[USA] SJEDINJENE AMERIČKE DRŽAVE - unutrašnja politika i uticaj na svetska kretanja

[Helena]

I BBC piše da se u epštjanovim fajlovima pominju Mask I princ Endrju.

Drugi demantuje, Elon kaže da je bio pozvan na ostrvo, ali da je odbio.

 

[nonick]

MAGA opet pobedjuje:

 

On September 22nd, 15 minutes before Argentina’s foreign-exchange markets opened, America’s government made an intervention. “Argentina is a systemically important US ally,” Scott Bessent, America’s treasury secretary, wrote on X, a social network. He added that the United States would “do what is needed” and that “all options for stabilisation are on the table.” The next day President Donald Trump met Javier Milei, Argentina’s libertarian president, and declared that he was doing a “fantastic job”. Early on September 24th, Mr Bessent announced that negotiations were under way for a $20bn swap line with the Argentine central bank, and that the US Treasury “stands ready to purchase Argentina’s USD bonds and will do so as conditions warrant”.

 

...

 

Argentine history is a graveyard of economic reforms. Attempts at fiscal propriety often go fine initially, then unravel. If the midterms go badly, and markets conclude that Mr Milei has lost all control of congress and that his re-election in 2027 is a long shot, Mr Trump’s dollars will not stop Argentina from going broke again.

 

Link

[Rex]

1 hour ago, Helena said:

Blagi bože 

 

 

Brate mili. Ne znam šta da kažem. Verotvarno nema šta smisleno da se kaže. Pa, jebote.

[robespierre]

Klovn od svega mora da napravi cirkus, ali nije on izvadio tu priču iz mađioničarskog šešira. U ovim člancima lepo piše COULD i MAY.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/too-much-tylenol-in-pregnancy-could-affect-development-idUSBRE9AL15A/

 

https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/using-acetaminophen-during-pregnancy-may-increase-childrens-autism-and-adhd-risk/

[Helena]

21 minutes ago, robespierre said:

Klovn od svega mora da napravi cirkus, ali nije on izvadio tu priču iz mađioničarskog šešira. U ovim člancima lepo piše COULD i MAY.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/too-much-tylenol-in-pregnancy-could-affect-development-idUSBRE9AL15A/

 

https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/using-acetaminophen-during-pregnancy-may-increase-childrens-autism-and-adhd-risk/

Vučić stajl, u sve se razume, i trovalentne i petovalentne vakcine i kad ih treba primati?

Ovo će se primiti kod MAGA, bog otac neće moći vratiti stvari u prihvatljive okvire, ako svet krene za ovim, kolektivni imunitet će nestati, pa nazdravlje.

 

 

[ters]

Pismo iz "war ravaged" Portland-a:

 

Dearest Mother, I write you from the besieged streets of Portland, where the Great Conflict of ’25 rages on. Our regiment defends the narrow ground between the cold-brew trench and the gluten-free sourdough bunker. The opposition came at dawn, wielding mason jars and ironic facial hair, chanting haikus about sustainability. Supplies are dwindling—our last oat milk was rationed to a single latte, and Sergeant Willow refuses to advance without his ethically sourced crystals. Pray for us, Mother.

[Angelia]

22 hours ago, Darko said:

U stvari, državljanin je precizniji prevod. 

Naravno da jeste jer je u duhu SH jezika, ja uglavnom koristim engleski, pa cesto ne mogu da se setim izraza u SH koji je adekvatan dok kucam odgovor, I gramatika mi je postala uzasna. Potpuno sam svesna toga, delimicno sam i ovde na forumu da ne zaboravim jezik.

19 hours ago, freethrow said:

Ne četvorimo i razumeo sam te u potpunosti. Hteo sam da kažem da si činom polaganja zakletve postala državljanka SAD, ali ne i građanka. U smislu antičke Grčke i u vrednosnom sistemu.

Ne u smisli anticke Grcke, naravno da sam mislila na drzavljanstvo, bilo je jasno na sta mislim. Ako bas hoces da ismevas moj SH, ima tu mnogo boljih stvari nego bukvalni prevod I losa gramatika, cesto pogresni anglicizmi. To nista ne dolazi iz nedostatka obrazovanja, nego 20 godina skoro exkluzivnog koriscenja engleskog jezika.

Moj klinac je uveren da prica tecni SH, a ustvari zvuci kao Amer koji je naucio SH. Iako je rodjen u Beogradu.

Ja sam to objasnila vise puta, I nije da mi smeta da mi pomognete da odrzim jezik, I da me ispravite, ali ako vam je to argument da sam glupa I nemam pojma sta pricam, dovidjenja.

[DameTime]

Odličan tekst u The Observer-u: 

First they came for the paracetamol – will epidurals and caesareans be next?

 

Quote

Trump said pregnant women should “tough it out” and that there was “no downside in not taking it”, “ absolutely no harm” – revealing plainly what he thinks about women and pain.

 

Quote

Trump’s narrative intersects with the renaissance of conservative ideas about how women should be and behave, and what they should tolerate, often based on a fantasy of an evolutionary past, a tradwife in the kitchen milking a cow, living under white male supremacy, led by an autocrat. This idea rests on a myth of what is “natural”, ignoring that “nature” sometimes means death in childbirth, and deadly diseases, such as measles and whooping cough.

 

Quote

His comments about women enduring pain, and blaming mothers for the perceived “crisis” of autism, maps on to centuries of misogyny and the positioning of women as reproductive vessels, decorative objects, servants, little else.

 

Quote

Telling women to “tough it out” and compelling women to motherhood is only possible in a world where those in power are catastrophically ignorant – and deeply, cruelly indifferent to the health, dignity and survival of women.

[Mina D. Harker]

Ali tačno znaš da tough it out ne važi za njihove žene i ćerke, jer i mizoginija ima neke granice. (Kad se radi o njihovoj svojini, ostale žene neka crknu) 

Na kraju i Kirkova udovica zastupa jedno, a radi drugo.

I opet se vraćamo na duple standarde koji su klasistički i elitistički. 

[Darko]

4 hours ago, DameTime said:

Odličan tekst u The Observer-u: 

First they came for the paracetamol – will epidurals and caesareans be next?

I jedno i drugo imaju rizike i za mamu i za bebu. To mogu da ti potvrde medicinski radnici. Što naravno ne znači da se izbor treba ukinuti, to bi bilo debilno ali me ne bi čudilo od ove administracije. Pogotovo ceasarean - kada idu komplikacije ceasarean je uglavnom najbolja opcija za mamu i za bebu. Nadam se da neće doći to toga.

[Smrtokapa]

Što se tiče duplih standarda i licemerstva:

 

[robespierre]

Ali žena u članku mrtva ladna piše da je povezivanje tilenola sa poremećajima razvoja pseudonauka… iako Harvard i Univerzitet u Oslu kažu drugačije? I umesto da neke mudre glave napregnu svoje sinapse i do kraja raščivijaju taj problem, klovn detonira minu u javnosti i ulazi se u klasičan ideološki sukob koji sa naukom nema veze.

[DameTime]

1 hour ago, Darko said:

I jedno i drugo imaju rizike i za mamu i za bebu. To mogu da ti potvrde medicinski radnici. 

 

Nije u tome uopšte poenta, već što njih nije briga za bilo šta što je olakšica ženama. Zbog toga su, nagađam, u naslovu teksta navedeni upravo ovi primeri. Naravno da medicinski radnici, da kažem prava struka, ne ova MAGAška, treba da odlučuju u vezi ovih stvari, ali uvek u koristi majke i bebe. 

[SteveFrancis#3]

Kako volim ove tudjim qrcem burazere... kakva prokleta steta sto on ne moze da ostane trudan, da nam na svom primeru pokaze kako se tough it out-uje porodjaj. Budalcina.

[Helena]

Evo, sad sam čitala uputstvo u Hemofarmovom paracetamolu.

 

Trudnice se ne pominju, dojilje da.

 

Jedan od tekstova koji su ovde postavljeni je iz 2013. ako sam dobro zapamtila, što je prilično dugo za sumnju a nedelovanje. 

 

U našim ambulantama se paracetamol daje kao lek izbora upravo trudnicama i smatra se netoksičnim.

 

E sad, dešavalo se (a zadnje čega se sećam je ranitidin) da se naglo, iznenada, povuče neki lek iz upotrebe.

Zaboravila sam koje je objašnjenje bilo za ranitidin, ali sam morala da popišem sve ampule koje imam i da ih vratim u Dom.

Kod paracetamola toga nema ni u nagoveštajima.

[Helena]

https://www.wspa.com/news/former-sc-representative-rj-may-agrees-to-plead-guilty-to-child-sex-crimes/

 

 

Former SC representative RJ May agrees to plead guilty to child sex crimes

Jel ovaj MAGA?

[robespierre]

36 minutes ago, Helena said:

 

 

Jedan od tekstova koji su ovde postavljeni je iz 2013. ako sam dobro zapamtila, što je prilično dugo za sumnju a nedelovanje. 

 

 

Neko sklon teorijama zavere bi mogao da pomisli da u Džonsonu i Džonsonu sede neki ljudi koje možda i nije briga za potencijalne štetne posledice svog proizvoda. 

 

Harvardova studija je objavljena u avgustu ove godine. 

 

Poenta je da laik kao što smo svi ovde iz dostupnih podataka NE MOŽE da zna šta je istina, jer do istine ni jednoj strani nije stalo. Pa će tako jedni da pričaju da tilenol 100% izaziva autizam, a drugi da je to pseudonauka, iako postoje relevantne studije koje ukazuju da možda baš i nije. Nikoga tu istina i ne zanima, već samo sopstvena ideološka agenda.

Edited 40 minutes ago by robespierre

[Helena]

1 minute ago, robespierre said:

 

Neko sklon teorijama zavere bi mogao da pomisli da u Džonsonu i Džonsonu sede neki ljudi koje možda i nije briga za potencijalne štetne posledice svog proizvoda. 

 

Harvardova studija je objavljena u avgustu ove godine. 

 

Poenta je da laik kao što smo svi ovde iz dostupnih podataka NE MOŽE da zna šta je istina, jer do istine ni jednoj strani nije stalo. Pa će tako jedni da pričaju da tilenol 100% izaziva autizam, a drugi da je to pseudonauka, iako postoje relevantne studije koje ukazuju da možda baš i nije. Nikoga tu istina i ne zanima, već samo sopstvena politička agenda.

Na prvom času farmakologije je profesorica otvorila čas držeći dva andola u rukama i rekla "Deco, u jednoj je lek, u jednoj otrov".

 

Videla sam šta piše i dala primer kako lekovi mogu da se povuku.

Da li misliš da je tranp čitao te tekstove i da li misliš da zna bolje i daje onakve panične izjave?

 

Pa još i i vakcinama?

[zoran59]

Ne pisem puno. Imam kakvo-takvo obrazovanje, pa i relativno normalnu inteligenciju, ali nisam preterano elokventan. A povremeno se pojavi neki clanak/napis koji odlicno predstavi bas ono sto bih hteo i da sam napisem, samo kad bih umeo.

I danas se pojavio bas jedan takav. 

 

You’re Comparing Trump to the Wrong Fascist Dictator

The “Is Trump the next Hitler?” debate misses his sinister parallels to another 20th-century European tyrant.

 

By John Meyer

In a deeply divided democracy, an aspiring authoritarian seizes new powers, often by declaring “emergencies” when none exist. This is only possible after he cobbles together a strong alliance of far-right forces in the military, conservative religious nationalists, a few massively wealthy oligarchs, and some centrists spooked by the specter of “socialism.” Freedoms are curtailed, institutions are undermined, and critics become “enemies of the people.” Before long, troops are in city streets—and not too long after that, democracy is gone, and an authoritarian reigns in its place.

This openly occurred in Spain in the 1930s with the rise of Gen. Francisco Franco. It’s also, for obvious reasons, a relevant historical lesson that parallels the U.S. today. While Donald Trump’s authoritarian ambitions frequently win him comparisons to Adolf Hitler, that is too far a stretch. Given Hitler’s well-deserved status as the shorthand for absolute evil, even the mention of Hitler can derail any conversation, with Trump’s camp rightly complaining of hyperbole or hysteria. However, a much better comparison is with Franco, whose contemporaneous rise to power is eerily similar to what America faces today—with a warning about what could come next.

In the early 1930s, Spain was fractured. The reformist government (the Republicans) supported workers’ rights, pressured wealthy landowners to divide their land more fairly among the people, and aimed to loosen the grip of the Catholic Church by enforcing the separation of church and state. Franco and his nationalist allies decried these reforms as a socialist threat and promised to restore the traditional power structure of the country. Campaigning on a message that Spanish society was headed for a moral collapse, Franco and his allies needed a crisis to unite the right and start a coup, even if they had to manufacture one themselves.

They got their chance after the murder of José Calvo-Sotelo, a popular conservative politician who was abducted and murdered by members of a left-wing militia. The murder was part of a lethal tit-for-tat: Hours earlier, José Castillo—a lieutenant in Spain’s militarized police force and socialist sympathizer who had helped violently quell riots at the funeral of a right-wing activist—had been assassinated by right-wing extremists.

But for Spain’s far right, it was all the pretext they needed: The Spanish Republic had lost control of law and order, and Franco and his allies launched a coup against the government, setting off the Spanish Civil War.

Trump has not (at least not yet) launched a civil war, but you’ll notice the familiar pattern: Trump has repeatedly declared “emergencies” and used them as a pretext for seizing additional powers. His immigration “emergency” required the end of due process in favor of rapid deportations; his trade imbalance “emergency” was justification for end-running Congress on tariffs. And, most recently and alarmingly, his public safety “emergencies”—set to the backdrop of falling violent crime rates in cities around the country—are a pretext for deploying the National Guard as a civilian police force.

The parallels don’t end there: The building blocks of Trump’s coalition mirror Franco’s allied forces.

Franco needed both financial backing from the powerful elites and spiritual backing from the Catholic Church, who could sway the faithful to his side.

One key backer was Juan March, once named “the richest man in Spain,” a notorious banker and shipping magnate from Mallorca who financed many of Franco’s military operations while securing foreign aid from Germany and Italy. During World War II, March was so powerful and influential that the Allies paid him a substantial sum to keep Spain from joining the Axis powers. Another important Franco supporter (among many) was José María de Ybarra, an industrialist from the Basque Country who supplied steel and transport infrastructure, and helped forge a political alliance among his wealthy friends and other industrial rivals.

Following his victory, Franco rewarded these conservative supporters by opposing land reform, protecting private property, crushing labor unions, and granting lucrative state contracts during Spain’s postwar reconstruction.

Franco’s reign was also tightly tied to the Catholic Church. Framing his rebellion as a holy crusade against godless socialists, Franco strengthened the church’s role in Spanish life by funding church reconstruction, reinstating religious education in schools, and giving the clergy authority to censor anything they deemed anti-Catholic.

The Catholic hierarchy relished their restored privileges and did little to oppose Franco’s secret and not-so-secret oppression and incarceration of his enemies. To some of the faithful, Franco was the lesser of two evils (authoritarianism vs. socialism). To others, his dictatorship was ethically righteous; God’s imperfect vessel to preserve the power of the church.

You don’t have to look too hard to see the similarities in the MAGA movement, particularly with billionaire oligarchs like Elon Musk and Peter Thiel lending their considerable financial support. Much as Franco rewarded his rich allies, Trump has done the same: aggressively pursuing a deregulatory agenda while ramming through massive tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the wealthy.

And the U.S. president certainly has a Franco-esque arrangement established with the American religious right. Trump has long been a self-avowed womanizer with, shall we say, flexible views on abortion. However, he holds evangelical support as an imperfect vessel for their own socially conservative agenda. As we now know, his first-term Supreme Court picks were the backbone of the judicial coalition that overturned Roe v. Wade, while his second-term executive actions have advanced the evangelical agenda even further.

But building a mass coalition also requires control of the mass messaging—alongside the nullification of critics who dare to intrude on official narratives with inconvenient truths.

Franco slowly brought all media under state control, shutting down or censoring any outlet that didn’t extol the virtues of his regime. Anything anti-government was labeled anti-patriotic. Journalists also had to register with the regime and were closely monitored. Many left-leaning reporters who criticized the government were later arrested, executed, or “disappeared.” Franco even commissioned newsreels that would be played in every cinema in the country. Called “NO-DO,” or Noticiarios y Documentales, these were propaganda short films framing Franco as a heroic military leader and as a compassionate guardian for his people.

In our current era of fragmented media, Trump has not needed to bring the U.S. media apparatus under his thumb. But he has been very successful in convincing a large portion of his supporters that his critics are “fake news,” while also commandeering the existing conservative media apparatus into the regime’s unofficial mouthpiece—parroting his rhetoric no matter how far it strays from any semblance of objective reality.

Unmaking a Democracy, One Increment at a Time

Franco didn’t change his country overnight. The dismantling of Spain’s democracy was done slowly and through stages. Weaponizing the government and ruling by fear takes time.

Did his allies envision Franco becoming a dictator for the rest of his life? Probably not. He was a means to an end, a powerful leader who could return Spain to its traditional roots. Only later did the ruling class realize the possible error of their loyalty. But it was too late.

Moderates were sidelined. Critics were silenced. And it was all done in the name of the state’s stability. And many people fanatically believed it. Eventually, the only remaining option was to step in line or lose all relevance.

Trump follows many of Franco’s authoritarian tactics. Paint any swing to the liberal side of the aisle as a moral threat. Claim every institution is corrupt and every loss is rigged. Then erode the power of these institutions from within through loyalist appointments across the government and civil society. Also, depict any government resistance as unpatriotic and ungodly. And finally, cast themselves as the lone protector of their country.

And if this last point proves problematic, then manufacture crisis after crisis, distorting real-world conditions in your favor through misinformation, manipulation, and intimidation. The path of least resistance is to portray every real and potential enemy as a devastating option that would produce something far, far worse.

The consequences were dire. Franco ruled Spain with an authoritarian grip for nearly 40 years. His regime came to an end only when his hand-picked successor did something the general—and his loyal allies—could never have predicted: return Spain to a democracy. The autocrat planned to continue his regime by appointing Prince Juan Carlos, the grandson of the former king, as his successor. During the handover, Juan Carlos promised stability and continuity. But then he surprised everyone by swiftly legalizing political parties, appointing the reformist Adolfo Suárez as prime minister, and overseeing the creation of a new democratic constitution.

Popular in News & Politics

You’re Comparing Trump to the Wrong Fascist Dictator

The Supreme Court Just Rewrote the Constitution to Give Trump Terrifying New Powers

The Comey Indictment Is Just the Beginning

 

The James Comey Indictment Is Huge. The Reaction So Far Is Exactly What They Want.

Within three years, Spain became a parliamentary monarchy with free elections and democratic rights for all Spaniards. It was a blessing, but one that came only after an autocrat succeeded in shaping Spanish life for two generations. And had Juan Carlos taken the more predictable step of holding on to power, Spain’s story could have played out far differently.

In the U.S. today, Franco’s rise stands as a stark warning to Americans about how Trump’s dreams could become reality. It’s a warning about how democracies can wither from within through any number of brutal tactics employed by a repressive leader who rules without restraint.

But an authoritarian government is neither a natural state nor an inevitability. It’s the result of millions of choices, both by the powerful and by the everyday people. Autocracy thrives on apathy and complacency, but even in dark times, people can accomplish the unexpected by choosing to take risks and fight back. Passivity is the enemy. Collective courage is the cure.

izvor: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/09/trump-hitler-comparisons-francisco-franco-fascism.html?pay=1759072762058&support_journalism=please

 

Nemam sta da dodam. USA, gde zivim, je u proverbijalnom qrtzu.

Spopala me navodno (negde sam procitao) kineska kletva: "dabogda ziveo u interesantnim vremenima!"

 

[robespierre]

5 minutes ago, Helena said:

Na prvom času farmakologije je profesorica otvorila čas držeći dva andola u rukama i rekla "Deco, u jednoj je lek, u jednoj otrov".

 

Videla sam šta piše i dala primer kako lekovi mogu da se povuku.

Da li misliš da je tranp čitao te tekstove i da li misliš da zna bolje i daje onakve panične izjave?

 

Pa još i i vakcinama?

 

Ja o vakcinama ne znam ništa, nisam informisan, a još manje sam stručan da iznosim mišljenje. Verujem da su sigurne za upotrebu sve dok neka relevantna institucija ne sprovede istraživanje koje će pokazati drugačije. Tramp i piskarala u medijima su podjednako nestručni. Naravno da je na klovnu najveća odgovornost jer on govori sa pozicije moći, pa onda na medijima, mi smo u toj priči nebitni. 

 

O ovome sam se sticajem okolnosti informisao jer je klovn detonirao bombu u javnosti, a druga strana ga spremno dočekala na volej da priču prilagodi svojoj ideološkoj agendi.

 

Možda sam ja u svojoj neinformisanosti propustio nešto pa je Harvard u međuvremenu postao čelična pesnica trampizma?

[Helena]

Da, propustio si da razumeš prvu rečenicu u postu koju su citirao, harvarde.

[𝓑𝓪𝓫𝔂]

15 minutes ago, robespierre said:

 

Neko sklon teorijama zavere bi mogao da pomisli da u Džonsonu i Džonsonu sede neki ljudi koje možda i nije briga za potencijalne štetne posledice svog proizvoda. 

 

Harvardova studija je objavljena u avgustu ove godine. 

 

Poenta je da laik kao što smo svi ovde iz dostupnih podataka NE MOŽE da zna šta je istina, jer do istine ni jednoj strani nije stalo. Pa će tako jedni da pričaju da tilenol 100% izaziva autizam, a drugi da je to pseudonauka, iako postoje relevantne studije koje ukazuju da možda baš i nije. Nikoga tu istina i ne zanima, već samo sopstvena ideološka agenda.

 

Ovom analogijom mozemo da zakljucimo nesto sto je totalno potkovano argumentom, da ljudi ginu u automobilima, pa se i dalje vozimo. 

 

Autizam otkriven pocetkom proslog veka, 50 godina nakon toga tylenol pocinje da se pravi. 

 

Svaki lek ima nuspojave i ne znaci da na svakog od nas svaki lek isto deluje, niti da ce neko imati bilo koju od nuspojava ili da nece imati sve. To vazi i za vakcine. 

 

Meni licno je bas diskutabilno da je Harvard to objavio ove godine, s obizorm koliko se sve 'narucuje'