USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

«‹›797 »

Push El Burrito: May 9, 2006; Soiled Meat

Laughing so hard at Hunter just ducking out while MTG rants.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 16:57

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 23, 2024 13:58

Paracaidas: Sep 24, 2016; Consistently Tedious!

Paracaidas posted:

IANAL

Again, the deck is stacked heavily against any of this by Lowell working. The only path I actually see is the justices using this as an excuse to severely curtail Congress' investigative powers, which I suspect would appeal to a bloc of conservative justices. It'd be a win for Hunter and a loss for functioning democracy more generally since (as we saw with Durham) the GOP has leaned in to the power of making the process and prosecution the punishment and any conviction ancillary. It'd hamstring legitimate efforts but leave plenty of room for the lawfare and harassment that's been the hallmark of GOP congresses long before Trump came on the scene.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 17:00

Iamgoofball: Jul 1, 2015

you're all missing a bigger point about the young white guys becoming chuds, you're right that they're worshipping tate and rogan and poo poo but they're becoming chuds because social media algorithms are pushing that poo poo to impressionable 14-18 year old kids, and the school systems that are supposed to be teaching kids empathy for other human beings and moral standards have been largely nonfunctional at best and actively busted up at worst since COVID hit, to the dismay of what remains of public school teachers

they're not becoming chuds at age 18, they're becoming chuds at age 14 and having it reinforced for them over the next 4 years because there's zero regulations on social media so they can just mainline as much tate and co as they want

none of this economic anxiety or job poo poo matters, 14 year olds aren't worried about if they need a college degree for their job, they're sitting around on their phones at school binge watching andrew tate and joe rogan and co internalizing all that poo poo instead of their education or what the school wants to teach them, and by the time they're graduating/dropping out if the school doesn't pity graduate them, they're so heavily indoctrinated in the right wing sphere they're not ever going to leave except by force, and at that point the only force that can be exerted on them is the legal system

# ? Jan 10, 2024 17:51

Gumball Gumption: Jan 7, 2012

The school system shouldn't be teaching you empathy.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 17:56

Hieronymous Alloy: Jan 30, 2009; Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!; Morbid Hound

Gumball Gumption posted:

The school system shouldn't be teaching you empathy.

What should?

If your answer is "parents" or "friends" keep in mind many kids don't have those.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 17:59

selec: Sep 6, 2003

Gumball Gumption posted:

The school system shouldn't be teaching you empathy.

Look, we make schools into day care, job training, penal institutions, health care institutions, points of distribution for basic needs like food, social work centers, and day cares for the students as well, what�s one more straw? What, is the camel too tired?

Every problem at a school has origins outside of school. A parent being incapable of teaching a kid empathy isn�t a school problem, it�s a Society Is Really Getting hosed problem. The insistence that we can�t ask any more of parents only makes sense if you internalize the idea that the only value a human has is to provide economic activity.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 18:01

PhazonLink: Jul 17, 2010

Tree Reformat posted:

Society is highly fractured and balkanized, increasingly so since the dawn of COVID. No one can even agree what the most popular current TV show is anymore.

That's the double-edged sword of the breaking of the monoculture: your message will at most reach some part of the populace, but never again the whole of it.

Capitalist Tracer Tong won.

also someone should post the Dark philosophers Mt Rushmore, where a son asks his father who the Dark philosophers Mt Rushmore are and the father says theyre great men that saved the world.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 18:05

Retro42: Jun 27, 2011

Iamgoofball posted:

you're all missing a bigger point about the young white guys becoming chuds, you're right that they're worshipping tate and rogan and poo poo but they're becoming chuds because social media algorithms are pushing that poo poo to impressionable 14-18 year old kids, and the school systems that are supposed to be teaching kids empathy for other human beings and moral standards have been largely nonfunctional at best and actively busted up at worst since COVID hit, to the dismay of what remains of public school teachers

they're not becoming chuds at age 18, they're becoming chuds at age 14 and having it reinforced for them over the next 4 years because there's zero regulations on social media so they can just mainline as much tate and co as they want

none of this economic anxiety or job poo poo matters, 14 year olds aren't worried about if they need a college degree for their job, they're sitting around on their phones at school binge watching andrew tate and joe rogan and co internalizing all that poo poo instead of their education or what the school wants to teach them, and by the time they're graduating/dropping out if the school doesn't pity graduate them, they're so heavily indoctrinated in the right wing sphere they're not ever going to leave except by force, and at that point the only force that can be exerted on them is the legal system

Gumball Gumption posted:

The school system shouldn't be teaching you empathy.

I worked with the local school district during COVID lockdowns and one of the biggest and longest reaching challenges was absolutely social interaction and empathy and all the related things. Either the children were stuck at home in a bubble OR in the small minority at school with other children with the same social/behavioral/etc issues. IE: Kids with no parents able to stay home with them or behavioral/etc issues that required more direct student-teacher interaction. Echo chambers are bad, kids trapped in echo chambers they don't even understand they are in is even worse. Long story short, COVID screwed up all the kids more so than it screwed the rest of us up, it's just going to take a bit longer to present itself.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 18:08

Papercut: Aug 24, 2005

Gumball Gumption posted:

The school system shouldn't be teaching you empathy.

Social/emotional development is like one of 3 broad categories that k-5 education is focused on, this is a ridiculous thing to say.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 18:11

GlyphGryph: Jun 23, 2013; Down came the glitches and burned us in ditches and we slept after eating our dead.

Gumball Gumption posted:

The school system shouldn't be teaching you empathy.

Teaching basic values and social skills and behavioural have been a primary function of the school system for... most of history. It has traditionally been considered a vital component of the education system and in many ways the primary skillset to develop in the lower grades (alongside basic literacy and numeracy). So I'm interested in why you feel this way. It's also one of the skillsets where school is pretty much the ideal environment for teaching it - unlike literacy, which is actually much easier to teach at home even if most people don't bother, social skills like empathy require exposure to a diversity of different people and attitudes in an ongoing way where consequences can be seen and learned from, which is a lot harder to get at home.

GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Jan 10, 2024

# ? Jan 10, 2024 18:11

Combed Thunderclap: Jan 4, 2011

The American Institute for Boys and Men posted a really great op-ed just a few days ago that collects a lot of what's been discussed about rightism and men in this thread in one place and theorizes about what might be happening in a way that backs up some of those arguments. Also offers some useful global perspective:

quote:

To Save Democracy, Help Men
[...]
Globally, men vote for radical parties at rates much higher than women. Spain�s far-right, populist, and conspiracy-minded Vox party received roughly double the number of votes from men than from women. So did Slovakia�s similarly-inclined Slovak National Party. While men and women voted for Poland�s anti-democratic Law and Justice Party at similar rates, men voted for the even more extreme Konfederacja nearly three times as much as women. A 2009 study of European parties that leaned authoritarian or populist found that men were generally around twice as likely as women to vote for them�and up to five times more likely in the case of the nationalist-populist Swedish Democrats.

It�s not just Europe: Brazil�s Jair Bolsonaro performed 10-points better among men than women in the 2018 election which brought him to power. Roughly the same gender difference pushed Argentina�s new populist libertarian leader over the top in November.

[...]

Unsurprisingly, young men without college degrees report that they have the least optimism and purpose in life among all the groups of men surveyed by Equimundo. Many have lost a reliable way to earn a living. They also claim to have the least social support, and are uncertain how to have basic relationships�with friends, let alone romantic partners. They feel their low status acutely, but because popular culture aggregates their lives with the men at the nosebleed top, they are told by much of the left that they are privileged and should take a back seat.

Many men turn these feelings inward, with the result that nearly three in every four deaths of despair�largely from opioids and suicide�are male. These deaths became so common that they were causing a decline in life expectancy for U.S. men even prior to COVID-19. That is a tragedy for these individuals, their families, and their communities.

But some men seek someone else to blame. That has become a tragedy for our democracy.

[...]

Nearly half of young men aged 18 to 25 told Equimundo that they trust one or more of the �men�s rights�, anti-feminist, or pro-violence manosphere influencers such as Andrew Tate, a self-described misogynist, MAGA supporter, and one of the most famous stars on TikTok (until he was taken off the platform). The manosphere takes the very real problems that men face, and blames them on women, cultivating a zero-sum world where men lose if women gain.

[...]

Americans spent decades building a path for empowered women and girls, without any accompanying effort to craft a broader and more secure sense of masculinity for the men who needed to stand alongside them. Now we are reaping the backlash.

Some of the answer undoubtedly lies in concrete goals that will help men feel more secure�such as higher wages for blue-collar, traditionally male jobs, and paths to success that hinge on skilled manual labor rather than college degrees.

But the connection between democratic backlash and men falling behind is not direct. Sweden�s economic inequality is laughably small by American standards�but it has been on one of the swiftest rises in Europe, which may play a role in the sizable gender gap in voting for its radical political party. Canada has one of the highest gaps between male and female university graduation among OECD countries, while Germany�s is the smallest in the OECD and smaller still in the eastern state of Saxony. Its strong vocational track and economy provides a high-status place for skilled manual laborers. But it is Germany where men are voting for the extreme AfD party, which is doing best in Saxony, while Canada�s political options remain reassuringly normal.

Material facts and cultural change together seem to create vulnerable men, but it takes a political storyteller to turn vulnerability into anger.

So, in addition to improving men�s situation materially, we need to consider how men can have a sense of purpose and status alongside empowered women. Years of cultural tropes have depicted strong, able women and bumbling men who fail to launch, but we need to depict both as competent adults. Women have been leaning in to mentoring young women for decades�men need to do the same to build real relationships that counteract online manosphere influencers taking over the roles of dads and big brothers.

Combed Thunderclap fucked around with this message at 18:42 on Jan 10, 2024

# ? Jan 10, 2024 18:38

Kagrenak: Sep 8, 2010

selec posted:

Look, we make schools into day care, job training, penal institutions, health care institutions, points of distribution for basic needs like food, social work centers, and day cares for the students as well, what’s one more straw? What, is the camel too tired?

Every problem at a school has origins outside of school. A parent being incapable of teaching a kid empathy isn’t a school problem, it’s a Society Is Really Getting hosed problem. The insistence that we can’t ask any more of parents only makes sense if you internalize the idea that the only value a human has is to provide economic activity.

We ask teachers to do too much for the staffing levels but I don't see why well-equipped and properly staffed schools shouldn't provide all those functions except for penal institutions? (other than school related punishments/behavior corrections, a conversation which is a whole different can of worms)

Going in order: The day care thing is a weird one to bring up outside of COVID because kids should be in school anyway, so that's an inherent secondary social good of public schooling. Health care: where do kids receive ongoing care at school? Of course schools need to provide acute care and triage, kids are there 8 hours a day and have no idea how to care for themselves. Points of distribution for food: if you mean beyond school breakfast and lunches, again, kids and families are already there, why would one not combine this function? Social work centers: who else is more situated to provide this service to children than the main second space they go to?

What is your alternative to having schools provide these functions? What other places are equipped to provide them and also have the same level of societal convenience (food/basic needs distribution) and crossover benefits (social work)? The problem is resourcing, not the core idea of schools being a key multi-functional social center.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 18:49

selec: Sep 6, 2003

Kagrenak posted:

What is your alternative to having schools provide these functions? What other places are equipped to provide them and also have the same level of societal convenience (food/basic needs distribution) and crossover benefits (social work)? The problem is resourcing, not the core idea of schools being a key multi-functional social center.

A functioning society would have ways to provide for these needs without Jerry-rigging schools to do it. I�m not opposed to a school being the site where this happens in a support role, but for many communities and families it is the only place any meaningful interaction with these kind of services occurs, at all.

Like what the gently caress is going on with our social welfare programs that schools have to raise money to give kids coats? Why do kids have to sell chocolate to fund their own educations?

And the more you push this stuff onto schools, the more you make teachers the people who are the only person in a child�s life they can reach out to for help, the less educating you�re doing.

This has been going on for a long time. My mom used to teach high school English and twice we had girls from my hometown living in our basement for a year or two while they finished school because social services weren�t getting them out of a bad situation, and the entire community decided that the kid couldn�t stay at home, so where did they end up? In the basement of their sophomore English teacher. This isn�t a bad thing about our community, or my mom; but she never should�ve been forced to save a kids life that way, much less twice.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 18:55

Kagrenak: Sep 8, 2010

selec posted:

A functioning society would have ways to provide for these needs without Jerry-rigging schools to do it. I’m not opposed to a school being the site where this happens in a support role, but for many communities and families it is the only place any meaningful interaction with these kind of services occurs, at all.

Like what the gently caress is going on with our social welfare programs that schools have to raise money to give kids coats? Why do kids have to sell chocolate to fund their own educations?

And the more you push this stuff onto schools, the more you make teachers the people who are the only person in a child’s life they can reach out to for help, the less educating you’re doing.

Yeah I agree with all this but our society isn't functioning. I think expanding services at schools—by diversifying and expanding the staff, not just expecting teachers to do everything, is a good stopgap measure. Distributing coats (that the kids/teachers did not have to raise money for and there is appropriate staffing support) at school seems like a good place to do it, for example.

Kids should not have to raise money for their own education in any way and diversifying the kinds of services kids get at school should not cause that to happen.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 19:04

Gumball Gumption: Jan 7, 2012

Sorry let me rephrase that, the education system should not be such an important lynchpin in teaching empathy that you can blame the rise of fascism on it. It is an absolute vibes argument that begins and ends at "the schools ain't teaching em!"

# ? Jan 10, 2024 19:31

GlyphGryph: Jun 23, 2013; Down came the glitches and burned us in ditches and we slept after eating our dead.

Basic empathy also offers no particular defense against fascism that I'm aware of.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 19:34

Failed Imagineer: Sep 22, 2018

GlyphGryph posted:

Basic empathy also offers no particular defense against fascism that I'm aware of.

It becomes a bit of a semantic argument I guess, but "basic universal empathy" is an antonym for "fascism"

# ? Jan 10, 2024 19:39

Civilized Fishbot: Apr 3, 2011

Discendo Vox posted:

Happy to stand corrected, I barely remember all the distinctions here. I'm assuming this group recognizes the eruv, so...idk. What a freaking weird situation.

Understandable assumption but Chabadniks dont hold by the eruv in Crown Heights.

The situation here is that these kids are totally drunk on Mesichist kool-aid and sincerely believe that their early 20th century gothic-revival synagogue, which was built as a medical office, is really the Holy Temple from the Bible so they decided that expanding it underground would be so awesome that it would make the Messiah show up.

Gumball Gumption posted:

The school system shouldn't be teaching you empathy.

Insane. Kids spend at least a third of their waking hours in school, it's their primary form of contact with people outside their families, if they're not learning empathy from it then that's extremely bad.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Jan 10, 2024

# ? Jan 10, 2024 19:58

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Chabad boys, Chabad boys.

What you gonna do? What you gonna do when the goyim come for you?

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:02

Hieronymous Alloy: Jan 30, 2009; Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!; Morbid Hound

GlyphGryph posted:

Basic empathy also offers no particular defense against fascism that I'm aware of.

I think that theory can be extrapolated from the argument made here: https://catvalente.substack.com/p/theres-no-such-thing-as-a-smart-fascist

In brief, fascism is often a product of simple mental laziness, while empathy requires mental and emotional work. Empathy protects from fascism the way physical strength protects from physical exhaustion.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:02

plogo: Jan 20, 2009

The original fascists had many smart people affiliated with the movement. Carl Schmitt, George Sorels, Robert Michels, Warner Sombert, Heidegger, would be examples off the top of the head, that were involved in the fascist movement to varying degrees.

Their ideas might have been wrongheaded but it was unequivocally not the case of mental laziness for the above.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:08

Tarezax: Sep 12, 2009; MORT cancels dance: interrupted by MORT

You can be really smart and also dumb as hell in other respects. See: doctors

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:09

Hieronymous Alloy: Jan 30, 2009; Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!; Morbid Hound

Read the essay, it's more than a title. The argument is not that fascists don't have brains, it is that they do not use them (or if they do use them, it is not on the subjects of their fascism).

Ben Carson may have been a brilliant surgeon but in politics he was a moron because he wasn't using his brain.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:11

Xiahou Dun: Jul 16, 2009; We shall dive down through black abysses... and in that lair of the Deep Ones we shall dwell amidst wonder and glory forever.

plogo posted:

The original fascists had many smart people affiliated with the movement. Carl Schmitt, George Sorels, Robert Michels, Warner Sombert, Heidegger, would be examples off the top of the head, that were involved in the fascist movement to varying degrees.

Their ideas might have been wrongheaded but it was unequivocally not the case of mental laziness for the above.

Is your argument literally just that smart people can't do dumb or intellectually lazy things? Because that's what I'm reading and that argument is laughably false.

Very smart people are frequently incredibly dumb or don't think about things ; the stereotype of the absent-minded genius is an old one. Not even getting into there being different kinds of intelligence or whether or not your cited examples are true, I don't think this argument survives the barest scrutiny.

Edit : Hell, if you ever want to think of yourself as smart, you better hope this is false because you just said something hella dumb.

Xiahou Dun fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Jan 10, 2024

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:12

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Republicans are essentially shutting down the House in protest over the spending deal that Speaker Johnson reached with Democrats.

By refusing to modify the floor rules, they need a 2/3 vote to pass them.

They are voting now and looks like they are getting close to actually doing it.

This would likely also throw a wrench in plans for a continuing resolution to prevent a government shutdown in 9 days if they extend this blockade (they haven't signaled if they will or won't and they may just prevent votes on these bills and shut it down for the next few days).

Several of the House committee chairs (plus the usual suspects in the HFC) are essentially revolting against the Speaker, which basically never happens because the Speaker picks the members of the committees.

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1745143299092906058
https://twitter.com/bresreports/status/1745159769000648717
https://twitter.com/bresreports/status/1745161836016664956

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Jan 10, 2024

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:14

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Speaker Johnson having a normal one today.

https://twitter.com/juliegraceb/status/1745131438477861299
https://twitter.com/liz_elkind/status/1745161407316795551
https://twitter.com/Fritschner/status/1745160000870261015
https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1745163429663453286

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:21

plogo: Jan 20, 2009

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

Read the essay, it's more than a title. The argument is not that fascists don't have brains, it is that they do not use them (or if they do use them, it is not on the subjects of their fascism).

Ben Carson may have been a brilliant surgeon but in politics he was a moron because he wasn't using his brain.

I did read the article and I disagree because I think what is scary about fascism is how many intelligent people were taken in by the movement and the ways in which thinkers that were ardent left wingers or liberals became so disaffected that they contributed to the construction of a fascist ideology. I think historians like Zeev Sternhell do a good job of describing these strands.

Xiahou Dun posted:

Is your argument literally just that smart people can't do dumb or intellectually lazy things? Because that's what I'm reading and that argument is laughably false.

Very smart people are frequently incredibly dumb or don't think about things ; the stereotype of the absent-minded genius is an old one. Not even getting into there being different kinds of intelligence or whether or not your cited examples are true, I don't think this argument survives the barest scrutiny.

Sure, but the article is a polemic that states "And he never could have been�because there�s just no such thing as a smart fascist. Not emotionally, not intellectually, not strategically or philosophically or practically" discounting all types of intelligence. There were smart fascist strategic thinkers, there were smart fascist philosophers, there were smart fascist political theorists, there were smart fascist military leaders. I named some in my prior post.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:22

Randalor: Sep 4, 2011

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Republicans are essentially shutting down the House in protest over the spending deal that Speaker Johnson reached with Democrats.

By refusing to modify the floor rules, they need a 2/3 vote to pass them.

They are voting now and looks like they are getting close to actually doing it.

This would likely also throw a wrench in plans for a continuing resolution to prevent a government shutdown in 9 days if they extend this blockade (they haven't signaled if they will or won't and they may just prevent votes on these bills and shut it down for the next few days).

The several of the House committee chairs (plus the usual suspects in the HFC) are essentially revolting against the Speaker, which basically never happens because the Speaker picks the members of the committees.

So just to clarify, but this is generally considered a bad thing to have happen in an election year, right? I mean, if we didn't live in the worst timeline where the inmates are running the asylum.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:25

Nissin Cup Nudist: Sep 3, 2011; Sleep with one eye open

We're off to Gritty Gritty land

So if this vote goes the wrong way, are we going to have another speaker election?

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:30

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Republicans are essentially shutting down the House in protest over the spending deal that Speaker Johnson reached with Democrats.

By refusing to modify the floor rules, they need a 2/3 vote to pass them.

They are voting now and looks like they are getting close to actually doing it.

This would likely also throw a wrench in plans for a continuing resolution to prevent a government shutdown in 9 days if they extend this blockade (they haven't signaled if they will or won't and they may just prevent votes on these bills and shut it down for the next few days).

The several of the House committee chairs (plus the usual suspects in the HFC) are essentially revolting against the Speaker, which basically never happens because the Speaker picks the members of the committees.

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1745143299092906058
https://twitter.com/bresreports/status/1745159769000648717
https://twitter.com/bresreports/status/1745161836016664956

Johson is done. the second something manages to pass or the goverment opens up in a month. he will get vacated.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:30

rkd_: Aug 25, 2022

Main Paineframe posted:

There's one important problem with this list of complaints: none of them are actually true. It's stuff that the conservative media discourse would like you to believe is true, but it's pretty much all bullshit. It's vibes-based nonsense rooted in deep misunderstandings and a total lack of data, taking full advantage of how baked into our society and culture white supremacy actually is.

I'm going to focus in on scholarships here, because these claims are so vague and divorced from any hint of data that they're almost impossible to actually argue against (which I'm sure is intentional), but the scholarships claim specifically is one that's focused enough and limited enough that there's actually hard data about it.

And what the hard data shows is that white students are actually more likely to get non-federal scholarships than black students are. They're generally more likely to get need-based aid, massively more likely to get merit-based aid, and much more likely to get private race-neutral scholarships and institutional aid. Moreover, they get larger scholarship awards than black students do. Although there aren't any whites-only scholarships for them to apply for, they're so much more likely to win non-race-based scholarships and grants that it more than makes up for that. Which, of course, is exactly the reason for affirmative action in the first place: stuff that's supposed to be race-neutral has massive advantages baked in for whites.

This article is a bit old, but it's an interview with someone who's researched this exact subject and breaks down some of the specifics in a more understandable way than just spouting tables of statistics:
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=134623124

So yeah, young white men may feel like it's impossible for young white men to get a scholarship, but they're flat-out wrong. If they feel that way, they feel that way because they don't have the slightest clue just how much harder things are for minority students, and because their parents have given them massively unreasonable expectations of how much financial aid they should be able to win (breeding resentment and rage when they're unable to live up to those expectations).

Well, I am talking specifically about working-class white men. To lump them together with all white men is exactly why they feel alienated.

Thanks for the links though, very interesting information! Considering about 70-75% of the US population is white and, presumably, the majority of students in US colleges and universities are white, it doesn't seem that surprising to me that 72% of all scholarships go to white people, and that could even indicate that a 'disproportionate' amount goes to non-white people. As I said though, I am pretty confident that most of these scholarships do not go to the working-class white men I was talking about. These men, who don't benefit from the system that is supposedly in their favor, don't really care much about the fact that other, more privileged members of their group gets to reap the benefits of being white.

The issue is that we went from a system of equality of opportunity to a system of equality of outcome. I get all the good intentions behind it, but if a working-class white man did not get the opportunities to be in a position to be eligible for a merit-based scholarship, and then sees that minorities who are going through similar hardship get similar scholarships because of the color of their skin, then that will sting. You can throw all the numbers at him about how privileged the other members of his race are, but all he knows is that he did not get the support he needed. In the past (and perhaps even now still) I'm sure people would tell that white man to go cry a river, but we're seeing now what they do instead.

Main Paineframe posted:

I don't intend to try to dig up data about your other claims, but they both drink from the same well. The media "generally being more focused on the plight of people other than white men" claim falls flat on its face if you consider the massive media empire dedicated primarily to presenting white men as persecuted heroes and slamming minorities as dangerous and evil.

I guess it depends on what kind of media you consume, but over the last decade, it has been a lot about white privilege and not so much about white plight. The only articles that I do see about that are about how not enough attention is being paid to their issues, and how (white) men commit suicide at a disproportionate rate compared to others. Then there are things like Pride Month and Black History Month. I get it, the events are celebrating and paying attention to groups that otherwise have been ignored, shunned, and/or persecuted. An argument can also be made that many holidays (i.e., Oktoberfest, St Patrick's Day, Christmas, etc.) are already a celebration of white culture. However, those events are not centered around the identity of being white and, as such, invite everyone to partake. The other events that are focused so closely on celebrating a specific identity are, almost inherently, exclusionary. I fully support their existence, but you need to shine a similar light on everyone to not make them feel ignored, shunned, and/or persecuted.

Main Paineframe posted:

As for "diversity quotas sometimes preventing an otherwise qualified white man from getting a job", that's based on a fundamental misunderstanding of what affirmative action is about. It's not taking opportunities from qualified white men and giving them to unqualified minorities, it's an attempt to address the fact that our qualification systems have deep institutional biases causing them to rate white men as more qualified than they actually are, while rating minorities as less qualified than they actually are. That "qualified" white man is, in reality, probably less qualified than the "unqualified" minority getting the job instead. The problem is that although we have plenty of evidence of deep flaws and systemic biases in our qualification systems which cause them to produce inaccurate results, removing those biases and mistakes from the qualification system has proven to be an immensely challenging task. However, we at least have a decent idea of how big the error is and how different people are affected, and so we can compensate for it. Yeah, that probably feels worse for everyone involved than just having the system produce accurate results in the first place, but it turns out rooting out centuries of deeply embedded white supremacy from a highly fragmented system spread across countless state and local jurisdictions is actually quite difficult.

Whether that white man is more, less, or equally qualified as the minority is rendered irrelevant by the system, his hiring becomes a non-starter. Again, from an ideal of equal opportunity to an ideal of equal outcome. The system is pretty racist in itself, as it's lowering expectations for minorities across the board. Additionally, while I understand the intentions behind it, it strikes any affected person as a wrong done to him, and this is something that reverberates through society and pushes those affected (or those hearing about it) to fringe groups. As a short-term initiative to force more diversity, I think these diversity quotas are great. As a long-term forceful division and balancing of society, however, not so much.

I guess my overall point is that I understand the statistics behind all of this, the intentions, the goals, etc. I'm just pointing out that a group that has historically also been oppressed by a white, privileged elite is now not only forgotten about in all of these support initiatives, they're even lumped together with the elite that exploited them and being told that they benefited just the same, so now it's someone else's turn. That message just won't reach those people, and, if you push it, of course they'll go to someone who tells them the opposite is true and exploits their anger to convert them into extremism.

I thought the article linked by Combed Thunderclap illustrates a lot of the issues and dangers really well.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:30

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Randalor posted:

So just to clarify, but this is generally considered a bad thing to have happen in an election year, right? I mean, if we didn't live in the worst timeline where the inmates are running the asylum.

If they extend it into next week to prevent any CR from being voted on (and can't get 2/3 of the chamber - so nearly all Democrats and about 40% of Republicans) then it could be a problem where they can't prevent the government from not being shut down.

I don't think they would have the numbers for that. Currently, it is just an extremely embarrassing thing for Speaker Johnson and more dysfunction in the House as they basically shut it down for some unknown amount of time this week.

These are all Republican bills, but they are just making it so nothing can get a vote without waiving the rules and the rules set under McCarthy (and kept under Johnson) won't let them vote on it right now because all the Democrats are voting with the Republicans rebels again.

Nissin Cup Nudist posted:

So if this vote goes the wrong way, are we going to have another speaker election?

They don't HAVE to, but it will be an incredibly awkward situation where the Speaker technically loses control of votes in the House unless those bills can get 2/3 of members to support them. If they decide to continue the blockade, then there won't be any new votes on anything that doesn't have 2/3 support.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Jan 10, 2024

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:31

Morrow: Oct 31, 2010

Randalor posted:

So just to clarify, but this is generally considered a bad thing to have happen in an election year, right? I mean, if we didn't live in the worst timeline where the inmates are running the asylum.

It is a level of disfunction in Congress that has not been seen ever. For reference, KMac was the first speaker to ever be ousted. And it's entirely within the House GOP (and features public in-fighting among leadership). For reference, Pelosi had a similar slim majority in the last Congress and did not have this level of drama.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:31

Gnumonic: Dec 11, 2005; Maybe you thought I was the Packard Goose?

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

Read the essay, it's more than a title. The argument is not that fascists don't have brains, it is that they do not use them (or if they do use them, it is not on the subjects of their fascism).

Ben Carson may have been a brilliant surgeon but in politics he was a moron because he wasn't using his brain.

That's a ridiculously silly position. Just looking at some of the names already mentioned, both Heidegger* and Schmitt gave elaborate intellectual defenses of fascism. Schmitt specifically has a very large body of political philosophy and legal theory that not only justifies fascism, but essentially argues that it is inevitable. I think Schmitt in particular is deeply evil, but I do not believe that anyone could read his work and think that he's stupid. Basically every leftist academic I know thinks his arguments deserve to be taken seriously even though they find him personally repugnant and strongly disagree with his conclusions.

Honestly, y'all should read (though not pay for, if you can avoid it) The Concept of the Political. It's the best presentation of the internal logic of authoritarianism/fascism that I've ever seen, and illustrates very well the way in which authoritarians have a totally different conception of what politics is than you or I (or any liberal or leftist) does.

*In fairness to Heidegger I think he was more of a careerist coward who would have justified anything if it'd benefit him, but Schmitt was 100% a true believer.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:36

Aztec Galactus: Sep 12, 2002

Pelosi would never do something so foolish as negotiate with Democrats

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:39

plogo: Jan 20, 2009

Gnumonic posted:

*In fairness to Heidegger I think he was more of a careerist coward who would have justified anything if it'd benefit him, but Schmitt was 100% a true believer.

In unfairness to Heidegger (because I have not engaged with his work in any meaningful sense) I would also note that the blogger's argument is partially cribbing Hannah Arendt who had personal reasons to want to absolve Heidegger.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:40

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

House is officially banned from voting on anything that doesn't have 2/3 support.

The Speaker traditionally has an iron grip of control over the House schedule and has many more official powers than the Senate Majority Leader, but because the perfect storm of the rules cut by Kevin McCarthy, the tiny majority, the unanimous opposition of Democrats, and the handful of Republicans who are willing to shut everything down, Johnson basically just became the first Speaker to ever lose control of the House.

Not clear if this is going to be an ongoing thing or a one-off protest, but extremely embarrassing and basically temporarily shuts down the House.

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1745167943401373801

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:42

Failed Imagineer: Sep 22, 2018

The clock is ticking loudly on his Speakership now

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:44

Mooseontheloose: May 13, 2003

Aztec Galactus posted:

Pelosi would never do something so foolish as negotiate with Democrats

I take it you never read any of the legislation that came out of the house during either or Pelosi's time as speaker. The progressive wing got a lot of their stuff in the legislation but the Senate waters it down.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:45

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 23, 2024 13:58

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

Morrow posted:

It is a level of disfunction in Congress that has not been seen ever. For reference, KMac was the first speaker to ever be ousted. And it's entirely within the House GOP (and features public in-fighting among leadership). For reference, Pelosi had a similar slim majority in the last Congress and did not have this level of drama.

it was way more nuts before the civil war when the dixichuds openly beat the gently caress out of people

https://www.amazon.com/Field-Blood-Violence-Congress-Civil/dp/0374154775
i think we get a fight or a beatdown this year though.

# ? Jan 10, 2024 20:45

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

«‹›797 »