Such a beautiful state, but the libs and nutjiobs have ruined it, unless you're a multi-millionaire.
Posted on 04/14/2018 2:19:08 PM PDT by Rummyfan
The demographic-inevitability thesis is less credible than ever.
Last week, one of the most powerful men in America, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, endorsed as a “great read” a Medium article entitled “The Great Lesson of California in America’s New Civil War.” The article, by Peter Leyden and Ruy Teixeira, is one entry in a lengthy four-part series called “California Is the Future,” and it posits that there is “no bipartisan path forward for America.” Leyden and Teixeira believe that there are two competing economic systems, classes, and cultures, and that one has to win while the other has to lose.
In other words, they think one-party rule is the path forward. America is locked in a version of a civil war — or, more precisely, the prelude to a civil war — and civil wars are resolved by domination:
America today has many parallels to America in the 1850s or America in the 1930s. Both of those decades ended with one side definitively winning, forming a political supermajority that restructured systems going forward to solve our problems once and for all. In the 1850s, we fought the Civil War, and the Republican Party won and then dominated American politics for 50 years. In the 1930s, the Democratic Party won and dominated American politics for roughly the same amount of time.
Most of the commentary has focused on Dorsey’s tweet (he later tried to backtrack), and his tweet certainly is notable. Does it reveal Twitter’s disdain for the GOP? Why would he be so reckless as to show his cards so clearly? It reaffirmed for conservatives that America’s lines of social-media communication are in (ideological) enemy hands.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Such a beautiful state, but the libs and nutjiobs have ruined it, unless you're a multi-millionaire.
Fortunately liberals can only ruin politics and cities
They can’t ruin the weather mountains and other incredible aspects of this giant and beautiful state
Especially here in the greater Bay Area
All so cal has is the beach. It’s a desert otherwise
Here there are stunning freezing beaches. Awesome mountains and hills. Redwood and pine forests and otherwise stunning beauty
one of the most powerful men in America, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey
Oh and wine country. Napa and Sonoma. Gorgeous and they do a real nice job at the bucolic vineyards there. Rose gardens. Stately buildings
It’s world class and the French at Italians know it
And of course the toilet city of San Francisco.
I don’t think it is a national divorce, or democratic domination. I think we are looking at a bunch of very vocal squatters who are trying to do everyone out of their property. They just need to be evicted.
The article cited the fact that most of the uber-lefty crap policies are repellant to most Californians. We have a small cadre of vocal a-holes who are trying to run everything. That is not a cause for a divorce or some sort of democratic dictatorship, that is a cause to find a way to defund the vocal a-holes.
California:very pretty scenery...filthiest bipeds on the planet.
One may talk about states rights, but the war of northern aggression set a precedent and with California we can use it.
How do you say the “Lost Cause” in Spanish?
Venezuela
“How do you say the “Lost Cause” in Spanish?”
Causo Losto
All center to right candidates should run as Democrats as well and turn this attempt at one-party rule into a nonpartisan ballot. Then they’d probably try to get rid of it.
According to Google:
causa perdida
California, by itself, is the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world.
Think about that.
The lure of those to protect their wealth and assert their control is on full display.
California could easily join with Mexican Nationals and created a new Nation state.
It would be one of extraordinary wealth and virtual slave labor.
All for their greater good.
Northern California, the inland areas, and other places are more conservative.
But their votes and lives don’t matter.
See how liberals like Reconstruction!
I think you put your finger on it there. The whole one-party "progressivism from the top down" model is not really compatible with the populist "demography is destiny" model, and an attempt by the former to force the latter has created an awful mess. The underlying assumption is that the ruling elite can bring in a dependent population that will keep them in charge for fear of losing the handouts. That's a problem if your program toward that end noisily condemns inequality of wealth as theirs does.
The result is a weird neo-feudal aristocracy on top of a sea of peasants model of society, and not for the first time. It's the model that a more or less wide consensus, from Franklin and Jefferson to Voltaire and Marx, all concluded could not stand in the face of modernity. Dorsey's insistence that somehow the difference between the competing economic systems in the past (labor) and today (energy) is pertinent strikes me as rather silly by comparison. These are, in fact, two peas in the same pod.
So there seems to me to be a real stability problem in a society that celebrates equality while structuring itself through inequality. Marx called that an internal contradiction, which it is. He also said it was a pre-revolutionary situation, which it also is. I'm not sure I'd like being a high-tech Baron living in a high-security penthouse with the streets teeming with hungry proles.
That too may well pass, perhpaps sooner than anticipated (see Russia, 1917 with it citizens occupying its mansions).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.