USA Politics

You're certainly allowed to make fun of various public figures if you see fit, as long as it's not driving the conversation down a rabbit hole of yelling back and forth, or in the case of Iron Maiden, going to make a moderator invoke the RLonger rule for lessening overall enjoyment. However, don't get upset when someone calls out an hominem, either, especially if you're trying to have a serious political debate.

However, you will all post with a modicum of respect towards one another, and I feel this conversation is trending towards that not being true. That is true of multiple people over the last little bit, so I'm not singling each other out. If you cannot post calmly and politely, without snide comments at each other, then I will thread ban you. And that's not based on who I think is right or wrong, but who cares for this community and treats it with respect.
 
Azas said:
Vaenyr often repeated that Kamala didn’t run on a woke or progressive agenda—and that’s fair. But it’s also fair to acknowledge that, for some people, the situation in the country had already gone too far.
Click to expand...
My one counterargument is that this is not a result of reality, but rather a result of propaganda from outlets such as Fox News and the campaigns of Trump and other Republicans.

I live in what’s considered the South and I can tell you that ‘woke’ barely exists here. My partner (a trans man) was discriminated against at work and nothing was done about it despite his HR report (long story). Minorities in America have far from taken over and if ‘woke’ actually exists then I’d love to see it.
 
iu
 
I actually do think there is a conversation to be had about political correctness and how some people on the left engage with ideas that they aren’t comfortable with.

But…

1: The right has problems with this too.

2: I can’t take any argument that uses the term “wokeness” unironically seriously.

3: This all seems secondary to the civil rights violations happening now and the party in power conducting the biggest wealth transfer in history to destroy the middle class. This nebulous discussion on wokeness is the argument that the aristocracy wants you to have because it’s a distraction.
 
I think that entertainers, particularly those in comedy, film, tv, or music who thrive on pushing the envelope on what’s offensive can be hyper vigilant on censorship.

Growing up in the US, I noticed it was almost always the religious right wing who wanted to censor. The PMRC was an exception but I don’t think it reflected the broader Liberal/Dem views on free speech.

So, public figures fought that battle and, by the mid-90s-early 2000s, it looked like they won.

But, emerging around 2014 or so, the left started wanting to shame, but not ban necessarily, some types of speech they considered offensive.

I think the reflexive reaction among many of the Gen X or Boomer generation celebrities was to be against what they considered a new wave of censorship only coming from the left this time.

It’s probably less a stand against the values of the left or the right and more about the free speech principle regardless of where they perceive the threat to it coming from.

Hence, you have someone like Alice Cooper complaining that people are too easily offended these days.

But, they were also too easily offended for different reasons back during his 1970s career peak.
 
Diesel 11 said:
My one counterargument is that this is not a result of reality, but rather a result of propaganda from outlets such as Fox News and the campaigns of Trump and other Republicans.

I live in what’s considered the South and I can tell you that ‘woke’ barely exists here. My partner (a trans man) was discriminated against at work and nothing was done about it despite his HR report (long story). Minorities in America have far from taken over and if ‘woke’ actually exists then I’d love to see it.
Click to expand...
Minorities have largely fallen through the cracks of modern civil rights debates.

True action, in my opinion, boils down to improving material conditions for disadvantaged people rather than corporate ESG messaging that professes progressive causes but still adheres to corporate profit as its guiding principle.

On a personal note, I am sorry to hear about what you and your partner are experiencing. No one should be subjected to harassment or discrimination.
 
Mosh said:
I can’t take any argument that uses the term “wokeness” unironically seriously.
Click to expand...
I could continue to put it in quotes every time I use it, but the reality is that the right wing has successfully co-opted the term and changed its standard definition. We can keep pretending that isn’t true, or we can accept it and move on. I’ve chosen the latter.

Mosh said:
This nebulous discussion on wokeness is the argument that the aristocracy wants you to have because it’s a distra
Click to expand...
I feel compelled to point out that you just used the word “wokeness” unironically seriously in the very next argument you made after complaining about it. (And the quotes here are a literal quote, so I’m not being hypocritical in my own use of them.)

As far as the substance of the conversation is concerned, the left needs to have this discussion much more broadly and openly if they want to start winning elections again. One could argue that avoiding that discussion also plays into the hands of the aristocracy.
 
Was I calling something woke or accusing someone/something of wokeness? I think my point was made, as much as you would like to attempt to obfuscate.
 
Mosh said:
Was I calling something woke or accusing someone/something of wokeness?
Click to expand...
I don’t see where you called that out in your initial complaint as a caveat, but we can all pretend you didn’t make a mistake if that makes you feel better.

And I responded to the substance of your argument too, so I’m not sure where this accusation of obfuscation is coming from.
 
What do people really believe? That is the fundamental question, I think.

Here’s an example of a group of professed anti-racists shooting two Black teenagers, killing one of them, in the incident that ended the CHOP occupation in Seattle’s Capitol Hill district in 2020.


While the act itself was tragic and could be considered an accident, these anti-racist “street fighters” not only never owned up to their culpability but actively tried to obfuscate it.


But wait, here’s a group of “patriots,” many wearing or flying flags with “Blue Lives Matter” on them beating the shit out of the police in DC in 2021.


Hypocrisy? Did they never actually believe in the things they say they believe in and just want to be seen as people with strong convictions? Are their beliefs simply discardable when convenient to them?

I just file it all under “people are dumb.” To me, civil rights and civil liberties for all, an effective economic safety net, and environmental stewardship are important.

But people using their beliefs to justify their bad behavior are jackasses.

I think, too often these days, debates are polarized to the point where each side sees the other as these bad extremes. While these bad extremes exist, most people don’t fall under those categories. They’re somewhere less extreme on the political spectrum.
 
Last edited:
Diesel 11 said:
My one counterargument is that this is not a result of reality, but rather a result of propaganda from outlets such as Fox News and the campaigns of Trump and other Republicans.

I live in what’s considered the South and I can tell you that ‘woke’ barely exists here. My partner (a trans man) was discriminated against at work and nothing was done about it despite his HR report (long story). Minorities in America have far from taken over and if ‘woke’ actually exists then I’d love to see it.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry to hear that — that sounds incredibly frustrating and unfair.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top