American Politics IV: 1400 Reasons Why(A Stimulus Serial)

[Picairn]

It is my understanding that once it became apparent that the KKK was not interested in being a workers' rights union of the Democratic Party (which they pretended to be) but advancing violence, Bedford (as one of its leaders) ordered it disbanded, then repudiated and distanced himself from it. But since he was an East of the Mississippi Democrat he wasn't worth leaning much about in history class. Regardless, destroying historical monuments keeps the next generation ignorant of history; and doomed to repeat the mistakes of those whom they in their malice and own bigotry would destroy.

Nonsense, removing statues of bigots (or putting them into museums) does not erase history. People know and remember historical figures from textbooks, records and inscriptions detailing the deeds of those long dead. I'd be more worried if extremists start to burn ancient books and records than removing a statue and putting it in a museum.

I wouldn't say the GOP, but American Conservative Republicans by definition are hostile to all forms of despotism be it by the one -- tyranny, the few -- oligarchy, or the many --democracy.

A nonsensical position. That will leave no other system to govern.

Only when Democracy is ameliorated by the rule of law, and good order such as in Western Europe shackled from its abuses by parliaments and their strangulating morass of unworkable government bureaucracies that tramples on the rights of everybody with equal aplomb, or restrained from its mischief, such as in the United States with a well written Federal Constitutional Republic that checks and balances its abuses while securing the blessings of liberty to all.

This is some American Exceptionalism nonsense. The rights of citizens in Western Europe are not more trampled on than the US, that is - we have instances of police, politicians and judges violating Americans' rights with aplomb in favor of tyrannical legalism and the interests of the rich. Who in their right mind would look at Citizens United or Kelo, the former allowing unlimited corporate money in politics and the latter giving states' government full power to eminent domain one's property for private development, and say that the little man is guaranteed better protections than his neighbors on the other side of the Atlantic? Who in their right mind would look at the incredible amount of voter suppression bills coming to the floor in many Republican states, and say that the Americans have equal protections to exercise their God-given rights? Who in their right mind would look at police routinely abusing their powers, beating up innocent black citizens and jailing them in the prison industrial complex, and say that Americans are secured their blessings of liberty? What kind of a joke is this?

Direct democracy is two wolves and one sheep voting on what's for dinner. A republic is two wolves and a well armed sheep voting on what's not for dinner. The United States was set up as a Federal Constitutional Republic that was designed to stop the tyranny of the majority against the rights of the minority. Democracy always tries to destroy that.

Non-sequitur devoid of logic. No country today practices direct democracy of the ancient Athens. Hell, none today allows for direct public assemblies of the old Roman Republic. Instead, all lower houses of bicameral nations are composed of elected representatives, in unicameral nations also the same. The tyranny of the majority scenario, is virtually non-existent in countries with a strong Constitution (written or non-written) and an independent judiciary, a feature which is a central theme in almost all Western democracies. More often than not, the biggest threat to the people everywhere is not a vicious mob crying for blood, but oligarchs buying politicians for influence or power-hungry generals vying for a throne.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Moving statues and busts to museums where they can be quietly dismantles or mothballed is not an option when forcing people to come face to face with the evils of their own past.

Why does a statue being in a museum make it easier to be dismantled? Surely vigilant defenders of historical education such as yourself would work just as hard to prevent its destruction no matter where it's located.

Do you have any evidence about the motives of "vigilant defenders" to lead to this extraordinary accusation that removing statues from their neighbourhoods, would extend even as far as removing statues of the same person in someone else's neighbourhood?

Because without evidence they would do that, you really can't bang the wedge so far in, as to claim they would pursue the destruction of statues once they're in museum.

Of about 150 statues/memorials removed, only 11 by my count were toppled or destroyed. The others were removed without damage by government or private sponsors.

"Toppled" being typical btw: with the statue or obelisk rarely being beheaded or broken up with sledgehammers or explosives.

You didn't know that many of the "cancelled" monuments met a peaceful end, did you?

[Umeria]

Why does a statue being in a museum make it easier to be dismantled? Surely vigilant defenders of historical education such as yourself would work just as hard to prevent its destruction no matter where it's located.

Do you have any evidence about the motives of "vigilant defenders" to lead to this extraordinary accusation that removing statues from their neighbourhoods, would extend even as far as removing statues of the same person in someone else's neighbourhood?

Because without evidence they would do that, you really can't bang the wedge so far in, as to claim they would pursue the destruction of statues once they're in museum.

Of about 150 statues/memorials removed, only 11 by my count were toppled or destroyed. The others were removed without damage by government or private sponsors.

"Toppled" being typical btw: with the statue or obelisk rarely being beheaded or broken up with sledgehammers or explosives.

You didn't know that many of the "cancelled" monuments met a peaceful end, did you?

I was, um, being sarcastic. I don't actually think the pro-statue movement cares all that much about historical education. The fact that Narland doesn't support having the statue in a museum exemplifies this.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Statues are singular, typically having a special location in a park or square. They almost always show the subject in a heroic or at least thoughtful posture: a singular view which does not at all encourage "this guy is a mixed bag". Critically they do not change over time to match the public's view.

Good points but let's be fair here.
They're not supposed to be an expression of nuance but an invitation/encouragement to look for it and that's apparently a widely accepted function of statues that overrides the authorial intent.

It's still unproven BS tho.

Statues can be gratifying to look at (be art) and they can be landmarks to seek out or direct others to, actually more effectively if they are abstract, or rare examples of an animal statue. Some historical dude isn't even recognizable if they aren't famous (just "statue of a dude with a pointy hat") and in the era of moving pictures, old dudes with too many clothes on, battleship grey and stationary, aren't what I consider gratifying to look at.

If they're not supposed to be an expression of nuance, then it's ridiculous to expect the public to see them in a modern light as "great but flawed man" when they still have exactly the same form.

Let's compromise: for those who don't care much for stationary monotone models of some old dude, require that all historical figures be depicted astride a fine, stationary monotone Horse. And that they be so designed that a team of six or so strong civilians with no equipment can unseat the august pimp, and replace him (or her) seated backwards on the Horse. No harm done, besides government having to get in a crane, and the bronze ghost looking undignified for a day or so. If government tires of the expense, they can remove the rider and leave the public with a fine Horse.

[Kowani]

Wow
2 pages of debate on the destroying of statues
When what’s actually happening is that the statue’s just being moved from the Capitol building to a nearby history museum
The caliber of debate here never ceases to amaze me

[Neutraligon]

Statues are singular, typically having a special location in a park or square. They almost always show the subject in a heroic or at least thoughtful posture: a singular view which does not at all encourage "this guy is a mixed bag". Critically they do not change over time to match the public's view.

Good points but let's be fair here.
They're not supposed to be an expression of nuance but an invitation/encouragement to look for it and that's apparently a widely accepted function of statues that overrides the authorial intent.

It's still unproven BS tho.

Most people do not pay attention to the statues at all. They are part of the landscape. Considering when they where commissioned they have not artistic, nor any historical significance.

[Kilobugya]

Sometimes it feels like every other male politician in NY has an abuse allegation or two. Fucking christ.

Sadly a lot of male who were powerful (in politics or otherwise) before the "metoo" era did abuse of their power that way. Not all of them, sure, but many. It was the "norm" and they didn't even see it as wrong.

I hope that'll change and powerful men will be more respectful of others from now on, if only by fear of scandals. But hopefully once "using your power to sexually abuse others" will no longer be the tragic norm, it won't be just by fear of scandals, but also because they realize it's wrong. Cell me an optimist if you want

[Kilobugya]

The GOP is literally the enemy of democracy.

Well, the things they are selling (tax cuts for the rich and cuts to social spendings, letting corporations destroy the environment and exploit workers, oppressing minorities) don't have a majority backing them. So either they change or they cheat. We both know which of the two they have chosen.

[Blargoblarg]

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a35812573/steven-donziger-chevron-house-arrest/

So glad a higher profile outlet finally did a deep dive into this case bc it's insane

That guy's stuck in house arrest under ridiculous charges entirely because he won a lawsuit against a big polluting oil company. Just shows how powerful and vindictive the fossil fuel industry can be to anyone who tries to make them pay for the damage they've done to the environment and the climate.

...

You'd prefer it if he'd voted for Trump?

Blargoblarg is a 'he' ? Can't judge a poster by their flag I guess.

I expect anyone who voted for Bernie in the Primary to vote for the politically-most-similar viable candidate in the General.

However, in Blargoblarg's case, I seem to remember they live in a State where their Presidential vote cannot make a difference, so it's OK. Hawkins is fine. I was just teasing them about liking losers more than winners.

I am a 'he', yes. The flag is because I like that character from that show. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

And my Midwestern state with its six electoral votes went to Trump like it did in 2016. I'd rather vote for a losing candidate who supports the socialist policies I support than vote for a likely winning candidate who doesn't support those policies.

[Kenzo-Cyprii]

Unsure if this has been shared but;

The slippery slope being that this was years and years ago. I find what she said disgusting but at the same time we’ve all posted stupid things on Facebook and Twitter in our lives. Of course racism like that goes beyond some cringy tweet so...

She resigned and wasn’t fired. Would a mandatory cultural sensitivity program or some kind of evaluation have alleviated this, you think?

[Kowani]

thank fuck, finally

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Wow
2 pages of debate on the destroying of statues
When what’s actually happening is that the statue’s just being moved from the Capitol building to a nearby history museum
The caliber of debate here never ceases to amaze me

Forgive us for wandering from the news stories you offer. We consider the broader issue of whether statues are "destroyed" or "moved" or "stored" more interesting than what you admit right here is a small story.

Sometimes people with strong opinions will debate about things, within the scope of American Politics, which didn't happen in the last few hours. If you find that insulting to your aspiration to set the agenda every damn day, then I guess you'll have to get used to it.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

You're not trying to be racist, are you? You just like "bunga bunga" and wanted to say it

What?

Cuomo is Italian American. Berlusconi is plain Italian. That's the only link I can see with bunga bunga parties.

That's a racist link. So what do you have to say for yourself?

[Purgatio]

Statues are singular, typically having a special location in a park or square. They almost always show the subject in a heroic or at least thoughtful posture: a singular view which does not at all encourage "this guy is a mixed bag". Critically they do not change over time to match the public's view.

Good points but let's be fair here.
They're not supposed to be an expression of nuance but an invitation/encouragement to look for it and that's apparently a widely accepted function of statues that overrides the authorial intent.

It's still unproven BS tho.

Isn't it generally easier to encourage and invite people to take a nuanced, multi-dimensional view of past historical figures when the discussion of the historical figure in question is conducted in a context that lends itself to that kind of deep-dive detail and nuance? A history textbook? A history classroom? A history museum? Statues in common, depoliticised public spaces like, say, a park or square, are the worst ways of encouraging that kind of nuanced view of history. Statues like that are often treated like artifacts and monuments, placed on literal pedestals, historical figures draped in grandiose, lionised poses, exuding a 'larger than life' greatness and confidence that naturally lends itself to awe and admiration, not a nuanced sober debate about the merits and demerits of historical figures.

Authorial intent absolutely matters, especially when that intent shapes the way the statue is both sculpted and presented. If a statue of a racist historical figure is erected with a racist intent, that will influence how the statue is presented, it'll influence the impact the author wants the viewing public to receive upon glancing or looking up at the statue or monument at issue. One can't simply say that some nebulous, amorphous 'invitation' to 'look for' a nuanced historical debate can erase the tangible impacts of authorial intent.

[Juristonia]

What?

Cuomo is Italian American. Berlusconi is plain Italian. That's the only link I can see with bunga bunga parties.

That's a racist link. So what do you have to say for yourself?

Can you knock it off? It's not particularly clever.

[Pasong Tirad]

I wouldn’t we’re quite like 1920s Germany...yet. If the Republicans lose seats in the Senate and the House in 2022, they may learn a lesson, but then again, it looks like they’re not interested in winning general elections and are just scared(or supportive) of the MAGA base.

It wouldn't be like it at as as the Social Democrats SDP (Socialist LIte) were the failures in charge and the utter fail National Socialists NAZI (Socialist with Attitude) were the only two games in town. There was no Anti-Socialist option. All the Socialists in the US are in the Democrat Party. +90% of GOP and ~20% of Independents favor Trump's Anti-Socialist (all forms of Socialism be it Communism (International Socialism), Fascism (Corporato-Socialism), Naziism (National Socialism), Fabianism (Slow-Burn Socialism by Buracracy), or whatnot), free-market, and anti-oppressive regulation policies.

Hey uh can you define socialism for us here

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Cuomo is Italian American. Berlusconi is plain Italian. That's the only link I can see with bunga bunga parties.

That's a racist link. So what do you have to say for yourself?

Can you knock it off? It's not particularly clever.

Oh, so you're onboard with the "that's not racist, it's just a coincidence" apologism, too?

[Vassenor]

Can you knock it off? It's not particularly clever.

Oh, so you're onboard with the "that's not racist, it's just a coincidence" apologism, too?

So what link are they trying to make?

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Oh, so you're onboard with the "that's not racist, it's just a coincidence" apologism, too?

So what link are they trying to make?

If I actually cared that much, I would search NSG for all references to "bunga bunga parties" and other cross-case references like "the Lolita express" or "locker-room talk".

But I can't be bothered. It's been ages since I heard an American compare another American to Berlusconi (who btw was accused of sex with under-age girls, not just harassing office staff) and I laugh at the suggestion that the Italian connection is just a coincidence. I don't have to prove it, just point it out, for any reasonable person to see the racism there.

The nicest thing I can say is that Immortan Khan saw the joke get a good reaction elsewhere, and didn't realize it was racist. I'd like to hear it from IK themselves though.

[Esalia]

The GOP is literally the enemy of democracy.

It is my understanding that once it became apparent that the KKK was not interested in being a workers' rights union of the Democratic Party (which they pretended to be) but advancing violence, Bedford (as one of its leaders) ordered it disbanded, then repudiated and distanced himself from it. But since he was an East of the Mississippi Democrat he wasn't worth leaning much about in history class. Regardless, destroying historical monuments keeps the next generation ignorant of history; and doomed to repeat the mistakes of those whom they in their malice and own bigotry would destroy.

Statues are not keeping the next generation from being ignorant of history.

Hell, they're not even a thing keeping the next generation from being ignorant of history. Statues barely tell you anything about the person they're honouring, except maybe a plaque telling you why they're being honoured with a statue, which are usually brief and lacking in nuance and detail (if you're super lucky perhaps it's in a museum or part of a guided tour or something where you get a more in-depth explanation of them).

You can one hundred percent defend against ignorance without statues, and can be blindingly ignorant of history with statues.

So what link are they trying to make?

If I actually cared that much, I would search NSG for all references to "bunga bunga parties" and other cross-case references like "the Lolita express" or "locker-room talk".

But I can't be bothered. It's been ages since I heard an American compare another American to Berlusconi (who btw was accused of sex with under-age girls, not just harassing office staff) and I laugh at the suggestion that the Italian connection is just a coincidence. I don't have to prove it, just point it out, for any reasonable person to see the racism there.

The nicest thing I can say is that Immortan Khan saw the joke get a good reaction elsewhere, and didn't realize it was racist. I'd like to hear it from IK themselves though.

This is an incredibly weak connection to say that any reasonable person can see the racism.

Like, the best you have is "bunga bunga was used against an Italian, Cuomo's an Italian American, therefore racist". Instead of, y'know, being a joke about just how many people have accused Cuomo of being sexually inappropriate.

I suppose calling American politicians with English ancestry twats is racist now? It's now racist to recycle insults or deriding jokes if the people it's used against share an ethnicity?

[Kannap]

I wouldn’t we’re quite like 1920s Germany...yet. If the Republicans lose seats in the Senate and the House in 2022, they may learn a lesson, but then again, it looks like they’re not interested in winning general elections and are just scared(or supportive) of the MAGA base.

It wouldn't be like it at as as the Social Democrats SDP (Socialist LIte) were the failures in charge and the utter fail National Socialists NAZI (Socialist with Attitude) were the only two games in town. There was no Anti-Socialist option. All the Socialists in the US are in the Democrat Party. +90% of GOP and ~20% of Independents favor Trump's Anti-Socialist (all forms of Socialism be it Communism (International Socialism), Fascism (Corporato-Socialism), Naziism (National Socialism), Fabianism (Slow-Burn Socialism by Buracracy), or whatnot), free-market, and anti-oppressive regulation policies.

Are we still pretending fascism and Hitler's Nazi Party are a form of socialism as if the socialists weren't some of the first people Hitler sent to the camps?

[Purgatio]

It wouldn't be like it at as as the Social Democrats SDP (Socialist LIte) were the failures in charge and the utter fail National Socialists NAZI (Socialist with Attitude) were the only two games in town. There was no Anti-Socialist option. All the Socialists in the US are in the Democrat Party. +90% of GOP and ~20% of Independents favor Trump's Anti-Socialist (all forms of Socialism be it Communism (International Socialism), Fascism (Corporato-Socialism), Naziism (National Socialism), Fabianism (Slow-Burn Socialism by Buracracy), or whatnot), free-market, and anti-oppressive regulation policies.

Are we still pretending fascism and Hitler's Nazi Party are a form of socialism as if the socialists weren't some of the first people Hitler sent to the camps?

Not to mention that anti-socialism was kinda like inextricably linked together with Hitler and the Nazis' anti-Semitism. The whole concept of Judeo-Bolshevism or Judeo-Marxism and the linking of Jews with the German left and the Soviet Union more generally. But no doubt someone's gonna come along and point out that they had "sozialisten" in the party name so that must mean the Nazis were socialists, as if that alone proves anything. There's no real point opening up this discussion.

[Vassenor]

I guess Virginia Woolf was being racist against Italians then back in the day then.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

If I actually cared that much, I would search NSG for all references to "bunga bunga parties" and other cross-case references like "the Lolita express" or "locker-room talk".

But I can't be bothered. It's been ages since I heard an American compare another American to Berlusconi (who btw was accused of sex with under-age girls, not just harassing office staff) and I laugh at the suggestion that the Italian connection is just a coincidence. I don't have to prove it, just point it out, for any reasonable person to see the racism there.

The nicest thing I can say is that Immortan Khan saw the joke get a good reaction elsewhere, and didn't realize it was racist. I'd like to hear it from IK themselves though.

This is an incredibly weak connection to say that any reasonable person can see the racism.

Like, the best you have is "bunga bunga was used against an Italian, Cuomo's an Italian American, therefore racist". Instead of, y'know, being a joke about just how many people have accused Cuomo of being sexually inappropriate.

I suppose calling American politicians with English ancestry twats is racist now? It's now racist to recycle insults or deriding jokes if the people it's used against share an ethnicity?

If you can't see it, don't take it badly. Your society is probably rife with racist assumptions and references, barely even noticed when they're instrumental to a joke.

Aussies are notoriously racist, but for most of us it's just friendly making-fun of people's peculiarities. Those of us who aren't consciously racist though, are acutely aware of racism where it's not friendly at all, but divisive. That joke about bunga bunga parties, would get you a reprimand in the public service, even if you said it on a break. Most bosses in the private sector would give you the benefit of the doubt, but they would bring it up later. They'd probably point out that you have no way of knowing if your co-workers have Italian ancestry or not. This is an essential aspect of multi-culturalism is that no-one has to announce their ancestry to have that respected.

Without that, you get ... Cuban Americans. So determined to fit in by being anti-Castro that they set themselves apart for generations. It's no good eh.

If you can't see that it's racist to compare Cuomo with Berlusconi (who was bad in other ways besides his sexual life) rather than Trump or Roy Moore, I can't help you with that. Living among racists may well make you racism-blind, and I can't help you with that. Just ask yourself, was the joke funny beyond "bunga bunga" being a comical sound?

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

I guess Virginia Woolf was being racist against Italians then back in the day then.

I expect. So what?