Facism doesn't equal socialism according to author D. Traylor. Protests that has happened in the past, may call for an ethnocentric ideology that promotes a new way of anti-government. Facism begets dictatorship whereas socialism begets anti- capitalism. So, are we waiting for a new regime to take place in the guise of nationalism and cultural preference, or rather don't we want to be our own individualized selves. You know the Bible's first commandment!
I think all roads lead toward a one world order regime which will be based on communism. or some sort of total control over the minions used for their own purposes, whatever those are.
then, W H A T ??????
"Thou shalt not kill," for the murderer slays the image of God."
I don't understand your reference to the 1st Commandment, (I had to look it up), relative to "individualized[sic] selves" and the other parts of your comment
What are you trying to say or ask?
I was merely referring to a phenomenalogy of a people or culture looking at how another culture thrives, but not really sharing the same values, all things not being equal. So even if being oneself, one can also love God first.
Perhaps I just don't understand your point. I do understand that almost, (so much "almost everyone" that it would be representatively accurate to just say "everyone's"), everyone's perspective of things is culturally influenced, but I don't see your comparisons' connection beyond that point.
Relative to a new ethnocentric ideology to form a new "anti-government" perspective, wouldn't one first have to experience such a culture to be able to form a credible perspective to promote?
As for your individualism thought, it is my perception that our human nature demands that we have some degree of individualism. I understand that is a personal and not universal perception, but I think history shows that when viewing the whole of humans, the few small segments, (sects?), that do accept being an identical cog are insignificant as representations of that concept.
So, yes, I do think that, normally, we all want to be our individual selves—within our different tribes. Even if that degree of individualism amounts to no more than a splash of color.
It has been said that there is nothing new left under the sun, just variations. In this case, I don't think any change in perspective will present a "new normal" for America, but only a variation of a human normal.
i tried to answer this. But in the end didn’t understand a thing about this post.
Facism doesn’t equal socialism is like saying dogs doesn’t equal cats. It does not make sense. Off course they don’t.
As G.A I don't get the last sentence either.
Oké. I will reply on the title.
During the fascist movement, was gov the politics of private ownership.
During Adolf Hitler's fascism (which came from Italy.) businesses made huge amount of money. The gov. promoted capitalism. Many bankers did business with the fascist regime of Hitler. A lot of foreign capital promoted Hitler's rise. Many upper-class families promoted Hitler.
So yes, Fascism and capitalism are no enemies of each other.
Is there any proof in that? Seems like if government during that time who really wasn't pro U.S., would buy into a capitalist society, they would merely try to negotiate business for specific entities: something they wanted to understand or possess. Just for business, i don't know what it accomplished.
The US is not the only capitalistic country. Germany itself had lots of big companies. During war time the car industry is doing big business for example. Also the pharmaceutical industry is doing big business. Lots of soldures are using drugs in war time.
And many banks (Swiss) have profited from the war with lucrative deals with Hirler.
IBM did business with the third Reich, and developed the number system to keep track of all the jews in the concentration camps for instance. There are photo's form Htiler talking with the upper class. Talking with business leaders.
War is big business.
Food for thought:
and that "guise of nationalism and cultural preference" is a MYTH!
Our constitution gives us all privilege.
Let's keep the Constitution of the United States and all that America truly stands for.
Let's keep working toward equal opportunity, which President Trump truly believes in and is working toward.
https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/349 … ys-america
... and yes, it's all about staying in touch with ones's Self: Body, mind and spirit.
- what are your goals, ambitions, hopes and dreams?
Without being able to fulfill your dreams in freedom and liberty, (within appropriate moral boundaries,) who are you?
Yes this is the America we speak about, justice for all; especially when growing up. It's a good philosophy, and yes that is suppose to be our driving force for our economy. But it's a new normal.
If private government has the will to put us back together again, will they?
You’re the first American I’ve seen who’s recognised that fascism is extreme right-wing ‘nationalism’ and not extreme left-wing socialism (communism).
Yes, Hitler's Germany is definitely extreme left-wing.
As the name NSDAP tells you so...National Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei . (National Socialist German Workers' Party)...Well, if it states in the name it is socialist, then Hitler must have been a Socialist, right...Like the DDR, which was, of course, a democratic country, as the name said so; Deutsche (German) Democratic Republic.
North Korea too, is a democratic country because the official name of North Korea is: Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
I just wonder why Hitler's extreme left-wing fascistic Germany fought against Russian communism? Weren't they supposed to be friends?
'What's in a name? that which we call a sewer By any other name would smell as shit'.
Actually Fascism is (as described by Wikipedia) far-right, authoritarian ultra-nationalism.
Likewise, Wikipedia makes it perfectly clear that the Nazi Party (National Socialist German Workers' Party) was a far-right political party:-
National Socialism, as in Nazism, is a far-right ideology that is anti-communism, as clearly stated in this Wikipedia article:-
The fact that Hitler’s party had the word ‘Socialism’ in it doesn’t mean it was a socialist party.
Communism is the opposite extreme to ultra-nationalism. That's why during the 2nd world war Russia ended up as an ally to the UK and USA.
Another example where non Brits often get confused is the difference between:-
• Social Democrats, and
• Democratic Socialists.
The Former is a centralist political party, akin to Liberals (UK) and Democrats (USA), while the latter are non-communist socialists e.g. the Labour Party who are Socialists who, unlike Communists, believe in free democracy.
O dear, I thought you British understood sarcasm.
I've obviously spent too much time with our American comrades on social media.
yes me too. I’m flabbergasted at times with the opinions I read here at Hubpages. Makes me understand that there are completely different worlds out there. Which is a good thing to realise. But mind boggling,..
Yep very true; and so frustrating when America lives in its own bubble.
It is frustrating. As the election of the president of the US has such a huge impact on the rest of the world. But the president is voted in by a majority of people who have no clue about what is happening in the rest of the world.
Especially now with a president who does not believe in climate change, a worldwide problem. Even as California is on fire because of it (And terrible maintenance that has a direct line of responsibility at the white house.)
People talk to easily about fascism. And use it just to easily as a scolding name without knowing what it means.
I always find Umberto's Eco explanation and points to pinpoint fascism incredibly clear.
http://www.openculture.com/2016/11/umbe … scism.html
And sadly president Trump is ticking too much of the boxes that point towards fascism.
From the viewpoint of an American, soon to vote in a new President, if other countries wish to hang on to American coat tails then they need to become more "Americanized", accepting the American way of life and government - not demand than Americans accept their notions of how a country should operate and change into what they wish to see.
As far as climate change causing our forest fires; we have known for many years that our methods of forest management were not good - that preventing the burning of our beautiful forests would lead to ever greater and more destructive fires. It had nothing to do with climate change then and it has very little to do with it now - it was, and is, a matter of leaving nature alone to do as it will without harmful human intervention. It is only very recently (the last few months) that these fires are suddenly caused by climate change; a very clear political attack on Trump with very little truth in it. Nor is our President responsible for making decisions on how forests are managed, and certainly not responsible for decades of mis-management. This, too, is merely a political attack with no truth in it.
From the viewpoint of an American, soon to vote in a new President, if other countries wish to hang on to American coat tails then they need to become more "Americanized", accepting the American way of life and government - not demand than Americans accept their notions of how a country should operate and change into what they wish to see.
?? - I don't see the relation of this paragraph with my statement.
Every country has it's own identity as is based on it's history. That's a good thing. I was not refering to how one should live. I was thinking about how the presidency of the US impacts the world on different levels.
As for instance China is taking over the world power I think it's important that the US and Europe ( I include the UK) should work together to break this take over. But what we see is that the EU and the US have the worst relations ever. This is pure Trumps poltics. You can call it fighting for US interests, but I think the oposite is happening. The position of the US has worsened as it is more isolating itself from the world scene. That's a sad thing.
The same can be said about the UK, that is isolating itself to now it chose not to fight together with the rest of Europe against China.
As for another big world problem, Climate Change,it is a problem that president Trump does not believe in Climate Change. As it is a fact and it's a fact too that humans are the cause.
Now how to deal with it may be a political point of view. Trump decided to go back to oil and coal. But that's not the future. Again China. China is looking into the solar panel industry and the battery industry. Trump doesn't want to invest in new technologies. That's I think bad for the US business and stratigic power position.
(Although there are a lot of windmills here in Spain made in the US.)
To have such a powerfull man like the president of the US not believing in Climate Change and having an anti-science atitude is not just terrible for the US, but terriblle for the rest of the world too.
I read somewhere that over a 70% of the forrests in Carlifonia are State responsible. (tell me if I'm wrong.) So that makes in the end The White house responsible.
Climate Change is going on for years. The temperatures are rising for years in Carlifornia and elsewhere in the world. So climate change is not something from the last couple of months. And forrrests are closely related to the clamite crisis as they are incredibly important for the worlds climate. The best thing you can do to stop climate change is to plant trees.
No, Trump is not responsible for decades of mismanigment, absolutely true. The deforestation and mismanigement is going on for a long time. But Trump did not exactly help.
By the way, it's not just the US that has decades of mis-management of their forrests. Here in Spain too. Actually 5 years ago there was a huge bushfire 8km from my home. I almost had to evacuate, but lucky for me it was on the other side of the highway and olive fields.
And because it was not in a wildly populated area the local government did react incredibly slow. And thus lots of woods burnt down. And heho, a couple of days later all the wood was sold to a huge firm in Italy. (the major of the village got a nice bottle of champagne...and more). And after the clean up of the burnt wood (and still standing good trees), they made a mess of it by ruining the soil. Now 5 years later, hardly enything has been done to prevent a next bushfire.. It's waiting for the next match..
So the US is not the only country were the climate crisis is low on the agenda. Here in Spain it's a huge issue on the streets but not in parlement. But I think it should be.
"?? - I don't see the relation of this paragraph with my statement."
Are you comments about the needs of America, or the good of the world, particularly your country? Do you make them with the American psyche in mind, or as a way to convince Americans to do what is good for you and your country? Are you trying to fit America and Americans into the mold of Europeans and European countries?
"But what we see is that the EU and the US have the worst relations ever."
If that is true (and I'm not sure it is), then the problem is that Trump is backing off from financing the rest of the world while they demand a change to our way of life. Which goes right back to my statement that Americans vote for America, and the American way of life.
"So that makes in the end The White house responsible."
It could well be that most of California is state land, vs federal land as it is in Idaho where I live. But that means the state, not Trump is responsible; Trump has zero say in how those forests are managed.
"But Trump did not exactly help."
About all Trump has done about forest management (as far as I'm aware) is to point out that liberal management of forests has been faulty. That was in response to ridiculous efforts to blame him for it, and he's right - what was not mentioned is that Republican management is little, if any, better and any improvement is likely due to a much lower population density.
Your comment about the nearby fire is indicative of the problem: America has for years tried to put out all forest/range fires, and that is NOT the right thing to do. Nature has evolved around fires, fires are necessary for forests to prosper. And when our policy is to promptly put them out (just as you say) we are doing the wrong thing. The result of those efforts is a truly massive buildup of fuel on the ground; fuel that burns so readily that even small fires are quickly transferred to trees. Trees that then burn themselves, catching the next tree on fire, rather than standing tall with a little scorched bark.
Some of that is understandable - we scarcely want homes and towns burned - but we do it where there ARE no homes or towns as well. The assumption that all fires are bad for the forest is false right to the core; fires are helpful to forests, wildlife and even low lying vegetation...until we stepped in to allow piles and piles of fuel to collect, unburnt, over millions of acres of forest.
And that is not due to climate change - it is due solely to mismanagement of forests. At most climate change can be blamed for an additional couple of degrees of temperature (that won't send a slow burning ground fire to tree tops) and, perhaps, local droughts - vegetation that has died from lack of water burns better.
At the same time, we in America have drastically lowered the water table over much of the country. I've read that farms that used to have 30' wells now require wells hundreds of feet down. At the same time, we take surface water (notably the mighty Colorado river), encase it in concrete so none escapes, and ship it to Los Angeles to the point that that major river is but a trickle (or nothing at all) by the time it reaches Mexico. This, too, will have an effect on fire damage, damage that has nothing to do with climate change.
So no, our forest and range fires are not caused by climate change (I see they've caught 10 arsonists setting forest fires so far this year, too), but on well meaning but very harmful management practices.
With reference to your comments wilderness:-
Peterstreep is talking about the good of the world, which includes the USA e.g. the issue of Climate Change (Global Warming) is a worldwide issue that adversely affects the USA just as much as it affects the rest of the world; we should all be in it together fighting a common enemy (Global Warming).
Yes peterstreep is right, relations between the EU & USA is bad, and does also adversely affect the UK e.g. Trump’s Trade War with the EU; Trump’s Climate Change Denial etc.
Notwithstanding your comments about managed fires; which is a valid point. FYI Climate Change is a major factor in the increase in ferocity and frequency of forest fires. Historically in the UK forest fires was a rare occurrence in the UK because (until recent decades) the UK was a wet and damp country. But not anymore; since the 1980s the UK has become noticeably, and increasingly hotter and dryer because of Climate Change, and consequently, forest fires have become far more common.
2018: Firefighters call in military to battle Saddleworth Moor fires (The worst fire on these moors in living memory (due to Global Warming)) https://youtu.be/6Ry6wDY90Q4
No, Peter was talking about the good of the world...as other countries (and Peter) define it.
That's the point I'm trying to make; other, far more socialistic, countries and peoples wish to force the US to become more like them so that US decisions (such as the election of a President) will fall more into line with what they view as "good". What Americans view as "good" is irrelevant to them.
"Trump's trade war" with the EU is a case in point; previous treaties were designed for the good of the EU, with the US taking the hind portion. Not a level playing field at all, and the EU isn't liking it when Trump insists that the US benefit at least as much as EU members from those treaties. US interests are strictly second priority to EU members, so they don't understand why the US is "waging war" on trade deals that were so advantageous to the EU - it is only "right" that the US shift some of it's wealth to the "less fortunate" nations...in the eyes of those nations.
Yes, I am talking about the good of the world. But I'm not saying at all that the identity of a nation should change.
Are you really afraid of a European Cultural War Wilderness? Europe dictating what kind of movies you should watch, what kind of cloth to wear, what kind of food to eat? Don't think so..
The last time I checked it was the other way around. In Europe we watch Holywood films, we go to the McDonalds, listen to Jazz and Soul music. Wear Nike shoes and baseball caps.
Europe is highly influenced by American culture after WWII.
And despite this influence Europe, or I should say every European country has its own identity. So I don't think there isn't any reason to be afraid of the cultural influence (political trends too). It will only enrich a country. But it will never take it over.
I don't know what Americans view as "good", I think you have Americans with all kind of different ideas. From extreme leftwing to extreme rightwing, from extreme religious to extreme anti-religious.
But if we talk about world problems like the Climate Crisis we face today, we need all the nations to work together. And If the president of the US does not believe in a world threat like Climate Crisis, then yes, we have a world problem. As extreme weather is becoming more and more the norm. An so will bush fires, tornados, crop failures, diseases, refugees and water shortages etc. . And If you don't want to work on this problem, well, then sooner or later you will get the bill.
"Are you really afraid of a European Cultural War Wilderness?"
To some small amount. But I AM concerned that Europe is insisting that the US become just another socialized country as Europe has done - that it give up it's individual responsibilities in favor of govt. controlling everything. That is, as I see it, a major difference in the two, and it is not something I wish to see change.
Yes, we have Americans that come with all ranges of ideas, including socialism. But, hopefully, that will remain small (compared to Europe) until my life is ended.
Climate "Crisis" - there are varying opinions on this, too. Personally I feel there is a problem, but not that the US is responsible to correct it all. When Europeans demand that the US spend years of our GDP, changing our lifestyle as we do so, while they spend peanuts isn't something I support. Electric cars for instance: while they are useful in Europe they are virtually useless here outside of major cities. We don't have the infrastructure to support them and it isn't a matter of adding a few charging stations. Same for rail travel; it just doesn't work in the wide open spaces of the US.
But I AM concerned that Europe is insisting that the US become just another socialized country as Europe has done--
I don't think Europe has the power to do so. Perhaps you have international trends. Most of the time I think the US was a frontrunner in this.
Most countries in Europe have a conservative government at the moment for example. I think Portugal and Spain are an exception.
Europe is far less "a socialized" continent as it used to be. Following the US and the UK, most countries have privitased railroads, hospitals, post, and other organizations that used to be government owened. I think only the UK and Spain have a national healthcare system. All the other countries have thrown the healthcare on the market.
I think every country followes it's own course in the end. It's always interesting to see the history of a country and how it politically grew.
My theory why China and Rusia became communist is that they already had a dictatorship (Tsaar, Emperor). Communism in my opinion never works for a country, but can work for small villages. (A kibuts is a communist community in a way).. And today China and Russia are two capitalistic countries ruled by a dictatorship.
The Netherlands used to be a republic for instance and only became a klingdom in 1814...It has lots of political parties, and I think because The Netherlands has lots of different religious groups. And had to live with them for centuraries, and so building a tolllercance towards minority religions (as long as you practice inside your own home)
Spain was for a long time a dictatorship. And you still notice the impact it had on the Spanish menatilty. The Dutch are (generaly spoken) businessman and entrepreneurs. In Spain entrepreneurship is something strange. It is only seen now in the younger genaration who have not felt the dictatorship of Franco.
And the Geramns for instance, because of the WWII are now far more genrous for immigrants then other European countries. They are also much more sensative for fascist behaviour and discrimination.
I think the US has it's own history and I don't think any country can change this.(Unless it is occupied for a couple of generations).
Climate "Crisis" - there are varying opinions on this, too. Personally I feel there is a problem, but not that the US is responsible to correct it all.
Agree. The responsibilty lies by all the countries, and not by one country specificaly.
And, yes, I can't use an electric car either. I'm still driving diesel. But well, I live on solar (made in China) looking out over the windmills (made in the US). so some things change.
Well actually there is NO Trade Deal between the EU & USA; both countries trade with each other under WTO rules, and it’s those WTO rules that Trump is contravening because of his ‘Nationalistic’ views.
When the UK leaves the EU on the 31st December, as it looks increasingly unlikely that the UK will leave with a Trade Deal then come 1st January the UK will be in the same boat as the USA e.g. trading with the EU on WTO Rules; at which time the British people will feel the brunt of the situation.
So I can sympathise with you, but Trade Wars is not the answer.
Wilderness, I didn’t say WTO is concerned with fair trade practices; but in the absence of Trade Deals, they are the best we have. FYI the WTO attempts to ‘level the playing field’ e.g. make the world market more competitive for less well advantaged countries; something which doesn’t suit the USA, but then the USA is a very self-centred culture!
If you don’t like WTO Rules then negotiating a Trade Deal with a country is a far better option for world trade than Trade Wars. The current Trade negotiations between the EU & USA started in 2010, but progress has been painfully slow; predominantly because the USA insists the American food exports are included in any Trade Deal in spite of the fact that many American foods (including American apples) are illegal in the EU because of the high level of artificial chemicals (toxins) contained in such American foods, toxins which are banned in the EU.
Europe BANS Cancer-Causing American Apples: https://youtu.be/oEh1IbOKRBo
Likewise, the Trade Talks between the USA & UK have stalled for the same reason e.g. both Margaret Thatcher and Boris Johnson rejected American foods in the Trade Talks that contain toxins that are classified as illegal in the UK.
Boris Johnson tells US: no NHS trade deal and 'not keen' on chlorinated chicken https://youtu.be/_BEe2T81jtg
Wilderness, when you say “Personally I feel there is a problem, but not that the US is responsible to correct it all.”
Nobody is asking the USA to “correct it all”. All that is being asked is that each country does its share in combating Climate Change e.g. it’s a worldwide problem and the whole world should be on-board in fighting Climate Change together.
The problem is that ‘per head of population’ the USA is one of the worst offenders in polluting the atmosphere; which adversely affects the whole world.
CO2 Emissions (data July 2020):-
• EU (Population 446 million) = 7% of world CO2 Emissions.
• USA (Population 328 million) = 15% of world CO2 Emissions.
• China (Population 1,393 million) = 28% of world CO2 Emissions.
The USA’s population is three quarters the size of the EU population, yet the USA produces more than twice as much CO2 Emissions than the EU.
China’s population is four times larger than the USA’s population yet China produces less than double the CO2 Emissions of the USA.
And do the people of the EU demand that China spend 4 times as much, do 4 times as much as the US? Do they require members of the EU to limit their travel as much as they do US citizens (remember that travelling in the EU isn't the same as travelling in the US)? Have EU members offered financial help in building the infrastructure for electric vehicles in the tremendous empty spaces of the US, or just demand that Americans do it all?
While I tend to think that Americans homes, outside of transportation, still use more energy than EU homes there is far more to the equation than that.
Wilderness, I understand your concept that the USA has wide open spaces compared to the EU, but China is even more vast than the USA; and yet China is leading the world in not only the rollout of EV cars, but also in building the charging stations network infrastructure across China, so that people in China can travel thousands of miles across the continent in their EV cars.
• China started building their EV charging point infrastructure in 2012.
• In 2017 China had a charging network with just 167,000 charging stations.
• By 2019 China had 446,000 charging points.
• China is currently installing on average, 10,000 new charging points a day.
In 2019, the USA had 68,800 charging points.
In 2019, the EU had 170,149 charging points.
World's Largest EV Charging Square in Shenzhen | INSIDE CHINA'S MOBILITY REVOLUTION https://youtu.be/r6Vp0IrkU54
In answer to your question, the EU does not demand that China spend 4 times as much as the USA; China is spending far more than that on its own accord; to combat pollution, and to make for a cleaner Environment.
LOL China is leading the world in building EV charging stations. When only a relatively tiny handful of people in the cities can have a car at all. This makes as much sense as their building of entire cities...that now sit empty because no one lives there.
You're missing the point entirely - while it's wonderful that China is building the world's largest charging station in one of their largest cities, it is the open spaces in the US that just doesn't have them and makes electric cars nearly worthless...unless you can afford one just to get to work and another car for all other travel.
I live in Boise, Id, where there are quit a few such stations. But. If I leave town, there is suddenly nothing for hundreds of miles. Google shows nothing North for some 400 miles, nothing South for about the same, nothing West for 500 miles and nothing East for God knows how far. This is because there are no cities of a decent size and no electric cars to charge. There are likely one or two hidden in these small cities, but they aren't going to be easy to find. There is just one population center in my state of Idaho greater than about 50,000 people - a state larger than Great Britain. You can drive for hundreds of miles, on primary highways, and not see a city larger than 5,000 people.
What is sadder is that I drive a Chevy Volt: a plug in hybrid with the largest battery of any hybrid, good for nearly 40 miles. I typically get around 3,000 miles per tank of fuel, driving around the city. But it is now discontinued - the one electric car that makes sense for America is gone, and no one is building a replacement.
Wilderness: Notwithstanding that China is a left-wing draconian dictatorship (communism) with a poor humanitarian record; China is not the peasant country it used to be.
In recent decades China has been transitioning from an agricultural based economy to an industrialised economy (just as Britain did between 1760 and 1840) e.g. a mass migration of the population from rural China to urban cities.
In 2015 55.88% of the Chinese lived in cities; by 2020 that had increased to 60.6% of the Chinese population.
For comparison 80% of Americans now live in urban areas; and 83.4% of Brits do.
The concept that China is: “building of entire cities...that now sit empty because no one lives there.” Is right-wing American propaganda; if you actually ‘fact-check’ you will find that building cities in China and moving people in is part of a long term economic strategy by the Chinese Regime e.g. “Capital Investment”. It’s an economic strategy of planning and building 20 years ahead as China transitions from an agricultural based economy to an industrialised economy. In fact if you check on some of the cities that were cited as empty in American right-wing propaganda you will find that they are now being occupied as China progresses with its long term goal of Industrialisation.
What you describe about the great distances around the area you live is akin to the vast open spaces in China between urban areas, but on a larger scale. Yet, as demonstrated in the video below, it is possible to travel across China in an EV car.
Below is a video of day 3 of a 4 day road trip across China by an American in an EV car. In China, the American travels up to 1000Km per day (Over 600 miles per day) in an EV (on a 4 day road trip across China); typically 300Km (186 miles) on a full charge.
China EV Road Trip Day 03: https://youtu.be/6BtWXsH3nB4
The point is: If it can be done in China, then why not in the USA.
Where you state in China “….only a relatively tiny handful of people in the cities can have a car at all.” in actual fact there are:-
• 273 million cars in the USA: 838 cars per 1,000 population.
• 270 million cars in China: 188 cars per 1,000 population.
Car ownership per head of population may currently be 4 times higher in the USA than in China; but China is changing, and car ownership becoming more common, it’s not just a relatively tiny handful of people that it once was. In 2019 4.7 million new cars were sold in the USA and 4.32 in China.
Your example of your hybrid is a poor example in that batteries in hybrids are not a patch on batteries in full EV cars. Currently the average EV car will travel around 250 miles on a single charge; and the technology is improving year on year. Plus (at least in Europe and China) the cost of running an EV on electricity is a fraction of the cost of petrol (gas) per mile.
Picking up on one of your points (about the UK) peterstreep, yep the current Nationalist Government in the UK is isolating the UK from Europe; with potential bizarre consequences just around the corner.
As you may know, in preparation for when the UK leaves the EU on the 31st December, Boris (UK Prime Minister) is currently pushing Legislation through Parliament which will break International Law. Consequently, such Legislation makes the prospect of a Trade Deal with the EU as from the 1st January highly unlikely; it also makes a Trade Deal with the USA highly unlikely as the Democrats in the USA have made it perfectly clear that they will block any Trade Deal with the UK if the UK breaks International Law and puts the 1998 Northern Ireland Peace Treaty at risk.
Consequently, the UK Conservative Nationalist Government unveiled its proposals for dealing with a ‘No Trade Deal’ with the EU as from 1st January; which has come in for a lot of anger from British Industry.
The details unveiled yesterday being:-
Kent, England, where over 99% of Trade takes place between the UK & EU will be separated from the rest of England by a ‘border’, and Lorries (trucks) will only be able to cross the border with a permit. The UK Government’s own prediction is that separating Kent from the rest of England with a border will result in queues of 7,000 lorries trying to cross the border into Kent (so that they can get to Dover to cross over into the mainland Europe (EU)), and that such a border will cause 2 day delays in exporting goods to the EU.
The Government proposals are a variation on ‘Operation Stack’, which the Conservative Government used in 2015; with disastrous results and chaos: https://youtu.be/J1mhF1SArAM
Picking up on your last point wilderness e.g. reference to the effect climate change has on forest fires.
FYI, it’s not just about forest management, climate change (global warming) is responsible for a dramatic increase in ferocity and frequency of forest fires worldwide; including in the UK, where historically such fires were rare, but now are becoming more common place.
• 2019: Wildfires ravage UK following hot weekend weather https://youtu.be/VMptNfWh8IE
• 2020: Huge forest fire in Wareham declared a major incident https://youtu.be/PXN_RxKHr1o
• 2017: How Europe’s forest fires have more than trebled in 2017 due to Global Warming https://youtu.be/BMCJJRRtRKI
I agree with you that "fascism" is too freely bandied about as a slander, and too often is a completely misunderstood and misapplied claim.
Unfortunately, that is about the only point of your comment I can agree with.
As a side note, I don't think the U.S. is any different from any other nation when it comes to voting for our president, (leader); we vote for our own interests, as I think every nation does. Whether our interests include the benefit or detriment of another nation will only affect our choice if that consideration affects us. Do you suppose other nation's citizens don't do the same?
No, of course, you vote for the leader or party that you think will have the best interests for your country. That makes sense. That's happening in every country.
It's just that who will be the president of the US will have a huge impact on the rest of the world. That's why the American elections are followed all over the world.
And because the news about the ins and outs of the presidency race can be followed all over the world, you've got those ignorant foreigners like NathanVille and me giving their opinions.;-)
No worries. we are a tolerant nation and we understand you guys are behind the curve of societal development. And what else would we expect from folks that think soccer is football. ;-)
Yes, we in the old world never got our heads around "American football". Or playing hockey on ice. (It's more a Canadian thing..But I thought it was popular in the US too.)...Speed skating yes (The Dutch are masters in it) but hockey!! And those jingles during the play...Just plain weird. I think the Fins are in it too..
Yep, I agree with every word you say peterstreep. And yes, that’s how we see it in the UK also, that Trump is so dangerously leaning towards fascism. He repeatedly refuses to say that he will transfer power peacefully in the event of losing the Presidential election, with every sign that he will try to use the Supreme Court to hang onto power even if he loses the election. The biggest worry might be if he managed to mobile the Federal Forces to stay in power; which would be a true sign of a fascist Dictator.
Interesting how discussion is shifting from Q&A on fascism to electric cars in Idaho. Please allow me to stop by and drop my throw in my thoughts.
wilderness, your point may be valid for the less than 2 Mill. people in remote Idaho. What about the other 300 plus Mill. in the US? Those on the West Coast or on the East Coast. Forgot, there are more Idahos: May be Kansas? I still have a postcard from a friend from Kansas: All black, description: "Kansas at night". What i want to say: I agree - electric cars without range extender don´t make sense in the Midwest - but everywhere else they do.
Imho it is misleading if you use the reasoning for "empty" Idaho to extrapolate on the US as a whole. And - when the world looks at the US as a whole, dropping out of the Climate agenda, having a huge CO2 footprint, energy inefficiency, then the world gets afraid and some people get angry.
I think you have a wrong impression about China. China is certainly not where "a relatively tiny handful of people in the cities" have a car. https://hbr.org/2013/08/car-density-on-chinas-roads-ri
A little anecdote from Shanghai: Licence plates are very expensive (to regulate car density). Electric car licence plates are almost for free. I asked one of my collegues in Shanghai about seeing so many green plates in the streets (they actually are green). He pointed out that the licence plate pricing makes E-cars attractive . At the same time a new status symbol is emerging: E-cars with regular, expensive licence plates, to show that you can afford it. The least China has to worry about is empty cities and empty roads.
Interesting fact about China. But I looked, and they have about 350 million motor vehicles (including trucks) on about 3 million miles of roads. On average, that just half the car density that your link gives. There is little doubt, however, that the density in cities is as much, or more, than in the US.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/276 … -in-china/
https://www.bing.com/search?q=number+of … ORM=CHROMN
As far as "a relatively tiny handful of people in the cities", it IS all relative. About one in 5 people in China have a car while it the US it is nearly a car per person. It would be interesting to see what the car density is on Chinese roads more than, say, 800 miles from the ocean (take a look at a map).
I never intended for Idaho to represent the US: rather it was used as an example (of which there are many) where electric cars are not practical. And where electric cars owned in Seattle, LA or other large city, would be wise to stay away from. That goes back to what I said: if you are fortunate enough to own two cars - an electric one for use in your large city and a gasoline one to travel with - it's all good. But if not, then an electric car won't be much value trying to travel the country.
While visiting Scotland I saw a charging station in Crianlarich (population 185). One day we may be able to afford that kind of distribution in the US, but that day is a long ways off.
I would say the demand for individual transport development is still huge in China. But as i wrote: The least that China has to worry about is empty cities and roads.
Concerning 800 km inland. Until recently i had business in some provinces that you would accept to be way off the coast (Sichuan province with Chengdu, Shanxii province with the old capital of Xian and the provinces Hubei and Hunan with the cities of Wuhan (quite fashionable today) and Changsha (birthplace of Mao)). What can i say: Traffic same as in the coastal provinces, however i noticed a different way of driving. Shanghai, Beijing: very civilized. Chengdu, Xian: more aggressive, louder: people use the horn, less civilized).
Enjoy this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Y5wdUkVKb0. even though it is nothing unusual. Traffic rules are simply different: For all participants: keep up speed and direction. You get run over if you don´t follow this rule.
My company had a large industrial project to support in the Shanghai region. Within periodic 3 monthly visits i witnessed the installation of 30 charging stations behind the workshop. I go to China since 1994, but they still surprise me with the speed they get things done.
In Germany, every company from a certain size on is required to provide charging stations for employees on company ground.
There are many issues with E-cars still unsolved. Not everywhere they are useful. But they are coming.
What is the US doing? Have Elon Musk do the job alone? Politics has to give guidelines and assist. Why not do it like the Chinese do with the licence plates. It works. Otherwise China will run circles around the US (and Europe) - and no more Chevy Volt, my condolences.
The US, just as other countries, is spreading charging stations. I would have thought that was apparent; a quick look at Google will show it.
But they cannot cover 4 million square miles (plus Alaska) overnight and doubly so when such a large percentage will never be used.
In addition, American car manufacturers are investing heavily in electric cars (and hybrids). I've seen tires specifically formulated for high fuel mileage come into being in just the last few years.
And some parts of the US have begun taxing owners of electric cars, and plug in hybrids, above and beyond gasoline guzzlers My complaints fall on deaf ears; as MPG figures rise (to infinite for electrics) there isn't enough money for road work...so those living green must pay more.
Wilderness, picking up on your point about seeing a charging station in Crianlarich in Scotland; one interesting bit of statistics is that (since 2019) there are now more charging points in Britain than petrol (gas) stations:-
In 2019: Total of 9,300 electric vehicle (EV) charging locations (30,000 charge points) across the UK, compared with 8,385 fuel stations. I’m not sure how many petrol pumps per fuel station, but still an interesting trend, especially considering that the sale of new petrol and diesel (fossil fuel) cars will be banned in the UK by 2035 (Bristol, where I live, is to ban the use of diesel cars in the city as from March next year).
EV Charging Points in Petrol (Gas) Stations in UK: https://youtu.be/nst2RGtgzfk
Conversion of Streetlamps (lamp posts) to EV Charging Points in UK (German Innovation): https://youtu.be/rKaEhBjt1ls
The general issue with charging stations is the grid. To have high performance charging (larger than 100 kW to charge within 60 min.), this will overload the supply grid.
I live in a street with some 100 houses. No mansions or villas, but upper middle class housing where all residents being able to afford E-cars. If our street would use E-cars with inhouse charging to only 10% of supply capacity, it would blow the fuses of main street supplies. Even regular house connection only allows some 20KW power inlet. Good for overnight charging, but still bad for the grid.
I am very sceptical about streetlight posts charging. Streetlights have low power connection. Hook up a Tesla and you either have a blackout or you park the car for a week to recharge.
This is one of the unsolved issues with E-mobility. How to supply electricity on the last km of the grid. The business consultant in me makes this calculation: Typical charging is 20 kW, takes 5 hours to recharge. Typical refill at a gas station is 5 minutes. Set aside the convenience factor, a single gas station with 4 hookups is worth 4 x 5 x 60/5 = 240 charging stations. Room for improvement.
I tend to promote either Hydrogen fuel cells or standardized battery packs with a quick change mechanism (like camping gas balloons). Just saying..
I am a little surprised at your comments; it makes it sound as if the UK is actually doing better in the EV Charging Points Infrastructure than Germany is?
Albeit it’s not inconceivable: In that a few years back Theresa May (then Conservative Prime Minister), committed the UK Government to funding of the development of the UK’s EV Charging Infrastructure, in joint partnership with private enterprise: With a policy goal of making public and private charging points available to every UK household by 2035.
1. The Home EV Chargers in the UK are ‘trickle charge’; 7.4Kw, and takes about 8 hours for a full charge.
2. The lamp post chargers are only 3.6Kw, and are intended as a top up e.g. add a bit of juice to a car while visiting friends, or a slow overnight top up etc.
3. On the move, all the charging points in the UK are ‘Rapid Charge’ e.g. typically 50Kw at the moment, but increasingly 100Kw and higher are becoming more common. A Rapid Charge at 50Kw will add 100 miles in 35 minutes; which is sufficient for most drivers.
4. Destination Chargers are now very common in the UK e.g. at supermarkets, in hotels, carparks and at work etc. These chargers are typically 7.4Kw, but can sometimes be as high as 22Kw, and they are intended as a top up charge while for example parking in a supermarket carpark while shopping.
Using public chargers to charge an electric car https://youtu.be/3C9ad9UzX4A
As regards power supply on the network; the National Grid has for many years been working hand in hand with the Government in building a robust ‘smart’ electricity network to meet the changing demands of Renewable Energy (as Britain swaps fossil fuel for Renewable Energy) and they are confident the National Grid is up to the challenge. For example, using ‘smart technology’ so that most home charging is done in the early hours of the morning when demand for electricity is at its lowest, when electricity is at its cheapest.
As regards Hydrogen and other Renewable Energy gases; that is also becoming a big thing in the UK e.g. Britain (along with Germany and China) is now developing Hydrogen trains; Aberdeen (city in Scotland) is rapidly replacing all its old busses and public lorries to Renewable Energy Hydrogen power, just as Bristol (where I live) have now replaced most of its old buses with buses that run on Renewable gas made from sewage and domestic food waste.
UK National Grid Green Energy Success Story | FOR Clean Energy & Electric Vehicles: https://youtu.be/ONp8dismI-Q
Good News is that we should have enough money saved to install solar panels in the new year; we’re also looking in to various options to install storage batteries at the same time e.g. to store surplus energy during the day to use in the evening; and thus use minimal power from the grid.
... it makes it sound as if the UK is actually doing better in the EV Charging Points Infrastructure than Germany is?...
Well Arthur - government propaganda always makes matters look better and more mature than they really are. My personal experience with midsize photovoltaic systems (90 .. 250 kWp) tells a story of how difficult it is to connect a system to the grid, if it is beyond household size, no matter power output or power generation.
This is why you find grown-up charging stations mostly in industrial areas only, so you don´t have to bury additional copper in the ground. A typical supercharger station from Tesla with 4 outlets requires a megawatt power input, That is a different animal if compared to lamp post charging for little scooters.
I hope you make a good pick for your upcoming PV project. Panels are cheap now a days. With storage batteries, i would be more careful. While PV systems for private use tend to pay back within 10 to 12 years. The batteries are more expensive and typically the night use effects are overrated. I never got any reasonable business case calculated (more than 25 years was the best i got from number crunching) and it is unclear how to deal with the limited charging /discharging cycle lifetime. With batteries and night useage advertising deludes.
.. a long way from fascism to household electricity generation and storage...
Yep, I am fully aware of Government propaganda, but I’m also aware of what my eyes tells me e.g. Rapid Charge Points are springing up all around me. I recent years I’ve seen them being installed at breath-taking speed in Service Stations, Pubic Carparks, Supermarket carparks, Shell petrol stations, places of work etc. across Britain. And most customers do an 80% charge within 20 minutes e.g. while they have a quick break at a motorway service station; and they are on their way again.
Also our National Grid has come a long way in the last 8 years; from an old system that did its job to a ‘smart’ national grid that provides constant power in spite of all the challenges of the modern Renewable Energy framework e.g. none of the brownouts that you get in the USA.
Charging an EV at home takes no more power than an electric shower e.g. electric showers in the UK these days run at between 7.5Kw and 9.5Kw, charging a car overnight at home is 7.5Kw. People using electric showers present no problems to the National Grid. The biggest problem (biggest challenge) to the National Grid is when millions of people turn on their electric kettles at 7:30pm in the evening, at the end of the popular British TV drama series during the weekdays e.g. ‘Eastenders’ and ‘Coronation Street’; what’s known as the ‘TV Pickup’ in the UK.
Below is an ‘OLD’ video showing how, a good few years back (before the days of Renewable Energy) the National Grid coped with the sudden demand for power in the UK when millions of Brits all turn on their electric kettles at the same time:-
Britain peak power demand https://youtu.be/slDAvewWfrA
Below, is another ‘OLD’ video of how the National Grid works in the UK, particularly its reliance on ‘Electric Mountain’ in Wales during peak periods e.g. the TV pickup; plus covers this topic of EV’s.
UK National Grid https://youtu.be/vX0G9F42puY
More Info on Electric Mountain in Wales, that plays a key role in meeting demand surges in the UK:-
Electric Mountain in Wales: https://youtu.be/d-Gbs_kXK8Q
As regards my solar panel project; I’m waiting until next year because the old feed-in tariff (similar to the scheme in Germany) ended this April, but a new feed-in tariff scheme doesn’t start until the 1st January 2021. Under the new scheme, rather than being paid over the odds for surplus electricity, what you will get paid in the future is a less generous scheme that pays market prices e.g. you sell your surplus electricity to your supplier cheaply (wholesale price) and they sell it onto their domestic customers at the going rate (retail price); so everybody is a winner, especially as the price of Renewable Energy is steadily dropping.
As regards the batteries: Yes, I am aware that the Tesla wall power batteries are very expensive and rarely pay for themselves; however, there are now a number of cheaper options on the market that are more economical e.g. battery systems at a fraction of the cost of the Tesla batteries. Obviously these batteries are not as good, but a lot cheaper, and worth looking into while we’re looking at the various options for solar panel.
For example: https://youtu.be/3WNFutp0n6Y
However, when making our final choice we will be guided by our Local Government. We’ll choose a suitable installer via our Local Authority; that way we’ll get an installation that is trusted and recommended by our Local Government (Labour), rather than risk getting it done by a cowboy operation. So our final choice will be governed by what system they offer.
Yes we have strayed a long way from fascism, but………..!?
by JOC 2 years ago
This article tended to resonate with how the left and the right view the issue.https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/07/opin … union.html
by ga anderson 16 months ago
Sanders' positive comments about Cuba's socialism prompted a look around.I found plenty of anti-Bernie thoughts, but I kept looking until I found one that I thought was least biasedMy thoughts:First, Cuba has a lot of problems, and not a few of them are caused by American sanctions. So, we are not...
by Scott Belford 4 years ago
In both the Federalist Papers AND the Constitutional Convention, it is extremely clear the distaste most of those involved in creating today's America had for democracy, which they saw as mob rule which allows "emotion" rather than "reason" to drive important decisions.Friday's...
by JOC 2 years ago
Recently, at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), conservatives had a common theme of railing against Socialism due to some of the progressives that have announced their candidacy for the presidency.Some of the internet comments made when this fearmongering was discovered were just...
by Kathryn L Hill 2 years ago
Could you? Could you give up all self-interest? and concern for your own self-benefit in life? Is it perfectly fine to force the rich to do so?Is it perfectly fine to force ANYONE to do so?
by Scott Belford 3 years ago
Commonly, those people who call themselves conservative hold socialism and communism as being the end-state of liberalism. I would argue that there is nothing "liberal" about socialism and communism. Think about it, the fundamental engine behind both is the need for the...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|