|
Just today a Canadian news program had a former FOX Producer on an interview talking about the culture within the studios there. I figured this would be relevant to the conversation here: http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/episode/2013/07/05/joe-muto-gawkers-fox-mole/ It sounds like the workplace culture there is really toxic between the staff and the management. That fact alone doesn't surprise me, but the low payroll somehow does. $12 USD per hour, hired as a media producer?
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2013 22:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 13:50 |
|
|
While in talking about research bias with a friend, I found mention of a "Stossel in the Classroom," with reports to be college courseware. It was unfamiliar to me, but a quick review of its major funding source would suggest it be gained from right wing and libertarian think tanks. Is there anyone here already more familiar with it? Any idea of its overall reach?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2015 06:25
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:My main concern is that when our generation does swing hard right, like the Boomers did, it'll be framed exactly along the lines of "we're tolerant, so stop talking about it" in the political framework of censorship. Censorship in any form is bad. The entire premise behind learning of why a particular viewpoint is bad is through discourse. Nobody under the age of 25 has lived long enough to develop a reasonable opinion about any social or political issues. Exposing them to that sort of discourse is absolutely necessary. This might be a tangent but, what would our generation's rightward shift even look like? The current orthodoxy in both social conservatism and even economic conservatism or neoliberalism has me with very serious reservations at best and outright repulsion at worst. I just can't go there, not without completely tossing my ethics and virtues. I'm left struggling to understand where the impulse for it even comes from. I'm not doubting that we'll become more set in our ways when we're older, but I'm just wondering what form it could possibly take because it is clearly not this. The best I can think of might be difficulties adapting to environmental mandates, but that would require actual social and political progression in the first place, which we practically have none of.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
Narciss posted:To be fair, Obama's presidency has moved the Overton Window so far to the left that it's about time things were brought into balance again. It has? News to me.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
The design choices in online social spaces and how they affect the community culture have always interested me as a topic. I've noticed that comment boards which use nested threading in their replies, like Disqus uses for many newspaper websites I know, eventually devolve into confusing messes where individual users argue and trip over one another. I could never really get into Reddit for the same reason, as its only manageable to follow if the total number of participants is below a certain amount. Strict chronological threading better jives in making things manageable for sites with a large number of possible users, like here on SA. (Tumblr also has nested threads, but the interface disguises them somewhat.) I would, however, be surprised if it turned out that nested or chronological threading favours either more right wing or left wing thought. I think it's more neutral in that particular way, but it would be more in line with what I've seen for nested threading to be more conducive towards the extremes of either case. For some reason, it surprises me to see LinkedIn with only 40% women. I would've thought them to be a strict 50/50. Wonder why...
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
Armani posted:Cardboard Box C had an amazing breakdown of how a lot of conservative groups like this deliberately reach out to Reddit and 4/8channers as a source of guaranteed rumor milling and trolling. I would also like to see this if the thread still exists. While it's obvious to see that the right wing media are connected to them in some way, the exact mechanics of how are unclear to me.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
FuzzySkinner posted:Meanwhile I guess ignore Bernie Sanders the entire time because I don't know? I don't know if this is a Right-Wing Media question or a Corporate Media question, but has the entire election coverage so far in the Right-Wing/Elite Media just completely ignored the existence of Sanders or what? I mean... I wouldn't put it past them, but I'm curious. Sanders very likely holds views and opinions that most of the GOP would find absolutely horrifying, but the reaction for him has been muted. Is that for reasons that he's too nonthreatening to them (on a racial, misogynist, or bigotry level) or is it because they literally have no information about him due to corporate censorship?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
At risk of slight derail, I have question for those in the thread who are a lot more acquainted with the right wing than I am. When there is complaint about "the liberal media bias," what exactly is the target of their aim? Is it more for the news media or is it more at entertainment media? I know, in the purest possible terms, that there really can't be such a thing as the liberal media bias because most of the owners of large broadcast media are significantly more likely to be right-wing themselves. In Canada, it's an honest wonder where the so-called liberal media could even possibly be, because the majority of the media chains are either Conservative-owned or just not interested in politics at all. (There is only one major liberal-aligned newspaper.) Nonetheless, constant wincing about "the liberal media bias" continues despite, probably because it somehow feels true regardless. The hypothesis I'm wrangling is that political division might be more geographically based rather than ideologically based. Broadcast media is highly centralized -- in the United States, media only exists as an industry in only a few places: New York, DC, California, etc. The places which media operate may be in a different ideological paradigm relative to all the non-media places which the national media broadcast to regardless. In Canada, our media is centred in Toronto, and a lot of "conservative backlash" (western alienation) we've had comes from the prairie provinces which feel the national media is forcing them to identify with a city that is very distant and far away, which simply wouldn't match their own experience of life. I get the feeling there might be something to this than conjecture, but I have no real idea how to test this as a hypothesis.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2015 01:06
|
|
|
Thank you for the responses, everyone. ... though, it seems I might have been looking at things a little too optimistically for my hypothesis to hold out on the media bias front. I just can't help but feel as if there must be some explanation for the divergence in political thought that has created this rift which could only be crossed through combat. I don't necessarily like the fact that there are us over here and them over there, as the myopia inert to echo chambers always creates limitations in both ways. I've seen good friendships ruined by simple disagreements over abortion, BLM, and Tumblr dramas, even though the same people were perfectly fine to gush endlessly about Nintendo games together. Something in the back of my mind can't quite rest with it. When the all-too-common response to sudden disagreement on even singular issues is to sever completely, I can't help but feel we're collectively doing something wrong. So wasteful. ... but with things getting as extreme as they are, I just don't know anymore.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
That's very true. It might be perverse to say it, but I honestly wish the instances I were witness to had such justification. At least then I could say the result happened for a good reason, and not just over mere theoreticals.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2015 06:29
|
|
|
The "dancing in the streets" stuff comes from the news coverage immediately following the Twin Tower attacks. When it was first reported that the hijackers were middle eastern, a news company had to go into their stock footage for B-Reel. Some such footage was of a protest/celebration of some major political event from back in 1996/1997 or so, long before the events of the day. This unfortunate stock footage was later interpreted to mean they were celebrating the attack on the Pentagon, irrespective of where the video actually came from. Trump supporters claim, semi-correctly, that they saw Muslims dancing in the streets. What, of course, they are not saying is that they saw it happen on TV. Not actually with their own eyes. Morroque fucked around with this message at 21:06 on Dec 6, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
Nckdictator posted:Not really Huh. Colour me surprised. Edit: Looking this over, it isn't surprising so many authorities tried their hardest to suppress it. Had it been reported on more widely, the public policy effects would've been disastrous. Especially because it refers to the already complicated mess that is I/P. Morroque fucked around with this message at 07:57 on Dec 7, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2015 07:30
|
|
|
Why is that polar bear wearing a traffic cone?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
Rick_Hunter posted:The thing that irks me the most is that it's really hard to incorporate any kind of cultural teachings into a lesson plan unless it's explicitly Judeo-Christian or neutered to not include any kind of faith based information. I went to a Jesuit high school in Indianapolis where they made a great effort to make us aware of different religions and cultures. Our first year included 4 quarterly cultural units for social studies and a world religion class that devoted equal lesson plans to several faiths. I took a class on liberation theology my junior year. Granted it was a private school but I'm pretty sure I didn't just flip a switch and change from Lutheran to Roman Catholic because I learned about Jesuits. Why do the Jesuits seem like such probably literal godsends? I went to just a regular Catholic school and I had to convince my own Grade 11 world religions teacher that Islam did not worship some completely different deity known as Allan, but was in fact another part of the Abrahamic faiths, which after much argument he begrudgingly agreed. It probably seemed like a minor annoyance at the time, but that's the sort of thing I realized in retrospect was a very serious red flag to have to do with a world religions teacher. Also, an entire class on liberation theology? Man, I wouldn't have even dreamed of getting such a cool thing like that. Rick_Hunter posted:I just can't figure out at what point in education, from K to 12, where someone can actually teach a course and say, "This is X culture, they value religion a lot based on their history, here are some historical lessons" without some soccer mom or blue-collar dad screeching " I can kind of imagine how that happens, though. The parents would assume that the kids are going to school in order to learn things similar to what the parents know. If the kids came home and said they learned X in school today, and said X was a thing the parent would be completely unfamiliar with, it puts the parents and shifted grounds in relation to their children. At least, in regards to things like mathematics, even if the parent knows nothing about it they at least understand it being a thing which was associated with own experience in schooling.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2015 16:32
|
|
THAT'S RELIGIOUS INDOCTRINATION 
" but they're ok with optional prayer led by school officials in group settings like athletics.
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Honestly the type of person willing to go to the level to become a publicly visible pundit to do little more than push a status quo that oppresses groups that do nothing to harm them beyond the perceived offense of daring to exist is probably nothing but people with mommy issues, daddy issues, and/or some sort of major social rejection in their youth. The fervent determination to prove some other group, whether it's gay people, black people, illegal immigrants, Muslims, or whoever as inferior screams insecurity and self-loathing. These people usually don't have any real skills or talents as people to make them feel special and distinguished so instead they have to invent reasons that people who are different from them are somehow beneath their own mediocrity. Mommy/Daddy issues I can understand, but what types of social rejection would lean in this direction? While I try not to dwell on it too much, my own experience with actual social rejection led me to value universalism and solidarity, if only because I understood how rare the two of them are. I would not wish social rejection upon anyone, simply because I know how damaging it could be. I just find it weird that social outcasts, aware of their status as outcasts, would end up doing things which would only create more outcasts, or even support the status quo which harmed them in the first place. There's gotta be something else to it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
The fallacy of the truth being in the middle is one we have to constantly re-learn every time we have a new object of truth to deal with.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
Flip Yr Wig posted:Anybody seen any right wing takes on Flint? Seems like they've been mostly dodging the issue. Of course they would. The governor who ordered it was a Republican.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
The lines "Country music is no longer a community, it is mass marketing," and "a symptom of the homogenization of the country format from radio consolidation" are the key points in it for me. I don't know if the fans themselves are necessarily to blame for indulging in a toxic culture they were assured was okay and normal. While their actions might be their own, they still got the signal from somewhere else. It's an issue media conglomerates have with originality. They want to have something which will sell and make them a lot of money. The problem is data only exists for pre-existing things, so the research bias eventually skews towards "just make more of that." When the media owners and gatekeepers are usually very far removed from the things they are representing, as most media work is handled and organized in major urban areas, there is also a huge risk of misunderstanding your properties or misrepresenting people to themselves. It's like they saw the stand-up comedy routines of Jeff Foxworthy and Larry the Cable Guy and thought, "Well! These guys who I have not heard of until this point sure seem super popular! They will now inform our standards in all things regarding this market segment going forward, in perpetuity." Then the subtle nuances that made country music its own thing naturally get lost in the process.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
fart blood posted:Front page of CNN is a banner that has this headline: Compaction cycle.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
McDowell posted:There is a story to be told about how Michael Moore (and Adam Curtis, among others) precipitated the court case that became the Citizen's United Decision. ...? What's the story behind that?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2016 02:02
|
|
|
RareAcumen posted:What's that mean? I tried googling it, couldn't come up with a specific answer. In Islam, all mentions of the Prophet in writing must be suffixed by the line "Peace Be Upon Him," hence PBUH. Your guess of how to factor a T-word into that is as good as mine.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
"Peace be untoward him," sort of works in Reagan's case. I suppose.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Kenzie posted:Maybe the right wing media will have a lot more trouble surviving if the GOP wins. Then they have to immediately shift gears toward defending the horrible new administration and how everything is great, America great, you have to support the president and if you're not you're a drat traitor and blah blah. Canada attempted having a "Fox News North" for a while with SUN TV - a kind of broadcast extension of those right-leaning tabloids whose main attraction were the "sunshine girls" pin-ups of bikini models. SUN TV failed to make past the term of the prime minister because they tried to be a pro-conservative news network in the middle of an already conservative government. They didn't get to play the political underdog card, so the only time anyone ever heard about them was when their O'Reilly knockoff said something horribly racist, usually about the Roma in Europe. Combine that with really bad internal management where a lot of anchors were having their paycheques delayed by weeks, SUN TV was shuttered mere months before the election of a liberal government. The point here is that it is very much not within Fox's interest to actually have a republican presidency of any sort. Unless their ideology is already in the ascendant, actually electing their guy into high office will adversely affect their bottom line. (And they're already paying their non-patronage staff pretty poorly.)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:^^ poo poo. I had heard of other nations that have made abortion illegal that have prosecuted women having miscarriages, because people thought they were having an abortion. Is that really happening here? http://www.democracynow.org/2015/4/2/20_years_in_prison_for_miscarrying (April 2nd, 2015) Strangely, I can't predict the result of this. I feel like my better side would be gravely underestimating the number of people who would agree or incline to agree with such an extreme position. It makes some degree of sense, when you think about it. The right wing has been resolutely defeated on the terms of Affordable Care and Gay Marriage. They've lost so much ground on a lot of culture war issues that they're hammering hard on the ones they still have left with any degree of support. Problem is, for them, how hard is too hard?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
Radish posted:It's why publicly they are stressing shutting down clinics is about safety and they are not making it technically illegal. It's both to get around Roe vs Wade but also so that people don't have to think too hard about women having to prove that their miscarriages were natural and not because they aborted their pregnancies intentionally at the threat of jail time or some other monstrous scenario until it's too late and the damage has been done. I've heard the phrase "The Criminalization of Pregnancy" come up in some progressive outlets to try and describe this, but it hasn't really stuck. In trying to forbid abortion in the way they are, they're achieving the same effect of making abortion mandatory.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
My understanding of Mass Effect as a Canadian-developed game was that The Illusive Man was this weird allegory for Steven Harper. I'm not sure if I just imagined that or if that was the intention but the writers didn't really know where to go with it. TIM's birth name is supposedly Jack Harper, so... I'd imagine Trump doesn't play video games, (nor would any presidential candidate right now,) so it wouldn't surprise me if the upper brass of campaign would've known they were stealing from Mass Effect. The problem would lie on the fault of the producers, who would've known and charged campaign money for.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:because its the most fw fw fw style film ever. It now strikes me that in the near future we will need to differentiate between "Forward Thinking" and "FW: FW: FW: Thinking."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
FuzzySkinner posted:The more I think about that clip, the more I realize that the ideological conservative movement is going to be dead in the very near future. Ted Cruz is their last ditch effort at it. Well that solves one problem only to create another. If ideological conservatives are out and the alt-right is in, then who is the alt-right? I can only say I know them as a weird offshoot of video game subculture that is a delayed reaction to the "Comics Code"-esque suppression that video games got when they were growing up. It was still a cultural issue back then, but it couldn't complete because only the anti-gaming side had any clout and the pro-gaming side were still just children. That's been swept under the rug and it's now coming out as a Pavlovian conditioning reacting to strange, semi-connected things. (The constant railing against something so harmless as trigger warnings? Blame the ESRB for that.) Even based on this, the idea that it can somehow now be considered a political force doesn't make much sense. I must be missing something. Edit: Or am I even looking at the proper alt-right? That's the problem of things being alternative to a mainstream, since there is only one mainstream and a whole lot of things beside it. Is it just authoritarianism then? Morroque fucked around with this message at 08:45 on Apr 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2016 08:42
|
|
|
Armani posted:Jesus Christ, that Archive.is link is not helping my 'Everything bad on the Internet is a carefully crafted lie by 4chan' panic instinct Y'know, I still can't accept it. The fact that 4chan is now, somehow, a kind of political force. It doesn't seem real, despite all the evidence. I was never a channer myself, even if I had a lot of friends who were, but for a long time I still respected the site as a place where some very silly stuff could happen. (Even if Sturgeon's Law still applied.) I might've been younger then, but I could still respect that. The image of that place is so cemented in my mind that I'm not sure how the evolution could've happened. It's like I blinked, and in that brief moment it all changed. I had just finished reading Whitney Phillips' book on Anonymous too, and even when her account of the chan culture is much less biased than Gabriella Coleman's, I didn't see any evidence of how it could've happened. It's like it occurred at the very point where her book ended in 2014/2015. Yeah sure, there might've been an ongoing fracture between "big-A Anonymous" and "little-a anonymous" at that time, but... it was just about white supremacy all along? ... really? ... on the Internet? ... where nobody can even see your face? It feels like a bad joke, and that at least fits the subject, but bad jokes don't feel real.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2016 04:37
|
|
|
Rick_Hunter posted:When you realize that a bunch of people between 13-30 make a bunch of super edgy friend of the family and heil hitler jokes on the internet because they can and then white supremacists noticed and started to mold these people into the future Aryan Nation, it's not surprising at all. There was a bit in Phillips' book about how the chans were handling things when the Cheezburger Network was founded, and started stealing a lot of the pure humour aspects away the chans and more towards a bigger audience. There was some hemming and hawing about how trolling subculture "sold out," but the thing I'm slowly piecing together reviewing some of the material again is the unsaid side of it. As the pure humour and internet memeing moved elsewhere, all that was left were the parts that couldn't leave 4chan and venture very far. I suppose I could see it by reading between the lines, but... even white supremacy feels like a betrayal of what the old Anon would've meant. This is Why We Can't Have Nice Things, Page 150 posted:Within the ranks of little-a Anonymous, resistance to the political gains made by Big-A Anonymous was widespread. In his article chronicling the first days of the Occupy Wall Street protest, reporter Saki Knafo interviewed a group of self-described lulzfags who had gathered outside the Church of Scientology New York branch, located just off Times Square. Rather than expressing support for the OWS arm of Anonymous, they decried the protesters as "annoying, deluded hippies" and "challenged their claim to the mantle of Anonymous." This sentiment was common on /b/, precipitating a great deal of subcultural self-reflection. Many anons even discussed adopting a new mascot, as the Guy Fawkes mask had been appropriated by "new anon." One anon explained: They went from that, to white supremacy, very quickly. I guess ideals based on nothing don't cost anything to betray.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
Honestly, the one thing I admired the most about Bernie was his method of campaign financing through small donors. It feels like how politics should be done. Frankly, I am amazed it could get him as far as getting to the super-delegate brick wall. That at least signals that there is hope for the system yet.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2016 05:24
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:Was just listening to some station called Democracy Now that I stumbled to on the way home and they were doing this. They were somehow more worthless than NPR election coverage I used to listen to DemocracyNow a lot, then I stopped for a while, now I am listening to them again because the workday is long and I often run out of podcasts to listen to otherwise. The reason I stopped listening was because they were late to begin covering Geoengineering, which I heard a lot about from other sources. I could tell it was the first time they had encountered the subject and they cast an immediate judgement as anti-Geoengineering, because it was like the corporations who caused the environment problems were promising they could get us out of it. (Technically correct, but really reductionist and oversimplified.) Also their coverage of Israel/Palestine, which sounds fine on the face of it, but if you haven't been paying strict attention to it since 1970 then it is absolutely imprenetrable. Not the most beginner-friendly news item. The comparison of DN as left-wing Fox News is correct, but the real story of it is sadder than that. They're trying so hard. So, so hard. Amy Goodman probably should be retiring or grooming a new host, but somehow she just keeps making more and more work for herself. She is literally losing her voice on air, much in the same way Bernie Sanders gave himself bronchitis from doing too many rallies, only much more sustained over time. As far as the coverage goes, they have good days and bad days, but there s a very peculiar reason why that is. I would understand them more as a ground-floor journalism sort of thing where a lot of reporters who go on to do better thing later get their start. Jeremy Scahill used to do reporting for them before he founded The Intercept. I also think the one reporter who covered the most of the Arab Spring in Egypt's Cario Square for all the American media was one of their regulars as well. It's the place where a lot journalist make their beginner's mistakes. Morroque fucked around with this message at 03:20 on May 3, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 3, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
Am I the only one who is surprised, and somewhat worried, by how he is suddenly attacking NAFTA? Considering how much of a negative effect globalization has had in the Rust Belt, that can only be guaranteed to gain him more votes. Like it is an actual, useful pivot. How is that going to play out?
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2016 09:34
|
|
|
Sure thing. Here you go: 
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2016 11:25
|
|
|
Stallion Cabana posted:was that the one where a goon did some long con thing where he became a prominent poster's internet girlfriend and then the knockoff facebook realized that goons were trolling them and started looking into their own thread. I think that one was Tea Party Community. They were the ones who ended up doing a news item on Fox News about their "sudden, popular success" -- too naïve to realize 95% of it was GBS Goonrushing them. Unless that happened to Reaganbook too, in which case it happened twice and no one was the wiser.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
As a case against Objectivism going away is to consider an analogue in Psychology: Freudianism. Most psychologists today view Freud's work as largely discredited or no longer admissible as functional theory. Yet, if we're to ask anyone what they knew about psychology, they'd statistically answer: ego, superego, and id. This is because Freudianism has existed for the longest and has had enough time to disseminate through various means. Newer, more updated psychological theories haven't had the cultural force behind them. (Hell, the probable reason why people know more about Freud as opposed to Jung is that Freudian theory worked its way into the early mass media system through Edward Bernays and early advertising.) The same applies to economic thought. Notice how a lot of libertarian thought revolves around things that were hot-button issues only as recently as the 1930's? That's because what carries heft today was formed in that context. For hell's sake, we still argue about the merits of Keynesianism in the CanPol thread, and how long ago was that? There are of course plenty of well-written responses to the problems about why the gold standard had to go, (my own favourite being Karl Polanyi) but starting in the 1960's poses some problems. Less lead time, and less culture behind it. When exactly was it did anyone realize how significant Milton Freidman and the Chicago School turned out? I've been able to find a few odd, passing references to them from books of the time, but it is only with hindsight can we realize "holy poo poo, neoliberalism and neoconservatism are kinda horrifying." I guess the main problem I have with conservative theory on economics is that it is based in old educations. Back in high school when I was pondering the innate unfairness of how a corporation like Walmart could run such monopolies and treat their workers so poorly, a friend not much older than me said, "it's just supply and demand. And competition. That's how the free market works." (This is enough for another high school student to pick up. That's how effective old ideas are at spreading.) But is a market saturated with large, competition-unfriendly corporations truly free? How does supply and demand work out in a digital world where supply is infinite? What does that mean for society? This old economics doesn't even try to deal with the problems we are dealing with today. No matter how real our issues are, and all the conservatives do is gaslight us and refuse to even acknowledge the problems. Oh you lazy millennials, they'd say, shut up and quit whining. Anything otherwise would profane their sacred calf, or worse, require effort.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
Hermetic posted:The first thing I thought when I saw the "HOLY BIBLE" with huge'rear end letters is "Wow, this is a woman who wants us to see her praying in public." "When you pray, don't be like the hypocrites who love to pray publicly on street corners and in the synagogues where everyone can see them. I tell you the truth, that is all the reward they will ever get."
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
What I don't understand is why he also felt it necessary to protest that message outside of a high school.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:RNC platform committee supports plank "rejecting the dark view of the individual as human capital." Huh. What's the story behind this one? ... this doesn't sound like them at all, which makes it strange to be seen in all the other things that do.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 13:50 |
|
|
Being from the general region Moore is also from, I can sort of see where he's coming from. This is an area that has been completely totally screwed by NAFTA and globalization. He was seen to be nominally left-wing mostly due to how the anti-globalization movement was also seen to be a left-wing phenomenon, and also because his earliest work was about labour issues. But anti-globalization is now a thing that Trump has under his policy set, given the new name of "anti-globalism" with a fresh coat of anti-semitic paint. It's entirely possible that all of the rust belt areas he has contact with are either pro-Trump or still anti-Clinton, especially because the labour side of the Democratic Party seems to still be no longer actually there. That's my guess as to why it probably seems like Trump is doing so well from Moore's vantage. Morroque fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Sep 28, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2016 00:21
|
|