|
Just to pre-empt every argument we're going to have: - BLM are the true racists - Antifa are the true fascists - Feminists are the true sexists - Abolitionists are the true slavers - LGBTQ people are the true oppressors - Conservatives are the true punk counter-culture - Something about freeze peach There, saved you all the trouble. e: forgot a few Pembroke Fuse fucked around with this message at 03:30 on Sep 11, 2017 |
#
¿
Sep 11, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 08:44 |
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:the russia thread for people who think putin has radio transmitters in their frosted flakes Don't let your biases leak out this early.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:Before we really get going, I'd like to say a prayer of thanks to 8BS for projectile vomiting in the trump thread so hard that it splashed on guyovich's shoes, and he used a tissue to wipe them off and discarded the tissue and that became the new USPOL thread. God works in truly mysterious ways.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
Official mascot of 2017, USPOL and maybe everything:
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2017 04:33
|
|
|
botany posted:but we already had a USpol thread There was violence on both sides (of that noose).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
skeleton warrior posted:oh, hey, another thread full of Majoran and Condiv telling us why Bernie Was Right And Would Have Won I wish we could lock Hillary and Bernie in a sound-proof room. Forever. And then get on with the very hard task of trying to elect Dems while shifting the overton window to the left.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:Locking Bernie up wouldn't solve anything. It's mostly those using him as a club to attack That Witch Hillary, Destroyer of Leftist Hope. Hillary and Bernie are at this point both seriously divisive well-poisoners who need to bow out of the lime-light and put their energy into behind-the-scenes work. I've seen enough arguments on Twitter and dKos that amount to cult of personality poo poo (Hillary/Bernie fanfiction, each side accusing the other of being corporate/Russian shills, etc, etc).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:"both sides! both sides!" i continue to insist as i slowly shrink and transform into an msnbc anchor Nah, I definitely support socialists... but I also support the idea of getting poo poo done. Bernie isn't getting anything done and being tied to individuals instead of ideas and ideals is likely to get people stuck on this stupid highschool drama. Seriously, all politicians are going to be tainted or damaged goods by the very nature of being politicians. It's our job to hold them to a higher standard, squeeze as much as we can from them and throw them out when they stop supporting our ideals. Politicians are tools of the people, not the other way around, and should be treated in an equally disposable fashion. If Kamala Harris or whoever the next Dem centrist is can move the needle further to the left, that's all I care about. If and when she can't, she needs to be thrown out on her rear end. Even the best pols are rarely loyal to their constituents, so we should hold no intrinsic loyalty to them.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2017 04:12
|
|
|
Majorian posted:
Seconded. They're not inherent Republicans. Many were unionists when they still had manufacturing jobs.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2017 04:53
|
|
, and one would think that every Dem could agree with that. But watch the Daily Show interview; Trevor Noah flat-out asks Reid why they can't do both. Her answer? "They're Republicans!" (except they're not)
|
KickerOfMice posted:That's the most American thing I've read all year. The rich are already murdering the homeless by politically denying them basic necessities like housing and mental health services. May as well cut out the middleman.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
According to the proud boys and tradwife, jerking it is killing all the sperm. Those poor little sperm are just smashing into the keyboard and dying helplessly.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
Don't try to politicize it by talking about guns, gun culture, NRA extremism, mental health, social assistance, welfare, spousal abuse or anything really... violent crime happens in a vacuum. There are people, guns and bullets, and sometimes the universe, via quantum jesus mechanics, rearranges them in such a way that a bunch of kids die. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2017 03:48
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:fighting poverty would help our society to stop producing hopeless aggressive young males and reduce mass shootings a lot more than any gun control policy that could ever pass on a federal level Yeah. I've pretty much given up on the idea that any politician is going to be able to go up against the gun lobby/culture and win. It would also require a radically different culture, like Australia, where many citizens gladly gave up their guns. Basically the only way to reduce gun violence in America is to increase education, mental health care and reduce poverty. I find those much more feasible than any kind of meaningful gun legislation at this point. Maybe in a 100 years we will stop fellating our guns long enough to enact something worthwhile.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:What would that even look like to you? Because nothing being put forward by Democratic leadership is going to reduce the homicide rate. For example, the enactment and subsequent sunset of the 1994 assault weapons ban had no measurable impact on the national homicide rate. Hey you know what would be cool? If we had an organization like the loving CDC investigate ways of at least improving gun safety. The CDC is forbidden from doing so, so we really have no idea if any legislation that we enact will work or not. Also, given the high correlation between say spousal abuse and gun homicide, I would say that revoking the rights of spousal abusers from owning guns might be a good start.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2017 04:36
|
|
|
Racism is a boring thing that white people love? :p
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2017 04:37
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Give me a call when you've solved the reality of limited resources. The issue isn't the reality of limited resources, it's the distribution and triaging of resources. We certainly have the resources to feed and clothe every man, woman and child on the planet, but we've "decided" that hedge fund managers, CEOs, bankers, oligarchs, their children and other "job creators" deserve over 40% of our total wealth in the US (up to 75% in Russia!). Globally the top 10% hold 85% of all wealth. Arguments to the contrary are really disingenuous when 1) most of the wealth is concentrated in the hands of a very small portion of the population and 2) most of that wealth isn't being used for anything except collecting rents, so to speak. Dead Reckoning posted:Oh cool, all we need to do is totally re-orient our economy without any of the corruption, waste and violence that normally accompanies such affairs. I'm sure glad we don't have to think about scarcity any more. You child. Observing that there is enough wealth in the economy to do what you want is like observing that we have enough steel in the world to build a ladder to the moon: pointless and naive... At this point, given the insane level of wealth disparity, corruption, waste, poor resource utilization, violence and increasing levels of all the previous that already pervades our economic system... I would say that yeah, we should be working to re-orient our economy as quickly as possible. Any legitimate cost-benefit analysis would be looking at how throughly broken our current system is, and you clearly aren't.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
nwo hatchet man posted:This doesn't make sense. If "logic warrants lethal force" they should aim to kill. If there's an opportunity to intentionally not kill them then lethal force isn't necessary in the first place. No one cares what weird Hollywood poo poo Finnish cops are taught. This just encourages cops to go to their gun more often to solve problems. Yes, police in the US are such problem solvers. Actual, empirical evidence shows that your bullshit theory has no merit. Most police forces in the world understand the fact that intermediate force exists, instead of the ideas that US police are saddled with: i) you are always justified in using lethal force so long as you can cite personal or public safety (even if you have to plant a gun on the victim).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2017 16:03
|
|
|
RandomBlue posted:Do you have a pile of terrible posts you just pick and chose from or do voices whisper them to you while you sleep? Most arguments in support of expanding funding for the military basically boil down to "Let's buy more pew pews, we need more pew pews so we can kill more brown people. There are scary brown we haven't killed enough of yet. Pew pew."
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:the same people who'll loving abolish law enforcement officers in Hellblazer's hypothetical, presumably Campaign Zero, loosely associated with BLM, focuses specifically on constructive solutions to the problem of violent policing. They have a good list here: https://www.joincampaignzero.org/solutions/#solutionsoverview It's a very worthwhile organization to support.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2017 05:06
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:I've heard of them! I'll read up, thanks. The union issue is tough. I'm torn between saying that public-service employees need strong union protections in general versus the idea that public service employees should really be as transparent as possible even if it places them under greater pressure, especially in policing. In any case, police unions at this point are only interested in getting their guys out of trouble, they promote the worst instincts of the police force and they're virulently racist and atavistic. In any case, I see most of the Operation Zero provisions as a minimum. Perhaps cops, by their very nature as judge, jury and executioner don't deserve a union at all.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2017 06:25
|
|
I love so many bits of the BLM constellation
|
At this point, the problem isn't just the police unions, it's the entire process of policing and justice itself. Elected judges and prosecutors routinely collaborate with police. Police not only get the public's benefit of the doubt, they are also being given the tacit support of the entire local justice system. At the very least, you have to begin by dismantling the elected system of judges and the collaboration between local law enforcement and judiciaries when investigating cops. In most decent countries, there is something similar to an SIU, and independent body that investigates police shootings and can sometimes make binding recommendations to the court system.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2017 13:21
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:Aren't exmilitary people also usually way better cops, because they have both trigger discipline and deescalation / situational awareness drilled into them for years? I've heard that ROEs in Iraq were more stringent than whatever training cops get, but can't confirm first-hand. Could just be bullshit.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
Condiv posted:What exactly are cops protecting us from nowadays? Nazis? Nah they sit back while those fuckers brutalize nonviolent counter protestors. Lynch mobs? Nope again, they're trying to protect teenagers who lynched a mixed race kid from the justice they deserve. Cops are really great at "interrogating", so good in fact that roughly 40% of innocent people suddenly find out they're really guilty and confess! http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/exonerations-2015_us_56ac0374e4b00b033aaf3da9
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:Click this for hot reddit action and South Dakota rendering itself even more uninhabitable. This is insane. Just loving insane.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2017 15:48
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:thats neat There are a lot of ways around this. Underperformance is really easy to prove: 1) Assign insane workload/workload employee isn't familiar with. 2) Wait for employee to get frustrated/fail. 3) Document. 4) Fire. In some cases you can just fire an employee for being late a certain number of times. Normally a business wouldn't care, but if you want to get rid of an employee, suddenly its a fireable offence.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
Xae posted:Why are y'all dumb enough to try to engage in conversation with someone who has openly and repeatedly called for genociding people who aren't left enough? If ACA gets repealed, I'm not sure people shouldn't start using "2nd Am solutions", as per Trump. If you're going to die because the GOP literally pulled the plug on you, why not take the Biblical path of an eye for an eye, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:The Democrats (or really their supporters) Yeah the Senate Dems tweet about how "Americans have spoken about the need for a bipartisan solution on health care" got flooded with "who the hell asked for bipartisanship? Do something!". e:dogtax 
Pembroke Fuse fucked around with this message at 13:36 on Sep 21, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 13:34
|
|
|
Your Boy Fancy posted:Glad you didn't read the point. Replace them. Vote them out. You do that on the state and county level. Man, you should SEE the candidates in the VA House of Delegates this year. Union members, Latinx, my personal favorite of the trans woman against a Republican caricature. This. The only viable way to socialism in the US is through the Dems. Third parties will literally hand the country over to the fascists. This is an unfortunate reality of the two party system. I mean, I guess you can wait for a revolution of the proletariat, but by that point there may not be anything worth saving left (or revolution will simply be impossible). I guess the model for us here are the Fabians.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
Mr Hootington posted:Good thing I learned that voting for a party that pays lip service to my beliefs doesn't work either. Yeah, voting at the Federal level doesn't. Voting at the local level does. You guys do know you can run for a local office for as little as 30-80K. I mean, that's a lot of cash for many, but I'm sure we have wealthy goons around.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 15:30
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:well best of luck to y'all in 2018 since you have 0 interest in doing anything but making GBS threads on the group you want to vote for you *We* don't have any power to meet your demands. I'm a democratic socialist, so there is a good chance I want at least 90% of what you want. I'm sure this thread roughly agrees up to 80% of what a leftist agenda looks like. The issue is that you can only do that through the Dem party, and you can only do that by replacing the current Dems, starting at the local levels and working your way up. So yeah, Dems are making GBS threads on the left right now... so it's our job to get them the gently caress out when possible and start shifting the overton window to the left. The solution isn't to become disengaged, it's to become *more* engaged.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 15:44
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:please don't mind the dead iraqis I'm pretty sure that at this point, American foreign policy is the gift that keeps on giving. Being terrible on foreign policy is pretty much the lowest cost for a politician. There is a really good chance that if you threw a rock at a Dem, you'd hit someone who's supported some horrible foreign policy initiative. I don't think you should use this as the first litmus test for the coming crop of candidates. This is more of a step 2 issue. Step 1: Find politicians who don't want to murder their own people Step 2: Find politicians who don't want to murder the peoples of the world Pembroke Fuse fucked around with this message at 16:04 on Sep 21, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 16:02
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:*Loses every branch of government, including presidency to the most hated, unpopular, and unqualified candidate in American history. I know it sounds bad, but all three branches of government were held by one party or another several times over the last century: quote:* Between 2001 and 2007, Republicans controlled at certain points all three branches while President George W. Bush occupied the White House. GOP control was interrupted between 2001 and 2003, as the Senate majority flipped to the Democrats as one senator switched his party affiliation, one senator died, and when the 2002 midterm elections shifted control of the upper chamber. http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/fact-check/2016/12/01/fact-check-one-party-three-branches-federal-government/94636286/ The issue is that the Democrats aren't losing to "reasonable" Republicans, they're losing to idiots, clowns and fascists. They're also losing at one of the worst times in history to lose.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:I don't think this is untrue, but it somewhat ignores that the vast majority of the loss came as backlash-to-black-president in 2010, where redrawing districts murdered everything. This doesn't mean that the Dems couldn't have handled things much better, but, to me, the root cause of the problems are that the left(all of it, from dead center to Karl Marx's ghost) rested on its laurels after electing a black guy, and Republicans instead chose to LOSE THEIR MINDS. This I think is really relevant. Redistricting has been one of the biggest losses for the left (perhaps on the same level as SCOTUS), but seriously, no one was really writing or losing their poo poo over it in 2010. We all missed the huge shift in power, and it basically took six years for the full effects to be felt. I guess there were also very few people who realized that Republicans would go from 0 to Full Fascist in 1 Black President.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Is living next to a derelict house a desirable situation? It doesn't matter if you can't afford to live there. This is a literal colonialist argument for land seizure. We "improved" the land, so we should get it. That improvement has no value to the original residents if they can no longer afford to live there (or, in colonial context, are subject to genocide).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
People forget that while mixed-income neighbourhoods are generally good for those lower on the income scale, usually this only comes about through some kind of organic growth and integration. If it's inorganic, like most gentrification projects are, anyone who could have benefited from living in a mixed-income neighbourhood (particularly the worst-off economically who can't at all afford the new rents) is driven out into even poorer areas. Gentrification, particularly in up-and-coming urban areas, forces the very poor to live even further away from centres of economic activity, thus reducing their access to even scraps of employment. The question to ask isn't "are the remainder better off now?", the question to ask is "how far away were the rest of the poor people pushed out to?". Relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l242Sj26k8M
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:72% of the population in Arlington, VA has been living there for more than 30 years. That is higher than the U.S. national average. Whenever you look at a gentrification project, you should ask yourself where the hell the rest of the poor people are being pushed out to. See my comment above about the value of mixed-income neighbourhoods.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The city has gotten less white in the past 30 years. Is your assertion that latino, asian, and african-americans are engaging in vicious colonialism? Are you vaguely implying that rich PoCs can't push out poor PoCs with the same kinds of negative effects on poor PoCs? Or are you focusing on Arlington, VA because it's one of the very few examples of PoC gentrification of a neighbourhood (whereas in fact most gentrification in the US is performed by wealthy whites against poor whites/PoCs)? It's interesting, I think I've heard other Libertarians bring up Arlington, VA before... and now I know why. It's a model example that's utterly unrepresentative of the general pattern of gentrification in the US.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:72% of the population in Arlington, VA has been living there for more than 30 years. That is higher than the U.S. national average. None of this is anywhere near representative of the actual experience of gentrification in the US, in terms of the groups conducting gentrification, the groups affected, and the outcome for the most vulnerable of those groups.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The city has a higher percentage of 30+ year residents than the national average. By nearly 20%. Gentrification looks pretty much the same everywhere. It's rapid and causes poor people and PoCs to leave: http://www.governing.com/gov-data/census/gentrification-in-cities-governing-report.html quote:Characteristics of Gentrifying Neighborhoods In essence, neighborhoods that gentrify kick out poor PoCs, who then move out to the even poorer neighborhoods in the region. Economic inequality becomes even more tightly concentrated in specific geographic areas. This is true across all parts of the US.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 08:44 |
|
|
Article is from 2005. More recent research shows it's mostly negative/mixed. Gentrification of the poorest neighborhoods simply doesn't happen, particularly neigborhoods that have high concentrations of PoCs (white-majority neighborhoods get richer, PoC-majority neighborhoods get poorer): http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0003122414535774 quote:Integrating census data, police records, prior street-level observations, community surveys, proximity to amenities, and city budget data on capital investments, we find that the pace of gentrification in Chicago from 2007 to 2009 was negatively associated with the concentration of blacks and Latinos in neighborhoods that either showed signs of gentrification or were adjacent and still disinvested in 1995. Gentrification leads to poor neighborhood isolation: http://www.scholarsstrategynetwork.org/brief/how-gentrification-american-cities-maintains-racial-inequality-and-segregation Poor neighborhoods that fail to to gentrify get even poorer as the remaining wealth drains out (most of them fail to gentrify): http://dillonm.io/articles/Cortright_Mahmoudi_2014_Neighborhood-Change.pdf Mass-scale gentrification is occurring pretty much everywhere, particularly in knowledge-hub cities.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2017 20:42
|
|