2020 Political Chatter

[Clean39T]

Top of my YouTube feed - an ad from the tRump campaign: "tRump is a warrior"...as he takes resources away from veterans who didn't wilfully ignore the seriousness of the pandemic. Veterans he called losers. Have they at last no decency?

.
.
.
We know the answer.
.
.

My subconscious keeps replaying the 'fax machine in the field' scene from Office Space. I've scolded it. It won't stop.

[GrantM]

npr 40+ years ago had some teeth.
they now knaw with gums only.
David Brooks style.

If people could graduate beyond the left/right political spectrum, recognizing that it's a package of tribal positions,
there might be hope of dialogue and political progress. What we need is a model how to have a political discussion.

Libertarian - anti coercion
Progressive - anti oppression
Conservative - pro tradition

These are all good ideas*. The key is to put good faith people together and have the hard conversations,
talk about how the benefits of each of these ideas, not how to maximize one while disregarding the others.

-g

*this isn't mine. Pinker said society can't be:Fair, Free, Equal all at the same time. Politics is about choices.

[Too Tall]

Riding past the hospital a few mins. ago. Man I SWEAR to dog I saw HypnoFrog in the crowd. Most impressive was the sparkling clean dump truck wrapped in the American Flag leaning on his fog horn. Goosebumps, I'm tellin' you.

https://flic.kr/p/2jPmym5

[Clean39T]

If people could graduate beyond the left/right political spectrum, recognizing that it's a package of tribal positions,
there might be hope of dialogue and political progress. What we need is a model how to have a political discussion.

Libertarian - anti coercion
Progressive - anti oppression
Conservative - pro tradition

These are all good ideas*. The key is to put good faith people together and have the hard conversations,
talk about how the benefits of each of these ideas, not how to maximize one while disregarding the others.

-g

*this isn't mine. Pinker said society can't be:Fair, Free, Equal all at the same time. Politics is about choices.

The problem is that it takes coercion to get the traditionalists to not be racist, misogynistic, classist, xeno- and LGBTQ-phobic - and they find progress to be oppressive. That is to say, the divisions are irreconcilable. And it is disingenuous of Pinker to say that they are all good ideas - or that they all have a place. Two of them are covers for ideologues that stand in the way of human flourishing. There is no good-faith argument for returning to a "simpler time where women knew their place, gays stayed in the closet, and the [insert minority] help was okay with the scraps we threw them". Just like there is no good-faith argument for destroying the planet for short-term profit or for denying healthcare and food to those who need it. The line, it is drawn, the curse it is cast. And the times....they are a changing.

[GrantM]

The problem is that it takes coercion to get the traditionalists to not be racist, misogynistic, classist, xeno- and LGBTQ-phobic - and they find progress to be oppressive. That is to say, the divisions are irreconcilable. And it is disingenuous of Pinker to say that they are all good ideas - or that they all have a place. Two of them are covers for ideologues that stand in the way of human flourishing. There is no good-faith argument for returning to a "simpler time where women knew their place, gays stayed in the closet, and the [insert minority] help was okay with the scraps we threw them". Just like there is no good-faith argument for destroying the planet for short-term profit or for denying healthcare and food to those who need it. The line, it is drawn, the curse it is cast. And the times....they are a changing.

Yeah, i don't think you got the point. None of the concepts are problematic in themselves, but need to be balanced to support the values of the society.
As such, they aren't "covers" for anything, they are truths. Humans can only deal with so much change - there is a role for culture, there is a role for historical knowledge.
Oppression can be incorrectly redefined as any unequal outcome. Society cannot be totally free - there are competing rights that have to be weighed.

It's sort of weird that political tribes have attempted to capture (some successfully) certain ideas as their own, when they used to be shared values.
I think the important way forward is for people understand there is a way to discuss what these ideas share in common, rather than try to exclude and divide
people along false lines.

-g

[echappist]

npr 40+ years ago had some teeth.
they now knaw with gums only.
David Brooks style.

Funny you mention Brooks, as he used to be on Friday's All Things Considered. I personally can't tolerate Brooks, America's pearl-clutcher-in-chief who constantly wails about erosion of "values", only to divorce his wife and marry his former assistant who is 23-year younger than he is. Does he have any sense of self-reflection? Nah, he'll keep on haranguing. Then again, I can't imagine his alimony payment being low.

If people could graduate beyond the left/right political spectrum, recognizing that it's a package of tribal positions,
there might be hope of dialogue and political progress. What we need is a model how to have a political discussion.

Libertarian - anti coercion
Progressive - anti oppression
Conservative - pro tradition

These are all good ideas*. The key is to put good faith people together and have the hard conversations,
talk about how the benefits of each of these ideas, not how to maximize one while disregarding the others.

-g

*this isn't mine. Pinker said society can't be:Fair, Free, Equal all at the same time. Politics is about choices.

Those are academic definitions of libertarianism and conservatism. The actual prevalent forms, as practiced today, are quite a bit different, as it is really about expediency and the golden rule (as in, one with the gold rules), as opposed to conducting oneself according to any sort of principles. Opposition party in power? We have to be fiscally prudent. Opposition party out of power? Let's run up the debt.

Also, as for libertarianism, one person's anti-coercion is another's oppression. The version of libertarianism as espoused by its loudest proponent pays lip service on some anti-coercion measures as a fig leaf but is really focused on relaxation of rules for the legally created concept of corporate personhood, except all externalities generated therefrom are heaped wholesale onto actual, natural-born person. Environmental pollution (think GE with PCBs dumped into the Hudson and various perfluoro polymer producers polluting ground water), de-clawing of FAA, free-for-all acquisition in the form of leveraged buyouts, etc. It's a Randian fantasy taken to the extreme, all "rights and freedoms" while eschewing responsibility, basically polar opposite of (and just about as practical as) collectivism.

[GrantM]

Those are academic definitions of libertarianism and conservatism. The actual prevalent forms, as practiced today, are quite a bit different, as it is really about expediency and the golden rule (as in, one with the gold rules), as opposed to conducting oneself according to any sort of principles. Opposition party in power? We have to be fiscally prudent. Opposition party out of power? Let's run up the debt.

Agreed, i think that's a huge part of the problem, political tribes are not based on an ideologically consistent and coherent set of priors,
but rather act for the most part like cults. And the spectrum of establishment parties are not representative of the non-believers either.

-g

[johnmdesigner]

Remember when he had mistresses sprinkled throughout the Italian gov't? His reign was like a low quality show on late nite cable TV, but it felt like someone had written a script, at least.

We need a Cicciolina in the Senate. Would make things way more interesting.

[Mark Walberg]

Passed this place on a ride recently.
Maybe these folks can help us !

America Repair.JPG

[Clean39T]

Yeah, i don't think you got the point. None of the concepts are problematic in themselves, but need to be balanced to support the values of the society.
As such, they aren't "covers" for anything, they are truths. Humans can only deal with so much change - there is a role for culture, there is a role for historical knowledge.
Oppression can be incorrectly redefined as any unequal outcome. Society cannot be totally free - there are competing rights that have to be weighed.

It's sort of weird that political tribes have attempted to capture (some successfully) certain ideas as their own, when they used to be shared values.
I think the important way forward is for people understand there is a way to discuss what these ideas share in common, rather than try to exclude and divide
people along false lines.

-g

Gotcha - I was going more in the direction of in-practice than in-theory.

For me the political points only matter once the social justice issues have been addressed. If conservatives and libertarians were capable of not discriminating against others on the basis of race, gender, ethnicity, income, religious affiliation, physical abilities, etc., there would be a conversation to be had. They by and large clearly are not - at least not in this country, at this time.

When it comes to issues of culture and living a good life, human flourishing, etc. - which gets confused for politics more often than not - social justice is again primary. It has to be. Something may be a tradition and may be part of your culture (flying Old Glory), or it may be your expression of freedom (burning your trash), but if it impinges on other groups in a way that fundamentally impairs their ability to live with their own dignity and freedom, it is simply not a just act in this modern and always-in-contact world to live out those traditions or freedoms.

So, I am happy at some point to discuss conservative or libertarian approaches to education, health-care, and the enforcement of law - I just need those two groups to first show that they believe that all humans are to be treated with dignity and respect, cared for with a social safety net and basic needs that allow the same, and that the environment is worth protecting for future generations, so they too can live with dignity.

Until then, politics for me remain a distraction and all-too-convenient cover for the groups that still believe they are somehow worth more as humans just because they were born white, rich, male, american, etc. - i.e., a cover.


* and I'm just riffing here, not attacking your statements or anything - replying on a forum is always taking a risk of taking things out of context or not understanding where the other person is coming from..

[GrantM]

So, I am happy at some point to discuss conservative or libertarian approaches to education, health-care, and the enforcement of law - I just need those two groups to first show that they believe that all humans are to be treated with dignity and respect, cared for with a social safety net and basic needs that allow the same, and that the environment is worth protecting for future generations, so they too can live with dignity.

So who are you reading that lean more to the right? Coleman Hughes? Glenn Loury? Saagar Enjeti?

[Clean39T]

So who are you reading that lean more to the right? Coleman Hughes? Glenn Loury? Saagar Enjeti?

That's out of my depth - waaaay out. My views of conservatives and libertarians are observational, not intellectual. Sure, I read some Rawles and was force-fed Rand at some point. Probably a few others. But I've definitely spent more time with the Left over the years.. Damn internet has really cramped my reading. Plus I read a lot for work. So usually by the end of the day I just want to ride my bike and scroll memes.

[jclay]

Done, though it's a more general address of what both parties offer. Submitted to the Pensacola News Journal and the Panama City News Herald, both conservative bastions.

The rest of you, get writing.

A small victory that I hope will open the eyes of the tiny percentage of remaining undecided, malleable voters; this got published, verbatim, in the Tallahassee Democrat:

Congressman Neal Dunn wrote on Facebook today that “Democrats want to defund, destroy, and dismantle our country”; that was corrosive, irresponsible and patently untruthful.

Citizens of all political stripes should reject such destructive statements and censure their authors. What will destroy our country are the demagoguery, incompetence and calculated political divisiveness of people like Congressman Dunn and President Trump.

Our nation and world are rapidly changing; that will not be stopped. We will thoughtfully plan and respond to that reality or suffer the consequences.

The future will not be a return to the sanitized world of Leave it to Beaver. We must acknowledge and ameliorate the corrosive results of historical and current racial wrongs, provide affordable education from trade school to university, gain the advantages of lower cost, family stability and industrial competitiveness provided by universal health care, protect the environment and start the job creating task of repairing and morphing our infrastructure into a more sustainable model; and much more. The Democratic Party and progressives have acknowledged and accepted the task; the Republican Party promotes the mirage of return to the past, has tried to divide us, and in so doing offers only destruction and failure.

And no John, Roe v Wade has nothing to do with my decision making, (I'm pro-choice) other than it's another "the sky is falling" outcry. It won't be overturned, period, but it's another "let's fire up the protest machine!" when a conservative, and "oh my God"- a Catholic judge is nominated.

Having been shown that it isn't just a "let's fire up the protest machine!", how real world decisions are effectively removing the choice from a lot of women, you have no reply? Does the evidence given to you make no dent in your position, give you no cause for rumination? It should.

[murphy]

According to Nate Silver / fivethirtyeight.com Missouri, where I live, is a pink state where Trump is forecast to win by 10% points. Nevertheless, unless I am deathly ill, I will vote in person on Nov. 3 and proudly cast a ballot for Joe Biden.

I think the only thing that could possibly make this state pink is St. Louis on one side and Kansas City on the other; everything in between (except maybe Columbia) is a sea of red. That being said I will also be voting bright and early for Biden, but I don't have much hope for my state.

[thollandpe]

There is one organization that seems to be consistently meeting its objectives and seeing a huge (and unpresidented) return on its investment.

“Russia’s persistent objective is to weaken the United States and diminish our global role. Using a range of efforts, including internet trolls and other proxies, Russia continues to spread disinformation in the U.S. that is designed to undermine confidence in our democratic process and denigrate what it sees as an anti-Russia ‘establishment’ in America.”

Nice when one of your “other proxies” occupies the Oval Office.

https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsro...-election-2020

[beeatnik]

Has anyone mentioned that Evangelicals, Fundamentalists and Pentecostals consider Catholics satanic. As in, literally, the Pope is Satan's representative on Earth. But they're packing the Supreme Court with Roman Catholics? Is this kind of like their support of Israel to accelerate The Rapture? Christian Freaks are so weird.

[johnmdesigner]

The fly landed on Pence’s head. Nuff said.

[climbgdh]

has anyone mentioned that evangelicals, fundamentalists and pentecostals consider catholics satanic. As in, literally, the pope is satan's representative on earth. But they're packing the supreme court with roman catholics? Is this kind of like their support of israel to accelerate the rapture? Christian freaks are so weird.

^^^^^^ this x 100000000000

[beeatnik]

^^^^^^ this x 100000000000

Weird and apocalyptic. Or more accurately, evil. If we define evil as longing for the deaths of billions in order to bring JC back to Earth.

[robin3mj]

Creating vast wedges of single issue voters has worked surprisingly well for the R’s over the past three decades. This is just more of the same.

(And this despite the fact that many Irish/Italian/etc catholic have also historically been pro labor, it’s really remarkable when you think about it.)