Federal policy towards cities

[Centropolis]

kool maudit called the rise of the alt-right on here a few years ago. i think in the states us "LIBERALS" are still entrenched in a mode of thinking that set in during Bush II, and the rise of the neocons. accordingly, i'm not sure they are done with us as clinton and now potential cabinet picks are revealing.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

kool maudit called the rise of the alt-right on here a few years ago.

If by that you mean the rise of "right-wing nationalism-populism" in the Western World in general (though mostly Europe), then sure, that's been very visible for years. But it wasn't called "alt-right" then...

[JManc]

The "alt-right" have been around for a while. They are the knuckle-draggers on Facebook comments sections proclaiming Obama is a socialist Kenyan Muslim and either have a Blue Lives Matters, Knights Templar, American flag/ bald eagle or a photo of themselves holding or shooting a gun...or their lifted truck...as their profile pic.

[Crawford]

They've been around since "the Muslim Kenyan" was elected, and are THE political base for the Trump catastrophe, though the term itself is somewhat newer.

The term has been in wide circulation for maybe 2-3 years.

[Leo the Dog]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The term has been in wide circulation for maybe 2-3 years.

First time I heard it was from HRC a couple months ago.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by JManc

... American flag/ bald eagle or a photo of themselves holding or shooting a gun...or their lifted truck...as their profile pic.

This didn't start with Obama, though.

So... this "alt-right" has 1) white nationalism and 2) a dislike for the establishment as its two major characteristics to distinguish it from the "non-alt" right?

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog

First time I heard it was from HRC a couple months ago.

I don't understand the point of this post. Your argument is that a term doesn't exist until you personally are made aware of the term?

If you want to learn more about the rise of white supremacy/nationalism, there are a million sources out there. Here's a good one:

http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/do...about-the.html

The term has been in use since around 2010, and originated from Richard Spencer, a white supremacist and Trump insider.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by lio45

This didn't start with Obama, though.

So... this "alt-right" has 1) white nationalism and 2) a dislike for the establishment as its two major characteristics to distinguish it from the "non-alt" right?

Yes, but it's more white supremacy than white nationalism. Term was coined and promoted by white supremacist organizations.

The National Policy Institute first started using the term.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Policy_Institute

[lio45]

If those are indeed the two main poles, then the distinction isn't really that useful - the classic, non-alt "right" in the US is mostly white already, and is mostly wary of the gubment already.

Just a slightly more extreme flavor of a well-known staple brand of US politics.

[Leo the Dog]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I don't understand the point of this post. Your argument is that a term doesn't exist until you personally are made aware of the term?

If you want to learn more about the rise of white supremacy/nationalism, there are a million sources out there. Here's a good one:

http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/do...about-the.html

The term has been in use since around 2010, and originated from Richard Spencer, a white supremacist and Trump insider.

I just searched for "alt right" on SSP, the first time it appeared was Aug, 2016.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...ht#post7523814

It was a newly adopted term from HRC's campaign in Aug 2016 to smear and intimidate Trump supporters and it was unsuccessful.

That's the point.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog

I just searched for "alt right" on SSP, the first time it appeared was Aug, 2016.

So you are now claiming that a term doesn't exist unless a skyscraper website references it in advance?

Why would a skyscraper website have lots of references to political philosophies of fringe hate groups (or any political philosophies, for that matter)? If I see no SSP references to Germany's CDU (one of the most powerful and important political parties on the planet), therefore the CDU doesn't exist?

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog

It was a newly adopted term from HRC's campaign in Aug 2016 to smear and intimidate Trump supporters and it was unsuccessful.

No, you made all this up. It's a white supremacist term dating from 2010, and has been in common circulation among white supremacists and nationalists for years.

It only became a universal term once it was clear that the alt right was about to crown our next President.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Crawford

So you are now claiming that a term doesn't exist unless a skyscraper website references it in advance?

To be fair, by that point, SSP had a several-hundred-page long U.S. Political Discussion thread. If a given term or faction is indeed mainstream, you'd expect to find at least a mention of it somewhere in there.

[lio45]

Addressing your recent edit:

Originally Posted by Crawford

If I see no SSP references to Germany's CDU (one of the most powerful and important political parties on the planet), therefore the CDU doesn't exist?

Yes indeed; if a current, active German Politics Discussion Thread that's several hundred pages long on any serious German discussion forum (regardless of the main subject of that forum; no need to be urban affairs or skyscrapers, it could be a Volkswagen enthusiast board, etc.) does not contain a single mention of a given political party, it's probably a safe conclusion that it either doesn't exist or is irrelevant.

[Crawford]

Here's a primer on the Alt-Right origins and philosophy, from the National Review, only the most influential Conservative publication in the U.S.

The article predates the election and Hillary even mentioning the Alt-Right, but since we're in a post-factual era, who cares, right?

The Racist Moral Rot at the Heart of the Alt-Right

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...cism-moral-rot

[Leo the Dog]

Originally Posted by Crawford

So you are now claiming that a term doesn't exist unless a skyscraper website references it in advance?

Why would a skyscraper website have lots of references to political philosophies of fringe hate groups (or any political philosophies, for that matter)? If I see no SSP references to Germany's CDU (one of the most powerful and important political parties on the planet), therefore the CDU doesn't exist?


No, you made all this up. It's a white supremacist term dating from 2010, and has been in common circulation among white supremacists and nationalists for years.

It only became a universal term once it was clear that the alt right was about to crown our next President.

Crawford, I don't think you're following me here. Once again, I haven't "made up" anything.

Whether the term existed before isn't what's being discussed. A quick google search confirms it existed as early as 2008. What is being discussed is that none of us political junkies ever used it, nor knew of it until the HRC campaign came out in Aug 2016 in an attempt (which failed miserably) to smear Trump supporters.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog

Crawford, I don't think you're following me here. Once again, I haven't "made up" anything.

Yes, I'm following you fine, and yeah, as usual, you're making everything up as you go, trying desperately to rationalize the racism and ignorance from your disaster of a President-elect.

You claimed that a political term doesn't exist unless SSP references it, which has nothing to do with anything.

Then you claimed that a term didn't exist until Hillary Clinton mentioned it, even though that same term has been in common usage for six years, and was being referenced by the most prominent mainstream conservative publications long before the election.

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog

What is being discussed is that none of us political junkies ever used it, nor knew of it until the HRC campaign came out in Aug 2016 in an attempt to smear Trump supporters.

Again, you're lying. The most mainstream publications on earth referenced the term well before HRC even mentioned it.

Of course HRC would also mention this fact. So has every sane commentator, from the far right to far left. The other Republican candidates mentioned it, major news sources mentioned it, even Trump supporters mentioned it, all well before HRC even brought it up.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog

What is being discussed is that none of us political junkies ever used it, nor knew of it until the HRC campaign came out in Aug 2016 in an attempt (which failed miserably) to smear Trump supporters.

...Because the Alt-Right never helped elect a president before.

[Leo the Dog]

Originally Posted by mhays

...Because the Alt-Right never helped elect a president before.

Yeah all those working class people of the upper midwest that traditionally vote Democratic and voted for Obama twice, suddenly became Alt Right racists...right?

[JManc]

Originally Posted by lio45

This didn't start with Obama, though.

So... this "alt-right" has 1) white nationalism and 2) a dislike for the establishment as its two major characteristics to distinguish it from the "non-alt" right?

No, it didn't but Obama's rise to the presidency certainly brought the phenomenon further out in the open with "members" increasingly more forthcoming about their views. Social media has also provided a safe venue with little to no accountability or repercussions. Until fairly recently, these people kept their views confined to sites like Stormfront.

[muertecaza]

Anyway...

It is reported today that President-Elect Trump will nominate Elaine Chao, former labor secretary under GWB, as secretary of transportation. Among other things, Ms. Chao is or at least was a Distinguished Fellow with the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. I briefly looked through her credits with the Heritage Foundation and didn't see anything much expressing opinions about transportation policy--it mostly focused on labor issues, since that was her previous role in government. But here is a recent article from the Heritage Foundation that I think fairly expresses their views on federal transportation spending:

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...administration

...Focus the federal role on the truly interstate aspects of the transportation network, i.e. the National Highway System. Eliminate all funding for local and wasteful projects such as mass transit, local roads, and bike paths. Lift the ban on tolling the Interstate Highway System. Draw down federal gas taxes from the current 18.4 cents per gallon to 5 cents per gallon or less over 5 years. Limit Highway Trust Fund spending to revenues, reserved for maintenance of the National Highway System and reclassify this spending as discretionary. This reform will pave the way for states, localities, and the private sector to take the lead on investing in their unique infrastructure needs...

The best way for the new President to improve the nation’s infrastructure is to remove the federal government from the equation through deregulation and funding reforms, not to follow his predecessor down the path of more government spending.

If Ms. Chao's views are anything like the author of the article's views, I think we can expect significant changes in federal funding of transportation projects. I doubt that tolling interstate highways or massively reducing the gas tax will happen. And it will be interest to see how this jives with Trump's rhetoric of massive infrastructure spending.