Jump to content
Martell Spy

U.S. Politics: Moscow Mitch

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, sologdin said:

am more or less certain that permanent exclusion from civil society of persons who deviate from peremptory norms predictably lumpenizes them for usage by the far right.

This may be a dumb question, but this comment touches on an issue I've been struggling with for a while now: how does the left, especially now in light of the BLM movement, #MeToo, anti-fascist and other movements that are rightfully calling out bad actors, continue their work raising consciousness of systemic and heretofore mostly unrecognized gender and racial bias inherent to American culture, while still providing an avenue for rehabilitation and acceptance back into the good graces of civil society?

The example that has occurred most prominently to me is that I am most certainly aware of the systemic racial and economic bias inherent in the criminal justice system, and as such, wholeheartedly support reform of the system and a focus on rehabilitation and reintegration of convicted felons, even violent felons, back into society. And fortunately there are programs and policy positions I can support to help realize this goal.

But what about bad actors in law enforcement, or the numerous individuals who have been rightfully outed by the #MeToo movement? Their bad actions surely are due at least partially to systemic factors in U.S. society, although not perhaps to the extent of someone caught up in the criminal justice system. And yes, they also were the ones benefitting from these systemic biases, so I'm not arguing that they shouldn't receive punishment, but thus far I haven't seen any wholehearted support for anything but permanent exclusion from "polite society", as it were, which as you say could create even more fertile recruiting ground for the far-right and proto-fascist groups that are popping up at an increasing rate.

This probably doesn't apply as much to the Harvey Weinstein's or Bill O'Reilly's of the world, but definitely does to the Pantaleo's and other non-elites. I recognize that there isn't much sympathy towards those who used the systemic biases in the U.S. to avoid responsibility for their anti-social behaviors, but shouldn't we focus on rehabilitation and reintegration into society for them also, if only to avoid creating even more enemies of the egalitarian society the left hopes to create?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our political culture is much better at outrage and vilification than it is at forgiveness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree 100% that there should be an effort for rehabilitation and re integration of this, lets say, "problematic" people, but, i also think that its a little unfair that the people who are most negatively affected (to put it mildley) by the actions of these people, are the ones that should and do, call out their bad behaviour, AND, they (or we) are also the ones responsible for their re integration and rehabilitation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Maithanet said:

Our political culture is much better at outrage and vilification than it is at forgiveness. 

Is it fair, to expect forgiveness from the many, many victims (direct or indirect) of the various hate groups, or the victims of lonely white men, or the victims of a huge fucking system that sees them (us) as less than people?. 

Its all OUR responsabilty, isn't it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Conflicting Thought said:

Is it fair, to expect forgiveness from the many, many victims (direct or indirect) of the various hate groups, or the victims of lonely white men, or the victims of a huge fucking system that sees them (us) as less than people?. 

Its all OUR responsabilty, isn't it. 

What an odd interpretation of my post.  I didn't mention hate groups, lonely white men or the huge fucking system.  And yet you assume that I'm seeking forgiveness for those people from their victims. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Questioning Jewish loyalty is about the dumbest way to appeal to Jews who vote Democratic. He really is VEEP come to life, just a whole lot worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 8/19/2019 at 5:47 PM, Tywin et al. said:

In normal times, this would just be bad satire, but today this is actually a rational assessment of his career opportunities. That's sad.

I'll go ahead and confirm that I wasn't joking. Pantaleo is too dumb and vicious to be a Staten Island cop. ICE was practically made for him.

Edited by DanteGabriel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Regarding partisanship and party loyalty, is Cook taking into account that the Republican Party is in the process of a realignment? That could have a strong negative effect on lifelong Republicans who dislike Trump but haven’t left the party if the economy tanks.

I don't know - like I said I didn't read his article, the article I linked was about the Dem primary after she dispensed with what I quoted.  But, I wouldn't characterize the GOP as "in the process of a realignment."  Coalitions are always shifting, of course, but I think people throw around the realignment term way too much when none of us really know what the fuck we're talking about.  Seems like an overreaction to Trump.  Trump is a symptom.  It's the same damn fuckfaces that started the Tea Party.  I mean, sure, the Bill Kristols of the world may stand up, but he doesn't give a shit, and frankly politically there's no reason for him to give a shit.

7 hours ago, The Great Unwashed said:

This may be a dumb question, but this comment touches on an issue I've been struggling with for a while now: how does the left, especially now in light of the BLM movement, #MeToo, anti-fascist and other movements that are rightfully calling out bad actors, continue their work raising consciousness of systemic and heretofore mostly unrecognized gender and racial bias inherent to American culture, while still providing an avenue for rehabilitation and acceptance back into the good graces of civil society?

I've attended hundreds of graduate seminars in my avoidance of becoming an actual adult, and one thing I've heard many times is a good grad seminar isn't going to answer the questions at the end.  A good grad seminar is figuring out and agreeing on the right question.  This is that question, and it's certainly not dumb in the slightest.  As for the answer, no fucking clue.

6 hours ago, Maithanet said:

Our political culture is much better at outrage and vilification than it is at forgiveness. 

I'm not so sure about that.  I think this is a common mistake of politicians, especially when they attain high levels of power.  I mean with Nixon, it was the coverup that killed him, not really the act.  Generally, my advice to office holders if they have a damaging scandal of any sort is to come clean and ask for forgiveness.  I think the American people are willing to listen to that.  Otherwise they're just gonna roll their eyes and say "well, another douchebag."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Conflicting Thought said:

I agree 100% that there should be an effort for rehabilitation and re integration of this, lets say, "problematic" people, but, i also think that its a little unfair that the people who are most negatively affected (to put it mildley) by the actions of these people, are the ones that should and do, call out their bad behaviour, AND, they (or we) are also the ones responsible for their re integration and rehabilitation. 

I absolutely agree that it's unfair. But I also recognize the cognitive dissonance I experience when, on the one hand, I advocate for the rehabilitation and reintegration even of violent felons back into society, but then turn around and say that Pantaleo should crawl under a rock and die on the other hand. 

And I'm certainly not saying that the people directly affected by these actions should be involved in the rehabilitation and reintegration process, or even that they should be okay with having these people back in "polite" society, but I also don't expect the families of violent crime victims to be thrilled when the perpetrator receives education and training in prison, and that their past actions shouldn't be held against them when it comes to finding work, or a place to live.

But at a societal level, it's vital that there be a process for both punishing bad actors, and also for allowing them a place back in society once their punishment has ended. 

I'm all for breaking the system that allows, protects and perpetuates this anti-social behavior, but I'm much less comfortable with breaking the individuals caught up in that system...and that's coming from someone who was firmly in the "punching a Nazi is okay" camp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

That moment in time when you wonder is Solo is making up a word, using a foreign word, or coming in stealthily with a super obscure word...

Very Gene Wolfe-like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I think I've figured out who is spreading the Area 51 conspiracy hysterics this week by reading a FB post-

I understand trump is leading it. He's going to buy Area 51 instead of Greenland.
ReplyReplies (1)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump is going full Messiah Complex.

 

I'm really looking forward to seeing how the Evangelicals respond to this. I expect a whole lot of silence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

I'll go ahead and confirm that I wasn't joking. Pantaleo is too dumb and vicious to be a Staten Island cop. ICE was practically made for him.

I know.

11 hours ago, DMC said:

I don't know - like I said I didn't read his article, the article I linked was about the Dem primary after she dispensed with what I quoted.  But, I wouldn't characterize the GOP as "in the process of a realignment."  Coalitions are always shifting, of course, but I think people throw around the realignment term way too much when none of us really know what the fuck we're talking about.  Seems like an overreaction to Trump.  Trump is a symptom.  It's the same damn fuckfaces that started the Tea Party.  I mean, sure, the Bill Kristols of the world may stand up, but he doesn't give a shit, and frankly politically there's no reason for him to give a shit.

It’s true that it’s hard to pinpoint realignments while you’re in one, but this one seems clear, and like you said it’s taken place between the rise of the Tea Party and Trump’s election. The Republican Party has fundamentally shifted on a number of issues, and these changes seem likely to hold firm for decades to come. If that’s not a realignment, idk what is.

Quote

I'm not so sure about that.  I think this is a common mistake of politicians, especially when they attain high levels of power.  I mean with Nixon, it was the coverup that killed him, not really the act.  Generally, my advice to office holders if they have a damaging scandal of any sort is to come clean and ask for forgiveness.  I think the American people are willing to listen to that.  Otherwise they're just gonna roll their eyes and say "well, another douchebag."

I think outrage is the default setting, but otherwise I agree. Americans can be quite forgiving if a politician is willing to except blame. If Hillary would have owned up to having a private server and deleting some emails from the jump, it wouldn’t have been an issue that dogged her throughout the entire campaign.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems depressingly likely as an explanation for what's behind the trade war with China

https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2019/08/20/41134903/the-trade-war-with-china-is-about-the-future-of-fossil-fuels

There are not circles of hell deep enough for the fucks that will try actively sabotage renewables and doom the planet for some extra profit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Mindwalker said:

I come back after a week, and no mentions of Greenland?

I mean, of all the idiocy and evilness Trump's been up to, it seems pretty harmless.  Although  I'm more surprised he hasn't suggested we just take it.

Edited by argonak
rewording

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Questioning Jewish loyalty is about the dumbest way to appeal to Jews who vote Democratic. He really is VEEP come to life, just a whole lot worse.

It's also antisemitic (it's a dual loyalty slur), but I assume his supporters won't let themselves see his antisemitism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

It’s true that it’s hard to pinpoint realignments while you’re in one, but this one seems clear, and like you said it’s taken place between the rise of the Tea Party and Trump’s election. The Republican Party has fundamentally shifted on a number of issues, and these changes seem likely to hold firm for decades to come. If that’s not a realignment, idk what is.

Well, if the "realignment" can be traced back to the rise of the Tea Party - otherwise known as a decade ago - then I'd more refer to that as a gradual shift.  But that's just a disagreement on conceptual definitions.  As the current shift "holding firm" for for decades, I suspect the coalitions of the GOP will continue to (d)evolve in the coming years and decades, just as both parties always have.

1 hour ago, karaddin said:

There are not circles of hell deep enough for the fucks that will try actively sabotage renewables and doom the planet for some extra profit

While I agree this is why Big Oil is probably behind the lobbying effort for Trump to continue/exacerbate the trade war, there's nothing in Trump's public behavior that suggests he has that type strategic ability.  Pretty sure his calculus amounts to "China = bad."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, argonak said:

I mean, of all the idiocy and evilness Trump's been up to, it seems pretty harmless.  Although  I'm more surprised he hasn't suggested we just take it.

Well, he might be leading up to that. 

Be a shame if something happened to Greenland since Denmark didn't pay for it's "protection".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the list of countries that Trump might invade to improve his chances of reelection, Greenland would have been way, way down the list. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×