired, were behind a paywall, but just now when I went to their site it seems not. Or maybe I haven't used up the mythical "monthly" (but really lifetime) 2 free articles. I'll also check out El Pais.
I often look at DeutscheWelle and Al-Jazeera, because as you say, it's often instructive to look at different incarnations of the same news item.
I wonder if there's a Ukrainian site where Americans can post their deepest apologies for Donnie's vile treatment.
Mod
Wow, indeed - I've just watched the video on the BBC, there's also an edited 'highlights' video on the Guardian site. I've never seen anything like that. Extraordinary. But scary that the split between the US and most of Europe is getting wider as Lindsay Graham says this shows that Ukraine is a 'bad investment' and a country with which America cannot 'do business' while European leaders post their support of Zelenskyy... I felt physically sick watching that.
Dark times ahead I fear . The most telling words, in that bombastic takedown of an elected president with more courage in his little finger than either of his two hosts , was Trumps aside that the press conference would "make good television" . Well that's alright then . So long as it gets a lot of clicks . ...
G wrote: "Susan_MG wrote: "It’s like Christmas everyday here in America. Today’s entertainment includes the White House list of ten productivity accomplishments and a foreign affairs smack down in the Oval o..."With the two articles limit, just need to keep clearing your cookies and then you can read more. I look at Al-Jazeera sometimes too. I also check out AP news and CNN online, although not all content is openly available. I think it's useful to see things from different angles.
Roman Clodia wrote: "G wrote: "Wow. I just read about the Trump/Vance meeting with Zelenskyy"Wow, indeed - I've just watched the video on the BBC, there's also an edited 'highlights' video on the Guardian site. I've ..."
It was horrific wasn't it, just so disrespectful and bullying.
Hester wrote: "Dark times ahead I fear . The most telling words, in that bombastic takedown of an elected president with more courage in his little finger than either of his two hosts , was Trumps aside that the ..."That's so depressing. Although I don't worry about Trump as much as I do Vance and Musk - almost starting to look like his minders. I wonder how far he's actually driving things. He doesn't seem that savvy in general.
Mod
Like when he questioned Zelenskyy's date of the Crimean annexation, suggesting it was 2015... and then shrugged it off saying he wasn't around then. Russia's jubilant response was instant.
This is one of the (many things) I find so hard to understand: America has been so paranoid about the 'red threat' for so long, how can Trump's validation of Putin be so acceptable?
Alwynne wrote: "Roman Clodia wrote: "G wrote: "Wow. I just read about the Trump/Vance meeting with Zelenskyy"Wow, indeed - I've just watched the video on the BBC, there's also an edited 'highlights' video on the..."
This is a cross between a classic shake down and classic abuser gaslighting. I love the way Donnie is angry that (he thinks) Zelenskyy presumes to know how "we feel", while completely denying the reality that he treated Zelenskyy like a child by carrying on "diplomacy" over his head. I had an abusive father. This is EXACTLY what he did.
Unfortunately, the branch of American Christianity that worships Trump is rife with abuse that they refuse to deal with (it makes the Catholic church scandals look like family picnics by comparison), so they are conditioned to accept this as normal and healthy.
Alwynne wrote: "Hester wrote: "Dark times ahead I fear . The most telling words, in that bombastic takedown of an elected president with more courage in his little finger than either of his two hosts , was Trumps ..."After watching him sleep through part of the cabinet meeting, I am more certain than ever that he is senile, and doing what Vance and Musk tell him to do. I have thought from the beginning that they are hoping Donnie will be impeached. Vance is a despicable human being, but he's got more political skill than Donnie. On the other hand, he has nowhere near the personal popularity, so I'm not really sure how that change, if it happens, will affect the success of the coup.
Roman Clodia wrote: "Alwynne wrote: "He doesn't seem that savvy in general."Like when he questioned Zelenskyy's date of the Crimean annexation, suggesting it was 2015... and then shrugged it off saying he wasn't arou..."
I don't understand that either. I think it has to do with the rise of White Christian Nationalism. Putin plays the Christian Nationalism game, as does Orban, and the adherents here are very drawn to what they see as the cultural successes of both: complete suppression of freedom of press, of LGBTQ+, of women, of POC of all types. Plus, PRRI, a research institute here that focuses on religion and politics, has done several surveys of authoritarian traits (they used questions developed post WWII that were developed to try to understand the attraction of Nazism), and they found an alarmingly high scale of authoritarian preference among Republicans as a whole, and MAGA or WCN adherents in particular.
I'm deeply disturbed and disappointed by the unwillingness of many Americans I know to seek deep understanding or engage with nuance. This may be at least partly attributable to their American evangelical Christianity (many of the people I know identify as evangelical, because I grew up in that corner of Christianity), which sees the world as divided into right and wrong. There is no room for nuance or questions in their outlook. I know I personally have spent the last 10 years grappling with how this binary outlook has affected me, and one of the reasons I left was that I always saw the world as nuance, and clearly did not fit in that system (also, thoughtful, intelligent women are not welcome in that circle unless they keep their mouths shut and pretend not to be intelligent. I am very bad at pretending anything.)
The red scares died away with the demise of the Soviet government.
Isn't it as simple as a scramble for resources? The way Putin and Trump are planning to carve up Ukraine makes me think of The Scramble for Africa . @GL I agree . It was abusive . Vance is clearly in charge and treated Zelenskyy like a naughty dog .
@Susan MG . Our press is also fragile . Local newspapers, which used to do a lot of legwork burrowing into and exposing stories , are now nothing but click bait . I wonder whether a local Manchester independent newspaper , The Mill, I follow came off substack recently because of the perceived threat you mention ?
As for policy over personality we have also drifted to the latter ..most stories that " go viral " need human interest and given social media revels in and amplifies gossip and rumour it means our politicians spend more and more time firefighting stories along the lines of he said she said .
G wrote: "Roman Clodia wrote: "Alwynne wrote: "He doesn't seem that savvy in general."Like when he questioned Zelenskyy's date of the Crimean annexation, suggesting it was 2015... and then shrugged it off ..."
It's not just WCN, Vance is an illiberal Catholic, he belongs to a branch of Catholicism that has a lot in common with WCN. It's also on the rise in America. Vance has even been denounced by various Catholic bishops for his beliefs, interpretation of Catholic doctrine. The man admires the Inquisition!
I'd be interested to know if he has any ties to Jacob Rees-Mogg. Peter Thiel, Vance's mentor also an illiberal Catholic, was partly inspired in his bizarre thinking by thoughts espoused by Rees-Mogg's father. Couldn't help wondering if Jacob Rees-Mogg's recent foray into reality TV was an attempt to acquire a popular following like Trump's.
Hester wrote: "Isn't it as simple as a scramble for resources? The way Putin and Trump are planning to carve up Ukraine makes me think of The Scramble for Africa . @GL I agree . It was abusive . Vance is clearl..."
Definitely imperialist stirrings. But I think G is considering the belief systems that are propping these up, legitimising these ambitions.
Roman Clodia wrote: "Alwynne wrote: "He doesn't seem that savvy in general."Like when he questioned Zelenskyy's date of the Crimean annexation, suggesting it was 2015... and then shrugged it off saying he wasn't arou..."
From reading Project 2025, China is now positioned as the equivalent of the Soviet Union, and 'woke' is regarded with the same level of hatred and suspicion - for 'woke' read anything the conservative to far-right/alt-right dislike - 'childless cat ladies', LGBTQ+, non-Christians - Jewish people get a pass because they play a part in prophecy in terms of the second coming - people of colour. Although again what counts as a person of colour shifts, so people who might previously be considered non-white like Nick 'your body, my choice,' Fuentes now identify as 'white' and are represented as such - although contested in some alt-right circles.
I view this as an anti-ideological, anti-values Axis, where the main determinant for alliance is to create spheres in which dominant leaders can exercise power without either external or internal interference. A pledge of non-interference in the spheres of the Alpha members is the ticket for admission.Zelenskyy and democratic Europe are threats to both Trump's regime and Putin's, because they espouse universal values that can inspire against their absolute, personal, corrupt rule. So Europe must be weakened by wrecking their economies, boosting military vulnerability to Russia and internal threats from AdF and the like.
Make the world safe for autocracy!
Ben wrote: "I view this as an anti-ideological, anti-values Axis, where the main determinant for alliance is to create spheres in which dominant leaders can exercise power without either external or internal i..."Except that there are shared "values"/internal strategies in terms of oppressing minorities from the LGBTQ+ communities onwards, weaponising religion etc
For example:
https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/...
Something Orban has also engaged in. There are a number of useful reports available via Human Rights Watch.
For Trump's camp I imagine driving a wedge between China and Russia may also be an aim.
Yes, I agree these are strategies that are used to cement alliances and to signal affinities with groups such as WCNs and other orthodox religious communities. But I think what lies at the base of these regimes is an aversion to any values that could trump fealty and submission to the leaders and could be used to question their personal rule.Values such as equal protection before the law, the Sermon on the Mount, the scientific method, the Golden Rule, etc. I'm not saying this regime is the first to elevate personal interest above universal values, but it is one of the most nihilistic.
Questions I wonder about -- not that they matter in the (nightmarish) short term.
What would it take for a conservative Christian to question Trump?
Does Xi have any "socialist values" that would cause him to question an alliance with a Trump/Putin axis, or is Xi too only about nationalism, recovery of Taiwan and a Chinese sphere of influence?
I do think many of Trump's followers imagine themselves as little Trumps who can exercise on a smaller scale the power he displays.
Ben wrote: "Yes, I agree these are strategies that are used to cement alliances and to signal affinities with groups such as WCNs and other orthodox religious communities. But I think what lies at the base of ..."When Xi started reshaping China he was represented as broadly socialist:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-5...
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/china/...
But that later shifted to a perception of his investment in/commitment to Marxist thought as a mix of idiosyncratic/pragmatic. Although that's not an uncontested viewpoint:
https://www.thewirechina.com/2024/10/...
https://consent.yahoo.com/v2/collectC...
https://asiancenturyinstitute.com/pol...
https://www.chinafile.com/reporting-o...
Mod
This is what I think too, and they're terrifying ones based on hate, authoritarianism, zero sum winner takes all, might is great etc.
Roman Clodia wrote: "Alwynne wrote: "Except that there are shared "values"This is what I think too, and they're terrifying ones based on hate, authoritarianism, zero sum winner takes all, might is great etc."
Wish I could disagree. Similar tendencies in Meloni's Italy, although she's dampened them down in government. It will be interesting to see which way she jumps now.
I suppose where I disagree is I don't consider the items on RC's list as "values". It's like the disagreement in The Republic and Gorgias about whether Justice can mean the advantage of the powerful.I really must reread Gorgias!
Mod
What would you consider them? I think strategies drop out of these so own the media so your message is the prominent one; sow division to divide and rule; put yourself both above the law and make yourself the arbitrator of what is law; accumulate power and money via corruption and minimize the power of opposers; surround yourself with sycophants who will follow orders without question.
Of course, Plato was a firm believer in a form of authoritarianism himself, even if his rationale was that people needed strong and moral leaders to counteract their democratic laziness.
The problem with the idea of Justice is that there isn't a universally agreed definition of what it means so it's easy to appropriate as the right has done with their so-called 'anti-woke' agenda where they're positioning EDI as 'unjust'.
Certainly one can disagree about what constitutes Justice. I'm just saying that it is a fundamentally different concept from that of putting one's own advantage above everything else, or saying there is nothing more to Justice than the advantage of the more powerful.I'll remove that last point, which is really a different argument altogether. My point is that when we talk about values, we are making a distinction between acting for our own interest and acting in accordance with a higher principle. Further analysis may yield contradiction in the principle, or hypocrisy in the assertion. But the assertion itself has power only because of that distinction.
Mod
Where do you think resistance will come from? I've seen some disconcerting 'thought pieces' from ex-military leaders, generals and even heads of security agencies who have all fallen foul of the current admin. Some of them have legal training, I think, and have expressed robust disagreement with what is happening - do they swear allegiance to the Constitution? In the failure of the Democrats to take a stand, is there a vacuum opening up for another leader of the opposition? Gosh, even just a few weeks ago, I never thought this would be a question I'd be asking!
Certainly Trump is looking to change our understanding of what is constitutional in the US, and he is pushing his power to the limits (and beyond) of what is legal and constitutional. But, just playing with words for a moment, while a dictator might say "if I do it, it's legal", I can't imagine anyone thinking it coherent to say "if I do it, it's just".But on to your second question. I don't know.
The Democrats have virtually no power in the Federal Government at present, except to prevent enactment of new laws by filibustering in the Senate, which allows them to prevent action in the absence of a 60 vote supermajority. This doesn't apply to certain budget-related legislation and confirmation of cabinet members or judges. The Democrats have been united against Trump and have been active where they control state governments. So I wouldn't say they've failed to take a stand. But at the moment there is no leader of the Democrats. I miss Nancy Pelosi!
Stopping Trump in Congress will require a few Republicans to vote with the Democrats. There is no sign of this yet, but the mood could change.
Also, we have not yet seen the Supreme Court rule on his actions. My guess is that 2 justices will support him regardless, three are unlikely to do so, and the other 4 will tend to support Trump but are yet untested on the types of issues he is bring up.
Then the question will be, if Congress or the Supreme Court do present resistance, then with the military, the FBI and the right wing vigilante groups on his side, will Trump resort to extra-legal measures to eliminate effective opposition? Will he use his control of the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Justice and the Us Attorneys to prosecute and imprison his opponents?
Many of the State governments controlled by Democrats are opposing him. It is likely that Trump will cut off federal money to them to threaten and punish them. Will he send in troops to take control or prosecute them?
My question is, what will it take for the American people to turn against him decisively? Without popular support, effective opposition in the current government configuration is unlikely. So good reporting of what is happening and good analysis are essential.
Ben wrote: "Certainly one can disagree about what constitutes Justice. I'm just saying that it is a fundamentally different concept from that of putting one's own advantage above everything else, or saying the..."I think all these things are quite difficult to pin down, depending on what is meant by justice or values and so on...In its broadest sense a value is simply a want or a desire. Plato was an absolutist but he believed in a system centred on a form of reason that accrued via knowledge - which although there's disagreement is often linked to a system of reincarnation.
But didn't he also think that rulers/kings 'knew' what was/wasn't justice? So that if a serf/subject did something that according to the ruler was unjust, they could be subjected to re-education of a sort, and if that failed be put to death.
Nor is the notion that might is right necessarily wrong, in the writings about rhetoric wasn't the point that notions of amorality could be set aside? So the point was not to tell the truth but to do whatever was necessary to exercise power?
I'm not sure how all that fits with Trump but it would fit with believers like Vance. They believe that their reasoning is right, unquestionable, and that therefore all means to shape the world in relation to their reasoning/belief systems is justifiable. And many of Trump's followers particularly certain Christian groups presumably feel the same way. If we take an issue like abortion. The liberal stance is people who don't agree can just not have one. But for some Christians this is unacceptable. From their perspective they are being asked to stand back and watch as millions of ensouled beings are being murdered. The attempt to win support for their position via debate has failed, so authoritarianism is the logical, next step. And that for them is achieving justice. For me it's oppression and injustice. And again if we look at trans people, for certain belief groups this is blasphemy. In their eyes God created men and women, and attempting to go against that is going against God.
This is where we have different perspectives Ben. This idea that you can appeal to reason via reporting will work for some but for people with particular belief systems Trump's excesses don't matter if they achieve a specific set of goals.
I'm not sure about the appeals to the Constitution either. Doesn't the existence of EO suggest a situation in which it's assumed the 'king/ruler' may need to step in to set things on the right path? If not the Constitution is quite problematic in any case set up by patriarchal white men, essentially capitalist as tied to the merchant class - so an administration that privileges wealth accumulation by a few not necessarily out of line with that. And also set up under a system in which slavery okay, and notions of social hierarchies, those who can be rightfully subjugated also okay.
Alwynne wrote: "But didn't he also think that rulers/kings 'knew' what was/wasn't justice? So that if a serf/subject did something that according to the ruler was unjust, they could be subjected to re-education of a sort, and if that failed be put to death.."I don't recall that being correct, but I would need to reread Gorgias to refresh my memory about Plato and justice. I don't think he, through Socrates, would have argued that an action becomes just if taken by the ruler. The power to "re-educate" and to put a citizen to death are powers exercised by the State that can be for just or for unjust purposes.
I do recall that Plato/Socrates regarded rhetoric as an art that serves power rather than truth, so it would not be contrary to my point.
Ben wrote: "Alwynne wrote: "But didn't he also think that rulers/kings 'knew' what was/wasn't justice? So that if a serf/subject did something that according to the ruler was unjust, they could be subjected to..."Weren't the kings the officers of the state?
Mod
And yes, Plato's distrust of rhetoric was why he would expell poets and musicians from his ideal republic - both poetry in its rhetorical form and music are powerful ways of moving the emotions of the people and can be used against them. This also speaks to Alwynne's point about the inadequacy of reason and analysis over emotion, faith and belief.
Mod
Roman Clodia wrote: "Btw, has anyone else been watching Have I Got News For You US? The first series was on iplayer, the current series isn't but I watched it on YouTube. Roy Wood Jr is just brilliant as are his usual ..."No, but I'll check it out. I was wondering about direct/indirect censorship of entertainment media. I know Disney and Netflix are sticking with DEI, and the heir to Disney has relatively progressive political views. So presumably no changes there soon. But find it interesting there's so much emphasis on book-banning and not that much on TV shows/films. The image of America projected by organisations like Disney and Netflix very much liberal, freewheeling. Maybe partly why the recent shifts are so jarring for people outside of America who don't normally follow politics.
Reading the 20th Century
Books mentioned in this topic
Emma (other topics)Sea Now (other topics)
Decline and Fall (other topics)
A Handful of Dust (other topics)
Brideshead Revisited: The Sacred and Profane Memories of Captain Charles Ryder (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Evelyn Waugh (other topics)Elizabeth Taylor (other topics)
Celia Fremlin (other topics)
Sylvia Townsend Warner (other topics)
Adrian McKinty (other topics)
More...
I thought he was impressive too, and so sorry about what's happening to all these workers/services.
Does anyone know who made the AI Gaza video that Trump shared? I read it as a pisstake/satirical take on Trump's plans i.e. not supportive, that Trump then took as positive.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...