General Politics Discussion [ARCHIVED] • Page 232

Why the hell has the Health Department not shut down this restaurant? This restaurant must be really good charity donors or know people intimately at the health department....

 

Fuck the restaurant

 

I'm actually okay with this one.

 

The health department employees are also shit and dirt eaters.

 

Sheesh, it's McDonald's and Coca-cola representing the food of choice of Olympians and the Olympics all over again. The vicious cycle never ends.

 

Make America Wayne's again

 

Oh cool..Food thread Pt. II.

 

I wonder if either candidate exercises

 

Well Trump obviously has perfect blood pressure and doesn't need to exercise, imagining Bernie power walking is amusing

 

[/QUOTE]
I started typing out a response to this, but I can honestly say I am at a loss. I don't actually know where to start with this. One can exonerate the democrats of their history, completely misunderstand how systems, particularly within the capitalist framework, operate, and still somehow have a semi-coherent argument about why my vote and my position is the one destroying millions of people's lives and opportunities, despite actual evidence to the contrary. Wow. Well, suffice to say, I don't tell people not to vote. I said a few pages back, I don't care who you choose to vote for. But, two things: it is not a moral choice and it is not being done for the sake of the marginalized people, despite your protestation. I just tell people not to have illusions regarding a party that is structurally welded to the well-being of a system that is profit-seeking. That is to say, the political superstructure amends policy according to the needs of capital, e.g., the market liberalization during the crisis in the '70's under Jimmy Carter, for example. But, I digress. The intellectual dishonesty endemic in many of your arguments, like the expansion of the social safety net, is astounding. For example, you neglect to mention how Obama offered to gut a slew of social safety nets in order to forge a budget deal with republicans. Luckily, it didn't pass, so we can pretend that the democrats will not sacrifice the things, which you claim to hold dear, in order to make a deal. Also, any time the government spends money is considered "redistribution". By what logic, I'm not sure, but like most things, the devil is in the details and many of the policies do not crowd out the private market, but work within the confines of it, therefore making them less reliant, less expansive and less useful in general. Liberals can call it social welfare and have that be that. To your other points, yes, war is terrible, David. Any war for liberation will be extensive. I've never lied about this. Innocent people will die. That will be terrible. To me and those with whom I work, however, given the challengers facing the country and the world at the moment, the increasing violence, the increasing militarism, the increasing violence of the state apparatus against black and brown subjects, on which both parties agree on everything except the percentage that should be subject to death, the choice is clear. We need to build something to destroy the world as we understand it. There is no glory to be found in this, this isn't about self-glorification or the aspirations to be part of some vanguard, it is about liberation and justice. None of us take this lightly. None of us shy away from what comes with class struggle, mostly because we've been subjected to brutal class power from the moment we were cognizant enough to walk out into the world by ourselves. We understand what violence means. We would prefer a peaceful transition. But, power concedes nothing without a fight. The difference between us is thus: you are fine with death and murder and destruction, so long as it can be rationalized within the realm of being the way the world is. I merely am saying that violence will be necessary as a measure of fighting for liberation from a system that slaughters people on a daily basis. One is resignation to the fact that people will die in perpetuity, the other is attempting to build things without that as a built-in feature.

As I said, the choice is clear: We can continue to spend time building the democrats, only to have them continually betray us or we can actually build a new electoral party, something that I am open to and I think is necessary. That is what I want to focus my energy on. Progressives and the left have tried it your way on multiples occasions, aiming to transform the party from within, only to have it completely frustrated on every level, whether on racial justice, the environment, foreign policy and every other reform that social democrats and socialists can agree upon. This is why the call the democratic party the graveyard of social movements. Black Lives Matters understands this, hence their reticence to support Hillary or to be folded into the democratic party and have what they fight for watered down during legislation that just needs to appeal to the white center. I wish more movements would take this tack. Of course, you will say that we need democrats in office, so that they can pass legislation. Well, one need look no further than New York City, where a democrat essentially tanked a police reform for purely political reasons. I guess this is gamesmanship to you or simply how we need to play the game. Is betrayal a feature of the program you aim to operate on? Nevertheless, it has never been more apparent than now, given our choices, that we need to build an independent movement and party. You may say, well, we have to beat Trump and then I understand building a movement. But, this is just a circular game that you and the DNC play through every election year. You pose the opposition as that which must be defeated at all costs, so there is never actually any point at which we can develop a politics independent of the party that has perpetrated and perpetuated the most dire problems we our facing, not just in this country, but this world. Obama's policy isn't less murderous, it is just murderous in a particular way. This is to say nothing of the various authoritarians that we provide funding to or the six billion dollars we provide to Israel to continue their assault against the Palestinians. Thankfully, though, you will be talking to anyone who will listen and voting to change minds, which I'm sure is some comfort to the victims of your chosen candidates policies. It certainly takes quite an effort to pat yourself on the back to do the bare minimum of, like, talking. But, this is not new. I said earlier I have noticed that the liberals that see fit to lecture are the same ones I never see when we do community organizing, or getting arrested for marching against cops or actually doing the hard work of building change from that ground up. Usually, they come around during electoral season to hector activists and community members about voting, then walking off, presumably to their middle-class lifestyle where they presume to be doing the hard work of casting a ballot on one day, every few years. If you think that is going to stop fascism, you are not only ignorant, you actually have no idea what in the fuck you are talking about.


PS: No, Bill Clinton's policies did kill five hundred thousand Iraqi children

Squeezed to death

 

Whoops. Sorry. I didn't mean to post this in the middle of a steak convo. My bad, folks. Anywho, this election is terrible. I hate it and I hate my Facebook feed of Hillary Supporters. Thankfully, the hostility I have towards white people has led to a number of people defriending me, so there are no potential Trump supporters.

 

Million dollar question, what will your drink of choice be on election night?

I'm thinking either Basil Hayden's bourbon or a local citrus IPA.

Or both.

 

I'll probably smoke weed, honestly.

 

If I wanted weed, I wouldn't even know where to get it haha.

To be honest, my wife and I will probably see a movie that night. In 2012 we went to a bar with friends thinking it would be a good way to disconnect but they had CNN coverage on ever television. Two fights broke out.

 

@Dominick when you mentioned organizing within a community, were you referring to building up a third party or organizing marches and protests?

Also, are quote boxes not working for anyone else? I tried to quote twice before posting and came out without the html or the box.

 

No one is allowed to eat steak. That's what we've established will happen from this democratic process laid out in front of us.

Speaking of having a role to play in the death of 500,000 children, no mention of the Rwandan genocide? Maybe that's what Obama was referring too when he said we all make mistakes as that is what happens when we "try".

 

I had never seen this:

Why The New Child Rape Case Filed Against Donald Trump Should Not Be Ignored

 

Surprisingly not been a bigger story , there's also this

Ex-Wife: Donald Trump Made Me Feel ‘Violated’ During Sex

 

...The sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council (not, as you insinuated, simply by Bill Clinton) were enacted in 1990 while the US government was under President George H.W. Bush. Not to mention it's been acknowledged multiple times that the 1990's Democrats were awful and who felt the only way to govern was to continue the policies of the ideology that dominated American governance for 12 years. But you seem to continue to think the reality of 1993 is the reality of 2016, despite there being no evidence this is true.

Here, BTW, is a much more detailed account of the sanctions and their evolution over time as they transitioned from one administration to the other. It was, of course as is always the case with you, not simply the case of Bill Clinton was evil and enacted an evil policy and all the dems worked together to keep it in place without any mounting pressure to change the policy.

Hmm...it's a shame that Congress wasn't filled with left wingers, Democrat, Independent, or other wise, that could comprise a majority and vote to lift these sections.

Also, the 500,000 figure...not ever verified. The original survey that found that number was retracted by the original survey conductor.

UNICEF did a survey a few years later and found the same results though, right? There was. But then three different studies, including a new one from UNICEF showed that the first UNICEF survery made the same mistake that the original survey did, entrusting local officials and not actually doing on-site verification. Low and behold, the new UNICEF survey concluded, and I quote:

The other two surveys that contradicted the original 500,000 claim due to sanctions were conducted by the UN Development Program and the World Health Organization

Also, if you're wondering why none of these are included in the NYTimes article, it's because they all came out a few years after the article was published.

But, continue perpetuating something that has been proven to be a myth...and something that, sadly, was used by the Bush Administration as justification for the invasion of Iraq. Yes, they used the excuse that invasion and war would be more humanitarian than economic sanctions. Too bad they were basing that justification on bad data.

 

Powerful people with the ability to silence people or literally bury them with their legal teams makes the most sense.

Considering Epstein has significant ties to both Trump and Bill Clinton keeping things mum in hopes of not creating a certain public perception, is in their mutual interests. Hillary can't use this (Ties to Epstein, not necessarily the accusations) without incriminating her husband, Trump can't use this against the Clinton's without incriminating himself.

Even if there is truth in this, we most likely won't find out as it will be settled out of court. Similar to Michael Jackson settling out of court, which I'm am surprised by the amount of people that don't know that.

 

There is a local Baltimore Green Party candidate for mayor for whom some of us have been working. Obviously, this is Baltimore, so there is a lot of focus on police brutality. In particular, in west Baltimore, which was most devastated by the redlining practices. We made it a point to say that, despite what happens, we will not abandon west Baltimore, so there is the Tubman house where people regularly meet for various meetings, like the Right To Housing Alliance, which helps people facing evictions or those who live in unsafe homes. There is a lot of stuff happening around the potential tax giveaway to Port Covington deal with Under Armor, which involves community meetings of a similar nature. Of course, there are the radical groups like the organization for socialism and liberation; the ISO, and various other sects. I'm missing a lot of stuff, but marches and protests are a part of it, as well as the actual formation of roots and action in communities. The Eddie Conway library was one of those efforts, getting books, stocking a library for kids with radical and regular political stuff. There's a lot of politics going on in Baltimore. Far more than has been going on in a while.