The General 'Murican Politics Thread

[-Robin-]

Those who say that institutional oppression is gone are those who gain the most from it never being spoken of again.

[SenEDDtor Missile]

"All [animals] are equal, but some are more equal than others." - Animal Farm altered Commandments after the pigs become just like humans.

The quote in question is an apt and succinct summary of institutional oppression (and yes I know it was referring to something a bit different, but the point stands).

[CleverSonicUsername]

17 hours ago, Rusty Spy said:

At the very least, can we at least say that Trump no longer has any right to talk shit about anyone now that we know that he's been pen pals with Russia behind our backs?

He was quoted a couple times a few years ago as having said he met Putin during a Miss Universe pageant and that Putin was a very nice guy. He then doubled down on a lie that he never met Putin in his life during the campaign, much in the same way he denied supporting the war in Iraq, another easily verifiable fib.

So nah. Most of the things he's talked shit about are things he's either been guilty of himself or is guilty of now, and it hasn't stopped him so far. He'll keep it up because Trump doesn't care.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

In other news, Trump told Netenyahu to back off on the Israeli settlements in front of reporters.

The hilarity in this is that this is the same stance Obama had when he was in office. Cue a "wtf?" from the Israeli PM.

[Tani Coyote]

Secretary of Labor nominee Puzder, famous for his sexualized burger ads and disdain for the living wage, has withdrawn himself from consideration after a tape where his ex-wife (incognito) discussed their abusive relationship surfaced in the Senate and on news sites.

Apparently several GOP Senators had asked Trump to come up with a replacement, losing their stomach for him as the allegations built up.

22 hours ago, Patticus said:

So no, this scandal alone probably won't deal a death blow to his nascent political career, but it will dog him for years, and play a key role in building the narrative of a president unfit to serve a second term.

It then becomes a question of his opponent, however. If they have baggage like Clinton did, it might just nullify Trump's own (as happened with Clinton).

I suppose the White House ruled out several key possibilities on the basis of corruption probes for a reason.

12 hours ago, Meta77 said:

Honestly I'd rather be pen pals with the second country with the most nukes in the world. People these days don't know how powerful those things are and how few it would take to wipe out most all of us. Doesn't mean you need to sleep with them but sure means you don't need to cross them

Most people are aware of how powerful nukes are. That's why mutually-assured destruction worked as policy for decades.

Frankly, the idea the United States is "hostile" towards Russia before Trump came into office is on par with the idea there's a war on Christmas because Christmas no longer enjoys a privileged, unchallenged position. This is what being removed from privilege and being equal looks like.

In reality, the United States has, for the most part, embraced a doctrine of self-determination and supported the idea that liberal democracy should eventually be implemented across the entire globe. Our problems with Russia stem in part from strategic issues (e.g. their cooperation with actual hostile regimes, like Venezuela or Iran) or from the fact they are upsetting that doctrine we've established. The fact Europe was destroyed by two world wars rooted in nationalist hysteria is enough evidence that wars for ethnic unification are unacceptable. Read: the West does not accept Russia's bullshit argument that they have a right to invade Georgia, Ukraine, or whatever other state because there are ethnic Russians there.

You'll notice: many don't take issue with the idea of Crimea rejoining Russia via a 100% fair, open referendum (and polls long before the occupation indicate that many Crimeans favored joining Russia) per se, but the way it happened. Russia invaded and occupied the place, then held the referendum. As soon as their man inside the Ukrainian government was ousted, they opted for an invasion over negotiation.

Russia's defenders frequently assert oppression on the basis of things like minority language protections being repealed, but that's a far cry from the Ukrainian or Georgian governments throwing Russians in camps or something.

And this is precisely where we tend to have beef with Russia. Not only are they rivals in places like Syria, but they actively flout the liberal consensus the United States and the West established in the aftermath of the Cold War. It should be noted that prior to Ukraine, we still had plenty of areas of cooperation with Russia: supplies to Afghanistan, the International Space Station, etc. Putin was a strategic rival, certainly, but he wasn't actively upsetting the order.

But once his troops started marching into other countries on flimsy bases like nationalism, he did. That's when it fell apart. See, if we normalize and legitimize active, persistent violations of national sovereignty on the basis of something like ethnic minorities, it sets a bad precedent and we'll be careening from one ethnic war to the next. The West learned from both World Wars just how awful this is, and it's frankly disappointing that Russia, the state that lost the most people in both Wars, has not.

One might point out Iraq as a case of America likewise flouting the order, as we did not get the UN's approval. But this ignores our justification: we argued (if falsely) that it was for the basis of regional peace, never mind against a dictator who had tried to destabilize the region before. Putin, on the other hand, uses 20th century arguments for his interventions.

Let's also look at the broader policy here: we can't be too close to Russia for a variety of reasons. Number one: this would cause China to feel encircled, and that would be disastrous. Number two: several of our European allies are wary of Russia, and expect us to side with them in disputes. This is why Trump is postulated to be a disaster for American foreign relations: he may get closer to Russia, but he's going to alienate just about everyone else.

Nuclear weapons aren't a good enough reason to throw out decades of key strategic relations with China, Western Europe, and the Pacific Rim, especially considering China has nuclear weapons of its own. As it stands, there is a tripolar balance of power (and this is likely to get even more complicated with the projected rise of India and Brazil) in the world: China, the West, and Russia. Russia is the junior partner in it all, trying to steer a middle ground between China and the US, even if it sides with China more (for obvious reasons, as it is the weaker power); if anything, getting close to Russia would run a higher risk of disaster because of what it might cause China to do in response.

Putin and his allies like to smugly declare that at least they're honest about their intentions, unlike America, but here's the difference: America's public stated purpose will do far more good for the world than his ever will. And history shows this pretty damned clearly.

6 hours ago, KHCast said:

Not sure if this is the right place to express my feelings on this, but do you guys think institutional oppression is still a thing in this country? It seems that many feel like it's not there, and that it not being as bad as it used to means people shouldn't act like it's a issue anymore.

It absolutely is.

What has changed is there are now cracks in the system: female Senators, gay Senators, Muslim Congressmen, black Presidents, etc. These are used as examples of how it is no longer an issue, when it's really just an argument that it's not quite as strong as it used to be.

The law has become largely blind to many demographics, further strengthening the argument, but blindness only works as policy if everyone is already fairly equal. There may not be specific prohibitions on black or poor suffrage, for example, but the various burdens imposed by voter ID and positioning of polling stations work to effectively curb their participation. One could argue this is unintentional, but it's so widespread that it's hard to not get Jim Crow South vibes from it.

Women are less likely to see promotion or similar pay, even with equal qualifications. Women and blacks receive less callbacks; a white convict has a higher callback rate than a black man with no criminal record. Darker-skinned Latinos (who are legal residents or citizens) are regularly caught up in attempts to round up the deported, and many live in constant fear due to the hardline approach to immigration issues; our citizenship structure means there are huge numbers of children who are either citizens who risk being torn from their families or who are technically undocumented but have lived here for so long they aren't aware they are. Blacks and men receive harsher sentences for the same crimes versus whites and women. The news media regularly depicts violence committed by blacks, but tends to downplay violence committed by whites. People who go on welfare (mostly single women and children) are demonized as lazy leeches whose only goal in life is to be baby factories. The list goes on.

The public sector and private sector both absolutely continue to practice oppressive behavior, for one reason or another.

[KHCast]

There's also educational and economical oppression even where minorities are less likely to escape poverty, or get into good schools compared to white peoples or Asians. 

The unfortunate thing though is that a lot of people I see chalk that up to personal/social issue vs a actual systematic problem. Still in their minds they think the system is not in this modern age created to oppress anyone.

[Patticus]

Trumple Thinskin has awoken from another fitful night of whatever nightmarish reality his consciousness passes into when he closes his eyes.

Today, like every other day, he is... displeased.

The overt hypocrisy continues. I seem to recall Trump, only last autumn, telling us (or at least heavily implying) that we should pay no attention to the sources of the Clinton campaign's leaked/hacked emails, and that we should instead focus on their content.

 

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

6 hours ago, Patticus said:

Trumple Thinskin

This needs to be a meme right now!!!!

[-Robin-]

So how about that Swedish Incident that happened yesterday? Glad we had Trump enlighten us on that attack!

 

Jesus christ. And this was just days after he griped about "fake news" media and called it the opposition party.

[AxelPrime]

35 minutes ago, -Robin- said:

So how about that Swedish Incident that happened yesterday? Glad we had Trump enlighten us on that attack!

 

Jesus christ. And this was just days after he griped about "fake news" media and called it the opposition party.

With all of these false claims of terrorist attacks, you can't help but feel that they really want a terrorist attack to happen or cause a false flag attack to justify their immigration ban.

What's next? Trump talks about the Moon Destruction Incident of 2001?

[shdowhunt60]

Just a heads up, Trump wasn't referring to a terrorist attack, but a report he saw on Fox News about the No-Go Zones in Sweden. 

He shouldn't have been vague like that, but to be fair everyone DID make an assumption. And assumptions tend to make a lot of asses.

[Nepenthe]

So he took a story from an already-unreputable news channel, didn't even quote it right, and went on air and spouted off about how Sweden's got an immigrant problem. And on top of the hundreds of other lies he has based policy and the WH's worldview on, we're supposed to give him the benefit of the doubt because he wasn't wrong in the way people initially said he was wrong? Seriously?

How about Trump actually start telling the truth about the world and learning how to read and parse information? He's the goddamned fucking President. He needs to start acting like it.

[kboyrulez12345]

It's even more embarrassing when you realize Trump, as the president, has access to a variety of more reliable intelligence agency's. He shouldn't have to use any TV news outlet.

[Tara]

4 minutes ago, kboyrulez12345 said:

It's even more embarrassing when you realize Trump, as the president, has access to a variety of more reliable intelligence agency's. He shouldn't have to use any TV news outlet.

According to recent leaks, he apparently spends an abhorrent amount of time watching the news instead of doing actual work at the White House so if that's true, chances are he got the information as a result of that, not because he was actively seeking it.

[Nepenthe]

2 hours ago, kboyrulez12345 said:

It's even more embarrassing when you realize Trump, as the president, has access to a variety of more reliable intelligence agency's. He shouldn't have to use any TV news outlet.

Because he started a fucking war with the intelligence and news community due to the Russian leaks, and also seems to be on this kick where he believes he doesn't need intelligence briefings because "he's intelligent." Everything about this fool is a constant reiteration of his superiority complex.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Really makes you wonder about those that are still supporting him and their intellect...

[shdowhunt60]

7 hours ago, Conquering Storm's Servant said:

Really makes you wonder about those that are still supporting him and their intellect...

Yeah, sometimes I wonder about my intellect too.

[Rusty Spy]

The shit that makes my piss boil the most about this debacle is how he's spent his whole time crying fake news at everything he doesn't like, giving endless praise to his tv safe spaces like Fox News, then goes on live tv in front of a crowd of people and delivers fake news taken from a news network reporting on fake statistics!

The level of hypocrisy this guy has displayed has reached critical mass and I'm ready to scream

Quote

He shouldn't have been vague like that, but to be fair everyone DID make an assumption. And assumptions tend to make a lot of asses.

I'm actually really sick of this excuse. Trump's use of innuendo and suggestive language is not subtle. We ALL know what he meant. When his supporters hear "you see what's happening in Sweden" he wanted to insinuate that Sweden's immigrants were causing problems for them and were dangerous. If there were an actual case of an incident or terror attack he would have been more specific, but he doesn't have any actual references so uses suggestive language and lets his supporters fill in the blanks.

[Tani Coyote]

Alt-right darling Milo Yiannopoulos is being rejected by the mainstream far more than he ever was before in light of his recent inappropriate comments, being uninvited as a keynote speaker at the D.C. Conservative Political Action Conference, having a book deal cancelled, and is expected to be dismissed from Breitbart News.

He's trying to act all apologetic for offensive comments, which is ironic given he's built his career from being a "people are too sensitive" ass.

Meanwhile, Trump is planning to issue a revised Executive Order regarding the refugee ban. It targets the same seven countries as the first order, but removes the singling out of Syrians and creates exemptions for green card holders and dual citizens.

Given the court issues with the original order stemmed from Trump's previous comments on a Muslim ban and lack of convincing evidence this would make the US safer, however, I wouldn't be surprised if the Ban Lite still gets overturned in the Courts.

The courts' orders didn't line item those parts of the ban, however, so I would think this order will be frozen just as quickly. He still hasn't addressed fundamental problems with the original order.

29 minutes ago, shdowhunt60 said:

Yeah, sometimes I wonder about my intellect too.

8 hours ago, Conquering Storm's Servant said:

Really makes you wonder about those that are still supporting him and their intellect...

I hate Trump as much as the next guy, but I think we go down a rabbit hole we really shouldn't go down when we start discussing the intelligence of people for their political views.

While there have been attempts to model intelligence (via the not completely holistic IQ score) across political viewpoints, the overall result is it's not enough to be a huge difference (this lack of a massive difference is precisely why many philosophers postulate the innate equality of human beings). Practically every human being is intelligent and rational; the issue is we only make as good a decision as the information we have available to us. This becomes particularly perilous when confirmation bias is in play, because it runs the risk of cutting off the flow of mind-changing information.

Your final argument is only as good as your premises. It doesn't help that while Trump lies plenty, so does the media, so it's fairly easy for there to be a partisan split. You would think we'd automatically distrust the government on the basis of libertarian principles (never mind the fact that while the media isn't completely trustworthy, it still has multiple competing sources), but this is the world we live in I suppose.

[Nepenthe]

6 minutes ago, Ogilvie said:

Alt-right darling Milo Yiannopoulos is being rejected by the mainstream far more than he ever was before in light of his recent inappropriate comments, being uninvited as a keynote speaker at the D.C. Conservative Political Action Conference, having a book deal cancelled, and is expected to be dismissed from Breitbart News.

The CPAC organization should be utterly ashamed for infringing upon Yiannopoulos' constitutional right to free speech. He should be allowed to continue promoting pedophilia so we can all just have a conversation. This cancellation is nothing more than special snowflakes getting offended at mere words because they frankly don't have an argument against him.

[KHCast]

@Ogilvie It certainly doesn't help that at that this point, with everything that's gone down, all I see from Trump supporters and moderates are people attempting to justify actions he does with weak straw pulling, finger pointing, and obscure instances in history that supposedly make  what Trump proposes "legal". Also doesn't help that they never seem to actually look at who they're defending and the threat he presents.

[shdowhunt60]

25 minutes ago, KHCast said:

@Ogilvie It certainly doesn't help that at that this point, with everything that's gone down, all I see from Trump supporters and moderates are people attempting to justify actions he does with weak straw pulling, finger pointing, and obscure instances in history that supposedly make  what Trump proposes "legal". Also doesn't help that they never seem to actually look at who they're defending and the threat he presents.

So... What Trump supporters have you talked to though? 

[KHCast]

Real life friends, social arguments online with those that aren't stereotypically seen as "uneducated conservative white dudes", etc. I mean I'm not seeing at this point much to defend the dude, so I don't blame people having hard times to make him look competent or presidential material without them attempting to decredit whatever media source makes a claim on him

[shdowhunt60]

1 hour ago, KHCast said:

Real life friends, social arguments online with those that aren't stereotypically seen as "uneducated conservative white dudes", etc. I mean I'm not seeing at this point much to defend the dude, so I don't blame people having hard times to make him look competent or presidential material without them attempting to decredit whatever media source makes a claim on him

I guess, from my perspective, I don't see much cause for outrage either. Most of the stuff I see complained about come across as not being a big deal, or are unsubstantiated. I take more umbrage with the fact that people are reacting this extremely to what tantamounts to being inconsequential. I care more about Antifa rioting than I do Trump saying something stupid. Trump always says stupid things, it's what Trump does. What's not okay are protests that turn violent due to mass hysteria.

I'm not going to make judgement calls on his presidency... I mean, ffs it's not even been 100 days yet, but there's things that he's doing that I like, and things that I don't like. I like that he's trying to get jobs back into the country, I think the travel ban is nothing but meaningless virtue signaling, I think that his choice for the head of the FCC is abhorent, and.... that's about it. What else has he done, really? Like I said, it hasn't even been 100 days yet.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

5 hours ago, shdowhunt60 said:

Yeah, sometimes I wonder about my intellect too.

I thought you didn't support him to begin with in the last American politics...