U. S Politics: I know why the caged babe screams.

[DMC]

14 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Read Benjamin Franklin, for that matter.

Of note, he was also the first to petition Congress to abolish slavery.

39 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

However, the historical falsehood being propagated by Sword of Doom is intended to enhance this vision of the west as a squalid racial supremacy and it is specifically designed to attack the United states at its core, polluting its foundation myth and denigrating its heroes.

Considering by Ratification most of the northern states had abolished slavery through either their own initiative or the Northwest Ordinance - albeit it certainly lingered - I'd say it's an exaggeration to claim perpetuating slavery was a main cause of the Revolution.  However, it is entirely historically accurate to depict slave states as a "squalid racial supremacy," and ensuring they could maintain such was certainly a motivator for sovereignty on their part.

[S John]

2 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

I see two major issues with the 20-30 hour work week as 'standard.'

 

1 - Paying a living wage for so little working time is likely to be genuinely rough on employers.

2 - And people do what, exactly, with the extra time?  I anticipate lots of stupid, even criminal things happening as people try to fill the empty hours.  Folks here remember the joy of being on unemployment for protracted periods?  Long, empty days?  Last year, I hired my daughter to fill in a couple days a week on the route.  Prior to that, I worked 6-7 hours a day, six days a week, barring the occasional holiday.  Dropping down to four days a week was rough.  Seriously rough.  Yes, I had projects to see to.  Before, those were, 'well, I'll budget a couple hours after work for that.'  Those extra days off, well, those couple hours came and went and left me with the whole rest of the day.

I’ve thought about #2 a lot, though in a different context.  Basically sometimes I daydream about winning the lottery (which I never actually play), and it is a pretty big question - what do you do with yourself all day if you don’t really have to do anything?  

The answer, for me anyway, would be to get into ‘work’ of a different sort.  Try to structure my day into blocks of doing this or that.  An hour working out, 2 hours woodworking or otherwise dicking around in the garage, 2 hours painting or some other creative pursuit, 2 hours reading, an hour of household tasks.  I think I’d be just fine with that.  I’d probably also take classes for shits and giggles, get a degree in ancient history or something.  Cooking classes, art classes, etc.  

Basically I’d make an excellent wealthy person, but if I were paid the same as now and only worked a 20-30 hr week those are the kind of things I’d fill the extra time with.  I do think it would be important for most people to find new things to get into with that extra time instead of geberal idleness.  It is interesting how you can not really love going to work but not going to work can be just as bad.  

[Bonnot OG]

I see some people like their white washed history and want to continue to worship racists and slave owners like Jefferson, who routinely raped his female slaves. 

They were a bunch of entitled reactionaries, end of story. 

[DMC]

22 minutes ago, Bonnot OG said:

want to continue to worship racists and slave owners like Jefferson, who routinely raped his female slaves. 

The woman who literally wrote the book on this has a very interesting take on such tendencies.

[OldGimletEye]

Guys, guys!, the true conservatism is good. And it is pure. I swears it. I swears it.

If only people would follow the light of the true conservatism, all would be well.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/18/opinion/amnesty-deportation-immigration-family-separation.html

Quote

Ripping children away from their parents is the most cinematically cruel part of the Trump immigration policy, but it is not the most telling part. The most telling part is what happened to Ludvin Franco.

Franco was an unauthorized immigrant who had been working in this country for over a decade. His wife, Anne, is from a Pennsylvania Dutch family that has been in this country for generations. They were married in 2013 and have three American children, Max, Javier and Valentina

 

Quote

What’s most significant is this: The Trump administration immigration officials have become exactly the kind of monsters that conservatism has always warned against.

While I appreciate Brooks being horrified about the immigration situation and saying conservatism should try to do more than just be one big movement of trolls, I just have to say, at this juncture, the argument “but he didn’t follow the true conservatism….” is getting a bit fuckin’ tiresome. Just sayin’.

 

[DMC]

10 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

While I appreciate Brooks being horrified about the immigration situation and saying conservatism should try to do more than just be one big movement of trolls, I just have to say, at this juncture, the argument “but he didn’t follow the true conservatism….” is getting a bit fuckin’ tiresome. Just sayin’.

Brooks' backhanded apologist act grew tiresome by the fall of 2002.  He also has a very punchable face.  Come to think of it, so do Frum and Kristol (I suppose George Will does too, but I don't have as much antipathy for him because he's actually maintained consistency for decades)  Strange pattern for the never-Trumpers.

[Rippounet]

3 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

2 - And people do what, exactly, with the extra time?  I anticipate lots of stupid, even criminal things happening as people try to fill the empty hours.  Folks here remember the joy of being on unemployment for protracted periods?  Long, empty days?

Are you guys for real ? 

About fifteen years ago, France tried a 35 hour work week (before conservatives intervened). This meant more days off for a lot of workers. There was a rise of participation in various non-profit associations. People took up new hobbies or sports, or simply dedicated more time to their family (including diy around the house). 

I don't recall anyone complaining about "long empty days." And in the age of the internet there's tons of things to do. One can also get involved in politics or get that degree that they always dreamt of.

[Bonnot OG]

10 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Are you guys for real ? 

About fifteen years ago, France tried a 35 hour work week (before conservatives intervened). This meant more days off for a lot of workers. There was a rise of participation in various non-profit associations. People took up new hobbies or sports, or simply dedicated more time to their family (including diy around the house). 

I don't recall anyone complaining about "long empty days." And in the age of the internet there's tons of things to do. One can also get involved in politics or get that degree that they always dreams of.

Also, who gives a fuck if someone just wants extra time to just hang out and zone out? 

 

[Martell Spy]

Trump Repeatedly Questioned Why the United States Couldn’t Simply Invade Venezuela

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/07/trump-repeatedly-questioned-why-the-united-states-couldnt-simply-invade-venezuela.html

Quote

Despite the repeated explanations of why he should tamp down talk of military action, Trump persisted. He mentioned it in public and later to Colombia’s president. So when it came time to meet with the leaders of four allied nations in Latin America, his aides called on him to please avoid any mention of a military option for Venezuela. What were the president’s first words at the dinner? “My staff told me not to say this…”

 

[DMC]

From ^^ :

Quote

But beyond this one episode, “critics say it also underscores how his ‘America First’ foreign policy at times can seem outright reckless, providing ammunition to America’s adversaries,” notes the AP. After all, talk of invasion is music to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s ears considering he often talks about how Washington wants to topple his regime to access the country’s oil reserves.

No shit.  Since the GOP pulled "aid and comfort to our enemies" out of Article III's ass during Iraq, I've always described this type of shit - which was even more prevalent when the neo-cons ran everything - as the true "aid and comfort."

[James Arryn]

3 hours ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Time out, this is a whopping progressive porkie: there is no evidence that the British intended to abolish slavery in the American colonies and that this prompted the uprising being celebrated in the USA today.

I appreciate this is a politics thread, not a history discussion, but I feel this is somewhat pertinent to the points I made earlier about the progressive idea of racism resting on the western world being founded on a system of racial (and others kinds of) oppression. 

Now, in the case of the black community in the USA this is obviously to a degree true. However, the historical falsehood being propagated by Sword of Doom is intended to enhance this vision of the west as a squalid racial supremacy and it is specifically designed to attack the United states at its core, polluting its foundation myth and denigrating its heroes.

The truth is that there is no evidence whatsoever the British intended to abolish slavery in the colonies, or that this was a material reason for the revolt. There was no government policy to do so. There was no way the British state would have the resources or the will or the desire to enforce any such laws.

Indeed, the only piece of evidence usually adduced to support the idea Britain was threatening slavery is the famous judgement of Lord Justice Mansfeld in the case of Somerset vs Stewart (1772). The learned judge, after much deliberation, refused a slave owner leave to take his slave, who was at the time with him in England, to Jamaica. The judgement itself stated that the slave owner was not permitted to do this as there was no law in England permitting slavery, implying thereby that slavery was illegal in the heart of the British Empire.

In terms of explaining the causes for the revolt in 1776 though, the expression to bear in mind is that one swallow does not make a summer. 

While I think you are substantially underplaying the significance of Somerset v Stewart, I will say that you generally make a pretty solid argument that Britain was not necessarily on the verge of abolition in the colonies. I agree there is not significant evidence that this was the case.

That doesn’t really refute the charge as stated, though. Which was about how things were perceived in the colonies. For which there is quite a lot of evidence, or at least there was years back when I studied this. But to illustrate the (I think unintentional) strawman’s emergence, if a century hence someone claims that Americans were motivated to invade Iraq at least in part out of a fear of Iraq’s WMDs, that point won’t really be refuted by stating that there is no evidence that Iraq had WMDs. You could (and I would) call that misapprehension almost entirely willful ignorance in the face of much available evidence to the contrary, but for w/e reason a great many Americans were motivated by that fear. 

So, establishing that X need not be true for Fear of X to motivate Americans to remember the Maine!...sorry, go to war, then as well argued as your point was, I think it misses the mark. What is more relevant is how this was perceived/portrayed/feared in America. It’s been a long time since I read any primary or even tertiary sources on this, so i’m not saying take me on faith. But it’s outts there if you want to go find it.

That said, I find the poster you’re responding to a bit one note...even if it’s a true, sincere, sadly topical note...so i’m not super inspired to track them down atm, as I personally think it a fool’s quest to reduce the various motivations of the various communities of colonists to one thing...though Freedom! is just as silly...but I thought your respectful post deserved a respectful response at least so far as I see the fallacy inherent in it. 

[Martell Spy]

Cops Called on Black Lawmaker Campaigning in Her Own District

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/07/cops-called-on-black-lawmaker-campaigning-in-own-district.html

 

Quote

 

Oregon State Representative Janelle Bynum was out in the heat on Tuesday, knocking doors in her district as she runs for a second term in office, when one of her own constituents called the police on her.

Bynum, who is black, was canvassing in Clackamas, just outside of Portland, when a police officer drove up to her and asked if she was selling something, she told The Oregonian. “It was just bizarre,” Bynum said.

 

 

[DMC]

53 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

I will say that you generally make a pretty solid argument that Britain was not necessarily on the verge of abolition in the colonies. I agree there is not significant evidence that this was the case.

That doesn’t really refute the charge as stated, though.

I agree with your argument that perception is more important than the actual historical outcome, but it's important to keep in mind that using the "Britain will abolish slavery" was likely used as a disingenuous fig leaf to garner support from the southern states.  In that way, to use an analogy that is as close as possible, it's kinda like Shay's.

[Martell Spy]

Woman Scales the Statue of Liberty’s Base to Protest U.S. Immigration Policies

https://www.thedailybeast.com/at-least-seven-arrested-for-unfurling-abolish-ice-banner-at-statue-of-liberty?ref=home

Quote

A woman protesting the Trump administration’s immigration policies climbed the base of the Statue of Liberty on Wednesday afternoon, forcing the evacuation of Liberty Island. After a dramatic, four-hour standoff with police, the woman was taken into custody. Earlier, the woman had participated in a protest during which several people unfurled a banner reading “Abolish ICE” at the base of the Statue of Liberty. At least six people were arrested over the protest, which was organized by the activist group Rise and Resist NYC.

 

[The Anti-Targ]

11 hours ago, Simon Steele said:

I agree with this--not all jobs are ready for such a massive cutback, but what about the ones that are? I cannot think of a career in this country where working less has reasonably been considered. For example, if we were to retool the education system so teachers and kids weren't locked up all day together and forced to be there--there are a lot of models of this that I don't want to get into except to say that realistic models of less schooling and better results do exist--the response from the right would be: "teachers already don't work enough." Or that teachers need to be paid less if they work less. 

When I stopped teaching in public education and went into higher ed, the first thing my department chair said me was that I had no required set of hours to be in my office except whatever office hours I assigned myself. I teach Tuesday and Thursday, I have office hours right after class, and the rest of the week I come and go as I please. They don't doubt the work I do outside of my office. I bring this us because this is incredibly rare. When I taught secondary education, the superintendent instituted a policy that on late start snow days (we might start at 11am due to terrible weather) that teachers still had to be there at 7:30am. I always saw this as extremely cynical but wholly representative of how American work hours are logged. If you're not on the premises, then you're not working.

So, how do we get it down to 30 hours a week and make the argument that wages should remain constant? An interesting development, for me, is that now I am not chained to work, I find myself probably working more than I ever did. Because I like it.

I think there are still a lot of moderate to low margin businesses that are still reasonably labour intensive that would struggle, or possibly go bankrupt, if they had to pay a 40hr week equivalent for people working 30hrs a week. So it's not possible at this point to legislate a standard 30hr week. If the concept of a 30hr week as the new definition of full time work is to be brought in, there needs to be a lot of transitional conditions and a pretty long transition time to ensure there aren't large scale business failures.

An interesting phenomenon raised here recently is that of people effectively giving away time to their employer for which they are not paid. Retail workers are often paid 8hrs but end up working 8.5-9hrs because the employer wants the worker to be at work preparing for opening 15-30 minutes before their official start time, and then do the cash up and close 15-30 minutes after their official end time. So, many workers are donating time to their employer, which should not be happening. And this donation of time gives a false impression of productivity and profitability. It also happens in professions such as hospital nursing and other shift-based professional work. A nurses shift ends at, say 7PM, but they are expected to stay for 15-30 minutes for the shift handover. Or the incoming nurses are required to some in 15-30 minutes early for shift hand over. The nurse's contract if for the hours between the official start and end time of the shift, so this pre-start / post-end time is mandatory free labour.

[The Anti-Targ]

30 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Cops Called on Black Lawmaker Campaigning in Her Own District

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/07/cops-called-on-black-lawmaker-campaigning-in-own-district.html

 

 

For those who are saying "Nothing to see here" with these instances of the cops being called, or just stopping a person and questioning them, where are all the news reports of the same things being done to white people, or Chinese, or any non-turban wearing south Asian person?

It may not be ending with arrest and going to trial, but it's socially conditioned and institutional racism none-the-less. I can sort of understand the initial position the cops are put in, if they refuse to check up on a call then the one time it is a legit criminal up to no good that will get massively blown up in the media. But there must be some subtle way in which the cops can check up on a call without intruding on a person who is going about his or her lawful business. But then you also have cases of cops just pulling over a car because a black person is driving a car that is too fancy for the "average" black person.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

6 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

For those who are saying "Nothing to see here" with these instances of the cops being called, or just stopping a person and questioning them, where are all the news reports of the same things being done to white people, or Chinese, or any non-turban wearing south Asian person?

It may not be ending with arrest and going to trial, but it's socially conditioned and institutional racism none-the-less. I can sort of understand the initial position the cops are put in, if they refuse to check up on a call then the one time it is a legit criminal up to no good that will get massively blown up in the media. But there must be some subtle way in which the cops can check up on a call without intruding on a person who is going about his or her lawful business. But then you also have cases of cops just pulling over a car because a black person is driving a car that is too fancy for the "average" black person.

Exactly.  Putting a group of people under heightened scrutiny by police because of the color of their skin should horrify every one of us.  It makes those people second class citizens and that should shock and embarrass the shit out of everyone who reads about this.  

Sweet Pea, how do you justify this one?

[Bonnot OG]

55 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Woman Scales the Statue of Liberty’s Base to Protest U.S. Immigration Policies

https://www.thedailybeast.com/at-least-seven-arrested-for-unfurling-abolish-ice-banner-at-statue-of-liberty?ref=home

 

God damn bad ass.

[Altherion]

11 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

An interesting phenomenon raised here recently is that of people effectively giving away time to their employer for which they are not paid.

"Giving away" is not quite the right terminology here; the unpaid labor is an unwritten condition of employment and people who refuse to play along most likely won't keep the job for long.

4 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

For those who are saying "Nothing to see here" with these instances of the cops being called, or just stopping a person and questioning them, where are all the news reports of the same things being done to white people, or Chinese, or any non-turban wearing south Asian person?

As a general rule, random people calling the police, the police arriving, determining that there is nothing of consequence at the scene and departing without incident is not even reported in the local news, let along national-scale media. In fact, it is quite common (PDF):

Quote

The most common reason persons sought assistance from the police in 2011 was to report a crime, suspicious activity, or neighborhood disturbance (about 19.7 million persons or 8% of the population)

Simply from the fact that there were 20 million such calls, I guarantee you that you can find all combinations of races (the PDF provides a breakdown of the callers among various demographic parameters, including race) and it is also practically guaranteed that some of the calls are downright silly. Whoever put together the campaign you see in the media cherry-picked a few incidents of white people calling the police to report on black people for the most absurd reasons found in the entire data set and made a narrative out of them. I suppose it works well when applied to the naive, the gullible and those already convinced that the criminal justice system is racist, but given the sheer number of calls, one can cherry-pick almost anything out of the data (but of course, getting it in the national media is another story...).

[DMC]

34 minutes ago, Scott de Montevideo! said:

Sweet Pea, how do you justify this one?

The most ludicrous part of his argument was when he posted crime statistics when they actually demonstrate the objective facts that prove his argument false:  (1) African Americans and Hispanics are disproportionately charged (and convicted) of crimes, (2) African Americans and Hispanics are disproportionately suspected by the police of committing crimes, and (3) African Americans and Hispanics are disproportionately shot by police.  (A close fourth would be the "Drug War" was and is a vehicle to put more brown people in jail, coinciding with mandatory minimums and the crack/coke disparity.)  It takes maybe a 9th grade education to intuit the common causality between all three.  Justifying these moral iniquities is classic cognitive dissonance.