|
Fritz the Horse posted:Just to echo this, we'd like to enforce the D&D rules about low-content/white-noise posting and "being boring" a little more tightly for this iteration of thread. If you're posting something that is very well-trodden territory for this thread and forum or is simply a catchprase or cliche, you might catch a probe (most likely a warning first). Similarly if you're white noise posting you may get a time out. Thank you for posting this guidance here. I know the mods get a lot of flak in this thread but it's good to see that there's some strategy and intent involved with this iteration. It's good advice and also good forum governance.
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2022 16:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 10:13 |
|
|
Sanctions can only be potentially ethical if we know they will be effective and cause the state in question to do what you want them to do. Even then, it's debatable if the human suffering is worth the policy outcome. However- there is basically zero data that shows sanctions work, so the poster who likened it to torture is spot on. Not only is it wrong, it's also not effective. So yes, not torturing someone is ethically superior to torturing them.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2022 00:36
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:
It wasn't a "win" it was a refusal to just play along and be an active participant in the continued loving over of the working class. There was also a sense that after VA went blue it would mean things would finally change and he helped to highlight that these fucks had no intention of actually instituting meaningful progress. He stayed true to his conscience and got drummed out for it. And now the common refrain is "he was just an rear end in a top hat who couldn't cut it" which is of course horse poo poo, but kind of proves his point (the system will find a way to grind up individuals with conscience, and it will convince the public they deserved it too). At least he tried. That's more than can be said for 99.9% of posters here, myself included.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2022 01:52
|
|
|
I know I shouldn't be shocked but seeing people flock to defend Will Smith committing a violent crime during the Oscars then getting a standing ovation an hour later is pretty nuts. His acceptance speech was basically him saying God told him to do it- just completely unhinged poo poo. Our culture is deeply, perhaps terminally sick. A lot of the same people cheering Smith would get the vapors at hitting someone for loudly advocating for genocide.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2022 15:14
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:Hitting people whose jokes punch down, people who mock others with disabilities, or advocate for genocide is okay actually. No it's really not and a tasteless joke about hair isn't in the same category as advocating for genocide. That a lot of people seemingly agree with you is the real problem. I don't really care about the slap itself. Rock wasn't hurt (he's got a real chin turns out) but the endless takes of "this hair joke justifies violence" is insane.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2022 15:39
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:No, mocking someone with a medical condition/disability isn't the same as advocating for genocide, but the first is how you build support for the second. Lol quoting this for posterity. Balding people are definitely next in line for the ovens, multimillionaire actors go in first. Smith's verbal outburst was defensible. Telling someone to loudly gently caress off if they're crossing a line is ok. Assaulting that person isn't, especially when they go up and claim God gave them permission to a standing ovation. tk posted:Oh, poo poo, do you have a list of medical conditions that you’re allowed to make fun of? No one, and I mean no one, is defending Rock's joke. Like among the millions of takes surrounding this, that is the one you will not see anywhere. What we adults are discussing is whether or not Smith was justified in physically assaulting someone for the joke(he wasn't). Let me know when you're ready to join that conversation. FLIPADELPHIA fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Mar 28, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2022 16:12
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:Yeah, there's certainly no intersection between racism, misogyny, and medical conditions happening here. My mother in law had the same auto immune disease with accompanying hairloss and it destroyed her self esteem to the point where she didn't even want to be seen shopping for groceries. But its sure something to see punching down at diseases being handwaved away by the same people who spent 4 years telling me how disgusting it was for Trump to mock disabilities. Nah, you don't get to use the motte and bailey here. You said Chris rock's joke was a part of how you build support for genocide. You don't get to just pretend that didn't happen. No one is here defending the joke. You keep wanting that to be true so your soft defense of violence can seem reasonable. But it's not true. virtualboyCOLOR posted:They’re both wealthy individuals so defending either of them makes one a class traitor. It is for the best to not care about rich people quarrels unless they impact classes lower than them. This is true but I can't help but think that this is normalizing violence even more than it already is in our twisted culture. Smith is a household name and has been famous for decades, largely from cultivating a fairly wholesome persona. Now he slaps the hell out of someone on live TV and gets legions of people, including people on this forum, defending his use of violence. Not saying it's a huge cultural turning point or anything, but it's definitely a step in the wrong direction. FLIPADELPHIA fucked around with this message at 16:33 on Mar 28, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2022 16:30
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:I just think it's really funny that some of the most comfortable people in the world are so miserable. This is a solid take and I should marinate on this more. Smith is an obviously self loathing person and that in itself is pretty funny.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2022 16:35
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:I'm not walking it back. Normalizing belittling people for medical conditions builds the foundation for institutional violence. Its no different than racist jokes. So making fun of Tim Pool for being bald is the same as blasting out an N word? Lol wow
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2022 16:37
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:Exactly. Not to mention that there's truly an interesting number of dudes on here eager to advertise how they'd proudly accept the public ridicule of their spouse with pacifism and good cheer. Ok so you're openly lying now. mdemone posted:what in the wide world of sports is happening in this country The event itself isn't that big of a deal, but it's causing a whole lot of people to show their rear end wrt toxic masculinity being ok actually. FLIPADELPHIA fucked around with this message at 16:59 on Mar 28, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2022 16:56
|
|
|
tk posted:Yeah, you are. You wouldn’t need to restate and minimize what the joke was about if you weren’t. It's not "minimizing" the joke to push back against the assertion that what Chris Rock said was "no different from racist jokes" or that it's a necessary step on the road to genocide. Quote where I did what you're accusing me of doing. It helps keep the conversation honest. It's wild that "guys stop lying about what I'm posting" is met with an accusation that I myself am lying - without at least pointing to the supposed lie.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2022 17:32
|
|
|
How are u posted:You'd think that Sinema would maybe realize that she should rotate, and allow the other Rotating Villians to rotate into her place in order to continue the "rotation" part of the rotation villainy. The rotations don't have to be a week or even a year. The only time a rotation is needed is when the democrats have the ability to enact meaningful legislation due to having Congress and the WH- so once a decade or so is more than enough.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2022 22:41
|
|
|
How are u posted:Well, if that's the only time a Rotation is called for then maybe Sinema should stop complaining about the other Rotating Villains hiding behind her skirts and stick to the schedule! She's getting more heat than previous villains (Lieberman, Baucus) mainly because the script is more obvious now. Makes sense that her handlers promised she'd be somewhat protected from the blowback and she's pissy that it isn't turning out that way. Obama publicly praised Baucus lol
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2022 00:24
|
|
|
Jayapal not endorsing Nina Turner has hit me pretty hard in terms of overall faith in electoralism as a solution to our problems. Turner isn't some radical- she advocates for 99% of the things that Jayapal and the progressive caucus run on. I think the real difference is that Turner actually wants to implement those policies instead of fundraise off of them, and that's super depressing for our political "future".
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2022 17:07
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:
While this is a very valid point, the inverse is also true. People in blue states that want to enact reasonable gun control or reasonable restrictions on business are unable to do so because of our extremely right wing federal judiciary. Balkanization would likely cause immense problems, but it would also solve some immense problems too. And this isn't even touching on the insane and ever growing disparity in power between rural and urban communities in this country. FLIPADELPHIA fucked around with this message at 16:19 on Apr 17, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 16:17
|
|
|
I think it would be worse (possibly much worse) in the short term but better in the long term. Not only would it make more just representation possible by destroying the US Senate, anything that undermines the ability of the US military to forcefully enact inhumane exploitation on a global scale should be considered a decent trade off to the potential short term decline in material conditions for US citizens. Just my opinion though, and I'm open to different perspectives. E: more and more I find myself asking the question "is the existence of the American Federal government a net benefit for humanity?" and I find fewer and fewer reasons to believe the answer to that question is a Yes. FLIPADELPHIA fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Apr 17, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 16:42
|
|
|
The conversation was spawned from a "current event" (Texas negotiating with a foreign power) so I don't see why anyone would object anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 22:43
|
|
|
I just don't think this will increase dem turnout in the midterms (I hope I'm wrong). Fascists get what they've wanted for decades because the people they voted for gave it to them. They can feel like winners AND stick it to Joe Biden. Meanwhile, progressives are going to be even more skeptical that voting for dems will protect even their most basic freedoms. I don't think this leak was tactical.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2022 04:03
|
|
|
How are u posted:It's going to be interesting to see if Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema stand united on this one. This is going to get really intense. How about this. I'll bet you $100 they won't do poo poo. "Intense" my rear end. marshmonkey posted:wonder if Collins and Murkowski feel embarrassed enough to lend their votes to this. No, Jesus Christ are you people still being credulous at this point or just trolling?
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2022 04:20
|
|
|
marshmonkey posted:I mean, I would like to see a journalist ask them this. Is that so loving dumb? To pretend like you don't know what they are going to say in response is a bit baffling, yes. They don't have any shame. They don't give a gently caress. Liberals have screamed for decades that Roe v. Wade was basically the Rubicon for Court legitimacy and now that we've crossed it, we expect Republicans of all people to suddenly develop a basic code of ethics?
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2022 04:38
|
|
|
RealityWarCriminal posted:If this happens, nothing gets passed regardless. And a bad poo poo Dem gets removed from the party, and can be replaced. Seems like win-win. This assumes the Party leadership agrees that they are "bad". Pelosi is supporting an anti-choice candidate against a pro-choice candidate in TX right now, as I type this. Schumer and Pelosi have to go before any of this becomes feasible IMO
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2022 21:17
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:
The Democratic Party leadership doesn't give a poo poo about helping people. They care about fundraising and decorum. I mean, this should be pretty obvious by now. I know people have been saying this for years but turns out, they were correct the whole time.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2022 23:17
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:I'm still happy with the results Say you aren't a starving Afghan child without saying you aren't a starving Afghan child. FLIPADELPHIA fucked around with this message at 17:39 on May 13, 2022 |
|
#
¿
May 13, 2022 17:35
|
|
|
BonoMan posted:I don't know there's something almost worse to the "you had your shot and royally hosed up... now it's our turn again." That sort of raw understanding that "your side isn't doing anything better" really entrenches apathy and enables the enemy to gain a stronger foothold than if they just would have one a second term. It's this. The Presidency swings back and forth between the parties in a fairly predictable cycle. To have our turn wasted on someone like Biden is infuriating. Biden's actions in Afghanistan (specifically the sanctions) will kill more people than the entire occupation / war did. "But Trump would have done worse" is a bullshit claim that's purely a distraction from the fact that Biden is killing thousands of people in Afghanistan right now.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2022 17:43
|
|
|
PhazonLink posted:regressives will vote for what ever is on team R in the general. Of course they will, but how motivated will the 5% of people who may / may not vote be to actually show up? They didn't show up for Romney, or for McCain. They showed up twice for Trump (but not in 2018).
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2022 20:31
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:Yes, I said leftists, not leftists in this thread. So a totally non-disprovable, anecdotal shitpost meant to antagonize rather than foster any real discussion or exchange of ideas. Nice.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2022 02:30
|
|
|
Imagine spending all that time and money "focus grouping" Trumpists to figure out, after all your work, that what Trumpists actually want is more Trump. And then imagine selling that conclusion as a product to credulous morons.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2022 17:30
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Where have we heard that before? Yeah but Trump is the fascist id in this country. Oz is pretty much the opposite of that.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2022 06:46
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:I'm legitimately shocked at how inept and out of lockstep with their voters the democrats really are. If Fetterman winning the primary, and if he goes on to win the general doesn't wake them up, nothing will. They don't care about voters they care about donors. We need to stop being credulous fools about this. They've shown us their true colors time and time again. poo poo, Lawrence O'Donnell talked about this in 2006.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2022 19:59
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:aren't you literally Finnish Uhh I live in Oklahoma City (have lived here my whole life) and the poster is 100% correct. Religion in Oklahoma is a satanic blend of authoritarian racism, violent nationalism, and unhinged prosperity gospel. Our legislature just passed a Bill that makes a zygote a person. It is the most politically hopeless state in the country.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2022 06:25
|
|
|
Ask the black men in supposedly progressive states like CA that get pulled over and harassed dozens of times by police if the US is an authoritarian nation. Ask the parents of Tamir Rice, Philando Castile, Daniel Shaver etc etc etc. Ask the woman who had to be medivac'd to CO from TX because she had an ectopic pregnancy and doctors in TX didn't want to get sued or go to prison for saving her life. Stories like these are about to get way more common.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2022 15:34
|
|
|
Kalit posted:By your definition, literally every government is an authoritarian government. Yes, obviously a government has authority over its citizens I didn't realize the governments of countries like Canada, Australia, the UK, or France routinely enable the blatant murder of citizens by police. I mean sure, we have rural county sheriff's departments with higher body counts than the police forces of these entire countries but no way that makes us authoritarian!
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2022 18:34
|
|
|
"the one thing keeping us from being an authoritarian state is that the government doesn't consistently murder people for dissent" isn't a very persuasive position for anyone trying to say the US isn't authoritarian. The state does routinely murder marginalized groups (minorities, people with mental health issues, people with addictions, the homeless, etc.) and also murders poor / lower class whites frequently. Hundreds / thousands per year. When these murders occur, those responsible almost never see charges and even fewer are convicted, leaving the only form of redress being cash payouts that come from the very citizens being subjected to this violence. If a cop shot me for no reason in front of my kids, and there was no video proof of my innocence, it wouldn't make the national news.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2022 20:19
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Authoritarian requires a widespread and harsh crackdown on every citizen who merely expresses an illegal political opinion (not counting things like terrorist threats or plots) In Russia, China, North Korea, etc you can be grabbed from your apartment and thrown in jail for posting criticism of the government on the internet, not by a rogue cop, not against a small group but as a matter of government policy against every person. THAT is an authoritarian government. There is no one definition for authoritarianism, and I don't buy the definition that handwaves away the avalanche of oppressive poo poo the US does to focus on domestic political speech only. It seems handcrafted to avoid incriminating the US. The right to verbalize dissent is just one right among many, and it's arguably not even the most important. Sure we can talk poo poo about the government but the right to actually protest its actions is frayed to the point of not existing meaningfully. Sure the cops can murder you with no reprecussions, landlords can throw you out into the street or cut off life preserving utilities, healthcare companies can execute you legally by withholding life saving treatment, and vigilantes can murder you as long as no one gets it on camera. And sure the government actively aids and abeds all of this. But we're not authoritarian because I can call Biden a piece of poo poo? Nah. That's not a useful definition of authoritarianism at all, and is more like a rhetorical weapon specifically to defend the US empire from criticism.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2022 20:21
|
|
|
Yeah that's a fair point - and I admit it just galls me personally to have the US touted as a bastion of "freedom" while other countries are labeled [insert derogatory term used by liberal academics to denigrate socialist policies]. The US has been coasting on fumes from our wealth for decades, and offers very little in terms of rights and privileges that actually create measurable happiness. (Turns out being wealthy is easy when you steal a continent and murder its inhabitants)
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2022 23:01
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:Its going to be an extremely unpopular position today but I'll be the first to say that empowering the government to disarm people is still a bad idea when your government is undergoing a soft coup by fascists. An AR15 won't do poo poo against the US military or whatever law enforcement agency comes for you. The idea that leftists can grab a few lovely bushmasters and wage a people's war against even the county governments we have in this country is pretty laughable. For as much as assault rifles are weapons of war, they are also incredibly ineffective against hard targets unless supplemented by bigger munitions. AKs aren't costing the Russians their lives in Ukraine. Turkish drones and AT missiles are. Heck Yes! Loam! posted:How many restrictions can we put on body armour? Seems like a background check for that is a good idea at least. Background checks wouldn't have prevented this shooting or Sandy Hook. A lot of times, these shooters wouldn't fail such a check. I'm not saying it's a worthless effort, just that it really wouldn't substantively improve the status quo.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2022 02:18
|
|
|
Right, but the hypothetical you're talking about, these "pockets of resistance" would be A. extremely ineffective and B. their price tag is the continual slaughter of innocents due to the overwhelming glut of readily available firearms you can buy easier than purchasing a car.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2022 02:22
|
|
|
Eric Cantonese posted:There is something to be said for at least slowing down the ease and speed circulation of purchased firearms in this country though, no? Legally purchased guns in lenient states easily become cheap illegally used guns in states with more stringent rules. Extreme risk laws temporarily restricting firearms access for high risk individuals who are a danger to themselves and others may have helped in a lot of incidents. And God knows how many lives might be saved if there was a way to screen for domestic violence risks. Yeah, I don't mean to naysay- if this effort prevented even one mass shooting, it would 100% be worth it. I just think that if we're serious about preventing this type of scenario (a person with no criminal history deciding to purchase a weapon then attack a school), the background check approach absolutely will not work. Systemic gun violence and mass shootings are two related but distinct societal problems, requiring different legislative and regulatory tools. Background checks will definitely help with the former, but not really the latter. Most mass shootings are committed by people who would pass a background check.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2022 02:40
|
|
|
Kalit posted:And now you're recycling arguments for why people state that universal healthcare would never work in our country. Even though it's not a problem in literally every other similar-ish country. It's somehow a problem that's unique to the US and we cannot overcome it Agree on this. One thing that's also unique about the US is that we have literally infinite money to combat these problems, most of which can be solved with the allocation of resources. We face unique challenges sure, but we have unique tools at our disposal as well.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2022 04:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 10:13 |
|
|
Bishyaler posted:I'm only saying the likelihood of a civil war in this wretched country doesn't seem to be diminishing and a rifle is better than empty hands. There is a high price tag for this fantasy.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2022 20:45
|
|