EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 8082
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States6943 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Defense Secretary James Mattis opposes a provision in the House’s version of the annual defense policy bill that would create a new military branch dedicated to space, a development congressional opponents of the move are hoping will bolster their position. In a letter released Wednesday by Rep. Michael Turner (R-Ohio), Mattis argued now is not the time to create a new branch of the military. “I strongly urge Congress to reconsider the proposal of a separate service Space Corps,” Mattis wrote in a letter to Turner. “I believe it is premature at add additional organization and administrative tail to the department at a time I am trying to reduce overhead.” Turner is pushing an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would strip out the provision creating the service and replace it with a requirement for the Pentagon to study the issue. Turner introduced a similar amendment when the Armed Services Committee considered the bill, but it failed in a voice vote. The Ohio Republican is hoping his amendment will make it past the Rules Committee for a vote on the House floor, and in a conference call with reporters, he highlighted Mattis’s letter as evidence the full House should consider the issue. “I don’t know of any other circumstance, and there may have been, where the secretary of the Air Force and the secretary of Defense weighed in an amendment,” Turner said. Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson has also voiced her opposition to the Space Corps plan, arguing it would add unneeded bureaucracy to the Pentagon. She reiterated her concerns in her own letter to Turner. The Space Corps would protect U.S. interests in space; deter aggression in, from and through space; provide combat-ready space forces; organize, train and equip space forces; and conduct space operations, according to the NDAA. The service would be housed under the Department of the Air Force, similarly to how the Marines are housed in the Department of the Navy. Those who support the creation of the branch say it’s needed to ensure national security threats in space get the focus they deserve. "It has been painfully apparent from the briefings we’ve gotten from our general officers that both Russia and China have nearly caught us in space capabilities," Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), chairman of the Strategic Forces subcommittee, said during the Armed Services Committee's markup of the bill last month. But opponents such as Turner argue Congress has not done nearly enough due diligence to create a new military service, something it has not done since 1947. In Wednesday’s conference call, Turner said the chairmen of the Intelligence Committee and Appropriations Committee have also voiced their concerns to him about the plan. Turner acknowledged there are issues with how the military handles space, but argued that it’s Congress’s fault for not giving the Pentagon the funding it needs. Creating the Space Corps, he said, would be saddling a new Defense secretary and new Air Force secretary with a congressionally mandated new military branch before they have time to fully study the issue. In his letter, Mattis also argued the issue needs to be studied more and that removing budget caps would be a better start to fixing the problem. “I share congressional concerns about the organization and management of the department’s space capabilities,” Mattis wrote. “The creation of an independent Space Corps, with the corresponding institutional growth and budget implications, does not address the specific concerns nor our nation’s fiscal problems in a responsive manner.” Source | ||
|
farvacola
United States18811 Posts
 | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7760 Posts
On July 13 2017 20:33 Zambrah wrote: I think white privilege is a tough subject for a few reason, like that it's usually viewed in a vacuum, whereas as you've all mentioned privilege comes in plenty of forms. To draw the game comparison out more all the more, it's like having a CON/INT/DEX/CHA/WIS/STR, but the white privilege score gets talked about the most so people focus in on that. The white dude has his life of heroine addled single parent poverty and hears about his white privilege and goes, "you're saying I'm PRIVILEGED?" Which feels like a dismissal of the serious problems he's faced in his life. I can't blame him for feeling uncomfortable with the idea of white privilege in a vacuum, but it doesn't exist in a vacuum. A rich black man has other types of privilege while not having white privilege, say the rich black dude has an INT score of 16 and a CON score of 8 and the aforementioned white dude has an INT score of 9 and a CON score of 15. It's obviously a wee bit more complicated than that but I don't see a lot of people really engage with the idea of privilege extending beyond white privilege and that seems to give people the idea that the exclusive privilege to have is of the white variety. Not sure D&D helps a lot. People are different and some have better chances (talent, intelligence, background) than others. That's fine. The problem is that skin colour has nothing to do with what you can do and how much you can contribute to society, and is something you can't do anything about. I'm not extremely talented in my field (I'm clumsy as hell, not the best start to be a virtuoso musician), and that's how it is, but have compensated by working harder and longer to reach a very good professional status. People facing systemic disadvantage in life because the society as a whole is racially biaised is something that ought to be corrected. That's all there is to it really. By the way, yhe GOP is getting back to what it has always been about: cutting taxes for the rich and aid to the poor. What a wonderful world, and what wonderful people. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18811 Posts
| ||
|
Zambrah
United States6943 Posts
On July 13 2017 20:43 Biff The Understudy wrote: Not sure D&D helps a lot. People are different and some have better chances (talent, intelligence, background) than others. That's fine. The problem is that skin colour has nothing to do with what you can do and how much you can contribute to society, and is something you can't do anything about. I'm not extremely talented in my field (I'm clumsy as hell, not the best start to be a virtuoso musician), and that's how it is, but have compensated by working harder and longer to reach a very good professional status. People facing systemic disadvantage in life because the society as a whole is racially biaised is something that ought to be corrected. That's all there is to it really. By the way, yhe GOP is getting back to what it has always been about: cutting taxes for the rich and aid to the poor. What a wonderful world, and what wonderful people. Whos saying that racially biased society doesn't need to be corrected? I'm just trying to elaborate why I think white people have such a difficult time acknowledging white privilege. I think people would be more open to the white privilege conversation if it wasn't always in a vacuum where like no other privilege in life is brought up. Ive got plenty of privilege, I have light skin, I'm a dude, Im not mentally handicapped, I'm not physically handicapped, I'm also poor from a single family home that contained a violent drug addict sister that has caused plenty of domestic issues. Everyone has their mix of privilege and lack of privilege, but sadly people don't talk about privilege much outside of white privilege. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8833 Posts
Take two people, equal in every single way and make one black and one white. Both females. Both apply for the same job. Remember, both are equal. Whoever gets that job, deserves it. Now, take 15 points from the white female (lower education and lower experience score (or whatever)). She lands the job even though she's not qualified any longer. Very simple and very quick idea of what people are talking about. Now, try explaining to that woman why she got that job. And then try to explain to her how she can help better the woman she "took" it from because of white privilege. This can be talked ad nauseam. And should until some sort of agreement is reached. But we can't continue to read past each other to score intellectual cool points. The U.S. refugee program surpassed the Trump Administration's 50,000-person cap on Wednesday, meaning that many refugees will now be denied entry into the country. The cap is expected to affect thousands of refugees. Last fiscal year, the U.S. admitted just under 85,000 refugees, and former President Barack Obama had aimed to resettle 110,000 refugees this fiscal year. But President Trump lowered the cap dramatically in his "travel ban" executive orders, and the cap went into effect on June 29. "The State Department initially told resettlement agencies it expected to hit that threshold by July 6," NPR's Jackie Northam reports. "But that date came and went and the number of refugees entering the country wasn't reached. So the date was extended to July 12." Source | ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
I'm hearing tall privilege is pretty neat, too. Don't even get me started on healthy privilege! And smart privilege? That one's just out-of-this-world. Smart people clearly need to tone down their brain and shut their mouth so everyone else can get ahead. Yes, absolutely, being white (in a predominantly white society, that is) is one of the countless variables that slightly influence your life. Compared to industriousness, good role models, strong genetics and personal confidence, it's most likely entirely negligible. After we solve this privilege, are we supposed to move on to all the other ones, until everyone comes as a vanilla standard from a conveyor belt? The very nature of this subject is diluting personal responsibility and disempowering people by providing them with handy premade excuses - in addition to dividing them along profound and sharp lines. Want blacks to have a better time? Fight against the war on drugs, or for single-payer healthcare. Measures that will actually help destitute people if economic status is the problem. Want Asian actors? Ask for Asian actors. Make an Asian super-famous. I don't hear Conor McGregor talking about Irish non-privilege. Or Bruce Lee, for that matter. Want people to have a better life in general? Advocate for the reinstatement of respect for the nuclear family. Ain't hearing nobody talk about the war on traditional family values since the sixties. As for quotas and similar cancerous measures, I'm pretty sure nobody is taking them seriously anymore. A sane society is a meritocracy in every sense of the word. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8833 Posts
| ||
|
Gahlo
United States35062 Posts
On July 13 2017 16:01 rageprotosscheesy wrote: Again: white privilege isn't just about poor black people. Its about all minorities in all economic positions, from the very poor to the very rich. Black quarterbacks are never described as smart, crafty, hardworking in the same way white quarterbacks are; Jeremy Lin is always described as deceptively < >; CBS thinks asian co-stars should be paid 10-15% less than their white co-stars. None of these people in this situation are poor. White privilege is white privilege because race is what defines this privilege. Not wealth, not age. not gender, not anything else. Bringing up Athletics probably isn't the most compelling avenue to go about discussing this. Turn on an NBA game and see 3+ white people playing? The layperson would assume a lot of bench players are on the court. Lin doesn't get that attribution because he's getting compared to white athletes, but he's getting compared to black athletes. Numerous white football players are also described as deceptively ___. In the recent NFL draft, there was a very talented running back who also happened to be white named Christian McCaffrey who kept getting snubbed when it came to people evaluating him because he was white that eventually this happened. Luckily for him draft prospect evaluation is a lot easier to fix than generations old economic disparity that hits the races unequally. | ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
On July 13 2017 22:06 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: I feel like you missed the entire point of the discussion on the matter. In that case I guess what the debate was about is "empathy" which I'm quite a fan of. It's admirable to have empathy for people when you recognize them as disadvantaged. But framing this discussion about a word as incendiary and loaded as "privilege" and then pointing it at an entire skin color category just doesn't seem right to me. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18811 Posts
| ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18811 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8833 Posts
On July 13 2017 22:11 Kickboxer wrote: In that case I guess what the debate was about is "empathy" which I'm quite a fan of. It's admirable to have empathy for people when you recognize them as disadvantaged. But framing this discussion about a word as incendiary and loaded as "privilege" and then pointing it at an entire skin color category just doesn't seem right to me. It's hard to be empathetic and still take advantage of the privilege you were born with. "I understand completely what you're going through, and I am an advocate for changes to the system that puts you on an equal playing field with me. The cops shouldn't be shooting you for having a joint in the car. I had a loaded Glock and a pound in my backseat last time I was pulled over." | ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
| ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
We (as in, society) can go and promote that privilege for everyone without making scapegoats, and we haven't been doing that at all. A bit random, I know. Just wanted to jump into the debate and rant a little sowwy everyone | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
I'm sure African Americans deserve and need better treatment in the USA and elsewhere, I just think the conceptual level of this issue, and the solutions offered (some kind of counter-privilege) are off | ||
| ||
