General Politics Discussion (III) [ARCHIVED] • Page 326

it's pretty awful, even reddit is hardly keeping up and they're very pro-NN

 

If you want to make an argument that there's a degree to which one can understand, and empathize, that's fine (and it doesn't change or go against anything I said on the matter). What that argument does not however do is equate to "a steadfast refusal to hear where MENA minorities are coming."

 

Didn't De Blasio say he was closing Rikers? Why would they be accepting transfers in the first place?

 

Green withdraws.

 

It's always jarring to see them grouped up. So scary.

 

they don't have to equate, but they certainly overlap. in any case, that's what Lightning has expressed, and repeatedly in this thread and offline we have seen characterizations of Trump voters that are limited entirely to "they're racist," which is a dismissive rather than practical or informative stance. in this instance, it seems fairly reasonable that MENA minorities feared, justifiably, that violence against them under Clinton would continue. the solution to this is to attempt to bring them into leftist spaces by addressing that rather than saying it's an insufficient reason to vote for Trump, because the latter is both useless and coming from the privileged status of never having our people decimated by genocide.

if we agree in that regard, cool.

 

No they don't. One is an express description of listening and attempting to understand, and empathize. That is not steadfast, and that is not a refusal to hear.

Ok, then if you want to discuss that specific thing ... fine ... but I do not characterize all Trump voters, or limit my understanding of them all to "they're racist." I definitely didn't do that in any of the posts in the last two pages, and that seems to be a completely different conversation than the current one.

I've seen no one say differently.

To begin with I don't believe there's an absolute "solution." I also believe both things can be true at the same time. There can, and should, be an attempt to address and listen and empathize and understand and all of those things -- while it's also possible to hold the belief that a specific thing and outcome is bad. Again, I think someone can do all of that and still believe a specific outcome is bad — understanding (to some degree) why someone is racist, for example, still means I think the racism and results from the racism are bad. Understanding why someone feels abandoned by the left, or democrats, doesn't mean I don't think a specific result is bad. (I think most people can at least empathize with feeling abandoned by politicians.) But that doesn't mean I think there's a good reason for voting for Trump. And, again, this is informed by how I view voting, which I'll quote a little from again to make it as clear as I can:

Voting should not be viewed as a form of personal self-expression or moral judgement directed in retaliation towards major party candidates who fail to reflect our values, or of a corrupt system designed to limit choices to those acceptable to corporate elites.

and:

The exclusive consequence of the act of voting in 2016 will be (if in a contested “swing state”) to marginally increase or decrease the chance of one of the major party candidates winning.

and:

The suffering which these and other similarly extremist policies and attitudes will impose on marginalized and already oppressed populations has a high probability of being significantly greater than that which will result from a Clinton presidency.

and:

Often this charge will emanate from establishment operatives who will use it as a bad faith justification for defeating challenges to corporate hegemony either in the Democratic Party or outside of it. They will ensure that it will be widely circulated in mainstream media channels with the result that many of those who would otherwise be sympathetic to a left challenge will find it a convincing reason to maintain their ties with the political establishment rather than breaking with it, as they must.

 

That's a pretty large dong. Magnum, even.

 

You've said the right wing people you deal with want to hear that theyre going to be protected and take care of, and I think it's pretty clear that the left is better on most of the non-interventionist ways to do this (immigration and refugee policies, specificslly). Trump ran the divide and conquer idea there with banning Muslims and MENA christians "fell for" it, basically endorsing what amounts to be a racist policy even though it's supposedly religion based. So when you said "help them", I thought you were talking about them apparently wanting a more active policy that extends into intervention.

 

is there context to this? I think it's almost better if there isn't

 

I thought that since I forewarned I could post the video. Now I know not to.

 

Prepare to see this being shared on conservative social media

No, the AHCA Doesn't Make Rape a Preexisting Condition

 

oohh I didn't see the video but I'm surprised it was on Twitter, though I shouldn't be surprised that what they consider ok is mad inconsistent

 

Some people in bands are reallllly dumb with politics... I encourage more posting of that here so I know who to delete from my iPod

 

Nothing in the new Republican health care bill specifically addresses sexual assault or domestic violence whatsoever. What it does say is that states can apply for waivers that will allow insurance companies, under certain limited circumstances, to charge higher premiums to people based on their personal medical histories—that's it

How did someone type this with a straight face?

 

re: specific types of nudity

If it doesn't automatically play or show in the screen shot, and there's a NSFW tag on it, I think in the past we've usually been ok with that.

 

the same way they submit their ballots with a smile... I guess

 

It's almost like Assange is trying to destroy the world or something

 

The best post in this thread will always be this.

 

the original context will always be the best

 

It's becoming increasingly clear to me that, along with a lot of other things, the left has to grapple with a deficit in understanding power. Conservatism, being the ideology of reaction, has to understand power. The left is concerned with formalism and/or electoralism or developing ideas, but it is often is in a vacuum and I think that hurts us in a lot of ways, particularly because we do not focus upon building power in the various arenas of civil society.

 

Oh