All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Xheight]

The difference is between viewing it as a certainty and viewing it as a possibility.

Presumably, if there was a ban on conspiracy theories that some people are calling for, it would allow discussion of prospects, as long as it's acknowledged that some meaningful and relevant information is missing.

"Covid-19 escaped from a lab in Wuhan, and the Chinese government is covering it up" or "Jeffrey Epstein was murdered on behest of rich and powerful associates worried he would reveal their involvement in underage sex trafficking" would count as conspiracy theories. There are more nuanced ways to express these as possibilities, while expressing the understanding that you may be mistaken.

Why must such beliefs be couched in skepticism when "Trump was a terrible president" is not? To call something speculative and opinion not is not more or less rooted in observed understanding.

[Xheight]

When the riots erupted in Washington D.C. following the assasination of MLK, the police and the national guard set up machine gun nests in the D.C.

but there were no machine gun nests in the D.C. on Jan. 6 when the insurrectionists stormed the Capital.

Your point? According to the Capitol Police the 6th caught them by surprise

“I had not received any national-level products prior to Jan. 6,” said Mike Sena, head of the National Fusion Center Association, a group representing the national network of intelligence-sharing offices created after 9/11 to ensure that DHS, DOJ, and FBI information flows around the country between the agencies and onwards to local law enforcement. “There wasn’t a push for information.”

Thursday, 4 April 1968 however followed in Stokely Carmichael's career away non-violence and his role in DC could be anticipated as well as the national riots of 1967 raised preparedness https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/blog...mer-riots-1967

[Johnathan]

That Space Force really worked out too...

I don't think it will be too productive to hash over Trump's presidency. A one-term president does not have a legacy. We're still essentially living with the Bush-Obama system as both of them had more effect on the essential systematic structure than Trump and I'm one liberal-leaning person that did not really hate or even dislike Trump or think that he is the embodiment of evil. Heck, I would like it more if he was more obviously and actively evil and corrupt like Nixon was or Reagan (full disclosure: I am a member of the Reagan Library but that's because it is in my neighborhood and I'm very much a community supporter - and it is a nice place to visit).

To be more general in politics, in the United States, I think we're all to blame for the current situation and it is not healthy to simply project the accountability onto the leaders that we collectively elected - though, honestly, we didn't really get a choice in the selection of the best candidates. The "best" candidate for president is likely the person who would never be able to afford to run for President - so maybe it is better not to continue to give Presidents so much power and importance in general - or the Federal Government.

Just for context - and I apologize because I know most people don't care - just to provide some context for my political aims or desires, I’m not a socialist and certainly not a Marxist (Leninist or Maoist or Juche), but my essential proposition is that if it was easier for people to be poor and working class, most of a society’s problems would be manageable and not continuous crises. If anything, I’m more a Georgist and would rather see cooperatives be the primary expression of capitalism rather than corporations (though I see a lot of benefits to corporate culture contrary to popular opinion).

Essentially, the best piece of equipment in any business is a human being. I know that sounds like looking at people as machines, but I’m more looking at it as the best way to ensure the value of human beings – actual people (i.e., all of us) remains at a premium in the current culture where it seems like there is a strong desire to elevate technology over humanity as a competitive advantage.

However, the one thing every piece of technology has in common is that it is an extension of some human capacity – it was conceived of, designed by, built by and is intended to be used by a person. No matter what technology is developed in the future, it will always be eclipsed by the potential of the people using and creating it – and determined by what those people need it for.

If a company can’t see the value in their workers, then they just aren’t thinking. They might as well say they don’t see any value in their consumers, because their customers are just the workers for other companies. In cooperatives, the consumers and/or the workers are the shareholders in the company, and that seems like the most optimal way to run any business – not on the stock market that simply produces more imaginary value for people who don’t do any work for the companies whose shares they "own" (not really, though as it is really owned by Cede and Co but that is a complicated topic).

I also think it is the best way to create a low-cost society without resorting to the sort of authoritarian one-party rule that we see in totalitarian governments like the Soviet Union, CCP, NKVD and, of course… National Socialists.

Even though my ideal world is a global confederacy of anarchic libertarians (not the Tea Party or Ayn Rand kind) running things in local and defined communities, I think the powerful interconnected co-operative model with Georgist underpinnings is a much better fit for the kind of world we’re living in today.

It's like one of the basic lessons in economics - the best model for an economic system is small businesses competing for a pool of individual unorganized workers. The second best is for large conglomerate corporations competing against a group of unionized and organized worker collectives. I know the ideal best is not an option, so I opt for the second best with value placed on the human beings over profit.

So, no matter who a person is, racist, marxist, nationalist, militant or moderate, I feel obligated to find a way to integrate all of them cooperatively. I mean in a hundred years we'll all be gone so who cares let's try to make it easier on all of us.

[Xheight]

How Trump steered America's police straight into the Oath Keepers

In 1953, Eisenhower signed Executive Order 10450 which many believed unleashed a massive program to purge homosexuals from the federal payrolls under the pretense of national security. The firings were seen as a witch hunt and became known as the “lavender scare” that paralleled the so-called “Red Scare” by McCarthy to purge Communists from the U.S. government. The order created conduct and character requirements for all employees, including habitual use of intoxicating drugs to excess and “sexual perversion”. The order remained on the books for 45 years.

Persecutions and purges all begin to look alike in an intolerant society.

[Johnathan]

Persecutions and purges all begin to look alike in an intolerant society.

Woodrow Wilson - a History professor that propagated the Lost Cause apologist view of the South in the Civil War - made segregating the Federal Government one of his first priorities as well. And FDR made it one of his priorities to reverse that and they were in the same party (though back then Democrats and Republicans were virtually the opposite of what they represent today).

Dividing people in a country based on "united we stand" will never reap any lasting benefits.

[worstblogever]

The difference is between viewing it as a certainty and viewing it as a possibility.

Presumably, if there was a ban on conspiracy theories that some people are calling for, it would allow discussion of prospects, as long as it's acknowledged that some meaningful and relevant information is missing.

"Covid-19 escaped from a lab in Wuhan, and the Chinese government is covering it up" or "Jeffrey Epstein was murdered on behest of rich and powerful associates worried he would reveal their involvement in underage sex trafficking" would count as conspiracy theories. There are more nuanced ways to express these as possibilities, while expressing the understanding that you may be mistaken.

The things that separate the examples you're giving and that we know Trump & Co. plotted Capitol attack can be summed up in a few words...

Evidence. Facts. Critical thinking to draw conclusions from those two things.

[Darkspellmaster]

That's before you even get to things like Illinois.

How long have Dems been running the table here?

Did it get public sector workers well funded pensions?

Folks don't just tune all of that out.

Hold on.

1. We've only had 16 as of this date Democrat Governors, and the GOP has had 24. Democrat have only been running the table for not as long as you seem to think.

2.We had how many GOP governors who happily kicked the can down the road. And use it to fuck thing up. Edger was the last GOP that I could say worked well with any Democrat, even that is a stretch. So don't put that on the Dems.

3.Yes they do at times until unions bringing it back up.

[CaptainEurope]

Focusing on one specific lie is potentially problematic.

It's not a big issue on this board, where the belief that the 2020 election was stolen is a fringe position.

In this case, it would be moderators responding to one guy.

There is a potential question of why the focus on that bullshit claim and not something else.

At the risk of evoking Godwin's law:
Would denying the Holocaust be ok?

That is not just banned on most forums and social media. It's actually illegal in my country.
And the reason it is illegal is because it is a lie that is repeated to further the cause of fascism, and in my country we have seen how lies of that kind can lead to actual fascism.

And #30, we do not care if you repeat the lie in a large newspaper or standing on a soap box in a park. It's a dangerous lie, whether it convinces one person or one million. Lies that have been PROVEN to get people to act violently, to kill, to try to end democracy... They should not be allowed on a message board that took the relatable decision not to allow discussion of Comicsg**te.

[CaptainEurope]

Name them. Who's spreading a left-wing conspiracy theory in here?

NOBODY.

You can't "both sides" this. You're pitching a hypothetical, but, if someone persisted in posting a left-wing conspiracy theory, I would want the same done to them. At worst, I've seen people on the left on this forum get bad information, share it, have it pointed out that it's a hoax, and move on.

We're talking here about perpetuating the same lie for over a year, and ones that have resulted in domestic terror attacks. That is... and I know Republicans struggle with how these work... a FALSE EQUIVALENCY.

And you know what, if left wing posters knowingly continue to spread disproven conspiracy theories, I'm fine with the posts getting deleted and those posters getting a warning and then a permanent ban. No problem at all.

[CaptainEurope]

The difference is between viewing it as a certainty and viewing it as a possibility.

Presumably, if there was a ban on conspiracy theories that some people are calling for, it would allow discussion of prospects, as long as it's acknowledged that some meaningful and relevant information is missing.

"Covid-19 escaped from a lab in Wuhan, and the Chinese government is covering it up" or "Jeffrey Epstein was murdered on behest of rich and powerful associates worried he would reveal their involvement in underage sex trafficking" would count as conspiracy theories. There are more nuanced ways to express these as possibilities, while expressing the understanding that you may be mistaken.

"conspiracy theory" is often shorthand for "disproven" or "baseless" conspiracy theory.

That is not the way you are using it.
Just to make that clear.

[numberthirty]

...

And #30, we do not care if you repeat the lie in a large newspaper or standing on a soap box in a park. It's a dangerous lie, whether it convinces one person or one million. Lies that have been PROVEN to get people to act violently, to kill, to try to end democracy... They should not be allowed on a message board that took the relatable decision not to allow discussion of Comicsg**te.

Politely...

That is where the hitch is.

If so much as a single person that turns up in this thread has been convinced?

I have seen right around "Nothing..." that would reflect that reality.

Past that...

I tend to doubt that anyone -

- First, finds this board to start with. It's a pretty big interweb, and the usual numbers don't really reflect that this is one of it's "Hot..." spots. Not bad, mind you. Just the reality of things.

- Second, that someone who has found this place even bothers with this particular thread. It is not exactly the most welcoming thread to ever grace the interwebs. Never mind that "Politics.." ain't some folks cup of tea. Never mind the clear lack of fresh faces.

- Third, the idea that someone gets past those first two and even bothers with the posting in question.

- Fourth, Not only did they bother with that posting. They apparently didn't even bother with anyone else's posts. Because the actual reality of things has been laid out rather clearly in quite a few of them.

While I guess all four of those things could happen in some kooked out "Longshot..." scenario?

I don't think that it is even remotely realistic to buy into that it is actually taking place. Never mind that folks need to be saved from that nonsense in a thread where folks have pointed out that it is nonsense rather clearly.

[numberthirty]

Past all of that...

What has actually drawn more attention to the nonsense in question?

- The time that it was mentioned

or...

- The multiple times that it has been brought up by folks looking to get it eighty-sixed?

Edit:

Actually more like "Potentially Drawn..."

Because, let's face facts. This thread is not exactly Studio 54.

[CaptainEurope]

Politely...

That is where the hitch is.

If so much as a single person that turns up in this thread has been convinced?

I have seen right around "Nothing..." that would reflect that reality.

Past that...

I tend to doubt that anyone -

- First, finds this board to start with. It's a pretty big interweb, and the usual numbers don't really reflect that this is one of it's "Hot..." spots. Not bad, mind you. Just the reality of things.

- Second, that someone who has found this place even bothers with this particular thread. It is not exactly the most welcoming thread to ever grace the interwebs. Never mind that "Politics.." ain't some folks cup of tea. Never mind the clear lack of fresh faces.

- Third, the idea that someone gets past those first two and even bothers with the posting in question.

- Fourth, Not only did they bother with that posting. They apparently didn't even bother with anyone else's posts. Because the actual reality of things has been laid out rather clearly in quite a few of them.

While I guess all four of those things could happen in some kooked out "Longshot..." scenario?

I don't think that it is even remotely realistic to buy into that it is actually taking place. Never mind that folks need to be saved from that nonsense in a thread where folks have pointed out that it is nonsense rather clearly.

That's a big pile of assumptions.

There are constantly new users joining this board.

To say that we don't have any responsibility for what he post here is some kind of Libertarian wet dream.

[numberthirty]

That's a big pile of assumptions.

There are constantly new users joining this board.

To say that we don't have any responsibility for what he post here is some kind of Libertarian wet dream.

Politely...

That's far less than all of the assumptions that go into someone winding up buying into the nonsense in question based on what is in this thread.

Never mind that if we were going to talk about "Responsibility..." seriously we would have to discuss the spotlight that all of the "It Must Go..." posts have put on the very nonsense that folks want to make certain no one is convinced by.

[JackDaw]

Politely...



I don't think that it is even remotely realistic to buy into that it is actually taking place. Never mind that folks need to be saved from that nonsense in a thread where folks have pointed out that it is nonsense rather clearly.

I agree. The incidence of any one changing their opinion on basis of discussions on these threads is as rare as rocking horse droppings.

And there’s the obvious fact that the site moderators have no interest in changing their style of moderation. (And I think they do a good job.)