He's getting the "Progressive Icon" sarcastic label for the same reason Tulsi Gabbard is- they've got horrible, horrible views on many subjects that many handwave because they're "sticking it to the US".
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Progressive Icon Glenn Greenwald went on Fox News to both sides the MAGA teens and blame the media
- Thread starter jack_package_200
- Start date
"progressive icon" implies that he's some darling who is viewed completely uncritically by everyone to the left of kirblar
he isn't viewed as not being problematic, and is constantly dogged by controversies like this, even by people who like him. i'm not going to pull a liberal era poster move and ask you for "receipts" of people "handwaving" his behavior, because i'm certain you could find examples even though i don't really see it.
I mean, we just had one in the last thread where someone asked for receipts on Greenwald supporting the Iraq war, was given them, then refused to accept that Greenwald's own words said what they said they did.
Nothing about what they did to Phillips is "unremarkable"
okay so that person got owned i guess
at least greenwald didn't retract his support for invading iraq immediately prior to announcing he's running for president
but i don't even feel like that's an example of a progressive refusing to criticize glen for something like associating with Fox or defending tulsi gabbard, it's just a typical internet scenario of someone being uninformed about something and then refusing to admit they were wrong, in this case regarding someone's support of the iraq war which was in 2004
Last edited:
just cheekily following in the footsteps of icon, my hero and founder of whataboutism, glen greenwald
But seriously I've never heard of the man. And if he's said such shit, he's not progressive in the slightest. This is clearly a racist situation and anyone who would both sides it can easily be discarded from any discussion regarding leftism and social progress.
Last edited:
How old are you? Legitimately serious on this one because it's kind of impossible to not know who he is if you were politically aware when the Snowden stuff went down.
But seriously I've never heard of the man. And if he's said such shit, he's not progressive in the slightest. This is clearly a hostage situation and anyone who would both sides it can easily be discarded from any discussion regarding leftism and social progress.
26.
I admittedly didn't start paying any attention to the nitty gritty of politics until like 2016, and wasn't super socially aware until about 2014. I'm a late bloomer.
Like I knew about Snowden, but I didn't really pay attention to his lawyer who googling him now is apparently this guy? In which case I could see why he'd be called as such before. But he's clearly not now.
I hate when leftists are so cynical that they betray their own ideals. I like a lot of the journalism Glenn does, but he just invalidates tons of the good will with things like this.
I've defended his views on plenty of occasions due to it accurately representing progressive viewpoints, but if your just gonna pretend like absolutely everything is equal every time something comes up like the MAGA kids, what point is there to differentiate the nuances?
I've defended his views on plenty of occasions due to it accurately representing progressive viewpoints, but if your just gonna pretend like absolutely everything is equal every time something comes up like the MAGA kids, what point is there to differentiate the nuances?
He was never a leftist though- him and Snowden being Ron Paul guys was always a tell.
There's some truth to what he's saying, until he gets to the theorizing about races being played out differently and imagining what the reaction would be. Both 'sides' are very quick to jump on the bandwagon of a group of black kids being up to no good, I highly doubly that theoretical white priest would have been trashed by the 'left' media.
Correcting the factual events of the original story is not what people are taking issue with. It's that now it's being framed like the MAGA kids are being victimized because we didn't have all of the facts from the beginning. So instead of adding additional details to what happened just saying "they wore MAGA hats which provoked a group of bigoted minorities, who then shouted vile trash at them, then the native American guy tried to get between them to prevent further conflict, then the kids shouted racist, vile shit at him and his group", now we have the out these racist, white privileged pricks needed.
That they were provoked by the native Americans and the group of black people, who originally started yelling at them because of their racist hat.
As if the actual context of them being racist pricks matters, in regard to whether they walked up to them or vice versa.
That doesn't change the context of kids throwing on MAGA hats and treating native Americans like the mascot of a sports game.
The media got the slightest out for them and are completely changing the context of the story since there were some details that weren't initially known.
Never mind that these kids shouted sexist/rape culture commentary at women and others who were standing around them, that their school has a history of racism and bullying, even sexual abuse. Never mind that the chaperones were all standing around and letting this happen, and in one case, even joining in (yelling things out and high fiving someone on the way out).
Or that full body black face and screaming at black people is acceptable. Or using their privilege to hire PR firms to completely lie about what transpired and gain sympathy from virtually everyone around them.
But since the events themselves were slightly misrepresented, now all these MAGA white kids are off the hook. Cuz that's all the media needed to justify it.
Last edited:
It's funny how you're doing the exact partisan "with-us-or-against-us ethos" Greenwald described 8 years ago:
https://www.salon.com/2011/12/31/progressives_and_the_ron_paul_fallacies/
Wait, you couldn't stomach watching more than 5 seconds of the video because of this kid but you know everything about said incident? Hmmmm
Glenn Greenwald + Family
We really doing the Strum Thurmond defense?
So what exactly is he objecting to when he is talking about the things people were saying about the kids on Twitter that the videos don't show? Were people saying they hit the guy or something? Is this about the fact that we can't be sure literally every single kid there was a racist? Is this about the smirking boy? Glenn seems to agree that there were racists there so what is he going on about? This is so fucking obviously the behavior of stupid right wing kids. Brainwashed, privileged, ignorant whatever I don't really care. We were all kids this age and we either were these people or saw these people. Couple that with the fact that they are right wing fundamentalist Catholics and it's pretty fucking obvious what happened here. You KNOW what this all is. These kids are in trouble now and they are going to try and defend what they did with any excuse the can find. I would too if I were that shitty. I just don't get how otherwise intelligent people can fall for this. Or at the very least let themselves be pulled into a different narrative by Fox. If you are so worried about Twitter Mobs and mistakes due to selective editing or something else that involves racism don't go on Fox News. I understand the platform is big, but this sort of topic isn't going to work there.
EDIT: That being said the Intercept is still fantastic. I haven't seen a single prominent person who works there or who has been friendly with Glenn agree with him here so I would be curious to see them challenge him. Is this him being ultra defensive due to so many liberals going crazy with bad Russia conspiracy takes and all the pro imperialist shit of the past...well forever? I think Glenn may have received the same brain worms they have.
EDIT: That being said the Intercept is still fantastic. I haven't seen a single prominent person who works there or who has been friendly with Glenn agree with him here so I would be curious to see them challenge him. Is this him being ultra defensive due to so many liberals going crazy with bad Russia conspiracy takes and all the pro imperialist shit of the past...well forever? I think Glenn may have received the same brain worms they have.
Last edited:
Strum Thurmond raped his housekeeper. I don't see the analogy.
I know from experience what it's like to be a smugly superior white boy, and I know that smirk when I see it. Explain to me how I misread this incident.
lol, reading makes my head hurt. better to just believe whatever Joan Walsh tweets.
it's funny how we're going through the exact same shit with Tulsi Gabbard now. if you're opposed by the DC establishment, then every deviation from progressive orthodoxy is a disqualifying sin. if you're supported by the DC establishment, then anyone pointing out glaring deviations from progressive orthodoxy is literally a jewish (well, at least one jew) conspiracy to help Trump win reelection.
The point is simple: being related to, married to, having kids that are or friends with minorities does not make you anti-racist.
Hell, same with being anti-imperialist, though it really helps.
gren greenwald is raping america because i can't cleanly pidgeonhole his politics on a linear spectrum
Very true, and its always necessary to get a big reminder check about that sort of thing.
So to you having a family/partner who isn't the same race as you means that you couldn't possibly be a racist?
What simplistic view you have.
Aside from this being totally absurd, can you point to one conservative on staff at the intercept?
but the other poster's reasoning for labeling him racist was specious in the first place. he and The Intercept do more to shine a light on domestic structural racism and the racism of american empire than all of this forum put together
good on you, most people didn't bother
call me when he gets a ResetEra account, then he'll be worth something
Laura Ingraham has minority children as well. I mean, obviously, she's not racist!Glenn Greenwald + Family
as far as i'm concerned, no one working there can be considered apart of a traditional conservative mindset as we'd normally understand it. You cant put out the kinds of articles they do and be a hack like that. But whether certain individuals believe in progressivism or social sentiments in the same way i do, or advocate for it in a well thought out manner is another story entirely.
I don't believe Jimmy dore is a conservative, he's a leftist. Do i think he's a smart guy or someone who people should look to for political or social advice? Not at all, despite agreeing with him on certain issues.
I agree with Glenn greenwald on quite a few issues and like his journalism, do i think that makes him my stripe? Well...
There was a dude at the old place who was Mexican and would make subtle racist comments about black people in every thread about race/racism. Turns out he was married to a black woman.
Just a few weeks ago we found out that one of the proud boys is married to a black woman.
You would have to be an idiot to think having a multi-racial family is an inoculation against racism.
Thanks for bringing this up.Glenn Greenwald + Family
People need to understand that having a mixed race family means that you're a progressive.
Milo Y would be a more appropriate comparison for the point you're trying to make.
Anyway Laura Ingraham is a hardcore white nationalist and it speaks volumes that he chose to go on her show no matter how much yall are gonna whine about how Maddow or whomever never invites him on. Not going on a white nationalist's show is literally always an option!
Hes not being used as a pawn when he regularly gets paid to appear on Fox News.
Can't say I've ever heard of him or watch Fox news but there were alot of clips of him on there when I searched on youtube.
It's not a subtle moment. That's not acceptable behavior regardless of the context. Do you think that kid would have shoved his face in the grill of a six-foot-tall white man leading the protest? I doubt it.
But yes, it's very possible to misconstrue a moment based on such a short clip, in which case it should be easy for you to prove I'm way off-base in my assumption.
What do *you* think happened? Take your time.
I'm sorry wait.
Standing in front of someone with a smug smile is not acceptable behavior regardless of the context?
Very interesting that this is where twitter steps in and starts moderating.