US Politics: Papers, Please

[Week]

2 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

There's a difference  "defending white nationalists" and pointing out that these sorts of protests play right into their hands. How much press do you suppose this event would've received minus the protest? How many people do you suppose are going to show up for a Milo speech in Berkeley?
 

None and very few. 

I agree with you - complete silence and empty chairs would have been a better message. 

[Swordfish]

16 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

THIS. He can't even get his own doctrine straight.

Sure he can.  His doctrine is 'tweak the nose of the identity politics crowd.'  And obviously, he's good at it.

14 minutes ago, Week said:

No response to the remainder - just further defense of white nationalists. Fun.

 

 

What the fuck are you talking about?  I have never defended white nationalists.

 

7 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Are we really going to play the technicality game? Trump ran on a white nationalist platform and since his victory we've seen a lot of instances of violence and threats of violence directed towards minority groups that white nationalist traditionally loath. And as someone who comes from one of those groups, I can tell you I've seen this before, and like @Mexal said, it's terrifying. 

 

Dude, it's not a technicality.  We don't know what the cause of the fires was.  That's a fact.

you either want to live in a post fact world or you do not.

You cannot point to those fires as examples of white nationalist activities before we even know the cause, much less any possible perpetrators.

 

Quote

Also, I think it's fair to assume that the first example was a case of arson. They've determined the cause already and if it was anything other then arson they'd have made that public quickly to tamp down any fears. 

You know what they say about what happens when you assume?  You make an ass out of Uma Thurman.

[Oreo Crumbs]

5 minutes ago, Seli said:

You do realize that current US government is all ready to legislate  "screw tolerance" to the ideals of equality that seem so important and natural to our younger generations? And at the same time trying to embed that attitude in SCOTUS?

Decades of being polite and tolerant, asking for others to be the same has gotten nothing but people claiming equality, freedom, social justice are all evil and oppressive. And getting that attitude in government.

I understand the current threats yes.

I said nothing about being polite, and politeness is not the same thing as tolerance.

The fight for tolerance is not decades old....it's as old as human history.  The sad truth is people are naturally prejudiced toward their own self-interest at the expense of others.  Tolerance must be fought for in society generation after generation, it will never end.  Hell, I have to make sure my kids learn it if I don't want them ending up like a*sholes, but I can't just assume they'll pick it up without guidance.

The West is currently experiencing a populist, anti-globalization backlash and it's up to liberals to fight back, setting the example with liberal tools.  "Screw tolerance" is not one of those tools.

[Week]

1 minute ago, Swordfish said:

What the fuck are you talking about?  I have never defended white nationalists.

 

1 minute ago, Swordfish said:

You cannot point to those fires as examples of white nationalist activities before we even know the cause, much less any possible perpetrators.

In this instance, perhaps no, but you make no effort to acknowledge the ongoing egregious acts of racism that have occurred since Trump was elected that would suggest that these could be (but aren't necessarily) related.

[Swordfish]

1 minute ago, Week said:

 

In this instance, perhaps no, but you make no effort to acknowledge the ongoing egregious acts of racism that have occurred since Trump was elected that would suggest that these could be (but aren't necessarily) related.

Oh good grief.  

What a silly , silly argument.

[Oreo Crumbs]

10 minutes ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

That's a fair point also. So how do you do that, exactly? Sit ins aren't going to work. 

Haha no idea.  If I knew the answer to that, Hillary would be President right now.

[Altherion]

28 minutes ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

What do you think about Dear Leader threatening to cut off federal funds for universities whose students riot? He's accusing Berkeley of not allowing free speech. 

Did he really do it or is this hypothetical? Obviously, the implementation matters, but in general, I think it is a great idea. College students tend to do things like this, yes, but the point of college is to teach them and guide them and right now, there are adults who egg them on (e.g. the "muscle" professor in Missouri) and the ones who try to calm them down are sometimes removed from their positions (e.g. the House Master at Yale). If the adults affiliated with the university refuse to provide adequate security and look the other way while the students riot or possibly even justify their behavior, then sure, the government should act.

[Kalbear]

Just now, Altherion said:

Did he really do it or is this hypothetical?

He threatened to do this:

Just now, Altherion said:

Obviously, the implementation matters, but in general, I think it is a great idea. College students tend to do things like this, yes, but the point of college is to teach them and guide them and right now, there are adults who egg them on (e.g. the "muscle" professor in Missouri) and the ones who try to calm them down are sometimes removed from their positions (e.g. the House Master at Yale). If the adults affiliated with the university refuse to provide adequate security and look the other way while the students riot or possibly even justify their behavior, then sure, the government should act.

There were about 50 police in riot gear there. 150 people dressed in black, armed with crowbars and wearing masks showed up long after the nonviolent protest had come in. There was no looking past this at all; it's not like police presence wasn't there.

More information about it here.

[Week]

Quote

 

"White House press secretary Sean Spicer called the attack “a terrible reminder” of why the president’s immigration restrictions were so important.

And then Canadian police named a white French-Canadian — whose Facebook “likes” included Marine Le Pen and Donald Trump — as their sole suspect. And the murders ceased to be a matter of political concern.

Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau condemned the shooting as “a terrorist attack.” The American president did no such thing. In fact, Trump released no formal statement on the subject — despite the fact that he had rarely missed an opportunity to comment on smaller-scale acts of violence perpetrated by Muslims in more distant lands.

[..]

 

In truth, President Trump’s exclusive focus on Islamic terrorism is not about protecting national security, but about protecting white conservatives’ emotional security. It is about protecting the comfort one can find in imagining that evil is a quality exclusive to an alien other — and in dividing the world between the righteous, who look like us, and the wicked, who look like them; between God’s people and the barbarians; Judeo-Christian civilization and the Muslim hordes.

But we can’t allow conservatives to make the Pentagon their safe space. We cannot ignore the reality of evil to protect their tender illusions. We must say the words “radical racist terrorism.” We cannot afford to be so politically correct anymore."

 

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/02/trumps-silence-on-radical-racist-terror-is-p-c-run-amok.html

This is true for the broader American community as well (the Left too) - there would have been a sea of Canadian flag profile pictures had it been an attack by a Muslim on a church. 

[Swordfish]

1 minute ago, Week said:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/02/trumps-silence-on-radical-racist-terror-is-p-c-run-amok.html

This is true for the broader American community as well (the Left too) - there would have been a sea of Canadian flag profile pictures had it been an attack by a Muslim on a church. 

What do you suppose facebook would've looked like if it had been a white redneck attack on a church?

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

27 minutes ago, Week said:

None and very few. 

I agree with you - complete silence and empty chairs would have been a better message. 

And you can still combat this guy without giving him the sort of press he wants. You send a reporter from the campus newspaper to tape all those empty seats. You tape his most outrageous statements and the ridiculous antics of his crowd. That's how you fight this guy. Allow him to speak. He buries himself in his own shit.

[Swordfish]

2 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

And you can still combat this guy without giving him the sort of press he wants. You send a reporter from the campus newspaper to tape all those empty seats. You tape his most outrageous statements and the ridiculous antics of his crowd. That's how you fight this guy. Allow him to speak. He buries himself in his own shit.

Or just don't cover him at all.  Even better.  Any press for this guy is good press.

[Altherion]

7 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

He threatened to do this:

There were about 50 police in riot gear there. 150 people dressed in black, armed with crowbars and wearing masks showed up long after the nonviolent protest had come in. There was no looking past this at all; it's not like police presence wasn't there.

More information about it here.

Thanks. If I read your article correctly, a bunch of masked people showed up, threw rocks at police, started fires, broke windows, etc.... and not a single one of them was arrested?! Yes, the police were there, but they appear to have done absolutely nothing -- we don't even know who these people were: the article claims non-student anarchists, but how would they know given that they were masked and none of them was detained? I don't think providing police that simply stand around and do nothing while crimes are committed qualifies as "adequate security."

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

45 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

THIS. He can't even get his own doctrine straight.

It's not like he's having babies with them.

And even if he could, it'd be fine as long as they were recognized. I mean, you've got to indulge the slavemasters, their 'dalliances'

[Kalbear]

10 minutes ago, Altherion said:

Thanks. If I read your article correctly, a bunch of masked people showed up, threw rocks at police, started fires, broke windows, etc.... and not a single one of them was arrested?! Yes, the police were there, but they appear to have done absolutely nothing -- we don't even know who these people were: the article claims non-student anarchists, but how would they know given that they were masked and none of them was detained? I don't think providing police that simply stand around and do nothing while crimes are committed qualifies as "adequate security."

They were protecting the people who were inside, including Milo. It probably wasn't adequate security given that force, but it certainly was adequate given the previous protest. 

You have to understand that this group is really, really good at doing precisely this. They've been able to do this in Seattle, Portland, Eugene, SF, LA and understand tactics and how to get away fairly well. They engage from a distance, tend to focus on property damage, and don't stay for very long. They come in after lines are set up and plans are made and engage at that point. 

It was adequate security for the person doing the talk - it was better than Seattle, for instance, where police could not get control of the situation for a couple hours. They chose not to engage and escalate things, too. That was another calculated action. It sounds like you'd rather that the police got violent with them?

[Rippounet]

1 hour ago, Chaircat Meow said:

It is not actually. The US is the larger economy in GDP terms when the measurement is in dollars, and the EU is also smaller in PPP terms when the UKs GDP is taken out.

And the EU has a significantly larger population, which matters if you're speaking in terms of potential markets...
Bottom line is, a trade war between the US and the EU could be terrible and no one would benefit from it.

1 hour ago, Tijgy said:

The problem is that in both instances the EU would never be able to act with unity because they will never be able to agree on what they should do about this (just like a lot of other important things).

I think the EU is going to go through a "make or break" moment in the next couple of years. Either its leaders learn to act with unity, or our Union comes to an end. There's both outside threats (Trump, Putin, possibly Erdogan) and inside threats (populist movements, Brexit, the Greek crisis).
Right now the situation isn't reassuring, but I'm pleased to see that the people in Brussels do realize the threats and so far are being rather efficient at reacting to them, although it's still too soon to say whether this will be enough. The next major elections (France, the Netherlands, Italy) also all have the potential to break the EU. Oh, and it would help if Germany stopped dictating absurd economic positions to everyone else.
If the EU survives the next few years it may finally become what it was meant to be. Ironically the outside threats may provide the much-needed catalyst to cement a Union that has been seriously weakened from the inside. Right now the EU is an unpopular and inefficient behemoth that seems to crumble under its bureaucratic weight. If it manages to deal with Trump and Putin and Brexit, not only will it overcome much of its bureaucratic sluggishness but it might even gain in popularity. Cohesion and unity often come about thanks to outside perils. Trump and Putin may prove the enemies we needed.
I'm not saying the odds look good. They really don't. But the EU without the UK's and the US's influences? Who knows...

1 hour ago, Swordfish said:

I'm also sort of fascinated by the lefts obsession with the alt right in general, given their mostly minuscule numbers, and overall political insignificance, Bannon or no Bannon.

I don't know what world you're living in, but in mine, the neo-fascists have become very significant.

[Swordfish]

2 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

 

I don't know what world you're living in, but in mine, the neo-fascists have become very significant.

I'm living in the world where all the evidence seems to suggest the self identified members of the alt right exist in extremely small numbers.

Do you have some data to the contrary?

 

 

[Rippounet]

1 minute ago, Swordfish said:

I'm living in the world where all the evidence seems to suggest the self identified members of the alt right exist in extremely small numbers.

Whatever their numbers, their overall political significance is considerable.

[Chaircat Meow]

23 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

And the EU has a significantly larger population, which matters if you're speaking in terms of potential markets...
Bottom line is, a trade war between the US and the EU could be terrible and no one would benefit from it.

The GDP figure takes population into account, obviously.

Do not disagree with the bolded though.

[Chaircat Meow]

Speaking of the EU, Guy Verhofstadt has tweeted a letter signed by the chairman of the EPP, on behalf of the group, asking Tusk and Juncker to refuse to accept Ted Malloch as US ambassador to the EU, on the basis that he has said he want the EU to collapse.

https://mobile.twitter.com/i/web/status/827199163305705473