|
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 |
|
|
On November 05 2021 06:12 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2021 04:14 mierin wrote:
I honestly don't believe the democrats in general want progressive things. Remember the ACA, where they were just one vote away from getting the public option? Or more recently with the federal minimum wage increase? I honestly believe if there were 100 democrats in the senate, 51 would "have reservations" about such legislation just like Sinema/Manchin. As much as we love to vilify republicans, the wealthy "elite" democrats are just as happy riding out the status quo as opposed to actually making progress. And I have no idea how to fix that. Munchkin and Sinema are the fall guys more often than not. Senator #48 doesn't have to speak up about "having reservations" if #49 and #50 already tanked the progressive policy without them.
Manchin makes a much better fall guy than Sinema. Sinema kinda pulls the curtain back on Democrats like Trump did for Republicans.
People don't even try to pretend people voted for Sinema to do this, that she's representing her constituents interest, or that Democrat (or centrist, or Republican) voters in her state even like her. She obliterates the narrative that Democrat's ineptitude is a matter of a principled diversity of opinions bumping into a democratic system.
|
|
|
On November 05 2021 02:33 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2021 02:08 Mohdoo wrote:On November 05 2021 02:06 Gorsameth wrote:On November 05 2021 01:13 KwarK wrote:
If you look at what most of the hard right Q conspiracy lizard people want, it’s a pretty hardline redistributive socialism. They want medical care, debt relief, more worker control in businesses, more job security, fairer pay, government seizures from corporate elites, and so forth and so forth. The problem with reaching these people is that they believe that the elitist ivory tower heir of New York real estate tycoon is going to give it to them and that the Democrats drink the blood of babies. But then you get to the issue that they want medical care, worker control and debt relief but only if their guys are the ones proposing it, and they keep electing guys that want nothing to do with it. Democrats/progressives could come up with the perfect plan that does everything the Qanon/right wing worker crowd wants and nothing they don't want and they will still scream and shout that it is the work of the devil simply because its proposed by someone with a (D) next to their name and not an (R). That is where a lot of 'progressive policy X has a majority support, even among Republicans' runs afoul. It doesn't matter that its something they want, so long as its a Democrat proposing it they will oppose it. The reason they don't want democrats proposing it is because democrats also come with all the extremely polarizing social stuff like CRT. If Democrats just saved that stuff for later, we'd actually be helping the poor right now. Do Democrats come with CRT though? I don’t recall that being in Hillary’s manifesto, or Biden’s? It was manufactured by a right wing think tank as a way of drumming up outrage. Let’s say that the Democrats had immediately announced that they actually supported the banning of CRT from all schools. Do you really think that would have settled it? It wasn’t in schools in the first place and there were no plans to put it there, the options for creating outrage really are limitless. It would simply be replaced by outrage over converting children to Islam in schools. This is like post birth abortion controversy. It doesn’t matter that no Democrats support infanticide, it only matters that the Republicans are loud in their opposition of it. There’s no way of winning against that when the voter base is this unsophisticated. If one party positions themselves as the party that opposes X then their low information voters will conclude that the other party supports X, whatever X is. I actually can’t think of an example more absurd than reality, CRT is an advanced college level class that nobody on any side of the political spectrum was putting in schools. Democrats do not, have never, and will never support CRT in schools for the simple reason that it’s an advanced and niche theory that school students have no use for and lack the appropriate background to understand. And yet you’re here telling me that they come with CRT. That’s how good right wing media is. You propose that they simply avoid these gotcha issues but the fact that this one even exists proves the impossibility of that.
"Critical race theory", whether correctly applied or not, has become the colloquial term people are using to describe these instances where school children are being told they are oppressors or oppressed, that they are privileged or inprivileged, they should have guilt for being the benefactors of slavery etc. The fact that it's technically not CRT doesn't really matter at this point.
|
On November 05 2021 20:38 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2021 02:33 KwarK wrote:On November 05 2021 02:08 Mohdoo wrote:On November 05 2021 02:06 Gorsameth wrote:On November 05 2021 01:13 KwarK wrote:
If you look at what most of the hard right Q conspiracy lizard people want, it’s a pretty hardline redistributive socialism. They want medical care, debt relief, more worker control in businesses, more job security, fairer pay, government seizures from corporate elites, and so forth and so forth. The problem with reaching these people is that they believe that the elitist ivory tower heir of New York real estate tycoon is going to give it to them and that the Democrats drink the blood of babies. But then you get to the issue that they want medical care, worker control and debt relief but only if their guys are the ones proposing it, and they keep electing guys that want nothing to do with it. Democrats/progressives could come up with the perfect plan that does everything the Qanon/right wing worker crowd wants and nothing they don't want and they will still scream and shout that it is the work of the devil simply because its proposed by someone with a (D) next to their name and not an (R). That is where a lot of 'progressive policy X has a majority support, even among Republicans' runs afoul. It doesn't matter that its something they want, so long as its a Democrat proposing it they will oppose it. The reason they don't want democrats proposing it is because democrats also come with all the extremely polarizing social stuff like CRT. If Democrats just saved that stuff for later, we'd actually be helping the poor right now. Do Democrats come with CRT though? I don’t recall that being in Hillary’s manifesto, or Biden’s? It was manufactured by a right wing think tank as a way of drumming up outrage. Let’s say that the Democrats had immediately announced that they actually supported the banning of CRT from all schools. Do you really think that would have settled it? It wasn’t in schools in the first place and there were no plans to put it there, the options for creating outrage really are limitless. It would simply be replaced by outrage over converting children to Islam in schools. This is like post birth abortion controversy. It doesn’t matter that no Democrats support infanticide, it only matters that the Republicans are loud in their opposition of it. There’s no way of winning against that when the voter base is this unsophisticated. If one party positions themselves as the party that opposes X then their low information voters will conclude that the other party supports X, whatever X is. I actually can’t think of an example more absurd than reality, CRT is an advanced college level class that nobody on any side of the political spectrum was putting in schools. Democrats do not, have never, and will never support CRT in schools for the simple reason that it’s an advanced and niche theory that school students have no use for and lack the appropriate background to understand. And yet you’re here telling me that they come with CRT. That’s how good right wing media is. You propose that they simply avoid these gotcha issues but the fact that this one even exists proves the impossibility of that. "Critical race theory", whether correctly applied or not, has become the colloquial term people are using to describe these instances where school children are being told they are oppressors or oppressed, that they are privileged or inprivileged, they should have guilt for being the benefactors of slavery etc. The fact that it's technically not CRT doesn't really matter at this point.
I wonder how much time and effort is worth trying to educate some of these people on what CRT really is. I mean, if some Americans aren't even going to acknowledge the existence of systemic racism and the fact that our history curricula and textbooks had been whitewashed for generations, I don't know how we'll ever be able to progress to a more nuanced discussion on intersectionality and the diversity of experiences, roles, and lenses of Americans with various identities (such as being a person of color).
|
Any time and effort would be better spent making sure people's material living conditions are better.
|
|
|
On November 05 2021 22:05 Zambrah wrote:
Any time and effort would be better spent making sure people's material living conditions are better.
Yeah "peoples material liveing conditions" Just not women and any minorities. Why bother dealing with the negative effects of racism and sexism on peoples material living conditions when they're just women and minorities?
|
On November 05 2021 23:09 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2021 22:05 Zambrah wrote:
Any time and effort would be better spent making sure people's material living conditions are better. Yeah "peoples material liveing conditions" Just not women and any minorities. Why bother dealing with the negative effects of racism and sexism on peoples material living conditions when they're just women and minorities?
Democrats aren't willing to do that though, they're more concerned with the appearance of caring about people's rights and their ability to afford rent and the like, thats why we see them do things like vote against the 15 dollar an hour minimum wage, and why we're about to see women's rights take a huge hit when the Supreme Court strikes down Roe v. Wade next month.
Democrats love to talk the talk but they aren't interested in walking the walk unless its for donors and corporations.
|
On November 05 2021 23:46 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2021 23:09 Sermokala wrote:On November 05 2021 22:05 Zambrah wrote:
Any time and effort would be better spent making sure people's material living conditions are better. Yeah "peoples material liveing conditions" Just not women and any minorities. Why bother dealing with the negative effects of racism and sexism on peoples material living conditions when they're just women and minorities? Democrats aren't willing to do that though, they're more concerned with the appearance of caring about people's rights and their ability to afford rent and the like, thats why we see them do things like vote against the 15 dollar an hour minimum wage, and why we're about to see women's rights take a huge hit when the Supreme Court strikes down Roe v. Wade next month. Democrats love to talk the talk but they aren't interested in walking the walk unless its for donors and corporations.
It would be crazy if there was some sort of bill in the senate right now that they were working on that was being slagged by the right for going to far in them walking the walk.
It would be even crazier if it was republicans grifting and stealing supreme court seats for their anti roe vs wade justices that was the cause for the supreme court striking it down too.
But yeah why have any connection to reality if you're still republican for some reason in this country.
|
On November 06 2021 00:05 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2021 23:46 Zambrah wrote:On November 05 2021 23:09 Sermokala wrote:On November 05 2021 22:05 Zambrah wrote:
Any time and effort would be better spent making sure people's material living conditions are better. Yeah "peoples material liveing conditions" Just not women and any minorities. Why bother dealing with the negative effects of racism and sexism on peoples material living conditions when they're just women and minorities? Democrats aren't willing to do that though, they're more concerned with the appearance of caring about people's rights and their ability to afford rent and the like, thats why we see them do things like vote against the 15 dollar an hour minimum wage, and why we're about to see women's rights take a huge hit when the Supreme Court strikes down Roe v. Wade next month. Democrats love to talk the talk but they aren't interested in walking the walk unless its for donors and corporations. It would be crazy if there was some sort of bill in the senate right now that they were working on that was being slagged by the right for going to far in them walking the walk. It would be even crazier if it was republicans grifting and stealing supreme court seats for their anti roe vs wade justices that was the cause for the supreme court striking it down too. But yeah why have any connection to reality if you're still republican for some reason in this country.
Manchin and Sinema (and a number of other Democrat senators probably, given how many voted against the 15 dollar minimum wage) are holding the bill up and they're Democrats, Democrats always seem to have some sort of excuse for why they can't do the good thing, they can never seem to actually just do a good thing, theres always something in the way, from Obama to now.
Even if we presume they really really want to do good things to make people's lives better they don't. Democrats have the power to expand the Supreme Court if they wanted to, but oops, can't do that because they can't actually ever do anything.
Whats the point of having the Democrats in power if you need 70 of them to do anything meaningful? Its a never ending cycle, Democrats fail to do anything, Democrats lose elections, Republicans play the game and get power, Democrats whine about it, barely scrape a majority, Democrats fail to do anything.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On November 05 2021 23:46 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2021 23:09 Sermokala wrote:On November 05 2021 22:05 Zambrah wrote:
Any time and effort would be better spent making sure people's material living conditions are better. Yeah "peoples material liveing conditions" Just not women and any minorities. Why bother dealing with the negative effects of racism and sexism on peoples material living conditions when they're just women and minorities? Democrats aren't willing to do that though, they're more concerned with the appearance of caring about people's rights and their ability to afford rent and the like, thats why we see them do things like vote against the 15 dollar an hour minimum wage, and why we're about to see women's rights take a huge hit when the Supreme Court strikes down Roe v. Wade next month. Democrats love to talk the talk but they aren't interested in walking the walk unless its for donors and corporations.
If they resolve some of these issues, they will compromise a key captive voter base (e.g. the consistent 90% black vote that Democrats can get). But alternatively, if they only do the bare minimum to look like they're standing up for those groups, they get to promise incremental improvements for decades and take lesser evilism all the way to the bank. It makes perfect sense to take the path they do, when their core goal is using the appearance of virtue to stay in power.
|
On November 06 2021 00:14 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2021 00:05 Sermokala wrote:On November 05 2021 23:46 Zambrah wrote:On November 05 2021 23:09 Sermokala wrote:On November 05 2021 22:05 Zambrah wrote:
Any time and effort would be better spent making sure people's material living conditions are better. Yeah "peoples material liveing conditions" Just not women and any minorities. Why bother dealing with the negative effects of racism and sexism on peoples material living conditions when they're just women and minorities? Democrats aren't willing to do that though, they're more concerned with the appearance of caring about people's rights and their ability to afford rent and the like, thats why we see them do things like vote against the 15 dollar an hour minimum wage, and why we're about to see women's rights take a huge hit when the Supreme Court strikes down Roe v. Wade next month. Democrats love to talk the talk but they aren't interested in walking the walk unless its for donors and corporations. It would be crazy if there was some sort of bill in the senate right now that they were working on that was being slagged by the right for going to far in them walking the walk. It would be even crazier if it was republicans grifting and stealing supreme court seats for their anti roe vs wade justices that was the cause for the supreme court striking it down too. But yeah why have any connection to reality if you're still republican for some reason in this country. Manchin and Sinema (and a number of other Democrat senators probably, given how many voted against the 15 dollar minimum wage) are holding the bill up and they're Democrats, Democrats always seem to have some sort of excuse for why they can't do the good thing, they can never seem to actually just do a good thing, theres always something in the way, from Obama to now. Even if we presume they really really want to do good things to make people's lives better they don't. Democrats have the power to expand the Supreme Court if they wanted to, but oops, can't do that because they can't actually ever do anything. Whats the point of having the Democrats in power if you need 70 of them to do anything meaningful? Its a never ending cycle, Democrats fail to do anything, Democrats lose elections, Republicans play the game and get power, Democrats whine about it, barely scrape a majority, Democrats fail to do anything.
Ah blameing the entire party for the furthest right members. Democracy is the "excuse" that you're looking for however.
Blaming them from not wanting to be the ones breaking one of the foundational "stool legs" of the republic for republicans abuseing the filibuster for everything and anything they can use it for.
Yes lets blame the party who is responsible and isn't filled with insane facists for the actions of the facists that's a really fun one for voting facist. Keep up the practice and you'll win a metal at the next mental gymnastics meet.
|
United States41989 Posts
On November 05 2021 20:38 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2021 02:33 KwarK wrote:On November 05 2021 02:08 Mohdoo wrote:On November 05 2021 02:06 Gorsameth wrote:On November 05 2021 01:13 KwarK wrote:
If you look at what most of the hard right Q conspiracy lizard people want, it’s a pretty hardline redistributive socialism. They want medical care, debt relief, more worker control in businesses, more job security, fairer pay, government seizures from corporate elites, and so forth and so forth. The problem with reaching these people is that they believe that the elitist ivory tower heir of New York real estate tycoon is going to give it to them and that the Democrats drink the blood of babies. But then you get to the issue that they want medical care, worker control and debt relief but only if their guys are the ones proposing it, and they keep electing guys that want nothing to do with it. Democrats/progressives could come up with the perfect plan that does everything the Qanon/right wing worker crowd wants and nothing they don't want and they will still scream and shout that it is the work of the devil simply because its proposed by someone with a (D) next to their name and not an (R). That is where a lot of 'progressive policy X has a majority support, even among Republicans' runs afoul. It doesn't matter that its something they want, so long as its a Democrat proposing it they will oppose it. The reason they don't want democrats proposing it is because democrats also come with all the extremely polarizing social stuff like CRT. If Democrats just saved that stuff for later, we'd actually be helping the poor right now. Do Democrats come with CRT though? I don’t recall that being in Hillary’s manifesto, or Biden’s? It was manufactured by a right wing think tank as a way of drumming up outrage. Let’s say that the Democrats had immediately announced that they actually supported the banning of CRT from all schools. Do you really think that would have settled it? It wasn’t in schools in the first place and there were no plans to put it there, the options for creating outrage really are limitless. It would simply be replaced by outrage over converting children to Islam in schools. This is like post birth abortion controversy. It doesn’t matter that no Democrats support infanticide, it only matters that the Republicans are loud in their opposition of it. There’s no way of winning against that when the voter base is this unsophisticated. If one party positions themselves as the party that opposes X then their low information voters will conclude that the other party supports X, whatever X is. I actually can’t think of an example more absurd than reality, CRT is an advanced college level class that nobody on any side of the political spectrum was putting in schools. Democrats do not, have never, and will never support CRT in schools for the simple reason that it’s an advanced and niche theory that school students have no use for and lack the appropriate background to understand. And yet you’re here telling me that they come with CRT. That’s how good right wing media is. You propose that they simply avoid these gotcha issues but the fact that this one even exists proves the impossibility of that. "Critical race theory", whether correctly applied or not, has become the colloquial term people are using to describe these instances where school children are being told they are oppressors or oppressed, that they are privileged or inprivileged, they should have guilt for being the benefactors of slavery etc. The fact that it's technically not CRT doesn't really matter at this point.
I think it does matter. CRT is a real thing, it has a basis in reality. People’s fear of a 10 minute hate session against white people in schools is not a real thing, it has no basis in reality. Blurring that line by using a word for something real to describe a paranoid delusion causes issues. They made up the rest of the persecution fantasy easily enough, they can make up a name for it.
It’s not “technically not CRT”, it’s not CRT. Had they called it English and spent the last few months bitching about schools teaching English it would be just as ridiculous. We should not cede control of our language to the insanity coming out of right wing think tanks.
|
On November 06 2021 00:28 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2021 00:14 Zambrah wrote:On November 06 2021 00:05 Sermokala wrote:On November 05 2021 23:46 Zambrah wrote:On November 05 2021 23:09 Sermokala wrote:On November 05 2021 22:05 Zambrah wrote:
Any time and effort would be better spent making sure people's material living conditions are better. Yeah "peoples material liveing conditions" Just not women and any minorities. Why bother dealing with the negative effects of racism and sexism on peoples material living conditions when they're just women and minorities? Democrats aren't willing to do that though, they're more concerned with the appearance of caring about people's rights and their ability to afford rent and the like, thats why we see them do things like vote against the 15 dollar an hour minimum wage, and why we're about to see women's rights take a huge hit when the Supreme Court strikes down Roe v. Wade next month. Democrats love to talk the talk but they aren't interested in walking the walk unless its for donors and corporations. It would be crazy if there was some sort of bill in the senate right now that they were working on that was being slagged by the right for going to far in them walking the walk. It would be even crazier if it was republicans grifting and stealing supreme court seats for their anti roe vs wade justices that was the cause for the supreme court striking it down too. But yeah why have any connection to reality if you're still republican for some reason in this country. Manchin and Sinema (and a number of other Democrat senators probably, given how many voted against the 15 dollar minimum wage) are holding the bill up and they're Democrats, Democrats always seem to have some sort of excuse for why they can't do the good thing, they can never seem to actually just do a good thing, theres always something in the way, from Obama to now. Even if we presume they really really want to do good things to make people's lives better they don't. Democrats have the power to expand the Supreme Court if they wanted to, but oops, can't do that because they can't actually ever do anything. Whats the point of having the Democrats in power if you need 70 of them to do anything meaningful? Its a never ending cycle, Democrats fail to do anything, Democrats lose elections, Republicans play the game and get power, Democrats whine about it, barely scrape a majority, Democrats fail to do anything. Ah blameing the entire party for the furthest right members. Democracy is the "excuse" that you're looking for however. Blaming them from not wanting to be the ones breaking one of the foundational "stool legs" of the republic for republicans abuseing the filibuster for everything and anything they can use it for. Yes lets blame the party who is responsible and isn't filled with insane facists for the actions of the facists that's a really fun one for voting facist. Keep up the practice and you'll win a metal at the next mental gymnastics meet.
Yes, I blame the Democratic party for the actions of the Democrats that make up the Democratic party. Weird, I know.
Yes, I also blame them for not being willing to use power to protect people's rights. Usually its some lame excuse like, "if the Democrats do it then the Republicans will do it," as though Republicans havent proven perfectly happy abusing institutions anyways. Doesn't matter though, I hope everyone who is going to lose access to safe abortions is going to be grateful that Democrats have kept some sort of sanctity in the Supreme Court. I'm not even sure what sanctity there is given how maliciously stacked it is. I'm sure people who need an abortion but won't be able to get one will be grateful for it though.
Yes, I think Democrats have some blame for the conditions that have led the US to becoming so susceptible to fascism, something about years of corporatism fucking over the middle and working classes and concentrating massive wealth in the hands of a few at the expense of everyone else just feels... bipartisan. I'm sure Democrats will cure fascism with their current strategy though, keep letting people get poorer and poorer, keep letting housing become more and more expensive, keep helping make sure we don't see real wage increases, keep letting the rights of marginalized people erode. A genius strategy, truly, we can hope for no better.
Its fascist by the way, not facist.
|
On November 06 2021 01:35 Zambrah wrote:
Yes, I blame the Democratic party for the actions of the Democrats that make up the Democratic party. Weird, I know.
Preach!
|
|
|
On November 06 2021 00:54 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2021 20:38 BlackJack wrote:On November 05 2021 02:33 KwarK wrote:On November 05 2021 02:08 Mohdoo wrote:On November 05 2021 02:06 Gorsameth wrote:On November 05 2021 01:13 KwarK wrote:
If you look at what most of the hard right Q conspiracy lizard people want, it’s a pretty hardline redistributive socialism. They want medical care, debt relief, more worker control in businesses, more job security, fairer pay, government seizures from corporate elites, and so forth and so forth. The problem with reaching these people is that they believe that the elitist ivory tower heir of New York real estate tycoon is going to give it to them and that the Democrats drink the blood of babies. But then you get to the issue that they want medical care, worker control and debt relief but only if their guys are the ones proposing it, and they keep electing guys that want nothing to do with it. Democrats/progressives could come up with the perfect plan that does everything the Qanon/right wing worker crowd wants and nothing they don't want and they will still scream and shout that it is the work of the devil simply because its proposed by someone with a (D) next to their name and not an (R). That is where a lot of 'progressive policy X has a majority support, even among Republicans' runs afoul. It doesn't matter that its something they want, so long as its a Democrat proposing it they will oppose it. The reason they don't want democrats proposing it is because democrats also come with all the extremely polarizing social stuff like CRT. If Democrats just saved that stuff for later, we'd actually be helping the poor right now. Do Democrats come with CRT though? I don’t recall that being in Hillary’s manifesto, or Biden’s? It was manufactured by a right wing think tank as a way of drumming up outrage. Let’s say that the Democrats had immediately announced that they actually supported the banning of CRT from all schools. Do you really think that would have settled it? It wasn’t in schools in the first place and there were no plans to put it there, the options for creating outrage really are limitless. It would simply be replaced by outrage over converting children to Islam in schools. This is like post birth abortion controversy. It doesn’t matter that no Democrats support infanticide, it only matters that the Republicans are loud in their opposition of it. There’s no way of winning against that when the voter base is this unsophisticated. If one party positions themselves as the party that opposes X then their low information voters will conclude that the other party supports X, whatever X is. I actually can’t think of an example more absurd than reality, CRT is an advanced college level class that nobody on any side of the political spectrum was putting in schools. Democrats do not, have never, and will never support CRT in schools for the simple reason that it’s an advanced and niche theory that school students have no use for and lack the appropriate background to understand. And yet you’re here telling me that they come with CRT. That’s how good right wing media is. You propose that they simply avoid these gotcha issues but the fact that this one even exists proves the impossibility of that. "Critical race theory", whether correctly applied or not, has become the colloquial term people are using to describe these instances where school children are being told they are oppressors or oppressed, that they are privileged or inprivileged, they should have guilt for being the benefactors of slavery etc. The fact that it's technically not CRT doesn't really matter at this point. I think it does matter. CRT is a real thing, it has a basis in reality. People’s fear of a 10 minute hate session against white people in schools is not a real thing, it has no basis in reality. Blurring that line by using a word for something real to describe a paranoid delusion causes issues. They made up the rest of the persecution fantasy easily enough, they can make up a name for it. It’s not “technically not CRT”, it’s not CRT. Had they called it English and spent the last few months bitching about schools teaching English it would be just as ridiculous. We should not cede control of our language to the insanity coming out of right wing think tanks.
Yeah pretty much this. And as for trying to educate people about what CRT actually is, I don't see why when either they will tune out or move on to the next made up outrage. Reminds me of the dictum that it takes many times more time and effort to debunk bullshit than it does to create it. It's tempting to think that the right wing bullshit should be combated by even more bullshit to keep them out of power, but that seems like a dark and dangerous road to go down.
|
On November 06 2021 00:54 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2021 20:38 BlackJack wrote:On November 05 2021 02:33 KwarK wrote:On November 05 2021 02:08 Mohdoo wrote:On November 05 2021 02:06 Gorsameth wrote:On November 05 2021 01:13 KwarK wrote:
If you look at what most of the hard right Q conspiracy lizard people want, it’s a pretty hardline redistributive socialism. They want medical care, debt relief, more worker control in businesses, more job security, fairer pay, government seizures from corporate elites, and so forth and so forth. The problem with reaching these people is that they believe that the elitist ivory tower heir of New York real estate tycoon is going to give it to them and that the Democrats drink the blood of babies. But then you get to the issue that they want medical care, worker control and debt relief but only if their guys are the ones proposing it, and they keep electing guys that want nothing to do with it. Democrats/progressives could come up with the perfect plan that does everything the Qanon/right wing worker crowd wants and nothing they don't want and they will still scream and shout that it is the work of the devil simply because its proposed by someone with a (D) next to their name and not an (R). That is where a lot of 'progressive policy X has a majority support, even among Republicans' runs afoul. It doesn't matter that its something they want, so long as its a Democrat proposing it they will oppose it. The reason they don't want democrats proposing it is because democrats also come with all the extremely polarizing social stuff like CRT. If Democrats just saved that stuff for later, we'd actually be helping the poor right now. Do Democrats come with CRT though? I don’t recall that being in Hillary’s manifesto, or Biden’s? It was manufactured by a right wing think tank as a way of drumming up outrage. Let’s say that the Democrats had immediately announced that they actually supported the banning of CRT from all schools. Do you really think that would have settled it? It wasn’t in schools in the first place and there were no plans to put it there, the options for creating outrage really are limitless. It would simply be replaced by outrage over converting children to Islam in schools. This is like post birth abortion controversy. It doesn’t matter that no Democrats support infanticide, it only matters that the Republicans are loud in their opposition of it. There’s no way of winning against that when the voter base is this unsophisticated. If one party positions themselves as the party that opposes X then their low information voters will conclude that the other party supports X, whatever X is. I actually can’t think of an example more absurd than reality, CRT is an advanced college level class that nobody on any side of the political spectrum was putting in schools. Democrats do not, have never, and will never support CRT in schools for the simple reason that it’s an advanced and niche theory that school students have no use for and lack the appropriate background to understand. And yet you’re here telling me that they come with CRT. That’s how good right wing media is. You propose that they simply avoid these gotcha issues but the fact that this one even exists proves the impossibility of that. "Critical race theory", whether correctly applied or not, has become the colloquial term people are using to describe these instances where school children are being told they are oppressors or oppressed, that they are privileged or inprivileged, they should have guilt for being the benefactors of slavery etc. The fact that it's technically not CRT doesn't really matter at this point. I think it does matter. CRT is a real thing, it has a basis in reality. People’s fear of a 10 minute hate session against white people in schools is not a real thing, it has no basis in reality. Blurring that line by using a word for something real to describe a paranoid delusion causes issues. They made up the rest of the persecution fantasy easily enough, they can make up a name for it. It’s not “technically not CRT”, it’s not CRT. Had they called it English and spent the last few months bitching about schools teaching English it would be just as ridiculous. We should not cede control of our language to the insanity coming out of right wing think tanks.
The fact that people are mislabeling their concerns over what is being taught as "critical race theory" does not automatically mean their concerns are illegitmate.
Even in the progressive city of San Francisco the school board is wildly unpopular and multiple members are facing recall. A poll from May found a 71% negative rating of the school board compared with just a 10% positive rating. Perhaps their most unpopular decision was deciding to end merit-based admissions to the prestigious Lowell High School and transition to a lottery system for the sake of "equity." The justification for this is to combat institutionalized racism and white supremacy but ironically at the time of that deicision the student body was only 18% white and incoming freshmans this year are only 16% white. White students aren't overrepesented. Asian students are overrepesented.
These absurd ideas are propagating across the country. Math is racist. Standardized testing is white supremacist. Gifted and Talented programs need to be ended because they are not diverse enough. I think it's impossible to raise everyone up to the same level overnight so if you want equity the only solution is to drop everyone to the lowest common denominator. All these things happening in school is not much ado about nothing just because "nobody is teaching critical race theory."
I do agree that we should stop letting ideologues hijack our language though. Sadly I think that ship is sailed. Now speech is violence. Silence is violence. Dave Chappelle is a transphobe. Jokes are hate speech. The NFL draft is akin to a slave auction. Almost anything and everything can be white supremacist or racist. Perhaps the only thing that can't be racist is actual discrimination against white people based on the color of their skin.
|
United States41989 Posts
On November 06 2021 02:34 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2021 00:54 KwarK wrote:On November 05 2021 20:38 BlackJack wrote:On November 05 2021 02:33 KwarK wrote:On November 05 2021 02:08 Mohdoo wrote:On November 05 2021 02:06 Gorsameth wrote:On November 05 2021 01:13 KwarK wrote:
If you look at what most of the hard right Q conspiracy lizard people want, it’s a pretty hardline redistributive socialism. They want medical care, debt relief, more worker control in businesses, more job security, fairer pay, government seizures from corporate elites, and so forth and so forth. The problem with reaching these people is that they believe that the elitist ivory tower heir of New York real estate tycoon is going to give it to them and that the Democrats drink the blood of babies. But then you get to the issue that they want medical care, worker control and debt relief but only if their guys are the ones proposing it, and they keep electing guys that want nothing to do with it. Democrats/progressives could come up with the perfect plan that does everything the Qanon/right wing worker crowd wants and nothing they don't want and they will still scream and shout that it is the work of the devil simply because its proposed by someone with a (D) next to their name and not an (R). That is where a lot of 'progressive policy X has a majority support, even among Republicans' runs afoul. It doesn't matter that its something they want, so long as its a Democrat proposing it they will oppose it. The reason they don't want democrats proposing it is because democrats also come with all the extremely polarizing social stuff like CRT. If Democrats just saved that stuff for later, we'd actually be helping the poor right now. Do Democrats come with CRT though? I don’t recall that being in Hillary’s manifesto, or Biden’s? It was manufactured by a right wing think tank as a way of drumming up outrage. Let’s say that the Democrats had immediately announced that they actually supported the banning of CRT from all schools. Do you really think that would have settled it? It wasn’t in schools in the first place and there were no plans to put it there, the options for creating outrage really are limitless. It would simply be replaced by outrage over converting children to Islam in schools. This is like post birth abortion controversy. It doesn’t matter that no Democrats support infanticide, it only matters that the Republicans are loud in their opposition of it. There’s no way of winning against that when the voter base is this unsophisticated. If one party positions themselves as the party that opposes X then their low information voters will conclude that the other party supports X, whatever X is. I actually can’t think of an example more absurd than reality, CRT is an advanced college level class that nobody on any side of the political spectrum was putting in schools. Democrats do not, have never, and will never support CRT in schools for the simple reason that it’s an advanced and niche theory that school students have no use for and lack the appropriate background to understand. And yet you’re here telling me that they come with CRT. That’s how good right wing media is. You propose that they simply avoid these gotcha issues but the fact that this one even exists proves the impossibility of that. "Critical race theory", whether correctly applied or not, has become the colloquial term people are using to describe these instances where school children are being told they are oppressors or oppressed, that they are privileged or inprivileged, they should have guilt for being the benefactors of slavery etc. The fact that it's technically not CRT doesn't really matter at this point. I think it does matter. CRT is a real thing, it has a basis in reality. People’s fear of a 10 minute hate session against white people in schools is not a real thing, it has no basis in reality. Blurring that line by using a word for something real to describe a paranoid delusion causes issues. They made up the rest of the persecution fantasy easily enough, they can make up a name for it. It’s not “technically not CRT”, it’s not CRT. Had they called it English and spent the last few months bitching about schools teaching English it would be just as ridiculous. We should not cede control of our language to the insanity coming out of right wing think tanks. The fact that people are mislabeling their concerns over what is being taught as "critical race theory" does not automatically mean their concerns are illegitmate. Even in the progressive city of San Francisco the school board is wildly unpopular and multiple members are facing recall. A poll from May found a 71% negative rating of the school board compared with just a 10% positive rating. Perhaps their most unpopular decision was deciding to end merit-based admissions to the prestigious Lowell High School and transition to a lottery system for the sake of "equity." The justification for this is to combat institutionalized racism and white supremacy but ironically at the time of that deicision the student body was only 18% white and incoming freshmans this year are only 16% white. White students aren't overrepesented. Asian students are overrepesented. These absurd ideas are propagating across the country. Math is racist. Standardized testing is white supremacist. Gifted and Talented programs need to be ended because they are not diverse enough. I think it's impossible to raise everyone up to the same level overnight so if you want equity the only solution is to drop everyone to the lowest common denominator. All these things happening in school is not much ado about nothing just because "nobody is teaching critical race theory." I do agree that we should stop letting ideologues hijack our language though. Sadly I think that ship is sailed. Now speech is violence. Silence is violence. Dave Chappelle is a transphobe. Jokes are hate speech. The NFL draft is akin to a slave auction. Almost anything and everything can be white supremacist or racist. Perhaps the only thing that can't be racist is actual discrimination against white people based on the color of their skin.
You’re listing a lot of unfounded fears and putting the burden on the reader to explain to you that the NFL draft is not actually being treated as a modern day slave auction. If you argue in this way I suspect you’ll be arguing alone.
Their concerns are not illegitimate because they’re using the wrong words to describe them, they’re illegitimate because they’re fantastical. I would oppose a primary school class in which black children were encouraged to throw rocks at white children while the teacher lectured the white children on how evil they are but no such class exists. It’s not that they’re using the wrong name for the stoning white guilt self hate class, it’s that they made it up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
