• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 22:47
CEST 04:47
KST 11:47
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Code S Season 1 (2026) - RO4 & Finals Preview4[ASL21] Ro4 Preview: On Course12Code S Season 1 - RO8 Preview7[ASL21] Ro8 Preview Pt2: Progenitors8Code S Season 1 - RO12 Group A: Rogue, Percival, Solar, Zoun13
Community News
Code S Season 1 (2026) - RO8 Results2Weekly Cups (May 4-10): Clem, MaxPax, herO win1Maestros of The Game 2 announcement and schedule !11Weekly Cups (April 27-May 4): Clem takes triple0RSL Revival: Season 5 - Qualifiers and Main Event12
StarCraft 2
General
Team Liquid Map Contest #22 - The Finalists Code S Season 1 (2026) - RO4 & Finals Preview Code S Season 1 (2026) - RO8 Results Code S Season 1 (2026) - RO12 Results MaNa leaves Team Liquid
Tourneys
GSL Code S Season 1 (2026) Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament KSL Week 89 2026 GSL Season 2 Qualifiers Maestros of The Game 2 announcement and schedule !
Strategy
Custom Maps
[D]RTS in all its shapes and glory <3 [A] Nemrods 1/4 players
External Content
The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 526 Rubber and Glue Mutation # 525 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 524 Death and Taxes
Brood War
General
vespene.gg — BW replays in browser Data needed BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Pros React to: TvT Masterclass in FlaSh vs Light BW General Discussion
Tourneys
[ASL21] Semifinals B [BSL22] RO8 Bracket Stage + Another TieBreaker [ASL21] Ro8 Day 4 Escore Tournament StarCraft Season 2
Strategy
Muta micro map competition Fighting Spirit mining rates [G] Hydra ZvZ: An Introduction Simple Questions, Simple Answers
Other Games
General Games
Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Starcraft Tabletop Miniature Game
Dota 2
The Story of Wings Gaming
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
Vanilla Mini Mafia Mafia Game Mode Feedback/Ideas TL Mafia Community Thread Five o'clock TL Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread YouTube Thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread UK Politics Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
The herO Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread [Req][Books] Good Fantasy/SciFi books
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread McBoner: A hockey love story Formula 1 Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
streaming software Strange computer issues (software) [G] How to Block Livestream Ads
TL Community
Travel Agencies vs Online Booking Platforms The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Why RTS gamers make better f…
gosubay
How EEG Data Can Predict Gam…
TrAiDoS
ramps on octagon
StaticNine
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1698 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2746

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2744 2745 2746 2747 2748 5726 Next
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting!

NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.

Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.


If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread
IgnE
Profile Joined November 2010
United States7681 Posts
October 14 2020 19:12 GMT
#54901
On October 15 2020 03:24 farvacola wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 03:07 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 15 2020 02:55 farvacola wrote:
My views are similar Mohdoo, statues as civic objects is an outdated concept that needs revisiting. A key component of a rigorous sense of US history (and all history for that matter) is that there are no heroes.

Maybe you don't need to see people represented by statues as heroes - or even necessarily good people - and the problem is solved. It's precisely because history is not about heroes that removing statues of everyone who doesn't qualify as a great person by today's standard or did things that we would consider shocking makes no sense at all.

I don't think making new statues of people makes a lot of sense either - and it's out of fashion anyway - but walking through Paris and be surrounded by statues of the great people of history is quite wonderful. And they give opportunities to learn and reflect. Many times when I grew up I got curious and learnt about a king, a writer or a scientist because I passed a statue of him or her regularly.

This raises an important point that lies at the base of the notion that the US has unique problems with its history, problems that serve as excellent fodder for politics that turn on recasting the past as a component of national identity. In a vacuum, I agree with you that having permanent physical reminders of national identity is not itself inherently problematic, but given what statues have been and are used for here, I think the approach needs to be different. Significant numbers of people here think talking about the Founding Fathers having owned slaves is an insult to America, and those same people think that systemic racism is not a problem. To the extent statues in public places are edifices of the System, there are real issues with their continued, unqualified existence. Maybe the answer is better education rather than tearing down or adding heavy disclaimers to statues, but as we know, there are people who think one of America's best qualities is that someone in Arkansas and someone in New York are not guaranteed access to the same things.
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 03:10 IgnE wrote:
On October 15 2020 02:55 farvacola wrote:
My views are similar Mohdoo, statues as civic objects is an outdated concept that needs revisiting. A key component of a rigorous sense of US history (and all history for that matter) is that there are no heroes.


What about aesthetic objects?

I think statues are very powerful as far as aesthetic objects go, but beyond that I am really not sure how to approach their use aside from the monument question.



So was 1619 the true founding of the USA? And if it were, would that qualify as an insult to America?
The unrealistic sound of these propositions is indicative, not of their utopian character, but of the strength of the forces which prevent their realization.
Biff The Understudy
Profile Blog Joined February 2008
France8082 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-14 19:30:09
October 14 2020 19:21 GMT
#54902
On October 15 2020 04:06 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 03:07 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 15 2020 02:55 farvacola wrote:
My views are similar Mohdoo, statues as civic objects is an outdated concept that needs revisiting. A key component of a rigorous sense of US history (and all history for that matter) is that there are no heroes.

Maybe you don't need to see people represented by statues as heroes - or even necessarily good people - and the problem is solved. It's precisely because history is not about heroes that removing statues of everyone who doesn't qualify as a great person by today's standard or did things that we would consider shocking makes no sense at all.

I don't think making new statues of people makes a lot of sense either - and it's out of fashion anyway - but walking through Paris and be surrounded by statues of the great people of history is quite wonderful. And they give opportunities to learn and reflect. Many times when I grew up I got curious and learnt about a king, a writer or a scientist because I passed a statue of him or her regularly.


I suppose your childhood curiosities just don't feel remotely important to me. I am totally comfortable carving that entire part of your life out altogether and demonstrating what you have left. Grasping on to that feels weird. If my favorite statue ever made someone uncomfortable in the way people view confederate monuments, I'd say "sure, who gives a shit". I can understand the sentimental value of childhood memories, but I also don't think its productive to pretend it piqued some sort of giant cultural shift.

It's not just childhood memory. It's a huge part if our culture. I am not really in favour of destroying thousand of statues that have a huge artistic, historical and cultural value because someone might get offended by what that person, who lived in a totally different context, with other set of values and an other understanding of the world, did.

Virtually no one is offended by statues of Napoleon just as no french jew is offended by statues of Philippe Le Bel or Louis XIV. Because in the french cultural context that would be absolutely ridiculous. People would literally laugh at you. Because no one in his right mind would EVER think that the statue of Napoleon is meant to celebrate his restauration of slavery in Haiti or even has anything to do with race whatsoever - and also because the dude was born in the XVIIIth century and well, people were very different.

Personally I find that attitude of judging figures of the past with our set of values and deciding who was a baddy and who was a good guy childish and going against everything history should be. It makes no sense. History is not about baddies and heroes. That doesn't even make sense.

I get that the US never solved the problem of slavery and the civil war and as Farcarola pointed out, certain things make sense over there that don't here.

Now if some far right asshole got elected somewhere and decided to erect a statue to Pierre Laval, well, I would be the first to want to top it down. That would be our equivalent to the statues of Lee. And I'm all for removing them. They are a clear symbol of oppression that were erected precisely for that reason.
The fellow who is out to burn things up is the counterpart of the fool who thinks he can save the world. The world needs neither to be burned up nor to be saved. The world is, we are. Transients, if we buck it; here to stay if we accept it. ~H.Miller
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18857 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-14 19:27:03
October 14 2020 19:26 GMT
#54903
On October 15 2020 04:12 IgnE wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 03:24 farvacola wrote:
On October 15 2020 03:07 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 15 2020 02:55 farvacola wrote:
My views are similar Mohdoo, statues as civic objects is an outdated concept that needs revisiting. A key component of a rigorous sense of US history (and all history for that matter) is that there are no heroes.

Maybe you don't need to see people represented by statues as heroes - or even necessarily good people - and the problem is solved. It's precisely because history is not about heroes that removing statues of everyone who doesn't qualify as a great person by today's standard or did things that we would consider shocking makes no sense at all.

I don't think making new statues of people makes a lot of sense either - and it's out of fashion anyway - but walking through Paris and be surrounded by statues of the great people of history is quite wonderful. And they give opportunities to learn and reflect. Many times when I grew up I got curious and learnt about a king, a writer or a scientist because I passed a statue of him or her regularly.

This raises an important point that lies at the base of the notion that the US has unique problems with its history, problems that serve as excellent fodder for politics that turn on recasting the past as a component of national identity. In a vacuum, I agree with you that having permanent physical reminders of national identity is not itself inherently problematic, but given what statues have been and are used for here, I think the approach needs to be different. Significant numbers of people here think talking about the Founding Fathers having owned slaves is an insult to America, and those same people think that systemic racism is not a problem. To the extent statues in public places are edifices of the System, there are real issues with their continued, unqualified existence. Maybe the answer is better education rather than tearing down or adding heavy disclaimers to statues, but as we know, there are people who think one of America's best qualities is that someone in Arkansas and someone in New York are not guaranteed access to the same things.
On October 15 2020 03:10 IgnE wrote:
On October 15 2020 02:55 farvacola wrote:
My views are similar Mohdoo, statues as civic objects is an outdated concept that needs revisiting. A key component of a rigorous sense of US history (and all history for that matter) is that there are no heroes.


What about aesthetic objects?

I think statues are very powerful as far as aesthetic objects go, but beyond that I am really not sure how to approach their use aside from the monument question.



So was 1619 the true founding of the USA? And if it were, would that qualify as an insult to America?

I don't think it's necessary to play with dates of founding, the important thing is to instill in citizens the idea that doing history right requires a critical perspective that embraces the good and the bad without pretending that the bad is something we can or should ignore. And sure, to the extent there is a school of thought that considers the US an unqualified beacon on the hill, acknowledging this country's deeply hewn inheritance of chattel slavery and its material consequences would certainly be an insult.
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15743 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-14 19:29:49
October 14 2020 19:28 GMT
#54904
On October 15 2020 04:21 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 04:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On October 15 2020 03:07 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 15 2020 02:55 farvacola wrote:
My views are similar Mohdoo, statues as civic objects is an outdated concept that needs revisiting. A key component of a rigorous sense of US history (and all history for that matter) is that there are no heroes.

Maybe you don't need to see people represented by statues as heroes - or even necessarily good people - and the problem is solved. It's precisely because history is not about heroes that removing statues of everyone who doesn't qualify as a great person by today's standard or did things that we would consider shocking makes no sense at all.

I don't think making new statues of people makes a lot of sense either - and it's out of fashion anyway - but walking through Paris and be surrounded by statues of the great people of history is quite wonderful. And they give opportunities to learn and reflect. Many times when I grew up I got curious and learnt about a king, a writer or a scientist because I passed a statue of him or her regularly.


I suppose your childhood curiosities just don't feel remotely important to me. I am totally comfortable carving that entire part of your life out altogether and demonstrating what you have left. Grasping on to that feels weird. If my favorite statue ever made someone uncomfortable in the way people view confederate monuments, I'd say "sure, who gives a shit". I can understand the sentimental value of childhood memories, but I also don't think its productive to pretend it piqued some sort of giant cultural shift.

It's not just childhood memory. It's a huge part if our culture. I am not really in favour of destroying thousand of statues that have a huge artistic, historical and cultural value because someone might get offended by what that person, who lived in a totally different context, with other set of values and an other understanding if the world, did.

Virtually no one is offended by statues of Napoleon just as no french jew is offended by statues of Philippe Le Bel or Louis XIV. Because in the french cultural context that would be absolutely ridiculous.

Personally I find that attitude of judging figure of the past with our set of values and deciding who was a baddy and who was a good guy childish and going against everything history should be. It makes no sense.

I get that the US never solved the problem of slavery and the civil war and as Farcarola pointed out, certain things make sense over there that don't here.



If people aren't bothered, I'm not either. It sounds like the situations between the US and France are totally different. My only point is that when people mourne the loss of luxury, they should consider there are many other luxuries and that sometimes it's ok to toss them in the trash for someone else's benefit, most notably in the context of statues.

Let's say I get 1 unit of pleasure from admiring a statue and someone else gets 1 unit of sadness/stress from it. I can enjoy plenty of other things, but people shouldn't have unpleasant images as a part of their environment. It is a courtesy I am happy to accommodate.

I don't have a clue what kinds of "left wing" statues are in the US, but I'd happily toss them all in the trash if it meant doing the same for all the others in the US.
Elroi
Profile Joined August 2009
Sweden5600 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-14 19:32:45
October 14 2020 19:29 GMT
#54905
On October 15 2020 03:59 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 03:41 Elroi wrote:
On October 15 2020 01:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
On October 14 2020 16:44 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 14 2020 16:00 Silvanel wrote:
On October 14 2020 06:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 14 2020 05:50 Elroi wrote:
I don't get it. It seems to me that there are so many viable ways to attack him. All of this misquoting and intentional misunderstanding just makes mainstream media look like the bad guys and Trump as the paradoxical hero.

On October 14 2020 05:14 Arghmyliver wrote:
On October 14 2020 03:44 Doodsmack wrote:
On October 14 2020 03:04 NewSunshine wrote:
It sounds a little different coming from a leader who has both refused to condemn and encouraged the violent parts of his base. It also sounds different coming from someone who incessantly accuses his opposition of perpetrating election fraud, and who told the Proud Boys to "stand by". So there's some context.


The "stand by" comment was highly suspect but some of this is just liberal media misinformation. For example the Charlottesville comment. Look at what Trump actually said:

Reporter: “Do you think that what you call the alt-left is the same as neo-Nazis?”

Trump: “Those people — all of those people — excuse me, I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups. But not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch. Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of a statue of Robert E. Lee.”

Reporter: “The neo-Nazis started this. They showed up in Charlottesville to protest —”

Trump: “Excuse me, excuse me. They didn’t put themselves — and you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group. Excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”


He first defined the two "sides" as those opposed to taking down the statue and those favoring it. Thus he defined the white supremacists as a subset of one of the two sides. He then said there very fine people on both sides, which is to say that some among the pro-statue side were fine people. That is not the same as saying that some white supremacists are very fine people. If you believe it is the same, you've basically been duped by misinformation. Oh and by the way, he also said this:

I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally.


Robert E Lee was a general in the army of the Confederate States of America who fought to maintain the right to enslave black people.

Napoleon was also a general who fought to maintain the right to enslave black people.

Napoleon never went to war to defend slavery. Lee did. That's extremely different.

Napoleon was kind of a dick, everyone agrees on that but his legacy encompass a lot, lot, lot more than his policies on slavery.

Statues of Lee were erected by white supremacist groups such as the Sister of the Confederacy; there is absolutely no ambiguity over what they are meant to celebrate,

I don't think ANY "fine person" would march to defend a statue of Lee.


I will add that Poland mentions Napoleon in its national anthem (in positive light), his legacy is vast and at least parts of it are very positive.

He is certainly an extremely complex character. But NOBODY looks at a statue of Napoleon and think "fuck yeah, white power". If anything people learn that one of his many flaws as a person were his racial views and one of his biggest crimes his restauration of slavery. But his role in history is soooo much more important than that.

I personally see him as a very negative figure with some contingent positive traits. But he built modern France and inspired generations after him and that's really something worth celebrating. He is a giant in our history.

If on the other hand you erect a statue of Lee and if you go demonstrate to preserve it, you absolutely are making a statement about white supremacy. Lee didn't write the Code Civil, didn't spread enlightenment across Europe and isn't responsible for building most of modern america's institution. His only role in history was to fight for rebels who betrayed the country to protect their rights to enslave people. No "fine person" celebrates that.


Would you oppose the Haitian population in France tearing down Napoleon statues?

What do you think about the statues of the black men who liberated Haiti - and then went for some ethnic cleansing of the white population of the island?

What if I said history is not about heroes and that removing statues of everyone who doesn't qualify as a great person by today's standard or did things that we would consider shocking makes no sense at all?


Then I would be in complete agreement with you. This notion that statues are simply a consecration of individuals is plainly wrong in my eyes. They are part of an intricate cultural fabric (see Biff's post above for an illustration of what I mean).

I'm actually not sure if you're referring to Nèg Mawon or statues of Jean-Jacques Dessalines, Toussaint Louverture (cited by John Brown as inspiration), or something else though?

I was thinking of Dessalines.
"To all eSports fans, I want to be remembered as a progamer who can make something out of nothing, and someone who always does his best. I think that is the right way of living, and I'm always doing my best to follow that." - Jaedong. /watch?v=jfghAzJqAp0
Biff The Understudy
Profile Blog Joined February 2008
France8082 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-14 19:36:50
October 14 2020 19:33 GMT
#54906
On October 15 2020 04:28 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 04:21 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 15 2020 04:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On October 15 2020 03:07 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 15 2020 02:55 farvacola wrote:
My views are similar Mohdoo, statues as civic objects is an outdated concept that needs revisiting. A key component of a rigorous sense of US history (and all history for that matter) is that there are no heroes.

Maybe you don't need to see people represented by statues as heroes - or even necessarily good people - and the problem is solved. It's precisely because history is not about heroes that removing statues of everyone who doesn't qualify as a great person by today's standard or did things that we would consider shocking makes no sense at all.

I don't think making new statues of people makes a lot of sense either - and it's out of fashion anyway - but walking through Paris and be surrounded by statues of the great people of history is quite wonderful. And they give opportunities to learn and reflect. Many times when I grew up I got curious and learnt about a king, a writer or a scientist because I passed a statue of him or her regularly.


I suppose your childhood curiosities just don't feel remotely important to me. I am totally comfortable carving that entire part of your life out altogether and demonstrating what you have left. Grasping on to that feels weird. If my favorite statue ever made someone uncomfortable in the way people view confederate monuments, I'd say "sure, who gives a shit". I can understand the sentimental value of childhood memories, but I also don't think its productive to pretend it piqued some sort of giant cultural shift.

It's not just childhood memory. It's a huge part if our culture. I am not really in favour of destroying thousand of statues that have a huge artistic, historical and cultural value because someone might get offended by what that person, who lived in a totally different context, with other set of values and an other understanding if the world, did.

Virtually no one is offended by statues of Napoleon just as no french jew is offended by statues of Philippe Le Bel or Louis XIV. Because in the french cultural context that would be absolutely ridiculous.

Personally I find that attitude of judging figure of the past with our set of values and deciding who was a baddy and who was a good guy childish and going against everything history should be. It makes no sense.

I get that the US never solved the problem of slavery and the civil war and as Farcarola pointed out, certain things make sense over there that don't here.



If people aren't bothered, I'm not either. It sounds like the situations between the US and France are totally different. My only point is that when people mourne the loss of luxury, they should consider there are many other luxuries and that sometimes it's ok to toss them in the trash for someone else's benefit, most notably in the context of statues.

Let's say I get 1 unit of pleasure from admiring a statue and someone else gets 1 unit of sadness/stress from it. I can enjoy plenty of other things, but people shouldn't have unpleasant images as a part of their environment. It is a courtesy I am happy to accommodate.

I don't have a clue what kinds of "left wing" statues are in the US, but I'd happily toss them all in the trash if it meant doing the same for all the others in the US.

I'm sure you know that it's not about pleasure and sadness. That's just those statues are here, they represents the people that made our nation, nobody ever claimed they were good guys, because that's not what history is about.

And none of these statues is there to celebrate racism or oppression - even if some of those people did terrible things - but just to remember the men and women who built the nation we live in and invite us to think about them, learn about their achievements - and also their faults - to better understand ourselves.

Again, terribly different context that the statues of confederate generals.

On that note, going to bed. Good night.
The fellow who is out to burn things up is the counterpart of the fool who thinks he can save the world. The world needs neither to be burned up nor to be saved. The world is, we are. Transients, if we buck it; here to stay if we accept it. ~H.Miller
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23957 Posts
October 14 2020 19:39 GMT
#54907
On October 15 2020 04:29 Elroi wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 03:59 GreenHorizons wrote:
On October 15 2020 03:41 Elroi wrote:
On October 15 2020 01:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
On October 14 2020 16:44 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 14 2020 16:00 Silvanel wrote:
On October 14 2020 06:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 14 2020 05:50 Elroi wrote:
I don't get it. It seems to me that there are so many viable ways to attack him. All of this misquoting and intentional misunderstanding just makes mainstream media look like the bad guys and Trump as the paradoxical hero.

On October 14 2020 05:14 Arghmyliver wrote:
On October 14 2020 03:44 Doodsmack wrote:
[quote]

The "stand by" comment was highly suspect but some of this is just liberal media misinformation. For example the Charlottesville comment. Look at what Trump actually said:

[quote]

He first defined the two "sides" as those opposed to taking down the statue and those favoring it. Thus he defined the white supremacists as a subset of one of the two sides. He then said there very fine people on both sides, which is to say that some among the pro-statue side were fine people. That is not the same as saying that some white supremacists are very fine people. If you believe it is the same, you've basically been duped by misinformation. Oh and by the way, he also said this:

[quote]


Robert E Lee was a general in the army of the Confederate States of America who fought to maintain the right to enslave black people.

Napoleon was also a general who fought to maintain the right to enslave black people.

Napoleon never went to war to defend slavery. Lee did. That's extremely different.

Napoleon was kind of a dick, everyone agrees on that but his legacy encompass a lot, lot, lot more than his policies on slavery.

Statues of Lee were erected by white supremacist groups such as the Sister of the Confederacy; there is absolutely no ambiguity over what they are meant to celebrate,

I don't think ANY "fine person" would march to defend a statue of Lee.


I will add that Poland mentions Napoleon in its national anthem (in positive light), his legacy is vast and at least parts of it are very positive.

He is certainly an extremely complex character. But NOBODY looks at a statue of Napoleon and think "fuck yeah, white power". If anything people learn that one of his many flaws as a person were his racial views and one of his biggest crimes his restauration of slavery. But his role in history is soooo much more important than that.

I personally see him as a very negative figure with some contingent positive traits. But he built modern France and inspired generations after him and that's really something worth celebrating. He is a giant in our history.

If on the other hand you erect a statue of Lee and if you go demonstrate to preserve it, you absolutely are making a statement about white supremacy. Lee didn't write the Code Civil, didn't spread enlightenment across Europe and isn't responsible for building most of modern america's institution. His only role in history was to fight for rebels who betrayed the country to protect their rights to enslave people. No "fine person" celebrates that.


Would you oppose the Haitian population in France tearing down Napoleon statues?

What do you think about the statues of the black men who liberated Haiti - and then went for some ethnic cleansing of the white population of the island?

What if I said history is not about heroes and that removing statues of everyone who doesn't qualify as a great person by today's standard or did things that we would consider shocking makes no sense at all?


Then I would be in complete agreement with you.

Show nested quote +
I'm actually not sure if you're referring to Nèg Mawon or statues of Jean-Jacques Dessalines, Toussaint Louverture (cited by John Brown as inspiration), or something else though?

I was thinking of Dessalines.

Would you apply that to Robert Lee, Andrew Jackson, and George Washington as well? In other words, would you oppose people wanting to remove those statues (and probably put them in museums)?
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Artisreal
Profile Joined June 2009
Germany9235 Posts
October 14 2020 20:31 GMT
#54908
On October 15 2020 03:41 Elroi wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 01:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
On October 14 2020 16:44 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 14 2020 16:00 Silvanel wrote:
On October 14 2020 06:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 14 2020 05:50 Elroi wrote:
I don't get it. It seems to me that there are so many viable ways to attack him. All of this misquoting and intentional misunderstanding just makes mainstream media look like the bad guys and Trump as the paradoxical hero.

On October 14 2020 05:14 Arghmyliver wrote:
On October 14 2020 03:44 Doodsmack wrote:
On October 14 2020 03:04 NewSunshine wrote:
It sounds a little different coming from a leader who has both refused to condemn and encouraged the violent parts of his base. It also sounds different coming from someone who incessantly accuses his opposition of perpetrating election fraud, and who told the Proud Boys to "stand by". So there's some context.


The "stand by" comment was highly suspect but some of this is just liberal media misinformation. For example the Charlottesville comment. Look at what Trump actually said:

Reporter: “Do you think that what you call the alt-left is the same as neo-Nazis?”

Trump: “Those people — all of those people — excuse me, I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups. But not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch. Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of a statue of Robert E. Lee.”

Reporter: “The neo-Nazis started this. They showed up in Charlottesville to protest —”

Trump: “Excuse me, excuse me. They didn’t put themselves — and you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group. Excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”


He first defined the two "sides" as those opposed to taking down the statue and those favoring it. Thus he defined the white supremacists as a subset of one of the two sides. He then said there very fine people on both sides, which is to say that some among the pro-statue side were fine people. That is not the same as saying that some white supremacists are very fine people. If you believe it is the same, you've basically been duped by misinformation. Oh and by the way, he also said this:

I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally.


Robert E Lee was a general in the army of the Confederate States of America who fought to maintain the right to enslave black people.

Napoleon was also a general who fought to maintain the right to enslave black people.

Napoleon never went to war to defend slavery. Lee did. That's extremely different.

Napoleon was kind of a dick, everyone agrees on that but his legacy encompass a lot, lot, lot more than his policies on slavery.

Statues of Lee were erected by white supremacist groups such as the Sister of the Confederacy; there is absolutely no ambiguity over what they are meant to celebrate,

I don't think ANY "fine person" would march to defend a statue of Lee.


I will add that Poland mentions Napoleon in its national anthem (in positive light), his legacy is vast and at least parts of it are very positive.

He is certainly an extremely complex character. But NOBODY looks at a statue of Napoleon and think "fuck yeah, white power". If anything people learn that one of his many flaws as a person were his racial views and one of his biggest crimes his restauration of slavery. But his role in history is soooo much more important than that.

I personally see him as a very negative figure with some contingent positive traits. But he built modern France and inspired generations after him and that's really something worth celebrating. He is a giant in our history.

If on the other hand you erect a statue of Lee and if you go demonstrate to preserve it, you absolutely are making a statement about white supremacy. Lee didn't write the Code Civil, didn't spread enlightenment across Europe and isn't responsible for building most of modern america's institution. His only role in history was to fight for rebels who betrayed the country to protect their rights to enslave people. No "fine person" celebrates that.


Would you oppose the Haitian population in France tearing down Napoleon statues?

What do you think about the statues of the black men who liberated Haiti - and then went for some ethnic cleansing of the white population of the island?

That sounds like a top notch job on conservation, on letting the good old times return. Conservatives would be proud.
passive quaranstream fan
Shingi11
Profile Joined May 2016
290 Posts
October 14 2020 20:34 GMT
#54909
538 just flipped Georgia into the Biden column today. You would think with how bad partnership has gotten some of there ruby red states would never vote for Biden. Might see Trump finally fall to single didgets this week.
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18857 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-14 20:51:26
October 14 2020 20:49 GMT
#54910
Here's a nice long story about what the conservative powers that be are doing to disrupt the election and support Trump. They are becoming surprisingly more frank it seems, and there are videos!

+ Show Spoiler +
As the presidential campaign entered its final stages, a fresh-faced Republican activist named Charlie Kirk stepped into the spotlight at a closed-door gathering of leading conservatives and shared his delight about an impact of the coronavirus pandemic: the disruption of America’s universities. So many campuses had closed, he said, that up to a half-million left-leaning students probably would not vote.

“So, please keep the campuses closed,” Kirk, 26, said in August as the audience cheered, according to video of the event obtained by The Washington Post. “Like, it’s a great thing.”

The gathering in Northern Virginia was organized by the Council for National Policy, a little-known group that has served for decades as a hub for a nationwide network of conservative activists and the donors who support them. Members include Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, and Leonard Leo, an outside adviser to President Trump who has helped raise hundreds of millions of dollars from undisclosed donors to support conservative causes and the nominations of conservative federal judges.

Videos provided to The Post — covering dozens of hours of CNP meetings over three days in February and three in August — offer an inside view of participants’ obsessions and fears at a pivotal moment in the conservative movement. The videos, recorded by CNP to share with its members, show influential activists discussing election tactics, amplifying conspiracy theories and describing much of America in dark and apocalyptic terms.

“This is a spiritual battle we are in. This is good versus evil,” CNP’s executive committee president, Bill Walton, said on Aug. 21, addressing attendees at the Ritz-Carlton in Pentagon City. “We have to do everything we can to win.”

Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, told attendees that same day that the left is “war-gaming” a plan to delay the election tally until Jan. 20, 2021, and enable House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to become acting president. “This is kind of like crazy talk” among political people, Fitton said. But he added: “This is not an insignificant concern.”

Expressing concern about voter fraud and disenfranchisement, Fitton called on the audience to find a way to prevent mail-in ballots from being sent to voters. “We need to stop those ballots from going out, and I want the lawyers here to tell us what to do,” said Fitton, whose organization is a tax-exempt charity. “But this is a crisis that we’re not prepared for. I mean, our side is not prepared for.”

In an interview with The Post, Fitton elaborated on his remarks. “The left has war-gamed this out,” Fitton said. “And it could cause civil war.”

Brent Bozell, a CNP executive committee member and founder of the Media Research Center, another tax-exempt charity, told attendees at one of the August sessions that he believes the left plans to “steal this election.”

“And if they get away with that, what happens?” he said. “Democracy is finished because they usher in totalitarianism.”
Bozell did not respond to messages seeking comment.

At the February meetings, attendees discussed plans for seeking an advantage in the upcoming vote. Two said the right will begin “ballot harvesting,” a controversial technique that involves the collection and delivery of sealed absentee ballots from churches and other institutions.

At the time of the meeting, Trump, his campaign officials and other Republicans were blasting the practice as an abuse by Democrats. “GET RID OF BALLOT HARVESTING, IT IS RAMPANT WITH FRAUD,” Trump tweeted this spring.
But Ralph Reed, chairman of the nonprofit Faith & Freedom Coalition, told the CNP audience that conservatives are embracing the technique this year.

“And so our organization is going to be harvesting ballots in churches,” he said. “We’re going to be specifically going in not only to White evangelical churches, but into Hispanic and Asian churches, and collecting those ballots.”

Reed did not respond to requests for comment.

J. Christian Adams, a former Justice Department official and the president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, a charity, described mail-in voting as “the number one left-wing agenda.”

Adams urged the activists not to worry about the criticism that might come their way. “Be not afraid of the accusations that you’re a voter suppressor, you’re a racist and so forth,” Adams said.

In response to questions, Adams wrote in an email: “I stand by what I said because it is accurate.”

The partisan commentary and election-related discussions captured on the videos involved members of an array of nonprofit organizations, including tax-exempt charities. In exchange for the right to accept tax-exempt donations, charities are prohibited from actively supporting political candidates or working in coordination on candidates’ behalf.

Such laws are rarely enforced, in part because of murkiness about what constitutes a violation, and because of the complex interactions between some charities and nonprofits known as “social welfare” groups, tax specialists said. Social welfare groups are permitted to engage in lobbying and advocacy but must devote less than half of their resources to political activity. An individual may serve as a leader of both a charity and an affiliated social welfare group.

Some of the sessions at the CNP conferences are designated as run by CNP Action, a social welfare affiliate that shares leaders with CNP.

Two tax law specialists who viewed hours of video at The Post’s request said some of the remarks and planning on the videos could be improper for the groups that are registered with the IRS as charities.

“What was jarring was that it was pretty clear to any reasonable observer that the entire purpose of the panel was to help the Republican Party win in November, up and down the ticket,” said Roger Colinvaux, director of law and public policy at Catholic University’s law school, referring to a panel about health care.

Marcus Owens, a lawyer who led the Exempt Organizations Division at the IRS from 1990 to 2000, told The Post that participants’ comments on the videos raise potential issues of compliance with election laws and charity rules. “I’ve never seen anything like it on videotape and live,” Owens said, referring to the overt partisan coordination among the nonprofit leaders. “It’s almost like a movie.”

A spokesman for Kirk said he was there representing himself, not in his capacity as the leader of Turning Point USA, a prominent conservative youth organization based in Phoenix.

In an interview, Bob McEwen, CNP’s executive director, said the Washington-based organization complies with IRS regulations and does not itself “do anything.”

“CNP doesn’t do ad campaigns. It doesn’t do brochures. It is a meeting of leaders,” said McEwen, who is also president of CNP Action, the related social welfare group. “Anything that’s done is done by the membership, not by the Council for National Policy.”

The sessions are closed to the public, and participants are told not to talk to the media about the group or its proceedings. “It absolutely could be open to the media, except that the media is known to be left, and then creates a distorted vision of their conversations,” McEwen said.

The Council for National Policy was launched during the Reagan administration by figures in the religious right to bring more focus and force to conservative advocacy.

It has attracted conservative luminaries and front-line activists from across the country, according to internal directories obtained by The Post. In the years leading up to Trump’s election, members included Stephen K. Bannon and Kellyanne Conway. The videos make clear that CNP maintains strong links to the White House.

Some participants spoke of a CNP-associated delegation that meets weekly with White House officials. They said the group, the Conservative Action Project, has helped to choose loyalists to run federal agencies and coordinate outside messages with nonprofit organizations to support administration policies and leaders.

“It’s kind of this little secretive huddle that meets every Wednesday morning,” Paul Teller, a Trump deputy and director of strategic initiatives for Vice President Pence, told the audience in August.

In February, during three days of meetings in Southern California, a CNP member named Rachel Bovard described the Conservative Action Project’s influence in helping the Trump administration select political appointees for the executive branch. She said the Conservative Action Project coordinated closely on these and other efforts with CNP members and the Conservative Partnership Institute, a tax-exempt charity run by former senator and tea party leader Jim DeMint of South Carolina.

“We work very closely — CAP does and then we at CPI also — with the Office of Presidential Personnel at the White House to try and get good conservatives in the positions because we see what happens when we don’t vet these people,” she said.
Bovard cited as examples two figures who testified against Trump last year in the House impeachment hearings: Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, former director for European affairs at the National Security Council, and Marie Yovanovitch, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine.

“All these people that led the impeachment against President Trump shouldn’t have been there in the first place,” Bovard told the CNP audience. “We want to prevent that from happening.”

In addition, Bovard described Ginni Thomas as a crucial link to the White House. “She is one of the most powerful and fierce women in Washington,” Bovard said. “She is really the tip of the spear in these efforts.”

Bovard and Thomas did not respond to requests for comment.

A White House spokesman said Teller declined to comment.

In another February session, Kelly Shackelford was introduced as CNP vice president, chairman of CNP Action and leader of the First Liberty Institute, another organization registered as a tax-exempt charity.

He bragged about extensive behind-the-scenes coordination by his group and other nonprofit organizations to influence the White House selection of federal judges.

“Some of us literally opened a whole operation on judicial nominations and vetting,” he said. “We poured millions of dollars into this to make sure the president has good information, he picks the best judges.”

Shackelford said he is among the nonprofit leaders now coordinating with the White House to support the Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to fill the seat previously held by Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

In an interview, Shackelford said he is focused on educating Americans and providing information that will help the White House choose judges who interpret the Constitution in a literal way.

Speakers at the August conference touched on many of the cultural issues absorbing conservatives today — sometimes with more edge and heat than they do in their typical public remarks.

In one of the sessions, author and former professor Carol Swain, speaking on a panel about race relations, said that “White people have lost their voice in America.”

She likened the Black Lives Matter movement to the Ku Klux Klan. “The Democratic Party is using Black Lives Matter and antifa the same way they used the KKK,” said Swain, who is Black. “They created the KKK. It was their terrorist wing to terrorize everyone.”

In response to questions, Swain stood by her remarks.

Some participants bridled at pandemic restrictions — and the video showed that many did not wear masks.

“You will need to wear masks in the public part of the hotel but not here,” Walton, the CNP president, announced to applause.

“Yeah,” Walton said. “That’s great!”

A state mandate in Virginia generally requires masks at indoor public settings.

On Aug. 21, in a rare CNP open session, Trump addressed the audience, which included acting homeland security secretary Chad Wolf. Later that day, Teller, the White House deputy, gave a high-spirited shout-out from the front of a conference room to Wolf’s team.

“I don’t know if you got to know Secretary Wolf’s team, sitting in the corner, they’re just a bunch of wingers. That’s like the most conservative table in the entire room, is Secretary Wolf’s team,” Teller gushed. “Great, great, great secretary.”
In contrast to his ebullience, some speakers at the meeting raised doubts about Trump’s prospects in November.
Nancy Schulze, a CNP member and co-chair of the Congressional Prayer Caucus Wives Council, said the lack of a clear health-care plan from Trump poses a “huge vulnerability” for the president.

“If we don’t get this right in the next 75 days, there is a question as to whether we’re going to prevail at all within the presidential campaign, or the House or the Senate,” she said.

Others described an elaborate social media and advertising campaign by a collection of nonprofits — some of them tax-exempt charities — to convince voters this fall that a Republican free-market approach to health care would offer more choices.

Organizers showed ads that feature doctors in white lab coats with stethoscopes. They told the CNP audience that market research found that featuring doctors engenders trust among voters.

“And so I remind people that what we’re trying to do is put on theater here,” said Alfredo Ortiz, president of Job Creators Network and chief executive of its foundation. “It’s the stage. It’s the script and the actors.”
Ortiz did not respond to requests for comment.

Among those involved are former House speaker Newt Gingrich and former health and human services secretary Tom Price. Organizers are asking allies in Congress to introduce a resolution that echoes the policy themes, such as the notion of personalized health care, Price told the crowd.

“It’s urgent, but it’s not too late,” Price said.


Videos show closed-door sessions of leading conservative activists: ‘Be not afraid of the accusations that you’re a voter suppressor’
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
Elroi
Profile Joined August 2009
Sweden5600 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-14 21:02:38
October 14 2020 20:59 GMT
#54911
On October 15 2020 04:39 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 04:29 Elroi wrote:
On October 15 2020 03:59 GreenHorizons wrote:
On October 15 2020 03:41 Elroi wrote:
On October 15 2020 01:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
On October 14 2020 16:44 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 14 2020 16:00 Silvanel wrote:
On October 14 2020 06:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 14 2020 05:50 Elroi wrote:
I don't get it. It seems to me that there are so many viable ways to attack him. All of this misquoting and intentional misunderstanding just makes mainstream media look like the bad guys and Trump as the paradoxical hero.

On October 14 2020 05:14 Arghmyliver wrote:
[quote]

Robert E Lee was a general in the army of the Confederate States of America who fought to maintain the right to enslave black people.

Napoleon was also a general who fought to maintain the right to enslave black people.

Napoleon never went to war to defend slavery. Lee did. That's extremely different.

Napoleon was kind of a dick, everyone agrees on that but his legacy encompass a lot, lot, lot more than his policies on slavery.

Statues of Lee were erected by white supremacist groups such as the Sister of the Confederacy; there is absolutely no ambiguity over what they are meant to celebrate,

I don't think ANY "fine person" would march to defend a statue of Lee.


I will add that Poland mentions Napoleon in its national anthem (in positive light), his legacy is vast and at least parts of it are very positive.

He is certainly an extremely complex character. But NOBODY looks at a statue of Napoleon and think "fuck yeah, white power". If anything people learn that one of his many flaws as a person were his racial views and one of his biggest crimes his restauration of slavery. But his role in history is soooo much more important than that.

I personally see him as a very negative figure with some contingent positive traits. But he built modern France and inspired generations after him and that's really something worth celebrating. He is a giant in our history.

If on the other hand you erect a statue of Lee and if you go demonstrate to preserve it, you absolutely are making a statement about white supremacy. Lee didn't write the Code Civil, didn't spread enlightenment across Europe and isn't responsible for building most of modern america's institution. His only role in history was to fight for rebels who betrayed the country to protect their rights to enslave people. No "fine person" celebrates that.


Would you oppose the Haitian population in France tearing down Napoleon statues?

What do you think about the statues of the black men who liberated Haiti - and then went for some ethnic cleansing of the white population of the island?

What if I said history is not about heroes and that removing statues of everyone who doesn't qualify as a great person by today's standard or did things that we would consider shocking makes no sense at all?


Then I would be in complete agreement with you.

I'm actually not sure if you're referring to Nèg Mawon or statues of Jean-Jacques Dessalines, Toussaint Louverture (cited by John Brown as inspiration), or something else though?

I was thinking of Dessalines.

Would you apply that to Robert Lee, Andrew Jackson, and George Washington as well? In other words, would you oppose people wanting to remove those statues (and probably put them in museums)?

I think I would. Although in the case of Robert E. Lee I don't know enough of the particular circumstances to say for sure. But in general I strongly dislike this particular branch of cancel culture. If it isn't literally something like Stalin statues in eastern Europe or Hitler statues I think statues generally should stay where they are.

1. Statues are part of a cultural fabric that is much greater than the simple consecration of the particular historical individual (basically what Biff has been saying in a couple of posts).
2. The almost "hygienic" approach to history supported by people who want to take down statues are fostering a way to look at history in a much too simplified way; as a simplistic battle between good and evil. This makes it impossible to actually learn from history or get any new perspectives on the present.

On October 15 2020 04:21 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 04:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On October 15 2020 03:07 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 15 2020 02:55 farvacola wrote:
My views are similar Mohdoo, statues as civic objects is an outdated concept that needs revisiting. A key component of a rigorous sense of US history (and all history for that matter) is that there are no heroes.

Maybe you don't need to see people represented by statues as heroes - or even necessarily good people - and the problem is solved. It's precisely because history is not about heroes that removing statues of everyone who doesn't qualify as a great person by today's standard or did things that we would consider shocking makes no sense at all.

I don't think making new statues of people makes a lot of sense either - and it's out of fashion anyway - but walking through Paris and be surrounded by statues of the great people of history is quite wonderful. And they give opportunities to learn and reflect. Many times when I grew up I got curious and learnt about a king, a writer or a scientist because I passed a statue of him or her regularly.


I suppose your childhood curiosities just don't feel remotely important to me. I am totally comfortable carving that entire part of your life out altogether and demonstrating what you have left. Grasping on to that feels weird. If my favorite statue ever made someone uncomfortable in the way people view confederate monuments, I'd say "sure, who gives a shit". I can understand the sentimental value of childhood memories, but I also don't think its productive to pretend it piqued some sort of giant cultural shift.

Virtually no one is offended by statues of Napoleon just as no french jew is offended by statues of Philippe Le Bel or Louis XIV. Because in the french cultural context that would be absolutely ridiculous. People would literally laugh at you. Because no one in his right mind would EVER think that the statue of Napoleon is meant to celebrate his restauration of slavery in Haiti or even has anything to do with race whatsoever - and also because the dude was born in the XVIIIth century and well, people were very different.

Just you wait.
"To all eSports fans, I want to be remembered as a progamer who can make something out of nothing, and someone who always does his best. I think that is the right way of living, and I'm always doing my best to follow that." - Jaedong. /watch?v=jfghAzJqAp0
IgnE
Profile Joined November 2010
United States7681 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-14 21:11:34
October 14 2020 21:09 GMT
#54912
On October 15 2020 04:26 farvacola wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 04:12 IgnE wrote:
On October 15 2020 03:24 farvacola wrote:
On October 15 2020 03:07 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 15 2020 02:55 farvacola wrote:
My views are similar Mohdoo, statues as civic objects is an outdated concept that needs revisiting. A key component of a rigorous sense of US history (and all history for that matter) is that there are no heroes.

Maybe you don't need to see people represented by statues as heroes - or even necessarily good people - and the problem is solved. It's precisely because history is not about heroes that removing statues of everyone who doesn't qualify as a great person by today's standard or did things that we would consider shocking makes no sense at all.

I don't think making new statues of people makes a lot of sense either - and it's out of fashion anyway - but walking through Paris and be surrounded by statues of the great people of history is quite wonderful. And they give opportunities to learn and reflect. Many times when I grew up I got curious and learnt about a king, a writer or a scientist because I passed a statue of him or her regularly.

This raises an important point that lies at the base of the notion that the US has unique problems with its history, problems that serve as excellent fodder for politics that turn on recasting the past as a component of national identity. In a vacuum, I agree with you that having permanent physical reminders of national identity is not itself inherently problematic, but given what statues have been and are used for here, I think the approach needs to be different. Significant numbers of people here think talking about the Founding Fathers having owned slaves is an insult to America, and those same people think that systemic racism is not a problem. To the extent statues in public places are edifices of the System, there are real issues with their continued, unqualified existence. Maybe the answer is better education rather than tearing down or adding heavy disclaimers to statues, but as we know, there are people who think one of America's best qualities is that someone in Arkansas and someone in New York are not guaranteed access to the same things.
On October 15 2020 03:10 IgnE wrote:
On October 15 2020 02:55 farvacola wrote:
My views are similar Mohdoo, statues as civic objects is an outdated concept that needs revisiting. A key component of a rigorous sense of US history (and all history for that matter) is that there are no heroes.


What about aesthetic objects?

I think statues are very powerful as far as aesthetic objects go, but beyond that I am really not sure how to approach their use aside from the monument question.



So was 1619 the true founding of the USA? And if it were, would that qualify as an insult to America?

I don't think it's necessary to play with dates of founding, the important thing is to instill in citizens the idea that doing history right requires a critical perspective that embraces the good and the bad without pretending that the bad is something we can or should ignore. And sure, to the extent there is a school of thought that considers the US an unqualified beacon on the hill, acknowledging this country's deeply hewn inheritance of chattel slavery and its material consequences would certainly be an insult.


I agree about instilling critical perspective building. I am not sure how to implement that, however, at the public school, and substituting one story about being formed in irredeemable darkness and sin for another story about being a shining beacon on a hill doesn’t seem that great. It’s the “danger of a single story” and all that. At what point do kids have the time, inclination, and teachers to tackle that? For my part, I remember AP US history at 16 being pretty open about slavery and primary sources and all of that. Before that, not so much. And that was relatively a long time ago now.
The unrealistic sound of these propositions is indicative, not of their utopian character, but of the strength of the forces which prevent their realization.
Doodsmack
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States7224 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-14 21:14:49
October 14 2020 21:11 GMT
#54913
On October 15 2020 02:22 Nouar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 01:48 Danglars wrote:
On October 15 2020 01:32 Doodsmack wrote:
Interesting to see that resistance Twitter, joined by Facebook and Twitter themselves, is being so quick to bury this NY Post story about Hunter Biden's emails. One resistance journalist, Maggie Haberman, did so much as link to the story and she is now excommunicated as "MAGA Haberman." WaPo is pretending to have a policy against publishing leaked materials close to an election (lol):



Facebook exec:



Needless to say, none of these standards would be applied to the Trump family (see leaked tax returns).


That’s a pretty stupid way to make a double standard. These guys circulated the pee tape story. It only goes in one direction. Either you publish with disclaimers about verifiability, or suppress until you find it. The suppression is way more interesting than the story itself, because you do have to be skeptical about the story itself.

About that story, I took a source that you can hardly call left-wing : Fox news.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-ukraine-burisma-adviser-email

That story says that Biden met with Burisma's #3, which I'm sure the Trump org never did, Trump never met anyone related to his children's business in Mar-a-Lago or elsewhere, for sure xD
No seriously, it's not that good but there's no indication of anything further than a meeting. The emails do not seem to mention any policy discussion or anything.

Show nested quote +
“Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together. It’s realty [sic] an honor and pleasure,” the email reads.

An earlier email from May 2014 also shows Pozharskyi, reportedly Burisma’s No. 3 exec, asking Hunter for “advice on how you could use your influence” on the company’s behalf.


They do not quote answers from Hunter either, saying that he would use that influence. THAT would be problematic.

The next bit is more interesting :

Show nested quote +
The message had the subject line “urgent issue” and was also sent to Hunter Biden’s business partner, Devon Archer, who also sat on the Burisma board at the time.

Pozharskyi said that “the representatives of new authorities in power tend to quite aggressively approach N. Z. unofficially with the aim to obtain cash from him.”

N.Z. isn’t identified in the email but appears to be a reference to Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky, whose first name is a Ukrainian version of “Nicholas.”

'Concrete actions'
When the alleged shakedown failed, “they proceeded with concrete actions” in the form of “one or more pretrial proceedings,” Pozharskyi wrote.

“We urgently need your advice on how you could use your influence to convey a message / signal, etc .to stop what we consider to be politically motivated actions,” he added.

Hunter Biden responded by saying he was with Archer in Doha, Qatar, and asked for more information about “the formal (if any) accusations being made against Burisma.”

“Who is ultimately behind these attacks on the company? Who in the current interim government could put an end to such attacks?” he added.


So Shokin was removed after pressure from Biden *AND THE WHOLE EU* because it seems he was a corrupt piece of shit. This exchange does not exactly go against that assertion, and does not mean anything improper happened. Hunter asked what formal accusations were being made, and who was behind it. After what looks clearly like corruption :
Show nested quote +
“the representatives of new authorities in power tend to quite aggressively approach N. Z. unofficially with the aim to obtain cash from him.”
When the alleged shakedown failed, “they proceeded with concrete actions” in the form of “one or more pretrial proceedings,” Pozharskyi wrote.


So, worst case, there was some access to the higher levels of the executive. Was that access used for anything corrupt ? It does not really look like so. On the contrary, it provides further proof to what the EU was complaining about and why they wanted that prosecutor fired.

It looks like a huge bunch of nothing to me. Especially if you compare to Trump getting millions in donations, selling access to Mar-a-lago, and giving government position to those same guys in their own field they have incentives in.

I won't even touch the raunchy and drug-related videos of Hunter, that has no relation to his father.



The story stops every time *before* any answer by Hunter that could be problematic and show corruption. Burisma clearly tried to leverage influence, but there doesn't seem to be anything inside that shows Hunter going through with that approach. So either they are keeping the juicy bits that could do damage until the last moment (when ? 3 weeks to go), either they don't have that information and are trying what they can to rile people up with partial bits meaning nothing. We're talking Giuliani, lol.


The article is from this morning. Further articles by Fox News that I tried to find this evening have... even less information, and try to keep things blurry to give the appearance of impropriety a bit more. The wordings mainly, and they include mostly reactions by republicans and Trump-world, which are expected to be overblown and not the hard facts of what was disclosed.


I suspect that if Don Jr was hired to the board of a Ukrainian energy company, and then arranged a meeting with his father, and then his father pressured Ukraine for action, you would be saying "this should be criminally investigated." Interestingly enough, the FBI has apparently seized these emails and videos as part of some sort of investigation.
Shingi11
Profile Joined May 2016
290 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-14 21:48:21
October 14 2020 21:11 GMT
#54914
On October 15 2020 05:49 farvacola wrote:
Here's a nice long story about what the conservative powers that be are doing to disrupt the election and support Trump. They are becoming surprisingly more frank it seems, and there are videos!

+ Show Spoiler +
As the presidential campaign entered its final stages, a fresh-faced Republican activist named Charlie Kirk stepped into the spotlight at a closed-door gathering of leading conservatives and shared his delight about an impact of the coronavirus pandemic: the disruption of America’s universities. So many campuses had closed, he said, that up to a half-million left-leaning students probably would not vote.

“So, please keep the campuses closed,” Kirk, 26, said in August as the audience cheered, according to video of the event obtained by The Washington Post. “Like, it’s a great thing.”

The gathering in Northern Virginia was organized by the Council for National Policy, a little-known group that has served for decades as a hub for a nationwide network of conservative activists and the donors who support them. Members include Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, and Leonard Leo, an outside adviser to President Trump who has helped raise hundreds of millions of dollars from undisclosed donors to support conservative causes and the nominations of conservative federal judges.

Videos provided to The Post — covering dozens of hours of CNP meetings over three days in February and three in August — offer an inside view of participants’ obsessions and fears at a pivotal moment in the conservative movement. The videos, recorded by CNP to share with its members, show influential activists discussing election tactics, amplifying conspiracy theories and describing much of America in dark and apocalyptic terms.

“This is a spiritual battle we are in. This is good versus evil,” CNP’s executive committee president, Bill Walton, said on Aug. 21, addressing attendees at the Ritz-Carlton in Pentagon City. “We have to do everything we can to win.”

Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, told attendees that same day that the left is “war-gaming” a plan to delay the election tally until Jan. 20, 2021, and enable House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to become acting president. “This is kind of like crazy talk” among political people, Fitton said. But he added: “This is not an insignificant concern.”

Expressing concern about voter fraud and disenfranchisement, Fitton called on the audience to find a way to prevent mail-in ballots from being sent to voters. “We need to stop those ballots from going out, and I want the lawyers here to tell us what to do,” said Fitton, whose organization is a tax-exempt charity. “But this is a crisis that we’re not prepared for. I mean, our side is not prepared for.”

In an interview with The Post, Fitton elaborated on his remarks. “The left has war-gamed this out,” Fitton said. “And it could cause civil war.”

Brent Bozell, a CNP executive committee member and founder of the Media Research Center, another tax-exempt charity, told attendees at one of the August sessions that he believes the left plans to “steal this election.”

“And if they get away with that, what happens?” he said. “Democracy is finished because they usher in totalitarianism.”
Bozell did not respond to messages seeking comment.

At the February meetings, attendees discussed plans for seeking an advantage in the upcoming vote. Two said the right will begin “ballot harvesting,” a controversial technique that involves the collection and delivery of sealed absentee ballots from churches and other institutions.

At the time of the meeting, Trump, his campaign officials and other Republicans were blasting the practice as an abuse by Democrats. “GET RID OF BALLOT HARVESTING, IT IS RAMPANT WITH FRAUD,” Trump tweeted this spring.
But Ralph Reed, chairman of the nonprofit Faith & Freedom Coalition, told the CNP audience that conservatives are embracing the technique this year.

“And so our organization is going to be harvesting ballots in churches,” he said. “We’re going to be specifically going in not only to White evangelical churches, but into Hispanic and Asian churches, and collecting those ballots.”

Reed did not respond to requests for comment.

J. Christian Adams, a former Justice Department official and the president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, a charity, described mail-in voting as “the number one left-wing agenda.”

Adams urged the activists not to worry about the criticism that might come their way. “Be not afraid of the accusations that you’re a voter suppressor, you’re a racist and so forth,” Adams said.

In response to questions, Adams wrote in an email: “I stand by what I said because it is accurate.”

The partisan commentary and election-related discussions captured on the videos involved members of an array of nonprofit organizations, including tax-exempt charities. In exchange for the right to accept tax-exempt donations, charities are prohibited from actively supporting political candidates or working in coordination on candidates’ behalf.

Such laws are rarely enforced, in part because of murkiness about what constitutes a violation, and because of the complex interactions between some charities and nonprofits known as “social welfare” groups, tax specialists said. Social welfare groups are permitted to engage in lobbying and advocacy but must devote less than half of their resources to political activity. An individual may serve as a leader of both a charity and an affiliated social welfare group.

Some of the sessions at the CNP conferences are designated as run by CNP Action, a social welfare affiliate that shares leaders with CNP.

Two tax law specialists who viewed hours of video at The Post’s request said some of the remarks and planning on the videos could be improper for the groups that are registered with the IRS as charities.

“What was jarring was that it was pretty clear to any reasonable observer that the entire purpose of the panel was to help the Republican Party win in November, up and down the ticket,” said Roger Colinvaux, director of law and public policy at Catholic University’s law school, referring to a panel about health care.

Marcus Owens, a lawyer who led the Exempt Organizations Division at the IRS from 1990 to 2000, told The Post that participants’ comments on the videos raise potential issues of compliance with election laws and charity rules. “I’ve never seen anything like it on videotape and live,” Owens said, referring to the overt partisan coordination among the nonprofit leaders. “It’s almost like a movie.”

A spokesman for Kirk said he was there representing himself, not in his capacity as the leader of Turning Point USA, a prominent conservative youth organization based in Phoenix.

In an interview, Bob McEwen, CNP’s executive director, said the Washington-based organization complies with IRS regulations and does not itself “do anything.”

“CNP doesn’t do ad campaigns. It doesn’t do brochures. It is a meeting of leaders,” said McEwen, who is also president of CNP Action, the related social welfare group. “Anything that’s done is done by the membership, not by the Council for National Policy.”

The sessions are closed to the public, and participants are told not to talk to the media about the group or its proceedings. “It absolutely could be open to the media, except that the media is known to be left, and then creates a distorted vision of their conversations,” McEwen said.

The Council for National Policy was launched during the Reagan administration by figures in the religious right to bring more focus and force to conservative advocacy.

It has attracted conservative luminaries and front-line activists from across the country, according to internal directories obtained by The Post. In the years leading up to Trump’s election, members included Stephen K. Bannon and Kellyanne Conway. The videos make clear that CNP maintains strong links to the White House.

Some participants spoke of a CNP-associated delegation that meets weekly with White House officials. They said the group, the Conservative Action Project, has helped to choose loyalists to run federal agencies and coordinate outside messages with nonprofit organizations to support administration policies and leaders.

“It’s kind of this little secretive huddle that meets every Wednesday morning,” Paul Teller, a Trump deputy and director of strategic initiatives for Vice President Pence, told the audience in August.

In February, during three days of meetings in Southern California, a CNP member named Rachel Bovard described the Conservative Action Project’s influence in helping the Trump administration select political appointees for the executive branch. She said the Conservative Action Project coordinated closely on these and other efforts with CNP members and the Conservative Partnership Institute, a tax-exempt charity run by former senator and tea party leader Jim DeMint of South Carolina.

“We work very closely — CAP does and then we at CPI also — with the Office of Presidential Personnel at the White House to try and get good conservatives in the positions because we see what happens when we don’t vet these people,” she said.
Bovard cited as examples two figures who testified against Trump last year in the House impeachment hearings: Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, former director for European affairs at the National Security Council, and Marie Yovanovitch, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine.

“All these people that led the impeachment against President Trump shouldn’t have been there in the first place,” Bovard told the CNP audience. “We want to prevent that from happening.”

In addition, Bovard described Ginni Thomas as a crucial link to the White House. “She is one of the most powerful and fierce women in Washington,” Bovard said. “She is really the tip of the spear in these efforts.”

Bovard and Thomas did not respond to requests for comment.

A White House spokesman said Teller declined to comment.

In another February session, Kelly Shackelford was introduced as CNP vice president, chairman of CNP Action and leader of the First Liberty Institute, another organization registered as a tax-exempt charity.

He bragged about extensive behind-the-scenes coordination by his group and other nonprofit organizations to influence the White House selection of federal judges.

“Some of us literally opened a whole operation on judicial nominations and vetting,” he said. “We poured millions of dollars into this to make sure the president has good information, he picks the best judges.”

Shackelford said he is among the nonprofit leaders now coordinating with the White House to support the Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to fill the seat previously held by Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

In an interview, Shackelford said he is focused on educating Americans and providing information that will help the White House choose judges who interpret the Constitution in a literal way.

Speakers at the August conference touched on many of the cultural issues absorbing conservatives today — sometimes with more edge and heat than they do in their typical public remarks.

In one of the sessions, author and former professor Carol Swain, speaking on a panel about race relations, said that “White people have lost their voice in America.”

She likened the Black Lives Matter movement to the Ku Klux Klan. “The Democratic Party is using Black Lives Matter and antifa the same way they used the KKK,” said Swain, who is Black. “They created the KKK. It was their terrorist wing to terrorize everyone.”

In response to questions, Swain stood by her remarks.

Some participants bridled at pandemic restrictions — and the video showed that many did not wear masks.

“You will need to wear masks in the public part of the hotel but not here,” Walton, the CNP president, announced to applause.

“Yeah,” Walton said. “That’s great!”

A state mandate in Virginia generally requires masks at indoor public settings.

On Aug. 21, in a rare CNP open session, Trump addressed the audience, which included acting homeland security secretary Chad Wolf. Later that day, Teller, the White House deputy, gave a high-spirited shout-out from the front of a conference room to Wolf’s team.

“I don’t know if you got to know Secretary Wolf’s team, sitting in the corner, they’re just a bunch of wingers. That’s like the most conservative table in the entire room, is Secretary Wolf’s team,” Teller gushed. “Great, great, great secretary.”
In contrast to his ebullience, some speakers at the meeting raised doubts about Trump’s prospects in November.
Nancy Schulze, a CNP member and co-chair of the Congressional Prayer Caucus Wives Council, said the lack of a clear health-care plan from Trump poses a “huge vulnerability” for the president.

“If we don’t get this right in the next 75 days, there is a question as to whether we’re going to prevail at all within the presidential campaign, or the House or the Senate,” she said.

Others described an elaborate social media and advertising campaign by a collection of nonprofits — some of them tax-exempt charities — to convince voters this fall that a Republican free-market approach to health care would offer more choices.

Organizers showed ads that feature doctors in white lab coats with stethoscopes. They told the CNP audience that market research found that featuring doctors engenders trust among voters.

“And so I remind people that what we’re trying to do is put on theater here,” said Alfredo Ortiz, president of Job Creators Network and chief executive of its foundation. “It’s the stage. It’s the script and the actors.”
Ortiz did not respond to requests for comment.

Among those involved are former House speaker Newt Gingrich and former health and human services secretary Tom Price. Organizers are asking allies in Congress to introduce a resolution that echoes the policy themes, such as the notion of personalized health care, Price told the crowd.

“It’s urgent, but it’s not too late,” Price said.


Videos show closed-door sessions of leading conservative activists: ‘Be not afraid of the accusations that you’re a voter suppressor’


I wonder if all these suppression tactics are backfiring. People are saying they will crawl through broken glass and wait all day to vote against Trump and Republicans. As Republicans try to clamp down on the voters more and more they are just motivating more and more people. Like the pool watchers comments, they have always kinda been there but now that the GOP is encouraging them people are incensed that someone would try and intimate there vote.

Edit
Sorry for the double post. Can't seem to fix it on mobile.
Shingi11
Profile Joined May 2016
290 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-14 21:44:46
October 14 2020 21:11 GMT
#54915
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18857 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-14 21:24:00
October 14 2020 21:16 GMT
#54916
On October 15 2020 06:09 IgnE wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 04:26 farvacola wrote:
On October 15 2020 04:12 IgnE wrote:
On October 15 2020 03:24 farvacola wrote:
On October 15 2020 03:07 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 15 2020 02:55 farvacola wrote:
My views are similar Mohdoo, statues as civic objects is an outdated concept that needs revisiting. A key component of a rigorous sense of US history (and all history for that matter) is that there are no heroes.

Maybe you don't need to see people represented by statues as heroes - or even necessarily good people - and the problem is solved. It's precisely because history is not about heroes that removing statues of everyone who doesn't qualify as a great person by today's standard or did things that we would consider shocking makes no sense at all.

I don't think making new statues of people makes a lot of sense either - and it's out of fashion anyway - but walking through Paris and be surrounded by statues of the great people of history is quite wonderful. And they give opportunities to learn and reflect. Many times when I grew up I got curious and learnt about a king, a writer or a scientist because I passed a statue of him or her regularly.

This raises an important point that lies at the base of the notion that the US has unique problems with its history, problems that serve as excellent fodder for politics that turn on recasting the past as a component of national identity. In a vacuum, I agree with you that having permanent physical reminders of national identity is not itself inherently problematic, but given what statues have been and are used for here, I think the approach needs to be different. Significant numbers of people here think talking about the Founding Fathers having owned slaves is an insult to America, and those same people think that systemic racism is not a problem. To the extent statues in public places are edifices of the System, there are real issues with their continued, unqualified existence. Maybe the answer is better education rather than tearing down or adding heavy disclaimers to statues, but as we know, there are people who think one of America's best qualities is that someone in Arkansas and someone in New York are not guaranteed access to the same things.
On October 15 2020 03:10 IgnE wrote:
On October 15 2020 02:55 farvacola wrote:
My views are similar Mohdoo, statues as civic objects is an outdated concept that needs revisiting. A key component of a rigorous sense of US history (and all history for that matter) is that there are no heroes.


What about aesthetic objects?

I think statues are very powerful as far as aesthetic objects go, but beyond that I am really not sure how to approach their use aside from the monument question.



So was 1619 the true founding of the USA? And if it were, would that qualify as an insult to America?

I don't think it's necessary to play with dates of founding, the important thing is to instill in citizens the idea that doing history right requires a critical perspective that embraces the good and the bad without pretending that the bad is something we can or should ignore. And sure, to the extent there is a school of thought that considers the US an unqualified beacon on the hill, acknowledging this country's deeply hewn inheritance of chattel slavery and its material consequences would certainly be an insult.


I agree about instilling critical perspective building. I am not sure how to implement that, however, at the public school, and substituting one story about being formed in irredeemable darkness and sin for another story about being a shining beacon on a hill doesn’t seem that great. It’s the “danger of a single story” and all that. At what point do kids have the time, inclination, and teachers to tackle that? For my part, I remember AP US history at 16 being pretty open about slavery and primary sources and all of that. Before that, not so much. And that was relatively a long time ago now.

Well that's the rub, isn't it, there are immediate and dramatic problems with how we teach our children that raise all sorts of concerns, but I don't take that to mean that we can't try to address US racial history problems as a threshold issue, rather that any good and just solution is going to need to be holistic in nature, piecemeal changes just cause whack a mole problems.

I should add that I think teaching the idea that we should all try to do the right thing can be a kind of optimism that counters the solemn understanding of how awful people can be to one another.
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
Nouar
Profile Joined May 2009
France3270 Posts
October 14 2020 22:12 GMT
#54917
On October 15 2020 06:11 Doodsmack wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 02:22 Nouar wrote:
On October 15 2020 01:48 Danglars wrote:
On October 15 2020 01:32 Doodsmack wrote:
Interesting to see that resistance Twitter, joined by Facebook and Twitter themselves, is being so quick to bury this NY Post story about Hunter Biden's emails. One resistance journalist, Maggie Haberman, did so much as link to the story and she is now excommunicated as "MAGA Haberman." WaPo is pretending to have a policy against publishing leaked materials close to an election (lol):

https://twitter.com/GlennKesslerWP/status/1316355821056536577

Facebook exec:

https://twitter.com/andymstone/status/1316395902479872000

Needless to say, none of these standards would be applied to the Trump family (see leaked tax returns).

https://twitter.com/GlennKesslerWP/status/1310616743509995528

That’s a pretty stupid way to make a double standard. These guys circulated the pee tape story. It only goes in one direction. Either you publish with disclaimers about verifiability, or suppress until you find it. The suppression is way more interesting than the story itself, because you do have to be skeptical about the story itself.

About that story, I took a source that you can hardly call left-wing : Fox news.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-ukraine-burisma-adviser-email

That story says that Biden met with Burisma's #3, which I'm sure the Trump org never did, Trump never met anyone related to his children's business in Mar-a-Lago or elsewhere, for sure xD
No seriously, it's not that good but there's no indication of anything further than a meeting. The emails do not seem to mention any policy discussion or anything.

“Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together. It’s realty [sic] an honor and pleasure,” the email reads.

An earlier email from May 2014 also shows Pozharskyi, reportedly Burisma’s No. 3 exec, asking Hunter for “advice on how you could use your influence” on the company’s behalf.


They do not quote answers from Hunter either, saying that he would use that influence. THAT would be problematic.

The next bit is more interesting :

The message had the subject line “urgent issue” and was also sent to Hunter Biden’s business partner, Devon Archer, who also sat on the Burisma board at the time.

Pozharskyi said that “the representatives of new authorities in power tend to quite aggressively approach N. Z. unofficially with the aim to obtain cash from him.”

N.Z. isn’t identified in the email but appears to be a reference to Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky, whose first name is a Ukrainian version of “Nicholas.”

'Concrete actions'
When the alleged shakedown failed, “they proceeded with concrete actions” in the form of “one or more pretrial proceedings,” Pozharskyi wrote.

“We urgently need your advice on how you could use your influence to convey a message / signal, etc .to stop what we consider to be politically motivated actions,” he added.

Hunter Biden responded by saying he was with Archer in Doha, Qatar, and asked for more information about “the formal (if any) accusations being made against Burisma.”

“Who is ultimately behind these attacks on the company? Who in the current interim government could put an end to such attacks?” he added.


So Shokin was removed after pressure from Biden *AND THE WHOLE EU* because it seems he was a corrupt piece of shit. This exchange does not exactly go against that assertion, and does not mean anything improper happened. Hunter asked what formal accusations were being made, and who was behind it. After what looks clearly like corruption :
“the representatives of new authorities in power tend to quite aggressively approach N. Z. unofficially with the aim to obtain cash from him.”
When the alleged shakedown failed, “they proceeded with concrete actions” in the form of “one or more pretrial proceedings,” Pozharskyi wrote.


So, worst case, there was some access to the higher levels of the executive. Was that access used for anything corrupt ? It does not really look like so. On the contrary, it provides further proof to what the EU was complaining about and why they wanted that prosecutor fired.

It looks like a huge bunch of nothing to me. Especially if you compare to Trump getting millions in donations, selling access to Mar-a-lago, and giving government position to those same guys in their own field they have incentives in.

I won't even touch the raunchy and drug-related videos of Hunter, that has no relation to his father.



The story stops every time *before* any answer by Hunter that could be problematic and show corruption. Burisma clearly tried to leverage influence, but there doesn't seem to be anything inside that shows Hunter going through with that approach. So either they are keeping the juicy bits that could do damage until the last moment (when ? 3 weeks to go), either they don't have that information and are trying what they can to rile people up with partial bits meaning nothing. We're talking Giuliani, lol.


The article is from this morning. Further articles by Fox News that I tried to find this evening have... even less information, and try to keep things blurry to give the appearance of impropriety a bit more. The wordings mainly, and they include mostly reactions by republicans and Trump-world, which are expected to be overblown and not the hard facts of what was disclosed.


I suspect that if Don Jr was hired to the board of a Ukrainian energy company, and then arranged a meeting with his father, and then his father pressured Ukraine for action, you would be saying "this should be criminally investigated." Interestingly enough, the FBI has apparently seized these emails and videos as part of some sort of investigation.

I do not mind it being investigated. Not necessarily Hunter's job, but what it meant with Joe. I would also like the Trump children business dealings abroad while they are serving a role in the administration to be investigated, too. Hunter Biden was not an administration official, so only dealings with his father could be an issue.

I'd also looove for everything Mar-a-lago related to be properly investigated, I can't believe this shit is legal.
NoiR
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23957 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-14 23:03:54
October 14 2020 22:54 GMT
#54918
On October 15 2020 05:59 Elroi wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 04:39 GreenHorizons wrote:
On October 15 2020 04:29 Elroi wrote:
On October 15 2020 03:59 GreenHorizons wrote:
On October 15 2020 03:41 Elroi wrote:
On October 15 2020 01:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
On October 14 2020 16:44 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 14 2020 16:00 Silvanel wrote:
On October 14 2020 06:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 14 2020 05:50 Elroi wrote:
I don't get it. It seems to me that there are so many viable ways to attack him. All of this misquoting and intentional misunderstanding just makes mainstream media look like the bad guys and Trump as the paradoxical hero.

[quote]
Napoleon was also a general who fought to maintain the right to enslave black people.

Napoleon never went to war to defend slavery. Lee did. That's extremely different.

Napoleon was kind of a dick, everyone agrees on that but his legacy encompass a lot, lot, lot more than his policies on slavery.

Statues of Lee were erected by white supremacist groups such as the Sister of the Confederacy; there is absolutely no ambiguity over what they are meant to celebrate,

I don't think ANY "fine person" would march to defend a statue of Lee.


I will add that Poland mentions Napoleon in its national anthem (in positive light), his legacy is vast and at least parts of it are very positive.

He is certainly an extremely complex character. But NOBODY looks at a statue of Napoleon and think "fuck yeah, white power". If anything people learn that one of his many flaws as a person were his racial views and one of his biggest crimes his restauration of slavery. But his role in history is soooo much more important than that.

I personally see him as a very negative figure with some contingent positive traits. But he built modern France and inspired generations after him and that's really something worth celebrating. He is a giant in our history.

If on the other hand you erect a statue of Lee and if you go demonstrate to preserve it, you absolutely are making a statement about white supremacy. Lee didn't write the Code Civil, didn't spread enlightenment across Europe and isn't responsible for building most of modern america's institution. His only role in history was to fight for rebels who betrayed the country to protect their rights to enslave people. No "fine person" celebrates that.


Would you oppose the Haitian population in France tearing down Napoleon statues?

What do you think about the statues of the black men who liberated Haiti - and then went for some ethnic cleansing of the white population of the island?

What if I said history is not about heroes and that removing statues of everyone who doesn't qualify as a great person by today's standard or did things that we would consider shocking makes no sense at all?


Then I would be in complete agreement with you.

I'm actually not sure if you're referring to Nèg Mawon or statues of Jean-Jacques Dessalines, Toussaint Louverture (cited by John Brown as inspiration), or something else though?

I was thinking of Dessalines.

Would you apply that to Robert Lee, Andrew Jackson, and George Washington as well? In other words, would you oppose people wanting to remove those statues (and probably put them in museums)?

I think I would. Although in the case of Robert E. Lee I don't know enough of the particular circumstances to say for sure. But in general I strongly dislike this particular branch of cancel culture. If it isn't literally something like Stalin statues in eastern Europe or Hitler statues I think statues generally should stay where they are.


Well that's just it, perspective and context. Andrew Jackson was a genocidal criminal or a national hero depending on who you talk to/what books they give your class in the US. Washington was pretty notoriously horrific to the Iroquois. Lee was a US hero against Mexicans before the civil war, and they all owned slaves and fought to keep them.

If you're of the peoples massacred and enslaved it's not unreasonable to find giant venerating statues and monuments of your ancestors murderers as unsuitable history lessons.

Columbus is another venerated figure in the US (less so lately) who was literally a criminal in his own day. His horrific crimes against humanity even disgusted the lords of imperialism.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Paljas
Profile Joined October 2011
Germany6926 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-15 00:34:22
October 15 2020 00:33 GMT
#54919
Napoleon establishing france as a modern nation is actually a very good reason to tear down his statues.
TL+ Member
iamthedave
Profile Joined February 2011
England2814 Posts
Last Edited: 2020-10-15 02:09:07
October 15 2020 01:56 GMT
#54920
On October 15 2020 03:59 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 15 2020 03:41 Elroi wrote:
On October 15 2020 01:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
On October 14 2020 16:44 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 14 2020 16:00 Silvanel wrote:
On October 14 2020 06:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On October 14 2020 05:50 Elroi wrote:
I don't get it. It seems to me that there are so many viable ways to attack him. All of this misquoting and intentional misunderstanding just makes mainstream media look like the bad guys and Trump as the paradoxical hero.

On October 14 2020 05:14 Arghmyliver wrote:
On October 14 2020 03:44 Doodsmack wrote:
On October 14 2020 03:04 NewSunshine wrote:
It sounds a little different coming from a leader who has both refused to condemn and encouraged the violent parts of his base. It also sounds different coming from someone who incessantly accuses his opposition of perpetrating election fraud, and who told the Proud Boys to "stand by". So there's some context.


The "stand by" comment was highly suspect but some of this is just liberal media misinformation. For example the Charlottesville comment. Look at what Trump actually said:

Reporter: “Do you think that what you call the alt-left is the same as neo-Nazis?”

Trump: “Those people — all of those people — excuse me, I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups. But not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch. Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of a statue of Robert E. Lee.”

Reporter: “The neo-Nazis started this. They showed up in Charlottesville to protest —”

Trump: “Excuse me, excuse me. They didn’t put themselves — and you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group. Excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”


He first defined the two "sides" as those opposed to taking down the statue and those favoring it. Thus he defined the white supremacists as a subset of one of the two sides. He then said there very fine people on both sides, which is to say that some among the pro-statue side were fine people. That is not the same as saying that some white supremacists are very fine people. If you believe it is the same, you've basically been duped by misinformation. Oh and by the way, he also said this:

I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally.


Robert E Lee was a general in the army of the Confederate States of America who fought to maintain the right to enslave black people.

Napoleon was also a general who fought to maintain the right to enslave black people.

Napoleon never went to war to defend slavery. Lee did. That's extremely different.

Napoleon was kind of a dick, everyone agrees on that but his legacy encompass a lot, lot, lot more than his policies on slavery.

Statues of Lee were erected by white supremacist groups such as the Sister of the Confederacy; there is absolutely no ambiguity over what they are meant to celebrate,

I don't think ANY "fine person" would march to defend a statue of Lee.


I will add that Poland mentions Napoleon in its national anthem (in positive light), his legacy is vast and at least parts of it are very positive.

He is certainly an extremely complex character. But NOBODY looks at a statue of Napoleon and think "fuck yeah, white power". If anything people learn that one of his many flaws as a person were his racial views and one of his biggest crimes his restauration of slavery. But his role in history is soooo much more important than that.

I personally see him as a very negative figure with some contingent positive traits. But he built modern France and inspired generations after him and that's really something worth celebrating. He is a giant in our history.

If on the other hand you erect a statue of Lee and if you go demonstrate to preserve it, you absolutely are making a statement about white supremacy. Lee didn't write the Code Civil, didn't spread enlightenment across Europe and isn't responsible for building most of modern america's institution. His only role in history was to fight for rebels who betrayed the country to protect their rights to enslave people. No "fine person" celebrates that.


Would you oppose the Haitian population in France tearing down Napoleon statues?

What do you think about the statues of the black men who liberated Haiti - and then went for some ethnic cleansing of the white population of the island?

What if I said history is not about heroes and that removing statues of everyone who doesn't qualify as a great person by today's standard or did things that we would consider shocking makes no sense at all?

I'm actually not sure if you're referring to Nèg Mawon or statues of Jean-Jacques Dessalines, Toussaint Louverture (cited by John Brown as inspiration), or something else though?



Then I'd say you're not much of a historian. The influence individual people have had over entire eras of history is astronomical. Besides, a hero doesn't have to be virtuous. That's more of a modern conceit.

The argument on statue removal comes down to a nation's relationship with its history. The USA's relationship with the civil war is far from settled, hence why the statues of confederate generals remain contentious even above and beyond the connections to slavery.

Very few of the people who get statues get then for being good. Nobody - literally nobody - would have said Napolean was a great guy. The French sure didn't. That's a completely irrelevant point though. If a discussion about removing statues of Napolean ever were to emerge it would centre on the role he played in shaping the course of EU history and whether or not people felt that influence were somehow something shameful or whatever. It'd never happen of course.
I'm not bad at Starcraft; I just think winning's rude.
Prev 1 2744 2745 2746 2747 2748 5726 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
OSC
00:00
OSC Elite Rising Star #19
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
PiGStarcraft637
RuFF_SC2 203
WinterStarcraft201
Ketroc 54
StarCraft: Brood War
GuemChi 6840
Noble 17
Bale 9
Dota 2
monkeys_forever580
NeuroSwarm154
LuMiX1
League of Legends
JimRising 753
Counter-Strike
taco 906
Other Games
summit1g17574
tarik_tv7739
Maynarde127
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick979
BasetradeTV215
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
[ Show 14 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Hupsaiya 96
• davetesta40
• CranKy Ducklings SOOP13
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• Azhi_Dahaki0
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Upcoming Events
Replay Cast
6h 13m
Wardi Open
9h 13m
Monday Night Weeklies
13h 13m
Replay Cast
21h 13m
The PondCast
1d 7h
Kung Fu Cup
1d 8h
GSL
2 days
Replay Cast
2 days
GSL
3 days
WardiTV Spring Champion…
3 days
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
3 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
WardiTV Spring Champion…
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
RSL Revival
5 days
Classic vs SHIN
Rogue vs Bunny
BSL
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Afreeca Starleague
6 days
Flash vs Soma
RSL Revival
6 days
BSL
6 days
Patches Events
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Escore Tournament S2: W7
2026 GSL S1
Nations Cup 2026

Ongoing

BSL Season 22
ASL Season 21
IPSL Spring 2026
KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 2
Acropolis #4
KK 2v2 League Season 1
BSL 22 Non-Korean Championship
YSL S3
SCTL 2026 Spring
RSL Revival: Season 5
Heroes Pulsing #1
Asian Champions League 2026
IEM Atlanta 2026
PGL Astana 2026
BLAST Rivals Spring 2026
IEM Rio 2026
PGL Bucharest 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 1
BLAST Open Spring 2026
ESL Pro League S23 Finals
ESL Pro League S23 Stage 1&2

Upcoming

Escore Tournament S2: W8
CSLAN 4
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
HSC XXIX
uThermal 2v2 2026 Main Event
Maestros of the Game 2
WardiTV Spring 2026
2026 GSL S2
BLAST Bounty Summer 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer Qual
Stake Ranked Episode 3
XSE Pro League 2026
IEM Cologne Major 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 2
CS Asia Championships 2026
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.