Shoresy

South America is a long-running case study in the vulnerabilities created by collectivism. It's an old herited Spanish cultural mindset that concentrates elite authority while diffusing responsibility. Spanish colonial rule baked in top-down authority, weak individual property, elite mediation, and that set South America on a generational path where collectivism felt natural and resistance to individual ownership felt normal. When “the people” are represented abstractly by the state, power collapses upward. That makes exploitation an easy path on all levels, whether by domestic strongmen or foreign interests, because outside actors like the USA or China only need to co-opt the top layer. In contrast, places like Switzerland generally tie national survival to individual responsibility, local oversight, local guns, and fragmented power, leaving no single lever to pull. Individual ownership and accountability simply makes exploitation structurally expensive, and it's a big reason why nobody wants to fuck with Switzerland. Even in backwards places like Vietnam and Afghanistan, decentralized rule instead of blind collectivism made them essentially unconquerable.

Let's be realistic. The only thing stopping China from taking Taiwan is Taiwan. USA isn't in any position to do anything about that in any practical manner except to deny China any US interests in Taiwan by securing assets in a practical manner. It's the difference between deterrence theater and deterrence reality. And Ukraine was lost in 2014 to US interests, whether the US recognized it or not. It was lost because the country fractured internally in a way that permanently broke U.S. leverage. Everything since then has been a monumental money sink, intended or not.

And I find it wildly humorous that your party does a performative song and dance on your capital steps one day out of the calendar year supporting law enforcement, and then goes on mass media to tell Americans that it is okay to attack them the other 364 days. Leaders model behavior, and when they publicly obstruct, delegitimize, or expel a law-enforcement agency, they are teaching the public what is socially acceptable. The blood is on their hands for attempting a mini-civil war against the federal government for short-term political gains.

NATO, like all things needs to be constantly updated to get with the current times. NATO has changed a lot, and so has America.

The key point isn’t “NATO bad” or “NATO good.” It’s that static institutions in a dynamic world decay into inertia due to basic entropy. NATO appears unable to realign incentives with current American interests. Updating involvement in NATO and with allies isn’t optional; it’s mandatory. Otherwise, maintenance becomes regression by default. The institution of NATO is propped up with bureaucratic legitimacy and not actual policies that help America. A case in point is the Euro tariff policy implemented in 1968. The European Union has, for over half a century, enforced a unified tariff wall against everyone outside the bloc, including the U.S., which is a key part of NATO, while simultaneously benefiting from U.S. security guarantees through NATO. That’s not a beneficial alignment. That’s structural asymmetry since 1968.

I'd argue that NATO no longer has America's shared interests down many dimensions, socially, economically, or security-wise, especially if you define “shared interests” as aligned incentives rather than historical commitments. In fact, investing capital into NATO is without question, a path toward a regression of American power. Every dollar sent to prop up NATO's interests is money that cannot then be used for American interests to contain Russia or China, and may indirectly help prop them up through bad NATO actors, of which there are many.

NATO lets Americans feel like power is being exercised collectively rather than decisively. It scratches to itch for Americans raised to believe collectivism is an inherent good in all cases. It feels safer, more moral, more “international.” But safety and virtue don’t equal strength. National power grows when invested capital produces real global leverage, not when it preserves comforting emotional structures.

So when people say “NATO makes America great,” what they usually mean is “NATO makes America feel legitimate.” Those are not the same thing. For a nuanced person, when NATO incentives diverge far enough from America's interests, legitimacy becomes a money sink, and not a force multiplier. See German purchases of Russian petroleum for Exhibit A.

For someone who declared this a nuanced issue, you don't show it here.

I believe the USA had some kind of crisis in the 60's where Russia agreed to not colonize Cuba. USA has no such agreements elsewhere in their hemisphere.

I believe Trump is at war with china and russia and want to deny them the hemisphere.

People get hung up on Trump’s personality and miss that underneath, the worldview is blunt but legible: you don’t have to win everywhere on the globe, but you just can’t let geopolitical powerhouse rivals set up shop nearby where it permanently breaks you.

What's the verdict on the Debby spam?

Peak performative words signalling virtue:

1) Totally

2) Demonizing

3) Entire

4) Vibrant

“Totally”= an absolute word meant to shut down the conversation. It signals certainty without meaningful information.

“Demonizing” = a moral accusation that reframes valid criticism as prejudice, instantly raising the social cost of disagreement and censoring dissent.

“Entire” = a strawman amplifier. No one is accusing everyone, but the word implies that people are.

“Vibrant” = pure virtue garnish. Emotionally positive and empirically empty.

None of those words helps solve fraud, oversight failure, or incentive problems. What they do is reframe an administrative failure to a moral posture. That’s textbook performative governance. When outcomes are bad, switch to coded language that reassures the in-group you’re still “one of the good people.”

These words are ambiguous and embellishing fluff for the performative crowd. And Walz is well-versed in the lingo of vibe-rants.

I doubt people in Minnesota care about being great. Most of your political left are in a self-flagellation cult, blaming themselves for everything in a hubristic manner.

A lot of that wing treats politics as moral penance performative guilt because it's far easier than problem-solving. If you blame yourself loudly enough and you signal virtue hard enough, that replaces the real work of actually making things better. It feels humble on the outside, but it’s weirdly hubristic too.

“Everything is our fault, therefore we’re the center of history.”

It's the thinking of a feminized society. Perfomative governance, which is the easiest form to corrupt thoroughly.

Your long-running “blame white men” framework predictably ends in social paralysis. Once your society decides a single group is the moral sink for all outcomes, problem-solving stops, and ritual punishment and ritual reparations take over.

And make no mistake, Walz was a master of this performative art.

I am confused as to why people in Venezuela are celebrating and cheering, why aren't they yelling death to America. I mean didn't the US just bomb the shit out of their country? None of this makes any sense. The news media and social media have been condemning the US for its actions against Venezuela for months and now the people of the country are cheering being bombed and their President and first lady being captured and brought back to America. None of this will ever make any sense to me, just contradictions everywhere.

Yeah, it makes little sense. Almost like your media is purposefully lying to you about what to be happy or afraid of...

Maybe you should tell Democrats that making your country great is how you get elected. Stop supporting losing issues.

Cool analogy equating Venezuela to a prison. Many have fled.

There is a huge demand in the U.S. for narcotics, and someone will supply them.

Phizer.

WWI was very bad for casualties because the modern weapons killed many as they fled. The Civil War was also quite a shocker for the time.

Sad to see an entire country give up.

with its own democratically elected leaders making national decisions. 

no.

No curtain calls for Maduro. It's over.

Cuba should be left alone because it keeps people from making threads about how great top-down, central-government-run socialism is.

They had a war with Maduro. He lost. The end.

Germany is such a waste in 2025. Destroyed all their power plants, forcing them to either freeze to death or buy oil from Russia. Can't talk about anything glorifying Germany in any way whatsoever. Demographic collapse. Cultural collapse. Bureaucratic rule. No energy to support industry. What's there to love anymore besides Oktoberfest?

exploiting deep-seated national grievances

Also, nobody else gave a crap about the German people. In the world of port-o-pottys, the man who gives a shit is king.

no

Modern Democracy is just a euphemism for late-stage Roman democracy, where the government became so corrupt, and the Roman people grew so complacent with the corruption that external barbarians had to intervene to save them. America is far into this late stage, importing people who care more about America than home-grown Americans do.

This is evident with Venezuelan refugees cheering for America while actual Americans cheer for Maduro.

So, Trump is the bad type of Authoritarian, and Chavez, China, Russia, and Iran are the "good types."

The action taken by Trump is not justified.

He should have hold a diplomatic meeting with Venezuela and persuaded the country not to exporting drugs to the U.S. earnestly.

His authoritarian behavior might fuel strong anger toward the U.S. among the allied countries of Venezuela like China, Russia and Iran.

It seems to me that Trump intends strongly to transform the incumbent government of Venezuela into the U.S.- friendly new government.

So, Trump is the bad type of Authoritarian, and Chavez, China, Russia, and Iran are the "good types."

Winston Smith needs more indoctrination.

Pretty sure the war is over when you capture the king. It's just like chess.