US Politics thread

[sebby]

Krassenstein have joined the chat

Your trolling is a headache and inflammatory. You don't know what you're talking about here and you're embarrassing yourself. And what wonderful tact you show fanning the flames after a domestic terror attack committed by an unhinged, large-in-number cult whose leader is still wielding tremendous power. Take a fucking break, bud.

Yes I am the one who is inflammatory.

You are indeed, if you are refusing to admit trumpers being able to breach the capitol with pipe bombs, zipties (gee i wonder why they might have those while busting into a government building), and other weapons, all the while having access to, and in some cases absconding with, potentially sensitive documents -- all bc they have been duped into believing a widely disproved conspiracy theory -- is the work of a large-in-number cult.

I see only two options for your behavior here, and both point to you being a truly awful person. So fuck off. You can respond if you like, but I'm blocking you now. The words you write are pure diarrhea and i've had just about enough.

[xianjiro]

I think size matters there (which has been a returning train of thought for regulation these past couple of years). Our forum, or some small social network, probably doesn't need regulation. A platform of millions probably needs some. Same idea as with monopolies. Once you reach a certain size, other rules apply.

Spoiler

As for the EU cookie story, it's clear that you can't leave things too much to the companies, because they won't think twice about using dark patterns to fool you into clicking whatever. Which is actually more problematic, since you've now given active consent to companies (ab)using your data. I think the best way there is transparency (show the public the size/impact of the data they share) rather than abstractions and checkboxes and big buttons labelled "GO ON" next to very small links saying "set up cookie preference".

It made me think of this tweet, which I think was quite interesting:

Also, I would take it further than just social media. The entire ad/marketing industry is crooked as fuck. If you ever wondered where fake news and public lying got so popularized, look no further

I'm with you on all of this. The one other issue we haven't mentioned is there are just so many jurisdictions. Seems like the UN should regulate the Internet.

Also, thanks for sharing that tweet and it's graphic. I just changed my messaging app thanks to that!

[xianjiro]

I end up disliking most American Presidents, unfortunately. I just happen to admire some of Trump's positions.

Just a bit of fun, ranking the five of them. I have reservations about all five administrations, even Carter's. It's an imperfect world and I'm a multi-issue political animal, so I tend to like some stances and dislike others. If that makes me nuts, so be it!

That is one twisted sense of fun. My best friend lost his US residency status because of Trump's policies. My girlfriend's been shouted at to "get the fuck out of my country" by a xenophobic bigot the likes of which make up his constituency. And that's just something that effects me personally, how about the $365+ million Americans dead because of the utter disregard and lack of preparedness with which this administration addressed the coronavirus?

It does make you nuts to treat a subject where human lives hang in the balance so flippantly. Shame on you. Enjoy those tax breaks though.

Well that's just it, he doesn't live here, so pfft on the tax breaks.

You can tell your gf I'm glad she's here (for you especially). I can't begin to quantify how pissed I am about people like your best friend. I hate racism and xenophobia and it disgusts me when it affects policy. I hope that all changes but part of me isn't so sure it will or those lives affected will be restored.

[Kublai Khan]

I read today that more Americans died in the storming of the US Capitol than died in Benghazi. Food for thought.

[OldAle1]

I hate racism and xenophobia and it disgusts me when it affects policy. I hope that all changes but part of me isn't so sure it will or those lives affected will be restored.

Of course it's not going to all change BUT despite the awful day that Wednesday was for this country we shouldn't let that diminish the great day that Tuesday was for our democracy. I remain very pessimistic overall - about almost everything except the value of art - but the Georgia elections and some other trends in the nation are maybe... just maybe... enough to equal and overcome the raging Trumpist xenophobia out there. In my own family I have three relatives who have become markedly more liberal - at least when it comes to voting, but I think in some other ways as well - over the last 20 years; two of them are over 85 and the other is over 50 and all are white men, one a fairly hard-core evangelical. At the same time only one person that I'm aware of has taken a hard turn to the right from a moderate/liberal position. I feel like I see quite a few small signs in this community that are positive, and I think there has been a small incremental change over the last year in particular nationwide, prompted by Agent Orange's total incompetence and venality, and the complicity in his party, and the protests over the summer. Maybe there are finally enough people waking up - and maybe it's enough that some of the not-so-left-wing members of the incoming government will be pushed to really help people, and take some steps (if it's possible) to cleanse the stain of the would-be-fascist elements from Washington and the country. I'd LIKE to feel hopeful but let's just say I feel like things could go any way right now, whereas if Nov 3 had turned out differently I'd be trying to figure out how to move to Canada.

[xianjiro]

I read today that more Americans died in the storming of the US Capitol than died in Benghazi. Food for thought.

We need hearings!

Special counsel investigation!

wonder what Mueller's doing these days

Actually, we just need to make it very uncomfortable for elected officials to continue to support Il Douche Grande

[OldAle1]

I read today that more Americans died in the storming of the US Capitol than died in Benghazi. Food for thought.

And ANTIFA, Hilary, Hugo Chavez and George Soros were responsible for both!

Plus the moon landing was fake, and Obama is a robot.

[xianjiro]

I read today that more Americans died in the storming of the US Capitol than died in Benghazi. Food for thought.

And ANTIFA, Hilary, Hugo Chavez and George Soros were responsible for both!

Plus the moon landing was fake, and Obama is a robot.

ah, being a robot isn't so bad as long as it's Made in USA

[xianjiro]

anyone else wondering if Cipp's twigged to the truth yet?

[Knaldskalle]

I read today that more Americans died in the storming of the US Capitol than died in Benghazi. Food for thought.

And ANTIFA, Hilary, Hugo Chavez and George Soros were responsible for both!

Plus the moon landing was fake, and Obama is a robot.

And since when have the Kenyans been able to make functional robots, huh?

[Knaldskalle]

As for the EU cookie story, it's clear that you can't leave things too much to the companies, because they won't think twice about using dark patterns to fool you into clicking whatever. Which is actually more problematic, since you've now given active consent to companies (ab)using your data. I think the best way there is transparency (show the public the size/impact of the data they share) rather than abstractions and checkboxes and big buttons labelled "GO ON" next to very small links saying "set up cookie preference".

I agree about the old cookie law, that was just plain stupid. However, the newer GDPR that replaces (as far as I understand it) the old cookie law shows that the EU learned. The GDPR avoids all the technicalities and instead says that users have to give "meaningful consent" and that the default must be opt-in not opt-out. A lot of websites are still not complying with that part, but it'll hopefully start sinking in that the standards have changed.

[Pretentious Hipster]

[prodigalgodson]

I end up disliking most American Presidents, unfortunately. I just happen to admire some of Trump's positions.

Just a bit of fun, ranking the five of them. I have reservations about all five administrations, even Carter's. It's an imperfect world and I'm a multi-issue political animal, so I tend to like some stances and dislike others. If that makes me nuts, so be it!

That is one twisted sense of fun. My best friend lost his US residency status because of Trump's policies. My girlfriend's been shouted at to "get the fuck out of my country" by a xenophobic bigot the likes of which make up his constituency. And that's just something that effects me personally, how about the $365+ million Americans dead because of the utter disregard and lack of preparedness with which this administration addressed the coronavirus?

It does make you nuts to treat a subject where human lives hang in the balance so flippantly. Shame on you. Enjoy those tax breaks though.

Roger's not American so the tax cuts don't matter. I get the sense that he's a free speech absolutist and that's probably his main thing - and of course something he shares with Trump. Just remembering some shit from IMDb days though and I remember why I didn't engage with him for a long time. Probably should go back to that.

Pfff okay, then neither of these guys knows what it's actually like to live in Trump's America. I appreciate outsiders' perspectives (if they're well-argued, not just pussyfooted about), but trust us, this shit is a living nightmare by all accounts.

[kongs_speech]

Trust me, click on this

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump?lang=en

Beautiful. This was such a bigly surprise to find upon checking the internet tonight.

[Pretentious Hipster]

[prodigalgodson]

I end up disliking most American Presidents, unfortunately. I just happen to admire some of Trump's positions.

Just a bit of fun, ranking the five of them. I have reservations about all five administrations, even Carter's. It's an imperfect world and I'm a multi-issue political animal, so I tend to like some stances and dislike others. If that makes me nuts, so be it!

That is one twisted sense of fun. My best friend lost his US residency status because of Trump's policies. My girlfriend's been shouted at to "get the fuck out of my country" by a xenophobic bigot the likes of which make up his constituency. And that's just something that effects me personally, how about the $365+ million Americans dead because of the utter disregard and lack of preparedness with which this administration addressed the coronavirus?

It does make you nuts to treat a subject where human lives hang in the balance so flippantly. Shame on you. Enjoy those tax breaks though.

Well that's just it, he doesn't live here, so pfft on the tax breaks.

You can tell your gf I'm glad she's here (for you especially). I can't begin to quantify how pissed I am about people like your best friend. I hate racism and xenophobia and it disgusts me when it affects policy. I hope that all changes but part of me isn't so sure it will or those lives affected will be restored.

Thanks xian! I'm glad she's here too haha, and from a broader societal standpoint, she's the one raising the top kids in their classes and working an essential job at the bank (when she could've easily gotten unemployment after being laid off by Nordstrom in April).

And yeah, the immigration system here is such a kafkaesque mess. After Trump took office the whole thing seems to have ground to a halt -- they pushed back his permanent green card hearing several years, and under current policy he can't renew his temporary green card or work visa while he's waiting for the hearing to come. It's de facto deportation of people who have already had their residency legally approved -- the temporary card is good for 2 years, but now it takes at least 4 to get a hearing for a permanent one, and in the meantime you can't work or rent property legally.

[OldAle1]

I read today that more Americans died in the storming of the US Capitol than died in Benghazi. Food for thought.

And ANTIFA, Hilary, Hugo Chavez and George Soros were responsible for both!

Plus the moon landing was fake, and Obama is a robot.

And since when have the Kenyans been able to make functional robots, huh?

Wakandan super-science man. The MCU movies are all based on reality, should be obvious but I guess you're not a True Believer

[Kublai Khan]

anyone else wondering if Cipp's twigged to the truth yet?

Wait, did Hillary enter the race?

[Knaldskalle]

[xianjiro]

all things considered, maybe we should call it a putsch although (so far) we haven't heard of the military's involvement - but it does sound bigly stronger than a sissy French word.

And I did see Nazi flags being carried around the Capitol. Just sayin'

[Dolwphin]

Your trolling is a headache and inflammatory. You don't know what you're talking about here and you're embarrassing yourself. And what wonderful tact you show fanning the flames after a domestic terror attack committed by an unhinged, large-in-number cult whose leader is still wielding tremendous power. Take a fucking break, bud.

Yes I am the one who is inflammatory.

You are indeed, if you are refusing to admit trumpers being able to breach the capitol with pipe bombs, zipties (gee i wonder why they might have those while busting into a government building), and other weapons, all the while having access to, and in some cases absconding with, potentially sensitive documents -- all bc they have been duped into believing a widely disproved conspiracy theory -- is the work of a large-in-number cult.

I see only two options for your behavior here, and both point to you being a truly awful person. So fuck off. You can respond if you like, but I'm blocking you now. The words you write are pure diarrhea and i've had just about enough.

Yes I am the one who is inflammatory, not you with your hyperbolic categorizations of the event and ad hominem attacks on people who pointed it out.

[Dolwphin]

Good commentary as usual from MT.

[Onderhond]

Good commentary as usual from MT.

Someone who tries to make a point on a platform that limits character length is generally not worth listening to. Not sure what the point is of scrolling through two pages watching someone try to construe a sentence. Can't you just link to the opening post next time?

Also very doomy whine that is typical for platforms as Twitter. I too am against censorship on these platforms, I'm also against taking waffle from these type of individuals seriously.

[xianjiro]

Good commentary as usual from MT.

of course businesses should be forced to do what one group wants and not the other, right? That's ultimately what he's calling for (it's just his group that's right - no one else). Now let's take the thought one step further. Corporations that supply and traffic in media should open themselves up to liability exposure by carrying any and every message (especially since the guys he's worried about being suppressed want to remove any such protections - to make things "better", not the least bit punitive that, right?). Would they then have the right to "ban" users who traffic in blatantly illegal speech? Say sex trafficking or selling drugs through the medium? How about RFPs for assassination? Calls to bring your guns and march on a capital? We don't want to suppress speech, do we?

But using it to organize riots is perfectly acceptable ON ALL SIDES. Oh, I forgot, BLM and antifa are the "terrorists" and whatever groups those were on Wednesday are "patriots". Whoops! Silly me!

Who knows, maybe later this month Uncle Puttie will welcome his useful idiot back home and the whole clan can migrate to a truly free country that isn't troubled by pesky leftists. Let's just hope they take their true believers with. Then maybe we can go back to having a discussion with the right.

But wait, why do those who profess to recognize the truth in character-limited discussions even bother posting here at all since clearly the owners and mods have stifled other users' free speech? You know, it's just those liberals imposing mono-culture on every nook and cranny.

(as far as communication goes, posting other people's memes and tweets as discussion reminds me of those people who used to cut words out of a magazine, glue them to a piece of paper, then mail them calling that a letter)

[Pretentious Hipster]

Edit: don't wanna start a fight lol

[Pretentious Hipster]

[Pretentious Hipster]

They didn't ban Richard Spencer during the purge? He's a big reason why America is in that mess

[Kublai Khan]

Good commentary as usual from MT.

He seems to be trying really hard to use this crisis to push his commentary that nothing the right-wing has ever done is wrong and the left is evil.

[OldAle1]

They didn't ban Richard Spencer during the purge? He's a big reason why America is in that mess

Mmm, he's a reason for some of the most violent extremism over the last few years, sure - I'll bet a good chunk of the insurrectionists who stormed the Capital know his name - but I doubt he's even a rumor to the average Agent Orange voter, in other words he's had a significant effect on a very small number of people, but very little effect on the larger numbers. I think the culture of general racism among cops and among large segments of the white population of the country overall, magnified by having a megalomaniac follow our first black President, is really responsible. Lots of dry kindling has been heaped up over the last several decades (and it's been a dry forest in this country since Columbus and the other slavers and mass-murderers first embarked towards the continent) and Spencer was just one of adding a few doses of lighter fluid to which Herr Reichsführer Drumpf added the lit match.

[Knaldskalle]

I see a lot of posts on Twitter about changing Section 230, the bit of legislation that protects corps from being sued over something one of their users posts. So Twitter, as it is now, can't be sued if Trump Jr. posts something seditious.

Do people really think that changing this will somehow prevent these corps from banning Trump? Quite the opposite, they'll really start banning politicians and anyone who doesn't post completely harmless stuff and posts will be reviewed prior to posting to ensure that it doesn't contain anything that the corp might be sued over. Anything coming even close to controversial will not be allowed and corps will ban anyone at the drop of a hat out of fear of getting sued.

[3eyes]

I need to do a lot of self-questioning about all the Schadenfreude I'm feeling right now. So many different ways in which everybody is ganging up on anyone associated with the Blob - people who have worked in the WH not being able to get jobs, etc... It begins to remind me of the McCarthy era.

[Dolwphin]

Good commentary as usual from MT.

of course businesses should be forced to do what one group wants and not the other, right? That's ultimately what he's calling for (it's just his group that's right - no one else). Now let's take the thought one step further. Corporations that supply and traffic in media should open themselves up to liability exposure by carrying any and every message (especially since the guys he's worried about being suppressed want to remove any such protections - to make things "better", not the least bit punitive that, right?). Would they then have the right to "ban" users who traffic in blatantly illegal speech? Say sex trafficking or selling drugs through the medium? How about RFPs for assassination? Calls to bring your guns and march on a capital? We don't want to suppress speech, do we?

But using it to organize riots is perfectly acceptable ON ALL SIDES. Oh, I forgot, BLM and antifa are the "terrorists" and whatever groups those were on Wednesday are "patriots". Whoops! Silly me!

Who knows, maybe later this month Uncle Puttie will welcome his useful idiot back home and the whole clan can migrate to a truly free country that isn't troubled by pesky leftists. Let's just hope they take their true believers with. Then maybe we can go back to having a discussion with the right.

But wait, why do those who profess to recognize the truth in character-limited discussions even bother posting here at all since clearly the owners and mods have stifled other users' free speech? You know, it's just those liberals imposing mono-culture on every nook and cranny.

(as far as communication goes, posting other people's memes and tweets as discussion reminds me of those people who used to cut words out of a magazine, glue them to a piece of paper, then mail them calling that a letter)

I don't think anybody would have a problem with not allowing illegal speech (e.g. child pornography). Regarding your legal remark: The entire point of Twitter is supposed to be that they are a platform and not a publisher. They can't be sued and held responsible for speech on their site, because they are not a publisher -- despite the fact that they moderate and censor content to now extreme lengths. I think they should be regulated as utility with 2nd amendment protections in place. The alternative would be to deploy anti-trust and allow political discourse to be more diffused across platforms.

There are going to be a crackdown on these leftist groups you mention. The Domestic War on Terror framework is being justified in the light of the raucous at the Capitol. Polarization and conspiracy theories resulted in this "insurrection", so obviously further repression of speech and promotion of authoritative sources is needed.

Russia-Gate had no factual basis.

Both leftist and right-wingers seems eager to censor/de-platform each other, in many cases, which is not good.

[RogerTheMovieManiac88]

It's a pity that I've saddened OldAle and I'm sorry to hear of the immigration troubles of those close to Prodigal. That is one area of Trump's policies that leaves me unenthused and cold. I'm in favour of common-sense, legal immigration procedures that humanise rather than dehumanise.

Thanks to Dolwphin for the Michael Tracey tweets (& I agree with your points re Twitter as a platform/publisher). Banning the American President from his primary tool of general communication must stand as a dark moment of censorship (even if he has not played nice). I am in favour of freedom of speech, yes. I feel that those shameful scenes at the US Capitol are on those who perpetrated them. And, quite obviously, any criminality should be prosecuted.

[Onderhond]

Both leftist and right-wingers seems eager to censor/de-platform each other, in many cases, which is not good.

Hear hear! The "if I can't see/hear/read it, it doesn't exist" mentality in the US seems to be very strong.

[xianjiro]

So, let me throw this idea out there: could platforms ask - okay, it's hard to have discussions with millions of users, so maybe require is the better word - could platforms require users to tone down incendiary rhetoric?

It's clear to me that incendiary commentary existed long before the present era, but it was confined to books, speeches, leaflets, and small newspapers. The ideas aren't new, they just didn't reach as many people; so in that sense size does really matter. One had to work pretty hard to find such material and for most of us, when it crossed our paths, we didn't pay it much heed. Radicalization really took off with the Internet when it became super easy for people to move from print (much harder to access) and access such ideas online. Now it crosses our paths daily.

(I hope I'm putting forth the idea, but I'm not feeling super well and my mind feels a bit muddled.)

There has to be a difference between sharing ideas about what would make things better - In life, in our countries, in social media, wherever - and incendiary rhetoric with the goal of getting people to fight. Clearly people have been advocating for violent overthrow of many governments (all governments?) for years, decades, and centuries. Clearly people in power have advocated for their bases to support this or that, but rarely have they been able to do it so freely and with such abandon as we've seen in the past decade. Also, it's clear that conspiracy theories existed long before the digital age - who shot JFK? and I have a book from about 1970 that posits very similar ideas to the deep state but I probably know no one else who's read it.

There's a huge difference between discussing what responsible immigration policy looks like and a statement like, If illegals won't leave voluntarily, then use your 2nd Amendment Right and force them out. Just how incendiary and promoting of violence is that second statement? There's a huge difference between "stop the steal" and "bring your guns for a march on the Capitol". And then there's the whole question about the truth. Is "stop the steal" an effort to ensure election integrity or change the result one doesn't like.

[Onderhond]

So, let me throw this idea out there: could platforms ask - okay, it's hard to have discussions with millions of users, so maybe require is the better word - could platforms require users to tone down incendiary rhetoric?

One of the big problems is that these platforms are in fact build to drive that kind of interactions. Twitter is the worst, since it limits your actual character count, forcing you to drop nuance and be blunt. Other platforms are not as direct about it, but the fact that typing a proper sentence on Facebook makes it look like you've just written a chapter of a 1000-page book is clearly by design.

A platform like Facebook also deliberately creates bubbles of like-minded people, fuelling confirmation bias and polarization. Before these platforms ask anything of their users, they should fix their problems first, so it's really the people posting that are being wilfully incendiary.

[OldAle1]

If we can't agree on basic facts - like whether or not there is a deadly disease ravaging our country, and whether or not Joe Biden legitimately won the election - then how do you think we are going to agree on what "incendiary" means? Agent Orange certainly wouldn't define it the way the majority of us on this forum would - and he had a lot of his posts flagged over the last several months, and it did NOTHING to reign him in - and though I think the right has been more guilty of such rhetoric than the left in the USA over the last few decades, they are not the only ones. Some reading this may remember a certain member of Film General on IMDb who more than once called for all CEOs and all millionaires to be executed and their wealth to be distributed to "the people". I really doubt he would be any more capable of understanding the difference between civil discourse and provocations of violence than our orange leader.

And of course those are extreme examples but the extremes are the problem to begin with aren't they? I think I could tone myself down a notch if asked to, I think most people I interact with could, but we don't have followings of millions and most of us still believe and hope for peaceful solutions to the problems of the world. Those who don't aren't going to be muzzled voluntarily.

[Pretentious Hipster]

Some reading this may remember a certain member of Film General on IMDb who more than once called for all CEOs and all millionaires to be executed and their wealth to be distributed to "the people". I really doubt he would be any more capable of understanding the difference between civil discourse and provocations of violence than our orange leader.

Damn I have a Mao hat and even I don't say that lol

[xianjiro]

Some reading this may remember a certain member of Film General on IMDb who more than once called for all CEOs and all millionaires to be executed and their wealth to be distributed to "the people". I really doubt he would be any more capable of understanding the difference between civil discourse and provocations of violence than our orange leader.

Damn I have a Mao hat and even I don't say that lol

nah, you'd probably need a Robespierre hat to come closer to such an idea

[Dolwphin]

Listening to some good-old fashioned (Swedish language) incitement to violence music! It would be a shame if such language was censored, speech is speech and actions are actions. The songs name would translate to "Arm Yourselves" .

Spoiler