EPThttp://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0099/Sections/0099.012.html
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3902
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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 | ||
|
lestye
United States4163 Posts
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0099/Sections/0099.012.html | ||
|
FeatherPlanes
45 Posts
On March 23 2023 06:10 BlackJack wrote: You say that as if there exists any scenario in which you could complain about being discriminated against for being a white man in progressive circles of San Francisco. You would either have to be remarkably stupid or just not care about your reputation to go around saying you were discriminated against for being a white man. You might as well start walking around with a MAGA hat on. I'm going to keept it a buck fifty here. Instead of putting thoughts into the man's head, we can take him to be a reasonable person and take his position at face value. Nothing about this person seems to scream anything but a well adjusted dad who wanted to serve his community. He's not a screaming lunatic lambasting the Board of Education on how vaccines make us magnetic. San Francisco is practically the gay capital of the world, he could very easily have spent his entire op-ed lambasting the SF Board of Education for discrimination against his sexuality since none of the existing canddiates were anything but heteronormative. For an event that might have been a huge example of anti-white racism, there's hardly any reporting on it from anyone that isn't a gossip rag like the Daily Mail. And I'm not going to take the Daily Mail's reporting at face value. The actual timeline of events is hard to keep track of but the National Review seems to suggest most of the actual shit flinging was from the parents themselves. Which absolutely tracks, have you ever been to one of these public townhall type events? There's an argument that a lot of the failure of American politics is due to normal people not particpating in civil society and ceding political spaces to the crazies...but that's a completely different topic to be discussed. Ultimately if he doesn't feel like he was rejected and discriminated because of his race, gender or sexuality, I'm not going to get offended on his behalf. Which is something I absolutely believe to be one of the worst parts of the type of performative activism (I guess you would call this as being woke?) performed by a lot of liberals. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10501 Posts
On March 23 2023 15:45 FeatherPlanes wrote: I'm going to keept it a buck fifty here. Instead of putting thoughts into the man's head, we can take him to be a reasonable person and take his position at face value. Nothing about this person seems to scream anything but a well adjusted dad who wanted to serve his community. He's not a screaming lunatic lambasting the Board of Education on how vaccines make us magnetic. San Francisco is practically the gay capital of the world, he could very easily have spent his entire op-ed lambasting the SF Board of Education for discrimination against his sexuality since none of the existing canddiates were anything but heteronormative. For an event that might have been a huge example of anti-white racism, there's hardly any reporting on it from anyone that isn't a gossip rag like the Daily Mail. And I'm not going to take the Daily Mail's reporting at face value. The actual timeline of events is hard to keep track of but the National Review seems to suggest most of the actual shit flinging was from the parents themselves. Which absolutely tracks, have you ever been to one of these public townhall type events? There's an argument that a lot of the failure of American politics is due to normal people not particpating in civil society and ceding political spaces to the crazies...but that's a completely different topic to be discussed. Ultimately if he doesn't feel like he was rejected and discriminated because of his race, gender or sexuality, I'm not going to get offended on his behalf. Which is something I absolutely believe to be one of the worst parts of the type of performative activism (I guess you would call this as being woke?) performed by a lot of liberals. I'm not putting thoughts into the man's head. I'm simply taking the school board at their word when they say they will consider him for the committee only if he comes back with some other minority candidates to balance him out. To say that only the Daily Mail and gossip rags are talking about the race issue isn't accurate. I introduced the topic by citing the same person that you cited later in the thread, Heather Knight's piece in the SFChronicle (a left-wing newspaper) which opens her piece with the 3 paragraphs I quoted previously in this thread. I get your argument that she's burying the lede and it's really about sandbagging to avoid talk of school reopenings (although very little of the article talks about that as well). It's worth mentioning that around the same time, the Vice President of the School Board was apologizing for tweets she made in 2016 where she called Asian-Americans house niggers that "use white supremacist thinking to assimilate and get ahead" when they should really be doing more to speak out against Trump. https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Alison-Collins-San-Francisco-school-Asians-tweets-16038855.php Sure, maybe it had nothing to do with race. I just don't think the fact that the white guy not playing the race card is some overwhelming evidence that it had nothing to do with race when he has massive disincentives to do so. | ||
|
Taelshin
Canada418 Posts
People should be hired and fired on merit not their god given attributes, the discussion above is laughable and pathetic at the same time. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21685 Posts
On March 23 2023 18:54 Taelshin wrote: Talking about merit and wanting Trump is a weird combination. He shouldn't run. Let Trump win or lose. He's done a great job in Florida. Dream ticket is trump - Rand Paul. Looks like it wont happen sadly. People should be hired and fired on merit not their god given attributes, the discussion above is laughable and pathetic at the same time. | ||
|
Taelshin
Canada418 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44334 Posts
On March 23 2023 18:59 Gorsameth wrote: Talking about merit and wanting Trump is a weird combination. You beat me to it. Taelshin, what about Trump's presidency would you consider to be meritorious and therefore worthy of being hired (elected) for another term? On March 23 2023 19:05 Taelshin wrote: @Gorsameth Sorry, It seems there is not enough straw to fill your quota, could you maybe... Try harder? Are you suggesting that what Gorsameth said is a strawman argument? Saying that Trump isn't meritorious is not a strawman argument. He may be wrong (or right) and we may disagree (or agree) with him, but in no way is this a strawman. A strawman would require you to first present an argument (but you didn't) and then him to somehow misrepresent that argument (but he simply questioned your statement). Or did you mean something else by "straw"? | ||
|
Mikau313
Netherlands230 Posts
On March 23 2023 19:05 Taelshin wrote: @Gorsameth Sorry, It seems there is not enough straw to fill your quota, could you maybe... Try harder? Is this where after 'communism', 'grooming' and 'woke' we now redefine 'strawman' to mean 'whenever something happens I disagree with'? | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28667 Posts
 | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11508 Posts
On March 23 2023 23:08 Liquid`Drone wrote: Maybe he meant Trump/Rand Paul is a dream ticket because they'd lose. A nightmare is also a dream. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28667 Posts
On March 23 2023 07:32 Djabanete wrote: Drone, I think you are right about how certain kinds of rhetoric — morally righteous criticism without any nuance or much benefit of the doubt for the interlocutor — can drive people away. What could be the reason for that sort of rhetoric to be prevalent enough in Sweden to push people rightward? - Is it overcorrection from people who are trying, for the first time, to reckon with bias against certain groups? (In this case, against Muslims?) - Is it just that being nuanced and giving benefit of the doubt is hard? - Is it that being nuanced and giving benefit of the doubt doesn’t play well on TV — or on the tech platforms where things can go viral? - Is it that right-wing media is getting better at picking out the worst arguments from the left and holding them up for mockery? - Is it that anti-democratic powers (basically Russia and China) are using troll farms to amplify the worst arguments? Good question, I think the answer differs greatly for Sweden and for the US. Also - to be fair and to elaborate a bit - I do believe this was probably a bigger issue in Sweden 10 years ago than it is now (because the progress of SD has forced the media and the left to both have a sort of reckoning with both their immigration policy and their messaging). But much of this predates a) social media b) troll farms - in Sweden, the things I criticize happened on a policy level and from printed media too, and to my knowledge, they didn't really have much of a presence of right wing media. In Sweden, I think it has mostly been a consequence of a misguided attempt of narrative control 'in service of goodness'. I've seen some examples of stories that were buried specifically because it was assumed that the story breaking would increase racist attitudes (for example stories of refugees sexually assaulting teenage girls at a music festival or Swedish police will no longer be able to give descriptions of alleged criminals for fear of being seen as racist.) Then the stories end up breaking anyway, and suddenly, we're not just dealing with a story of 'some refugees from extremely patriarchal societies might actually not have developed the same respect for women as boys growing up in one of the most feminist societies throughout human history' (again, this doesn't mean Swedish boys never sexually assault women - but we have to accept the data that says there's a difference in prevalence), but also a story of 'and the media tried to suppress it'. Or the second story - 'apparently, criminals tend to be brown skinned so frequently that the police/media/politicians assume we'll become racist if we're informed of their ethnicity, and it seems like skin color is actually something that could help identify criminals'. Both cases are well-intended, but the way I see it, they've backfired in a rather severe manner, and in both cases, the real issue is a combination of mistrust and an assumption of a relationship between data and attitude. This is where I see the parallel to some of the US left - a tendency to assume that x opinion will follow the sharing of y data, and sometimes the refusal to acknowledge said data, even if it happens to be correct and even though accepting the data does not have to influence political opinion, and a slight notion of 'we, the noble elites know the best direction for society and whatever steps are necessary to get there, it's worth it'. Philosophically, I guess I could say it's more consequentialist and less principled than I prefer. The thing is, I still support taking in a bunch of refugees and having as liberal of an immigration policy as possible. But if Somali immigrants in Norway are associated with high rates of being on welfare and a higher rate of violent crime (whereas Somali immigrants in Minnesota integrate much better), and Syrian refugees coming to Norway integrate very successfully, we need to map these things and keep track of them to be able to design proper policy. 'Somalian immigrants in Norway are more likely to be criminal or be on welfare than ethnic Norwegians' does, indeed, tend to be something racists hone in on, but it is, also, backed up by statistics, and if I always deflect when the statement is brought up, I will end up looking unreasonable - even if well intended. | ||
|
Elroi
Sweden5595 Posts
| ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28667 Posts
Still, I think it's important to be honest about the challenges and not pretend that they don't exist. For the second point, might've changed my life, but I'm still pretty successful and happy with where I am - teaching sociology and history seems more fun than teaching math anyway, and I find it likely I'd have ended up as a teacher either way. However, again, it's a question of prioritizing resources, not about hypothetically having enough for everybody, and I think it was more important and beneficial both for the individuals in question and society as a whole to have the students who struggled most with math develop basic skills than for me to reach my potential.  | ||
|
Mikau313
Netherlands230 Posts
On March 24 2023 07:03 Elroi wrote: You always make a lot of sense Drone, - but I have to say I find it a little odd that you can so clearly point out the big problems that have come with mass immigration in Sweden over the last decade, and still advocate for "as liberal of an immigration policy as possible." And similarly, just a couple of pages ago, you advocated for a school system that uses almost all of its resources to help the weakest students, while in the same post detailing exactly how that system fucked you over as a student and probably changed your life. Not speaking for Drone, but in a general sense: "These are the issues associated with X" doesn't mean "X only brings issues". Immigration can be (and in many metrics objectively is) a net positive for a country, but that doesn't mean that there aren't issues in need of addressing. It might be a net positive to the system as a whole to be focusing our school resources on the weakest students, but that doesn't mean there might not be downsides to that for individual students. This is true for almost everything. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28667 Posts
For refugees, Norway benefiting isn't part of the equation for me. While there are ways we do benefit, this isn't why I want us to accept refugees. But there are also obvious challenges and real limits in what number is viable, and refugees from different countries mount different challenges. None of my previous posts were supposed to read as opposed to immigration - what I'm opposed to is not being willing to have honest conversations about the challenges, and this is where I feel 'the left' can do better. It's not just regarding immigration, same thing regarding dealing with climate change, etc. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23231 Posts
On March 25 2023 04:51 Liquid`Drone wrote: I wholeheartedly agree with that also, and I am definitely one of those who think Norwegian culture has been enriched by immigration - but I think different principles apply for different forms of immigration. For work related immigration, I think it's fair to think it must benefit the host country. And there, I think it both does and doesn't - for a country like Norway, there are challenges related to wages for manual labor decreasing because there's a big supply of Polish or Lithuanian workers who are happy to do the work for less wages than what you need for a comfortable life in Norway. But on the positive side, goods that depend upon manual labor might cost less for the consumer. For refugees, Norway benefiting isn't part of the equation for me. While there are ways we do benefit, this isn't why I want us to accept refugees. But there are also obvious challenges and real limits in what number is viable, and refugees from different countries mount different challenges. None of my previous posts were supposed to read as opposed to immigration - what I'm opposed to is not being willing to have honest conversations about the challenges, and this is where I feel 'the left' can do better. It's not just regarding immigration, same thing regarding dealing with climate change, etc. In my experience socialists do a reasonable job of having conversations about the challenges, just typically not with people that are using them to rationalize their (more often than not, deplorable) intransigence. Part of the divisions between "the left" and socialists is that if you diagnose the problem differently, you'll come up with different (in this case often conflicting) remedies. "The left" (basically AOC through Manchin) don't see capitalism itself as a problem in need of remedy, socialists do. That means when talking about how to tackle challenges "the left" is trying to merge mutually exclusive concepts of capitalism and humanism*, with a priority on preserving/appeasing capitalism. While socialists are trying to figure out how a solution will help move us past capitalism in a serious humanist* pursuit. + Show Spoiler + *"Humanism/t" is a tricky word in this context so it may need more clarification I'd be fine with providing in the future So "the left" (and "reasonable people" to their right) find themselves acting in antithesis of socialists, then are perpetually confused why despite seemingly agreeing on the surface, socialists treat them as oppositional rather than allies in training or something. That same "left" does with that what it does with lots of radical rhetoric, coopt it/bastardize it to use against people to their right without comprehending it or its original implications to their worldview. I think that is what you're keying in on. | ||
|
Slydie
1919 Posts
On March 25 2023 05:58 GreenHorizons wrote: In my experience socialists do a reasonable job of having conversations about the challenges, just typically not with people that are using them to rationalize their (more often than not, deplorable) intransigence. Part of the divisions between "the left" and socialists is that if you diagnose the problem differently, you'll come up with different (in this case often conflicting) remedies. "The left" (basically AOC through Manchin) don't see capitalism itself as a problem in need of remedy, socialists do. That means when talking about how to tackle challenges "the left" is trying to merge mutually exclusive concepts of capitalism and humanism*, with a priority on preserving/appeasing capitalism. While socialists are trying to figure out how a solution will help move us past capitalism in a serious humanist* pursuit. + Show Spoiler + *"Humanism/t" is a tricky word in this context so it may need more clarification I'd be fine with providing in the future So "the left" (and "reasonable people" to their right) find themselves acting in antithesis of socialists, then are perpetually confused why despite seemingly agreeing on the surface, socialists treat them as oppositional rather than allies in training or something. That same "left" does with that what it does with lots of radical rhetoric, coopt it/bastardize it to use against people to their right without comprehending it or its original implications to their worldview. I think that is what you're keying in on. I am actually more curious about how you define "captialism", and what is your alternative way of encouraging and interchanging goods and services without using means of trading (captial). You have explained the flaws of the current system many times, what is your alternative, which has a chance of working with real people who want "humanness" in their lives? About immigration, politicians won't say it loud, but it is a very effective way of regulating the labour market, especially if you get skilled workers you really need. High unemployment=low immigration and vica versa. | ||
|
Taelshin
Canada418 Posts
@DPB Never mentioned trump and merit in the same sentence. I know my post's are long and hard to read through ill try to limit my word count. @mikau I'm sorry I don't understand your post maybe you could elaborate. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28667 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44334 Posts
On March 23 2023 20:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: You beat me to it. Taelshin, what about Trump's presidency would you consider to be meritorious and therefore worthy of being hired (elected) for another term? On March 25 2023 21:52 Taelshin wrote: @DPB Never mentioned trump and merit in the same sentence. I know my post's are long and hard to read through ill try to limit my word count. You wrote: On March 23 2023 18:54 Taelshin wrote: He shouldn't run. Let Trump win or lose. He's done a great job in Florida. Dream ticket is trump - Rand Paul. Looks like it wont happen sadly. People should be hired and fired on merit not their god given attributes, the discussion above is laughable and pathetic at the same time. Unless you're defining "dream ticket" as something other than "the pair of individuals you really want to be president and vice president", you're very clearly implying that Trump and Paul are meritorious in certain ways. And that makes sense, because I would expect pretty much anyone to be able to name at least a few good things about a presidential candidate that they want to vote for. However, given your snide one-liner response and explicit avoidance of my good-faith follow-up question to what you said, + Show Spoiler + and please don't make fun of other people's reading comprehension, especially when your spelling and grammar are atrocious, Or maybe you wrote the names backwards and want Trump to be Paul's VP? | ||
| ||
