2020 Democratic Presidential Primary | OT | Hickenlooper makes it to the debate

Status
Not open for further replies.
OP
OP
pigeon

pigeon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,597
Totally not like we have evidence of Russian interference and the Russians are actively dismantling democracies around the world through divide and conquer.

Nope it’s just us neoliberals afraid of a Bernie presidency!
This is totally unrelated wtf

We're not talking about Russian intelligence here we're talking about people wanting to throw around fun references to the USSR without having to engage with all the gulags and things. Like I keep saying, how come nobody ever posts any Pol Pot memes? Isn't he a great example of a revolutionary communist leader? Is there some reason don't we see more Khmer Rouge posters?

Yes! It's all the mass killings! People have internalized the idea that Pol Pot massacring a huge number of innocents to fail to create a communist state was actually bad and should not be lionized. They just don't seem to have grasped that about, like, the Holodomor.
 

Cocaloch

Banned
Nov 6, 2017
4,562
Where the Fenians Sleep
The issue is that given the presence of people on the forum who literally hold those types of views
I'm not sure the presence of literally anyone believing something is really that meaningful. Tankies aren't even slightly prevalent here in terms of absolute numbers or especially in discursive presence. BY all means call out tankies if you see them, but I'm not sure what acting like they are a serious group here accomplishes other than ad hominems.

(most recent flashpoint on this: Venezuela where "things are fine, western media lies, Maduro's last elections are legitimate" line of argument came up)
I'm sure there are a couple of people that said everything is fine, I'm also sure far more people wrote far more about being anti-interventionist despite not everything being fine.

when these subjects come up, being explicit and not deflecting is helpful because some people very much are in the "I'm going to argue what would need to be true in order to do X" mindset. (Fork's response clarifying was much appreciated.)
Yes, being explicit is good. No one is saying it's not. The issue isn't asking people to be explicit, it's implications about people being tankies.

I think it's a pretty serious accusation to suggest someone is actually a mindless supporter of the USSR, and it's one that isn't reasonably applied to anyone in the context of the discussion every time I've seen it come up on this website.

Yes! It's all the mass killings! People have internalized the idea that Pol Pot massacring a huge number of innocents to fail to create a communist state was actually bad and should not be lionized. They just don't seem to have grasped that about, like, the Holodomor.
Who are these people man? Are they in this thread? Can you quote them?

Tankies exist, but how are they that relevant to this conversation? You can't reasonably get mad at me for being off topic when challenging someone's arguments but then have an argument based on people that believe something existing elsewhere in a way that isn't clearly connected to the discussion at hand.
 
Last edited:

TheModestGun

Member
Dec 5, 2017
2,214
it doesn't matter if the person is being genuine when the argument they are supporting is hostile

The time for education has passed. It is not on the shoulders of minorities to give clueless majorities patience and kindness. They can either sit at the table or be dismissed from it. My avenue for said dismissal has been made clear by now.
I’ll be honest here, after reading through your interactions with that “Brocialist” guy it didn’t really seem as though what he was supporting was hostile to you. It seemed like he was talking about the idea of a broader organizing principal and trying to change the notion of who the working class is and what it represents. Black people and POC of all kinds are the working class as well. Not just white people.

I can for sure see and understand your reticence to the phrasing and term due to some problematic associations historically but I think class consciousness needs to be more broadly recognized and one of the biggest issues liberals/the left have struggled to address is a unifying political message. We have had a hard time creating a unifying principal or idea to join around. That’s why there are so many disparate groups within the Democratic Party, and why we have a hard time affecting change.

But if I missed apart of the thread chain and he was just being a dick, then I apologize in advance.
 

Kirblar

Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,880
I'm not sure the presence of literally anyone believing something is really that meaningful. Tankies aren't even slightly prevalent here in terms of absolute numbers of especially in discursive presence. BY all means call out tankies if you see them, but I'm not sure what acting like they are a serious group here accomplishes other than ad hominems.

I'm sure there are a couple of people that said everything is fine, I'm also sure far more people wrote far more about being anti-interventionist despite not everything being fine.

Yes, being explicit is good. No one is saying it's not. The issue isn't asking people to be explicit, it's implications about people being tankies.

I think it's a pretty serious accusation to accuse someone of actually being a mindless supporter of the USSR, and one that isn't reasonably applied to anyone in the context of the discussion every time I've seen it come up on this website.

Who are these people man? Are they in this thread? Can you quote them?
It's not about accusing people, it's about asking people to be specific so that they're clearly differentiating themselves and we don't have to guess. This is true of many topics, not just the USSR, when you have lines of opinion that could be coming out of people based one either a) differences of opinions on the evidence or b) a horrificly awful worldview ideology. This is true of topics relating to race, gender, foreign policy, etc. etc. It's unavoidable, and it's why people are constantly on guard in a world where we've got a guy named "Brocialist" dropping into the thread about how identity politics elected Trump yesterday.

You do also have members of group (a) accidentally picking up the arguments of group (b) because they don't understand why the arguments are a problem. (Happened a lot in the Venezuela thread) Being explicit helps also tease this out and avoid getting them lumped into category (b) because they weren't filtering sources well enough.
I’ll be honest here, after reading through your interactions with that “Brocialist” guy it didn’t really seem as though what he was supporting was hostile to you. It seemed like he was talking about the idea of a broader organizing principal and trying to change the notion of who the working class is and what it represents. Black people and POC of all kinds are the working class as well. Not just white people.

I can for sure see and understand your reticence to the phrasing and term due to some problematic associations historically but I think class consciousness needs to be more broadly recognized and one of the biggest issues liberals/the left have struggled to address is a unifying political message. We have had a hard time creating a unifying principal or idea to join around. That’s why there are so many disparate groups within the Democratic Party, and why we have a hard time affecting change.

But if I missed apart of the thread chain and he was just being a dick, then I apologize in advance.
This is why the first post was a problem - https://www.resetera.com/threads/2020-democratic-presidential-primary-ot-bernies-running-but-yang-wants-1000-mo-ubi.91234/page-159#post-18228378
 
OP
OP
pigeon

pigeon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,597
I wish I was.

Cocaloch tried to explain you his point and you just went "oh food discussion doesnt belong here".
Kirblar: The USSR was trash.
Brainchild: The USA is trash.
Me: That seems like whataboutism to me.
Cocaloch: No, it was a challenging of implicit norms about historical evaluation and (1/372)

I find this reality denial impossibly enraging to engage with. I'm happy to accept that you are incapable of recognizing any error or misstep from a person you personally like, but in that case please stop wasting my time since you clearly have no intention of productive conversation.
 

Midramble

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
2,869
San Francisco
This country was built on the backs of slaves and its founders claimed this land by nearly eradicating its aboriginal inhabitants; the descendants of said founders have yet to make amends with the descendants of the people this country's founders oppressed for their own benefit.

Currently, there are more than 3000 cities with lead poisoning toxicity worse than Flint, MI. It is an environmental catastrophe that has thrust our most vulnerable citizens into 3rd world conditions, where they do not have fair access to one of the most basic biological necessities: clean water.

We Americans do not get to sit on our high horses and talk about how much better we are than the USSR. Not when we ignore the moral imperative taking care of our own children's most basic needs. There are things we can be praised for, but overall, I'd say this country is absolute basura.
You say clean water, but that article seems to point that the other cities seem to stem from existing legacy paint and industrial waste. Do you have another article that talks specifically about water? I ask because my understanding was that water is constantly tested and Flint was a case of neglectful testing and covering up, while these other cases seem to be of people going to and living in old industrial areas that haven't been cleaned up. Like instances where asbestos still exists in the US and when it is found it is removed while in some places asbestos is still allowed for use.

Though on that particular case it seems asbestos may be coming back here as well due to the current administration.
 
Mod post - stay on topic

B-Dubs

Oh well, what the hell?
Administrator
Oct 25, 2017
15,327
Official Staff Communication
Enough. This is not the thread to debate the merits of the Soviet Union or Communism or Capitalism or any of the other crazy derails you all like to go on. This is a containment thread for all the 2020 Dem Primary news. Don't derail it again.
 

Cocaloch

Banned
Nov 6, 2017
4,562
Where the Fenians Sleep
It's not about accusing people, it's about asking people to be specific so that they're clearly differentiating themselves and we don't have to guess. This is true of many topics, not just the USSR, when you have lines of opinion that could be coming out of people based one either a) differences of opinions on the evidence or b) a horrificly awful worldview ideology. This is true of topics relating to race, gender, foreign policy, etc. etc. It's unavoidable, and it's why people are constantly on guard in a world where we've got a guy named "Brocialist" dropping into the thread about how identity politics elected Trump yesterday.

You do also have members of group (a) accidentally picking up the arguments of group (b) because they don't understand why the arguments are a problem. (Happened a lot in the Venezuela thread) Being explicit helps also tease this out and avoid getting them lumped into category (b) because they weren't filtering sources well enough.
Communication is a two way street. Often it helps to be explicit, but it also helps to not immediately read people as being Tankies or possible Tankies when the vast majority of people that would say such things aren't Tankies.

It'd probably also help if people were asked to clarify their opinions before the pejorative is even brought up.
 

Sami

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,422
This is the biggest reason for me that Bernie is far and away my first pick. Warren has gotten better in recent years so I wouldn't feel gross giving her a vote in 2020 either.

I really want to see the Democrats move further left on this issue because I do not personally feel comfortable voting for a candidate that refuses to acknowledge Israel's atrocities against the Palestinians.
 

Kirblar

Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,880
You say clean water, but that article seems to point that the other cities seem to stem from existing legacy paint and industrial waste. Do you have another article that talks specifically about water? I ask because my understanding was that water is constantly tested and Flint was a case of neglectful testing and covering up, while these other cases seem to be of people going to and living in old industrial areas that haven't been cleaned up. Like instances where asbestos still exists in the US and when it is found it is removed while in some places asbestos is still allowed for use.

Though on that particular case it seems asbestos may be coming back here as well due to the current administration.
Going back on topic, Lead Poisoning was in Clinton's 2016 platform and it almost assuredly will be in our 2020 candidate's platform. It's a massive infrastructure cost but it needs to happen because it just straight up makes society worse off. Vox had a good overview here- https://www.vox.com/2016/3/9/11186504/clinton-flint-lead-poisoning

There's a lot of good historical stuff out there on the topic, the major issue is that lead is pervasive and widespread and that makes it a pain in the ass. Lead pipes deep underground, lead paint in old housing, emissions in the ground/soil/etc. There's one study here detailing just how prevalent it was in early 1900s cities - http://www.pitt.edu/~troesken/papers/lead2.pdf and there's at least one explicitly showing the "install lead pipes" = "violent crime goes up" problem by looking at installations and tracking the stats in the area relative to the baseline in the era overall.

If you were gonna toss social engineering stuff in a "Green New Deal" this absolutely should be in there.
 

TheModestGun

Member
Dec 5, 2017
2,214
It's not about accusing people, it's about asking people to be specific so that they're clearly differentiating themselves and we don't have to guess. This is true of many topics, not just the USSR, when you have lines of opinion that could be coming out of people based one either a) differences of opinions on the evidence or b) a horrificly awful worldview ideology. This is true of topics relating to race, gender, foreign policy, etc. etc. It's unavoidable, and it's why people are constantly on guard in a world where we've got a guy named "Brocialist" dropping into the thread about how identity politics elected Trump yesterday.

You do also have members of group (a) accidentally picking up the arguments of group (b) because they don't understand why the arguments are a problem. (Happened a lot in the Venezuela thread) Being explicit helps also tease this out and avoid getting them lumped into category (b) because they weren't filtering sources well enough.

This is why the first post was a problem - https://www.resetera.com/threads/2020-democratic-presidential-primary-ot-bernies-running-but-yang-wants-1000-mo-ubi.91234/page-159#post-18228378
Thanks for the explanation. Yeah his framing especially the initial post does sound hostile to minority specific issues now with that framing.
 

brainchild

GameXplain
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
6,775
Minnesota
User Banned (1 day): ignoring modpost, continuing derail
They can both be trash but your argument was literally “the USSR can’t be trash because the US is trash”

If you have moved to “they’re both trash” great we won
I never made that argument in the first place. The point was about mentioning some positive aspects of other countries even when they're considered to be generally terrible. If that's not ok to do, the same would apply to the US as well; not that the USSR wasn't trash.

We have programs designed to address this. (School Lunch, food subsidies, etc.) Yes, they aren't effective enough and people still fall through the cracks. This does not require revolution. You can iterate on this stuff, we've been doing it for a long time and will continue to do so.

And doing so is possible because we have enough food/wealth/etc. to redistribute. You can't redistribute food so that there's a baseline amount for everyone if not enough food exists to cover everyone in the first place.
The lead crisis deserves prolonged, national attention. These cities need federal funding at this point since the causes are partially infrastructural and environmental, and it's not something each respective city can handle on their own. Unfortunately, we can't address the problem with policies if there's no one or no money to enforce them, which is the situation we're in right now.

A large part of the problem is the lack of priorities. If the government doesn't think the issue is that important, it's not going to be dealt with, regardless of the programs that are in place. And with institutional racism alive and well, it's going to be even harder for communities of color to get the help they need.
 

Reyes

Member
Oct 25, 2017
16,577
Moving from the current convo:

We have another candidate saying to remove the fillbuster, anyone here against doing it?
 

Soul Skater

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,337
Moving from the current convo:

We have another candidate saying to remove the fillbuster, anyone here against doing it?
No

Really like we saw in the GOP in full control these past years, they were much more reluctant to vote a certain way when their legislation actually had a chance of passing. And really it was a good cover to have an excuse as to why they couldn’t do some of the things they promised that they know would blow up in their face if they actually went through with it

It’s a stupid system of just endless games and can kicking. The GOP killed it and went around it when it came time to get things done that they actually want

It’s also worth noting you can gut or over turn legislation passed with 60 votes with 50. So even in the *not possible* event we got 60 votes a future republican congress could just take it back with 50. You can also appoint judges that are against the legislation your opponent wants with 50. Its not fair and makes no sense
 

Soul Skater

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,337
But if we do both then problem solved?
House, senate + presidency without the buster.. yes. We theoretically could add as many states as we would be able to

But it’s going to be hard to get any. We need to sweep. I don’t just getting the majority will be enough. We need as many seats as possible because there’s going to be opposition to it and we’ll need some no votes to spare
 

Apharmd

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,858
get rid of the senate altogether.
Agreed. The Senate really is a relic. Harris and Feinstein represent almost 40m Americans. Wyoming's two senators represent less than 600,000 people... Democrats control most of the wealthiest, most educated, thriving, exciting, diverse parts of the country but are not represented in government to an extent that reflects this.
 

Fork

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
4,398
Lima, Peru
Cant imagine how much stress the new dem administration will have considering they have two years to basically fix the US before a midterm wave probably ruins their majorities.

sigh
 
Status
Not open for further replies.