The Empire Strikes Back

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: LOL I would disagree. If I didnt we would not have much to talk about!
No he did not build a galactic alliance, that was already built. The troops were not payed for by the alliance. In fact its never been said who actually paid for the clone army but several books suggest it was actually paid for by the Sith. So in that context that army was actually an invading army, just not an overtly invading army. This was the genus of the Sith plan. They instigated a civil war and then pitted the alliance separatists against the clone troops which destabilized the entire alliance. Once this was done the clone army was turned against the rest of the republic and brought them under control as well. In effect they were a trojan horse that waltzed right into the heart of the republic.

During this time the alliance govt was still in effect but the emergency powers granted the chancellor allowed him to bring this clone army in. Once that was done and he seized power by their force he declared himself an emperor and then proceeded to dismantle the alliance govt and get rid of the representatives and in their place installed regional governors all loyal to him. So no the functional govt under the alliance looked nothing like the final empire. All this work to convert it was done after the declaration and it was backed up by the secret covert building and invasion of the clone army. Palpatine did not legally seize power. He only legally gained emergency powers. But his invading army and declaration of an empire were illegal.

As for the UN it only makes sense that its headquartered in New York since the US started the organization at the end of WWII. It was designed to be a body in which all nations join and govern international peace and security so that no empire like the Nazis could ever be created again. And of course the US acts unilaterally at points in time as its prerogative but it is done through a legislative process, not the order of an emperor. The US also has its own military under the authority of that same legislative body and even though the command in chief is the president it is also not a body loyal to the president as the clone army was. Unlawful orders will not be followed by our military as is their standing basic tenet.

That was excellent, even if it relies on non-canon material to support it. I happen to like the EU so I'll concede on the initial funding coming not coming from the Republic even though they were ordered by Sifo-Dyas. I could argue it was actually all of the following:

Dooku's vast personal fortune
Funds skimmed from the Republic's budget by Palpatine
Money taken from the Jedi budget by Sifo-Dias.
Money appropriated from the Trade Federation by Dooku
Sith funds.
https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/65706/how-did-the-republic-pay-for-the-clone-army

keep in mind that funding had to be ongoing and also pay for weapons, armor, and ships; all of which could not have been provided by the Kamino. If we're using EU/Legends then you have to consider how Darth Plagueis supplied the funds to build, train, and supply the Clone Army. He gained control of the InterGalactic Banking Clan.
https://www.quora.com/How-was-the-clone-army-funded

according to starwars.fandom.com The Banking Clan was subject to the Core Five, joined the confederacy, but still conducted business with the Republic before being taken over by Senator Rush Clovis which ceded control to the office of the Supreme Chancellor.
https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/InterGalactic_Banking_Clan

This happened prior to the empire declaration. Then if you read the article on Supreme Chancellor...
https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Supreme_Chancellor

You'll see how Palpatine consolidated power well before declaring it an empire. In other words... there was a definite period in which

The conflict with the Separatists helped to greatly expand the chancellor's authority with additional wartime powers, resulting in the marginalization of the Senate as Palpatine became dictator in all but name

By 19 BBY the office of the Chancellor had appropriate power controlling the Senate and the courts, as well as the Banking Clan and the Republic Military. All that, he gained LEGALLY. The Army was a "Republic Army" and not an invading force. It was ordered by the Jedi, bankrolled by the Banking Clan. These were both manipulated into doing it of course but that's my whole point. By the time Palps actually said "empire" it was an empire in all but name. He ALREADY had control over the Senate and the Court. But once he had legal authority he didn't really need them anymore. And he was able to use the emergency powers as the final key to setting up that legal authority which is why he was never prosecuted and why the republic army continued to fight for him; with only a rebellion breaking off to oppose him. Did he really need to do that? Arguably if he never said "empire" and never replaced the Senate there may have never been a rebellion. And isn't that what I said about America? That as long as we don't say the "e" word that's is what allows us to behave like and consolidate more power than any previous empire. We simply have to be in denial for it to work.

https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Emergency_Powers_Act

The Emergency Powers Act was crucial to the fall of the republic because it basically said that the Chancellor could choose when the emergency was over and until it was over he didn't have to allow new elections and could make decisions without senate approval, including the decision to reorganize the republic into the empire.

My argument, Kyrin, is that the power of the Empire, which Palpatine masterfully obtained and used, was already there within the Republic and all he had to do was take the wheel, and manipulate it to the extent that he had power over the economic (banks), political (senate), judicial (courts) and military arms of the government. It was already set up to have all that power but to SHARE IT among the representatives of the different worlds. But if one person or a small group of wealthy people could use Citizens United and other levers to control politicians that's already bad. But if one of these same people became president and controlled court picks, it COULD (not saying it has already) set the stage for something worse.

HOWEVER... I don't feel the wealthy people who are obviously manipulating congress WANT to directly control the Executive necessarily because that would put too much political heat on them and the control they already have over the people who make our laws. So I'm not at all saying "yes this is clear cut and there's nothing to argue". I'm saying it is anything but clear and so was what happened to the Galactic Republic in its last days. They didn't see this coming at all. They didn't realize the Banking Clan had been infiltrated by a Sith lord. And because these pieces on the chess board appeared to be separate and having their own independent motivations, these same pieces could be moved by a small group of people. In effect, it was already an empire. They just didn't know it yet. The actual declaration was simply Sidious saying "checkmate".

Right now... whatever you think about Trump, it is clear that he's had an oddly powerful grip on Republicans in Congress. I'm not sure there's anyone who doesn't see that. He doesn't have the same control over the courts and that is where the system has really proved its genius. However, it's not exactly for lack of trying which is why people like Mitch McConnell are willing to do complete hypocritical 180s on court appointments. Because it's all about power to them and if Trump has it they believe their party has it. And if their party gets control of congress, the executive, and the supreme court then as long as everyone bats for their team (which is what some believe) then there will be no "real" check and balance on Republican power.

And keep in mind that eventually Palpatine lost and was overthrown by the rebellion so further confirmation that empires in name do not work! As long as no one operating in the shadows comes out and tries to publicly grab all the power that the US has already consolidated then perhaps there will never be a rebellion and they can continue to rule from the shadows forever. In other words, as long as we feel like we have a vote we're allowed to dream the American dream of freedom even if it is limited by the interests of those corrupt elite ruling from the shadows. Cabinet and Dept heads like Ben Carson and Betsy DeVos are just like those regional governors in Palpatine's empire. So what's the difference? How close do we get to effectively exactly what happened in Star Wars before we can agree that something's wrong? And is this very debate the same reason why no one seemed to have seen it happening in SW besides a handful of Jedi? The rest probably didn't think it was possible.

A little housekeeping just to help us stay on target and keep us from getting too distracted by minor sidebars.

OP:
There will be a lot of fodder for debate and a lot of controversial aspects that people are sure to disagree with. And I want to keep a metaphorical relationship between the government in discussion, to the Empire in the Star Wars universe. If you disagree that one is anything like the other you can argue that too. And if it is similar then what is it that makes it so? What is at the heart of this empire? And what is it that continues to put it in a position to be influenced and arguably taken over by the "Sith"? Is there a Palpatine among us? How do we detect a Palpatine? If there is, are there rebels who oppose this person and can they be successful?

We have discussed whether the US can be called an empire, but I'd like to remind folks that this word was used within the context of "likeness" not "sameness". Is there a perceivable relationship between the government in question to the Empire in Star Wars. It doesn't have to be a 1:1 ration of exactness; just a similarity within the context of "could the same or similar thing happen to the US"? And if we're intellectually honest then I feel like if we're going to ask that question then you have to ask whether or not it has already "happened" or "started to happen". In other words, from someone's perspective maybe we've lost the Democratic Republic a long time ago. In someone else's perspective maybe we're starting to slide uncomfortably in that direction. Where is the truth? What is the truth?

I've reached an understanding, although perhaps tenuous, with Kyrin that I can use the word "empire" so long as we can also use the word "republic", which is cool because I do think both are true and applicable in different senses. Clearly, it has the exterior vestiges and appendages of a Democratic Republic. Internally, there are are "devices" that allow the representation of the citizens to be superseded or circumvented by financial or corporate interests. If the government represents the people how come the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer? Why is there gerrymandering? Clearly there are rules to the game but clearly those rules are being bent and broken.

So since there are still plenty of things to debate still let's start the transition to Episode II, or whether or not the "empire is striking back". This is clearly a play on words so it's not to be taken literally. Rather, it is to say that it seems that there are elements that have been lying dormant or simply moving under the radar of public consciousness, that are now feeling themselves and performing certain activities in broad daylight that play to their agenda. Perhaps they would like to be an empire more than the rest of the country does but for "whatever" reason they feel like they're in power now.

ZealotX wrote:
Right now... whatever you think about Trump, it is clear that he's had an oddly powerful grip on Republicans in Congress. I'm not sure there's anyone who doesn't see that. He doesn't have the same control over the courts and that is where the system has really proved its genius..

Well I for one do not see that. In the first two years of his presidency he got a lot of push back from republicans. He failed to get the Obama health bill reformed because of it. And what we are really talking about here in Star Wars is an IMAGINARY govt. I never saw anything about the judicial branch in Star Wars and the fact that the congress would just unanimously cheer him in is a ridiculous concept, albeit one to further a story. It lacked that branch simply because that made the story good in the fact that Palpatine could take over and become emperor. That would not happen in our real life govt without a much greater effort and a great deal of force. Trump has used his powers to their fullest in his time there and they have been challenged over and over, both by the courts and by congress. The system works as it is designed.. as a republic, not an empire.

And without calling anyone Hitler, if you study the rise of the Nazi party, on which the Star Wars empire was based upon, you may start seeing some interesting similarities with today's rhetoric.

The Nazi party started as the "National Socialist German Workers’ Party"

Now the History channel's website focuses more on "German pride and Antisemitism" I would imagine that
1. These is nothing wrong with "German pride"
2. Germans were afraid of losing their jobs and began seeing Jews as a threat to those jobs.

The mere mention of Hitler and Nazis seems to come fully loaded because we all know the outcome. Hitler is forever stigmatized with evil and so we have to be careful in who we and how we associate others with that same stigma.

With that being said, I don't think the Germans intended from the beginning to be Antisemitic or commit genocide. It was more like a zeitgeist that started with a more benign position and over time the anger of seeing Jews have good jobs and the fear of them losing good jobs fused into a situation where they cared less and less what happened to those Jews.

It's not a 1:1 comparison by any stretch of the imagination but there seem to be a lot of white voters that feel like this is is their country (now) and therefore they are (if anyone is) entitled to jobs. This would be the same concern as the German Worker's party. They look around. They see black people getting a lot of jobs, especially a lot of government jobs. They see Jews making tons of money and keeping it to themselves (as commanded by the Torah). They see Hispanics crossing the border and taking jobs. And logically, even if they aren't competing for jobs working out in the fields there is a very good chance that the CHILDREN of those workers will not be working the same jobs but rather learning English in American schools and competing for college spots and jobs that either they or their children will want. And hey... it's not like there isn't a part of me that understands and sympathizes with this. Especially when they feel like we're letting people break the rules in order to be in a position to "take" our jobs in the future. Aren't we already in debt? Why should our resources help people who aren't even supposed to be here?

And if I am imagining all this then why is it that people are identifying as "white nationalists"? Let's say "white nationalists" have nothing to do with Nazis. Why do they have to be "white" nationalists? Why not just nationalists? Why be exclusive rather than inclusive? Isn't because they're not worried about black jobs and Asian jobs but just white jobs? They know KKK will never be mainstream again (like it used to be) because of it's history. They know that the Nazi party will never be mainstream again because of its history. So... "white nationalism" because "white nationalism" has no history (yet) to be ashamed of or to be shamed by. And with control of an Executive branch and even the Senate bending the knee to the MAGA agenda, which YES absolutely was the brain child of white nationalists, these people don't just have gripes and complaints. They have real power. And as long as that agenda benefits others who, may not be members of or ascribe to all the objectives of the white nationalists, there isn't resistance from those people but rather a subtle tacit approval. At the very least they'll make excuses and blame the other side. Kids in cages? Oh that's unfortunate but their parents shouldn't have bought them. We start making these arguments not realizing that we're sliding down a slippery slope towards fascism.

This, what I will call an, undercurrent has existed in this country for a long time. It's not new. Anyone who thinks it's new simply hasn't been paying attention or taking America's pulse in the right places. Many rural folk see themselves in opposition with the "rich" city folk who more and more start looking like the elites from the Hunger Games. Hillary Clinton's wardrobe did her no favors on the campaign trail. And yes, she did deserve to lose even if it Russia and Trump's popularity weren't factors. She was a "corporate democrat" and democrats, like Nancy Pelosi, are often guided by the donor class as well to the point where if corporations need something that sounds more Republican they simply Lobby the Republicans and if they need something that sounds more democratic they lobby the democrats. Trust me, there's enough blame to go around without feeding into partisan tropes.

This current of "white nationalism" wasn't new but was driven underground by the Civil Rights movement; not because blacks were involved but because whites were getting involved as well. It became a taboo to be overtly racist so racist switched to covert racism. And in many if not most cases, their racism wasn't really about hate but fear of losing their way of life; the survival of white culture and white wealth. So, imho, this is what put them into a position to "strike back"... it's not everyone, just like I doubt there was ever a 45+% of the actual citizens of the Republic who were ever in support of everything the Galactic Empire was doing (although I would have liked to see Palpatine's fictional approval numbers lol). I would imagine that most citizens of the empire didn't want it and only tolerated it because they had no choice. They were powerless to stop it because their representatives had foolishly given that power away.

But how did it happen? Saikat Mandal had this to say:

Imagine this:

You have lost a war.

You had to secede a chunk of your land to the people against whom you lost.

Your military has been greatly reduced and further increase is highly prohibited.

Your economy is in shambles and unemployment is at an all time high.

There is widespread poverty and hunger.

Out of all this you find an extremely charismatic leader who shows extreme promise to reinstate to your past glories. You find that he has galvanized the nation and has stood up against the oppressors who had trampled your nation.

What do you do at that time?

YES. Yes you guessed it right. You support that man, for he is your saviour in such times of hardship.

So by now you must have understood that once the Nazis were in power there was great support for them. Not to mention that Hitler greatly decreased unemployment, there was increase in industrial outputs, food rations were getting better.

At this time Hitler was very popular. The people simply adored him and believed that he could lead them to greatness.

Oh the irony.

Sound familiar? In my opinion, Make America Great Again means that America isn't great right now because there are struggles being experienced by a base of people that weren't struggling as much when others (like African Americans) were struggling much more. Now that they're struggling more they're looking to white nationalism and a savior, who, if given enough power, they believe will lead them [back] to greatness.

ZealotX wrote:
Sound familiar?

Oh brother.... no it does not sound familiar at all! lol You cant compare the Nazi govt to ours and just go well there ya go! were an empire. There is no such similarity. The Germans had a king just a few years before so they were already used to a monarchy. They country was completely destabilized by WWI, economy dead, military destroyed, hyper inflation, paramilitary govt parties ruled the land and they had a weak republic structure. None of this is true in the US. The saga of star wars is not only based on Nazi Germany but also the Romans, the Greeks, the Knights Templar, Richard Nixon and the Viet Nam war. So I think to cherry pick just Nazis is disingenuous.

Now you pull the race card which I think is bad form. We are not in a race war nor have we ever been no matter how much democrats try to tell people we are. Make America Great Again is not "Make White America Great Again". Thats just crap. Whites are not worried about black or Hispanic jobs. And they sure dont have the issue with immigrants that you seem to want to put forth. What is of concern is illegal immigrants and the lack of enforcement of our boarder and immigration laws. I have no idea where you got this concept of white against minorities but its just not a valid point here. People have been identifying as white nationalists since the 70s, and it is an undercurrent I agree. But it continues to be. They are not in control of the executive branch of the govt. I mean WTF are you even talking about here? The president has done more for black jobs that any other president in recent history, He has increased funding for black colleges and expanded minority job training programs. just to name a few things. Im not going to turn this into a black vs white thing...

American Imperialists are behind Trump..

Just like the Globalists were behind Hillary..

The Wolf and the Fox, and you're the hen..

Trump has swamp creatures just like Obama did..

People really aren't seeing the game of Hierarchy here.. which is why I like Anarchism.

America is an economic empire first. Politically and militarily centralized power controls and maintains that empire.. it is entirely OPPOSITE of what was intended by the Constitution..

However, the current Zeitgeist, and its current disruption, was at least two decades in the making.. first by putting the different identy groups further in their corners.. Now Black America is the face of the democratic party, backed by LBGT and (Feminaziism) lol.. While "white nationalism" was grouped with anti-globalism, the militia and men's clubs, and the Christian right in the GOP.. causing the more "liberal" repubs like the Bushes (who have their own messed up history) to forsake them (along with the anti-globalism they hate)..

The powers that be underestimated America's laziness lol they should've made it seem like he was going to win so people would be actually scared into voting like was planned.. but now they're stuck lol and the fake left and phony right are destroying each other in the process of this attempted role reversal..

The left was never meant to be the radicalized population to kick off civil unrest. The right was ready for all out civil war..

Uzima Moto wrote: they should've made it seem like he was going to win so people would be actually scared into voting like was planned.

Who exactly is "they"?

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

ZealotX wrote:
Right now... whatever you think about Trump, it is clear that he's had an oddly powerful grip on Republicans in Congress. I'm not sure there's anyone who doesn't see that. He doesn't have the same control over the courts and that is where the system has really proved its genius..

Well I for one do not see that. In the first two years of his presidency he got a lot of push back from republicans. He failed to get the Obama health bill reformed because of it. And what we are really talking about here in Star Wars is an IMAGINARY govt. I never saw anything about the judicial branch in Star Wars and the fact that the congress would just unanimously cheer him in is a ridiculous concept, albeit one to further a story. It lacked that branch simply because that made the story good in the fact that Palpatine could take over and become emperor. That would not happen in our real life govt without a much greater effort and a great deal of force. Trump has used his powers to their fullest in his time there and they have been challenged over and over, both by the courts and by congress. The system works as it is designed.. as a republic, not an empire.

Look at Lindsey Graham's statements about Trump before and after the election. That was one of his worst critics. The reason, and we can debate this if you want, that Obamacare didn't get replaced has nothing to do with opposition to Trump. It was because Trump lied. On the campaign trail Trump said he had a plan that was better. He said everyone would be covered and pre-existing conditions will be covered.

“I alone can fix it,” Trump said of Obamacare and other problems he saw plaguing the country, at the 2016 Republican National Convention.

Trump repeatedly promised to repeal Obamacare “immediately, fast, quick,” and replace it with a system that would provide “great health care for a fraction of the price.” He promised to “repeal and replace” Obamacare with “something terrific” that helps people with “no money.” He also promised to “take care” of all Americans with health care.

Trump and Republican in Congress have nearly abandoned their Obamacare repeal efforts. The House narrowly passed a bill, but the Senate has failed to find a proposal supported by a majority of Republicans. Most recently, four Republican Senators announced they’d oppose a bill championed by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Trump.

The Congressional Budget Office found that different versions of congressional plans to repeal Obamacare — each trumpeted by Trump in his quest to get a bill passed — would result in over 20 million people losing coverage, as well as higher premiums and out-of-pocket costs for people with lower incomes and those nearing retirement.

Even though Trump promised not to simply repeal the ACA without a replacement, he has since advocated a wide range of tactics, including just letting Obamacare fail through administrative neglect and repealing with a two-year delay and no replacement.

Trump promised to save social security and medicaid without cuts but supported bills with drastic cuts to medicaid funding in excess of $700 billion.

I just want to say, I agree with that 100%, except pre-existing conditions, I would absolutely get rid of Obamacare, we’re going to have something much better, but pre-existing conditions, when I’m referring to that, and I was referring to that very strongly on the show with Anderson Cooper, I want to keep pre-existing conditions. I think we need it. I think it’s a modern age, and I think we have to have it.

However the plans moving through congress from the GOP would remove protections for pre-existing conditions.

The reason its getting stalled is because there is a bipartison effort to block it because of the obvious effect it would have, even on the GOP's own constituents. There are people who would literally die. And at the same time these bills don't match the populist campaign promises Trump made. They are simply Trump concessions because "who knew healthcare was so complicated". The power Trump has is political. In other words, all of these campaign promises that speak to a MAGA agenda, are popular with the base and therefore Republicans in congress are very careful not to visibly oppose. But the way they defend Trump even when some Fox news people have spoken honestly against him? ...speaks to his power and influence.

https://thinkprogress.org/check-in-trumps-major-promises-f1bdf8a96088/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/subjects/health-care/

And yes... as I've been saying... its only thanks to the Judicial branch that the GOP doesn't seem to have absolute power. They have a majority on the supreme court and now states are currently flexing their power by challenging Roe v. Wade. Trump can't tell judges what to do and things have to circulate up to the Supreme Court. However, as we have seen in Trump's appointments of people who have pretty much auditioned for the job by filating his ego on national TV, he seeks to put people in positions who will work for his interests and be loyal to him; same as I would imagine Palpatine did with his regional governors. You can do the same thing with judicial picks if you have an organization that basically follows judges like baseball players and picks the ones who have made statements most in line with your views. The president can't stack the court completely because they have lifetime appointments but if he can replace enough he can swing the entire bench in his favor. But we have yet to see the full impact of this. What Trump is doing, seemingly at every turn, is testing the full extent of his power. He's seeing the extent of it and simply using lawyers to get around those obstacles. Apparently you CAN ban Muslims, for example. You just can't do it directly and you can't CALL IT THAT. Which is much like my previous argument about the word "empire". You can behave like one but you can't call it that and expect it to keep functioning the same. I don't think anyone expects Trump or anyone else for that matter to announce on white house lawn that they are going to reorganize America into an Empire. I think what people like myself are concerned about isn't a name or label, but how it behaves and affects people.

Trump is not America's greatest threat or her savior. I wish folks would stop sitting in that box..

Americans literally have the right to remove their Government but sit on their thumbs and vote for somebody to do it for them.. sad case.. but Americans couldn't do that, anyway. They're too impulsive and presumptuous of their own positions. Unwilling to learn to just live and let live..

What I mean by "they" in that sentence is those globalist interests that were pushing for Trump to lose..

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

ZealotX wrote:
Sound familiar?

Oh brother.... no it does not sound familiar at all! lol You cant compare the Nazi govt to ours and just go well there ya go! were an empire. There is no such similarity. The Germans had a king just a few years before so they were already used to a monarchy. They country was completely destabilized by WWI, economy dead, military destroyed, hyper inflation, paramilitary govt parties ruled the land and they had a weak republic structure. None of this is true in the US. The saga of star wars is not only based on Nazi Germany but also the Romans, the Greeks, the Knights Templar, Richard Nixon and the Viet Nam war. So I think to cherry pick just Nazis is disingenuous.

Now you pull the race card which I think is bad form. We are not in a race war nor have we ever been no matter how much democrats try to tell people we are. Make America Great Again is not "Make White America Great Again". Thats just crap. Whites are not worried about black or Hispanic jobs. And they sure dont have the issue with immigrants that you seem to want to put forth. What is of concern is illegal immigrants and the lack of enforcement of our boarder and immigration laws. I have no idea where you got this concept of white against minorities but its just not a valid point here. People have been identifying as white nationalists since the 70s, and it is an undercurrent I agree. But it continues to be. They are not in control of the executive branch of the govt. I mean WTF are you even talking about here? The president has done more for black jobs that any other president in recent history, He has increased funding for black colleges and expanded minority job training programs. just to name a few things. Im not going to turn this into a black vs white thing...

You continue to defend as if I'm attacking or talking about all whites. This actually threatens to turn the argument into something that it was not. It was never a black vs white thing because like I told you recently, neither group is a MONOLITH. You can't speak for all whites to say what they do or do not think just as I cannot do the same thing for blacks. There are black people in different political parties, social spheres, income brackets, etc.

But to say "race card" or "race war" would be a bit irresponsible and incites a completely wrongheaded attitude that says "we can't even talk about people who are racist because someone who isn't racist may think you're talking about them." That's BS. If you're not racist then I'm not talking about you. It really is that simple. What people are afraid of, I think, it that the shoe just might fit and they are comfortable wearing it, but they don't want anyone to know they are comfortable wearing it unless that person is also wearing the same shoes. But if it's not your shoe then don't wear it and don't act like I'm trying to sell it to you. You may not think there is a racial issue deep within the republican base but even other republicans are starting to see it. Personally, I've witnessed more racist garbage coming out of people's mouths in the last two years than the last 30 combined.


(you can start 5min in)

"racism is part of what kept conservatism together" - John Ziegler, conservative republican.

I'm now going to make an assumption. I'm going to assume you understand what a dog whistle is, what it's purpose is, and how they're used in politics.

And understand the context around my perspective. You may not hear them but I hear them all the time; stories about racists who are calling the cops on black people for doing such mundane things as:
grilling in the park
parking
sleeping
lawnmowing
selling lemonade
swimming
attending a swimming party
and much more.

I personally overheard a kid tell my step son that whites were better than blacks. And in the same school district a girl on his soccer team said something racist which made him want to quit. And on the bus some kid told him and/or his sister to "go back to the plantation".

And these are kids. Kids are going to echo things they hear their parents saying. And obviously this isn't every white kid, but for every 1 kid who says something racist how many kids are simply not saying anything? 10? 20? 200? And the fact is that this area is outside the city. More rural. Racism is clearly worse in areas (some) whites identify as "their territory". This of course effects education which allows a lower standard of education in non-white communities. But hey... these policies aren't racist because they aren't labeled as such, right?

And did I mention we don't live in the South? I went to school in Alabama. I cannot even imagine what rural AL is like right now. When I was there my bosses young niece (white) pointed at me and said "you're a black man!" which was admittedly very weird to me but simply spoke to her lack of exposure to black people which then allows kids to believe anything said about black people. But she didn't dislike me and I didn't dislike her. I'm still friends with my boss on Facebook.

Look...

Either you hear the dog whistle or you weren't meant to hear it. That's how it works. Someone wisely said that MAGA points back to Ronald Reagan. That makes perfect sense.

“One perfect example – a perfect example – of how special interests and the powerful have pitted white working-class Americans against brown and black working Americans in order to just screw over all working-class Americans is Reaganism in the ’80s,” Ocasio-Cortez said during an interview at the conference.

This blew a lot of people's minds. I was born in 79 so I was barely aware of Reagan's presidency. He was revered by white people so I assumed he was relatively good for everyone.

"More than any other modern U.S. president, it was Ronald Reagan who cultivated the concept of so-called reverse discrimination, which emerged in the 1970s as a backlash against affirmative action in public schooling as court-ordered busing grew throughout the country. During these years, a growing number of white Americans came to believe civil rights programs and policies had outstretched their original intent and had turned whites into the victims of racial discrimination."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2017/10/10/how-the-reagan-administration-stoked-fears-of-anti-white-racism/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.8fc1045f607b

Not only had I not heard this before but certain groups recently coming out started to make more sense to me. Certain white males have been ranting about being discriminated against and one only has to put two and two together.

Opponents of affirmative action found even more support among conservative officeholders. In the 1980s, the Reagan administration began to roll back civil rights protections and legally designated targets for affirmative action hires, thus bringing the politics of reverse discrimination to the White House. Under the now familiar banner of “Let’s Make America Great Again,” Reagan campaigned vigorously against affirmative action in 1980, promising voters he would overturn policies that mandated, in his view, “federal guidelines or quotas which require race, ethnicity, or sex . . . to be the principle factor in hiring or education.”

And then... it happened. All the dog whistles became audible. Finally... a president was now openly saying what they were trying to hear and accomplish for decades. The older folks already knew what MAGA meant because they heard it before.

In the absence of legal support, Reagan’s assault on affirmative action required political cunning. The president established a two-pronged approach to circumvent existing civil rights laws. First, his administration simply stopped enforcing laws of which it disapproved. Reagan’s secretary of labor, for example, implemented new federal compliance guidelines that exempted as many as 75 percent of companies contracting with the federal government from previously mandatory affirmative action programs.

And here comes Trump preaching deregulation and putting incompetent people in charge of departments he doesn't care about and wants to destroy or defund.

Second, Reagan fundamentally restructured the composition of federal courts and the government’s civil rights enforcement apparatus, which included the Justice and Labor departments and the Commission on Civil Rights. Reagan removed affirmative action supporters from their posts and re-staffed a significant portion of the DOJ and the Commission on Civil Rights with people like William Bradford Reynolds, the head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, who opposed existing civil rights law.

I'm quoting heavily but I think these words are far more important than my own.

In so much as Reagan cared about a civil rights issue, it was not school integration or affirmative action but rather reverse discrimination against white men. Though the rhetoric of reverse discrimination preceded the Reagan presidency and had spread considerably among affirmative action opponents in the years before his election, it was the Reagan administration that first enshrined such assumptions in policy.

The Trump administration promises to enhance these policies. President Trump has borrowed a page from Reagan by appointing Jeff Sessions, a longtime opponent of the Voting Rights Act, to the position of attorney general. Under Sessions, the DOJ promises once again to work to undermine civil rights law by vociferously opposing reverse discrimination.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/373417-jeff-sessionss-year-at-doj-is-a-year-the-civil-rights-movement-will-never
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/w47cbd/the-daily-show-with-trevor-noah-jeff-sessions-cracks-down-on-racism-against-white-people
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/03/us/politics/trump-affirmative-action-race-schools.html
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/the-justice-department-embraces-white-grievance/535683/
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/jeff-sessions-race-civil-rights/story?id=43633501

So it is possible that Trump's base will never leave him because he and his cronies have been scoring points for the MAGA agenda which was created by people like Bannon and Gorka. How much Trump has been used by people like this remains to be seen. Does everyone know exactly what MAGA means? I doubt it. But clearly the US made progress in some areas that some wish was never made and want to go back to a time before that progress. I'm sure it isn't sufficient to convince everyone. I know that. However, I hope someone thinks to themselves "hey wait, what if MAGA means something different from what I thought?" I hope someone will investigate the policies that the current administration is seeking that are linked to the policies that the Reagan administration was seeking. And then I know we wont all get there, but I hope at least some of us can agree that MAGA is ultimately a racist strategy and that is why racists are coming out of their shells, KKK and Nazis are marching and having rallies, and why David Duke endorsed Trump; that all of these happenings are not coincidence but rather providence.