|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On November 28 2017 12:00 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 11:51 Nebuchad wrote:On November 28 2017 10:35 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 07:01 Nebuchad wrote:On November 28 2017 06:45 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 06:10 Nebuchad wrote:I'm working on being less petty in the future but here's a 1h video about cultural marxism to counter that 40m video about cultural marxism + Show Spoiler + That's an interview between university professor/administrator ... possibly lawyer ... and a TA. If you're not going to watch it, maybe don't label it before telling everybody through action that you're not going to watch it. I did watch a small portion of it. This is my counter to it. You watched a small portion of it and said it was about cultural marxism? Was the sound muted? It's a video about attempting to prove that conservative voices are squashed on campuses because of cultural marxism, which fits under the category of cultural marxism videos, yeah. What is it you don't understand? Look at the pinned comment by the poster of your video, Think Club (you have to put it in your name that you're a thinker, that way it becomes true): "I believe this Lindsay Shepherd rebuke was personal for Dr. Herdert ( sic) Pimlott. If you look at his scholarly work Pimlott is just a typical Marxist professor who most likely sees Jordan Peterson as the antichrist." You need to spend more time watching source material and not whining about the YouTube poster or comments. It was reported on in several news outlets and the professor has since apologized. You’re like a MAGA megafan that calls an Obama speech “socialism.” It makes my side look bad, therefore let’s call it whatever we like!
What was I wrong about?
Your response is about how they're right about the cultural marxism in this instance ("it happened", "the guy apologized"), not about how I was off topic (which was your initial claim).
|
On November 28 2017 11:23 Plansix wrote:
O'Keefe should be in jail. Attempting to fabricate a story to influence an election should be its own separate crime.
For all the hatred from certain circles about the "MSM" and how the left dominates the media, I don't see the same level of due diligence, ethical reporting, fact-checking or quality of investigative journalism from the anti-MSM representatives they love to bring up so often. Say what you want about their editorial pages, but there's a reason why people tend to trust WaPo or NYT over Breitbart and Project Veritas.
|
Didn't they run the piss dossier?
Veritas is really narrow and not really an outlet, just activists that run off those videos. You should see Breitbart's coverage of cartels that nobody else is doing.
|
On November 28 2017 12:07 oBlade wrote:
Didn't they run the piss dossier?
Veritas is really narrow and not really an outlet, just activists that run off those videos. You should see Breitbart's coverage of cartels that nobody else is doing.
What level of trust do you put in stuff posted on Breitbart, personally?
|
They were pushing the 3 millions illegal votes and DNC murdered this intern lies, if I remember correctly?
|
On November 28 2017 12:01 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 12:00 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 11:51 Nebuchad wrote:On November 28 2017 10:35 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 07:01 Nebuchad wrote:On November 28 2017 06:45 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 06:10 Nebuchad wrote:I'm working on being less petty in the future but here's a 1h video about cultural marxism to counter that 40m video about cultural marxism + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fsbQP4lYUE That's an interview between university professor/administrator ... possibly lawyer ... and a TA. If you're not going to watch it, maybe don't label it before telling everybody through action that you're not going to watch it. I did watch a small portion of it. This is my counter to it. You watched a small portion of it and said it was about cultural marxism? Was the sound muted? It's a video about attempting to prove that conservative voices are squashed on campuses because of cultural marxism, which fits under the category of cultural marxism videos, yeah. What is it you don't understand? Look at the pinned comment by the poster of your video, Think Club (you have to put it in your name that you're a thinker, that way it becomes true): "I believe this Lindsay Shepherd rebuke was personal for Dr. Herdert ( sic) Pimlott. If you look at his scholarly work Pimlott is just a typical Marxist professor who most likely sees Jordan Peterson as the antichrist." You need to spend more time watching source material and not whining about the YouTube poster or comments. It was reported on in several news outlets and the professor has since apologized. You’re like a MAGA megafan that calls an Obama speech “socialism.” It makes my side look bad, therefore let’s call it whatever we like! What was I wrong about? Your response is about how they're right about the cultural marxism in this instance ("it happened", "the guy apologized"), not about how I was off topic (which was your initial claim).
Uhh you like using the term cultural marxism? Like you believe a bunch of german emigres founded a movement to overthrow western society? Because labeling a pretty sad exchange between professor/administration and a TA "cultural marxism" needs explanation.
You really really need to separate a "video attempting to prove" and a recording of an exchange in your mind. Leave the fake news to the real outlets.
|
They screwed the pooch on that one. Their credibility will suffer.
|
On November 28 2017 12:07 oBlade wrote:
Didn't they run the piss dossier?
Veritas is really narrow and not really an outlet, just activists that run off those videos. You should see Breitbart's coverage of cartels that nobody else is doing.
link to said coverage?
and is it actual original reporting? (I didn't recall breitbart having much of any budget to support actual original reporting)
I'd question your claim of noone else doing it; there's certainly coverage of various cartel actions from many sources (despit ethe massive dangerous involved). often when people make such claims, it turns out they simply weren't aware of all the other coverage.
|
|
|
On November 28 2017 10:43 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 10:33 mozoku wrote:On November 28 2017 09:03 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:48 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 08:43 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:18 Mohdoo wrote:On November 28 2017 08:08 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 04:14 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:57 KwarK wrote:On November 28 2017 03:52 Shiragaku wrote:
[quote]
What I am trying to get at is you wouldn't refuse to be friends with a liberal because Hillary and Obama did certain things that are not progressive so why is it acceptable to do the same to a Trump supporter, assuming they are not calling you a cuck every other sentence. A Hillary supporter whose support of Hillary was predicated on her covering up of sexual abuse (as in that's why they liked her) would be morally unacceptable to me. A Hillary supporter who supported her in spite of that because there was no better alternative would be fine for me. The problem is that Trump supporters don't get to claim that there wasn't a less racist alternative to Trump. They can only say that the racism wasn't a significant factor to them. And when racism in the 21st century seems to be defined as not giving disrespect to certain people, is that the worst thing that someone can believe in? Whenever I hear people use that argument, it really sounds like they are crying wolf at this point. Racism really doesn't mean anything to most people anymore when it is constantly being applied. What people fail to see is that Trump's campaign was not built upon racism, it was in reaction to the people left behind with globalization and many of them live in a worst situation than they did years or decades ago and when they have to pay respect to groups of people or use phrases they have never even heard of years ago, how do you expect them to react? On November 28 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 03:50 Shiragaku wrote:
[quote]
I don't know about you guys, bust most of my friendships with liberals ended was over shit like cultural appropriation, the legitimacy of gender fluidity, and my criticisms of campus identity politics.
In California, lots of gay people said that they were scared for their lives because Trump is in office and statistically and anecdotally, that is bullshit. Lots of women with nice jobs and attending good universities continue to insist they are oppressed when they are in a pretty good position compared to most Americans. And so many PoCs on college campuses engage in outright bullying and use their identity to cynically silence people. When you look more into their background, its not uncommon to see that they came from good families.
I can befriend people with many different political views and can still disagree with them, but with many urban progressives, I am always one comment from being socially ruined. I also hear that a lot of gays don’t want to move out of MA or RI because the rest of the country is so unfriendly to them. I know people who have come back to the area because the rest of the country treated them like this. I have had Muslim friends who straight up left this country because it treated them so poorly. You don’t seem that interested in believe these folks, so I would argue that you value your political views more than their friendships. I have grown up in rural America and there was definitely racism and homophobia. There were times when people refused to serve my mom because she was Asian and we had gay people who were bullied and eventually committed suicide. And the anti-Muslim sentiment was there, but on a personal level, most Muslims were integrated for the most part. But the Islamphobia is pretty bad and it is getting worse. However, with people like Jon Stewart and shows like Glee, that all changed so fast for the better. Rural America, although not San Francisco or New York is definitely way much friendly and livable than it used to be. When I moved to California, it was even better, especially for someone like me, but one thing that irks me is when I see people who have never experienced racism claiming oppression like some reward. I know what bigotry was like in action and there is nothing more infuriating when people in liberal bubbles LARP as a minority in their fictionalized view of suburban/rural America and use it to cynically promote their worldview. My problem with 'Rural Americans voted for Trump 'because the country left them behind' is that Trump in no way represents their interests. They fell for the same con they have fallen for for decades and after Trump disappointing them they will run off to the next conman who promises them everything they want to hear. I get that people don't want to accept the truth, yes the country failed them by not restructuring the economy decades ago away from failing industries, yes its shit, it sucks and there is no easy way forward. But going 'My dad worked in a coal mine, I want to work in a coal mine' , 'no one wants coal anymore' , 'well, make them use it' doesn't do anything. When offered a choice between a conman promising them the world and a shady politician with a plan she might not follow through on, the voted for the conman. Sorry that I don't feel more sympathy for believing in the impossible. The entire idea of "We're a coal family and we're proud" is a great example of how prone to tribalism humans are. How in the world do you actually positively identify with manual labor. god damn. These people are just so easily manipulated it drives me insane. Coal mining was a well enough paying job to pay for a nice house and develop a nice neighborhood. So people wanting the old life back is expected, it was a good job back then. The problem now is that coal mining is dangerous, unhealthy, increasingly automated and suffering from competition like natural gas and renewable resources. That's the reality of the situation. Unless the USA subsidies coal, they aren't getting their quality of living they once had back. And if we're subsiding (white) coal miners, that's basically welfare to prop up a shrinking industry that even China and India aren't too fond of because its dirty as heck. Subsidizing coal doesn't even work since, as you said, automation means that new and bigger mines won't even meet the demand for work and the work that is offered would require more and more education. That's actually the funny thing about Trump's campaign promise towards coal miners. If you stopped for a second and thought about why coal was dying, the economic and environmental reasons are dead obvious. But that would require some people over there to finally accept the hard truth instead of blaming China/regulations/left wing environmentalists/Democrats/RINOs/globalists/etc. You don't think coal miners have a legitimate grievance against pretty much all of those groups? All of them essentially worked to put coal miners out of business without any concern for what the coal miners would actually do after they succeeded. I'm obviously an unabashed advocate of both the free market and free trade but it doesn't take a genius to realize low-skilled coal miners can't easily transfer their skills and tend not to be the type to have both the foresight and requisite character traits to proactively learn a new skillset in preparation for the demise of the coal industry. If you're a 55 year old ex-coal miner without adequate retirement savings (like most Americans) in 2017, what do you even do? A mass retaining program starting 10-20 years ago for half of Trump's base probably would have easily paid for itself by now. If that had been available and these workers had turned it down, I'd have a lot less sympathy for them but, pragmatically speaking, I expect foresight and good planning to be a trait of the political class--not the working class--thus the much of the onus for the current mess falls on said political class. To be clear, I'm not saying it justifies Trumpism and total/utter mistrust of elites, but the elites really did fuck up as far as America's working class is concerned. And some of the sneering around here at coal miners is pretty gross. It's easy to say "lol learn a new profession" when you're a software engineer who has to learn new things for their job everyday and is mentally used to it, but when you're a union worker for 30 years where various career filters have been applied and you probably don't have personality traits that are particularly amenable for learning, the union structure provides no incentive to learn anything new so you haven't done it for 30 years, and you're 55 so your time to profit from your educational investment is 10 years (rather than 40 as for a student), the whole "learn a new profession" thing sounds a lot more daunting and a lot less worth it. The policies put in place by Obama that limited coal production had a whole bunch of money for retraining and systems in place to help the transition. Trump ended those. The working class of America is really good at shooting itself in the foot because they keep electing Republicans. Because Republican keep telling them government is the one destroying their jobs and then turning around ending the services that would help people find new jobs. Much like immigration, the Republicans will never address this problem because then they couldn't get re-elected by railing against it.
What does a "a whole bunch of money put aside" actually mean in practice? Clearly, the program was a failure as there's a bunch of unemployable manufacturers and coal miners that got Trump elected. Furthermore, if the program was at all popular, why wasn't there a backlash when Trump cut it? Something doesn't add up here.
On November 28 2017 11:45 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 10:43 Plansix wrote:
The policies put in place by Obama that limited coal production had a whole bunch of money for retraining and systems in place to help the transition. Trump ended those. The working class of America is really good at shooting itself in the foot because they keep electing Republicans. Because Republican keep telling them government is the one destroying their jobs and then turning around ending the services that would help people find new jobs. Much like immigration, the Republicans will never address this problem because then they couldn't get re-elected by railing against it. It's quite frankly ridiculous that people try to frame this as "well both sides fucked them over so their grievances are justified." The coal industry did a really good job of not only selling the con, but making people believe that it was the other side's fault.
Of course it did, it should come as zero surprise that a corporation values profits over its employees' interests. The system is expected to work that way, so blaming the corporations makes little sense.
It's supposed to be a combination of competent political class policies (i.e. an effective retraining program offered) and the coal miners' good sense (i.e. utilizing said retraining program) that ensures the coal miners' have a financial future. Either the coal miners and manufacturers are all fools or the program was inadequate.
|
On November 28 2017 12:25 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 12:01 Nebuchad wrote:On November 28 2017 12:00 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 11:51 Nebuchad wrote:On November 28 2017 10:35 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 07:01 Nebuchad wrote:On November 28 2017 06:45 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 06:10 Nebuchad wrote:I'm working on being less petty in the future but here's a 1h video about cultural marxism to counter that 40m video about cultural marxism + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fsbQP4lYUE That's an interview between university professor/administrator ... possibly lawyer ... and a TA. If you're not going to watch it, maybe don't label it before telling everybody through action that you're not going to watch it. I did watch a small portion of it. This is my counter to it. You watched a small portion of it and said it was about cultural marxism? Was the sound muted? It's a video about attempting to prove that conservative voices are squashed on campuses because of cultural marxism, which fits under the category of cultural marxism videos, yeah. What is it you don't understand? Look at the pinned comment by the poster of your video, Think Club (you have to put it in your name that you're a thinker, that way it becomes true): "I believe this Lindsay Shepherd rebuke was personal for Dr. Herdert ( sic) Pimlott. If you look at his scholarly work Pimlott is just a typical Marxist professor who most likely sees Jordan Peterson as the antichrist." You need to spend more time watching source material and not whining about the YouTube poster or comments. It was reported on in several news outlets and the professor has since apologized. You’re like a MAGA megafan that calls an Obama speech “socialism.” It makes my side look bad, therefore let’s call it whatever we like! What was I wrong about? Your response is about how they're right about the cultural marxism in this instance ("it happened", "the guy apologized"), not about how I was off topic (which was your initial claim). Uhh you like using the term cultural marxism? Like you believe a bunch of german emigres founded a movement to overthrow western society? Because labeling a pretty sad exchange between professor/administration and a TA "cultural marxism" needs explanation. You really really need to separate a "video attempting to prove" and a recording of an exchange in your mind. Leave the fake news to the real outlets.
Of course I don't believe it, because I'm not an idiot. But that's what the theory about US universities being (allegedly, btw) leftwing not because of the right's anti-intellectualism making it hard for professors to support it, but because of a voluntary effort to suppress and eliminate rightwing beliefs in students, is called.
You find it ridiculous, so do I. That's not what off topic means though.
|
On November 28 2017 12:27 Danglars wrote:They screwed the pooch on that one. Their credibility will suffer.
What credibility? James O'Keefe is the only person in america less trust worthy than Alex Jones. He's literally been convicted in court over his willingness to smear without truth.
|
On November 28 2017 12:31 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 10:43 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 10:33 mozoku wrote:On November 28 2017 09:03 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:48 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 08:43 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:18 Mohdoo wrote:On November 28 2017 08:08 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 04:14 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:57 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
A Hillary supporter whose support of Hillary was predicated on her covering up of sexual abuse (as in that's why they liked her) would be morally unacceptable to me. A Hillary supporter who supported her in spite of that because there was no better alternative would be fine for me.
The problem is that Trump supporters don't get to claim that there wasn't a less racist alternative to Trump. They can only say that the racism wasn't a significant factor to them. And when racism in the 21st century seems to be defined as not giving disrespect to certain people, is that the worst thing that someone can believe in? Whenever I hear people use that argument, it really sounds like they are crying wolf at this point. Racism really doesn't mean anything to most people anymore when it is constantly being applied. What people fail to see is that Trump's campaign was not built upon racism, it was in reaction to the people left behind with globalization and many of them live in a worst situation than they did years or decades ago and when they have to pay respect to groups of people or use phrases they have never even heard of years ago, how do you expect them to react? On November 28 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
I also hear that a lot of gays don’t want to move out of MA or RI because the rest of the country is so unfriendly to them. I know people who have come back to the area because the rest of the country treated them like this. I have had Muslim friends who straight up left this country because it treated them so poorly. You don’t seem that interested in believe these folks, so I would argue that you value your political views more than their friendships. I have grown up in rural America and there was definitely racism and homophobia. There were times when people refused to serve my mom because she was Asian and we had gay people who were bullied and eventually committed suicide. And the anti-Muslim sentiment was there, but on a personal level, most Muslims were integrated for the most part. But the Islamphobia is pretty bad and it is getting worse. However, with people like Jon Stewart and shows like Glee, that all changed so fast for the better. Rural America, although not San Francisco or New York is definitely way much friendly and livable than it used to be. When I moved to California, it was even better, especially for someone like me, but one thing that irks me is when I see people who have never experienced racism claiming oppression like some reward. I know what bigotry was like in action and there is nothing more infuriating when people in liberal bubbles LARP as a minority in their fictionalized view of suburban/rural America and use it to cynically promote their worldview. My problem with 'Rural Americans voted for Trump 'because the country left them behind' is that Trump in no way represents their interests. They fell for the same con they have fallen for for decades and after Trump disappointing them they will run off to the next conman who promises them everything they want to hear. I get that people don't want to accept the truth, yes the country failed them by not restructuring the economy decades ago away from failing industries, yes its shit, it sucks and there is no easy way forward. But going 'My dad worked in a coal mine, I want to work in a coal mine' , 'no one wants coal anymore' , 'well, make them use it' doesn't do anything. When offered a choice between a conman promising them the world and a shady politician with a plan she might not follow through on, the voted for the conman. Sorry that I don't feel more sympathy for believing in the impossible. The entire idea of "We're a coal family and we're proud" is a great example of how prone to tribalism humans are. How in the world do you actually positively identify with manual labor. god damn. These people are just so easily manipulated it drives me insane. Coal mining was a well enough paying job to pay for a nice house and develop a nice neighborhood. So people wanting the old life back is expected, it was a good job back then. The problem now is that coal mining is dangerous, unhealthy, increasingly automated and suffering from competition like natural gas and renewable resources. That's the reality of the situation. Unless the USA subsidies coal, they aren't getting their quality of living they once had back. And if we're subsiding (white) coal miners, that's basically welfare to prop up a shrinking industry that even China and India aren't too fond of because its dirty as heck. Subsidizing coal doesn't even work since, as you said, automation means that new and bigger mines won't even meet the demand for work and the work that is offered would require more and more education. That's actually the funny thing about Trump's campaign promise towards coal miners. If you stopped for a second and thought about why coal was dying, the economic and environmental reasons are dead obvious. But that would require some people over there to finally accept the hard truth instead of blaming China/regulations/left wing environmentalists/Democrats/RINOs/globalists/etc. You don't think coal miners have a legitimate grievance against pretty much all of those groups? All of them essentially worked to put coal miners out of business without any concern for what the coal miners would actually do after they succeeded. I'm obviously an unabashed advocate of both the free market and free trade but it doesn't take a genius to realize low-skilled coal miners can't easily transfer their skills and tend not to be the type to have both the foresight and requisite character traits to proactively learn a new skillset in preparation for the demise of the coal industry. If you're a 55 year old ex-coal miner without adequate retirement savings (like most Americans) in 2017, what do you even do? A mass retaining program starting 10-20 years ago for half of Trump's base probably would have easily paid for itself by now. If that had been available and these workers had turned it down, I'd have a lot less sympathy for them but, pragmatically speaking, I expect foresight and good planning to be a trait of the political class--not the working class--thus the much of the onus for the current mess falls on said political class. To be clear, I'm not saying it justifies Trumpism and total/utter mistrust of elites, but the elites really did fuck up as far as America's working class is concerned. And some of the sneering around here at coal miners is pretty gross. It's easy to say "lol learn a new profession" when you're a software engineer who has to learn new things for their job everyday and is mentally used to it, but when you're a union worker for 30 years where various career filters have been applied and you probably don't have personality traits that are particularly amenable for learning, the union structure provides no incentive to learn anything new so you haven't done it for 30 years, and you're 55 so your time to profit from your educational investment is 10 years (rather than 40 as for a student), the whole "learn a new profession" thing sounds a lot more daunting and a lot less worth it. The policies put in place by Obama that limited coal production had a whole bunch of money for retraining and systems in place to help the transition. Trump ended those. The working class of America is really good at shooting itself in the foot because they keep electing Republicans. Because Republican keep telling them government is the one destroying their jobs and then turning around ending the services that would help people find new jobs. Much like immigration, the Republicans will never address this problem because then they couldn't get re-elected by railing against it. What does a "a whole bunch of money put aside" actually mean in practice? Clearly, the program was a failure as there's a bunch of unemployable manufacturers and coal miners that got Trump elected. Furthermore, if the program was at all popular, why wasn't there a backlash when Trump cut it? Something doesn't add up here. Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 11:45 TheYango wrote:On November 28 2017 10:43 Plansix wrote:
The policies put in place by Obama that limited coal production had a whole bunch of money for retraining and systems in place to help the transition. Trump ended those. The working class of America is really good at shooting itself in the foot because they keep electing Republicans. Because Republican keep telling them government is the one destroying their jobs and then turning around ending the services that would help people find new jobs. Much like immigration, the Republicans will never address this problem because then they couldn't get re-elected by railing against it. It's quite frankly ridiculous that people try to frame this as "well both sides fucked them over so their grievances are justified." The coal industry did a really good job of not only selling the con, but making people believe that it was the other side's fault. Of course it did, it should come as zero surprise that a corporation values profits over its employees' interests. The system is expected to work that way, so blaming the corporations makes little sense. It's supposed to be a combination of competent political class policies (i.e. an effective retraining program offered) and the coal miners' good sense (i.e. utilizing said retraining program) that ensures the coal miners' have a financial future. Either the coal miners and manufacturers are all fools or the program was inadequate.
The program was never put in place, it was killed. Now there is nothing for a dying energy industry.
|
On November 28 2017 12:39 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 12:27 Danglars wrote:They screwed the pooch on that one. Their credibility will suffer. What credibility? James O'Keefe is the only person in america less trust worthy than Alex Jones. He's literally been convicted in court over his willingness to smear without truth.
Convicted over wiretapping & breaking and entering if I remember correctly. This kind of entrapment is new.
*I should add that given his past editing, he must release all videos in unedited versions to be believed.
|
United States43704 Posts
On November 28 2017 10:33 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 09:03 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:48 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 08:43 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:18 Mohdoo wrote:On November 28 2017 08:08 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 04:14 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:57 KwarK wrote:On November 28 2017 03:52 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:49 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
You don't have to excuse one to condemn the other. You're forcing a false dichotomy. What I am trying to get at is you wouldn't refuse to be friends with a liberal because Hillary and Obama did certain things that are not progressive so why is it acceptable to do the same to a Trump supporter, assuming they are not calling you a cuck every other sentence. A Hillary supporter whose support of Hillary was predicated on her covering up of sexual abuse (as in that's why they liked her) would be morally unacceptable to me. A Hillary supporter who supported her in spite of that because there was no better alternative would be fine for me. The problem is that Trump supporters don't get to claim that there wasn't a less racist alternative to Trump. They can only say that the racism wasn't a significant factor to them. And when racism in the 21st century seems to be defined as not giving disrespect to certain people, is that the worst thing that someone can believe in? Whenever I hear people use that argument, it really sounds like they are crying wolf at this point. Racism really doesn't mean anything to most people anymore when it is constantly being applied. What people fail to see is that Trump's campaign was not built upon racism, it was in reaction to the people left behind with globalization and many of them live in a worst situation than they did years or decades ago and when they have to pay respect to groups of people or use phrases they have never even heard of years ago, how do you expect them to react? On November 28 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 03:50 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:30 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
You continue to miss the point. These people are told about the problems we face due to the results of the election. We explain it to them like polite people. They respond that they do not believe our problems are real. So we are not friends with them. I don't know about you guys, bust most of my friendships with liberals ended was over shit like cultural appropriation, the legitimacy of gender fluidity, and my criticisms of campus identity politics. In California, lots of gay people said that they were scared for their lives because Trump is in office and statistically and anecdotally, that is bullshit. Lots of women with nice jobs and attending good universities continue to insist they are oppressed when they are in a pretty good position compared to most Americans. And so many PoCs on college campuses engage in outright bullying and use their identity to cynically silence people. When you look more into their background, its not uncommon to see that they came from good families. I can befriend people with many different political views and can still disagree with them, but with many urban progressives, I am always one comment from being socially ruined. I also hear that a lot of gays don’t want to move out of MA or RI because the rest of the country is so unfriendly to them. I know people who have come back to the area because the rest of the country treated them like this. I have had Muslim friends who straight up left this country because it treated them so poorly. You don’t seem that interested in believe these folks, so I would argue that you value your political views more than their friendships. I have grown up in rural America and there was definitely racism and homophobia. There were times when people refused to serve my mom because she was Asian and we had gay people who were bullied and eventually committed suicide. And the anti-Muslim sentiment was there, but on a personal level, most Muslims were integrated for the most part. But the Islamphobia is pretty bad and it is getting worse. However, with people like Jon Stewart and shows like Glee, that all changed so fast for the better. Rural America, although not San Francisco or New York is definitely way much friendly and livable than it used to be. When I moved to California, it was even better, especially for someone like me, but one thing that irks me is when I see people who have never experienced racism claiming oppression like some reward. I know what bigotry was like in action and there is nothing more infuriating when people in liberal bubbles LARP as a minority in their fictionalized view of suburban/rural America and use it to cynically promote their worldview. My problem with 'Rural Americans voted for Trump 'because the country left them behind' is that Trump in no way represents their interests. They fell for the same con they have fallen for for decades and after Trump disappointing them they will run off to the next conman who promises them everything they want to hear. I get that people don't want to accept the truth, yes the country failed them by not restructuring the economy decades ago away from failing industries, yes its shit, it sucks and there is no easy way forward. But going 'My dad worked in a coal mine, I want to work in a coal mine' , 'no one wants coal anymore' , 'well, make them use it' doesn't do anything. When offered a choice between a conman promising them the world and a shady politician with a plan she might not follow through on, the voted for the conman. Sorry that I don't feel more sympathy for believing in the impossible. The entire idea of "We're a coal family and we're proud" is a great example of how prone to tribalism humans are. How in the world do you actually positively identify with manual labor. god damn. These people are just so easily manipulated it drives me insane. Coal mining was a well enough paying job to pay for a nice house and develop a nice neighborhood. So people wanting the old life back is expected, it was a good job back then. The problem now is that coal mining is dangerous, unhealthy, increasingly automated and suffering from competition like natural gas and renewable resources. That's the reality of the situation. Unless the USA subsidies coal, they aren't getting their quality of living they once had back. And if we're subsiding (white) coal miners, that's basically welfare to prop up a shrinking industry that even China and India aren't too fond of because its dirty as heck. Subsidizing coal doesn't even work since, as you said, automation means that new and bigger mines won't even meet the demand for work and the work that is offered would require more and more education. That's actually the funny thing about Trump's campaign promise towards coal miners. If you stopped for a second and thought about why coal was dying, the economic and environmental reasons are dead obvious. But that would require some people over there to finally accept the hard truth instead of blaming China/regulations/left wing environmentalists/Democrats/RINOs/globalists/etc. You don't think coal miners have a legitimate grievance against pretty much all of those groups? All of them essentially worked to put coal miners out of business without any concern for what the coal miners would actually do after they succeeded. I'm obviously an unabashed advocate of both the free market and free trade but it doesn't take a genius to realize low-skilled coal miners can't easily transfer their skills and tend not to be the type to have both the foresight and requisite character traits to proactively learn a new skillset in preparation for the demise of the coal industry. If you're a 55 year old ex-coal miner without adequate retirement savings (like most Americans) in 2017, what do you even do? A mass retaining program starting 10-20 years ago for half of Trump's base probably would have easily paid for itself by now. If that had been available and these workers had turned it down, I'd have a lot less sympathy for them but, pragmatically speaking, I expect foresight and good planning to be a trait of the political class--not the working class--thus the much of the onus for the current mess falls on said political class. To be clear, I'm not saying it justifies Trumpism and total/utter mistrust of elites, but the elites really did fuck up as far as America's working class is concerned. And some of the sneering around here at coal miners is pretty gross. It's easy to say "lol learn a new profession" when you're a software engineer who has to learn new things for their job everyday and is mentally used to it, but when you're a union worker for 30 years where various career filters have been applied and you probably don't have personality traits that are particularly amenable for learning, the union structure provides no incentive to learn anything new so you haven't done it for 30 years, and you're 55 so your time to profit from your educational investment is 10 years (rather than 40 as for a student), the whole "learn a new profession" thing sounds a lot more daunting and a lot less worth it.
Yes, I don't think they have a legitimate grievance against any of those groups. The "job killing" regulation mostly just prevents their employers from shifting externalities directly onto the workers themselves. If mining a unit of coal generates $100 in wealth and causes $150 in long term health problems to the miner then the miner wouldn't have an economic incentive to mine it. But if it's a mining company then it's still economically rational, as long as the long term health problems can be viewed as an externality, an expense a third party has to pay. One party makes $100, another loses $150, but it's economically rational to for the first party to continue. That's how the coal mines used to run, they made the communities they operated in poorer by operating and then, when forced to make payments into plans to offset future health costs for their employees, blamed the big government for interfering.
But by far the number one reason coal jobs have declined is nothing to do with regulation, China, globalists, environmentalists, leftists, or anything else. It's technology. It's the same issue horses have with the internal combustion engine. The problem isn't with the coal industry, any more than it is with domestic manufacturing (which is at an all time high), it's that output has gone up while blue collar jobs have fallen. The US manufactured over twice as many automobiles in 2017 as in 2009, but I'll bet you anything they didn't employ twice the workforce.
|
One wonders if those who claim that Trump does not make any racist statements will ever come to terms with the quantity of quotes with double meaning where if you give it 100% charity, it's not racist, but if you view it in another light, it is.
At a Monday event honoring the Native American Code Talkers, President Trump revived one of his favorite lines of attack against Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., questioning her claim that she’s part Native American and calling her “Pocahontas.”
...
Trump made his remarks standing beneath a portrait of Andrew Jackson, whose military campaigns against Native American tribes in the early 1800s earned him the nickname “Indian Killer.”
www.yahoo.com
|
On November 28 2017 12:27 Danglars wrote:They screwed the pooch on that one. Their credibility will suffer.
What credibility? They were shown in a literal court of law to have no credibility, and yet right wingers continue to buy into their videos. At this point their credibility is less than zero and has been for well over a year, yet people (many of whom happen to support trump and some of whom post on these forums) continue to use their videos as "proof."
|
United States43704 Posts
On November 28 2017 12:31 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 10:43 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 10:33 mozoku wrote:On November 28 2017 09:03 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:48 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 08:43 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:18 Mohdoo wrote:On November 28 2017 08:08 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 04:14 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:57 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
A Hillary supporter whose support of Hillary was predicated on her covering up of sexual abuse (as in that's why they liked her) would be morally unacceptable to me. A Hillary supporter who supported her in spite of that because there was no better alternative would be fine for me.
The problem is that Trump supporters don't get to claim that there wasn't a less racist alternative to Trump. They can only say that the racism wasn't a significant factor to them. And when racism in the 21st century seems to be defined as not giving disrespect to certain people, is that the worst thing that someone can believe in? Whenever I hear people use that argument, it really sounds like they are crying wolf at this point. Racism really doesn't mean anything to most people anymore when it is constantly being applied. What people fail to see is that Trump's campaign was not built upon racism, it was in reaction to the people left behind with globalization and many of them live in a worst situation than they did years or decades ago and when they have to pay respect to groups of people or use phrases they have never even heard of years ago, how do you expect them to react? On November 28 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
I also hear that a lot of gays don’t want to move out of MA or RI because the rest of the country is so unfriendly to them. I know people who have come back to the area because the rest of the country treated them like this. I have had Muslim friends who straight up left this country because it treated them so poorly. You don’t seem that interested in believe these folks, so I would argue that you value your political views more than their friendships. I have grown up in rural America and there was definitely racism and homophobia. There were times when people refused to serve my mom because she was Asian and we had gay people who were bullied and eventually committed suicide. And the anti-Muslim sentiment was there, but on a personal level, most Muslims were integrated for the most part. But the Islamphobia is pretty bad and it is getting worse. However, with people like Jon Stewart and shows like Glee, that all changed so fast for the better. Rural America, although not San Francisco or New York is definitely way much friendly and livable than it used to be. When I moved to California, it was even better, especially for someone like me, but one thing that irks me is when I see people who have never experienced racism claiming oppression like some reward. I know what bigotry was like in action and there is nothing more infuriating when people in liberal bubbles LARP as a minority in their fictionalized view of suburban/rural America and use it to cynically promote their worldview. My problem with 'Rural Americans voted for Trump 'because the country left them behind' is that Trump in no way represents their interests. They fell for the same con they have fallen for for decades and after Trump disappointing them they will run off to the next conman who promises them everything they want to hear. I get that people don't want to accept the truth, yes the country failed them by not restructuring the economy decades ago away from failing industries, yes its shit, it sucks and there is no easy way forward. But going 'My dad worked in a coal mine, I want to work in a coal mine' , 'no one wants coal anymore' , 'well, make them use it' doesn't do anything. When offered a choice between a conman promising them the world and a shady politician with a plan she might not follow through on, the voted for the conman. Sorry that I don't feel more sympathy for believing in the impossible. The entire idea of "We're a coal family and we're proud" is a great example of how prone to tribalism humans are. How in the world do you actually positively identify with manual labor. god damn. These people are just so easily manipulated it drives me insane. Coal mining was a well enough paying job to pay for a nice house and develop a nice neighborhood. So people wanting the old life back is expected, it was a good job back then. The problem now is that coal mining is dangerous, unhealthy, increasingly automated and suffering from competition like natural gas and renewable resources. That's the reality of the situation. Unless the USA subsidies coal, they aren't getting their quality of living they once had back. And if we're subsiding (white) coal miners, that's basically welfare to prop up a shrinking industry that even China and India aren't too fond of because its dirty as heck. Subsidizing coal doesn't even work since, as you said, automation means that new and bigger mines won't even meet the demand for work and the work that is offered would require more and more education. That's actually the funny thing about Trump's campaign promise towards coal miners. If you stopped for a second and thought about why coal was dying, the economic and environmental reasons are dead obvious. But that would require some people over there to finally accept the hard truth instead of blaming China/regulations/left wing environmentalists/Democrats/RINOs/globalists/etc. You don't think coal miners have a legitimate grievance against pretty much all of those groups? All of them essentially worked to put coal miners out of business without any concern for what the coal miners would actually do after they succeeded. I'm obviously an unabashed advocate of both the free market and free trade but it doesn't take a genius to realize low-skilled coal miners can't easily transfer their skills and tend not to be the type to have both the foresight and requisite character traits to proactively learn a new skillset in preparation for the demise of the coal industry. If you're a 55 year old ex-coal miner without adequate retirement savings (like most Americans) in 2017, what do you even do? A mass retaining program starting 10-20 years ago for half of Trump's base probably would have easily paid for itself by now. If that had been available and these workers had turned it down, I'd have a lot less sympathy for them but, pragmatically speaking, I expect foresight and good planning to be a trait of the political class--not the working class--thus the much of the onus for the current mess falls on said political class. To be clear, I'm not saying it justifies Trumpism and total/utter mistrust of elites, but the elites really did fuck up as far as America's working class is concerned. And some of the sneering around here at coal miners is pretty gross. It's easy to say "lol learn a new profession" when you're a software engineer who has to learn new things for their job everyday and is mentally used to it, but when you're a union worker for 30 years where various career filters have been applied and you probably don't have personality traits that are particularly amenable for learning, the union structure provides no incentive to learn anything new so you haven't done it for 30 years, and you're 55 so your time to profit from your educational investment is 10 years (rather than 40 as for a student), the whole "learn a new profession" thing sounds a lot more daunting and a lot less worth it. The policies put in place by Obama that limited coal production had a whole bunch of money for retraining and systems in place to help the transition. Trump ended those. The working class of America is really good at shooting itself in the foot because they keep electing Republicans. Because Republican keep telling them government is the one destroying their jobs and then turning around ending the services that would help people find new jobs. Much like immigration, the Republicans will never address this problem because then they couldn't get re-elected by railing against it. What does a "a whole bunch of money put aside" actually mean in practice? Clearly, the program was a failure as there's a bunch of unemployable manufacturers and coal miners that got Trump elected. Furthermore, if the program was at all popular, why wasn't there a backlash when Trump cut it? Something doesn't add up here.
Your argument here appears to be
a) voters are rational
b) voters would be outraged by the cuts to the Appalachian Regional Commission
c) you would have heard about that backlash
d) but you haven't heard about that backlash
e) therefore the Appalachian Regional Commission must suck
That's not a good argument.
Also there was actually quite a lot of backlash at the time. You can google it. You not hearing about it is on you. The backlash was sufficient that it made it back into the budget, at reduced levels, for another year.
|
On November 28 2017 14:01 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 12:27 Danglars wrote:They screwed the pooch on that one. Their credibility will suffer. What credibility? They were shown in a literal court of law to have no credibility, and yet right wingers continue to buy into their videos. At this point their credibility is less than zero and has been for well over a year, yet people (many of whom happen to support trump and some of whom post on these forums) continue to use their videos as "proof."
The conviction literally said “Guilty of having no credibility!”
|
On November 28 2017 13:50 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 12:39 Nevuk wrote:On November 28 2017 12:27 Danglars wrote:They screwed the pooch on that one. Their credibility will suffer. What credibility? James O'Keefe is the only person in america less trust worthy than Alex Jones. He's literally been convicted in court over his willingness to smear without truth. Convicted over wiretapping & breaking and entering if I remember correctly. This kind of entrapment is new. *I should add that given his past editing, he must release all videos in unedited versions to be believed.
True. His past releases were probably the worse sin in regards to credibility. Breaking into a senator's office just demonstrates he's a moron.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
