Trump's chief strategist Steve Bannon: "I'm a nationalist " totally not racist

[Jacque67 7,328]

Before Bannon joined the Trump campaign in August, and before he was appointed as President-elect Trumps chief White House strategist, the former Breitbart chairman was coasting through liberal Hollywood as an unabashedly right-wing filmmaker and documentarianone openly influenced by Nazi propagandist Leni Riefenstahl. His artistic endeavors were at times idiosyncratic, like when he yearned to adapt William Shakespeares brutal and bloody tragedy Titus Andronicus to on the moon with creatures from outer space, according to his former Hollywood writing partner Julia Jones. (She also co-wrote with Bannon a Shakespearean hip-hop musical about the 1992 L.A. riots.)

These days, however, hes less interested in producing and directing propaganda films and is far more keen on, say, forging international alliances with ultra-right-wing, nationalist, populist political parties in western Europe.

He has long wanted to work with all of those parties, but that was only in promoting them with Breitbart, a source close to Bannon told The Daily Beast earlier this month. Now he has the power of the White House to do it.

With that in mind, its on to the executive branch for Bannonwhere he is set to serve as one of the most powerful voices and operators working in the Trump era.

Like [Andrew] Jacksons populism, were going to build an entirely new political movement, Bannon continued, in The Hollywood Reporters borderline-loving profile of the nationalist, alt-right ringleader. Bannon concluded by saying, I am Thomas Cromwell in the court of the Tudors.

President Andrew Jackson carried out genocidal mass murder and ethnic cleansing, and Thomas Cromwell was executed for treason.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/11/18/trump-s-chief-strategist-steve-bannon-i-m-a-nationalist-totally-not-racist.html

#DarknessIsGood.

[yuna628 9,758]

Thomas Cromwell? LOL! Oh gawd man, so full of himself. If he is so obsessed with Shakespeare I guess he's spent a lot of time looking at Richard III. An apt fit for our Presidential performance piece.

[millefleur 5,047]

Shakespearean hip-hop musical? Alien creatures from outer space? Lol

[JayJayH 546]

I have nothing left over for Steve Bannon. Breitbart is the right-wing equivalent of Slate, and is about as serious a news outlet as MTV and TMZ. If you were to take a character out of a political horror show, it would be Steve Bannon.

That said, I think a little more analysis than "Jackson-populism = native genocide" is needed. All I've really seen so far in the media is that Steve Bannon is a genocidal maniac and an unabashed anti-semite, mostly from having seen the words "Nazi" and "Bannon" mentioned in the same sentence somewhere at some point. Nevermind the fact that he's possibly the most pro-Israeli person to set foot in the White House in two decades, nevermind that the vast majority of the headlines he's being criticized for were written by a gay Jew (Milo Yiannopoulous) and never mind that the editor-in-chief of Breitbart London, Raheem Kassem can hardly be classified as a white nationalist. Nevermind that Breitbart Jerusalem is dedicated to anything but anti-semitism.

Say what you want about nationalism, but the only way to conclude that "American nationalism" = "white nationalism" is to assume that "American = white." A remarkably high percentage of people on the left seem to have concluded that this is the case and that's worrisome. In nation states across Europe, it makes sense to make that comparison. In the U.S., it really doesn't.

"DarknessIsGood" is a satirical wordplay referring to exactly what most of the leftist media is doing right now.

1. Freak-out session.

2. Fundamental misunderstanding.

3. Failure to analyze.

When the bar is set so low from the onset, it's easy to overdeliver, hence "darkness is good."

Bannon is correct on one thing: If 'he' delivers what he actually intends to deliver (an FDR-style New Deal almost), a more populist-oriented GOP will be in control for the next 60 years while Democrats sit and wonder why the inevitable genocide never happened (This is an awfully big 'if').

This is far from support of Bannon, but rather a plea to Democrats to focus their efforts on reality rather than a continued cry of "racism!" and "[fillinblank]phobia!"

Caution is a great thing, but hyperbole freak-out sessions is what got Trump elected in the first place.

In 2016, the absolute worst thing you can possibly be is a racist, xenophobe, Islamophobe, transphobe or a homophobe, and the threshold for being called such things is so low that it is applied to anyone who objects to any contemporary liberal policy, including roughly half of America.

Edited November 19, 2016 by JayJayH

[yuna628 9,758]

I have nothing left over for Steve Bannon. Breitbart is the right-wing equivalent of Slate, and is about as serious a news outlet as MTV and TMZ. If you were to take a character out of a political horror show, it would be Steve Bannon.

That said, I think a little more analysis than "Jackson-populism = native genocide" is needed. All I've really seen so far in the media is that Steve Bannon is a genocidal maniac and an unabashed anti-semite, mostly from having seen the words "Nazi" and "Bannon" mentioned in the same sentence somewhere at some point. Nevermind the fact that he's possibly the most pro-Israeli person to set foot in the White House in two decades, nevermind that the vast majority of the headlines he's being criticized for were written by a gay Jew (Milo Yiannopoulous) and never mind that the editor-in-chief of Breitbart London, Raheem Kassem can hardly be classified as a white nationalist. Nevermind that Breitbart Jerusalem is dedicated to anything but anti-semitism.

Say what you want about nationalism, but the only way to conclude that "American nationalism" = "white nationalism" is to assume that "American = white." A remarkably high percentage of people on the left seem to have concluded that this is the case and that's worrisome. In nation states across Europe, it makes sense to make that comparison. In the U.S., it really doesn't.

"DarknessIsGood" is a satirical wordplay referring to exactly what most of the leftist media is doing right now.

1. Freak-out session.

2. Fundamental misunderstanding.

3. Failure to analyze.

When the bar is set so low from the onset, it's easy to overdeliver, hence "darkness is good."

Bannon is correct on one thing: If 'he' delivers what he actually intends to deliver (an FDR-style New Deal almost), a more populist-oriented GOP will be in control for the next 60 years while Democrats sit and wonder why the inevitable genocide never happened (This is an awfully big 'if').

This is far from support of Bannon, but rather a plea to Democrats to focus their efforts on reality rather than a continued cry of "racism!" and "[fillinblank]phobia!"

Caution is a great thing, but hyperbole freak-out sessions is what got Trump elected in the first place.

In 2016, the absolute worst thing you can possibly be is a racist, xenophobe, Islamophobe, transphobe or a homophobe, and the threshold for being called such things is so low that it is applied to anyone who objects to any contemporary liberal policy, including roughly half of America.

Jay, it's my position that Bannon is not intending to deliver a ''New Deal''. I don't believe that he believes in a Constitutional Republic, I believe he is into something different entirely. He is a self-avowed Leninist, and wishes to destroy our entire system, by throwing some pro-anarchist philosophy, and streams of nationalism gobbledegook into the mix. His method in doing this is to appeal to these elements to stoke a movement (as most despots are wont to do). His world is a love affair of the 1930s and an obsession with WWI (overlooking the perils of WWII entirely). While his defenders constantly point to Milo as ''but he's a Jew!'' and ''but he's gay!" as if this should give him a pass for being a despicable human being and utter racist xenophobe - news flash, anyone, no matter their background can be horrible individuals. Milo is not exempted for this. His claims of Thomas Cromwell, speaks of megalomania, if not lacking in the fundamental understanding of whom Cromwell was - and that even as he was hailed as a martyr by one faith, he too was also a horrible person via his actions in defense of it. Liberals are not the only people in the mix who have grave concerns about Bannon and this 'socio-political movement' he has helped to bolster, but you'd find conservatives, are too, vocal opponents. Even if I gave a sliver of doubt that he should have some lofty, honest, and non-violent-non-discriminatory goals to change our nation for the better, he has already tainted himself by aligning himself to movements that are inherently destructive to this Republic. I don't misunderstand Bannon. To the contrary. But his placement on the team is no surprise to me, it's all part of the greater plan.

Edited November 19, 2016 by yuna628

[eieio 1,594]

Liberal playbook. The broken record gets old.

[JayJayH 546]

Jay, it's my position that Bannon is not intending to deliver a ''New Deal''. I don't believe that he believes in a Constitutional Republic, I believe he is into something different entirely. He is a self-avowed Leninist, and wishes to destroy our entire system, by throwing some pro-anarchist philosophy, and streams of nationalism gobbledegook into the mix. His method in doing this is to appeal to these elements to stoke a movement (as most despots are wont to do). His world is a love affair of the 1930s and an obsession with WWI (overlooking the perils of WWII entirely). While his defenders constantly point to Milo as ''but he's a Jew!'' and ''but he's gay!" as if this should give him a pass for being a despicable human being and utter racist xenophobe - news flash, anyone, no matter their background can be horrible individuals. Milo is not exempted for this. His claims of Thomas Cromwell, speaks of megalomania, if not lacking in the fundamental understanding of whom Cromwell was - and that even as he was hailed as a martyr by one faith, he too was also a horrible person via his actions in defense of it. Liberals are not the only people in the mix who have grave concerns about Bannon and this 'socio-political movement' he has helped to bolster, but you'd find conservatives, are too, vocal opponents. Even if I gave a sliver of doubt that he should have some lofty, honest, and non-violent-non-discriminatory goals to change our nation for the better, he has already tainted himself by aligning himself to movements that are inherently destructive to this Republic. I don't misunderstand Bannon. To the contrary. But his placement on the team is no surprise to me, it's all part of the greater plan.

I would agree, and I find Steve Bannon to be about as likable as the plague.

Which is why I'm worried about the current mainstream media reaction. Rather than pointing out the problems of turning the clock back to a 1930s economic nationalist era, I'm hearing people freak out about the word 'nationalism' to mean 'white supremacy.' This is a dangerous comparison because it makes the assumption that 'America = white.' I'm particularly concerned with the left freely making this assumption. Bernie Sanders' economic platform was every bit as nationalist as well - In a nutshell: Limit immigration from the 3rd world, manufacture in America and scrap free trade deals.

As far as Milo goes, sure, you could have the odd one out, but that doesn't change the fact that Breitbart is a much more ethnically diverse employer than the Huffington Post, yet, it's the Huffington Post that likes to slam Breitbart for being a bunch of white nationalists. This is the paradox of leftist identity politics today - Skin color isn't an ambiguous thing anymore, it's a state of mind. Ben Shapiro left Breitbart because he didn't think Breitbart was conservative, not because it was anti-semitic. Again, Breitbart is perhaps the most staunchly pro-Israeli media outlet in existence today, so I find the unquestioned charges of antisemitism to be strange at best, crying wolf at worst. I'm honestly more worried about Israeli settlements where they don't belong, than I am of Bannon's alleged antisemitism.

Steve Bannon is a despicable human being, but he isn't a stupid one, and he's certainly not out of touch. He knows 'the movement' isn't going to succeed if Trump doesn't deliver. He admittedly knows it's going to fail if 'the movement' doesn't get 40% of the black and Hispanic vote. He knows he's working within the realities of a state apparatus that functions a whole lot better than Germany's did in 1930. It's European-style right-wing populism, plain and simple. It has been brewing like a pressure cooker under the lid of political correctness and liberal smugness for years - (For decades in Europe). Right-wing populism is nationalism, but nationalism in the American context isn't necessarily a terrible thing at the get go if it isn't ethnic nationalism.

I'm saying basically what Bernie Sanders is saying - Have caution. Give credit where credit is due. Don't flinch when it comes to defending people's rights and have zero tolerance for ethnic scapegoating. But if you set the bar low. If you're unnecessarily cautioning against genocide, then the only winner is going to be Trumpism. Much of the left has already jumped on the "Trump is going to deport 3 million people!!!" bandwagon. As if deporting someone who didn't visit VJ before coming here was akin to racial genocide. With no understanding of immigration law, this is now classified as racism and xenophobia. No mention of the fact that Trump has actually called for a possible amnesty bill "once the borders are secured."

This is dangerous.

Edited November 19, 2016 by JayJayH

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

I happen to agree with jayjay on this one. Steve Ban on may be a nationalist but he is not a racist or a Nazi. Which I can be described as that as well.

But I was listening to the radio this past week here in Los Angeles and they got on this subject about him as well. But one of the hosts for the station Ben Shapiro was born their defending him even though he can't stand him. Ben used to work over at Breitbart before resigning last year. He said over the years at Breitbart he never ever heard anything close to bring anti-semitic and Ben is a Orthodox Jew.

[millefleur 5,047]

I agree with this article that Bannon has relatively little clue as to what he's talking about when he calls himself a "Leninist":

It’s not irrelevant at all that Lenin and Bannon are ideological opposites — even if Bannon, because he is a cynical BS artist, might well argue that it is irrelevant, or even that they are not ideological opposites. I don’t just mean that Lenin was a passionate believer in socialism (or in “social democracy,” the term he used for most of his career) and Bannon is a passionate believer in — well, in something else, or quite likely nothing at all. More to the point, Lenin’s ideology was overt and public, whereas Bannon’s is a political black box. (Of course it’s tempting to apply the F-word, but I don’t know whether it fits, and neither do you.)

Whatever misdeeds you want to hang around the Bolshevik founder’s neck (and there are plenty), Lenin was not a cynical BSer and not given to deceit or dissimulation. Lenin told everyone who would listen, from the Marxist underground to the Tsarist secret police, that he wanted to overturn the corrupt and autocratic Russian state and replace it with a “dictatorship of the proletariat,” which wasn’t supposed to sound as scary then as it does now.

What does Steve Bannon want? Radosh remembers him saying, “Lenin wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.” That leaves the follow-up question unanswered: What happens after that? A dictatorship of who, or what? I would speculate not only that Bannon didn’t expect Trump to be elected president but also that he didn’t want him to.

(The "F" word there is Fascist, btw.) Lenin wanted to destroy the state by replacing it with a new state, namely the state control of the means of production. I don't really know what Bannon wants to replace it with, or if he has even thought that far ahead about it. I'm no fan of Lenin, but I think it's pretty clear that he and Bannon are not on the same intellectual wavelength.

[bcking 3,157]

Liberal playbook. The broken record gets old.

Of the right-leaning people in this forum, you my friend win the award for the least substance.

In real life do you speak to people through youtube videos? Seriously, if you want to contribute to a discussion please do but just posting a video mash-up just isn't cutting it. Use a little more of your brain please.

As to the topic at hand:

My impression of the man (I had never heard of him before this past week) is that he thinks he is very intelligent, and tries to "show it off" but fails miserably. His references to Jackson, Cromwell, Lenin etc... show how little he understands history and politics. Bannon also seems to just make things up in order to further a "point" he thinks. He is actually very similar to the version of Trump that as present on the campaign trail.

My hope is that Trump will pick people of substance and intelligence to help inform him and direct him and that the "Non-campaign" Trump will be more balanced, cool and collected. This appointment does not encourage me. He's going to be the little voice with the devil's pitchfork in one ear of Trump saying "Post on twitter..."

[yuna628 9,758]

I agree with this article that Bannon has relatively little clue as to what he's talking about when he calls himself a "Leninist":

(The "F" word there is Fascist, btw.) Lenin wanted to destroy the state by replacing it with a new state, namely the state control of the means of production. I don't really know what Bannon wants to replace it with, or if he has even thought that far ahead about it. I'm no fan of Lenin, but I think it's pretty clear that he and Bannon are not on the same intellectual wavelength.

Bannon does wish to destroy the state, but not just the state, the entire system. All parties, all government, and replace it with something else of his own utopian making.

[millefleur 5,047]

Bannon does wish to destroy the state, but not just the state, the entire system. All parties, all government, and replace it with something else of his own utopian making.

But therein lies the difference....what exactly is the replacement? Lenin didn't like the bourgeois-controlled state, but he was happy with one controlled by the proletariat. Lenin was not an anti-statist, quite the opposite. The Marxist dialectic, which is essentially what the entire philosophy hinges upon. I don't think Bannon has a plan that thought out or developed, much like Trump himself. Besides, it would be pretty unconstitutional to overthrow the entire US government...which seems odd of an American Nationalist, when the country is essentially defined by the Constitution. I guess this is why people assume he's also a white nationalist, because being anti-state and an American nationalist do seem at odds with one another.

Anyway, it's pretty funny and ironic that a right-wing person would even align himself to a famous Communist. Lenin was pretty elitist, though, and he thought most people were basically idiots who didn't know what was good for them, so it was his job to educate/agitate the masses in order to let "progress" take its course. I could see the similarities between Lenin and Bannon from that angle, heh. Except Lenin's ideas rest on the shoulders of Marx, whereas Bannon's ideas rest on the shoulders of ????

Edited November 20, 2016 by millefleur

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Is this just your opinion? Or can you provide links where he said something to make you think that's his goal?

Bannon does wish to destroy the state, but not just the state, the entire system. All parties, all government, and replace it with something else of his own utopian making.

[yuna628 9,758]

But therein lies the difference....what exactly is the replacement? Lenin didn't like the bourgeois-controlled state, but he was happy with one controlled by the proletariat. Lenin was not an anti-statist, quite the opposite. The Marxist dialectic, which is essentially what the entire philosophy hinges upon. I don't think Bannon has a plan that thought out or developed, much like Trump himself. Besides, it would be pretty unconstitutional to overthrow the entire US government...which seems odd of an American Nationalist, when the country is essentially defined by the Constitution. I guess this is why people assume he's also a white nationalist, because being anti-state and an American nationalist do seem at odds with one another.

Anyway, it's pretty funny and ironic that a right-wing person would even align himself to a famous Communist. Lenin was pretty elitist, though, and he thought most people were basically idiots who didn't know what was good for them, so it was his job to educate/agitate the masses in order to let "progress" take its course. I could see the similarities between Lenin and Bannon from that angle, heh. Except Lenin's ideas rest on the shoulders of Marx, whereas Bannon's ideas rest on the shoulders of ????

Well, here's the thing it does sound elitist doesn't it? That one person's vision for America is somehow much better than the rest, that you know what's best for the country, and that only you can cure whatever is supposedly wrong with it. That one person, or one collective group of persons could be the ''savior'' if you will. If you listen to the things he says and look at all of Bannon's writings, you get this overall impression from him - that he feels he is enlightened to the ills of society and that the only way to 'fix' it, is to destroy it all. But yes, what is the replacement? He says he has drawn inspiration from Riefenstahl... and if saying Lenin doesn't give most American's pause in figuring out what he means, surely that name might. I do indeed feel that he believes, not in the poor or middle class being the best of us, but that they simply don't know what's best for them, so by using propaganda, psychological tactics, and stirring non-logical emotions and not constructive dialogue in favor of anger and what ''feels true to you, even when it is not truth'' is the best way to achieve this progress. Get the pitchforks and clubs, light the town on fire sort of philosophy. Achieve a goal through violence and curtailing of freedoms (and yes those protestor mobs are playing right into his hands). Fear, he says is a good thing. The best sort of motivation. He overlooks it also motivates people to do some extremely horrific things; but this is the tactic he loves. To some degree, our founders could sound a bit elitist back in the day. Consider Hamilton, who was rather into thinking those who should vote for the country should not be the 'everyman' but the educated/wise man. And that people didn't entirely know what was best for them in government or may be easily hoodwinked into thinking what's best for them. Or Madison who was concerned that the larger the republic and population grew the more difficult it would be to keep a coherently stable government or party, due to sectionalism. Madison was pretty astute, because we see this happening before our very own eyes.

As for nationalism, or white nationalism, or alt right nationalism - or whatever name people want to pretty package it in to make themselves feel more comfortable with the beliefs they have adopted, it comes from the same dangerous thing of which I see little distinction. Bannon doesn't care about the consequences of his schemes, he may not even directly or coherently care what shoulders his ideas rest upon, or where his ultimate goal will lead. But even if Jay and I disagree on nationalism, or the causes of it or certain other particular - I think we agree that this is a man you want far away from government as possible.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

I think JayJay and Yuna make valid points, but Yuna leans where I lean. Trump supporters deny it, but their gloating over-reaction to the election win makes the truly despicable campaign Trump ran a valid reason for concern over how Trump will act as President.

Trump scapegoated, besmirched, belittled and truly reached out to the dark ugliness that still remains in certain segments of US society. I am not at all convinced that he can put the ugliness back in a bottle.

There is a reason White Nationalists and flat out American Neo-Nazis are really excited and happy right now. That is not the same as saying all Trump supporters are either of those two groups, but it's not a fact deserving of simply brushing aside because false accusations from the ultra-Left are made too often.