|
I don't see an Olympics thread, but I'm curious what is the big deal with Eileen Gu? I assume she's an American who was born and or partially raised in China and thus triggered a lot of libs/conservatives?
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2022 05:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 23, 2024 01:29 |
|
|
I see. I was doing a pain test to see how long I could last watching Bill Maher and he mentioned her: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50vs0cDuWQQ
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2022 05:44
|
|
|
Wasn't sure where to post this as the official Ukraine thread seemed more of a place to post updates on the war than takes of the situation from other sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-Q-nomraAM Bernie Sanders former press secretary interviews his former foreign policy advisor about the current situation and it's very informative. Also, since it's Youtube, despite being informative it has an incredibly clickbait headline. At no point does the video even hint that there will be World War III and even goes over why such Clancyisms are foolish.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2022 23:43
|
|
|
quarantinethepast posted:I wonder if for the next 10 years Russia is going to be the main rival for US foreign policy over China. At best it would only last for the next decade or two at most. China has become the fastest developing country in the world with a strong economy that's growing faster all on the back's of the worlds largest population. Barring complete stagnation, they will become more and more of a force to be reckoned with. You can't have around 1/6th of the world's population and a modern economy and not be a global superpower. The United States has the world's largest economy and is the third most populous. Being that it's the "go to zone" for immigrants and only Indonesia is even remotely close to matching it's population*, means that the country will remain relevant for some time due to it's massive economy and large population that, is as of now, steadily growing. Russia on the other hand is a regional power that grows weaker by the year. It has a stagnate population and it's economy nearly lives and dies by oil prices. And unlike China it's political/economic system isn't something that you find other nations striving for. Russia is a fading power that's thrashing about to stay relevant on the world stage, but it's fate has been sealed for thirty years. *EDIT - I realize I forgot India. But the point I was getting at is that there are very few countries with populations matching the United States and only one other besides China that surpasses it. So even if other nations pull a modern China and have insane rapid development over the better half of the next half century, the United States will still likely have a stronger economy on paper. A TLDR version of this is that population + economy is a combo that will keep China and US highly relevant through the years with China gradually becoming even more relevant, while such a combo will keep making Russia increasingly irrelevant. punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 05:57 on Feb 25, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2022 05:45
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Stuff. One of the challenges of integration is that while many people want it, they all aren't necessarily on the same page, especially POC. I can't tell how many times I've seen argument revolving around HBCUs or how much integration should happen vs investing in one's own distinct community. Both liberals and leftist speak of ethnic minorities as a cohort, but they tend to only be united as far as "We don't like Republicans", and even that is slowly changing if the 2020 election exit polls are anything to go by.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2022 06:25
|
|
|
Dems in New Mexico actually did something good. Hopefully there is no catch.Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It was actually a big political issue in NYC during the 90's and up through Bloomberg. Bloomberg cut the city's parade permits down dramatically because people were upset about their impact on traffic/noise. But, there was also a lot of "why do we need an Afro-Haitian Women's Rights celebration every year at Christmas!" and other "too many ethnic parades" complaints. The “Puerto Rican Day Parade” episode was okay. As a Puerto Rican myself watching it a few months ago for the first time I didn’t understand the controversy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2022 20:32
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:A lot of states are actually doing free/dramatically reduced college costs at the state-level in good ways. It's a start at least. Probably the only good things Democrats have done in recent years.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2022 21:18
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:This is Allen Glines' current campaign website: I legitimately thought this was Frankie Munez at first glance.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2022 06:14
|
|
|
I remember when Bill Gates was held up as a saint by many liberals a decade ago. Good podcast about his foundation focused on feeding Africa from Al Jazeera.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2022 18:55
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Nearly all the major philanthropy stuff is tax scams, if not outright bait and switch. The episode also mentions it is enticing to Bill and his ilk in that (in an exact quote) “having a green revolution in these areas will prevent a red revolution.”
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2022 19:05
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I don't remember when Bill Gates was declared a saint, but the main points of the author they interview are: I was referring to the idea that billionaire philanthropist will help save the world, something that was very common amongst liberal circles (well even more than now) during the 2000s and early 2010s. There was also the fact that the foundation pushed the “go big or go home” with crops that used the model India used of high fertilizer and mono crops, but has recently been devastating for the country and will become further devastating as food shortages become more common due to the Ukraine-Russian war. punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 19:38 on Mar 14, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2022 19:35
|
|
|
It's amazing how liberals have backed themselves into a corner involving CRT.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2022 20:08
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:The thing is that white folks are uncomfortable with talking about real history and that's bipartisan....obviously it's worse from the conservatives but also liberal whites are a problem on this. "CRT" doesn't even really exist. It was just something the right made up to make it sound like there is some type of government crafted policy to teach race in schools. The fact that the Democrats/liberals even accept that CRT is even a thing chalks up to a huge blunder.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2022 20:36
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:I certainly don't remember him being held up as a saint by anyone, especially in these forums. I wasn't on these forums during virtually all the time period. I was on Neogaf and Reddit.' But in terms of media coverage, well just going by NPR there were dozens of article about Gates Foundation in 2006 alone. NPR had several puff pieces about the foundation (though admittedly some are from one huge interview special, but still had multiple articles about it): https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5512899 https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5512896 https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5514403 (Heavily deals with the Gates Foundation) https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5516260 https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6066564 And it was hardly just NPR: https://www.salon.com/2008/01/24/bill_gates_and_wal_mart/ https://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gates-saving-the-world-2011-8?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gates-infographic-2012-1?op=1 https://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Guide-to-Giving/2010/1120/Can-Warren-Buffett-and-Bill-Gates-save-the-world Solkanar512 posted:Again, who specifically are you speaking of? Politicians, like Beto O' Rouke. Arist posted:Sure, but CRT in how it is being defined by the right is just a catchall boogeyman for anything that makes white people uncomfortable. By even conceding that it's a real thing you're giving up too much ground. It's a dishonest truth. Exactly my point. Thank you.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2022 21:03
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I'm sure they will probably settle on permanent DST. Imagine being dumb enough to trade a later sunset for an earlier sunrise. I don't give a gently caress if it's dark when I drive to work because I will be AT WORK all day. When I get off work I want it to be as bright out as possible because I am now OFF WORK. It's not complicated.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2022 01:54
|
|
|
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/jon-stewart-climate-change-panel-fossil-fuel-companies_n_6230e861e4b0fe0944dcaa7f https://twitter.com/TheProblem/status/1503367828682027008 quote:Jon Stewart takes a deep dive on a number of issues, from gun control to COVID-19 safety protocols, on his new Apple TV+ series. His remarks on climate change, however, have left some of his fans feeling a bit perplexed. It's almost like this massive industries should all be nationalized?  quote:Rolling Stone’s Alan Sepinwall described show as being “stuck in the past,” while NPR’s Eric Deggans wrote that it feels “like a stitched-together pastiche of items from Stewart’s old show and a few other programs he inspired.” At Vox, Constance Grady wrote a consideration of “The Problem” that doubled as an essay on how the brand of liberalism Stewart popularized at “The Daily Show” has aged poorly. They are correct.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2022 07:20
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:China is the single largest emitter of carbon in the world and Russia is #4. Both have state controlled fossil fuel companies. Jizz Festival posted:You think if the government ran these industries climate change would suddenly become a concern in how they're run? Industries don't cease to be competing with others in the world market just because they're ran by a government. Staying competitive would always be a concern, a reason to make the exact same choices as ordinary capitalists. If they were state owned the population could put pressure on he government by voting in candidates that will force these industries to adopt a cleaner and more renewable standard. This is an alternative to the current system where the best that can be done is toothless regulation that is often attempted by these companies, just for these energy companies to Second, you mention China but they have among the fastest growing renewable energy industries in the world and look to be dominating the industry in the future. And it’s hardly just one article saying this. The reason why China is the number one polluter is because they are number one in population. But when accounting by per capita metrics they are nowhere near the top. There is also a correlation amongst developed countries that have nationalized all or much of their energy sector and renewable energy adoption (renewable energy % of total). But to be fair, most developed countries are at the top due to having low population coupled with an abundance of renewable resources. Iceland is number one by far, but not because of it’s nationalized energy sector, but because their island is a renewable energy powerhouse.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2022 17:12
|
|
|
Voting only matters if: - There is a candidate/party committed to fighting for the task you want no matter the obstacle. - There is a "movement" on the ground putting pressure to get these tasks moving (e.g. trade unions, organizations, etc.) The amount needed in both categories depends on the size and strength of said obstacles. America largely lacks the strength in both categories on most things that matter. You can't achieve anything without both existing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2022 20:51
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:You forgot the third, yet most important, factor: Capital is an obstacle. A very large one. Hence why said movement needs to be big enough to take it down.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2022 22:52
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Just to be clear on where eligible non-voters lean on the political spectrum, you can find a large study here: https://knightfoundation.org/press/...ink-about-2020/ Hmm... quote:Splitting the vote in 2020. If non-voters all turned out in 2020, non-voter candidate preferences show they would add nearly equal share to Democratic and Republican candidates (33 percent versus 30 percent, respectively), while 18 percent said they would vote for a third party.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2022 05:04
|
|
|
Nix Panicus posted:https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1504073842871963653?s=20&t=OrDQ-a8X6elVMbYkATIoXQ Oh look another reason why we should nationalize the energy sector.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2022 17:11
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:New Monmouth poll is out: Good stuff. Lol at the word bubble pic. I never got why “Divided” is such a terrible unholy thing to happen to a country.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2022 23:09
|
|
|
I kind of dislike the ambulance analogy used in here when it comes to voting. To me I kind of see it like there are a bunch of people on a ship, and there is water gushing out from a hole in the floor that’s gradually sinking the ship. The issue isn’t whether or not something is in “the right direction”, it’s whether or not the action taken will even curb the situation at all. Take Obamacare for instance. It was hailed as THE crowning achievement and legacy of Obama’s presidency. It promised more healthcare coverage for Americans and to make healthcare affordable. Yet today healthcare is not only more expensive than ever, but paying for it has never been more out of reach for Americans. With 1/3 of Americans putting off-treatment with the lion-share of them having serious conditions (yes this is from 2019 but I can’t imagine COVID has improved things). Yes, the ACA increased “coverage” and “access” to healthcare, but it did jackshit for people actually receiving healthcare, never mind whether it was adequate or not. It was like there was a hole on a ship that was spewing water, and the ACA was a piece of chewing gum that someone put over it. They hoped it would at least slow down the geyser, or at least by them some time, but the second they lifted their finger off of it, the water blew the gum across the room and continued its increasing ferocity. And again, that’s the ACA, so everything else Obama has done has been less effective than that. Yet people were out there smugly propping poo poo like this. Sure, all this stuff sounds good until you stop and think “Wait, I mean it’s cool that Obama expanded Pell grants but isn’t student debt at record highs today?” It’s not about passing legislation that is “in the right direction” it’s about passing legislation with some teeth. It’s not like performance on statistic on inequality, poverty, wages, infrastructure quality, healthcare costs, racial disparities, and the like are on a rollercoaster where the ups and downs are correlated on which ever party is in charge, these things keep gradually getting worse and worse regardless of who is in charge. Now here is the dilemma that most people face. While Democrats don’t do anything to address the issue, Republicans actively make it worse. If Democrats are throwing poo poo like chewing gum and cotton balls into the geyser, Republicans try to put it out by whacking the floor with a hammer, actively making the geyser worse. So, looking at this situation you get the impression that both of these parties are either delusional, idiots, or most likely that they actually want water to keep coming into the ship. You suspect that they have some insurance policy on the ship and a secret means to escape, which is twisting their arms and creating strong cognitive dissonance from actually helping. So, what do you do in this conundrum? You should support the Democrat who while is not plugging up the hold, they are at least for the most part not actively not destroying it. But wait, that’s not right, because in the end you are going to drown, it will just take longer. So, what DO you do? You do the only logical thing you can. You find some wood, nails, and your own hammer to repair the floor. Sure, this takes longer, requires much more effort, and you will likely have to fight off the two people currently “tending” the leak, but it’s your only way of survival. So, putting your time and energy should solely be investing in something that will actually prevent the current situation. This is why people say it’s better to put focus on building a movement by investing in organizations, unions, and pushing policies that will actually solve issues like poverty, inequality, healthcare, and other disparities. I’d be happy to vote for someone, but they will need to be actually helping plug up leak, otherwise my time would be better spent elsewhere.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2022 10:18
|
|
|
Kavros posted:DSA's systemic problems are (as I have heard it loudly complained about in my house often) at least more a matter of typical poorly managed leftist cohesion issues and terrible levels of committee brain. It's not like the greens, who long ago ceased being a realistic advocate for leftist causes of any kind, including environmentalism, because they're a carefully curated spoiler project, run with no structural capacity for affecting positive change, they just get funded and corralled to disrupt left causes and/or stoke discord. The activist right wing absolutely constantly criticizes and holds their politicians feet to the fire. It's one of the reasons why their so successful. It's so bad that just being the head of Republican leadership is a headache. Remember when even Paul Ryan barely took the job of Speaker of the House because he wasn't considered radical enough by much of the Republican base? If anything the left doesn't criticize it's team anywhere remotely enough. The Squad went from being a young and energetic firebrand group advocating for things notably to the left of American politics, to most of them barely being any different than your typical Democratic politician. People aren't mad that AOC isn't calling for full communism now, they're angry at her because she has done nothing to challenge the Democratic establishment (you know what she got elected on) and her voting record has increasingly gotten worse over time (such as voting "present" on funding Israel). Not to mention, going by that Pew Research demographics thing, if there is any type of base the Left should focus on it's the "Outsider Left" who are essentially as left wing as the "Progressive Left" but are poorer, younger, much more anti-establishment, and in general are much closer within the median of the country. Not to mention they are already the larger "group" of the two. In contrast almost 7/10 of the Progressive Left are white and half have college degrees. They aren't representative of the country as a whole and are hardly a group you should haver as the backbone of a base focused on the working class and minorities. Terminal autist posted:Its never that simple and the post your responding to is a persom being disenchanted with DSA's response to foreign policy which is totally rear end backwards when they're struggling to even get representation in local politics let alone backing a canidate at a national level. We're seeing a realignment at least a temporary one where the new brand of conservatives are having an internal fight in the post-trump void to see what the prevailing ideology will be. Marjorie Green is anti-interventionst at least for Ukraine and certainly had a more reasonable take than the neo-con backed Dems, you have Bill Kristol as a mainstay on MSNBC and the dem aligned media going all in on escalation and acting identical the worst of bush era fox news coverage. I never understood the mass reluctance toward the DSA's foreign policy because they aren't as mean to some countries as they should be. I mean sure they are treating Russia with kid gloves, but the Democrats have supporting apartheid Israel as a litmus test, support right wing coups around the world (Anenz in Bolivia), and are actively funding an even more brutal war on Yemen. At the very worst you'd be trading one rotten pill for another. DSA's kid gloves on Russia and actively supporting the PSUV in Venezuela is concerning, but being where the alignment of international politics is in even the Democratic landscape, let alone the American landscape, I hardly view that as some sort of instant disqualification. punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Mar 19, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2022 17:20
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:But if you are willing to give one more of a pass by voting for their candidates, then aren't you saying that one sides "wrongs" matter less than another's? Exactly. If the situation was "I'm not supporting Democrats or the DSA", that would be different. But the situation is "I'm supporting the Democrats but not the DSA." Not to mention the comparison still isn't accurate. The DSA isn't advocating to supply Russia with arms and financial aid, which is what the Democrats are doing in regards to the Saudis and Israel.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2022 18:14
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:All true but that voting bloc has no money. So in the minds of politicians, left or right, they may as well not exist. But keep voting for us because, man, have you seen those crazy motherfuckers over there on the red side of the aisle? You want THEM in charge? I mean it's not really about money, it's about organization, direct action, and yes electoral politics. I touched on it on a similar post. The TLDR of it is that in order for leftists to take hold in America they need to reach working class, minorities, and "average joe" demographics. AKA "The masses". As of now left wing politics is far over representative of white and upper middle class voters. That said, things are heading in the right direction with socialism's popular growing (that gallup poll posted earlier is like the only one showing it isn't) and it is growing with the demographics leftists need to build a movement with. That said, it takes decades to build such movements, the labor movement during the 1930s was preceded by decades of hardwork. In countries like Bolivia, it took decades for MAS to get a hold. So really it's just effort and time. It's all in a matter of if this will continue and build up enough to wield before climate change and/or the rising tide of ring wing authoritarianism swallows us all.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2022 19:41
|
|
|
Fritz the Horse posted:apartheid South Africa? Though I'm hardly an expert on that history and they weren't single handedly responsible for ending apartheid. Also not an invasion. Someone linked me this paper on the subject earlier.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2022 23:02
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:From what people who follow Ukrainian politics seem to say they run the gamut from "Kremlin money trail isn't even hidden" to "We must restore the USSR to eliminate the homosexuals and other Western degenerates" types to, yeah, the already mentioned Illia Kyva that doesn't really seem to have changed views so much as labels from his far right roots. Yeah the entire thing reminds me last year in Bolivia how after MAS won they changed the rules of the government to get rid of the military personal and judges who were appointed and still openly supported the coup. You don't have to play nice with people who's goal is to actively kill the will of the people by any means necessary, including force. Not to mention in Ukraine's case these parties want to wipe away the entire existence of the nation. Hieronymous Alloy posted:Of course the US is arming Nazis. The goddam LAPD is full of Nazis. The American armed forces are full of nazis in all branches. They way I would look at it is imagine a world like today but if Russia had more military might than the United States. Now imagine if Russia invaded the modern day United States. There would be a lot of Americans fighting. Military, civilians, and volunteer groups. A lot of these volunteer groups are 3%er types. If the United States was struggling in the war, should other countries not give U.S. any aid since a small amount of it could potentially get to the 3%ers? Every country has radical groups, and unfortunately when it comes to these volunteer armies it attracts the right wing. Centrists and liberals world-wide don't fit the demographics of people who are going to want to start their own independent militaries. Hence why they tend to be either far right or at times far left. This isn't to say that you should actively be arming such groups, but more so that refusing to give aid to the country at all whatsoever, even when meticulously planning where your aid goes to have as little support going to these groups as possible, is ludicrous. punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 19:53 on Mar 20, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2022 19:51
|
|
|
Legitimate question, what's wrong with sending aid to militia's that aren't fascists? Why are the choices "send aid" or "don't send aid at all"?Gumball Gumption posted:Policy wise I think then a good compromise for both sides of the left would be that if/when Ukraine pushes Russia out funds to rebuild will be dependent on de-arming far right groups who were armed as part of the war. I doubt the far right groups will give away their equipment willingly, or is there something I'm missing here?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2022 22:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 23, 2024 01:29 |
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:Compliance with that requirement seems... imperfect. Why is this? Is it because Ukraine is desperate enough to give weapons to anyone, or because it's difficult to keep tracking of who you are handing weapons to during the chaos of an active conflict in your own borders?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2022 22:49
|
|