Steve Bannon

[Bentaycanada]

What does everyone think of Steve Bannon?

I heard him speak in an interview a few months back and was amazed to find he was nothing like I expected.

His ideas aren’t nearly as out there as people tend to say and I’ve found I rather enjoy his interviews. He appears to give credence to some of Trumps policies in a way the man himself just can’t.

I really enjoyed this most recent one. In contrast, I found his audience to be embarrassing....

 

[MaxOfMetal]

For his work with Breitbart, Roy Moore and of course Trump, he can take a long walk off a short pier. His impact on discourse within this country will be discussed for generations.

You can have him up in Canada. We'll pay you to take him.

There's nothing "out there" about him. He's as mainstream racist as they come.

That said, I do agree with some of his positions, including a more fair taxation of the rich (as in, more) and to scale back our wars in the Middle East. That's it though. His ideology is too toxic past that.

 

[Drew]

Yeah, fuck Bannon. He openly courted the white supremacist movement at Breitbart, and Trump's candidacy is what we got out of that.

 

[Bentaycanada]

Ok, so I hear this thrown around a lot, but I’ve yet to see actual footage or evidence.

So, he’s a racist? How? I haven’t seen him make a single racist statement.

I get the Breitbart, Mooer and Trump stuff. I’m not a fan of any of those.

Did Breitbart and white supremacists really lead to Trump? If so, where were they during the 8 years Obama was in office?

I don’t follow Breitbart, just because I find it as useless as the rest of the click bait out there. Mooer and Trump just don’t fit my ideal of what a leader or representative should be. But I also don’t let my dislike of a Trump as a person affect my view of his presidency.

That’s what I’m thinking of with Bannon. I don’t like Breitbart, but the man himself is interesting. Name someone on the left (besides Sanders) that’s doing anything remotely like this.

 

[Drew]

Ok, so I hear this thrown around a lot, but I’ve yet to see actual footage or evidence.

So, he’s a racist? How? I haven’t seen him make a single racist statement.

I get the Breitbart, Mooer and Trump stuff. I’m not a fan of any of those.

Did Breitbart and white supremacists really lead to Trump? If so, where were they during the 8 years Obama was in office?

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/04/28/breitbartcom-becoming-media-arm-alt-right

Bannon was, as I'm sure you're aware, a founding member of Britbart and took over as executive chair in 2012 after Andrew Breitbart's death. That change corresponded with a increasingly open embrace of the alt right.

There's also the fact Bannon straight-up stated that Bretbart was the platform of the alt-right.

 

[Bentaycanada]

I think it’s worth remembering the “Alt-Right” don’t actually exist. It’s a made up term that has been used to varying degrees to label everyone from Trump supporters to (yes) White supremacists.

It’s sort of like “Obamacare” and “the Muslim ban”. These were not actually things, and were largely misrepresentative of what they were based on.

It’s not like Bannon hasn’t made mistakes, and Brietbart is definitely a part of that. During 2016/2017 the so-called Alt Right appeared to be growing as an influential movement (be it good or bad). Or even a reactionary movement to the college campus protests / riots from the left.
Just like with Moore, Bannon chose the wrong horse. Afterwhich he had to quickly attempt to distance himself from it. How much so is open to debate!

In this case Charlottesville was the example. But it’s not like that was a random occurance. Both the Alt Right and Antifa protest clashing parties had largely been leading up to this big confrontation. A look at the events leading up to it show a clear upsurge in violence and rhetoric prior to Charlottesville.

On that note, let me be clear. If you stood with white supremacists on that day, regardless of your leanings, you deserve what comes from it. They have no place in civilized society and they were the much larger aggressor of that event.

Back to Bannon, all that shit aside (and I get that many may not be able to just put that aside). His interviews and lectures since then have been very interesting. I have yet to find a racist statement from him. So I cannot call him that.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

So he's a garbage person who supports terrible people for his own benefit to the detriment of society as a whole, but he's kind of interesting and mildly charismatic so it's all cool?

Hard pass. Again, I'm sure if he was playing in your country's politics you might have a different opinion of him.

 

[MFB]

They exist, but they (the policies in question ) are victims of public/popular reapproriation from their original terms: Obamacare = Affordable Care Act, Muslim Ban = Travel Ban (with the subtle implication that the majority of people from these areas were Muslims), and Rebranded White Nationalism = Alt-Right = Fascists.

Don't try and say these things don't exist, the opponents of them just try to hide them under terms that more fit their narrative so they don't have to live with the consequences of what goes along with the belief in them.

 

[Bentaycanada]

Yes, he is interesting. In a time where the political status quo has been challenged, he at least has something to offer.

What’s the opposite of this? I see nor hear anything challenging from the left, outside of weak name calling and illogical gender/race politics. Which is what cost them the 2016 election, not Breitbart and white supremacists.

Give me some people that are worth listening to opposite of him, and I’ll give them the time of day.

Also Max, you keep hinting that I shouldn’t have a view on American politics because I’m not living there. But I did used to live there (NC) and can anytime I want to. I was there during Reagan, Clinton and W, so what are you getting at please?

 

[MaxOfMetal]

Also Max, you keep hinting that I shouldn’t have a view on American politics because I’m not living there. But I did used to live there (NC) and can anytime I want to. I was there during Reagan, Clinton and W, so what are you getting at please?

No, I'm saying that thanks to ideologues like Bannon the political discourse in this country has gotten incredibly toxic the last decade.

You're welcome to comment, but if you haven't been here in a while you might not understand the impact he's had. None of it too positive.

It certainly isn't like anything I've ever seen.

I'm not trying to change your world view or give you another cult of personality to follow.

Instead of marching out the same right wing bullet points, can you articulate just what Bannon has offered? More specifically the positive, and why you're so drawn to him?

As I said, I do think he makes some points on tax reform and foreign policy, but everything else he stands for is pretty reprehensible.

His stoking of anger and fear for political gain, his pushing of actual fake news, support of violent mercenary groups, his push for greater defense spending globally, opposition to the Iran Nuclear Deal, and of course his support of hard-line right wing nationalist organizations make him too problematic for me. He's an interesting figure, he had to be to get where he is, but I don't find that nearly as romantic as others seem to.

 

[Drew]

I think it’s worth remembering the “Alt-Right” don’t actually exist. It’s a made up term that has been used to varying degrees to label everyone from Trump supporters to (yes) White supremacists.

It’s sort of like “Obamacare” and “the Muslim ban”. These were not actually things, and were largely misrepresentative of what they were based on.

Ok, I agree that "alt right" is a shitty term and I personally strive to use neo-Nazi and white supremecist in its place... But, let's also not forget that Bannon was one of the people primarily responsible for pushing its adoption, that in the case of Breitbart they really WERE white supremecists, and that nitpicking over choice of language here masks the fact that Bannon was responsible for an open embrace of white nationalism on the part of Breitbart under his tenure.

So, yes, he used Breitbart to push white nationalism, he embraced Trump, pro-white hate groups embraced Trump, and Steve Bannon can fuck right off and does not deserve a platform.

 

[Bentaycanada]

Well the idea of populism that Bannon espouses is interesting. By no means does it have me on board, but it is none the less interesting. It’s also a far lot better than the sum of zero offered by his opposition.

In Bannon’s case it creates debate, which is good. Debate is healthy. Simply writing off people as “racist” or “garbage” has no value.

The fact that he is going out and engaging with people is good. It doesn’t matter if they’re with him or against him, at least he has the front to do it.

Both the left and right have lived in an echo chamber for too long. It took steps for me to listen to people like Bannon, and it definitely put be outside my comfort zone. For one, I’m glad I’ve done it.

Calling it “following a cult of personality” is unproductive. In his case there’s nothing even remotely close to that. Listening to people that you are unfamiliar with or even uncomfortable with will never change your world view. But it is better than pretending they don’t exist.

Stoking anger, fear, outrage and fake news have been on both sides since 2016. I agree that one side out weights the other on this issue, but I don’t see Bannon at the centre of it either.

You’d think after 2016 that people would want to engage again, but somehow 2 years later we’re all further apart. I for one did not pick a side in the last election and like the vast majority (I assume), I’m wading somewhere in the middle waiting for some decent compromise.

In the mean time, I will listen to anyone offering something to actually talk about, rather than the silence from the left I used to know.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

Well the idea of populism that Bannon espouses is interesting. By no means does it have me on board, but it is none the less interesting. It’s also a far lot better than the sum of zero offered by his opposition.

In Bannon’s case it creates debate, which is good. Debate is healthy. Simply writing off people as “racist” or “garbage” has no value.

The fact that he is going out and engaging with people is good. It doesn’t matter if they’re with him or against him, at least he has the front to do it.

Both the left and right have lived in an echo chamber for too long. It took steps for me to listen to people like Bannon, and it definitely put be outside my comfort zone. For one, I’m glad I’ve done it.

Calling it “following a cult of personality” is unproductive. In his case there’s nothing even remotely close to that. Listening to people that you are unfamiliar with or even uncomfortable with will never change your world view. But it is better than pretending they don’t exist.

Stoking anger, fear, outrage and fake news have been on both sides since 2016. I agree that one side out weights the other on this issue, but I don’t see Bannon at the centre of it either.

You’d think after 2016 that people would want to engage again, but somehow 2 years later we’re all further apart. I for one did not pick a side in the last election and like the vast majority (I assume), I’m wading somewhere in the middle waiting for some decent compromise.

In the mean time, I will listen to anyone offering something to actually talk about, rather than the silence from the left I used to know.

I feel like Bannon's brand of populism is tainted by his associations.

On paper it looks compelling, but I don't trust it in reality.

Pure populism is far all the people, not just those you feel worthy or fit only into certain archetypes.

I don't write him off as "racist" or "garbage", but his work with people who fit into those categories taints any message he has.

How can you be for the people while stoking what would be a new cold war?

 

[Bentaycanada]

I feel like Bannon's brand of populism is tainted by his associations.

On paper it looks compelling, but I don't trust it in reality.

Pure populism is far all the people, not just those you feel worthy or fit only into certain archetypes.

I don't write him off as "racist" or "garbage", but his work with people who fit into those categories taints any message he has.

How can you be for the people while stoking what would be a new cold war?

I can agree with this. I found that when I started looking into him I had a hard time taking it in, knowing what I disliked about him.

His message is definitely tainted by his associations, but maybe that will change with time. Don’t ask me how!

I came to watching his interviews after a nearly 2 year hiatus from politics at all.
Like most folks up here, I did take an interest in the 2016 election and it left such a bad taste in my mouth that I had to step away.

2 years on and it doesn’t look like much has changed. I personally blamed the media for a significant part of how Trump won and they haven’t changed at all. But on top of that, all the left wing media that supposedly hates him, still run stories on him constantly and offer nothing else.

If Trump or Bannon are so terrible and evil, then the opposition has to offer up something else.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

I can agree with this. I found that when I started looking into him I had a hard time taking it in, knowing what I disliked about him.

His message is definitely tainted by his associations, but maybe that will change with time. Don’t ask me how!

I came to watching his interviews after a nearly 2 year hiatus from politics at all.
Like most folks up here, I did take an interest in the 2016 election and it left such a bad taste in my mouth that I had to step away.

2 years on and it doesn’t look like much has changed. I personally blamed the media for a significant part of how Trump won and they haven’t changed at all. But on top of that, all the left wing media that supposedly hates him, still run stories on him constantly and offer nothing else.

If Trump or Bannon are so terrible and evil, then the opposition has to offer up something else.

It just seems so "comic book" to look for a singular hero to rise up and face down with singular villians like Trump or Bannon or [insert political operative here]. I don't really think of it in those terms.

Our political process is slow, by design. For me personally I look towards an overall goal and support the candidates that most help to realize that goal. A single politician, even the President, can only affect so much individual change. You need state legislators, mayors, attorney generals, governors, representatives, senators, etc. if you want change.

As far as the media, Trump is the POTUS. He can't be ignored outright. I think I'd take over reporting vs. under reporting. Though, I don't really watch network news. I just pull up Reuters, AP and sometimes The Guardian. I can't tell you the last time I watched Fox or any of the letter soup.

 

[Randy]

But on top of that, all the left wing media that supposedly hates him, still run stories on him constantly and offer nothing else.

Political media constantly run stories about the leader of the wealthiest nation in the world, which they're headquartered in? For shame!

I'm not sure what you consider an offering. Nobody left of Trump are offering alternatives to what, his policies? If you think that you're not listening very closely, which is a dangerous thing for someone dipping their toe back into politics by binge watching Steve Bannon interviews.

 

[Bentaycanada]

Political media constantly run stories about the leader of the wealthiest nation in the world, which they're headquartered in? For shame!

I'm not sure what you consider an offering. Nobody left of Trump are offering alternatives to what, his policies? If you think that you're not listening very closely, which is a dangerous thing for someone dipping their toe back into politics by binge watching Steve Bannon interviews.

Ok well outside of “Trumps racist”, “Bannon’s racist”, I haven’t heard anything that offers any value.

Where’s the discussion on policy? Where’s the debate on what the right leadership is, if not the current president?
The only place I’ve seen anything remotely close to this is the Bill Maher show, and even then it’s 99% Trump outrage material.

If you have someone of substance that is going out and engaging people on the issues then by all means, what’s their name?

The next election will be hilarious because it appears the only good arguement is “he’s a Racist, sexist, blah blah blah”. It didn’t work in 2016, and it won’t work now. Unless the left wises up, and gets prepared, Trump will win again in 2020, and if you don’t like Bannon now, you’ll really hate him by 2024.

 

[ExileMetal]

Ok well outside of “Trumps racist”, “Bannon’s racist”, I haven’t heard anything that offers any value.

Where’s the discussion on policy? Where’s the debate on what the right leadership is, if not the current president?
The only place I’ve seen anything remotely close to this is the Bill Maher show, and even then it’s 99% Trump outrage material.

If you have someone of substance that is going out and engaging people on the issues then by all means, what’s their name?

The next election will be hilarious because it appears the only good arguement is “he’s a Racist, sexist, blah blah blah”. It didn’t work in 2016, and it won’t work now. Unless the left wises up, and gets prepared, Trump will win again in 2020, and if you don’t like Bannon now, you’ll really hate him by 2024.

I think you are either trolling or not trying very hard, but start with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

 

[Randy]

If you have someone of substance that is going out and engaging people on the issues then by all means, what’s their name?

The next election will be hilarious

If your argument is that the Democrats don't have anyone who's carrying the banner of the party and has a chance in 2020, first of all you're making that point in a very 'round about' way and secondly, you're preaching to the choir.

You know what are some pretty good policy alternatives to Trump? Idk, what we were doing for the eight years prior seemed to be a nice start.

For all the "strong economy" talk (that's been trending that way already since 2012 anyway), the rising interest rates, the volatility in the stock market and the big name American companies shutting down factories wholesale seem to argue otherwise.

So yeah, previous 8 years... Maybe piles of trade tariffs, ripping up trade agreements and giving the finger to our trade partners, and putting in place tax cuts that include no incentives to reinvest those tax savings in this country weren't especially necessary or valuable reforms.

Or hey, look at Trump and his tough guy border policy. Previous policy was "catch and release" and not pushing deportation for non violent criminal offenders. News policy says crossing the border itself is an illegal act, so prosecution at the border and deportation of ALL illegal immigrants is encouraged. Tough guy right? Sounds good, then why are border crossings at repeatedly records highs? How come you've never seen mass migration caravans of people trying to ran their way into the border until now? Hey maybe the old policy wasn't so bad.

How about banning trans soldiers from serving in the military? I know, he needed to do something because of all those well documented occurrences of trans people negatively effecting the missions. Thats why we've been losing so much lately, I knew it! Or hey, maybe the military needs all the dedicated, hard working minds and bodies they can get. Show me a metric that says you make your military stronger by allowing less people to join it.

How's Trumpcare been working out? Remember Obamacare, that awful death panel laden policy that was making everyone poorer and sicker, and it was going to be ripped up and replaced 'really quick'? Oh yeah, never happened. Guy has all three branches of government and 10 years of promises from his party and, well, crickets.

Should I go on? Funny thing too, all those points and I didn't even need to make a moral argument or create any new policy to get there.

I'm sorry but arguing Bannon and Trump are right just because they're rigid, or persistent or machismo does nothing for me. Populism was alive and well before those two sentient autumn squashes were part of the political landscape. "What if we write policy based on what the majority of people want?" Woah, transformational.

EDIT: Also, you and I have very different definitions of whats hilarious. I prefer a pie in the face or an exploding cigar.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

Ok well outside of “Trumps racist”, “Bannon’s racist”, I haven’t heard anything that offers any value.

Where’s the discussion on policy? Where’s the debate on what the right leadership is, if not the current president?
The only place I’ve seen anything remotely close to this is the Bill Maher show, and even then it’s 99% Trump outrage material.

If you have someone of substance that is going out and engaging people on the issues then by all means, what’s their name?

The next election will be hilarious because it appears the only good arguement is “he’s a Racist, sexist, blah blah blah”. It didn’t work in 2016, and it won’t work now. Unless the left wises up, and gets prepared, Trump will win again in 2020, and if you don’t like Bannon now, you’ll really hate him by 2024.

I still think you have this somewhat back-asswards.

Choose the policy, and then the politicians that have the best way of accomplishing said policy goal.

You don't choose a politician first and then adhere to them. At least that's not how it should work.