George Takei: "When history looks back on this period, people will ask..."

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

[Baitball Blogger]

1. That's the price of living in a capitalist system.

[Silent3]

27. Oh, come on, Stalin killed 20 million of his own countrymen

This is the price of a poorly-educated public never given the tools (seldom even in the context of an otherwise-good education) to recognize and reject propaganda and insane conspiracy theories.

Yes, it might suit some capitalists to have an ignorant and malleable populace like ours, but that's not at all unique to capitalism.

[cayugafalls]

28. +1000

Well said and spot on.

A good well funded educational system would have prevented large numbers of completely ignorant people waiting to be exploited.

[jaxexpat]

40. Mr. Naive, public universal education is useless when people in power.......

don't understand or appreciate the value of knowledge. It's spiritual ultimately, this social cohabitation thing. Capitalism sees no point to universal knowledge except to maintain a competent workforce. A society whose total focus is on profit and wealth is just a hell on earth. That's where we in the USA are right now, don't you see? Reaping the rewards of a society whose values favor capital over life itself. AND it's only the beginning! The logic used to align socialistic concepts to horrible failure is, itself, toxic. Step back, take a deep breath and try not to cough. Meanwhile those within our population who choose teaching as their career of passion are usually degraded and ridiculed. Why? Because they're among the least compensated when compared to their educational investment. People even consider them losers. Capitalists WILL NOT FUND or cherish universal education EVER. We are equitably rewarded to live here.

[cayugafalls]

43. Excuse me? Name calling gets you no where with me bud.

I'm not going to argue capitalism when I was espousing educational access. We probably agree on more than you think, but you will get no discussion from me by calling me naive.

Good day.

[jaxexpat]

67. Please excuse me. I didn't, until rereading, realize the unnecessary tenor of my reply.

My sincere apologies. Alas, sometimes, passion is my burden.

[cayugafalls]

76. Sorry, I completely missed this, we are all good. ;-)

I don't know why I did not see this, perhaps I got so many replies in a short time.

Thank you so much. We definitely agree on a lot of issues.

Again sorry for my late reply, this is why I love DUers!

[stevesinpa]

29. so...

you are seriously comparing a dictator killing people for political motives to people dying for simple greed and neglect. no, our situation is directly a result of capitalism.

[Silent3]

41. Non-capitalist systems are not free from greed...

...or the drive for power and privilege.

Greed combined with intelligence would have favored a strong, competent COVID response. Hell, political competence would have favored a strong, competent COVID response too.

The far better explanation of the mess we're in now is Trump's fairly unique short-sighted desire for political advantage.

[Baitball Blogger]

30. We are talking about our fellow Americans who enable Trump.

"but also why so many of their fellow Americans didn’t seem to care."

It's about the money. They don't want to help their fellow Americans with social programs. They want it redistributed to the top, where they believe they can a better deal.

[Silent3]

44. Huge amounts of wealth have been destroyed by COVID, even if *some* rich bastards...

...temporarily benefit in the short term.

Screwing up our COVID response as we have doesn't even make sense in terms of smart, long-term capitalist thinking.

Trump could look like a hero right now if he had led a world-class successful COVID response, and would probably be sailing toward re-election. THAT would have benefited capitalists who love his low-tax, low-regulation, corporate-welfare policies far more than fucking up so badly that (barring a successful effort to steal the election) Democrats are likely to take power.

[Kid Berwyn]

63. How billionaires got $637 billion richer during the coronavirus pandemic

40 million Americans filed for unemployment during the pandemic, but billionaires saw their net worth increase by half a trillion dollars.

This isn't the first time billionaires have seen gains while others dealt with loss, and it tends to tie back to two things. First, the government disproportionately gives more aid to larger companies.

Then, when the stock market bounces back, the unequal bailouts mean that the wealthy still have money on hand to invest and thus profit, while the middle and lower classes do not.

Wealth-friendly tax laws and loopholes then keep those billionaires at the top. Knowing all of this, some are advocating for policies to help level the playing field and create change.

Source: https://www.businessinsider.com/billionaires-net-worth-increases-coronavirus-pandemic-2020-7

I’m old. I’ve seen the country change from the land where where everything good is possible to the home of money trumps peace. In my time, the greatest good has come from Democratic action.

[Silent3]

64. It's still not good long-term strategic capitalist thinking...

...nor does it prove that capitalism alone would lead to a deliberately botched COVID response (in case you haven't noticed, there are plenty of capitalist economies out there around the world doing much, MUCH better than the US with COVID).

Most of that money enriching the billionaires right now comes from huge deficit run-ups, which might have been necessary, but should have been used much, much better. It's not particularly a feature of capitalism to borrow lots of money for bad reasons or misuse borrowed funds.

We have a particular problem in this country of a particularly bad right-wing populist, supported by idiots who don't much give a damn what damage Trump does, so long as he pisses off "the libtards". COVID is particularly bad right now in countries with Trump-like leaders (Brazil) or autocratic leaders that Trump admires and wishes to emulate (Russia).

[Dustlawyer]

35. That is part of it but it mainly boils down to the Plutocrats being able to purchase our politicians

with their made to order campaign finance system as well as their control over our media by leveraging their advertising dollars. This one two punch has allowed them to cut education, have the laws that support their interests, and have propaganda spewed to the American public to displace blame and manipulate them to supporting whatever they decide they want.

Our country has been run by billionaires and corporations through the control they have over everything. Until and unless we somehow can pressure enough politicians to enact real campaign finance reform and take back the FCC and give it teeth we will be stuck fighting the symptoms of these root causes and losing.

[Silent3]

45. In non-capitalist system, however, power inequalities take form in other ways...

...which simply give a different group of people their own motivations to spew manipulative propaganda and pass laws that favor a privileged few.

Point to something that is unique to capitalism, which would almost certainly be done better in any non-capitalist system, and then this capitalism-bashing has a point. Otherwise, not so much.

[Dustlawyer]

47. Any system can and will be abused. The best we can do is fight to keep

it as fair as possible. This country as a whole did better when unions were a strong counterbalance to the power of big business. They gradually beat us down and gained more power. We need to have a correction to level the playing field.

[Silent3]

50. And that's my point.

Well-regulated capitalism can work out well for many people.

Badly-regulated anything turns into a clusterfuck.

The vast wealth capitalism creates certainly provides many people with the motive, and the power, to tilt power further and further in their favor. It's a valid concern about capitalism.

Get rid of capitalism, however, and human ambition doesn't suddenly disappear. In whatever system replaces capitalism (or better stated, in whatever system represses capitalism -- because capitalism isn't really itself a system, but a description of market circumstances), ambitious and unscrupulous people will continue to work to bend the rules in their personal favor.

Anyone who imagines that they can design a system that would somehow control those people who are both unscrupulous and ambitious, I'd ask them this: Don't you realize that's not guaranteed to work forever? And that only constant vigilance can hope to keep things in control?

If you accept that constant vigilance is necessary no matter what, and that there are no guarantees of ever-lasting success, then what's wrong with trying to regulate capitalism so that it benefits the most people?

[AlexSFCA]

61. what is "non-capitalist system"? Can you name a country as an example?

[Silent3]

66. The only examples are the ones that a lot of people seem to think "don't count"...

Last edited Thu Sep 17, 2020, 02:11 PM - Edit history (2)

...and that's former communist countries.

I do not use the terminology "non-capitalist system" to refer to specific countries. When people talk about the supposed evils of capitalism, isn't it inherent that they think a "non-capitalist system" would be better? So that's just a generic term for any system that abolishes capitalism, real or hypothetical.

Even the social democracies of the current world (that we'd do well to emulate in many ways) have large capitalist components to their economies. That's just capitalism with good regulation and progressive taxation on top of it.

China is communist in name only right now. Crony capitalism with a lack of democracy best describes China at present.

So I'm afraid the only actually-enacted examples of non-capitalist systems (so long as we aren't going too far back in history, to things like feudalism, say) are the ones plenty of people scream aren't fair comparisons: Soviet-style communism. Off the top of my head, the only current country somewhat in that mold is North Korea -- not a country worthy of emulation in any way, shape, or form.

Maybe Cuba counts too, which is nowhere near as fucked up as North Korea, and maybe even gets a thing or two right, but Cuba is still not a great place to point to and say, "Look how much better life is when you get rid of capitalism!"

Which means that when people scream that this social ill or that human rights abuse or the other colossal fuck-up of some sort is the fault of capitalism, they have only their imaginary, hypothetical non-capitalist utopias to compare to when they act as if abolishing capitalism would somehow make everything better.

It's not my burden of proof to provide examples of these non-capitalist systems which supposedly are the proof that getting rid of capitalism makes the world better. It's the anti-capitalism complainers who have that burden.

[AlexSFCA]

68. absolutely

I am not aware of any “non-capitalist” country that is doing better than capitalist countries. Of course, every single EU county, Canada, Australia, etc. are market capitalist economies. Not chrony capitalism.
Democratic Party is the party of capitalism. GOP is the party of kleptocracy and rw populism.
Read Robert Reich who advocates for saving capitalism as the most important priority and key to democracy.

[Progressive dog]

70. Right

[Heartstrings]

2. But her emails....

[Doc_Technical]

3. Capitalism works just fine,

if it is monitored and controlled by government agencies that
work for the good of the country.
It doesn't work well when public apathy allows government
agencies to be run by corporate lackeys.

[cynical_idealist]

8. agreed

And a strong education system is required to help people realize
that the world works better when we cooperate and are nice to each other.

peace


GET HIM OUT

[bdamomma]

51. +10000

nt

[PETRUS]

12. Chattel slavery worked "just fine," from certain points of view.

Personally, I don't think capitalism has ever worked "just fine."

[DSandra]

22. Capitalism works fine if it is regulated (rules based) and limited to certain sectors of society

Capitalism has no business being in healthcare, education (except through apprenticeship), and other vital functions where underperformance may be highly consequential to public health and the functioning of society, and should be highly regulated in other areas that are essential for basic living (including food and housing.)

[ArizonaLib]

32. The bottom has been falling out since Reagan's election

His treason that was left unpunished (his campaign manager making a backroom deal with Khomeini to keep the hostages until his inauguration, his ditching of the fairness doctrine, ditching Sherman antitrust, the SCOTUS rulings against finance reforms, even at the state level, and gutting the voting rights act, which was renewed unanimously. This is where we get Fox News lying to consumers, media consolidations limiting information to voters, etc. The list gets longer.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

36. Yes. A hundred years from now history books will

absolutely date the beginning of the decline and fall of America to Reagan's election.

Two things in particular are dooming this country: the continued overblown military-industrial complex, and too-low taxes on the rich.

[ArizonaLib]

56. Yes - the surprise to everyone was white males who voted for him

The bigoted right wingers taking over the AM station programming to broadcast to commuters desperate to come back from the embarrassment of Watergate. Also, tv's Nightline nightly program with Ted Koppel counting the days 'America Held Hostage'. Remember that?

[not fooled]

39. The problem is

that the capitalists always end up using the fruits of their system to purchase the government and dismantle effective regulation.

Prof. Richard Wolff argues against "regulated" capitalism ever being successful long term, for just this reason. Hard to argue with him after we've seen FDR's government turned into a bunch of lackeys for industries they are supposed to regulate.

[Silent3]

72. Does *any* human institution work out long term?

This complaint about capitalism tending toward corruption might well be true, but it's not uniquely true about capitalism.

The argument to abolish capitalism (if that's what the anti-capitalist complainers propose as a solution) carries no great weight until such people can point to a proven alternative which has some miraculous ability to resist corrupting influences, decade after decade, generation after generation.

Do you know of such an alternative?

[not fooled]

73. Just as capitalism supplanted feudalism and monarchy

it will in turn be replaced by something. We don't necessarily know or have the capacity to foresee what the next paradigm might be. I just hope whatever comes next does better by the majority of people.

Prof. Wolff has proposed employee-owned cooperatives, e.g. Mondragon in the Basque region of Spain.

Some native American societies, e.g. the Iroquois, had successful, long-term societies organized around cooperation and interdependency. [link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_Iroquois|]

I'm sure there are more examples. There have been many ways of organizing societies through human history. Some others were undoubtedly successful for their populations, but unable to withstand the motives that drive capitalism.

[Silent3]

74. If we don't know what comes next, however...

...does it make much sense to bitch about capitalism, as if it's this awful, uncontrollable evil that must be demolished right now, when you don't have a proven replacement for it?

I'm all for trying things like employee-owned cooperatives, and seeing both how well they turn out, and how applicable they are to various industries. That seems more like a variation upon capitalism, however, not a replacement for it. It's still private ownership of the means of production, but with ownership more broadly distributed, and more to employees than stock holders. How big a chunk of each company each person owns, however, is highly unlikely to be an equal share for each employee.

As for something like the Iroquois economy, it might have been stable for a long time, but (a) it was stable largely because the pace technological and societal change was very slow by modern standards, and (b) do we really know how fair and equitable it seemed to each and every member of the Iroquois society? How would we equate things like the quality of health care for all people, when no one at all got access to very advance health care, or problems like "the digital divide"?

[not fooled]

75. Capitalism in the present day

yes, it makes sense to contest the evils of rampant environmental destruction, sociopathic levels of profit-seeking, the creation of historic levels of inequality, the erosion of democracy in this nation, and the devolution of America into a corrupt plutocracy in which the vast majority of citizens live in fear of a minor catastrophe because they have no resources.

And just how long has capitalism been "successful?" I think a case can be made that in previous centuries, when natural resources and indigenous populations were new and abundant sources of exploitation, capital could be accumulated more readily, facilitating the rise of capitalism, but now that overt colonialism is shunned and many resources are reaching exhaustion or collapse, capitalism more and more turns to extracting and concentrating wealth from the citizens of the capitalist countries themselves, i.e. privatizing and profitizing the former commons. That's not exactly a long record of success, but rather an extended period of time when capital accumulation was facilitated by new frontiers of resources. Now that resource wars are on the horizon for dwindling supplies, seeking returns leads to more and more exploitative behavior.

Note that "capitalism" is not synonymous with free enterprise or individual initiative and ownership, as much as some defenders of capitalism try to conflate all of these. Instead, toxic late-stage capitalism leads to monopolies and oligarchies as the few biggest market players concentrate power and resources in fewer and fewer hands. Hardly a recipe for a nation of individual entrepreneurs.

The alternative isn't just "state ownership of the means of production" or other bogeymen trotted out by apologists for unfettered, toxic, late-state capitalism. FDR achieved a balance of sorts that enabled more equitable distribution of resources, but the capitalists chafed under even modest regulations and now have successfully reduced America to a corporate playground.

[Silent3]

77. "FDR achieved a balance of sorts"

And that's exactly my point. I said from the start that capitalism obviously requires effective regulation and oversight, and with those things, it can do quite well for a large number of people, and create a minimal safety net for all.

Of course, even under FDR, black people in the US were still getting a raw deal. But the fault there was racism, not capitalism.

Note that "capitalism" is not synonymous with free enterprise or individual initiative and ownership...

Maybe not precisely synonymous, but damn close to it (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism):

Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit. Central characteristics of capitalism include capital accumulation, competitive markets, a price system, private property and the recognition of property rights, voluntary exchange and wage labor. In a capitalist market economy, decision-making and investments are determined by every owner of wealth, property or production ability in capital and financial markets whereas prices and the distribution of goods and services are mainly determined by competition in goods and services markets.

yes, it makes sense to contest the evils of rampant environmental destruction, sociopathic levels of profit-seeking...

Of course it makes sense to do that. I've said nothing contrary to that. But capitalism is simply the current milieu in which many human failings, like greed and corruption, are playing out. Capitalism's only direct connection to such problems is that it simply makes a lot of human failings far more efficient to express.

Abandoning capitalism, and certainly just bad-mouthing capitalism without offering proven, solid solutions, does nothing to advance the cause of remedying social ills and environmental destruction.

[not fooled]

78. No, I think well regulated capitalism can work

and never said otherwise--the problems I cited with capitalism reflect destruction of what FDR accomplished, and it's been deliberate--look what happened--we're not in FDR's capitalism any more--the oligarchs took their wealth and bought out the government, destroying by now virtually all of what FDR put in place that made capitalism more equitable. That's Professor Wolff's point--that the same thing keeps happening.

But, take heart--we are headed for oligarchical fascism, faster if red don gets in another term. Then, almost all of us will be vassal serfs to a criminal autocracy and won't have to worry about whether capitalism is regulated enough.

[link:https://eand.co/why-does-trump-want-to-steal-a-country-its-the-biggest-racket-of-all-260c6bf2f35e|]

[PETRUS]

79. Interesting subthread.

My opinions are much closer to yours than they are to Silent3's, but I disagree with the statement "well regulated capitalism can work." Obviously, one has to define what it means for something to "work" (in some cases that might be self-evident, but I can't assume that applies here). When we're talking political economy, for me the criteria would include (among other things) both moral justification and ecological sustainability. I don't think capitalism in any form passes those tests (let me know if you want some elaboration on that). I gather you disagree? May I ask what you're thinking when you say "well regulated capitalism can work?"

[Silent3]

80. I suspect you're asking the other poster, but for me "work" means, and can only mean...

Last edited Mon Sep 21, 2020, 04:09 PM - Edit history (1)

...works for a time, given regulation and vigilance, and "works" as well as anything that's actually been tried that you can compare it to.

The Soviet Union, for example, produced some enormous ecological disasters - the Aral Sea, Chernobyl, etc. A lack of capitalism didn't save the environment there.

If the argument is that capitalism inevitably fails, that may well be true, but what is the proven alternative that's eternally self-sustaining, or at least longer lasting?

My gripe with people who rail against capitalism is that they don't have anything proven to be better as a replacement to offer us, and they fail to make a case the failings they attribute to capitalism aren't simply generic human failings merely being expressed through capitalism.

Ever since the pace of technological changes has picked up, governments, economies, and societies have changed faster and faster too. The only societies and human institutions which have been stable for centuries have been nearly unchanging in all ways for centuries. And just because they were stable doesn't mean they were good, either. I like antibiotics and the internet and knowing something about what the stars actually are when I look up at them -- there's no idealized golden age of the past I want to go back to.

Are there plenty of things we should try, at least on a small scale, see how they work, and then build on them if they work well? Certainly! But grousing about how evil capitalism supposedly is in the meantime doesn't get us anywhere.

[PETRUS]

81. Hey.

Sorry for the delay. I was away from DU for a couple of days. I don't mind at all that you replied to me, and I'm happy to give you a response. We're obviously coming at this from very different places, which might mean the conversation goes nowhere, but it could also make for an interesting discussion. It's a complex topic, and for that reason as well as my suspicion that we have different baseline assumptions, I don't know how to be brief. If you've moved on and no longer care to talk about this, that's fine. If you do want to continue, let me know and I'll work on putting my thoughts into writing (I can't promise that will happen quickly, though).

Thanks.

[Silent3]

82. Sure! We don't all have to discuss...

...the polls and the post office and COVID and the SCOTUS all the time, even though such things are (understandably) dominating everyone else's attention.

[PETRUS]

83. Great, thanks!

There are several things I want to cover: what I think constitutes a moral set of social arrangements, some of what I think it takes for a society to survive intact for a reasonable length of time, and why I think reconciling those two goals is difficult; why I think the moral problems of capitalism have to do with design and not individual behavior; what I think we might learn from studying other societies, and why I think it's difficult to draw firm conclusions when engaging in that exercise. I doubt that's an exhaustive list, but I haven't had time to organize my thoughts or even begin to put them into words.

In the meantime, I want to offer my reaction to one of the things you've said. In so many words, you've stated a couple of times that you're inclined to dismiss critics of capitalism because you don't think they have any proven alternatives to offer. I have some problems with that. When I read your words, I immediately thought of the "precautionary principle." In general terms, I think of that as a fundamentally conservative value (not in the way we use the term "conservative" to denote political tribes in the US - I have a "conservative" side in a general sense of the word), and it's one I respect and at least partially embrace. It factors into my thinking about climate change and ecological overshoot, for example. But for me, the precautionary principle doesn't mean "don't do anything new," it just means one should proceed with care. I think that's a reasonably healthy position to take - human history is full of unfortunate unintended consequences. But whether we're talking political economy or engineering, humankind has never limited itself to what has been done before, and I don't think we should. While I think it's not invalid as your opinion, I think it's an unrealistic expectation/demand to put on others. To me, it's either self-defeating, or a hollow attempt to defend the status quo, depending on the context. Another problem I have with your statement is that it implies that we lack information on functional alternatives to the market, and that's just not true (more on that when I post again). My last complaint about that statement is that I don't believe it is incumbent on any one critic to offer an alternative. Identifying problems is the first step in solving them, and criticism is valuable in and of itself in that regard, at least.

More to come...

Have a pleasant evening!

[Sympthsical]

4. To be fair, we don't care about a great many things

We're a fairly comfortable society created by a consumer culture that only pays attention to a handful of serious things at any given time.

America is, if anything, terribly on brand at all times.

The media talks about the 24 hour news cycle. And what that has produced is a 24 hour attention span. The media move on to some other thing after a day or two, and then so do we.

[BComplex]

5. And my answer...it all goes back to fox propaganda.

That's what the people watch AND BELIEVE who don't care.

[KS Toronado]

17. Yes, fox noise turn their viewers into a "me me me " crowd with their brainwashing.

[NewJeffCT]

23. Yes, 25 years of Fox News and 30 years of Rush Limbaugh

have had a mass brainwashing effect on millions.

[BComplex]

26. Worst of all, they've had that effect on NEWS. The other stations treat fox like they're legitimate

and that really needs to stop. Unless they think the National Inquirer is news, they need to stop treating fox like it's for real. And the pundits need to CONTINUALLY say so.

#1 It will cause a ruckus that might help the ratings
but most importantly
#2 It will draw attention to the fact that fox is propaganda and IS NOT NEWS. They went to the supreme court to make the supreme court declare them ENTERTAINMENT, not news.

[Dukkha]

6. the most perplexing question will be

How could the worst president in history who caused all those deaths never fall below a 40% approval rating.

[cynical_idealist]

9. even 4% approval would be mind boggling

"2020 hindsight" will take on a whole new meaning...

[calimary]

10. In this case, "hindsight" could easily mean "viewed from that little opening in one's ass."

[Captaindad]

7. Please send this to everyone

https://www.betterknowaballot.com

[Hamlette]

11. They will also ask "what did you do?" which motivates me to keep working for Dems.

[bucolic_frolic]

13. People were frightened for their lives and livelihoods

We already lost the war due to bad decisions by dear leader. The rest of the world's economies are recovering, we're still dying. Our only competitive edge, until we confront the pandemic head-on, is the Fed's ability and desire to flood commerce with money. It has made the apparition of recovery.

Our competitive disadvantage vis-a-vis covid and other countries will become apparent. We will have inflation, and will consume less because of it, just like the 1970s.

Biden will inherit a mess if he is elected, and as Obama was saddled with birtherism, Biden will encounter some form of MAGA-covidism that blames him instead of Trump - because you know 'her emails', denial of reality, and invention of new ones such as QAnon.

[Harker]

14. Eloi and Morlocks. n/t

[FailureToCommunicate]

38. +1

[VladmireTrumpkins]

15. Thoughtful people will look back and say..

what the fuck were those assholes thinking!

[C Moon]

16. Just today I saw someone (an actual aquaintance, and not just a digital friend)...

screaming "open up already! enough is enough!" He had his reasons, but was just being selfish.
Yeah, open up with an out of control virus, and now the flu.
Those are going to be the comments that will drop jaws decades from now.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

37. Ask him to put you in his will.

And then be obnoxiously gleeful about your imminent inheritance.

[NBachers]

18. And why did so many cheerlead for the death of more Americans?

[Faygo Kid]

19. An American treasure, if I was Prez, he would get the top honor.

Yes, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. He's that important.

And I also believe it's a crime that The Smothers Brothers never got the Mark Twain Prize. They made a huge difference in our lives, and were funny as hell, too.

[ancianita]

20. I share NO responsibility with the 63 million Americans who voted for THE failed president who

is PRIMARILY the one who let 200,000 Americans die.

I don't know what Takei means by "so many of their fellow Americans didn't seem to care." Those who don't care are Trump supporters.

I am not in the number who "don't care." I belong to the 80% of Americans who've been suffering taxation without representation about COVID and 100 other things gone wrong, and who've not had their voices heard except by national polls.

We've been fighting to win, and we're going to be on the right side of American history from this period. And the "we" who he implicates should never let any telling of this period ignore that.

[Rhiannon12866]

21. Twitter reply:

Link to tweet

[RVN VET71]

60. Point well made. Points well made.

The atrocities committed during the last 4 years were broadcast to the American people. The information was there.

But half of us chose to look the other way and pretend either it wasn't happening or it was "fake news" -- and they were massaged into accepting the lies of Trump and his mouthpieces because it gave them a prettier story. Covid-19? Nah, it's like the flu and will go away -- if it exists at all, yuk, yuk. Kids in cages? Nah, it's like an upper class summer camp, just like that cutie pie Ms. Ingraham said. Forced hysterectomies? First of all it wouldn't've happened if these women had not tried to sneak into America probably as drug mule prostitutes! Second of all, it's all lies and it never happened. Third of all, the doctor who did them was a dark skinned immigrant, if he did them, which he didn't. Yes, yes, and choking deaths? I seen blacks break into stores and violently attack white people, so what are the Democrats doin' about that? Defunding the police so the same gangs can move next door to your suburban home -- or even into your suburban home!! Black men!!!

That's the mind set of nearly 50% of us, nut-shelled so you don't have to review your notes. It's why we're in serious jeopardy of losing all of the freedoms established for us by the Founders.

[cwydro]

24. Very, very true.

[Illumination]

25. They also will ask why it was that Republicans loved $ over their people & planet! They

might also wonder if Republicans could be a new discovery of an evil life form from HELL!...:

[Missn-Hitch]

31. A: Jesus is their co-insurance and Q has his hand very far up their arse.

[Cha]

33. I have the answer right now. Because the ones

who don't care are in a Cult led by a Psychotic Sociopath.

[bdamomma]

52. They

are a cult. A death cult.

[Cha]

57. Yes, they've really gone way beyond

proving just how much of a Death Cult45 they are.

[cayugafalls]

34. Same question history asked after Germany was defeated.

The answer lies in history. We should learn from it, rather than forget it happened.

Education is super important for ALL Americans. However, re-instating the Fairness Doctrine and breaking up the monopolies of media ownership would go a long way to helping ease some problems and make fixing them possible.

[VOX]

42. Let's hope there'll be an honest history recorded by sane people in a functioning democracy.

Rather than endless genuflection to Dear Leader by trumptards or like “minded” lunatics.

Vote them out, and keep them out!

[raccoon]

46. People will ask why we let such an idiot stay in power for so long. Nt

[bdamomma]

55. exactly

in other countries they run out despots and tyrants.

[warmfeet]

48. The number of deaths and

the not caring is just beginning.

George is absolutely correct, but this is just the beginning.

[colsohlibgal]

49. No Doubt

They will also wonder what was wrong with the millions who saw and hear Donald Trump and saw him as Presidential caliber. It will flabbergast folks for Centuries.

[BootinUp]

53. Exactly.nt

[Nitram]

54. And they will ask, "What were you doing to help?"

[Bucky]

58. History books will NOT ask why we let 200,000 Americans die

Because the number of dead will be closer to 300,000 by the end of the year and under the best case scenario be over 350,000 deaths by this time next year.

[MoonchildCA]

62. I expect it to be much higher.

If we don’t get a widely available vaccine until the latter half of next year, we’ll likely have close to a million by the end of next year, and if Trump is still in office, it will probably be even higher.

It’s only been around for 6 or 7 months, and was somewhat localized at first. Now that it has had time to spread throughout the states and rural communities, I fear the numbers will magnify.

[AlexSFCA]

69. History books won't ask, they'll tell exactly what and why it happened.

[Acornsouth]

59. Not really quite sure if history will last much longer....

With the west coast on fire from drought, five hurricanes in the Atlantic at one time, hurricane hitting the gulf, massive flooding, Ice sheet breaking off Antarctica causing a rise in sea levels of 10' or more, pandemic running freely killing hundreds of thousands of people, and a leader that denies all of this....How much longer do you think we can sustain this?... Our kids may be the last surviving population in this country if things don't change. That is not hyperbole, it the truth! This planet will not be able to sustain any life if we continue to pollute it and destroy our environment … It's just very sad!

[Azathoth]

65. Same reason people didn't care initially about AIDS victims

Conservatism exists because there is, and always will be, a percentage of the human population that could care less about what happens to others and only becomes interested in an issue when it affects them personally.

[BlueTsunami2018]

71. Or Piss Wig will be hailed as a great leader who single handedly ended it.

The victors write the history. I don’t think people really understand what happens if this asshole is allowed to stay in power.