-
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.
Trump tweets spliced together video of Ilhan Omar and 9/11
- Thread starter Deleted member 17092
- Start date
She dropped the ball the first time, did better the second time, and was good this time around.
I agree here.
It happens EVERY TIME. Just the thought of black and brown folks not doing their duty brings out this rabid defense of these jerks. It makes me sick.
I mean she fucked up the first time round but unlike a lot of her colleagues she actually improved herself in this regard and has step up to defend Omar.
I didn't know there were right wing posters on that site and I had been there for over a decade. I guess I just focused more on the gaming and GoT stuff. Disgusting.
We really don't have a choice anyways...Either democrats....and who else? The Green Party?
With like 98% of black women in alabama voting for jones too lol
I'm not romanticizing it, read it again. The point is that extreme poverty is a relativistic term, it ONLY accounts for capital and the concept of monetary gain as the sole abject piece of studying and measuring human growth and the subsidy of surviving. It doesn't measure the quality of that life or the real costs associated with actually living. The point is that we're not making marked improvements just based on this strata no longer being the case. That you can't use monetary license to measure the kind of life people lead just through a bunch of numbers about how much money they have.
The point is that the transition away might be a net good for some, but for other's it saps them of all functional mobility. I'm not fucking saying Feudalism is better, I'm not saying the world hasn't been getting better. But to qualify everything through only one stratum through which we measure any human happiness is absurd and reductive as to be laughable.
The point that you're keen to miss to just CONSTANTLY insult me like a fucking three year old, is that poverty is only one aspect of human living and that it doesn't codify every aspect of human living, we cannot remove the dignity of people just to have them shovel mountains of garbage for a quarter an hour and claim that they have a demonstrably better life.
Of course I wrote that with a straight face, I'm sorry that people living with a semblance of dignity and not being beaten down by the constant onslaught of capital is a demure feeling that you find laughable. I'm sorry that you think that there's some abject net good that the constant hoarding of capital, where people aren't entitled to even a fraction of what they produce through their own labor, is somehow a functional and satisfactory system. Yes, Capitalism is better than Feudalism, so what, that doesn't say anything, that's not a substantive retort to anything.
People don't have access to any of those inane first world things you listed off NOW. 80% of the global population will never travel farther than ten miles from the place they were born (http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/migration/tab-a-1.xls), one in five people encounter hunger or extreme hunger during at least one part of their lives in the United States, 15% of the population does not have health care and an additional 15% will live their entire lives being underinsured which is functionally the same as being uninsured (https://www.commonwealthfund.org/si...2017_oct_collins_underinsured_biennial_ib.pdf) and that rate is HIGHER than it was in 2003, long after the ACA was passed. I'm the one out of touch? At no point am I arguing that we put all of human development back into a bottle and go back to subsiding as serfs, the point that I and others make is that just because things are better and on the surface appear to be perfect they are not. "The end of history" was a myth, and the constant invective and insults towards something you don't actually have any form of conceptual understanding of belies the point. You're trying to quantitatively assess and judge something based on factors that the global institutions report VASTLY differently than the local and state level measurements dictate to be the actual poverty level.
The point is that globally the extreme poverty numbers go down in the aggregate because they are not qualitative, they're based on an arbitrarily selected number that doesn't reflect the actual needs of people to live a full life. Which, btw, I grew up in a household that relied on government assistance so I know first hand how the measurement for poverty is bullshit. Again, half the world lives under the "new" poverty line dictate by the World Bank last year of $5.50 a day. If "economists" can't even decide a baseline to agree with what poverty is then why does monetary income even cover that? You're arguing that income is a net indicator of the access to necessary resources to live when that's A) not even true to begin with as we see in even purported "middle-income" countries that 70% of the worlds poor now live within these nations despite decades of growth and upward mobility, B) again you're not measuring the actual aggregate of people's relative wealth and well being, you're just slapping a number on it and calling it solved, and C) it doesn't measure any form of moral quality of life, which we again have the resources to completely and totally eliminate overnight. The top 1% of the US population could eradicate poverty in an hour if they elected to do so.
Global hunger is increasing (22% of children under 5 will be permanently stunted thanks to severe malnutrition), poverty has risen the last decade despite multiple attempts by the IMF and the World Bank to fudge the numbers, the amount of uninsured and underinsured people continues to rise, infant mortality and life expectancy in the US continues to trend downwards. The point that you oh so astutely missed isn't "people just need to go back to serfdom", it's that what we've replaced serfdom with is not any better in any substantive form for the quality of life for the majority of the human population.
You don't even understand what Socialism is. Nebulous concepts like "innovation" are totally abstract and functionally meaningless. What is that even supposed to mean? You're going to need more than empty buzzwords that could literally mean anything to have any meaningful distinction in this ideological discussion. Artists, the bright, the driven, people like that have existed before we created "the market" and the systems that our current late capitalist society functions with. You're trying to paint it as if people just don't do anything if there isn't monetary benefit for them, and while I will even grant you that under the condition that this is true, it doesn't tell us anything about the depth to which the system "encourages it". Because the system is the one these people live within, of course it's how they produce their craft or ply their trade, it's the only avenue available to them. That's not an argument, that's sophist libertarianism.
Nobody thinks the global revolution is happening overnight, few think it will even happen in our lifetimes. But we live in a world where we throw away enough food to end global hunger, we burn off enough waste energy to kill an ocean, and we piss away money and capital on absolute useless nonsense both in the "market" and through our rampant and disgusting consumerism.
Socialism is the ablution of capital as the end goal, but the intermediary goals are a democratic control of the workplace, total control of the benefits of labor, by labor, the needs of society being put forward despite not being "efficient" or "Market friendly" because they are what we need to do. You're not going to abolish the use of fossil fuels within capitalism, it's not happening, because it's "not efficient" despite that it's quite literally killing us. You have to sacrifice, you have to exchange that fact, you have to see that the systems to which we prop up capital are not of any net benefit to the average person past a specific point in history and the factors which govern them.
I also note how you completely and utterly ignored the actual, substantive questions I posed to you about the data you claim denotes Capitalism as the only functional system and any attempt to deal with the active dissolution of capital as childish. So I will ask you again.
Where are Roser's numbers showing slum growth? Where are Diamandis's numbers showing the self-reporting of quality of life? Depression rates? Mental illness? Where are Roser's numbers showing the increasing control of all wealth by the rich? Where are Fukuyama's numbers showing the steady collapse of wildlife populations, from insects to fisheries to large carnivores? Where are Roser's numbers showing the loss of arable land? Where are Pinker's numbers showing decreasing soil fertility? Where are Roser's numbers showing the growing pollution of our waterways?
Where are the numbers that showcase the profound DAMAGE to people and the human spirit that late capitalism is doing? You can't view the world and the human condition through numbers, you can't reduce human suffering down to a stat on a page, you can't dismiss the profound damage that capitalism has done to people just because "well we have microwaves now" and assume that the rising tide raises all ships. It doesn't, the very core concept of capitalism DEMANDS that people be unequal, abandoned, and left to die. Socialism does not preclude growth, it doesn't demand a managed economy (which every fortune 500 company is literally a managed ecosystem), it doesn't stop the rising tide. It simply provides people that the fruits of their own labor is their own, and that nobody is left to die simply because it isn't in the profit motive to save them. Which we have with Capitalism, even highly regulated capitalism, everywhere on earth.
I would agree generally but this instance has to deal with a black muslim woman so pretending it isn't about race and religion would be missing the mark.
White men have said and done MUCH worse things about 9/11 (like the entire GOP platform towards first responders) with 0 backlash.
The fact you don't see your post as that speaks VOLUMES about you as a person.
Also since I'm the only one you're responding to answer Eating Olive's question.
That's the thing. POC have been reliable Democratic voters for decades; we have no choice but to be. Even after all this with Ilhan Omar, POC will still vote for Democratic candidates in 2020 at >95% rates like every election. All we ask in return is some fucking backup in the face of resurgent rightwing racism, and all we get is finger wagging and push back. And then when we dare to express disappointment in that, we are labelled as not "unifying" and falling for GOP tricks.
It is damn infuriating, and I won't blame black and brown people at all if they decide to sit out in 2020.
I agree that this issue is very much race related, but the post I was responding to was about the 2016 (and 2020) elections, not this news item.
Most of them just stayed in the gaming section and avoid political threads. Now that everybody jumped ship they came out of woods and are more comfortable. Evil Lore too.. It's sad what that site turned into.
It's really not. Thread is a mess, and everyone always has the smokescreen of "Oh you just don't want to criticize dems" to hide behind. This nonsense is really going to spin out of control as we approach election season if mods cannot figure out what to do. Having a circle jerk of "fuck the dems" every time the Republicans do something stupid isn't sustainable. It will be chaos by election season when the right goes into "how can we throw our base some red meat"-mode. And not everyone is from the US and cares to see the forum flooded with these copy paste discussions. If this is going to be the way this plays out, then at least give it an OT and bottle this stuff up somewhere.
Y'all see AOC getting called an anti Semite for defending Omar? The right is absolutely disgusting.
I can only repeat my speech to the brickwall:
If your voting hinges entirely on a fellow forumdweller saying "well atleast its not Hitler", you really should consider to get into politics instead.
The majority of muslim voters chose Bernie Sanders over Clinton. Guess American muslims don't count as a minority/POC in your books?
The issue with Omar is more Islamophobia and her criticism of Israel than anything else. How dare a lowly muslim dare to speak up. That's why no one is supporting her. That's why liberal Americans casually accept the attacks against her - in the US, Islamophobia is an accepted discrimination.
Whoa this thread blew up...We're all pretty left leaning here yea? Why did this suddenly ballon to almost 30 pages ( I'm on mobile ) ?
Any criticism of the Democrats: "WHY DO YOU WANT FOUR MORE YEARS OF TRUMP!!!"
If there is one thing left people can agree on, than its probably deep passionate hate for each other.
But it is not just fourmdwellers. It's damn near the entire Democratic leadership acting that way.
Here's my cue: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/southasia/2014/08/29/exposing-the-great-poverty-reduction-lie/
1) No measurement of "poverty" is quantitative because the "poverty line" itself is malleable and has been adjusted numerous times, always to make bad news into good news and to move the goalposts so they're easier to hit
2) The bulk of "poverty reduction" at the end of the 20th century to the start of the 21st century has been carried by China
Non-Chinese poverty reduction has been pitiful.
But Chinese growth is starting to plateau. As they move their poor above the poverty line, global "poverty" reduction also slows. I don't see any capitalist defenders saying we should adopt Dengism for poverty reduction though, pretty weird.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/09/why-china-is-central-to-global-growth
IMO, she was a lot worse the second time around. The first time she just stayed silent until after Omar's coerced apology; the second time, she was openly attempting to play both sides (arguing against singling Omar out while endorsing the premise that Omar was guilty of antisemitism) from almost the very beginning of the controversy.
The post I was quoting dealt specifically with the black vote, hence my mentioning it. Of course muslims are a minority. It feels like you're attacking me for no reason here.
And yes, islamophobia is still a big issue in the US (and around the world), that hardly needs no be stated. I do disagree with your claim that no one is supporting her. There has been lots of support shown these past 24 hours - less than it should've been, true, but as stated - islamophobia is a big issue.
The right wing believing they have any grounds of criticizing anything as anti-semitic is something that should be responded to with, ah, nothing more polite than raucous laughter for daring to make such a hilarious joke. And really, things much less polite.
Here's my cue: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/southasia/2014/08/29/exposing-the-great-poverty-reduction-lie/
1) No measurement of "poverty" is quantitative because the "poverty line" itself is malleable and has been adjusted numerous times, always to make bad news into good news and to move the goalposts so they're easier to hit
2) The bulk of "poverty reduction" at the end of the 20th century to the start of the 21st century has been carried by China
Non-Chinese poverty reduction has been pitiful.
But Chinese growth is starting to plateau. As they move their poor above the poverty line, global "poverty" reduction also slows. I don't see any capitalist defenders saying we should adopt Dengism for poverty reduction though, pretty weird.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/09/why-china-is-central-to-global-growth
We should all be grateful to our billionaires overlords to make sure we are never poor on paper, we couldn't go on without them.
Here's my cue: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/southasia/2014/08/29/exposing-the-great-poverty-reduction-lie/
1) No measurement of "poverty" is quantitative because the "poverty line" itself is malleable and has been adjusted numerous times, always to make bad news into good news and to move the goalposts so they're easier to hit
2) The bulk of "poverty reduction" at the end of the 20th century to the start of the 21st century has been carried by China
Non-Chinese poverty reduction has been pitiful.
But Chinese growth is starting to plateau. As they move their poor above the poverty line, global "poverty" reduction also slows. I don't see any capitalist defenders saying we should adopt Dengism for poverty reduction though, pretty weird.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/09/why-china-is-central-to-global-growth
How are people going to argue that Dems being accessories to the hatred of a black Muslim congresswoman as though that's the position of "unity?" Or that people asking for dems to protect their own is actually divisive?
How does someone do that for an ungodly amount of page after page in this thread? Jesus Christ
How does someone do that for an ungodly amount of page after page in this thread? Jesus Christ
I feel like this is just going to fly through people heads and this topic is going to go on forever.
I feel like on the list of things democrat leaders should do (and not just pelosi, schumer and perez but prominent figures like gillibrand as well), standing unified against an edited video to make one of their own members look like a terrorist sympathizer to racists to incite them to literally kill her is a pretty low bar. Especially in the wake of a mass shooting at a mosque and someone being arrested for planning to kill her.
Alas.
Last edited:
I don't want to get too off-topic around the 2016 election. I mentioned it as part of a greater point, which is that Democrats shouldn't expect minority votes by default, even when they run candidates who have terrible records on issues important to us. And the lower black turnout was part of the reason why Clinton lost, in such a tight race... I think that the Dems should take that as a warning. Or they can continue to ignore it, I guess.
I think that they have improved on it for 2020? In general the field has been better on racial issues. Look at the responses to Trump's incitement against Omar. Aside from Gillibrand and Beto's (which he recovered from in his speech today) they were good. Look at the discussion around slavery reparations and criminal justice reform.
This is more of an issue with the long-time Democratic leadership in Congress. Pelosi and Schumer expect unity but that unity only works one way... it's time for these dinosaurs to move out of the way and let some fresh blood take the reigns.
The only one exhibiting any dismissal is the person (HINT: you) positing that minorities should vote exclusively to appease his moral quandaries instead of questioning why Democrat leaders are blatantly ignoring calls for violence against a minority politician, and thus, other minorites.
So your laughable attempts at trying to make US feel bad because us minorities dare not meet your narrowminded needs is rightfully going to fall on deaf ears lol.
I didn't say anything about minorities. All I said was that everyone shoud vote and not throw away those votes.
Pelosi is a FUCKING HACK. I would say she needs to go but she'll probably get replace with another moderate pro=establishment politician so it's not like it matters in the end.
The worst part is that this is the Israel-loving dinosaur that had the audacity to join that photoshoot with the real progressives that one time. Just another opportunistic politician that only cares about her bottom line. Democrats are garbage period.
Yeah, you've been saying this to minorities in regards to a minority suggesting that minorities be more mindful of who we vote for
Yes, sure, that's all you said. While saying that everyone here who was complaining about the democratic leadership that we will cause Trump's victory in 2020 despite none of us saying we won't vote democrat come the presidential election. While also refusing to answer whether or not you see us (the minority voting base) as cattle to vote to your whims than sacrificed at your political convenience.
AOC has been one of the most vocal supporters of Omar and is often one of the first to defend her. When her supporters feel let down by her, she listens and does better.
I'm with you.
You get Tom Perez going on TV and stanning for George W. Bush, the Speaker of the House not even mention Omar, and people want me to have a discussion about unity with the Democratic party when it's obvious they can't even do that at their level. Our elected officials need to BE BETTER. I'm a white dude and I'm not going to wield the "four more years of Trump" boogeyman anymore because that's done from a place of incredible privilege. If candidates want people to vote for them, they need to give more than lip service to their claims of diversity.
Continuing to excuse George W Bush is a really weird thing considering Trump even turned the Republican base against him and there are pretty much 0 democrats who support the Iraq war to this day except for the media that likes to play on W's "lovable" clumsiness.
You have no need to defend yourself against shit like this.
I'm glad you made your case, but this member doesn't deserve a second of your time my dude.
Edit: I know prince's post is long, but ya'll should read it regardless.
Replying to a PoC in a discussion about civil liberties with a gif depicting the leader of xenophobic street thugs isn't a great look.
The same person that earlier in the thread, confused Tulsi Gabbard with Rashida Tlaib... who only really have in common being WOC with a "similar" skin tone.
I was just thinking that twitter was a mistake but... nah still a mistake.
