[worry]

http://theweek.com/a...e-dying-despair
Why poor white Americans are dying of despair

This isn't directly election-related, but it does involve the politics (formal and informal) of the last half century, and the seemingly unprecedented rise in mortality among poor white Americans. I'm not particularly shocked by the information, and I do have a slight "chickens coming home to roost" feeling about it, but I think that impulse is ugly and I'm trying to quarantine it in favor of a more empathetic view. These are, after all, vulnerable people who have been perpetually used and exploited by the aggressive, heartless, cannibalistic long con that is conservatism. It makes me think that what is often thought of as a generational problem is going to be a lot messier than that would indicate. Is there going to be a turning point? I kind of doubt it, at least internally-sourced. The light at the end of the tunnel is more likely to come from demographic shifts that outflank conservative voting blocs, and thus help everybody -- including poor whites as a byproduct.

[Tsundoku]

A couple of interesting articles about the growing amount of intolerance at what is supposed to be the bastions of tolerance - Universities:

http://theweek.com/a...eral-toleration

I read this one a while back but it is excellent and is referred to in the above article:

http://www.theatlant...an-mind/399356/

TL;DR - we turned the next generation into wimps who can't face anything they don't like and are setting things up to suit that view.

These are referred to as well:

http://www.theatlant...at-yale/414810/

http://www.theatlant...e-space/415080/

This post has been edited by Tsundoku: 12 November 2015 - 02:07 AM

[worry]

Strikes me as, let's say, interesting that the self-styled "moderate" PC-has-gone-too-far crowd comes out strongest when the issue is people being held accountable for racism (or incompetence in their response to racism). In all honesty this Freedom of Speech Defender pose sounds like the same fear-mongering that's always suggesting our democracy or our country or our Constitution is threatened by anti-freedom forces on the left, in place of an actual salient argument. Every protest has its bandwagoners and co-opters, and it's easy to point at the (figurative or literal) white dude with the Molotov cocktail and Guy Fawkes mask while ignoring the core protesters making eloquent arguments and reasonable requests. Like, who and what is really under threat here by the protesters? Jobs of a few status quo-touting incompetents in positions of authority. On the other hand, what is the threat to the protesters? Well for one thing, actual racists who have made actual threats of violence: http://www.stltoday....OeB05Vc.twitter
Seems to me that's the kind of speech that's being made unwelcome on campus, and frankly it doesn't shock me that this guy

considers it a threat.

Anyway, here's some wise words from Roxane Gay on the matter. She's much more plugged in and poignant than I could possibly be:
http://www.newrepubl...erious-business

[worry]

(Btw that was in response to just the first article. Haven't checked out the others yet, so they might have less pat, condescending content).

[Tsundoku]

Don't know the dude at all so it may be as you say. I just posted it as I had read the "Coddling" piece in The Atlantic a while back and seeing it referenced in the first article made me think about the issue a little more.

[worry]

Yeah I hear you. I'm not saying there's zero validity to critiques of on-campus thought policing, or that grievance peddling doesn't exist, or that college kids can sometimes be unwise in a pick-your-battles kind of way. But I 100% don't trust a take that starts with the Yale and (especially) Mizzou issues as prime examples of PC culture run amok. The racism is clear and present, and the response from adults who should know better was dismal. Also, the coddling issue isn't new either; like 5 years ago conservatives (eg Fox News) were blaming Mr. Rogers for ruining a generation by telling kids they were special just as they are. For some reason the right (and some in the middle and on the left too, worth saying) has a hankering for constantly denigrating and dismissing millennials, and these protests incorporate millennials, college (ie socialist petri dishes), race, and social justice in such a way they couldn't help but land in the cross hairs.

[amphibian]

Here is a brilliant piece on the Mizzou protests (and on the way people are talking about them) by Tressie McMillan-Cottom: http://tressiemc.com.../11/12/fascism/

She makes the point that this is not coddling or giving in to narcissistic students. Yes, there were people that handled the protest thing badly, particularly in the specific way that they tried to exclude the press from what they were doing. The student protestors do have a right not to be observed in an intimate way, though. The members of the press now often do not realize that they themselves change what they observe and particularly by how they observe because the press today isn't that much more diverse than it was in the 1960s. I can testify to how low paying entry level journalism/coverage is even in sports. Again and again, those that make it through the tough times of early journalism/coverage jobs to the decent jobs up the ladder are those who have the financial strength/support network to survive the tough times - usually white guys - and that shapes narratives in ways that are unfriendly or even dismissive of minorities and students.

Here is one excerpt from the link above:

Quote

The press is not a rational objective actor.

The press shapes as much as it documents.

All press benefits as much from social change as it benefits from the status quo. That means the press, especially corporate media, is always serving two masters.

The press has rights but so do persons and sometimes we define those rights by working through the moments when they clash.

This is a heavy moment for those clashes. The moment’s heaviness deserves attention because context matters to intellectual rigor, if not hyperbolic hand-waving.

The Moment For Movement-Making
The Mizzou student-activists are organizing in a moment of public, private and State surveillance unlike any ever before seen in modern history in a wealthy imperialist nation where a huge part of our conspicuous consumption is surveilling ourselves as a status symbol.

They are organizing within the most corporate driven era of higher education in the history of the United States with all that entails for curtailing citizen-building at the expense of making markets and more consumers.

These students were organizing against the major capital interests that can now purchase unprecedented access to politicians in a massive police apparatus that has virtually unchecked privilege to target, surveill, detain and murder in a media culture controlled by many of the same capital interests.

This moment requires a level of sophistication that I doubt even my elder cohort can quite grasp. This is not the 1960s. It isn’t even the 1980s.

Social media allowed Mizzou students to attract the requisite public attention for successful social action. But, media both social and traditional (and increasingly that’s a false distinction but it still means something discursively so roll with it) can bring as much harm as it can good given the political economy in which we all live.

The first amendment protects the press against censure but it does not delimit the democratic action of those the press covers.

All due respect to the man who gave the world Stringer Bell but what we saw at that student rally was democracy in action, not fascism.

Fascism means something more than a thing one does not like.

Fascism means a system of social organization that concentrates power and doesn’t just discourage dissent but organizes the State against it.

I don’t like to literalize metaphors for the most part. I like creative license. I use it from time to time with various degrees of success. Denying writers metaphors is cheap way to become a demagogue.

But sometimes the material reality subsumes creative licence and the moment at Missouri is one such moment.

It’s not just that the moment is important. It’s not just that the students are still very much in danger for doing something important. It is that hand-waving about a fascist state can confuse us about what making democracy looks like.

This post has been edited by amphibian: 12 November 2015 - 04:48 PM

[Terez]

Jindal is out. He's the third, behind Walker and Perry. All governors (of Louisiana, Wisconsin, and Texas respectively).

[worry]

That racial violence stats meme Trump tweeted yesterday turned out to be Neo-Nazi propaganda: https://twitter.com/...681813758349312

Not the biggest shock, since that seems to be the constituency he's courting.

[Maark Abbott]

worry, on 23 November 2015 - 11:17 PM, said:

That racial violence stats meme Trump tweeted yesterday turned out to be Neo-Nazi propaganda: https://twitter.com/...681813758349312

Not the biggest shock, since that seems to be the constituency he's courting.

Please tell me there aren't people taking his candidacy seriously. Please?

[worry]

As far as I know he's still got a sizable lead, and his attacks on Carson (in tandem with Carson's own continued incompetence) have really worked. It would no longer be surprising if he won the party nom, frankly. That said, there's still some time for mainstream Republicans (the merely functionally white supremacist wing) to bat down the Trump supporters (the ideologically white supremacist wing).

[Nicodimas]

Since most of the poster's seem to harp on the republican party so much, how about this which shows the republican party shifting in a very important way. Let's hope we see more of this!

Quote

His main job, Begay said, is to provide a voice for tribal communities and rural areas "but not through the lens of a political ideology." He said he votes based on what he thinks is best for his constituents, leaving aside party labels.

"I think that's what we're supposed to do," he said.

However, he turned to the Republican Party instead of registering as an independent because he wants to reinforce what he says is the GOP message of self-determination — the very thing tribes are trying to emphasize to the state and federal governments.

http://dailycaller.c...join-gop-video/

[EmperorMagus]

http://www.theguardi...ardino-shooting

I seriously want Trump to become the Republican candidate. It would be a beautiful political phenomenon to observe, almost like Hitler winning the elections in Germany.

[Terez]

Nostalgia for Infinity, on 08 December 2015 - 01:02 AM, said:

http://www.theguardi...ardino-shooting

I seriously want Trump to become the Republican candidate. It would be a beautiful political phenomenon to observe, almost like Hitler winning the elections in Germany.

Strange definition of beautiful you got there.

It's still hard to see him getting the nomination outright (50%+ of primary delegates). But a plurality is still highly likely, which would give us that brokered convention I mentioned a while back.

[EmperorMagus]

Terez, on 08 December 2015 - 01:09 AM, said:

Nostalgia for Infinity, on 08 December 2015 - 01:02 AM, said:

http://www.theguardi...ardino-shooting

I seriously want Trump to become the Republican candidate. It would be a beautiful political phenomenon to observe, almost like Hitler winning the elections in Germany.

Strange definition of beautiful you got there.

It's still hard to see him getting the nomination outright (50%+ of primary delegates). But a plurality is still highly likely, which would give us that brokered convention I mentioned a while back.

Is there a set voting system for the GOP primaries (first past the past, winner takes all, proportional) or does it change by State?
I was wishing for FPTP so we could have the trump nomination.

Beautiful implies that by becoming the nominee trump almost certainly will lose the Republican party both the presidency and the congress. It's also quite interesting to watch him walk over every principle of Democracy to his base's applause.

[Terez]

Nostalgia for Infinity, on 08 December 2015 - 05:04 AM, said:

Terez, on 08 December 2015 - 01:09 AM, said:

It's still hard to see him getting the nomination outright (50%+ of primary delegates). But a plurality is still highly likely, which would give us that brokered convention I mentioned a while back.

Is there a set voting system for the GOP primaries (first past the past, winner takes all, proportional) or does it change by State?
I was wishing for FPTP so we could have the trump nomination.

There is no FPTP for primaries; we usually only use FPTP for general elections. When there's a primary election for Congress or Governor, if no one gets a majority there will be a run-off election. With the nominations for President, though, we have the conventions. If no one gets 50% of the delegates, then all of the delegates (which are assigned to you when you win a state primary) are released from their obligation to vote for you at the convention, and they can vote for whoever they want, which continues until there is a majority winner.

It's generally believed that Trump doesn't stand a chance in a brokered convention because delegates tend to be Establishment types. As for the allotment of delegates state by state, the GOP keeps changing their rules to try to benefit Establishment candidates, but states can make their own rules within the GOP rules. So some states assign delegates proportionally, and some do winner takes all.

https://www.gop.com/...nating-process/

[EmperorMagus]

Terez, on 08 December 2015 - 05:46 AM, said:

Nostalgia for Infinity, on 08 December 2015 - 05:04 AM, said:

Terez, on 08 December 2015 - 01:09 AM, said:

It's still hard to see him getting the nomination outright (50%+ of primary delegates). But a plurality is still highly likely, which would give us that brokered convention I mentioned a while back.

Is there a set voting system for the GOP primaries (first past the past, winner takes all, proportional) or does it change by State?
I was wishing for FPTP so we could have the trump nomination.

There is no FPTP for primaries; we usually only use FPTP for general elections. When there's a primary election for Congress or Governor, if no one gets a majority there will be a run-off election. With the nominations for President, though, we have the conventions. If no one gets 50% of the delegates, then all of the delegates (which are assigned to you when you win a state primary) are released from their obligation to vote for you at the convention, and they can vote for whoever they want, which continues until there is a majority winner.

It's generally believed that Trump doesn't stand a chance in a brokered convention because delegates tend to be Establishment types. As for the allotment of delegates state by state, the GOP keeps changing their rules to try to benefit Establishment candidates, but states can make their own rules within the GOP rules. So some states assign delegates proportionally, and some do winner takes all.

https://www.gop.com/...nating-process/

That's fucked up.
Remind me why do people support that party again? Are they all brain-dead ? It's like a whole series of systems specifically meant to impede the democratic system.

[Terez]

Nostalgia for Infinity, on 08 December 2015 - 06:32 AM, said:

Terez, on 08 December 2015 - 05:46 AM, said:

There is no FPTP for primaries; we usually only use FPTP for general elections. When there's a primary election for Congress or Governor, if no one gets a majority there will be a run-off election. With the nominations for President, though, we have the conventions. If no one gets 50% of the delegates, then all of the delegates (which are assigned to you when you win a state primary) are released from their obligation to vote for you at the convention, and they can vote for whoever they want, which continues until there is a majority winner.

It's generally believed that Trump doesn't stand a chance in a brokered convention because delegates tend to be Establishment types. As for the allotment of delegates state by state, the GOP keeps changing their rules to try to benefit Establishment candidates, but states can make their own rules within the GOP rules. So some states assign delegates proportionally, and some do winner takes all.

https://www.gop.com/...nating-process/

That's fucked up.
Remind me why do people support that party again? Are they all brain-dead ? It's like a whole series of systems specifically meant to impede the democratic system.

To which most Republicans with wits would respond that we were always intended to be a republic. Our founders largely did not trust majority rule, so they decentralized power in what they felt was a pragmatic way, limiting the power of the unwashed masses. It's why we have such creative election laws, despite some progress toward a truer democracy over the last 200 years. There are various safeguards in the system to prevent people like Donald Trump from ever coming to power (not that he really has a chance in the general election).

[Gorefest]

Then how did Bush Jr slip through? Seems to me that, in the USA, if you have enough money, you can buy your way up.

This post has been edited by Gorefest: 08 December 2015 - 09:53 AM

[worry]

Well, he didn't actually win the election, so that's a tricky question. You'd have to delve into all the dirty dealings in Florida as well as the partisan chicanery in the SCOTUS decision that concluded things. That may or may not support your point, but money didn't actually translate to winning the election by votes.