|
Wait isn't there already... Yes, I could write pages on why I'm here but I'll try to keep it succinct.
There's a difference of opinions on what's wrong with the US politics thread. It's more or less made my participation untenable. Without driving down that road too much there are still many news stories and related discussions I want to have the opportunity to participate in here.
Thus here we are (before people worry or hit report, I cleared this with Seeker).
The basic idea here is that the same rules (more or less) as the US politics thread apply here, though since it's a blog it will start with me handling the enforcement of those rules myself. Though I'll make clear now, I'm not opposed to coming to an agreement on alternatives or just trying out different ideas.
I had thought I would limit the news spam to SB, but it feels anemic to me over in the thread so post what news you think pertains to US politics (domestic or abroad), with some substantive commentary (and a connection if it's not apparent (to me) at first glance. I'm going to be pretty loose with any enforcement on this at first but there won't be posts about about the Mueller Investigation, or related trials. Trump/anon rumor posts aren't disallowed, but people will be far more interested elsewhere. This should neutralize one of our biggest issues, where posters are free to discuss that without my interruption in the thread, we'll be free from that stuff interrupting us here.
Posters banned from previous threads are also welcome, however if you got banned from the last thread you'll probably get banned from this one too.
One big difference (imo) will be the enforcement of the “show, don't tell” rule and posters will be discouraged from making snippy hit and run posts, particularly if they aren't funny.
If you've found yourself here you probably know what my biggest pet peeves are regarding posting style, quality, substance, etc... But for those who aren't familiar, go ahead and check my posts in the website feedback thread for US politics from the start, http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread it'll be a fun read if you've stumbled here for other reasons.
Here's the TLDR version summed up on a single page
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread?page=193
*Farvs rules have been removed
Sitewide TL rules still apply but I personally will try to sort out any issues before they need to be passed to moderation staff, which if I have my preference will be limited to mods I want to coordinate with (but this depends on circumstances)
Not sure how this is all going to go so I'm just going to be posting some of the US politics news/commentary I'm interested in and welcome people to join me and hope for the best.
Just as a heads up, much of the orthodoxy that's accepted in the US politics thread will be expected to be substantiated if its to be repeated here. Additionally if one is sensitive to critique of US empire this probably won't be a blog you enjoy.*
*This entire post will be refined over time
Welcome all, to the US politics Mega-Blog
|
There's lot's that's been going on I wish would get more attention/posts among the politically minded here from US supplied bombs and our help being used by our ally to blow up dozens of children (in an ongoing humanitarian crisis of our and our allies making), a prison strike taking place in prisons around the country, the dynamics of the Nike-Kaepernick kerfuffle (beyond the superficial), and many more.
In the interest of immediacy and looking forward I'll start with this though.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) have introduced a bill that would tax companies like Amazon and Walmart for the cost of employees’ food stamps and other public assistance. Sanders’ Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies Act (abbreviated “Stop BEZOS”) — along with Khanna’s House of Representatives counterpart, the Corporate Responsibility and Taxpayer Protection Act — would institute a 100 percent tax on government benefits that are granted to workers at large companies.
The bill’s text characterizes this as a “corporate welfare tax,” and it would apply to corporations with 500 or more employees. If workers are receiving government aid through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly known as food stamps), national school lunch and breakfast programs, Section 8 housing subsidies, or Medicaid, employers will be taxed for the total cost of those benefits. The bill applies to full-time and part-time employees, as well as independent contractors that are de facto company employees.
www.theverge.com
While I haven't had a chance to read the text of the bills themselves they sound like a good start. I've largely given up on electoral politics (at the national level) as a venue for the radical changes I think necessary, for those who haven't, this is what works as I think recent elections are demonstrating.
Amid all the stagecraft of the Kavanaugh nomination (which Democrats could have stalled indefinitely by refusing to show up for the committee), this is what people really want.
They want a prescription for something that will improve their material conditions, not demagoguery about the threat posed by the other side (increasingly just Trump and cronies, rather than a generic conservative agenda).
If Democrats don't embrace this proposal and more like it they will come up remarkably short in the midterms and risk losing 2020 to Trump imo.
With that, I invite people to discuss this or other news anything US politics related with the OP in mind of course.
Don't be shy to ask questions if you're unfamiliar either, I just request if you're unfamiliar with a topic or US politics in general that you preface or word your question to that effect.
|
Taxing companies isn’t going to solve the problem of low wages. What will solve it is creating labor scarcity, resulting in upwards pressures on employee compensation. So promote policies that restrict the growth of the untrained workforce and increase workforce training. In other words, more trade schools, less immigration.
|
On September 06 2018 10:43 xDaunt wrote:
Taxing companies isn’t going to solve the problem of low wages. What will solve it is creating labor scarcity, resulting in upwards pressures on employee compensation. So promote policies that restrict the growth of the untrained workforce and increase workforce training. In other words, more trade schools, less immigration.
I'm not opposed to radically overhauling the entire workforce/training paradigm, but would you agree that scarcity won't solve the problem of large corporations relying on the government to provide their workers with enough resources to float near the poverty line for many years (if I concede it would), while this proposal would put more immediate pressure for companies to raise wages?
That's not to say we can do a better job of modernizing our education and workforce training in general, but that the exploitative nature of this particular 'loophole' needs a more immediate solution not present in the remedy you suggest.
|
On September 06 2018 10:56 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2018 10:43 xDaunt wrote:
Taxing companies isn’t going to solve the problem of low wages. What will solve it is creating labor scarcity, resulting in upwards pressures on employee compensation. So promote policies that restrict the growth of the untrained workforce and increase workforce training. In other words, more trade schools, less immigration. I'm not opposed to radically overhauling the entire workforce/training paradigm, but would you agree that scarcity won't solve the problem of large corporations relying on the government to provide their workers with enough resources to float near the poverty line for many years (if I concede it would), while this proposal would put more immediate pressure for companies to raise wages? That's not to say we can do a better job of modernizing our education and workforce training in general, but that the exploitative nature of this particular 'loophole' needs a more immediate solution not present in the remedy you suggest.
I guess I disagree with the proposition that employers rely upon welfare programs when setting their own wages. Even in the absence of any welfare programs, the rational employer is going to be economically incentivized to pay the lowest wage that the labor market will bear. Stated another way, the receipt of welfare benefits isn't a cause of the problem of low wages so much as it is a symptom of it.
|
On September 06 2018 11:15 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2018 10:56 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 06 2018 10:43 xDaunt wrote:
Taxing companies isn’t going to solve the problem of low wages. What will solve it is creating labor scarcity, resulting in upwards pressures on employee compensation. So promote policies that restrict the growth of the untrained workforce and increase workforce training. In other words, more trade schools, less immigration. I'm not opposed to radically overhauling the entire workforce/training paradigm, but would you agree that scarcity won't solve the problem of large corporations relying on the government to provide their workers with enough resources to float near the poverty line for many years (if I concede it would), while this proposal would put more immediate pressure for companies to raise wages? That's not to say we can do a better job of modernizing our education and workforce training in general, but that the exploitative nature of this particular 'loophole' needs a more immediate solution not present in the remedy you suggest. I guess I disagree with the proposition that employers rely upon welfare programs when setting their own wages. Even in the absence of any welfare programs, the rational employer is going to be economically incentivized to pay the lowest wage that the labor market will bear. Stated another way, the receipt of welfare benefits isn't a cause of the problem of low wages so much as it is a symptom of it.
I don't think they rely on it so much as it allows them to extract more profit than if they felt a moral obligation or (as this law would institute) a financial and political incentive to provide wages that put people above the poverty line.
Keep in mind that unless they just stubbornly chose to pay the tax out of spite, this would mean that instead of the cost of their workforce being deferred to society, it would instead be concentrated back onto their employer. There would be nothing stopping employers from saying that they are being forced to overpay workers and collaborate with or without the public sector to implement the kind of programs they need in order to justify the cost of their workers.
In other words:
Low Wages Cost U.S. Taxpayers $152.8 Billion Each Year in Public Support for Working Families
When jobs don’t pay enough, workers turn to public assistance in order to meet their basic needs. These programs provide vital support to millions of working families whose employers pay less than a liveable wage. At both the state and federal levels, more than half of total spending on the public assistance programs analyzed in this report—Medicaid/CHIP, TANF, EITC, and food stamps—goes to working families.
laborcenter.berkeley.edu
That cost is basically subsidizing the corporations that exploit it.
I don't see how trade schools resolves that, but if instead of paying wages that close the gap they want to pay the tax I suppose schools are better than what the government would probably prefer to spend it on.
What support do you have for this theory of training our way into a labor scarcity driving up wages with unemployment already where it is?
|
|
|
So GH, question for you: We're obviously going to see something resembling a resolution to the investigations into Trump sometime over the next month so as to influence the midterms. How do you see this shaking out based upon what you're seeing?
|
On September 07 2018 04:53 xDaunt wrote:
So GH, question for you: We're obviously going to see something resembling a resolution to the investigations into Trump sometime over the next month so as to influence the midterms. How do you see this shaking out based upon what you're seeing?
I'm generally against discussing that topic here but this stupid NYT letter and Kavanaugh has liberals completely discombobulated.
Well, legally speaking I think what I've always thought, that maybe some cronies get some slaps on the wrist but Trump isn't going down for this, despite liberals thinking they've found the thing that will finally take down Trump at least once a week (ratings!). The cronies only get something remotely stern if Trump bails on them. Looks like everyone's pleading so Manafort is the only person on the chopping block and Trump's indicated he's got pardons coming if he needs them. That Manafort is getting stuck for stuff completely unrelated to the campaign just feeds the perception that it was all a witch hunt for anything wrong that these political opponents might be able to get in trouble for, and had nothing to do with any sincere belief that Russia's interference was so much worse than Israel or the other countries that interfere in our elections or us in theirs.
It's undeniably clear to me that the whole thing was about sticking it to Trump and Trump called their bluff.
Combine that with Kavanaugh where Democrats refused to locate their spines. Some people will fall for the theatrics and grandstanding, quite a few people know Democrats chose not to stop the Kavanaugh nomination, and it was just blue state dems caving to Trump and the Republicans without a fight.
So where does that put us for the midterms?
Well Democrats are looking at midterms they should cleanup on, anything less than them blowing out Republicans is a miserable failure. True to form they are desperately trying to fail miserably.
All things considered I think Democrats fail in the midterms, how badly they fail depends on how they run for the general. Looks like Gillum and Ocasio are already turning toward the center which is the surest way for Democrats to lose (Ocasio's district is safe).
Gillum is a good example, Centrism isn't where it's at, so long as Democrats keep trying to sway Republican voters instead of motivating people already to their left to vote for them they will fail more often than they succeed. But as soon as he took the nomination from the more traditional establishment backed candidate he's been shifting to the center. Basically looks like he just cut in the political succession line in front of the establishment pick by doing the work.
Republicans keep the senate, and if impeachment talk keeps floating around as well as 25th amendment stuff instead of hitting every news show to talk about proposals like Bernie put forward they will probably not win the house. It's hard to overstate just how lopsided this set-up is for Democrats, but they should have a large house majority in the bag if they weren't so terrible.
So to be a bit more specific than the professionals I'm ruling out Democrats blowing out Republicans in the house (which is the outcome that should happen if they weren't completely incompetent), it'll be close to even or they'll still be the minority.
Looking to 2020 seeing liberals fall for Booker's theatrics and rally behind Kamala "the cop" Harris, Trump's looking pretty safe for 2020 too.
|
On September 07 2018 06:03 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2018 04:53 xDaunt wrote:
So GH, question for you: We're obviously going to see something resembling a resolution to the investigations into Trump sometime over the next month so as to influence the midterms. How do you see this shaking out based upon what you're seeing? I'm generally against discussing that topic here but this stupid NYT letter and Kavanaugh has liberals completely discombobulated.
That NYT op-ed isn't going to move the needle at all. If anything, all it does is prove Trump's charge that there is a swamp and a deep state composed of unelected bureaucrats with an undue sense of entitlement who need to be cleared out. All sorts of "conservatives" have been saying that Trump's policies are insane and crazy since the campaign, and they have all been made to look like fools. Whoever this "senior" administration official is will suffer a similar fate.
Well, legally speaking I think what I've always thought, that maybe some cronies get some slaps on the wrist but Trump isn't going down for this, despite liberals thinking they've found the thing that will finally take down Trump at least once a week (ratings!). The cronies only get something remotely stern if Trump bails on them. Looks like everyone's pleading so Manafort is the only person on the chopping block and Trump's indicated he's got pardons coming if he needs them. That Manafort is getting stuck for stuff completely unrelated to the campaign just feeds the perception that it was all a witch hunt for anything wrong that these political opponents might be able to get in trouble for, and had nothing to do with any sincere belief that Russia's interference was so much worse than Israel or the other countries that interfere in our elections or us in theirs.
It's undeniably clear to me that the whole thing was about sticking it to Trump and Trump called their bluff.
Yeah, I don't think that he's just called their bluff. I think that he's about to turn the tables on them in a big way. I'm waiting for Trump to declassify the FISA applications, which he says that he's going to do (and will likely wait to do it until he thinks that he can inflict maximum damage upon the other side before the election). That's going to be the big tell.
The part of all of this that is amazing to me is that democrats seem to be missing/ignoring the fact that virtually the entire command structure of the FBI/DOJ has been sacked, demoted, and/or facing the grand jury investigation. It's very clear which way things are rolling right now. And I'm starting to wonder how far into the Obama administration this investigation is going to reach. Brennan's hysterics certainly make much more sense when viewed in the context of the possibility that he knows his ass may be on the line.
Combine that with Kavanaugh where Democrats refused to locate their spines. Some people will fall for the theatrics and grandstanding, quite a few people know Democrats chose not to stop the Kavanaugh nomination, and it was just blue state dems caving to Trump and the Republicans without a fight.
The opposition to Kavanaugh has been hilarious in its impotence. Booker's theatrics today were simply sad. To the extent that the democrats wanted to make a statement about Kavanaugh and Trump's Supreme Court nominations, I don't think that they've done it.
So where does that put us for the midterms?
Well Democrats are looking at midterms they should cleanup on, anything less than them blowing out Republicans is a miserable failure. True to form they are desperately trying to fail miserably.
All things considered I think Democrats fail in the midterms, how badly they fail depends on how they run for the general. Looks like Gillum and Ocasio are already turning toward the center which is the surest way for Democrats to lose (Ocasio's district is safe).
Gillum is a good example, Centrism isn't where it's at, so long as Democrats keep trying to sway Republican voters instead of motivating people already to their left to vote for them they will fail more often than they succeed. But as soon as he took the nomination from the more traditional establishment backed candidate he's been shifting to the center. Basically looks like he just cut in the political succession line in front of the establishment pick by doing the work.
Republicans keep the senate, and if impeachment talk keeps floating around as well as 25th amendment stuff instead of hitting every news show to talk about proposals like Bernie put forward they will probably not win the house. It's hard to overstate just how lopsided this set-up is for Democrats, but they should have a large house majority in the bag if they weren't so terrible.
So to be a bit more specific than the professionals I'm ruling out Democrats blowing out Republicans in the house (which is the outcome that should happen if they weren't completely incompetent), it'll be close to even or they'll still be the minority.
I don't really disagree with any of this. The only thing that I'd add is that the political landscape is going to look very different a month from now. One of two things is going to happen. Either Mueller is going to drop a bomb on Trump, making this investigation seem worthwhile, or Trump is going to expose it all as a fraud. I'm leaning towards the latter, simply because, if Mueller had anything, or if there ever was anything nailing Trump, we'd have known about it a long time ago given all of the leaks. The interesting thing about this situation is that someone is going to be vindicated. It's not like all of this is going to be swept under a rug by someone. Documents exist showing what happened. For this reason, I want to see the FISA applications.
Looking to 2020 seeing liberals fall for Booker's theatrics and rally behind Kamala "the cop" Harris, Trump's looking pretty safe for 2020 too.
Yeah, I haven't seen the democrat yet who is going to beat Trump in 2020. Booker is a clown, and Kamala Harris doesn't scare anyone.
|
Yeah, I don't think that he's just called their bluff. I think that he's about to turn the tables on them in a big way. I'm waiting for Trump to declassify the FISA applications, which he says that he's going to do (and will likely wait to do it until he thinks that he can inflict maximum damage upon the other side before the election). That's going to be the big tell.
I wouldn't get your hopes up, Trump and Republicans are taking their voters for pretty much the same ride Democrats are.
Republicans actually want to lose the house (or view it as not the worst possible outcome) because it relieves them of a great deal of responsibility. Problem for them is the seats they are likely to lose are the ones of the geriatrics that want to keep their seat and be completely worthless.
The part of all of this that is amazing to me is that democrats seem to be missing/ignoring the fact that virtually the entire command structure of the FBI/DOJ has been sacked, demoted, and/or facing the grand jury investigation. It's very clear which way things are rolling right now. And I'm starting to wonder how far into the Obama administration this investigation is going to reach. Brennan's hysterics certainly make much more sense when viewed in the context of the possibility that he knows his ass may be on the line.
Again, I wouldn't get too excited. Democrats are blinded by money and corporate influence and no one is getting held accountable for anything (to any significant degree).
I don't really disagree with any of this. The only thing that I'd add is that the political landscape is going to look very different a month from now. One of two things is going to happen. Either Mueller is going to drop a bomb on Trump, making this investigation seem worthwhile, or Trump is going to expose it all as a fraud. I'm leaning towards the latter, simply because, if Mueller had anything, or if there ever was anything nailing Trump, we'd have known about it a long time ago given all of the leaks. The interesting thing about this situation is that someone is going to be vindicated. It's not like all of this is going to be swept under a rug by someone. Documents exist showing what happened. For this reason, I want to see the FISA applications.
Mueller's not dropping a bomb, and even if he does it's not like it's stopping you or anyone else from voting for the republican in their district. Republicans standing up to Trump are surely at more risk than the ones avoiding saying anything negative about him.
Yeah, I haven't seen the democrat yet who is going to beat Trump in 2020. Booker is a clown, and Kamala Harris doesn't scare anyone.
Every signal I've seen shows that Democrats plan on losing in 2020, they're still dreaming about a Democratic house sending up impeachment for the senate to shit on, wasting everyone's time and energy.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Thus here we are (before people worry or hit report, I cleared this with Seeker).
Heh, someone reported your OP anyways.
I like the idea. Not sure if it’s going to work for more than a couple of days, but I’ll watch for at least a bit.
|
On September 08 2018 01:00 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +Thus here we are (before people worry or hit report, I cleared this with Seeker). Heh, someone reported your OP anyways. I like the idea. Not sure if it’s going to work for more than a couple of days, but I’ll watch for at least a bit.
roflmao. I'm pretty sure I'm the one who accidentally one-stared it at least.
Might not end up being a very popular blog but we should manage to have some fun and good conversations here. If not at least I'll have something to point to when Democrats are again asking themselves "how could this happen!?!" and assuring themselves that "No one saw this coming", easier than searching them out in the main thread. So as to hope maybe it won't happen yet again.
|
Happy birthday GH! I have long found that I have nothing to say in US pol discussions, because the whole thing is basically incomprehensible to a European, but I like reading those occasionally and the posts from you are on average the saner ones, so if this place stays alive, I might give it a read from time to time.
|
On September 08 2018 02:04 opisska wrote:
Happy birthday GH! I have long found that I have nothing to say in US pol discussions, because the whole thing is basically incomprehensible to a European, but I like reading those occasionally and the posts from you are on average the saner ones, so if this place stays alive, I might give it a read from time to time.
Thanks, here's hoping for the best.
Obama was back in public today and he endorsed Medicare for All, a 180 from the 2016 election where Hillary said it will never ever happen to the cheers of liberals, and that bringing it up is a terrible idea (pushed again recently by Democrat "strategists").
Democrats backed the wrong candidate in 2016.
|
On September 08 2018 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2018 02:04 opisska wrote:
Happy birthday GH! I have long found that I have nothing to say in US pol discussions, because the whole thing is basically incomprehensible to a European, but I like reading those occasionally and the posts from you are on average the saner ones, so if this place stays alive, I might give it a read from time to time. Thanks, here's hoping for the best. Obama was back in public today and he endorsed Medicare for All, a 180 from the 2016 election where Hillary said it will never ever happen to the cheers of liberals, and that bringing it up is a terrible idea (pushed again recently by Democrat "strategists"). https://twitter.com/ddiamond/status/1038109264391430145Democrats backed the wrong candidate in 2016.
GH is going to make TL political discussions great again.
To Obama’s credit, he actually went away for longer than I thought he would. Frankly, I’m pretty sure that Trump would sign a Medicare for all bill if congress sent him one. Even if it was a Democrat bill.
|
On September 08 2018 08:09 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2018 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 08 2018 02:04 opisska wrote:
Happy birthday GH! I have long found that I have nothing to say in US pol discussions, because the whole thing is basically incomprehensible to a European, but I like reading those occasionally and the posts from you are on average the saner ones, so if this place stays alive, I might give it a read from time to time. Thanks, here's hoping for the best. Obama was back in public today and he endorsed Medicare for All, a 180 from the 2016 election where Hillary said it will never ever happen to the cheers of liberals, and that bringing it up is a terrible idea (pushed again recently by Democrat "strategists"). https://twitter.com/ddiamond/status/1038109264391430145Democrats backed the wrong candidate in 2016. GH is going to make TL political discussions great again. To Obama’s credit, he actually went away for longer than I thought he would. Frankly, I’m pretty sure that Trump would sign a Medicare for all bill if congress sent him one. Even if it was a Democrat bill.
And Democrats are too petty (and beholden to the insurance industry) to send it even if they got their majorities.
From the private sector to government, it amazes me how bad at their jobs people can be and still be held up as examples to follow.
|
Looks like ANTIFA is doing work that needs to be done in this country and our law enforcement agencies have completely failed to do.
A Georgia police officer has been suspended after anti-fascists exposed his history of liking racist Facebook posts explicitly promoting the Ku Klux Klan, a violent white supremacist terror group.
East Ellijay Police Department Officer Tommy Long was put on paid administrative leave pending an investigation into any ties he might have to the KKK, Chief of Police Larry Callahan told HuffPost Thursday.
On Wednesday, Atlanta Antifascists — a member group of the Torch Network of militant anti-fascists, which confronts and exposes white nationalists across America — published an article with screenshots showing Long liking multiple Facebook posts promoting the KKK.
Callahan told HuffPost that Long admitted the Facebook page belonged to him, but either denied or claimed not to remember liking some of the KKK-related posts uncovered by Atlanta Antifascists. Long did not respond to a HuffPost request for comment. There is no evidence that Long himself is a member of the KKK.
Long was friends on Facebook with six accounts appearing to belong to two KKK members: Imperial Wizard Charles Geoffrey Denton (aka “Cole Thornton”), and Grand Dragon Justin Stephen Owens (aka Stephen Owens).
After Atlanta Antifascists published its article Wednesday, Long temporarily de-activated his Facebook account. When it was re-activated Thursday, he was no longer friends with the two KKK members. He has not, however, un-liked racist posts from the two white supremacists.
“Are you upset about blm [Black Lives Matter] being in Georgia?” Owens, the KKK member, wrote in a Facebook post in July 2016. “You like to sit back and watch yet another city destroyed by these mongrels? Our state! Georgia with this crap going on! TAKE A STAND, SAVE OUR LAND, JOIN THE KLAN!...”
www.huffingtonpost.com
That's the 4th cop in Georgia in the last month affiliated/sympathetic with white supremacist groups.
EDIT: omg... long story short, there are no anti-muslim camps in China or you'd see pictures. Doesn't stop people from believing that propaganda whole though.
Also the worst descriptions make them sound better than US prisons.
|
Well, there are photos of the re-education camps in Xinjiang, so I’m not sure why you think it’s a myth. And it’s not like Chinese, military-enforced, cultural imperialism over there is any secret. The crackdown has been going on for years.
As for Antifa, good for them. They finally figured out how to do something productive without resorting to violence, mayhem and destruction. One would think that they’d figure out that stuff doesn’t work in this country.
|
On September 09 2018 23:49 xDaunt wrote:Well, there are photos of the re-education camps in Xinjiang, so I’m not sure why you think it’s a myth. And it’s not like Chinese, military-enforced, cultural imperialism over there is any secret. The crackdown has been going on for years. As for Antifa, good for them. They finally figured out how to do something productive without resorting to violence, mayhem and destruction. One would think that they’d figure out that stuff doesn’t work in this country.
I guess some Canadian law student finding buildings on google maps does it?
They sound better than US prisons anyway, but I would have guessed you're supportive of reeducating Muslims?
On ANTIFA yeah they seem better at that than the police. Maybe the PD's will take notes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
