On Racism and other isms.

452 thoughts on “On Racism and other isms.”

1. Lots to think about here, but a couple of quick points.
   First:
   When I discuss this, I’m not accusing anyone of hating on anyone else.
   I forget the specific context of my comment that you reference here, but suffice it to say that I’m not receiving anything anybody is saying to mean I’m hating anyone.
   So please no worries there.
   My general thought about racism is more or less similar to yours. Everybody or very nearly everybody partakes of it, the best single thing any of us can do about it is to try to cultivate a sense of self-awareness about it, and a lack of defensiveness if it is brought to our attention. Even if what is brought to our attention reflects a mistaken understanding of what our intent was.
   The racism that dresses up in a Klan hood is easy to identify and not that hard to deal with, because it is so easy to identify. And the folks walking around in Klan hoods are generally happy to own it.
   It’s the other kinds that are more challenging to deal with. The racism that we partake of without being all that aware of, and the racism that is perceived when it is not even intended and may not even exist.

2. Lots to think about here, but a couple of quick points.
   First:
   When I discuss this, I’m not accusing anyone of hating on anyone else.
   I forget the specific context of my comment that you reference here, but suffice it to say that I’m not receiving anything anybody is saying to mean I’m hating anyone.
   So please no worries there.
   My general thought about racism is more or less similar to yours. Everybody or very nearly everybody partakes of it, the best single thing any of us can do about it is to try to cultivate a sense of self-awareness about it, and a lack of defensiveness if it is brought to our attention. Even if what is brought to our attention reflects a mistaken understanding of what our intent was.
   The racism that dresses up in a Klan hood is easy to identify and not that hard to deal with, because it is so easy to identify. And the folks walking around in Klan hoods are generally happy to own it.
   It’s the other kinds that are more challenging to deal with. The racism that we partake of without being all that aware of, and the racism that is perceived when it is not even intended and may not even exist.

3. The issue can get more complex when the “race” involved isn’t actually considered a race by those from further away.
   I am put in mind of something I encountered in college (late 1960s). The Japanese American kids, before they left home, were routinely told something like “You’re going to be meeting lots of different people, and that’s OK. You can follow your heart. Just don’t bring home any Chinese; they’re inferior.”
   For symmetry, the Chinese American kids were told exactly the same thing, just with the roles reversed. Coming home with a white** prospective spouse was fine. Just not mixing Chinese and Japanese ancestries.
   ** There were few enough black kids in college that I suspect they simply weren’t on the parents’ radar screen. And heaven knows what they’d have said about Koreans, if the parents had thought of them.

4. The issue can get more complex when the “race” involved isn’t actually considered a race by those from further away.
   I am put in mind of something I encountered in college (late 1960s). The Japanese American kids, before they left home, were routinely told something like “You’re going to be meeting lots of different people, and that’s OK. You can follow your heart. Just don’t bring home any Chinese; they’re inferior.”
   For symmetry, the Chinese American kids were told exactly the same thing, just with the roles reversed. Coming home with a white** prospective spouse was fine. Just not mixing Chinese and Japanese ancestries.
   ** There were few enough black kids in college that I suspect they simply weren’t on the parents’ radar screen. And heaven knows what they’d have said about Koreans, if the parents had thought of them.

5. Very thoughtful post. A couple of things:
   None of this is to suggest that racism is somehow worse than classism or sexism (or vice versa), but for me, it does suggest to me that racism is what society has to deal with first, with the caveat that mileage will definitely vary.
   The racism that dresses up in a Klan hood is easy to identify and not that hard to deal with, because it is so easy to identify.
   I don’t know what is meant by “deal with”. I don’t think that racism is something we can “deal with”, it’s done, and then we move on to sexism or classism. To me, it’s really hard to consider “dealing with” Klansmen. The fact that domestic terrorists are predominantly white supremacists is something we’re “dealing with”, and not very well.
   If we’re all racists (in the sense that we all are predisposed to stereotype people, or enjoy our privilege, etc.), we should try to fight it. But we’re not going to overcome it completely – it’s something that we all have to fight. When we’re lucky enough to have friendships that help us to think past it, that’s hugely important, and probably breaks barriers.
   So reading more history (that includes, and fills in the history of racism), more fiction by African-American authors, etc. is something I’m working on steadily. But if it’s a focus, the exercise should be a prototype for how we consider our predispositions towards other humans (and our environment) in general. It’s about learning. It’s about respect. It’s about I and Thou.

6. Very thoughtful post. A couple of things:
   None of this is to suggest that racism is somehow worse than classism or sexism (or vice versa), but for me, it does suggest to me that racism is what society has to deal with first, with the caveat that mileage will definitely vary.
   The racism that dresses up in a Klan hood is easy to identify and not that hard to deal with, because it is so easy to identify.
   I don’t know what is meant by “deal with”. I don’t think that racism is something we can “deal with”, it’s done, and then we move on to sexism or classism. To me, it’s really hard to consider “dealing with” Klansmen. The fact that domestic terrorists are predominantly white supremacists is something we’re “dealing with”, and not very well.
   If we’re all racists (in the sense that we all are predisposed to stereotype people, or enjoy our privilege, etc.), we should try to fight it. But we’re not going to overcome it completely – it’s something that we all have to fight. When we’re lucky enough to have friendships that help us to think past it, that’s hugely important, and probably breaks barriers.
   So reading more history (that includes, and fills in the history of racism), more fiction by African-American authors, etc. is something I’m working on steadily. But if it’s a focus, the exercise should be a prototype for how we consider our predispositions towards other humans (and our environment) in general. It’s about learning. It’s about respect. It’s about I and Thou.

7. “ Reed’s a racist insofar as he doesn’t think race matters. ”
   Reed is black, so this would be the self-hating type. But I don’t think he ever said or thinks this.
   Here is a piece from last year.
   https://newrepublic.com/article/154996/myth-class-reductionism

8. “ Reed’s a racist insofar as he doesn’t think race matters. ”
   Reed is black, so this would be the self-hating type. But I don’t think he ever said or thinks this.
   Here is a piece from last year.
   https://newrepublic.com/article/154996/myth-class-reductionism

9. I also read the Harper’s piece. I don’t think it is much of a criticism to say that Reed believes he is right and that the people he criticizes are wrong.
   Also, there is this notion that Obama was kept from doing things by Republicans. Of course he was, but that doesn’t mean that he was a closet leftist. He was kept from doing even “ moderate” things by McConnell to the extent that McConnell could stop him. But he was no leftist on either foreign or domestic policy and that is what Reed is criticizing him about. It is an ideological critique, but all you can see, LJ, are personalities and race.

10. I also read the Harper’s piece. I don’t think it is much of a criticism to say that Reed believes he is right and that the people he criticizes are wrong.
    Also, there is this notion that Obama was kept from doing things by Republicans. Of course he was, but that doesn’t mean that he was a closet leftist. He was kept from doing even “ moderate” things by McConnell to the extent that McConnell could stop him. But he was no leftist on either foreign or domestic policy and that is what Reed is criticizing him about. It is an ideological critique, but all you can see, LJ, are personalities and race.

11. In that second Reed piece in Donald’s 11:57, I think that Reed is guilty of a bit of misrepresentation when he says that class reductionism is a myth. He acts as if the critics of race and gender blind marxism are being overly reductionist, but his own formulation of their critiques is guilty of the same sort of reductionism.
    Relieving the economic burden on the lower classes will absolutely help disadvantaged groups across the board, but it will not alleviate the effects of racism, sexism, ableism, etc. that lead to many of those maldistributions.
    The central problem is not one of deciding which of these different forms of oppression should be the focus of our action. The central problem is one of maintaining solidarity among the oppressed while supporting changes that remove one type of privilege from which an individual might benefit before being able to address the type of oppression that makes that individual a net loser in the overall system.
    There is no one size fits all justice for the many interlocking systems of oppression we have created for ourselves. We have to iron them all out a bit at a time and be willing to suffer some temporary losses in status for the sake of solidarity.
    Without solidarity we are all stuck in the Prisoner’s Dilemma.

12. In that second Reed piece in Donald’s 11:57, I think that Reed is guilty of a bit of misrepresentation when he says that class reductionism is a myth. He acts as if the critics of race and gender blind marxism are being overly reductionist, but his own formulation of their critiques is guilty of the same sort of reductionism.
    Relieving the economic burden on the lower classes will absolutely help disadvantaged groups across the board, but it will not alleviate the effects of racism, sexism, ableism, etc. that lead to many of those maldistributions.
    The central problem is not one of deciding which of these different forms of oppression should be the focus of our action. The central problem is one of maintaining solidarity among the oppressed while supporting changes that remove one type of privilege from which an individual might benefit before being able to address the type of oppression that makes that individual a net loser in the overall system.
    There is no one size fits all justice for the many interlocking systems of oppression we have created for ourselves. We have to iron them all out a bit at a time and be willing to suffer some temporary losses in status for the sake of solidarity.
    Without solidarity we are all stuck in the Prisoner’s Dilemma.

13. There is no one size fits all justice for the many interlocking systems of oppression we have created for ourselves. We have to iron them all out a bit at a time and be willing to suffer some temporary losses in status for the sake of solidarity.
    Justice is by its nature equal or it’s not justice. Its remedies are varied to address different levels and varieties of harm.

14. There is no one size fits all justice for the many interlocking systems of oppression we have created for ourselves. We have to iron them all out a bit at a time and be willing to suffer some temporary losses in status for the sake of solidarity.
    Justice is by its nature equal or it’s not justice. Its remedies are varied to address different levels and varieties of harm.

15. There’s one way to effectively deal with racism (and the other isms). But it’s slow.
    First, you conclude that it’s wrong. Some people will never get that far, of course. But you can expand the pool of those who do until you marginalize them.
    Second, you change how you talk. That’s actually pretty easy, once you decide to try.
    Third, you change how you act. That can be harder, but is still generally doable. Just achieving those two makes a world of difference for those on the receiving end.
    Fourth, you can try to change how you feel. For some, that can happen. For example, beloved child (grandchild) turns up with a spouse of another race/class/whatever. Who turns out to be a delight. But for other people, it can be impossible. Still, if they’ve managed the first three, that’s enough.
    Finally, and in parallel, you change how you teach the next generation. Or, if this from South Pacific is correct, just don’t teach them. I had an aunt who had seriously racist views on blacks. She decided it was wrong, but could never get over them herself. However she very deliberately and carefully avoided raising her children with those views. No prejudice in sight among those kids or their children. (Feel free to argue there’s still some there. Think of it like in the HIV treatment commercials: if it’s no longer detectable, it won’t hurt others.) So it can be done.
    This is what we have seen, at warp speed, with homosexuality. Folks our age are, in many cases, unable to entirely get past the views we were raised with. But a couple generations on, most kids see it as a complete non-issue. And are a bit puzzled (not to mention disdainful) at adults who get worked up about it.
    You’ll never get to 100%. Just as we still have folks who are convinced the South was right, and should have won the Civil War. But you can reduce them to irrelevance . . . and try to keep them there.

16. There’s one way to effectively deal with racism (and the other isms). But it’s slow.
    First, you conclude that it’s wrong. Some people will never get that far, of course. But you can expand the pool of those who do until you marginalize them.
    Second, you change how you talk. That’s actually pretty easy, once you decide to try.
    Third, you change how you act. That can be harder, but is still generally doable. Just achieving those two makes a world of difference for those on the receiving end.
    Fourth, you can try to change how you feel. For some, that can happen. For example, beloved child (grandchild) turns up with a spouse of another race/class/whatever. Who turns out to be a delight. But for other people, it can be impossible. Still, if they’ve managed the first three, that’s enough.
    Finally, and in parallel, you change how you teach the next generation. Or, if this from South Pacific is correct, just don’t teach them. I had an aunt who had seriously racist views on blacks. She decided it was wrong, but could never get over them herself. However she very deliberately and carefully avoided raising her children with those views. No prejudice in sight among those kids or their children. (Feel free to argue there’s still some there. Think of it like in the HIV treatment commercials: if it’s no longer detectable, it won’t hurt others.) So it can be done.
    This is what we have seen, at warp speed, with homosexuality. Folks our age are, in many cases, unable to entirely get past the views we were raised with. But a couple generations on, most kids see it as a complete non-issue. And are a bit puzzled (not to mention disdainful) at adults who get worked up about it.
    You’ll never get to 100%. Just as we still have folks who are convinced the South was right, and should have won the Civil War. But you can reduce them to irrelevance . . . and try to keep them there.

17. if this from South Pacific
    i made this one: https://youtu.be/mtYNjMZSVdc

18. if this from South Pacific
    i made this one: https://youtu.be/mtYNjMZSVdc

19. Like I say, it’s not gonna be fast. Sigh

20. Like I say, it’s not gonna be fast. Sigh

21. Recasting what I say as ‘so you’re telling ME I’m racist’ is wrong. I’m saying that WE are all racist.
    I don’t think it’s wrong. It certainly follows logically.
    And I don’t think that telling people they are racists is a particularly good way to get them to listen to you or look at things differently. Like it or not, it’s a loaded word. You are telling them they are no better than Bull Connor or Lester Maddox, so you’re going to get into arguments about definitions, rather than discussions of problems.

22. Recasting what I say as ‘so you’re telling ME I’m racist’ is wrong. I’m saying that WE are all racist.
    I don’t think it’s wrong. It certainly follows logically.
    And I don’t think that telling people they are racists is a particularly good way to get them to listen to you or look at things differently. Like it or not, it’s a loaded word. You are telling them they are no better than Bull Connor or Lester Maddox, so you’re going to get into arguments about definitions, rather than discussions of problems.

23. And I don’t think that telling people they are racists is a particularly good way to get them to listen to you or look at things differently.
    I think I agree with this. There are plenty of people in our country currently who embrace hatred, to a greater or lesser degree. There are others who are trying to learn, self-examine, make things better. The latter don’t necessarily deserve a trophy, but maybe deserve to avoid the stigma of the word “racist”. Privileged, in most cases, still applies to them [me], and we hope that’s understood.

24. And I don’t think that telling people they are racists is a particularly good way to get them to listen to you or look at things differently.
    I think I agree with this. There are plenty of people in our country currently who embrace hatred, to a greater or lesser degree. There are others who are trying to learn, self-examine, make things better. The latter don’t necessarily deserve a trophy, but maybe deserve to avoid the stigma of the word “racist”. Privileged, in most cases, still applies to them [me], and we hope that’s understood.

25. I apologise if this (by an NYT contributor called Wajahat Ali who has been reaching out to Trump voters since 2016) is not completely germane to a conversation which I have not been able to follow closely, with links etc. But it seemed to me to be worth a look, and certainly deals with issues we have discussed in this connection:
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/19/opinion/trump-supporters.html?action=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage&section=Opinion
    We cannot help people who refuse to help themselves. Mr. Trump is an extension of their id, their culture, their values, their greed. He is their defender and savior. He is their blunt instrument. He is their destructive drug of choice.
    Don’t waste your time reaching out to Trump voters as I did. Instead, invest your time organizing your community, registering new voters and supporting candidates who reflect progressive values that uplift everyone, not just those who wear MAGA hats, in local and state elections. Work also to protect Americans against lies and conspiracy theories churned out by the right-wing media and political ecosystem. One step would be to continue pressuring social media giants like Twitter and Facebook to deplatform hatemongers, such as Steve Bannon, and censor disinformation. It’s not enough, but it’s a start.
    Or, you can just watch “The Queen’s Gambit” on Netflix while downing your favorite pint of ice cream and call it a day.
    Just as in 2016, I don’t need Trump supporters to be humiliated to feel great again. I want them to have health insurance, decent-paying jobs and security for their family. I do not want them to suffer, but I also refuse to spend any more time trying to understand and help the architects of my oppression.

26. I apologise if this (by an NYT contributor called Wajahat Ali who has been reaching out to Trump voters since 2016) is not completely germane to a conversation which I have not been able to follow closely, with links etc. But it seemed to me to be worth a look, and certainly deals with issues we have discussed in this connection:
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/19/opinion/trump-supporters.html?action=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage&section=Opinion
    We cannot help people who refuse to help themselves. Mr. Trump is an extension of their id, their culture, their values, their greed. He is their defender and savior. He is their blunt instrument. He is their destructive drug of choice.
    Don’t waste your time reaching out to Trump voters as I did. Instead, invest your time organizing your community, registering new voters and supporting candidates who reflect progressive values that uplift everyone, not just those who wear MAGA hats, in local and state elections. Work also to protect Americans against lies and conspiracy theories churned out by the right-wing media and political ecosystem. One step would be to continue pressuring social media giants like Twitter and Facebook to deplatform hatemongers, such as Steve Bannon, and censor disinformation. It’s not enough, but it’s a start.
    Or, you can just watch “The Queen’s Gambit” on Netflix while downing your favorite pint of ice cream and call it a day.
    Just as in 2016, I don’t need Trump supporters to be humiliated to feel great again. I want them to have health insurance, decent-paying jobs and security for their family. I do not want them to suffer, but I also refuse to spend any more time trying to understand and help the architects of my oppression.

27. you’re going to get into arguments about definitions, rather than discussions of problems.
    I basically agree with LJ that most folks are, in one way or other and to some degree or other, racist.
    And, I agree with Bernie’s point here.
    Our history has made the word too loaded to be a useful lever for thinking about the issue in a reasonable way. At least in this country, probably in other places as well.
    I notice that, at least in some situations, I respond to people in different ways, at least in part because of their apparent ethnic or racial heritage.
    Personally, I’d call that racism, and I think it’s pretty common. But I’m also fine with leaving the word out of the discussion for anything other than truly hostile and toxic cases.
    If the word gets in the way, choose different words.
    He is their defender and savior. He is their blunt instrument.
    I find this basically and regrettably true.
    With extremely rare exceptions – perhaps one person – I simply do not engage with Trump supporters on the topic of Trump.
    Period.
    As far as I can tell, there is no upside. There is no productive or useful conversation to have.
    There are other things to talk about, I talk with them about those other things.

28. you’re going to get into arguments about definitions, rather than discussions of problems.
    I basically agree with LJ that most folks are, in one way or other and to some degree or other, racist.
    And, I agree with Bernie’s point here.
    Our history has made the word too loaded to be a useful lever for thinking about the issue in a reasonable way. At least in this country, probably in other places as well.
    I notice that, at least in some situations, I respond to people in different ways, at least in part because of their apparent ethnic or racial heritage.
    Personally, I’d call that racism, and I think it’s pretty common. But I’m also fine with leaving the word out of the discussion for anything other than truly hostile and toxic cases.
    If the word gets in the way, choose different words.
    He is their defender and savior. He is their blunt instrument.
    I find this basically and regrettably true.
    With extremely rare exceptions – perhaps one person – I simply do not engage with Trump supporters on the topic of Trump.
    Period.
    As far as I can tell, there is no upside. There is no productive or useful conversation to have.
    There are other things to talk about, I talk with them about those other things.

29. What do you call structural racism in order to avoid the term but still preserve the force inherent in the level of harm? I have a UC issued black belt in words and I have a hard time finding words to convey the seriousness of our racism problems that are not either unclear or that undercut the seriousness and trivialize the issue.
    Which is especially frustrating when the audience we are trying to spare in this are the ones with the “Fuck Your Feelings” branded merch.

30. What do you call structural racism in order to avoid the term but still preserve the force inherent in the level of harm? I have a UC issued black belt in words and I have a hard time finding words to convey the seriousness of our racism problems that are not either unclear or that undercut the seriousness and trivialize the issue.
    Which is especially frustrating when the audience we are trying to spare in this are the ones with the “Fuck Your Feelings” branded merch.

31. Thanks for the comments, I’ll address everything as a single comment, apologies if that seems unfair. Russell agrees with my basic premise, and that’s why I pointed out what seemed to be to be the unequal responses to disaffected Trump supporters vs protests that have defund the police slogans. AOC’s response to the question ‘what does an America with a defunded police look like’ is here
    https://news.yahoo.com/aoc-asked-defunding-police-her-130800430.html
    he good news is that it actually doesn’t take a ton of imagination.
    It looks like a suburb. Affluent white communities already live in a world where the choose to fund youth, health, housing etc more than they fund police. These communities have lower crime rates not because they have more police, but bc they have more resources to support healthy society in a way that reduces crime.
    When a teenager or preteen does something harmful in a suburb (I say teen bc this is often where lifelong carceral cycles begin for Black and Brown communities), White communities bend over backwards to find alternatives to incarceration for their loved ones to “protect their future,” like community service or rehab or restorative measures. Why don’t we treat Black and Brown people the same way? Why doesn’t the criminal system care about Black teens’ futures the way they care for White teens’ futures? Why doesn’t the news use Black people’s graduation or family photos in stories the way they do when they cover White people (eg Brock Turner) who commit harmful crimes? Affluent White suburbs also design their own lives so that they walk through the world without having much interruption or interaction with police at all aside from community events and speeding tickets (and many of these communities try to reduce those, too!)
    Just starting THERE would be a dramatically and radically different world than what we are experiencing now.
    And it doesn’t seem like radical marxist pie in the sky to me.
    wj points out racial animosity between Japanese and Koreans. I didn’t go there because, when racism happens to me here, I may feel it but I don’t _know_ it. My Japanese is good enough to detect shifts in tone and nuance aimed towards me, but I’m not confident enough to be able to bear clear witness. And that’s for me. Figuring out how it works when others are the target is a lot more difficult.
    I do know that it is not a one way street. When I was in Korea, I visited Seodaemun prison
    https://english.visitkorea.or.kr/enu/ATR/SI_EN_3_1_1_1.jsp?cid=268143
    In the gift shop, there was a little diorama for sale that, when you assembled it, you got the scene of Ahn Jung-geun assassinating Ito Hirobumi, who was the first Japanese prime minister and was on the 1000 yen bill from 1963 to 1984 in Harbin (The Chinese, ever helpful, have opened a museum to Ahn Jung-geun there)
    This seems like a whole nother level of animosity. Lost Cause people don’t make and sell in gift shops dioramas of John Wilkes Booth jumping from Lincoln’s box. Yet Koreans and Japanese are friends, lovers, husbands and wives.
    It’s also made complex by the fact that you have two groups of Koreans in Japan, ones who are supporting the South and another group that supports the North who are all Zainichi Koreans, who are those who elected to stay in Japan after the war, and who have been granted permanent residency but have chosen not to take Japanese citizenship.
    http://yris.yira.org/comments/2873
    And this isn’t two countries with a long history of postwar exchange. University students were only allowed to travel outside Korea from 1980, and people older than 40 weren’t given the privilege until 1984. Japanese could travel but that didn’t happen on a large scale until after 1964 and the Olympics. Contrast that with the length of time for Irish, Italians, or other groups that were discriminated against in the US. In fact, the notion that countries outside the West should be expected to travel the same development in what is really a historical instance is another example of racism. I’m not saying the west hates Asians (you loved the walkman! And K-pop is the bomb!) I’m just saying that there’s a blind spot.
    I should also note that I come from a long line of pissed off fathers. My grandfather on my father’s side was none too happy that a son of his was marrying a white woman. (Strangely enough, when the daughters married white men, that was complaint) And my father-in-law, when coming to meet me at the train station with my future wife, asked her ‘kono mono da’ (That thing?) What I’m trying to say is that not letting your kids marry someone is not the epitome of racism, it’s more like the bitter end.
    About the focus on ‘deal with’. I don’t get the nuance sapient is adding, that ‘dealing with’ automatically assumes an end state where you don’t have to anymore. People say they deal with addictions, with problems, with a whole wealth of things that have no fixed end point. In fact, ‘deal with’ is probably from the American English fascination with gambling, and relates to card games. When you stop dealing, the game is over.
    The question about not calling people racists is a counter-argument, but it seems to have worked for religion, with people admitting that they are sinners or that they are not enlightened. Given the resurgence of racism that gives you things like arguing that all the votes in Detroit need to be tossed out,
    https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/wayne-county-republican-canvassers-rescind-vote-result-in-circuit-court-race-reverses-warm-thursday-coming
    it seems we need a little more calling out, not less.
    Finally, since the comment is long enough to invoke Godwin, about ‘seeing’ ideologies versus my own blindness, while it’s good to know that Donald sees things that I don’t, he can spell McT, I’m not really sure what ‘seeing’ means in relation to ideology. Sarcastically, I could ask that if we could get a sketch artist to draw a picture, then maybe we could nail the perp.
    But seriously, ideologies are built on foundations of what we actually see and experience. The ideology of slavery or Nazi anti-semitism wasn’t simply erected on thoughts. As Richard Rubenstein notes in The Cunning of History, a key foundation of the Holocaust was making the Jews appear to be less than human. What ideology is at the heart of the IP conflict? To me, it seems to be a whole raft of them, but at the base, there is a racist foundation concerning Palestinians. If one could ‘deal with’ that, the ideologies that are propped up on that would have a lot harder time staying up. That’s my take.
    ps this was in the spam trap, so if you post something and it doesn’t get up, drop a line. I’ll try to keep an eye on it, but a quick line to the kitty would be helpful.

32. Thanks for the comments, I’ll address everything as a single comment, apologies if that seems unfair. Russell agrees with my basic premise, and that’s why I pointed out what seemed to be to be the unequal responses to disaffected Trump supporters vs protests that have defund the police slogans. AOC’s response to the question ‘what does an America with a defunded police look like’ is here
    https://news.yahoo.com/aoc-asked-defunding-police-her-130800430.html
    he good news is that it actually doesn’t take a ton of imagination.
    It looks like a suburb. Affluent white communities already live in a world where the choose to fund youth, health, housing etc more than they fund police. These communities have lower crime rates not because they have more police, but bc they have more resources to support healthy society in a way that reduces crime.
    When a teenager or preteen does something harmful in a suburb (I say teen bc this is often where lifelong carceral cycles begin for Black and Brown communities), White communities bend over backwards to find alternatives to incarceration for their loved ones to “protect their future,” like community service or rehab or restorative measures. Why don’t we treat Black and Brown people the same way? Why doesn’t the criminal system care about Black teens’ futures the way they care for White teens’ futures? Why doesn’t the news use Black people’s graduation or family photos in stories the way they do when they cover White people (eg Brock Turner) who commit harmful crimes? Affluent White suburbs also design their own lives so that they walk through the world without having much interruption or interaction with police at all aside from community events and speeding tickets (and many of these communities try to reduce those, too!)
    Just starting THERE would be a dramatically and radically different world than what we are experiencing now.
    And it doesn’t seem like radical marxist pie in the sky to me.
    wj points out racial animosity between Japanese and Koreans. I didn’t go there because, when racism happens to me here, I may feel it but I don’t _know_ it. My Japanese is good enough to detect shifts in tone and nuance aimed towards me, but I’m not confident enough to be able to bear clear witness. And that’s for me. Figuring out how it works when others are the target is a lot more difficult.
    I do know that it is not a one way street. When I was in Korea, I visited Seodaemun prison
    https://english.visitkorea.or.kr/enu/ATR/SI_EN_3_1_1_1.jsp?cid=268143
    In the gift shop, there was a little diorama for sale that, when you assembled it, you got the scene of Ahn Jung-geun assassinating Ito Hirobumi, who was the first Japanese prime minister and was on the 1000 yen bill from 1963 to 1984 in Harbin (The Chinese, ever helpful, have opened a museum to Ahn Jung-geun there)
    This seems like a whole nother level of animosity. Lost Cause people don’t make and sell in gift shops dioramas of John Wilkes Booth jumping from Lincoln’s box. Yet Koreans and Japanese are friends, lovers, husbands and wives.
    It’s also made complex by the fact that you have two groups of Koreans in Japan, ones who are supporting the South and another group that supports the North who are all Zainichi Koreans, who are those who elected to stay in Japan after the war, and who have been granted permanent residency but have chosen not to take Japanese citizenship.
    http://yris.yira.org/comments/2873
    And this isn’t two countries with a long history of postwar exchange. University students were only allowed to travel outside Korea from 1980, and people older than 40 weren’t given the privilege until 1984. Japanese could travel but that didn’t happen on a large scale until after 1964 and the Olympics. Contrast that with the length of time for Irish, Italians, or other groups that were discriminated against in the US. In fact, the notion that countries outside the West should be expected to travel the same development in what is really a historical instance is another example of racism. I’m not saying the west hates Asians (you loved the walkman! And K-pop is the bomb!) I’m just saying that there’s a blind spot.
    I should also note that I come from a long line of pissed off fathers. My grandfather on my father’s side was none too happy that a son of his was marrying a white woman. (Strangely enough, when the daughters married white men, that was complaint) And my father-in-law, when coming to meet me at the train station with my future wife, asked her ‘kono mono da’ (That thing?) What I’m trying to say is that not letting your kids marry someone is not the epitome of racism, it’s more like the bitter end.
    About the focus on ‘deal with’. I don’t get the nuance sapient is adding, that ‘dealing with’ automatically assumes an end state where you don’t have to anymore. People say they deal with addictions, with problems, with a whole wealth of things that have no fixed end point. In fact, ‘deal with’ is probably from the American English fascination with gambling, and relates to card games. When you stop dealing, the game is over.
    The question about not calling people racists is a counter-argument, but it seems to have worked for religion, with people admitting that they are sinners or that they are not enlightened. Given the resurgence of racism that gives you things like arguing that all the votes in Detroit need to be tossed out,
    https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/wayne-county-republican-canvassers-rescind-vote-result-in-circuit-court-race-reverses-warm-thursday-coming
    it seems we need a little more calling out, not less.
    Finally, since the comment is long enough to invoke Godwin, about ‘seeing’ ideologies versus my own blindness, while it’s good to know that Donald sees things that I don’t, he can spell McT, I’m not really sure what ‘seeing’ means in relation to ideology. Sarcastically, I could ask that if we could get a sketch artist to draw a picture, then maybe we could nail the perp.
    But seriously, ideologies are built on foundations of what we actually see and experience. The ideology of slavery or Nazi anti-semitism wasn’t simply erected on thoughts. As Richard Rubenstein notes in The Cunning of History, a key foundation of the Holocaust was making the Jews appear to be less than human. What ideology is at the heart of the IP conflict? To me, it seems to be a whole raft of them, but at the base, there is a racist foundation concerning Palestinians. If one could ‘deal with’ that, the ideologies that are propped up on that would have a lot harder time staying up. That’s my take.
    ps this was in the spam trap, so if you post something and it doesn’t get up, drop a line. I’ll try to keep an eye on it, but a quick line to the kitty would be helpful.

33. Which is especially frustrating when the audience we are trying to spare in this are the ones with the “Fuck Your Feelings” branded merch.
    I have no problem with calling that crowd racist, and I no longer have an interest in sparing them (although I believe in doing what is least likely to cause them to go shoot somebody). I also have no problem acknowledging that I am a “racist” in the sense that I have not understood or acknowledged the history and the magnitude of suffering of people in the African-American community, and that I need to continue to work on it. So “racism” is a fine word for what’s been happening for the past many centuries.
    I won’t call my friends, the ones who care about this issue and are making an effort, racist. They can decide that for themselves, and most of them are trying to do just that.

34. Which is especially frustrating when the audience we are trying to spare in this are the ones with the “Fuck Your Feelings” branded merch.
    I have no problem with calling that crowd racist, and I no longer have an interest in sparing them (although I believe in doing what is least likely to cause them to go shoot somebody). I also have no problem acknowledging that I am a “racist” in the sense that I have not understood or acknowledged the history and the magnitude of suffering of people in the African-American community, and that I need to continue to work on it. So “racism” is a fine word for what’s been happening for the past many centuries.
    I won’t call my friends, the ones who care about this issue and are making an effort, racist. They can decide that for themselves, and most of them are trying to do just that.

35. There’s one way to effectively deal with racism (and the other isms). But it’s slow.
    I think I see a problem there.
    I have a hard time finding words to convey the seriousness of our racism problems that are not either unclear or that undercut the seriousness and trivialize the issue.
    Me, too. It’s not a problem of “finding the right words” it’s a problem of building an effective coalition that brings about the public policies we desire.
    Mike the Mad Biologist repeats all the time that upwards of 20% of white Dem voters are, in fact, racist to some significant degree or another….so the problem is to find out what in god’s name gets them to pull the Dem lever.
    That, I do not know. But I don’t believe it comes down to using the right words.

36. There’s one way to effectively deal with racism (and the other isms). But it’s slow.
    I think I see a problem there.
    I have a hard time finding words to convey the seriousness of our racism problems that are not either unclear or that undercut the seriousness and trivialize the issue.
    Me, too. It’s not a problem of “finding the right words” it’s a problem of building an effective coalition that brings about the public policies we desire.
    Mike the Mad Biologist repeats all the time that upwards of 20% of white Dem voters are, in fact, racist to some significant degree or another….so the problem is to find out what in god’s name gets them to pull the Dem lever.
    That, I do not know. But I don’t believe it comes down to using the right words.

37. There’s one way to effectively deal with racism (and the other isms). But it’s slow.
    I think I see a problem there.
    No argument that it’s a problem that it’s slow. But the thing is, I don’t see anything faster that has any significant chance of actually working. If you have a concrete suggestion for something that has a realistic chance of actually happening, by all means share.

38. There’s one way to effectively deal with racism (and the other isms). But it’s slow.
    I think I see a problem there.
    No argument that it’s a problem that it’s slow. But the thing is, I don’t see anything faster that has any significant chance of actually working. If you have a concrete suggestion for something that has a realistic chance of actually happening, by all means share.

39. Mike the Mad Biologist repeats all the time that upwards of 20% of white Dem voters are, in fact, racist to some significant degree or another….so the problem is to find out what in god’s name gets them to pull the Dem lever.
    Forgive me if there’s a link to that earlier – don’t always read everything, but it would be helpful to know what that means. This is another example of “upwards of 20% of white Dem voters are, in fact, racist to some significant degree or another” versus “we are all racists” being a problem. See what I’m saying?

40. Mike the Mad Biologist repeats all the time that upwards of 20% of white Dem voters are, in fact, racist to some significant degree or another….so the problem is to find out what in god’s name gets them to pull the Dem lever.
    Forgive me if there’s a link to that earlier – don’t always read everything, but it would be helpful to know what that means. This is another example of “upwards of 20% of white Dem voters are, in fact, racist to some significant degree or another” versus “we are all racists” being a problem. See what I’m saying?

41. But the thing is, I don’t see anything faster that has any significant chance of actually working. If you have a concrete suggestion for something that has a realistic chance of actually happening, by all means share.
    Fortunate for us all that the communities we have consistently oppressed have been longsuffering and patient.
    Too bad we don’t have that on our side where the environment is concerned.
    The curve of history may bend towards justice, but if ecological collapse is running ahead of justice’s schedule…
    We can’t keep waiting to be good until we are forced by circumstances to be good.

42. But the thing is, I don’t see anything faster that has any significant chance of actually working. If you have a concrete suggestion for something that has a realistic chance of actually happening, by all means share.
    Fortunate for us all that the communities we have consistently oppressed have been longsuffering and patient.
    Too bad we don’t have that on our side where the environment is concerned.
    The curve of history may bend towards justice, but if ecological collapse is running ahead of justice’s schedule…
    We can’t keep waiting to be good until we are forced by circumstances to be good.

43. We can’t keep waiting to be good until we are forced by circumstances to be good.
    This doesn’t sound like a plan.
    Let’s look at what’s happened in presidential elections:
    Al Gore ran in 2000, and the “left” derided him as a stuffed suit who sighed too much. (Okay, maybe that was a right-wing talking point but the Naderites bought it.)
    2004 was a chance, but Kerry? R’s and D’s? Same same.
    2008 and 2012, yay, but that’s because we’re not talking here about Congressional elections, and R sabotage.
    2016? haha
    So, in 2020, left/liberals get it, but we’ve also mobilized an insane number of monsters, more than we knew existed.
    It seems weird now to be talking about fixing anything when a civil war with the real live fascists is, in fact, happening. My question is who’s going to mobilize and lead for our side? Because we’re way behind. I am pretty convinced that most of the people on the non-fascist side would be willing to abandon a racist society. But maybe there aren’t actually enough of us.

44. We can’t keep waiting to be good until we are forced by circumstances to be good.
    This doesn’t sound like a plan.
    Let’s look at what’s happened in presidential elections:
    Al Gore ran in 2000, and the “left” derided him as a stuffed suit who sighed too much. (Okay, maybe that was a right-wing talking point but the Naderites bought it.)
    2004 was a chance, but Kerry? R’s and D’s? Same same.
    2008 and 2012, yay, but that’s because we’re not talking here about Congressional elections, and R sabotage.
    2016? haha
    So, in 2020, left/liberals get it, but we’ve also mobilized an insane number of monsters, more than we knew existed.
    It seems weird now to be talking about fixing anything when a civil war with the real live fascists is, in fact, happening. My question is who’s going to mobilize and lead for our side? Because we’re way behind. I am pretty convinced that most of the people on the non-fascist side would be willing to abandon a racist society. But maybe there aren’t actually enough of us.

45. 2004 was a chance, but Kerry? R’s and D’s? Same same.
    Oh, to clarify, this was a talking point among the left. The right? BandAids.

46. 2004 was a chance, but Kerry? R’s and D’s? Same same.
    Oh, to clarify, this was a talking point among the left. The right? BandAids.

47. We can’t keep waiting to be good until we are forced by circumstances to be good.
    Just to be clear, I am definitely NOT advocating just waiting. Especially as I’m talking about something that’s slow. All the more reason to get cracking on it.
    All I’m saying is that those pining for an instantaneous miracle cure for racism are, IMHO, doomed to disappointment.

48. We can’t keep waiting to be good until we are forced by circumstances to be good.
    Just to be clear, I am definitely NOT advocating just waiting. Especially as I’m talking about something that’s slow. All the more reason to get cracking on it.
    All I’m saying is that those pining for an instantaneous miracle cure for racism are, IMHO, doomed to disappointment.

49. Just to be clear, I am definitely NOT advocating just waiting.
    Again, good thing, because we’ve embarked on a civil war. How violent it will get is anyone’s guess. I hope we win this cold war, but not sure that we will.

50. Just to be clear, I am definitely NOT advocating just waiting.
    Again, good thing, because we’ve embarked on a civil war. How violent it will get is anyone’s guess. I hope we win this cold war, but not sure that we will.

51. This doesn’t sound like a plan.
    Correct. It’s not a plan. It’s a person trying to come to terms with his loss of faith in the efficacy of our collective decision making systems.
    We have no shortage of plans, or of approaches to trying to sell those plans to an unruly polity. But having a plan that is inadequate to the circumstances is cold comfort in a warming world.
    We can’t aim at pragmatic solutions. I’m not patting anyone on the back for crafting an implementable plan that creates consensus for an inadequate solution. We have to aim at transformation.

52. This doesn’t sound like a plan.
    Correct. It’s not a plan. It’s a person trying to come to terms with his loss of faith in the efficacy of our collective decision making systems.
    We have no shortage of plans, or of approaches to trying to sell those plans to an unruly polity. But having a plan that is inadequate to the circumstances is cold comfort in a warming world.
    We can’t aim at pragmatic solutions. I’m not patting anyone on the back for crafting an implementable plan that creates consensus for an inadequate solution. We have to aim at transformation.

53. We have no shortage of plans
    But still we have to pick one, and leave our existential angst behind. We can’t win without a plan, without [as you mentioned] solidarity, and without discipline.
    So let’s find it. Since you are aware of a lot of plans, please put some out there for us to decide which one to go with. Because it’s time to do this.

54. We have no shortage of plans
    But still we have to pick one, and leave our existential angst behind. We can’t win without a plan, without [as you mentioned] solidarity, and without discipline.
    So let’s find it. Since you are aware of a lot of plans, please put some out there for us to decide which one to go with. Because it’s time to do this.

55. We have to aim at transformation.
    As long as the plan aiming at transformation is a secret handshake, it’s not going anywhere.

56. We have to aim at transformation.
    As long as the plan aiming at transformation is a secret handshake, it’s not going anywhere.

57. just in case, the spam trap seems to be going, so if you get caught, let me know.
    Also, I’m on a business trip this weekend, so not sure about how everything will go, so please play nice.

58. just in case, the spam trap seems to be going, so if you get caught, let me know.
    Also, I’m on a business trip this weekend, so not sure about how everything will go, so please play nice.

59. some history for both those who push for “instantaneous change” (ah, the smell of fresh straw!) and more moderate types (in the thrall of corporate interests!-straw right back atcha’!).
    Solidarity in tension is OK with me.

60. some history for both those who push for “instantaneous change” (ah, the smell of fresh straw!) and more moderate types (in the thrall of corporate interests!-straw right back atcha’!).
    Solidarity in tension is OK with me.

61. Forgive me if there’s a link to that earlier – don’t always read everything, but it would be helpful to know what that means.
    No problem.
    Here you go.

62. Forgive me if there’s a link to that earlier – don’t always read everything, but it would be helpful to know what that means.
    No problem.
    Here you go.

63. Thanks, bobbyp. Well worth reading.

64. Thanks, bobbyp. Well worth reading.

65. More food for thought.

66. More food for thought.

67. More food for thought.
    Thanks for this bobbyp.
    I was not aware of Fetterman before watching this. It’s impossible for me to overstate how freaking right on I think this guy is. Straight up, no BS, solid.
    I hope he gets a bigger platform going forward.

68. More food for thought.
    Thanks for this bobbyp.
    I was not aware of Fetterman before watching this. It’s impossible for me to overstate how freaking right on I think this guy is. Straight up, no BS, solid.
    I hope he gets a bigger platform going forward.

69. yeah. he’s a treat.
    his attitude reminds me of a lot of people i know from PA and NY. no BS indeed.

70. yeah. he’s a treat.
    his attitude reminds me of a lot of people i know from PA and NY. no BS indeed.

71. Just revisiting byomtov’s restatement of the problem with “racist;” one of the defining difficulties of Web Era politics in my mind is the way that it essentially turns every forum into a public forum and allows populists and propagandists to take a statement made in a particular context to a particular group of people and pull it out of context.
    Yes, it’s always been done, but it was never done so easily or spread so easily, and it was never subject to so much easy manipulation and alteration.
    So when someone says that a particular policy is grounded in racism and that many of the people supporting that policy are doing so for racist reasons, it’s easy for someone to take that statement and misrepresent it so that it seems like a very different sort of attack.
    An old friend of mine I grew up with (who is a bit of a racist and a sexist) recently got worked up over AOC saying that people need to keep track of those who were supporting Trump’s bid to invalidate votes and make lists of what they said so that those people could not walk it back later. But the way that it was framed was as if that list were an Enemies List and AOC was being Stalinist.
    I think what Fetterman is saying, in essence, is that we should not run from words like “racist” but should stand tall and insist on talking about the whole issue and resist the flattening and emptying out of the issues. Saying that a ban on fracking would make a lot of people’s lives difficult is not a pro-or anti- fracking position. It’s an acknowledgement that the problem is fraught so that people don’t feel like they are being ignored even if we say that we want to move away from fracking.

72. Just revisiting byomtov’s restatement of the problem with “racist;” one of the defining difficulties of Web Era politics in my mind is the way that it essentially turns every forum into a public forum and allows populists and propagandists to take a statement made in a particular context to a particular group of people and pull it out of context.
    Yes, it’s always been done, but it was never done so easily or spread so easily, and it was never subject to so much easy manipulation and alteration.
    So when someone says that a particular policy is grounded in racism and that many of the people supporting that policy are doing so for racist reasons, it’s easy for someone to take that statement and misrepresent it so that it seems like a very different sort of attack.
    An old friend of mine I grew up with (who is a bit of a racist and a sexist) recently got worked up over AOC saying that people need to keep track of those who were supporting Trump’s bid to invalidate votes and make lists of what they said so that those people could not walk it back later. But the way that it was framed was as if that list were an Enemies List and AOC was being Stalinist.
    I think what Fetterman is saying, in essence, is that we should not run from words like “racist” but should stand tall and insist on talking about the whole issue and resist the flattening and emptying out of the issues. Saying that a ban on fracking would make a lot of people’s lives difficult is not a pro-or anti- fracking position. It’s an acknowledgement that the problem is fraught so that people don’t feel like they are being ignored even if we say that we want to move away from fracking.

73. what I take away from Fetterman is this:
    * pretty much all of this stuff is complicated
    * the focus should be on making people’s lives better
    * oh yeah, weed. 🙂
    speak plainly about people’s real lives. it’s worth a try.

74. what I take away from Fetterman is this:
    * pretty much all of this stuff is complicated
    * the focus should be on making people’s lives better
    * oh yeah, weed. 🙂
    speak plainly about people’s real lives. it’s worth a try.

75. I’m getting ready for a business trip, the first time I have travelled on any public transport for longer than 15 mins since I flew in from Korea at the end of Feb. So a rather strange mix of feelings. Anyway, a link related to this
    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/nov/20/megan-rapinoe-taking-knee-white-people-were-mad-book-extract-usa-womens-football
    take care

76. I’m getting ready for a business trip, the first time I have travelled on any public transport for longer than 15 mins since I flew in from Korea at the end of Feb. So a rather strange mix of feelings. Anyway, a link related to this
    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/nov/20/megan-rapinoe-taking-knee-white-people-were-mad-book-extract-usa-womens-football
    take care

77. So when someone says that a particular policy is grounded in racism and that many of the people supporting that policy are doing so for racist reasons, it’s easy for someone to take that statement and misrepresent it so that it seems like a very different sort of attack.
    Yes. So it seems wiser to me to say, “This policy has racially discriminatory effects. It should be changed/abandoned/whatever.”
    It is also useful to point out how past, undeniably racist, policies have consequences today. This is not hard. Think of housing policies, employment discrimination, underfunded and segregated schools…
    This sort of thing, ISTM, is more persuasive and productive than telling people they, or the country, are racist.
    BTW, Fetterman impressed me, too.

78. So when someone says that a particular policy is grounded in racism and that many of the people supporting that policy are doing so for racist reasons, it’s easy for someone to take that statement and misrepresent it so that it seems like a very different sort of attack.
    Yes. So it seems wiser to me to say, “This policy has racially discriminatory effects. It should be changed/abandoned/whatever.”
    It is also useful to point out how past, undeniably racist, policies have consequences today. This is not hard. Think of housing policies, employment discrimination, underfunded and segregated schools…
    This sort of thing, ISTM, is more persuasive and productive than telling people they, or the country, are racist.
    BTW, Fetterman impressed me, too.

79. Seems relevant here.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/opinion/immigrants-vote-election-politics.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

80. Seems relevant here.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/opinion/immigrants-vote-election-politics.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

81. Some background on one of the races mentioned in the NYT article Donald linked to. The Gil Cisneros/Young Kim contest that was mentioned there seems like a poor exemplar for a rightward drift amongst minority populations or a plea for not treating populations as enclaves. That district sits on a corner connecting Los Angeles, Orange, and San Bernadino counties. The cities in the area all have enclave communities and areas where the business signs are predominantly in languages other than English.
    The area always leaned Republican. Cisneros was a bit of a surprise in an off-year election. Kim retook the district largely by having more overlap in her enclave with other enclaves than did Cisneros, and the whites in the district tend to lean Republican as well.
    I’m not saying that the article’s premise is flawed, but I am saying that the NYT and their writers don’t seem to understand the local dynamics. They look like they fit the curve, but they don’t fit for the inferred reasons.
    The split to think about there is the district/statewide split. District voting concerns can be very targeted and identity driven. Candidates for statewide races have to try for broader appeal while not antagonizing a plurality of enclaves. They should look at district level voting differences for statewide elections, not district elections.

82. Some background on one of the races mentioned in the NYT article Donald linked to. The Gil Cisneros/Young Kim contest that was mentioned there seems like a poor exemplar for a rightward drift amongst minority populations or a plea for not treating populations as enclaves. That district sits on a corner connecting Los Angeles, Orange, and San Bernadino counties. The cities in the area all have enclave communities and areas where the business signs are predominantly in languages other than English.
    The area always leaned Republican. Cisneros was a bit of a surprise in an off-year election. Kim retook the district largely by having more overlap in her enclave with other enclaves than did Cisneros, and the whites in the district tend to lean Republican as well.
    I’m not saying that the article’s premise is flawed, but I am saying that the NYT and their writers don’t seem to understand the local dynamics. They look like they fit the curve, but they don’t fit for the inferred reasons.
    The split to think about there is the district/statewide split. District voting concerns can be very targeted and identity driven. Candidates for statewide races have to try for broader appeal while not antagonizing a plurality of enclaves. They should look at district level voting differences for statewide elections, not district elections.

83. I’m just waiting for big sur to finish updating and I’m out the door, but I just want to make a short comment. I don’t disagree with Bernie’s noticed that you can’t call people racist, but if you look at the comment thread that provoke this post, I didn’t say anything about people being racist, I simply noticed that there was an asymmetry in argumentation. I know it’s an easy thing to hide behind what you say and make a claim that I wasn’t pointing to that, but the sensitivity that that observation met with seems to be part of the problem.
    Everyone please stay safe and stay well

84. I’m just waiting for big sur to finish updating and I’m out the door, but I just want to make a short comment. I don’t disagree with Bernie’s noticed that you can’t call people racist, but if you look at the comment thread that provoke this post, I didn’t say anything about people being racist, I simply noticed that there was an asymmetry in argumentation. I know it’s an easy thing to hide behind what you say and make a claim that I wasn’t pointing to that, but the sensitivity that that observation met with seems to be part of the problem.
    Everyone please stay safe and stay well

85. “ I simply noticed that there was an asymmetry in argumentation”
    I think this is wrong. The word “ asymmetry” is vague anyway. But one “ asymmetry is that a certain type of “ anti racist” thought gives affluent people a license to feel morally superior to much less affluent people. It’s not helpful. I also think certain forms of anti racism are themselves racist in that they reduce people to racial or ethnic categories. We argued about this last summer— labeling certain ways of thinking as “ white” as a Smithsonian exhibit apparently did was both racist and insulting to everyone of all races and ethnicities. And one reason many of us on the left were unpleasantly surprised by the election was the fact that there doesn’t appear to be such a thing as an Hispanic or Latino or LatinX vote. There is instead a very large number of people with little in common other than that they speak Spanish ( or their ancestors did) and many of them don’t see issues the way lefties thought they were supposed to. Also, as people sometimes say, politics is local.

86. “ I simply noticed that there was an asymmetry in argumentation”
    I think this is wrong. The word “ asymmetry” is vague anyway. But one “ asymmetry is that a certain type of “ anti racist” thought gives affluent people a license to feel morally superior to much less affluent people. It’s not helpful. I also think certain forms of anti racism are themselves racist in that they reduce people to racial or ethnic categories. We argued about this last summer— labeling certain ways of thinking as “ white” as a Smithsonian exhibit apparently did was both racist and insulting to everyone of all races and ethnicities. And one reason many of us on the left were unpleasantly surprised by the election was the fact that there doesn’t appear to be such a thing as an Hispanic or Latino or LatinX vote. There is instead a very large number of people with little in common other than that they speak Spanish ( or their ancestors did) and many of them don’t see issues the way lefties thought they were supposed to. Also, as people sometimes say, politics is local.

87. And one reason many of us on the left were unpleasantly surprised by the election was the fact that there doesn’t appear to be such a thing as an Hispanic or Latino or LatinX vote.
    Actually, the main reason there is a “Black vote” is that Republican politicians have been so diligent in making it happen. The liberal/moderate/conservative distribution among blacks isn’t that different from that among whites. (And, in my observation, Hispanics actually run more conservative overall.) But if you persist in demonizing people, it’s going to be harder for them to bring themselves to vote for you. Regardless of your stand on the (non-racial) issues that they care about.
    And consider, just for a moment, how elections would routinely turn out if Democratic/Republican vote distributions were the same across all racial and ethnic groups. And that’s before you consider how the distribution might shift if Republicans moved from reactionary to merely conservative.

88. And one reason many of us on the left were unpleasantly surprised by the election was the fact that there doesn’t appear to be such a thing as an Hispanic or Latino or LatinX vote.
    Actually, the main reason there is a “Black vote” is that Republican politicians have been so diligent in making it happen. The liberal/moderate/conservative distribution among blacks isn’t that different from that among whites. (And, in my observation, Hispanics actually run more conservative overall.) But if you persist in demonizing people, it’s going to be harder for them to bring themselves to vote for you. Regardless of your stand on the (non-racial) issues that they care about.
    And consider, just for a moment, how elections would routinely turn out if Democratic/Republican vote distributions were the same across all racial and ethnic groups. And that’s before you consider how the distribution might shift if Republicans moved from reactionary to merely conservative.

89. And consider, just for a moment, how elections would routinely turn out if Democratic/Republican vote distributions were the same across all racial and ethnic groups.
    Well, unless you consider white voters the norm, it looks as if Biden would have won by a much larger margin. Maybe 87-13 if we take Black voters as the norm.

90. And consider, just for a moment, how elections would routinely turn out if Democratic/Republican vote distributions were the same across all racial and ethnic groups.
    Well, unless you consider white voters the norm, it looks as if Biden would have won by a much larger margin. Maybe 87-13 if we take Black voters as the norm.

91. Except that the point was that black voters aren’t the norm. Their votes are skewed because they’ve been driven away.
    You only get white voters skewed the way black voters are now if you have the GOP start demonizing them the same way. Which seems like a super low probability scenario.

92. Except that the point was that black voters aren’t the norm. Their votes are skewed because they’ve been driven away.
    You only get white voters skewed the way black voters are now if you have the GOP start demonizing them the same way. Which seems like a super low probability scenario.

93. It seems to me that, as always, we have a lot of eliding race, ethnicity, and culture going on.
    It seems to me, having lived and taught in an extremely diverse place for many years now, that race, and ethnicity, and national origin are by no means monolithic, but that they are powerful shapers of identity and culture that complicate any effort to aim at broad appeals to values or collective myths.
    Bring up a topic in a classroom full of students from diverse backgrounds and you will find that the range of opinions are pretty consistent, but that the affinities and allegiances that form around those shift with every change of topic.
    But one thing that also becomes clear is that, for some topics in which race plays a strong role – especially those where people are marked and profiled and othered by race – the people who are marked by those prejudices react more strongly and bond more tightly than on the other subjects.
    And none of these things are apparent if you have not lived in that environment for a while.
    Trying to map that out and model it with any degree of certainty would make for a fascinating database and SQL query puzzle.

94. It seems to me that, as always, we have a lot of eliding race, ethnicity, and culture going on.
    It seems to me, having lived and taught in an extremely diverse place for many years now, that race, and ethnicity, and national origin are by no means monolithic, but that they are powerful shapers of identity and culture that complicate any effort to aim at broad appeals to values or collective myths.
    Bring up a topic in a classroom full of students from diverse backgrounds and you will find that the range of opinions are pretty consistent, but that the affinities and allegiances that form around those shift with every change of topic.
    But one thing that also becomes clear is that, for some topics in which race plays a strong role – especially those where people are marked and profiled and othered by race – the people who are marked by those prejudices react more strongly and bond more tightly than on the other subjects.
    And none of these things are apparent if you have not lived in that environment for a while.
    Trying to map that out and model it with any degree of certainty would make for a fascinating database and SQL query puzzle.

95. In other words, we need to think differently about the sorts of collective affinities and identities that we choose for ourselves and those that are chosen for us by others, and we need to think about which one is in play in different circumstances.

96. In other words, we need to think differently about the sorts of collective affinities and identities that we choose for ourselves and those that are chosen for us by others, and we need to think about which one is in play in different circumstances.

97. Except that the point was that black voters aren’t the norm.
    And a good thing, too. Trump carried the white vote by 5%. The great unwashed “un-normies” carried him to victory.
    Maybe a “thank you” is in order.

98. Except that the point was that black voters aren’t the norm.
    And a good thing, too. Trump carried the white vote by 5%. The great unwashed “un-normies” carried him to victory.
    Maybe a “thank you” is in order.

99. Except that the point was that black voters aren’t the norm. Their votes are skewed because they’ve been driven away.
    Of course. But have Asian voters (61-39) been driven away? Mostly , if you want to talk about a group being skewed by GOP policies and politics, I think you have to consider white voters as well. Would a Republican Party more attractive to Blacks be less attractive to whites?
    What I took you to be saying is that if the GOP changed that way it would have huge majorities, like the 58-41 edge those exit polls show for whites.
    I’m dubious.

100. Except that the point was that black voters aren’t the norm. Their votes are skewed because they’ve been driven away.
     Of course. But have Asian voters (61-39) been driven away? Mostly , if you want to talk about a group being skewed by GOP policies and politics, I think you have to consider white voters as well. Would a Republican Party more attractive to Blacks be less attractive to whites?
     What I took you to be saying is that if the GOP changed that way it would have huge majorities, like the 58-41 edge those exit polls show for whites.
     I’m dubious.

101. the GOP’s policies have driven many white voters away – white voters who can’t stand the racism (plus the anti-science, flag-waving, idiot-worshipping clusterfuck of nonsense) that the modern GOP proudly and loudly represents.

102. the GOP’s policies have driven many white voters away – white voters who can’t stand the racism (plus the anti-science, flag-waving, idiot-worshipping clusterfuck of nonsense) that the modern GOP proudly and loudly represents.

103. Would a Republican Party more attractive to Blacks be less attractive to whites?
     Well, to the extent that the GOP today has become the party of racism (and reaction), probably. The racists would drift back to their natural home in the American Independent Party. It would take becoming less reactionary, and more straight conservative, to avoid a net loss of white voters.

104. Would a Republican Party more attractive to Blacks be less attractive to whites?
     Well, to the extent that the GOP today has become the party of racism (and reaction), probably. The racists would drift back to their natural home in the American Independent Party. It would take becoming less reactionary, and more straight conservative, to avoid a net loss of white voters.

105. The process of thinking this thru is a long one and requires, first of all, the willingness to reconsider positions. Arthur Ashe, a closeted black tennis professional, could not understand why women would expect more equitable pay on the pro tennis tour. (he later realized his error).
     Insofar as asymmetry being vague, that’s because we don’t agree on what should be counted as evidence. This is not a unique problem. When corpus linguistics began, there were and continue to be a lot of arguments over what constitutes evidence. But that misses the point. An asymmetry points to a place where one should start thinking about why things are. Or at least it should.
     There is ample evidence that affluent people look down on the less-affluent. I don’t think anyone denies that. It’s the gas that makes the engine of capitalism run. This was a recent example
     https://deadline.com/2020/11/euphoria-lukas-gage-hollywood-support-after-director-disses-apartment-1234620061/
     The thing is, if called on it, ideally, people will have the same reaction as the director called out did. Unfortunately, for racism, you often get a lot of post hoc reasoning for why it happens. Black while driving stops are necessary to keep crime down, they can’t stop every beemer that comes down the road. Aggressive police tactics are necessary because there is a culture of crime. If there was an immediate dismissal of Defund the Police, I’m just suggesting that people recalibrate.
     Simon Balto at LGM has this
     https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2020/11/policing-is-unaccountable-violence
     and this
     https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2020/11/the-history-of-policing-is-an-argument-against-reform
     There is a broad misconception among most of the American public, including among police themselves, that the reason police departments exist is to promote general well-being and public safety. If that were true, then reforming police would mean simply bringing them into better alignment with their fundamental purpose.
     The inconvenient truth of police history in the United States, however, is that police departments were not designed to keep a generic public safe. Rather, they were meant to serve the needs of capital and to uphold racial and ethnic hierarchies. To put it differently, police were designed with power and control in mind, not generalized public safety.
     Balto isn’t one of the usual fire breathers there, so one may want to at least pause before issuing dismissals.

106. The process of thinking this thru is a long one and requires, first of all, the willingness to reconsider positions. Arthur Ashe, a closeted black tennis professional, could not understand why women would expect more equitable pay on the pro tennis tour. (he later realized his error).
     Insofar as asymmetry being vague, that’s because we don’t agree on what should be counted as evidence. This is not a unique problem. When corpus linguistics began, there were and continue to be a lot of arguments over what constitutes evidence. But that misses the point. An asymmetry points to a place where one should start thinking about why things are. Or at least it should.
     There is ample evidence that affluent people look down on the less-affluent. I don’t think anyone denies that. It’s the gas that makes the engine of capitalism run. This was a recent example
     https://deadline.com/2020/11/euphoria-lukas-gage-hollywood-support-after-director-disses-apartment-1234620061/
     The thing is, if called on it, ideally, people will have the same reaction as the director called out did. Unfortunately, for racism, you often get a lot of post hoc reasoning for why it happens. Black while driving stops are necessary to keep crime down, they can’t stop every beemer that comes down the road. Aggressive police tactics are necessary because there is a culture of crime. If there was an immediate dismissal of Defund the Police, I’m just suggesting that people recalibrate.
     Simon Balto at LGM has this
     https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2020/11/policing-is-unaccountable-violence
     and this
     https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2020/11/the-history-of-policing-is-an-argument-against-reform
     There is a broad misconception among most of the American public, including among police themselves, that the reason police departments exist is to promote general well-being and public safety. If that were true, then reforming police would mean simply bringing them into better alignment with their fundamental purpose.
     The inconvenient truth of police history in the United States, however, is that police departments were not designed to keep a generic public safe. Rather, they were meant to serve the needs of capital and to uphold racial and ethnic hierarchies. To put it differently, police were designed with power and control in mind, not generalized public safety.
     Balto isn’t one of the usual fire breathers there, so one may want to at least pause before issuing dismissals.

107. When Balto says

     There is a broad misconception among most of the American public, including among police themselves, that the reason police departments exist is to promote general well-being and public safety. [emphasis added]

     he pretty much explodes his own argument. If the police themselves think their mission is to promote general well-being and public safety, then reform is exactly the path forward.
     If they took Balto’s view of what police departments are intended for, then he might be right that reform, at least reform which didn’t include 100% staff change, wouldn’t work. But, as he admits, most members of police forces already have the outlook he favors. So the path to get there is reforms which make it easier for them to do that. And which removes the minority who have a different agenda.

108. When Balto says

     There is a broad misconception among most of the American public, including among police themselves, that the reason police departments exist is to promote general well-being and public safety. [emphasis added]

     he pretty much explodes his own argument. If the police themselves think their mission is to promote general well-being and public safety, then reform is exactly the path forward.
     If they took Balto’s view of what police departments are intended for, then he might be right that reform, at least reform which didn’t include 100% staff change, wouldn’t work. But, as he admits, most members of police forces already have the outlook he favors. So the path to get there is reforms which make it easier for them to do that. And which removes the minority who have a different agenda.

109. wj – his statement does not in any way explode his argument.
     Most college level teachers, including teachers at for-profit schools, think that the reason schools exist is to teach students. This is in no way contradictory to the idea that the regents at most big universities prioritize institutional budgets and bond ratings over educational quality and shape university policy accordingly, often to the detriment of the students.

110. wj – his statement does not in any way explode his argument.
     Most college level teachers, including teachers at for-profit schools, think that the reason schools exist is to teach students. This is in no way contradictory to the idea that the regents at most big universities prioritize institutional budgets and bond ratings over educational quality and shape university policy accordingly, often to the detriment of the students.

111. Arthur Ashe, a closeted black tennis professional
     Seriously? Do you have a link?

112. Arthur Ashe, a closeted black tennis professional
     Seriously? Do you have a link?

113. But nous, that doesn’t mean you improve teaching by abolishing colleges and starting over. It means you reform them. Different processes to select regents, different financing structures, etc.

114. But nous, that doesn’t mean you improve teaching by abolishing colleges and starting over. It means you reform them. Different processes to select regents, different financing structures, etc.

115. Lots of people argue that we should be trying to reorganize post-secondary education to focus more on vocational training and trade schools. That is the functional equivalent of the “defund” crowd where police are concerned.
     A movement like the above for colleges and universities would see many of these institutions close. And the resultant restructuring would alter the mission of the remaining colleges and universities, and make us all rethink the role of higher education in society.
     Is that a reform or is that a fundamental transformation?

116. Lots of people argue that we should be trying to reorganize post-secondary education to focus more on vocational training and trade schools. That is the functional equivalent of the “defund” crowd where police are concerned.
     A movement like the above for colleges and universities would see many of these institutions close. And the resultant restructuring would alter the mission of the remaining colleges and universities, and make us all rethink the role of higher education in society.
     Is that a reform or is that a fundamental transformation?

117. Hey Janie, here you go.
     https://www.tennis-prose.com/bios/arthur-ashe-challenged-billie-jean-kings-equal-prize-money-crusade/
     and the beat goes on
     https://arthurashe.ucla.edu/2016/03/22/gender-equality-in-tennis-1-step-forward-2-steps-back/
     Raymond Moore, the CEO and tournament director of the BNP Paribas Open in Indian Wells, came under fire for comments he made during his annual state of the tournament address, in which he said that women’s professional tennis players should “go down on their knees every night and thank God that Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal were born, because they have carried this sport.” He went on to say that in his “next life” he would like to return as someone in Women’s Tennis Association, remarking, “they don’t make any decisions and they are lucky.”

118. Hey Janie, here you go.
     https://www.tennis-prose.com/bios/arthur-ashe-challenged-billie-jean-kings-equal-prize-money-crusade/
     and the beat goes on
     https://arthurashe.ucla.edu/2016/03/22/gender-equality-in-tennis-1-step-forward-2-steps-back/
     Raymond Moore, the CEO and tournament director of the BNP Paribas Open in Indian Wells, came under fire for comments he made during his annual state of the tournament address, in which he said that women’s professional tennis players should “go down on their knees every night and thank God that Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal were born, because they have carried this sport.” He went on to say that in his “next life” he would like to return as someone in Women’s Tennis Association, remarking, “they don’t make any decisions and they are lucky.”

119. lj, I wasn’t questioning the bit about his change of mind about equal pay. You will notice that I didn’t quote a word of that part of your comment. I quoted the bit about Ashe being “closeted.”
     Unless I’ve copmletely lost track of what “closeted” means, that suggests that you think he was gay. As far as I know, he was not, and I can’t find a single source that contradicts that impression.

120. lj, I wasn’t questioning the bit about his change of mind about equal pay. You will notice that I didn’t quote a word of that part of your comment. I quoted the bit about Ashe being “closeted.”
     Unless I’ve copmletely lost track of what “closeted” means, that suggests that you think he was gay. As far as I know, he was not, and I can’t find a single source that contradicts that impression.

121. He died of HIV and I jumped to the wrong conclusion, I’m sure because it supported what I wanted to bring out. Thanks for the correction, I really should have double checked that.

122. He died of HIV and I jumped to the wrong conclusion, I’m sure because it supported what I wanted to bring out. Thanks for the correction, I really should have double checked that.

123. I figured as much, at least the part about making an assumption based on how he died, but I could have been clearer in pointing it out.

124. I figured as much, at least the part about making an assumption based on how he died, but I could have been clearer in pointing it out.

125. Balto isn’t one of the usual fire breathers there…
     I’d say he and Loomis are the most left leaning of the regulars. Simon gets a lot of pushback for being a ‘bernie bro’ and his thoughts on police reform defunding. Loomis gets into it regularly with the commenters regarding “good libruls” and “good schools”.

126. Balto isn’t one of the usual fire breathers there…
     I’d say he and Loomis are the most left leaning of the regulars. Simon gets a lot of pushback for being a ‘bernie bro’ and his thoughts on police reform defunding. Loomis gets into it regularly with the commenters regarding “good libruls” and “good schools”.

127. It would take becoming less reactionary, and more straight conservative, to avoid a net loss of white voters.
     The GOP has been going down the reactionary ethnonationalist path since Reagan, and you believe there is some miracle that will get it to stop and reconsider? A concerted effort to bring sense to the party is (a.) NOT happening-it is getting worse, or have you not noticed?; and (b.) would render the party in two, and the center “sane” Republicans would go the way of the Whigs in the 1850’s.

128. It would take becoming less reactionary, and more straight conservative, to avoid a net loss of white voters.
     The GOP has been going down the reactionary ethnonationalist path since Reagan, and you believe there is some miracle that will get it to stop and reconsider? A concerted effort to bring sense to the party is (a.) NOT happening-it is getting worse, or have you not noticed?; and (b.) would render the party in two, and the center “sane” Republicans would go the way of the Whigs in the 1850’s.

129. Here’s a recent Balto entry on the state of current policing. Check out the comments….

130. Here’s a recent Balto entry on the state of current policing. Check out the comments….

131. Sorry, missed the back and forth before JanieM’s appreciated correction. wj, what is the chater movement if not a defund education attempt? This is not to say I agree with charter schools, it’s too often a cover for either grifters or people with problematic attitudes, but it seems like a similar situation.
     I’d also add that in education, you have a lot of teachers who are doing the best they can despite problematic circumstances. Yet the larger forces only permit them to carve out a small area within which to try and develop their own vision. I don’t want to mistake fiction for real life, but there are a slew of portrayals of cops following a similar path.
     bobbyp, I don’t disagree with you about Balto, but by fire-breather, I was referring more to tone than to position. Again, it may just be because some of the other front pagers are up there much more often, but that’s just my impression.

132. Sorry, missed the back and forth before JanieM’s appreciated correction. wj, what is the chater movement if not a defund education attempt? This is not to say I agree with charter schools, it’s too often a cover for either grifters or people with problematic attitudes, but it seems like a similar situation.
     I’d also add that in education, you have a lot of teachers who are doing the best they can despite problematic circumstances. Yet the larger forces only permit them to carve out a small area within which to try and develop their own vision. I don’t want to mistake fiction for real life, but there are a slew of portrayals of cops following a similar path.
     bobbyp, I don’t disagree with you about Balto, but by fire-breather, I was referring more to tone than to position. Again, it may just be because some of the other front pagers are up there much more often, but that’s just my impression.

133. FWIW, after reading lj’s “closeted” description, I also went down the rabbit hole searching the net about Ashe, and was therefore curious about the use of the term. Good to see it still means what it used to mean – the changing meaning of slang terms can sometimes feel too much to keep up with.

134. FWIW, after reading lj’s “closeted” description, I also went down the rabbit hole searching the net about Ashe, and was therefore curious about the use of the term. Good to see it still means what it used to mean – the changing meaning of slang terms can sometimes feel too much to keep up with.

135. The GOP has been going down the reactionary ethnonationalist path since Reagan, and you believe there is some miracle that will get it to stop and reconsider?
     Nope. But it wasn’t a prediction that they would. It was intended as a comment on what would be required to maintain their percentage of the white vote if the flat-out racists left.

136. The GOP has been going down the reactionary ethnonationalist path since Reagan, and you believe there is some miracle that will get it to stop and reconsider?
     Nope. But it wasn’t a prediction that they would. It was intended as a comment on what would be required to maintain their percentage of the white vote if the flat-out racists left.

137. what is the chater movement if not a defund education attempt?
     My sense is that charter schools got started as specialized schools. Say one focused on science education or theater. (Someone with more experience feel free to correct me on that.)
     Then, some folks who thought that elementary and secondary education** needed reform seized on it as easier than trying to reform an entire school system.
     ** Just a note that what nous and I were talking about was university education, rather than elementary and secondary where charter schools are.

138. what is the chater movement if not a defund education attempt?
     My sense is that charter schools got started as specialized schools. Say one focused on science education or theater. (Someone with more experience feel free to correct me on that.)
     Then, some folks who thought that elementary and secondary education** needed reform seized on it as easier than trying to reform an entire school system.
     ** Just a note that what nous and I were talking about was university education, rather than elementary and secondary where charter schools are.

139. https://democracyjournal.org/arguments/the-untold-history-of-charter-schools/
     It’s a twisty turny tale, like most things in this world unfortunately.
     If you want to talk about unis, it is predicted that 1/3 of the universities in Japan will have to close because of lack of students in the next 20 years. Yet any changes are made almost impossible because of entrenched forces. So I’m pretty familiar with situations where things have to change, but there is no possibility of change because it is impossible to imagine when the current system is gone.

140. https://democracyjournal.org/arguments/the-untold-history-of-charter-schools/
     It’s a twisty turny tale, like most things in this world unfortunately.
     If you want to talk about unis, it is predicted that 1/3 of the universities in Japan will have to close because of lack of students in the next 20 years. Yet any changes are made almost impossible because of entrenched forces. So I’m pretty familiar with situations where things have to change, but there is no possibility of change because it is impossible to imagine when the current system is gone.

141. It would take becoming less reactionary, and more straight conservative, to avoid a net loss of white voters.
     I’m curious what that would mean in terms of policies. I don’t see it, because American conservatism looks intellectually bankrupt to me.
     If the Republican Party abandons resentment what does it have left to appeal to voters with?

142. It would take becoming less reactionary, and more straight conservative, to avoid a net loss of white voters.
     I’m curious what that would mean in terms of policies. I don’t see it, because American conservatism looks intellectually bankrupt to me.
     If the Republican Party abandons resentment what does it have left to appeal to voters with?

143. In line with wj’s comments on charter schools. Yes, the early vision for charters as outlined by Shanker (president of the AFT at the time) was that they would be schools at which teachers could innovate pedagogies that better reached marginal students. It was meant to liberate teachers to help students. That never got off the ground before George Gilder and the Focus on the Family crowd grabbed hold of it as a tool for fighting against unions, evolution, and sex education, and charters shifted radically.
     Then the techno-libertarians and the venture capitalists grabbed hold of the teaching reform rhetoric to engage in some “market disruption” disaster capitalism so they could sell their apps as teacher replacements.
     Of course those same forces are looking at higher ed as the next market, and regents and administrators are using COVID to try to implement some of these disruptions in the name of adapting to an emergency.

144. In line with wj’s comments on charter schools. Yes, the early vision for charters as outlined by Shanker (president of the AFT at the time) was that they would be schools at which teachers could innovate pedagogies that better reached marginal students. It was meant to liberate teachers to help students. That never got off the ground before George Gilder and the Focus on the Family crowd grabbed hold of it as a tool for fighting against unions, evolution, and sex education, and charters shifted radically.
     Then the techno-libertarians and the venture capitalists grabbed hold of the teaching reform rhetoric to engage in some “market disruption” disaster capitalism so they could sell their apps as teacher replacements.
     Of course those same forces are looking at higher ed as the next market, and regents and administrators are using COVID to try to implement some of these disruptions in the name of adapting to an emergency.

145. Both schools and law enforcement agencies have exploited the disaster capitalism model in ways that have corroded our sense of common cause in favor of paranoid self-interest.

146. Both schools and law enforcement agencies have exploited the disaster capitalism model in ways that have corroded our sense of common cause in favor of paranoid self-interest.

147. When all else fails, hire a consultant.

148. When all else fails, hire a consultant.

149. COVID is pushing the devolving of K-12 education to a higher rate. When the pandemic is over, there’s going to be more empty seats in the public schools than when it started.

150. COVID is pushing the devolving of K-12 education to a higher rate. When the pandemic is over, there’s going to be more empty seats in the public schools than when it started.

151. COVID is pushing the devolving of K-12 education to a higher rate. When the pandemic is over, there’s going to be more empty seats in the public schools than when it started.
     Which will further hasten the fragmentation of US society, reinforce partisanship even further, and put many more children in severe danger of abuse.

152. COVID is pushing the devolving of K-12 education to a higher rate. When the pandemic is over, there’s going to be more empty seats in the public schools than when it started.
     Which will further hasten the fragmentation of US society, reinforce partisanship even further, and put many more children in severe danger of abuse.

153. COVID is pushing the devolving of K-12 education to a higher rate. When the pandemic is over, there’s going to be more empty seats in the public schools than when it started.
     Covid is forcing alternatives to traditional K-12 education. But from what I am seeing and hearing from parents, there is a burning desire to get back to normal. So I wonder whether the number of “empty seats” is going to be all that large.

154. COVID is pushing the devolving of K-12 education to a higher rate. When the pandemic is over, there’s going to be more empty seats in the public schools than when it started.
     Covid is forcing alternatives to traditional K-12 education. But from what I am seeing and hearing from parents, there is a burning desire to get back to normal. So I wonder whether the number of “empty seats” is going to be all that large.

155. Just a note that what nous and I were talking about was university education, rather than elementary and secondary where charter schools are.
     Sorry about going back to this, but don’t think that the frictionless word of e-commerce is making unis better
     https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2019/04/adjunct-professors-higher-education-thea-hunter/586168/
     definitely click on the related stories

156. Just a note that what nous and I were talking about was university education, rather than elementary and secondary where charter schools are.
     Sorry about going back to this, but don’t think that the frictionless word of e-commerce is making unis better
     https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2019/04/adjunct-professors-higher-education-thea-hunter/586168/
     definitely click on the related stories

157. I’m curious what that would mean in terms of policies. I don’t see it, because American conservatism looks intellectually bankrupt to me.
     If the Republican Party abandons resentment what does it have left to appeal to voters with?
     Sorry for the slow reply.
     I’d say that there is a market, if you will, for a non-racist, non-reactionary, conservative party. Whether the Republican Party could ever again be that is debatable. But that’s separate for the question of whether conservative policies could get votes.
     Note that the intellectual bankruptcy you see is a) real, and b) far more like reactionary than conservative. But it leaves a lot of room between what our progressives here argue for and that. One where a lot of the population would be comfortable.
     So what would a conservative approach look like?
     1) Recognize that, while the government is a necessary part of doing some problems, (and no question there are problems that need to be addressed) it is not the ideal solution for everything.
     2) When government is involved in solving problems, it is generally (although not always) preferable to have that be the government as close to the people as possible. That is, solve problems with local government if possible**, or with state government, before pulling the Federal government in.
     3) Prefer that solutions to problems be incremental rather than sweeping.
     You can work up policies on issues based on those. For example, take guns.
     1) Yes, there is a real problem. And clearly the government is going to have to be involved. (Lack of government involvement having done nothing useful.)
     2) Given how easily transportable guns are, controls are going to have to be Federal rather than local. (No offense to New York and its Sullivan Act.)
     3) We can start with banning everything which isn’t a handgun (with limited ammunition capacity) and isn’t designed for hunting. Will that be sufficient? Probably not. But start there. And move on to those once we’ve got the military hardware out of private hands.
     Hope that helps.
     ** No question, some issues are too widespread, and have impacts across too wide an area, for local solutions to be feasible. But that’s some, not all.

158. I’m curious what that would mean in terms of policies. I don’t see it, because American conservatism looks intellectually bankrupt to me.
     If the Republican Party abandons resentment what does it have left to appeal to voters with?
     Sorry for the slow reply.
     I’d say that there is a market, if you will, for a non-racist, non-reactionary, conservative party. Whether the Republican Party could ever again be that is debatable. But that’s separate for the question of whether conservative policies could get votes.
     Note that the intellectual bankruptcy you see is a) real, and b) far more like reactionary than conservative. But it leaves a lot of room between what our progressives here argue for and that. One where a lot of the population would be comfortable.
     So what would a conservative approach look like?
     1) Recognize that, while the government is a necessary part of doing some problems, (and no question there are problems that need to be addressed) it is not the ideal solution for everything.
     2) When government is involved in solving problems, it is generally (although not always) preferable to have that be the government as close to the people as possible. That is, solve problems with local government if possible**, or with state government, before pulling the Federal government in.
     3) Prefer that solutions to problems be incremental rather than sweeping.
     You can work up policies on issues based on those. For example, take guns.
     1) Yes, there is a real problem. And clearly the government is going to have to be involved. (Lack of government involvement having done nothing useful.)
     2) Given how easily transportable guns are, controls are going to have to be Federal rather than local. (No offense to New York and its Sullivan Act.)
     3) We can start with banning everything which isn’t a handgun (with limited ammunition capacity) and isn’t designed for hunting. Will that be sufficient? Probably not. But start there. And move on to those once we’ve got the military hardware out of private hands.
     Hope that helps.
     ** No question, some issues are too widespread, and have impacts across too wide an area, for local solutions to be feasible. But that’s some, not all.

159. I’d say that there is a market, if you will, for a non-racist, non-reactionary, conservative party. Whether the Republican Party could ever again be that is debatable. But that’s separate for the question of whether conservative policies could get votes.
     How big a market? If the Republicans can’t be that party where will the votes come from?
     As to the principles:
     1) Recognize that, while the government is a necessary part of doing some problems, (and no question there are problems that need to be addressed) it is not the ideal solution for everything.
     This sounds unobjectionable, almost anodyne, to me. But it’s not a flag that many are going to rally around.
     2) When government is involved in solving problems, it is generally (although not always) preferable to have that be the government as close to the people as possible. That is, solve problems with local government if possible**, or with state government, before pulling the Federal government in.
     Ok, but conservatives don’t really seem to believe this. We’ve had any number of cases where Republican state legislatures, or state officials, have overridden local ordinances. Think of anti-discrimination laws, voting procedures, etc.
     (Personally, I think lots of problems require a national approach. States can’t fight recessions, or wars, for that matter. Environmental issues don’t respect state lines. States have a much worse record than the national government on individual rights.)
     In general, it seems to me that this sort of principle is mostly an argument of convenience. If it helps someone’s cause they are all for it. Otherwise maybe not.
     3) Prefer that solutions to problems be incremental rather than sweeping.
     Again, a decent general idea, if not one to stir souls. Still, shouldn’t it really depend on the problem being addressed? The civil rights laws of the 1960’s were rather sweeping, and rightfully so, for example, and we may well need sweeping policies for climate change.
     Would you consider ACA to have been an incremental approach to health insurance? I would, yet it isn’t much loved by conservatives.
     Since we are talking about “market size” what do you think the market among conservatives would be for your approach to gun control?

160. I’d say that there is a market, if you will, for a non-racist, non-reactionary, conservative party. Whether the Republican Party could ever again be that is debatable. But that’s separate for the question of whether conservative policies could get votes.
     How big a market? If the Republicans can’t be that party where will the votes come from?
     As to the principles:
     1) Recognize that, while the government is a necessary part of doing some problems, (and no question there are problems that need to be addressed) it is not the ideal solution for everything.
     This sounds unobjectionable, almost anodyne, to me. But it’s not a flag that many are going to rally around.
     2) When government is involved in solving problems, it is generally (although not always) preferable to have that be the government as close to the people as possible. That is, solve problems with local government if possible**, or with state government, before pulling the Federal government in.
     Ok, but conservatives don’t really seem to believe this. We’ve had any number of cases where Republican state legislatures, or state officials, have overridden local ordinances. Think of anti-discrimination laws, voting procedures, etc.
     (Personally, I think lots of problems require a national approach. States can’t fight recessions, or wars, for that matter. Environmental issues don’t respect state lines. States have a much worse record than the national government on individual rights.)
     In general, it seems to me that this sort of principle is mostly an argument of convenience. If it helps someone’s cause they are all for it. Otherwise maybe not.
     3) Prefer that solutions to problems be incremental rather than sweeping.
     Again, a decent general idea, if not one to stir souls. Still, shouldn’t it really depend on the problem being addressed? The civil rights laws of the 1960’s were rather sweeping, and rightfully so, for example, and we may well need sweeping policies for climate change.
     Would you consider ACA to have been an incremental approach to health insurance? I would, yet it isn’t much loved by conservatives.
     Since we are talking about “market size” what do you think the market among conservatives would be for your approach to gun control?

161. Gun control in Congress?
     “WASHINGTON (AP) — A firearms-toting congresswoman-elect who owns a gun-themed restaurant in Rifle, Colorado, has already asked Capitol Police about carrying her weapon on Capitol grounds, her office has acknowledged. If she does so, she apparently won’t be alone.
     The practice is allowed for lawmakers, with some limitations, under decades-old congressional regulations. The public is barred from carrying weapons in the Capitol, its grounds and office buildings.”
     Gun-toting congresswoman-elect may carry Glock at Capitol: The practice is allowed for lawmakers, with some limitations, under decades-old congressional regulations

162. Gun control in Congress?
     “WASHINGTON (AP) — A firearms-toting congresswoman-elect who owns a gun-themed restaurant in Rifle, Colorado, has already asked Capitol Police about carrying her weapon on Capitol grounds, her office has acknowledged. If she does so, she apparently won’t be alone.
     The practice is allowed for lawmakers, with some limitations, under decades-old congressional regulations. The public is barred from carrying weapons in the Capitol, its grounds and office buildings.”
     Gun-toting congresswoman-elect may carry Glock at Capitol: The practice is allowed for lawmakers, with some limitations, under decades-old congressional regulations

163. So what would a conservative approach look like?
     By wj’s standard I’m a conservative. I don’t even go as far as his suggested approach on guns.
     None of which surprises me, it just tells me a lot about the state of the art of political economy here in the US.

164. So what would a conservative approach look like?
     By wj’s standard I’m a conservative. I don’t even go as far as his suggested approach on guns.
     None of which surprises me, it just tells me a lot about the state of the art of political economy here in the US.

165. Would you consider ACA to have been an incremental approach to health insurance? I would, yet it isn’t much loved by conservatives.
     I would say that the ACA is exactly the kind of incremental approach I’m talking about.
     I’d attribute the lack of love among “conservatives” to three things. First, a lot of folks who get lumped in with conservatives are actually libertarians. Who have a whole different philosophocal view of any government at all. Second, there are the self-styled “conservatives” who are actually reactionaries. They don’t want anything at all change — except maybe to change back to being the way they (mis)remember their childhood. And third, there are those who oppose the ACA simply because Obama** was the one who got it passed. I don’t recall similar outrage when Romney implemented something similar in Massachusetts.
     Contrast that with the more progressive (apologies to the progressives here if I’m misrepresenting you) approach of “Medicare for all.” I can see several more incremental expansions of the ACA (starting with getting implemented across all states) which stop well short of that.
     Since we are talking about “market size” what do you think the market among conservatives would be for your approach to gun control?
     Happily, it’s not just about those currently embracing the conservative label. I think there are a lot of “moderate” Democrats who are actually quite conservative, but put off by the nut cases currently generating a lot of noise claiming to be more-perfect-than-thou conservatives. Add them to the kinds of conservative gun enthusiasts who typified the NRA before it became a gun manufacturers’ lobbying group (I’m old enough to remember when the NRA was pro gun control). You’ve got a pretty good sized group.
     ** I think you could make a pretty good case that Obama personally is the kind of conservative I’m thinking of. Which is why, I think, progressives tended to find him so frustrating. They assumed he had to be on their wavelength and he just wasn’t.

166. Would you consider ACA to have been an incremental approach to health insurance? I would, yet it isn’t much loved by conservatives.
     I would say that the ACA is exactly the kind of incremental approach I’m talking about.
     I’d attribute the lack of love among “conservatives” to three things. First, a lot of folks who get lumped in with conservatives are actually libertarians. Who have a whole different philosophocal view of any government at all. Second, there are the self-styled “conservatives” who are actually reactionaries. They don’t want anything at all change — except maybe to change back to being the way they (mis)remember their childhood. And third, there are those who oppose the ACA simply because Obama** was the one who got it passed. I don’t recall similar outrage when Romney implemented something similar in Massachusetts.
     Contrast that with the more progressive (apologies to the progressives here if I’m misrepresenting you) approach of “Medicare for all.” I can see several more incremental expansions of the ACA (starting with getting implemented across all states) which stop well short of that.
     Since we are talking about “market size” what do you think the market among conservatives would be for your approach to gun control?
     Happily, it’s not just about those currently embracing the conservative label. I think there are a lot of “moderate” Democrats who are actually quite conservative, but put off by the nut cases currently generating a lot of noise claiming to be more-perfect-than-thou conservatives. Add them to the kinds of conservative gun enthusiasts who typified the NRA before it became a gun manufacturers’ lobbying group (I’m old enough to remember when the NRA was pro gun control). You’ve got a pretty good sized group.
     ** I think you could make a pretty good case that Obama personally is the kind of conservative I’m thinking of. Which is why, I think, progressives tended to find him so frustrating. They assumed he had to be on their wavelength and he just wasn’t.

167. I always knew Obama to be conservative. What frustrated me was not expecting him to be on a more progressive wavelength, but rather his playing the role of the bipartisan when it was clear from the outset that the GOP would paint him as a wild eyed leftist and obstruct everything on those grounds. I think he could have fought the GOP more strongly and openly for the middle ground rather than pretending that there was good faith still to be had on the other side of the aisle.

168. I always knew Obama to be conservative. What frustrated me was not expecting him to be on a more progressive wavelength, but rather his playing the role of the bipartisan when it was clear from the outset that the GOP would paint him as a wild eyed leftist and obstruct everything on those grounds. I think he could have fought the GOP more strongly and openly for the middle ground rather than pretending that there was good faith still to be had on the other side of the aisle.

169. I think Obama should have drone-struck the RWNJ wing of the GOP until the rubble bounced.
     Instead, he just drone-struck their sanity, and here we are.

170. I think Obama should have drone-struck the RWNJ wing of the GOP until the rubble bounced.
     Instead, he just drone-struck their sanity, and here we are.

171. Defund was a terrible slogan, as it communicated what is common sense only to those who already knew what it meant.
     Which seems to be democratic oversight of police departments, and civilian control of police budgets.
     You don’t need to agree with Balto’s analysis to recognise the arguments against current policies.
     I mean this sort of crap is just its own reduction ad absurdam:
     How a Deadly Police Force Ruled a City
     https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/11/23/how-a-deadly-police-force-ruled-a-city
     And specifically on funding:
     …Even after the bankruptcy, Vallejo officers were some of the highest paid in California. Tonn’s base pay during his first full year in Vallejo was a hundred thousand dollars—thirty-six thousand dollars more than he made in Galt. This didn’t account for overtime and benefits. In 2018, he made twenty-seven thousand dollars in overtime and thirty-one thousand dollars in “other pay,” and received twenty-two thousand dollars’ worth of benefits. In addition, his pension was funded with fifty-eight thousand dollars…

172. Defund was a terrible slogan, as it communicated what is common sense only to those who already knew what it meant.
     Which seems to be democratic oversight of police departments, and civilian control of police budgets.
     You don’t need to agree with Balto’s analysis to recognise the arguments against current policies.
     I mean this sort of crap is just its own reduction ad absurdam:
     How a Deadly Police Force Ruled a City
     https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/11/23/how-a-deadly-police-force-ruled-a-city
     And specifically on funding:
     …Even after the bankruptcy, Vallejo officers were some of the highest paid in California. Tonn’s base pay during his first full year in Vallejo was a hundred thousand dollars—thirty-six thousand dollars more than he made in Galt. This didn’t account for overtime and benefits. In 2018, he made twenty-seven thousand dollars in overtime and thirty-one thousand dollars in “other pay,” and received twenty-two thousand dollars’ worth of benefits. In addition, his pension was funded with fifty-eight thousand dollars…

173. “ Which is why, I think, progressives tended to find him so frustrating. They assumed he had to be on their wavelength and he just wasn’t.”
     Depends on who you mean. I knew Obama wasn’t a far lefty back in 2008 and maybe before by listening to his language on foreign policy. Some far lefties naively thought he was one of them simply because of his background, but you just had to listen to what he said to know this was wrong. People on both the right and parts of the left had an imaginary Obama in their heads. In extreme cases it got ridiculous. There was one commenter at Jon Schwarz’s old blog who though Obama was doing his best given that if he stepped out of line the CIA would assassinate him.
     He was a very moderate centrist liberal, for better or worse.

174. “ Which is why, I think, progressives tended to find him so frustrating. They assumed he had to be on their wavelength and he just wasn’t.”
     Depends on who you mean. I knew Obama wasn’t a far lefty back in 2008 and maybe before by listening to his language on foreign policy. Some far lefties naively thought he was one of them simply because of his background, but you just had to listen to what he said to know this was wrong. People on both the right and parts of the left had an imaginary Obama in their heads. In extreme cases it got ridiculous. There was one commenter at Jon Schwarz’s old blog who though Obama was doing his best given that if he stepped out of line the CIA would assassinate him.
     He was a very moderate centrist liberal, for better or worse.

175. What frustrated me was not expecting him to be on a more progressive wavelength, but rather his playing the role of the bipartisan when it was clear from the outset that the GOP would paint him as a wild eyed leftist and obstruct everything on those grounds. I think he could have fought the GOP more strongly and openly for the middle ground rather than pretending that there was good faith still to be had on the other side of the aisle.
     This sounds right to me. It’s important to distinguish between Obama’s views and his strategy.
     I agree with nous that his strategy was poor, not to say naive. He should have been much more aggressive on a number of matters, especially including the stimulus.
     I also agree with Donald that Obama was (is) a moderate liberal.

176. What frustrated me was not expecting him to be on a more progressive wavelength, but rather his playing the role of the bipartisan when it was clear from the outset that the GOP would paint him as a wild eyed leftist and obstruct everything on those grounds. I think he could have fought the GOP more strongly and openly for the middle ground rather than pretending that there was good faith still to be had on the other side of the aisle.
     This sounds right to me. It’s important to distinguish between Obama’s views and his strategy.
     I agree with nous that his strategy was poor, not to say naive. He should have been much more aggressive on a number of matters, especially including the stimulus.
     I also agree with Donald that Obama was (is) a moderate liberal.

177. I agree with nous that his strategy was poor, not to say naive. He should have been much more aggressive on a number of matters, especially including the stimulus.
     What was he going to do about Congress? Even in his first two years (minus the Kennedy dying, and the Franken not being seated part) when we had a trifecta, he had sh*t to deal with (like Lieberman, blegh).
     I fully expect for all of this Democrat-hating and -blaming by the “left” to recur immediately. Already we see tweets….
     I’m with you in spirit though! I wish we had the magical man/woman who would just get all of this done! I’ve suggested that the critics should run! Trouble is none of them will win. That’s it right there, folks!
     Let’s just do what we can to win GA, then write lots of letters to our President, our Senators and our Congressmen. Let’s not undermine our fragile Democratic and democratic government. Not again.

178. I agree with nous that his strategy was poor, not to say naive. He should have been much more aggressive on a number of matters, especially including the stimulus.
     What was he going to do about Congress? Even in his first two years (minus the Kennedy dying, and the Franken not being seated part) when we had a trifecta, he had sh*t to deal with (like Lieberman, blegh).
     I fully expect for all of this Democrat-hating and -blaming by the “left” to recur immediately. Already we see tweets….
     I’m with you in spirit though! I wish we had the magical man/woman who would just get all of this done! I’ve suggested that the critics should run! Trouble is none of them will win. That’s it right there, folks!
     Let’s just do what we can to win GA, then write lots of letters to our President, our Senators and our Congressmen. Let’s not undermine our fragile Democratic and democratic government. Not again.

179. By the way, a comment of mine got lost in the wilderness. Its subject was Caste by Isabel Wilkerson. Highly recommend the book, but won’t replicate the comment, in case it resurfaces.

180. By the way, a comment of mine got lost in the wilderness. Its subject was Caste by Isabel Wilkerson. Highly recommend the book, but won’t replicate the comment, in case it resurfaces.

181. sapient – no one said that he could have gotten anything more through than he did. But there is also the battle for the hearts and minds narrative to be fought, and that’s the one to fight if the other is destined to be a stalemate. You can’t tear down the master’s house with the master’s paradigms.

182. sapient – no one said that he could have gotten anything more through than he did. But there is also the battle for the hearts and minds narrative to be fought, and that’s the one to fight if the other is destined to be a stalemate. You can’t tear down the master’s house with the master’s paradigms.

183. battle for the hearts and minds narrative
     Loads of people can fight that battle, and they didn’t/don’t seem to be doing all that well. Great pontificating though!

184. battle for the hearts and minds narrative
     Loads of people can fight that battle, and they didn’t/don’t seem to be doing all that well. Great pontificating though!

185. sapient,
     wrt the stimulus he may well have gotten the best deal he could. Who knows?
     But it was a mistake, IMO, for him to characterize it as just the right size. It wasn’t, and he should have said so.
     Fine to say, “It was all I could get,” but not “It was just right.”
     Plus, his subsequent turn to “austerity” was seriously misguided.

186. sapient,
     wrt the stimulus he may well have gotten the best deal he could. Who knows?
     But it was a mistake, IMO, for him to characterize it as just the right size. It wasn’t, and he should have said so.
     Fine to say, “It was all I could get,” but not “It was just right.”
     Plus, his subsequent turn to “austerity” was seriously misguided.

187. By wj’s standard I’m a conservative.
     Always glad to welcome another moderate conservative out of the closet. 😉

188. By wj’s standard I’m a conservative.
     Always glad to welcome another moderate conservative out of the closet. 😉

189. Interesting conversation about what “Obama should have done.” I’d like to have a quote about “just the right size”. Here’s”>https://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/us/politics/26talkshow.html”>Here’s an article I found about Larry Summers trying to sell the stimulus in the face of a Senate that was interested in filibustering it. That’s the closest thing I could find.
     This was just after Obama was inaugurated. Sure, he was, in his first week, busy with rhetoric about “reaching across the aisle.” He was still hopeful, in that first week, that if he appeared to be a moderate, it would somehow help him. Obviously, that was never to be.
     I find it silly and counterproductive to fault him for that. The stimulus passed. It saved the economy, and created a booming economy that survived most of Trump. No, it didn’t solve every problem.
     I learned two things from the Obama administration: 1) Republicans always deal in bad faith. 2) Democratic leaders, no matter how fragile their position, can never count on “progressives” to have their back.

190. Interesting conversation about what “Obama should have done.” I’d like to have a quote about “just the right size”. Here’s”>https://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/us/politics/26talkshow.html”>Here’s an article I found about Larry Summers trying to sell the stimulus in the face of a Senate that was interested in filibustering it. That’s the closest thing I could find.
     This was just after Obama was inaugurated. Sure, he was, in his first week, busy with rhetoric about “reaching across the aisle.” He was still hopeful, in that first week, that if he appeared to be a moderate, it would somehow help him. Obviously, that was never to be.
     I find it silly and counterproductive to fault him for that. The stimulus passed. It saved the economy, and created a booming economy that survived most of Trump. No, it didn’t solve every problem.
     I learned two things from the Obama administration: 1) Republicans always deal in bad faith. 2) Democratic leaders, no matter how fragile their position, can never count on “progressives” to have their back.

191. Sorry. Messed up the link. It’s here: https://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/us/politics/26talkshow.html

192. Sorry. Messed up the link. It’s here: https://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/us/politics/26talkshow.html

193. I learned two things from the Obama administration: 1) Republicans always deal in bad faith. 2) Democratic leaders, no matter how fragile their position, can never count on “progressives” to have their back.
     I have a thought. Nust in recognition of the way various Republican state officials have dealt with the election aftermath. How about if we exert ourselves to say “Congressional Republicans always deal in bad faith.”
     I’d argue that it’s still a tiny bit too sweeping. But it’s a whole lot more accurate than including the entire party.

194. I learned two things from the Obama administration: 1) Republicans always deal in bad faith. 2) Democratic leaders, no matter how fragile their position, can never count on “progressives” to have their back.
     I have a thought. Nust in recognition of the way various Republican state officials have dealt with the election aftermath. How about if we exert ourselves to say “Congressional Republicans always deal in bad faith.”
     I’d argue that it’s still a tiny bit too sweeping. But it’s a whole lot more accurate than including the entire party.

195. in recognition of the way various Republican state officials have dealt with the election aftermath. How about if we exert ourselves to say “Congressional Republicans always deal in bad faith.”
     Sure, wj. Some state Republicans passed the [very minimum] bar of integrity by conducting the elections without lying, cheating and stealing, which is now the norm for Congressional and Executive Branch Republicans. And it was a profile in courage for them to do so because they are being maligned by the leader of the party.
     So sure, I’ll definitely give kudos to them.

196. in recognition of the way various Republican state officials have dealt with the election aftermath. How about if we exert ourselves to say “Congressional Republicans always deal in bad faith.”
     Sure, wj. Some state Republicans passed the [very minimum] bar of integrity by conducting the elections without lying, cheating and stealing, which is now the norm for Congressional and Executive Branch Republicans. And it was a profile in courage for them to do so because they are being maligned by the leader of the party.
     So sure, I’ll definitely give kudos to them.

197. “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”
     The fact that their behaviour did not require more that the minimal bar of integrity in doing their jobs does not make them necessarily profiles in courage. (Even if it gets them and their families death threats. Which, in several cases, it has.) But it is sufficient to contradict accusations of “always dealing in bad faith.” Which is all I’m asking.

198. “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”
     The fact that their behaviour did not require more that the minimal bar of integrity in doing their jobs does not make them necessarily profiles in courage. (Even if it gets them and their families death threats. Which, in several cases, it has.) But it is sufficient to contradict accusations of “always dealing in bad faith.” Which is all I’m asking.

199. I don’t understand why moderate Democrats continue to attack progressives for wanting a better future than we can manage right now and trying to convince people that their way is better, especially when both ostensibly agree on those policy goals and when progressive politicians have consistently voted for whatever D policy could be implemented in the face of obstruction. It doesn’t matter that progressive have sent money to moderate campaigns or done work to get out the vote.
     They grumbled. Those bastards.
     I guess hoping for more and saying so is a deep betrayal. At least that is what every DNC centrist I know has said repeatedly.
     Maybe someday the DNC centrists will stop inching ever rightward and start to appreciate who has had whose backs this entire time. Looks like that’s still a ways off, though.

200. I don’t understand why moderate Democrats continue to attack progressives for wanting a better future than we can manage right now and trying to convince people that their way is better, especially when both ostensibly agree on those policy goals and when progressive politicians have consistently voted for whatever D policy could be implemented in the face of obstruction. It doesn’t matter that progressive have sent money to moderate campaigns or done work to get out the vote.
     They grumbled. Those bastards.
     I guess hoping for more and saying so is a deep betrayal. At least that is what every DNC centrist I know has said repeatedly.
     Maybe someday the DNC centrists will stop inching ever rightward and start to appreciate who has had whose backs this entire time. Looks like that’s still a ways off, though.

201. “ I fully expect for all of this Democrat-hating and -blaming by the “left” to recur immediately. ”
     You are damn right it will. A lot of us are not happy with the national security picks. But I will judge the policies on a case by case basis. I expect some policy choices will be good and some probably not so good. Based on past experience, a few may be awful.,
     Anyway, that was the selling point for Biden. We lefties didn’t like him, but we might be able to pressure him. All that whining about Yemen seems to have had an effect. It went from being an issue only fucking nutcases ever talked about to becoming a priority. Trump wouldn’t budge because Trump is a total sociopath. Blinken went from supporting the war in 2015 to opposing it now.

202. “ I fully expect for all of this Democrat-hating and -blaming by the “left” to recur immediately. ”
     You are damn right it will. A lot of us are not happy with the national security picks. But I will judge the policies on a case by case basis. I expect some policy choices will be good and some probably not so good. Based on past experience, a few may be awful.,
     Anyway, that was the selling point for Biden. We lefties didn’t like him, but we might be able to pressure him. All that whining about Yemen seems to have had an effect. It went from being an issue only fucking nutcases ever talked about to becoming a priority. Trump wouldn’t budge because Trump is a total sociopath. Blinken went from supporting the war in 2015 to opposing it now.

203. Blinken in 2015
     https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security/u-s-expedites-arms-shipments-to-coalition-bombing-yemen-idUSKBN0MY1TL20150407

204. Blinken in 2015
     https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security/u-s-expedites-arms-shipments-to-coalition-bombing-yemen-idUSKBN0MY1TL20150407

205. And hopefully he won’t pick Michael Morell for CIA chief.
     https://www.thedailybeast.com/biden-weighs-mike-morell-as-his-cia-chief-a-key-dem-senator-says-dont-bother

206. And hopefully he won’t pick Michael Morell for CIA chief.
     https://www.thedailybeast.com/biden-weighs-mike-morell-as-his-cia-chief-a-key-dem-senator-says-dont-bother

207. While this is from 2007, I think this is appropriate when discussing all the things that Obama should have done or not done.
     https://www.latimes.com/la-oe-ehrenstein19mar19-story.html
     When the magical negro intersects with the green lantern theory of the presidency,
     https://www.vox.com/2014/5/20/5732208/the-green-lantern-theory-of-the-presidency-explained
     all kinds of interesting things happen.

208. While this is from 2007, I think this is appropriate when discussing all the things that Obama should have done or not done.
     https://www.latimes.com/la-oe-ehrenstein19mar19-story.html
     When the magical negro intersects with the green lantern theory of the presidency,
     https://www.vox.com/2014/5/20/5732208/the-green-lantern-theory-of-the-presidency-explained
     all kinds of interesting things happen.

209. The interview with the wonderful (and let’s remember, extremely effective) Stacey Abrams in yesterday’s NYT is very relevant to so much we have been discussing (the slogan “defund the police”, the presence of different strands of thought in the Dem big tent), that I think it deserves a place here:
     https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/24/us/politics/stacey-abrams-georgia.html?action=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage&section=Politics
     There are divisions among Democrats, especially moderate and progressive on some of the down ballot results. You have respect in both those camps. Do you think messages like “defund the police” hurt the party in House and Senate races?
     I think you run the campaign for the place where you live. And I’ve always held to the reality that we exist on a spectrum of progress. There are those who have made it further along that spectrum. There are other communities that are struggling to find our way. And the responsibility of every election in every campaign is to identify where you are, but also where you can go.
     But it’s up to those local communities to calibrate how broad and how far the vision can reach.
     I think it is not helpful to try to force every single person into the same mold. I talk about the work I do here as translating “progressive” into “Southern,” because I know that there are conversations that are absolutely necessary, but you can’t get to that if you haven’t built the language to describe it. And we’ve got to do the work of building the language before we can get to the slogans.
     But is it zero sum? The word we hear from some of the moderate members of the House is that too much space is given to some of these progressive members and those slogans and that hurts them.
     For the Democratic Party, it is our burden and our benefit that we are faced with diversity. Republicans rarely have to engage because of the homogeneous nature of their belief system. When you are against most things, it is not necessary to articulate what you are for.
     And this is a broad generalization and I know it, but Democrats have always had to recognize that the big tent that we built in, we’re going to have robust conversations inside it. And those conversations always spill out into the atmosphere. Republicans are going to weaponize those conversations. And it can be whispers or it can be shouts, but they’re going to find a way to leverage them.
     Our responsibility is to make certain we built a base understanding of who we are.

210. The interview with the wonderful (and let’s remember, extremely effective) Stacey Abrams in yesterday’s NYT is very relevant to so much we have been discussing (the slogan “defund the police”, the presence of different strands of thought in the Dem big tent), that I think it deserves a place here:
     https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/24/us/politics/stacey-abrams-georgia.html?action=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage&section=Politics
     There are divisions among Democrats, especially moderate and progressive on some of the down ballot results. You have respect in both those camps. Do you think messages like “defund the police” hurt the party in House and Senate races?
     I think you run the campaign for the place where you live. And I’ve always held to the reality that we exist on a spectrum of progress. There are those who have made it further along that spectrum. There are other communities that are struggling to find our way. And the responsibility of every election in every campaign is to identify where you are, but also where you can go.
     But it’s up to those local communities to calibrate how broad and how far the vision can reach.
     I think it is not helpful to try to force every single person into the same mold. I talk about the work I do here as translating “progressive” into “Southern,” because I know that there are conversations that are absolutely necessary, but you can’t get to that if you haven’t built the language to describe it. And we’ve got to do the work of building the language before we can get to the slogans.
     But is it zero sum? The word we hear from some of the moderate members of the House is that too much space is given to some of these progressive members and those slogans and that hurts them.
     For the Democratic Party, it is our burden and our benefit that we are faced with diversity. Republicans rarely have to engage because of the homogeneous nature of their belief system. When you are against most things, it is not necessary to articulate what you are for.
     And this is a broad generalization and I know it, but Democrats have always had to recognize that the big tent that we built in, we’re going to have robust conversations inside it. And those conversations always spill out into the atmosphere. Republicans are going to weaponize those conversations. And it can be whispers or it can be shouts, but they’re going to find a way to leverage them.
     Our responsibility is to make certain we built a base understanding of who we are.

211. They grumbled. Those bastards.
     I guess hoping for more and saying so is a deep betrayal. At least that is what every DNC centrist I know has said repeatedly.
     This fake victimhood language is silly and inaccurate.
     I don’t know what “DNC centrist” you know, so I can’t speak to what they say, but all Democrats I know hope for more and say so. Did you read the NYT article about the stimulus I posted? You seem to have changed the subject, which was “Obama didn’t stand up for a more aggressive stimulus.”
     The conversation wasn’t about “hope”. It was about criticizing Obama for achieving too little with his stimulus. When evidence was presented about what happened (and this was in the January of his inauguration) everyone starts talking about something else.
     The point regarding Obama and his “failures” is well illustrated by lj’s articles.
     GftNC’s article about Stacey Abrams is a lesson in what we face, and how to do it. Somehow, Stacey Abrams works for “more” in a way that doesn’t threaten what we currently have. That is the most constructive strategy, rather than a rolling 24/7 news feed of Democrats’ inadequacies.

212. They grumbled. Those bastards.
     I guess hoping for more and saying so is a deep betrayal. At least that is what every DNC centrist I know has said repeatedly.
     This fake victimhood language is silly and inaccurate.
     I don’t know what “DNC centrist” you know, so I can’t speak to what they say, but all Democrats I know hope for more and say so. Did you read the NYT article about the stimulus I posted? You seem to have changed the subject, which was “Obama didn’t stand up for a more aggressive stimulus.”
     The conversation wasn’t about “hope”. It was about criticizing Obama for achieving too little with his stimulus. When evidence was presented about what happened (and this was in the January of his inauguration) everyone starts talking about something else.
     The point regarding Obama and his “failures” is well illustrated by lj’s articles.
     GftNC’s article about Stacey Abrams is a lesson in what we face, and how to do it. Somehow, Stacey Abrams works for “more” in a way that doesn’t threaten what we currently have. That is the most constructive strategy, rather than a rolling 24/7 news feed of Democrats’ inadequacies.

213. Ms Abrams laid out a fundamental and inclusive political vision. You will also notice that she did not bother to carp about how “bad” the slogan “defund the police” is, and effectively moved the conversation on.
     There’s a lesson there.

214. Ms Abrams laid out a fundamental and inclusive political vision. You will also notice that she did not bother to carp about how “bad” the slogan “defund the police” is, and effectively moved the conversation on.
     There’s a lesson there.

215. because she’s a better communicator than that – when asked about it, she sidesteps how bad it is and gets to the message she want’s to communicate.
     anyone here think Abrams would have come up with that particular slogan?

216. because she’s a better communicator than that – when asked about it, she sidesteps how bad it is and gets to the message she want’s to communicate.
     anyone here think Abrams would have come up with that particular slogan?

217. What activists do.

218. What activists do.

219. What activists do.
     preen?

220. What activists do.
     preen?

221. Just to be clear, the op-ed about Obama as a magical negro and the link to the Green Lantern theory of presidential power wasn’t aimed at any particular comment, it just lined up with my take, which is if Obama had not been a moderate conservative centrist, he wouldn’t have gotten elected.

222. Just to be clear, the op-ed about Obama as a magical negro and the link to the Green Lantern theory of presidential power wasn’t aimed at any particular comment, it just lined up with my take, which is if Obama had not been a moderate conservative centrist, he wouldn’t have gotten elected.

223. From bobbyp’s link:
     Erik Loomis: “That this narrative has legs with the moderate wing of the Democratic Party as well, particularly people who simply don’t care cops slaughtering Black people such as Abigail Spanberger, really does require a step back to discuss some basic realities of our politics.”
     This is bullshit. I live near her district, a gerrymandered Virginia Trump-heavy district that she barely could win. (I pay attention, because no Democrat has won in my district since the gerrymandering happened.) I know the Democrats who vote and run in these districts. Erik is POS.
     AOC wins handily in her district because people agree with her take on things. Yay! I agree with a lot of what she says as well.
     Spanberger runs in a district where she wins by the skin of her teeth because there are Trump signs in yard after yard after yard. To say that she “simply doesn’t care [blah]” is as ugly as it comes. Without Spanberger and people like her, we would not have a Congressional majority. And, yes, I didn’t like seeing Spanberger’s argument with the leftier Democrats on the front page of the Washington Post, so I wrote her a note to tell her so. But she was worried about the Trump turnout, and our lost seats, and her take on why is important for her to be discussing privately with colleagues.

224. From bobbyp’s link:
     Erik Loomis: “That this narrative has legs with the moderate wing of the Democratic Party as well, particularly people who simply don’t care cops slaughtering Black people such as Abigail Spanberger, really does require a step back to discuss some basic realities of our politics.”
     This is bullshit. I live near her district, a gerrymandered Virginia Trump-heavy district that she barely could win. (I pay attention, because no Democrat has won in my district since the gerrymandering happened.) I know the Democrats who vote and run in these districts. Erik is POS.
     AOC wins handily in her district because people agree with her take on things. Yay! I agree with a lot of what she says as well.
     Spanberger runs in a district where she wins by the skin of her teeth because there are Trump signs in yard after yard after yard. To say that she “simply doesn’t care [blah]” is as ugly as it comes. Without Spanberger and people like her, we would not have a Congressional majority. And, yes, I didn’t like seeing Spanberger’s argument with the leftier Democrats on the front page of the Washington Post, so I wrote her a note to tell her so. But she was worried about the Trump turnout, and our lost seats, and her take on why is important for her to be discussing privately with colleagues.

225. Always glad to welcome another moderate conservative out of the closet. 😉
     LOL.
     It strikes me now and then that I’m more conservative than the typical American “conservative”, but it’s a hard sell.
     A self-governing commonwealth, operating under the rule of law, in small-r republican form. How far back does that go? It’s not like we invented it.
     I think you run the campaign for the place where you live.
     Everything I hear from Abrams increases my respect for her. We’re lucky to have her leading the charge in GA. I hope she gets a national platform, if she wants one.
     She might not.
     Spanberger runs in a district where she wins by the skin of her teeth
     That is the reality. Further, Spanberger is not obliged to represent my point of view, or the point of view of anyone to the left of her constituents.
     AOC is a millennial Latina from the Bronx. She is responsible to the people who elected her to office. Her point of view reflects that.
     Spanberger is a 40-something former CIA ops officer from Richmond VA who ousted Tea Party drone Dave Brat from his seat in the House by a margin of about 6,000 votes. She is responsible to the people who elected her to office. Her point of view reflects that.
     As an aside, Spanberger has also worked with universities to diversify their student bodies, and worked to increase the availability of affordable housing in the commonwealth of VA. So “defund the cops” or not, she’s done way more at a hands-on, boots-on-the-ground level to further progressive values than most folks have, including for example me.
     The (R) party at the national level is pretty monolithic. That is their strength, and their weakness. The (D) is not. That is their strength, and their weakness.
     The (D)’s with all their flaws are about 1,000 times more likely to further values that are important to me than the (R)’s are. So I’ll pretty much take any available (D) over any available (R), any time that’s possible.
     I’m happy to have people like AOC in the House, and I’m happy to have people like Spanberger in the House. Let’s do our best to make sure they all get to stay there.
     And as a total aside, capital-R Russell is the same as lower-case-r russell. I have a new tablet and it will not by god allow me to lower-case the first letter of my name.
     I feel judged. 🙂

226. Always glad to welcome another moderate conservative out of the closet. 😉
     LOL.
     It strikes me now and then that I’m more conservative than the typical American “conservative”, but it’s a hard sell.
     A self-governing commonwealth, operating under the rule of law, in small-r republican form. How far back does that go? It’s not like we invented it.
     I think you run the campaign for the place where you live.
     Everything I hear from Abrams increases my respect for her. We’re lucky to have her leading the charge in GA. I hope she gets a national platform, if she wants one.
     She might not.
     Spanberger runs in a district where she wins by the skin of her teeth
     That is the reality. Further, Spanberger is not obliged to represent my point of view, or the point of view of anyone to the left of her constituents.
     AOC is a millennial Latina from the Bronx. She is responsible to the people who elected her to office. Her point of view reflects that.
     Spanberger is a 40-something former CIA ops officer from Richmond VA who ousted Tea Party drone Dave Brat from his seat in the House by a margin of about 6,000 votes. She is responsible to the people who elected her to office. Her point of view reflects that.
     As an aside, Spanberger has also worked with universities to diversify their student bodies, and worked to increase the availability of affordable housing in the commonwealth of VA. So “defund the cops” or not, she’s done way more at a hands-on, boots-on-the-ground level to further progressive values than most folks have, including for example me.
     The (R) party at the national level is pretty monolithic. That is their strength, and their weakness. The (D) is not. That is their strength, and their weakness.
     The (D)’s with all their flaws are about 1,000 times more likely to further values that are important to me than the (R)’s are. So I’ll pretty much take any available (D) over any available (R), any time that’s possible.
     I’m happy to have people like AOC in the House, and I’m happy to have people like Spanberger in the House. Let’s do our best to make sure they all get to stay there.
     And as a total aside, capital-R Russell is the same as lower-case-r russell. I have a new tablet and it will not by god allow me to lower-case the first letter of my name.
     I feel judged. 🙂

227. “Yay! I agree with a lot of what she says as well.”
     Then why not just leave it at that? Why all the hippie punching? Two can play the “shut up, shut up, shut up” game. It is not very productive.
     That you took the time to read the Loomis post is appreciated. On to Georgia. Thanks.

228. “Yay! I agree with a lot of what she says as well.”
     Then why not just leave it at that? Why all the hippie punching? Two can play the “shut up, shut up, shut up” game. It is not very productive.
     That you took the time to read the Loomis post is appreciated. On to Georgia. Thanks.

229. The (D)’s with all their flaws are about 1,000 times more likely to further values that are important to me than the (R)’s are. So I’ll pretty much take any available (D) over any available (R), any time that’s possible.
     I’m happy to have people like AOC in the House, and I’m happy to have people like Spanberger in the House. Let’s do our best to make sure they all get to stay there.
     Amen, amen, and thrice amen. (Four times is not right out.)

230. The (D)’s with all their flaws are about 1,000 times more likely to further values that are important to me than the (R)’s are. So I’ll pretty much take any available (D) over any available (R), any time that’s possible.
     I’m happy to have people like AOC in the House, and I’m happy to have people like Spanberger in the House. Let’s do our best to make sure they all get to stay there.
     Amen, amen, and thrice amen. (Four times is not right out.)

231. I don’t understand why moderate Democrats continue to attack progressives for wanting a better future than we can manage right now and trying to convince people that their way is better
     Perhaps you know different moderate Democrats than I do. Because the ones I know don’t do that.
     They do, however, argue that sometimes the things that progressives say cause them to lose elections that they believe they (the moderate Democrats) would have won. Instead, those elections get won by conservatives, or worse. Who then do things that neither the moderates nor the progressives like.

232. I don’t understand why moderate Democrats continue to attack progressives for wanting a better future than we can manage right now and trying to convince people that their way is better
     Perhaps you know different moderate Democrats than I do. Because the ones I know don’t do that.
     They do, however, argue that sometimes the things that progressives say cause them to lose elections that they believe they (the moderate Democrats) would have won. Instead, those elections get won by conservatives, or worse. Who then do things that neither the moderates nor the progressives like.

233. To say that she “simply doesn’t care [blah]” is as ugly as it comes.
     yup. none are as pure as Loomis.

234. To say that she “simply doesn’t care [blah]” is as ugly as it comes.
     yup. none are as pure as Loomis.

235. LOL.
     It strikes me now and then that I’m more conservative than the typical American “conservative”, but it’s a hard sell.
     Glad I succeeded in brightening your day, russell (I can take a hint). Any win’s a good win.
     Certainly the label “conservative” has gotten pretty toxic. But you’re correct, you’re far closer to what the term traditionally meant than the crazies currently making it their own.
     Everything I hear from Abrams increases my respect for her. We’re lucky to have her leading the charge in GA. I hope she gets a national platform, if she wants one.
     Amen. She’s the only reason that Democrats have a prayer of winning those Senate seats. Even with how aweful the Republican candidates are. Without which seats, Moscow Mitch probably stonewalls pretty much everything. See the rest of the discussion on the impact of high-profile progressives on races elsewhere.

236. LOL.
     It strikes me now and then that I’m more conservative than the typical American “conservative”, but it’s a hard sell.
     Glad I succeeded in brightening your day, russell (I can take a hint). Any win’s a good win.
     Certainly the label “conservative” has gotten pretty toxic. But you’re correct, you’re far closer to what the term traditionally meant than the crazies currently making it their own.
     Everything I hear from Abrams increases my respect for her. We’re lucky to have her leading the charge in GA. I hope she gets a national platform, if she wants one.
     Amen. She’s the only reason that Democrats have a prayer of winning those Senate seats. Even with how aweful the Republican candidates are. Without which seats, Moscow Mitch probably stonewalls pretty much everything. See the rest of the discussion on the impact of high-profile progressives on races elsewhere.

237. Even with how aweful the Republican candidates are.
     I’m in awe of them, too. ;^)

238. Even with how aweful the Republican candidates are.
     I’m in awe of them, too. ;^)

239. They do, however, argue that sometimes the things that progressives say cause them to lose elections that they believe they (the moderate Democrats) would have won.
     it’s strange… The Left™ is very sensitive to phrasing when “corporate”, “centrist”, “neo-liberal” Dems speak. they’re ready to point out any impure nuance and to tell us how it doesn’t help the cause, etc.. but when they say things? nah. doesn’t matter. everyone knows the self-evidently-correct true meaning behind the slogans.

240. They do, however, argue that sometimes the things that progressives say cause them to lose elections that they believe they (the moderate Democrats) would have won.
     it’s strange… The Left™ is very sensitive to phrasing when “corporate”, “centrist”, “neo-liberal” Dems speak. they’re ready to point out any impure nuance and to tell us how it doesn’t help the cause, etc.. but when they say things? nah. doesn’t matter. everyone knows the self-evidently-correct true meaning behind the slogans.

241. sapient,
     ‘d like to have a quote about “just the right size”
     How’s this?
     Off by a bit – the package that passed was a bit under $800 billion, but I’m sure he said stuff like this later. I remember criticizing him for it on the grounds that it was bad politics.

242. sapient,
     ‘d like to have a quote about “just the right size”
     How’s this?
     Off by a bit – the package that passed was a bit under $800 billion, but I’m sure he said stuff like this later. I remember criticizing him for it on the grounds that it was bad politics.

243. You know…I live in Orange County. It’s purple. When I got here it was red. There are a ton of Trump signs around. We probably have more actual white supremacists around than in most places. It’s not as if I live in some progressive utopia.
     In 2018 we narrowly elected Katie Porter with hard work and a lot of support from progressive Democrats. No hippies were punched. No progressives were criticized in an effort to look more centrist. She ran on winning issues and positions. You’ve all seen the videos of her questioning execs and making them uncomfortable.
     We re-elected her by a wider margin in 2020 and flipped a seat in the state senate in favor of her primary challenger from 2018, Dave Min.
     Again, no hippies were punched. And again, I personally knew Sanders supporters who went out in masks to canvas their neighborhoods for both Katie and Dave.
     It’s possible to win in a reddish-purple district as an unapologetic Democrat. It’s possible to do so without aiming fire at The Squad and Bernie. And doing so can actually improve the odds for those who follow. But you have to run on issues that crosscut and you have to run against Republicans, not against the Democrats to your left.
     Progressive Democrats don’t have to live in the closet and it doesn’t have to be “Democrats versus Progressives.” It can be a winning coalition even in purple districts.

244. You know…I live in Orange County. It’s purple. When I got here it was red. There are a ton of Trump signs around. We probably have more actual white supremacists around than in most places. It’s not as if I live in some progressive utopia.
     In 2018 we narrowly elected Katie Porter with hard work and a lot of support from progressive Democrats. No hippies were punched. No progressives were criticized in an effort to look more centrist. She ran on winning issues and positions. You’ve all seen the videos of her questioning execs and making them uncomfortable.
     We re-elected her by a wider margin in 2020 and flipped a seat in the state senate in favor of her primary challenger from 2018, Dave Min.
     Again, no hippies were punched. And again, I personally knew Sanders supporters who went out in masks to canvas their neighborhoods for both Katie and Dave.
     It’s possible to win in a reddish-purple district as an unapologetic Democrat. It’s possible to do so without aiming fire at The Squad and Bernie. And doing so can actually improve the odds for those who follow. But you have to run on issues that crosscut and you have to run against Republicans, not against the Democrats to your left.
     Progressive Democrats don’t have to live in the closet and it doesn’t have to be “Democrats versus Progressives.” It can be a winning coalition even in purple districts.

245. I remember criticizing him for it on the grounds that it was bad politics.
     We can agree to disagree about that. What he seems to be saying (the way I translate it) is “Let’s pass it already! It’s good and needs to be done without further bickering.” Seemed right to me.

246. I remember criticizing him for it on the grounds that it was bad politics.
     We can agree to disagree about that. What he seems to be saying (the way I translate it) is “Let’s pass it already! It’s good and needs to be done without further bickering.” Seemed right to me.

247. Progressive Democrats don’t have to live in the closet and it doesn’t have to be “Democrats versus Progressives.” It can be a winning coalition even in purple districts.
     certainly.
     but always remember: it goes both ways. if people want to use “moderate” and “centrist” as insults, they don’t have much to complain about if they get accused of aiming fire at people who could be their allies.

248. Progressive Democrats don’t have to live in the closet and it doesn’t have to be “Democrats versus Progressives.” It can be a winning coalition even in purple districts.
     certainly.
     but always remember: it goes both ways. if people want to use “moderate” and “centrist” as insults, they don’t have much to complain about if they get accused of aiming fire at people who could be their allies.

249. An interesting thought piece, in a comment on Leonard Pitts’ latest column. Consider if Stacy Abrams had won her election to be Georgia’s Governor. That would leave Brian Kemp as Georgia’s Secretary of State. Can you picture him standing up to Trump’s BS the way Brad Raffensperger did?

250. An interesting thought piece, in a comment on Leonard Pitts’ latest column. Consider if Stacy Abrams had won her election to be Georgia’s Governor. That would leave Brian Kemp as Georgia’s Secretary of State. Can you picture him standing up to Trump’s BS the way Brad Raffensperger did?

251. What nous said – and in any two party system, you absolutely have to be a coalition to win.
     This very interesting insider account of Democrat congressional losses makes it very clear what they thought the problems were, and it was zip to do with left/right issues
     https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/25/democrats-campaigns-lost-house-seats-dccc-439676
     … Every election cycle, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, along with the Democratic National Committee and their biggest and most influential allies, wield disproportionate influence through the weight of their endorsements and their power of the purse. Often operating in concert, and inspiring big donors to follow, they decide which candidates are “viable,” who is worthy of full financial support, how their campaigns should operate and which consultants they can hire. And this year, the direction set by D.C. Democrats proved to be a very big part of why House Democrats fell far short of a hoped-for 2020 blue wave, instead diminishing their hard-fought majority won in 2018…

252. What nous said – and in any two party system, you absolutely have to be a coalition to win.
     This very interesting insider account of Democrat congressional losses makes it very clear what they thought the problems were, and it was zip to do with left/right issues
     https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/25/democrats-campaigns-lost-house-seats-dccc-439676
     … Every election cycle, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, along with the Democratic National Committee and their biggest and most influential allies, wield disproportionate influence through the weight of their endorsements and their power of the purse. Often operating in concert, and inspiring big donors to follow, they decide which candidates are “viable,” who is worthy of full financial support, how their campaigns should operate and which consultants they can hire. And this year, the direction set by D.C. Democrats proved to be a very big part of why House Democrats fell far short of a hoped-for 2020 blue wave, instead diminishing their hard-fought majority won in 2018…

253. “be conservative in what you send, and liberal in what you accept”
     That’s been in RFC’s for a looooong time; when translated into personal guidelines, one can live one’s own life with ‘conservative’ principles, while being ‘liberal’ in how one treats others.

254. “be conservative in what you send, and liberal in what you accept”
     That’s been in RFC’s for a looooong time; when translated into personal guidelines, one can live one’s own life with ‘conservative’ principles, while being ‘liberal’ in how one treats others.

255. Nigel, that take is interesting, and some of it is helpful (although the failure of polling is a problem that surprised everyone – not sure the authors have a decent idea to address that better than anyone else).
     As to the pandemic, well f’ it. Democrats were more careful than Republicans, and if that’s what lost us seats, we’ll do better next time. Putting people at risk was not our brand, and I’m proud of that.

256. Nigel, that take is interesting, and some of it is helpful (although the failure of polling is a problem that surprised everyone – not sure the authors have a decent idea to address that better than anyone else).
     As to the pandemic, well f’ it. Democrats were more careful than Republicans, and if that’s what lost us seats, we’ll do better next time. Putting people at risk was not our brand, and I’m proud of that.

257. Thanks for the link, Nigel. The story is both disheartening and unsurprising.
     Democrats seem to have a long-standing problem with inept consultants.
     As I’m sure others here did, I gave a fair amount of money to a number of candidates, especially in Senate races. Bad day at the track – I didn’t pick a single winner, though Ossoff and Warnock still give me some hope.
     I’m not happy about this, and really would like to hear from the DNC, DSCC, Masto, Schumer, whoever about what happened, along with some acceptance of responsibility.
     Oh, and I wouldn’t mind a refund from that idiot Cal Cunningham.

258. Thanks for the link, Nigel. The story is both disheartening and unsurprising.
     Democrats seem to have a long-standing problem with inept consultants.
     As I’m sure others here did, I gave a fair amount of money to a number of candidates, especially in Senate races. Bad day at the track – I didn’t pick a single winner, though Ossoff and Warnock still give me some hope.
     I’m not happy about this, and really would like to hear from the DNC, DSCC, Masto, Schumer, whoever about what happened, along with some acceptance of responsibility.
     Oh, and I wouldn’t mind a refund from that idiot Cal Cunningham.

259. I just want to wish all of you a happy and safe thanksgiving. I don’t know if this sentiment fits with the tradition, but at least now giving thanks seems appropriate, despite the horrific pandemic death toll, because there is hope that things will be improving soon – a vaccine (or 3), a new and sane administration, and (DV) a successful runoff in Georgia.

260. I just want to wish all of you a happy and safe thanksgiving. I don’t know if this sentiment fits with the tradition, but at least now giving thanks seems appropriate, despite the horrific pandemic death toll, because there is hope that things will be improving soon – a vaccine (or 3), a new and sane administration, and (DV) a successful runoff in Georgia.

261. Pedantic perhaps, but if Abrams had beaten Kemp then Kemp would have returned to being a private citizen, as his term as Secretary of State was expiring. He was not on the ballot (nor could have been) for re-election to Secretary of State.

262. Pedantic perhaps, but if Abrams had beaten Kemp then Kemp would have returned to being a private citizen, as his term as Secretary of State was expiring. He was not on the ballot (nor could have been) for re-election to Secretary of State.

263. Any win’s a good win.
     Maybe that’s why you are a conservative? (I keed, I keeeed!!)
     I’m the one who keeps beating this dead horse, but (unless someone can point me to something saying I’m wrong), I don’t think that the defund the police phrase came out of focus groups and a Don Draper like pitch. This is not to say that bad ideas don’t come out in that way like this frex (I’m actually a connoisseur of such ads and the recent ones by the Tories was quite fun in that regard
     https://www.dazeddigital.com/politics/article/50747/1/a-brief-explainer-on-the-government-dystopian-fatima-cyber-ad
     https://www.bustle.com/life/government-fatima-cyber-advert-is-part-of-2019-campaign
     I especially like the redone ad in the second link that points to all the jobs that the ad requires, jobs that the government suggests need to retrain.
     But I feel like the phrase in question (and again, if someone can point me to something that suggests I’m wrong, please do) is a anguished scream, not the product of a focus group.
     I can’t speak for others, but the hardest lesson for me to learn, and one that I’m still having to teach myself, is that sometimes, and a lot more often than I think, offering well-meaning criticism is not always the best thing. It’s made tougher by the fact that people on the left tend to enjoy poking and prodding at meanings (that’s why the academy is full of marxists, amirite?) It’s made almost impossible by people on the right who gin up other problems and claim that the left is hypocritical by not focussing on the problems they want them to focus on.
     I also think that focussing on the optics of the defund the police is actually a way that the consultants mentioned by bernie above try and justify their own existence. Obviously, you can’t have the hoi polloi come up with their own slogans, look what happens! while failing to acknowledge that they are simply protecting their revenue stream. (I’m assuming that none of you are in that category)
     Having tossed yet another turd in the punchbowl, I’ll finish by echoing GftNC’s comment. Take care y’all.

264. Any win’s a good win.
     Maybe that’s why you are a conservative? (I keed, I keeeed!!)
     I’m the one who keeps beating this dead horse, but (unless someone can point me to something saying I’m wrong), I don’t think that the defund the police phrase came out of focus groups and a Don Draper like pitch. This is not to say that bad ideas don’t come out in that way like this frex (I’m actually a connoisseur of such ads and the recent ones by the Tories was quite fun in that regard
     https://www.dazeddigital.com/politics/article/50747/1/a-brief-explainer-on-the-government-dystopian-fatima-cyber-ad
     https://www.bustle.com/life/government-fatima-cyber-advert-is-part-of-2019-campaign
     I especially like the redone ad in the second link that points to all the jobs that the ad requires, jobs that the government suggests need to retrain.
     But I feel like the phrase in question (and again, if someone can point me to something that suggests I’m wrong, please do) is a anguished scream, not the product of a focus group.
     I can’t speak for others, but the hardest lesson for me to learn, and one that I’m still having to teach myself, is that sometimes, and a lot more often than I think, offering well-meaning criticism is not always the best thing. It’s made tougher by the fact that people on the left tend to enjoy poking and prodding at meanings (that’s why the academy is full of marxists, amirite?) It’s made almost impossible by people on the right who gin up other problems and claim that the left is hypocritical by not focussing on the problems they want them to focus on.
     I also think that focussing on the optics of the defund the police is actually a way that the consultants mentioned by bernie above try and justify their own existence. Obviously, you can’t have the hoi polloi come up with their own slogans, look what happens! while failing to acknowledge that they are simply protecting their revenue stream. (I’m assuming that none of you are in that category)
     Having tossed yet another turd in the punchbowl, I’ll finish by echoing GftNC’s comment. Take care y’all.

265. Priest, thanks for the clarification.

266. Priest, thanks for the clarification.

267. For all of those here (to be fair, I include myself) who are self-styled slogan experts, I recommend this link.
     My add-fee invoice shall be forwarded under separate cover.
     Go, turkees.

268. For all of those here (to be fair, I include myself) who are self-styled slogan experts, I recommend this link.
     My add-fee invoice shall be forwarded under separate cover.
     Go, turkees.

269. That looks fun, bobbyp!
     Happy Thanksgiving, folks, and thanks to those who wish us that, and know that we have a lot of dodged bullets to be thankful for.

270. That looks fun, bobbyp!
     Happy Thanksgiving, folks, and thanks to those who wish us that, and know that we have a lot of dodged bullets to be thankful for.

271. Fun stuff, bobbyp!
     And interesting to see that Trump’s “America First” slogan was first a theme of Warren G. Harding — until Trump, easily our most corrupt President.

272. Fun stuff, bobbyp!
     And interesting to see that Trump’s “America First” slogan was first a theme of Warren G. Harding — until Trump, easily our most corrupt President.

273. “Make your wet dreams come true.” (not what You think, dirty old reader!)
     “They can’t lick our Dick”
     “Don’t change Dicks in the midst of a screw, vote for Nixon in ’72”
     
     Ouch!

274. “Make your wet dreams come true.” (not what You think, dirty old reader!)
     “They can’t lick our Dick”
     “Don’t change Dicks in the midst of a screw, vote for Nixon in ’72”
     
     Ouch!

275. Not sure if this is reform or defund. Looks like the involved unions are worried that this is defund and want to make sure that any reform have to be put through the existing system first.
     https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-11-25/la-county-could-dismantle-juvenile-justice-system-for-care-first-model
     The plan calls for children and young adults who have committed crimes to be served in home-like settings, and includes 24/7 youth centers and support teams that establish relationships with young people who might otherwise be locked in facilities far from home.
     The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday took the first steps to transition juvenile probation to a proposed new Department of Youth Development, in a three-phase approach that will take at least five years. Similar approaches have been tried in San Francisco; Houston; New York City; King County, Wash.; and Oregon.
     I don’t care what it is called so long as we give plans like this our best shot.

276. Not sure if this is reform or defund. Looks like the involved unions are worried that this is defund and want to make sure that any reform have to be put through the existing system first.
     https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-11-25/la-county-could-dismantle-juvenile-justice-system-for-care-first-model
     The plan calls for children and young adults who have committed crimes to be served in home-like settings, and includes 24/7 youth centers and support teams that establish relationships with young people who might otherwise be locked in facilities far from home.
     The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday took the first steps to transition juvenile probation to a proposed new Department of Youth Development, in a three-phase approach that will take at least five years. Similar approaches have been tried in San Francisco; Houston; New York City; King County, Wash.; and Oregon.
     I don’t care what it is called so long as we give plans like this our best shot.

277. Off topic but current events again show that reforming (i.e. curtailing) presidential pardon power should be on the to-do list.
     With a Dem in office this could even draw some (shortsighted) GOP votes. Not enough though for the necessary constitutional amendment.
     Main points (I am repeating myself):
     1. No pardons for crimes committed by or on behalf of the executive branch or members thereof*.
     2. Only specifically named crimes can be pardoned.
     3. No preemptive pardons (You have to be formally judged guilty by appropriate legal authority before.).
     4. Promising a pardon to further illegal activities is a felony (also covered by 1.) that legal authorities HAVE to prosecute at the latest when the person doing so is leaving office.
     5. Exceptions shall require approval by Congress with a significant majority to be determined (to avoid pure partisanship).
     6. Commuting of sentences as a pardon-in-all-but-name are to be treated the same way with the exception of the death penalty (which can still be commuted to life without parole).
     *that should cover ‘private’ illegal acts while being a member of the branch.

278. Off topic but current events again show that reforming (i.e. curtailing) presidential pardon power should be on the to-do list.
     With a Dem in office this could even draw some (shortsighted) GOP votes. Not enough though for the necessary constitutional amendment.
     Main points (I am repeating myself):
     1. No pardons for crimes committed by or on behalf of the executive branch or members thereof*.
     2. Only specifically named crimes can be pardoned.
     3. No preemptive pardons (You have to be formally judged guilty by appropriate legal authority before.).
     4. Promising a pardon to further illegal activities is a felony (also covered by 1.) that legal authorities HAVE to prosecute at the latest when the person doing so is leaving office.
     5. Exceptions shall require approval by Congress with a significant majority to be determined (to avoid pure partisanship).
     6. Commuting of sentences as a pardon-in-all-but-name are to be treated the same way with the exception of the death penalty (which can still be commuted to life without parole).
     *that should cover ‘private’ illegal acts while being a member of the branch.

279. Promising a pardon to further illegal activities is a felony (also covered by 1.) that legal authorities HAVE to prosecute at the latest when the person doing so is leaving office.
     Might need to have some detail about how eleptical said promise can be to warrant prosecution. Because individuals with enough experience with, or just long proximity to, oeganized crime (e.g. our current President) can be quite good at circumlocutions.

280. Promising a pardon to further illegal activities is a felony (also covered by 1.) that legal authorities HAVE to prosecute at the latest when the person doing so is leaving office.
     Might need to have some detail about how eleptical said promise can be to warrant prosecution. Because individuals with enough experience with, or just long proximity to, oeganized crime (e.g. our current President) can be quite good at circumlocutions.

281. I don’t care what it is called so long as we give plans like this our best shot.
     Completely with you.

282. I don’t care what it is called so long as we give plans like this our best shot.
     Completely with you.

283. Let me add to Hartmut’s list.
     Assisting in genocide and/ or war crimes is a felony. For both parties.
     Torture is a felony.
     No preemptive pardons.
     No looking forward, not back.
     The rule of law is about more than lying to the FBI and process crimes and it should also include what we do to people overseas. Separating children at the border is one of the worst things his Administration did, but killing them in Yemen is worse.
     On the moderate- liberal divide, I don’t agree that both sides want the same thing except in the very broad sense that most people want prosperity, rainbows and ponies for everyone who wants one. It is an ideological divide on some issues. Not necessarily all issues, but some. On foreign policy it is often a divide. On health care it is a divide.
     The Green Lantern meme only works as a rebuttal,for lefties who really think Obama could have done whatever he wanted. I don’t think he could, but I don’t think he wanted what the far left wanted. He pivotedmto the austerity language very quickly, language which is poisonous to the left. You don’t talk about austerity and about the Federal,government living within its means when you are still,pulling out of a recession. And the ACA could be the best thing attainable at the time, but the Andre mic shows the idiocy of a complex Rube Goldberg system based on having insurance supplied by your employer.
     I think the closing paragraph of this piece about the pandemic has broader application. A politician might not be able to so what is best, but if so, tell the public why you can’t achieve it. Maybe you lose your job, but I think that kind of honesty might be refreshing.
     Leftists and moderates are stuck with each other, but the mere fact that moderates say that Biden was a better candidate than Sanders was based on the idea that many moderates were scared of Sanders, as scared as they were of Trump. They reject the goals. What holds the Democrats together is lesser evilism. That’s politics. Some far lefties threaten to go third party or not vote if a moderate is at the head of the ticket and some moderates threaten the same thing if it is a leftist, because they don’t have the same goals.
     While I am ranting, on the subject of slogans in this particular case I am on the moderate side. Slogans are a means to an end. That’s all. If you aren’t sure a slogan will achieve what you want, it seems a bit silly to be caught up in defending it. The principle or policy goal you want to achieve is what you should defend.

284. Let me add to Hartmut’s list.
     Assisting in genocide and/ or war crimes is a felony. For both parties.
     Torture is a felony.
     No preemptive pardons.
     No looking forward, not back.
     The rule of law is about more than lying to the FBI and process crimes and it should also include what we do to people overseas. Separating children at the border is one of the worst things his Administration did, but killing them in Yemen is worse.
     On the moderate- liberal divide, I don’t agree that both sides want the same thing except in the very broad sense that most people want prosperity, rainbows and ponies for everyone who wants one. It is an ideological divide on some issues. Not necessarily all issues, but some. On foreign policy it is often a divide. On health care it is a divide.
     The Green Lantern meme only works as a rebuttal,for lefties who really think Obama could have done whatever he wanted. I don’t think he could, but I don’t think he wanted what the far left wanted. He pivotedmto the austerity language very quickly, language which is poisonous to the left. You don’t talk about austerity and about the Federal,government living within its means when you are still,pulling out of a recession. And the ACA could be the best thing attainable at the time, but the Andre mic shows the idiocy of a complex Rube Goldberg system based on having insurance supplied by your employer.
     I think the closing paragraph of this piece about the pandemic has broader application. A politician might not be able to so what is best, but if so, tell the public why you can’t achieve it. Maybe you lose your job, but I think that kind of honesty might be refreshing.
     Leftists and moderates are stuck with each other, but the mere fact that moderates say that Biden was a better candidate than Sanders was based on the idea that many moderates were scared of Sanders, as scared as they were of Trump. They reject the goals. What holds the Democrats together is lesser evilism. That’s politics. Some far lefties threaten to go third party or not vote if a moderate is at the head of the ticket and some moderates threaten the same thing if it is a leftist, because they don’t have the same goals.
     While I am ranting, on the subject of slogans in this particular case I am on the moderate side. Slogans are a means to an end. That’s all. If you aren’t sure a slogan will achieve what you want, it seems a bit silly to be caught up in defending it. The principle or policy goal you want to achieve is what you should defend.

285. “ Andre mic ”
     It took a minute to remember what I meant before the spellcheck gremlins got hold of it. That was “pandemic”. Why would the gremlins go for Andre mic?
     Between my fat fingers and spell check I expect at some point I will end up typing an impassioned defense of a Mitt Romney-AOC 2024 presidential ticket.

286. “ Andre mic ”
     It took a minute to remember what I meant before the spellcheck gremlins got hold of it. That was “pandemic”. Why would the gremlins go for Andre mic?
     Between my fat fingers and spell check I expect at some point I will end up typing an impassioned defense of a Mitt Romney-AOC 2024 presidential ticket.

287. the mere fact that moderates say that Biden was a better candidate than Sanders was based on the idea that many moderates were scared of Sanders,
     i am not in the least scared of Sanders.
     i was afraid he’d get utterly crushed by Trump, however. his history, his present, his self-description, his style all work against him. and yes, his policies: a lot of other people just don’t want them. all that adds up to 4 more years of Trump. decline.

288. the mere fact that moderates say that Biden was a better candidate than Sanders was based on the idea that many moderates were scared of Sanders,
     i am not in the least scared of Sanders.
     i was afraid he’d get utterly crushed by Trump, however. his history, his present, his self-description, his style all work against him. and yes, his policies: a lot of other people just don’t want them. all that adds up to 4 more years of Trump. decline.

289. I forgot to supply the link to the piece I referenced
     https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/11/pandemic-restrictions-no-logic/617204/

290. I forgot to supply the link to the piece I referenced
     https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/11/pandemic-restrictions-no-logic/617204/

291. “ i am not in the least scared of Sanders.”
     People often don’t fit neatly into nice little boxes, especially if there are only two boxes supplied. Some moderates wouldn’t vote for Sanders on the most extreme moderate end. And yeah, despite what they think, centrists can be extremists.

292. “ i am not in the least scared of Sanders.”
     People often don’t fit neatly into nice little boxes, especially if there are only two boxes supplied. Some moderates wouldn’t vote for Sanders on the most extreme moderate end. And yeah, despite what they think, centrists can be extremists.

293. Cleek,
     i am not in the least scared of Sanders.
     i was afraid he’d get utterly crushed by Trump, however.
     Me too.
     Donald,
     On health care it is a divide.
     I’m not sure it’s as big a divide as all that. I think there is general agreement that the goal is universal health coverage. The disagreement seems to be about the best way to accomplish that.
     Some far lefties threaten to go third party or not vote if a moderate is at the head of the ticket and some moderates threaten the same thing if it is a leftist, because they don’t have the same goals.
     The lefties do more than threaten. Ralph Nader, Jill Stein? These things still smart, especially Nader, and account for some of the intra-party hostility.

294. Cleek,
     i am not in the least scared of Sanders.
     i was afraid he’d get utterly crushed by Trump, however.
     Me too.
     Donald,
     On health care it is a divide.
     I’m not sure it’s as big a divide as all that. I think there is general agreement that the goal is universal health coverage. The disagreement seems to be about the best way to accomplish that.
     Some far lefties threaten to go third party or not vote if a moderate is at the head of the ticket and some moderates threaten the same thing if it is a leftist, because they don’t have the same goals.
     The lefties do more than threaten. Ralph Nader, Jill Stein? These things still smart, especially Nader, and account for some of the intra-party hostility.

295. i was afraid he’d get utterly crushed by Trump, however.
     It seems to me, from here, that this was by far the most common (and absolutely correct to my way of thinking) reason for Dems of any stripe to oppose Sanders. Pace McKinney, he really doesn’t look like that much of a socialist from a European perspective (like AOC), and getting rid of Trump was the number one priority for a) the US, and b) the world. Everything else was (and had to be) subordinated to that. That is why, in that cause alone, my enemy’s enemy (Lincoln Project et al) was my friend.
     FWIW, although I thought Corbyn was a) stupid, and b) suspect in many attitudes (e.g. anti-semitism enabling, at the very least), my reasons for opposing him (going as far as joining the Labour party for the first time ever) were fairly and squarely because I thought he was unelectable, and would therefore condemn the UK to many more years of Tory rule – and so it turned out, although even people like me did not foresee quite how ruinous that Tory rule would turn out to be, nor that Brexit would be at least partly the consequence.

296. i was afraid he’d get utterly crushed by Trump, however.
     It seems to me, from here, that this was by far the most common (and absolutely correct to my way of thinking) reason for Dems of any stripe to oppose Sanders. Pace McKinney, he really doesn’t look like that much of a socialist from a European perspective (like AOC), and getting rid of Trump was the number one priority for a) the US, and b) the world. Everything else was (and had to be) subordinated to that. That is why, in that cause alone, my enemy’s enemy (Lincoln Project et al) was my friend.
     FWIW, although I thought Corbyn was a) stupid, and b) suspect in many attitudes (e.g. anti-semitism enabling, at the very least), my reasons for opposing him (going as far as joining the Labour party for the first time ever) were fairly and squarely because I thought he was unelectable, and would therefore condemn the UK to many more years of Tory rule – and so it turned out, although even people like me did not foresee quite how ruinous that Tory rule would turn out to be, nor that Brexit would be at least partly the consequence.

297. there’s no way i would’ve voted 3rd party if any of the dozens of people in the Dem primary made it. some i wouldn’t have been crazy enthusiastic about. but not a chance, at all, ever, that even the least of them would cause me to throwing away a chance to get Trump out.

298. there’s no way i would’ve voted 3rd party if any of the dozens of people in the Dem primary made it. some i wouldn’t have been crazy enthusiastic about. but not a chance, at all, ever, that even the least of them would cause me to throwing away a chance to get Trump out.

299. And in other news, regarding Amy Coney Barret’s debut on the SCOTUS decision enabling churches and synagogues to hold superspreader events, Greg Gonsalves (as retweeted by hilzoy) tweets:
     This pandemic has piled sadness upon sadness, bodies upon bodies, grief upon grief. I cannot see how @SCOTUS, the Diocese of Brooklyn, the synagogues who made this happen see this as a victory for anything but a god who demands human sacrifice in the most gruesome terms.
     and
     Conservatives are crowing over this as an own the libs moment, denying that many who support public health restrictions are people of faith. This broke long standing precedent, so don’t at me with your calls for originalism etc. This is just know-nothing politics by other means.

300. And in other news, regarding Amy Coney Barret’s debut on the SCOTUS decision enabling churches and synagogues to hold superspreader events, Greg Gonsalves (as retweeted by hilzoy) tweets:
     This pandemic has piled sadness upon sadness, bodies upon bodies, grief upon grief. I cannot see how @SCOTUS, the Diocese of Brooklyn, the synagogues who made this happen see this as a victory for anything but a god who demands human sacrifice in the most gruesome terms.
     and
     Conservatives are crowing over this as an own the libs moment, denying that many who support public health restrictions are people of faith. This broke long standing precedent, so don’t at me with your calls for originalism etc. This is just know-nothing politics by other means.

301. This is just know-nothing politics by other means.
     they don’t know anything. and they want to stay that way.
     that’s going to be my default assumption any time any ‘conservative’ opens her/his mouth, ever, forever.

302. This is just know-nothing politics by other means.
     they don’t know anything. and they want to stay that way.
     that’s going to be my default assumption any time any ‘conservative’ opens her/his mouth, ever, forever.

303. Apparently, the only safe place for crowds to gather is protest marches against the man…

304. Apparently, the only safe place for crowds to gather is protest marches against the man…

305. It seems to me, from here, that this was by far the most common (and absolutely correct to my way of thinking) reason for Dems of any stripe to oppose Sanders. Pace McKinney, he really doesn’t look like that much of a socialist from a European perspective (like AOC), and getting rid of Trump was the number one priority for a) the US, and b) the world. Everything else was (and had to be) subordinated to that. That is why, in that cause alone, my enemy’s enemy (Lincoln Project et al) was my friend.
     I think the Dems missed a bunch of big opportunities where Sanders is concerned. It’s clear that Sanders’ rhetoric a) appealed to a lot of people in focus and values, but b) turned others off for being too radical and unrealistic. What the Dems should have taken from this is a) a more combative stance and a focus on prosperity for the working class but b) more substance and less messianic hand waving about the path there.
     Pretty much what Fetterman said.

306. It seems to me, from here, that this was by far the most common (and absolutely correct to my way of thinking) reason for Dems of any stripe to oppose Sanders. Pace McKinney, he really doesn’t look like that much of a socialist from a European perspective (like AOC), and getting rid of Trump was the number one priority for a) the US, and b) the world. Everything else was (and had to be) subordinated to that. That is why, in that cause alone, my enemy’s enemy (Lincoln Project et al) was my friend.
     I think the Dems missed a bunch of big opportunities where Sanders is concerned. It’s clear that Sanders’ rhetoric a) appealed to a lot of people in focus and values, but b) turned others off for being too radical and unrealistic. What the Dems should have taken from this is a) a more combative stance and a focus on prosperity for the working class but b) more substance and less messianic hand waving about the path there.
     Pretty much what Fetterman said.

307. This broke long standing precedent
     The whole thrust of “originalism” is to break long standing precedent. Essentially, it is radical reactionism.

308. This broke long standing precedent
     The whole thrust of “originalism” is to break long standing precedent. Essentially, it is radical reactionism.

309. The lefties do more than threaten. Ralph Nader, Jill Stein? These things still smart
     Hell’s bells. I am still smarting from 1972. Nader’s vanity campaign was a special case. Jill Stein is a joke. And the whole thing about opposing Sanders “because he couldn’t win” is essentially conceding that moderate Dems would decamp in droves.
     So….both ways.

310. The lefties do more than threaten. Ralph Nader, Jill Stein? These things still smart
     Hell’s bells. I am still smarting from 1972. Nader’s vanity campaign was a special case. Jill Stein is a joke. And the whole thing about opposing Sanders “because he couldn’t win” is essentially conceding that moderate Dems would decamp in droves.
     So….both ways.

311. Pardon Power: A power that is so easily abused should not exist (Ford, Bush I, Clinton-WTF were you thinking, Bill?, and now Trump).
     Perhaps our intrepid Founders were envisioning the intolerable circumstances of something like the Dreyfus Affair, but when they threw Gene Debs in jail it was pretty obvious that the great “American character” was simply not up to that task.

312. Pardon Power: A power that is so easily abused should not exist (Ford, Bush I, Clinton-WTF were you thinking, Bill?, and now Trump).
     Perhaps our intrepid Founders were envisioning the intolerable circumstances of something like the Dreyfus Affair, but when they threw Gene Debs in jail it was pretty obvious that the great “American character” was simply not up to that task.

313. Slogans are a means to an end. That’s all. If you aren’t sure a slogan will achieve what you want, it seems a bit silly to be caught up in defending it. The principle or policy goal you want to achieve is what you should defend.
     Very well put, Donald. It’s kind of depressing how many people seem to regard slogans as more important than policies.

314. Slogans are a means to an end. That’s all. If you aren’t sure a slogan will achieve what you want, it seems a bit silly to be caught up in defending it. The principle or policy goal you want to achieve is what you should defend.
     Very well put, Donald. It’s kind of depressing how many people seem to regard slogans as more important than policies.

315. This pandemic has piled sadness upon sadness, bodies upon bodies, grief upon grief. I cannot see how @SCOTUS, the Diocese of Brooklyn, the synagogues who made this happen see this as a victory
     The moral superiority of doing things which will injure or kill your supporters is not obvious to me. But an astonishing number of those who claim to be motivated by morality seem to see things that way.

316. This pandemic has piled sadness upon sadness, bodies upon bodies, grief upon grief. I cannot see how @SCOTUS, the Diocese of Brooklyn, the synagogues who made this happen see this as a victory
     The moral superiority of doing things which will injure or kill your supporters is not obvious to me. But an astonishing number of those who claim to be motivated by morality seem to see things that way.

317. And the whole thing about opposing Sanders “because he couldn’t win” is essentially conceding that moderate Dems would decamp in droves
     I don’t think so. Look at how narrow the margins were in the critical last few states. All it would have taken would be a fairly small number of conservative but anti-Trump Republicans deciding that Sanders was a bridge too far. And staying home. And you’ve got 4 more years of Trump, aided and abetted by McConnell. From which the country might well not recover.

318. And the whole thing about opposing Sanders “because he couldn’t win” is essentially conceding that moderate Dems would decamp in droves
     I don’t think so. Look at how narrow the margins were in the critical last few states. All it would have taken would be a fairly small number of conservative but anti-Trump Republicans deciding that Sanders was a bridge too far. And staying home. And you’ve got 4 more years of Trump, aided and abetted by McConnell. From which the country might well not recover.

319. Just jumping in for a (US-holiday-centric) minute to wish everyone a happy Thanksgiving. Hope that everyone has something good to eat and someone they love to share it with, even if only remotely.
     Fingers crossed for better times in 2021.
     Stay safe y’all.

320. Just jumping in for a (US-holiday-centric) minute to wish everyone a happy Thanksgiving. Hope that everyone has something good to eat and someone they love to share it with, even if only remotely.
     Fingers crossed for better times in 2021.
     Stay safe y’all.

321. I think the moderates for decades have hippy punched. The idea is that leftists have nowhere to go, so they should shut up, support the moderate, and vote. Lefties say nasty things about moderates and if we had power we’d tell them Sanders is the candidate so vote for him and shut up. It’s how politics works. But the policy differences are real.
     I don’t support third party voting, but I understand the temptation. The compromise for me is that I will vote for the Democrat and maybe even shut. up for a few months before November, but for the rest of the time issues take precedence over pragmatic political calculations. You say what you think. You make weird alliances. In that sense you are pragmatic, but it is about the issue and not about what makes Democrats look good.
     Bernard— On health care there are as usual a wide range of views, but I think that if we have private health insurance we need to regulate the hell out of them and anyone who loses his or her job is automatically covered by a public option. And the public option has to be good.
     I am skeptical this will happen. A public option will get the sort of treatment that any welfare program tends to get— it will be seen as a target for cuts.
     A genuinely desirable public option could become a stepping stone towards single payer, which is why I am guessing any such public option that passes will probably be something nobody would want unless they had no alternative.
     Any good plan should bring down costs, which suggests that any good plan will be opposed by all the people profiting from the current setup. These people make political donations.

322. I think the moderates for decades have hippy punched. The idea is that leftists have nowhere to go, so they should shut up, support the moderate, and vote. Lefties say nasty things about moderates and if we had power we’d tell them Sanders is the candidate so vote for him and shut up. It’s how politics works. But the policy differences are real.
     I don’t support third party voting, but I understand the temptation. The compromise for me is that I will vote for the Democrat and maybe even shut. up for a few months before November, but for the rest of the time issues take precedence over pragmatic political calculations. You say what you think. You make weird alliances. In that sense you are pragmatic, but it is about the issue and not about what makes Democrats look good.
     Bernard— On health care there are as usual a wide range of views, but I think that if we have private health insurance we need to regulate the hell out of them and anyone who loses his or her job is automatically covered by a public option. And the public option has to be good.
     I am skeptical this will happen. A public option will get the sort of treatment that any welfare program tends to get— it will be seen as a target for cuts.
     A genuinely desirable public option could become a stepping stone towards single payer, which is why I am guessing any such public option that passes will probably be something nobody would want unless they had no alternative.
     Any good plan should bring down costs, which suggests that any good plan will be opposed by all the people profiting from the current setup. These people make political donations.

323. Any good plan should bring down costs, which suggests that any good plan will be opposed by all the people profiting from the current setup.
     For starters, let Medicare negotiate on drug prices. Yes indeed, it is exactly the camel’s nose under the edge of the tent.
     Critical question: can progressives resist trumpeting that detail long enough to get it passed? I’m guessing not.

324. Any good plan should bring down costs, which suggests that any good plan will be opposed by all the people profiting from the current setup.
     For starters, let Medicare negotiate on drug prices. Yes indeed, it is exactly the camel’s nose under the edge of the tent.
     Critical question: can progressives resist trumpeting that detail long enough to get it passed? I’m guessing not.

325. For starters, let Medicare negotiate on drug prices.
     Sure. Some other possibly low hanging fruit that does not involve radical “government takeover” of the health care system:’
     (1.) Make it easier for foreign doctors to practice medicine in the US.
     (2.)Stop letting the medical profession, through their control of med school populations, restrict the supply of doctors.
     (3.) Allow well trained nurses to expand their legally permitted health care responsibilities.
     (4.) Reform our patent law.
     See Dean Baker’s writings on this.

326. For starters, let Medicare negotiate on drug prices.
     Sure. Some other possibly low hanging fruit that does not involve radical “government takeover” of the health care system:’
     (1.) Make it easier for foreign doctors to practice medicine in the US.
     (2.)Stop letting the medical profession, through their control of med school populations, restrict the supply of doctors.
     (3.) Allow well trained nurses to expand their legally permitted health care responsibilities.
     (4.) Reform our patent law.
     See Dean Baker’s writings on this.

327. My thought about health care is that we have to start from the premise that it’s not something that lends itself to an efficient market.
     If we don’t start with that, everything else that follows will be done poorly.
     Horses for courses, as folks in the UK say.

328. My thought about health care is that we have to start from the premise that it’s not something that lends itself to an efficient market.
     If we don’t start with that, everything else that follows will be done poorly.
     Horses for courses, as folks in the UK say.

329. On health care there are as usual a wide range of views, but I think that if we have private health insurance we need to regulate the hell out of them and anyone who loses his or her job is automatically covered by a public option. And the public option has to be good.
     They are already regulated. If that’s inadequate, and I have no idea if it is, then make it stricter.
     Would the public option be taxpayer-funded, or just the opportunity to buy into Medicare?
     Stuff of that nature makes sense to me.
     Any good plan should bring down costs, which suggests that any good plan will be opposed by all the people profiting from the current setup.
     I suspect that the best way to bring down costs is to do things that reduce administrative cost. Health care economics is pretty complex, and I don’t know everything that drives the costs up. I do know that the cost of capital doesn’t disappear because you pretend not to see it, which is not to say there’s no profiteering.

330. On health care there are as usual a wide range of views, but I think that if we have private health insurance we need to regulate the hell out of them and anyone who loses his or her job is automatically covered by a public option. And the public option has to be good.
     They are already regulated. If that’s inadequate, and I have no idea if it is, then make it stricter.
     Would the public option be taxpayer-funded, or just the opportunity to buy into Medicare?
     Stuff of that nature makes sense to me.
     Any good plan should bring down costs, which suggests that any good plan will be opposed by all the people profiting from the current setup.
     I suspect that the best way to bring down costs is to do things that reduce administrative cost. Health care economics is pretty complex, and I don’t know everything that drives the costs up. I do know that the cost of capital doesn’t disappear because you pretend not to see it, which is not to say there’s no profiteering.

331. All it would have taken would be a fairly small number of conservative but anti-Trump Republicans deciding that Sanders was a bridge too far. And staying home. And you’ve got 4 more years of Trump, aided and abetted by McConnell. From which the country might well not recover.
     Well, speaking for the independents I know in WI, there was also a danger they could decide that Biden was a shill and he was one gaffe away from a third party protest vote. The pandemic may have saved him in WI just by keeping him from having a more public profile.
     The candidate they most were interested in early on was Gabbard because she was a cranky iconoclast non-interventionist with libertarian leanings. Thank goodness that went nowhere.
     Those WI independents would absolutely love Fetterman, BTW.
     Which gets back to what I was saying about Sanders’ appeal. They loved his attitude and parts of his platform; they loved his fire and fight, they just thought he was a bit too pink and idealistic.
     Biden, though, seemed status quo and milquetoast and over groomed and they never expressed anything but cynicism about the idea of voting for him. They probably would have voted third party instead were it anyone but Trump that he was running against.
     It’s a small focus group, but it covers a lot of the people I grew up with who stayed in rural WI, and I think that there were a similar number of people who voted for Trump that were FB friends of theirs who would also vote for a Fetterman type Dem over Trump if that were on offer.
     I don’t think the moderate/liberal divide amongst the political junkies like us maps well onto the independents who are cynical about politics.

332. All it would have taken would be a fairly small number of conservative but anti-Trump Republicans deciding that Sanders was a bridge too far. And staying home. And you’ve got 4 more years of Trump, aided and abetted by McConnell. From which the country might well not recover.
     Well, speaking for the independents I know in WI, there was also a danger they could decide that Biden was a shill and he was one gaffe away from a third party protest vote. The pandemic may have saved him in WI just by keeping him from having a more public profile.
     The candidate they most were interested in early on was Gabbard because she was a cranky iconoclast non-interventionist with libertarian leanings. Thank goodness that went nowhere.
     Those WI independents would absolutely love Fetterman, BTW.
     Which gets back to what I was saying about Sanders’ appeal. They loved his attitude and parts of his platform; they loved his fire and fight, they just thought he was a bit too pink and idealistic.
     Biden, though, seemed status quo and milquetoast and over groomed and they never expressed anything but cynicism about the idea of voting for him. They probably would have voted third party instead were it anyone but Trump that he was running against.
     It’s a small focus group, but it covers a lot of the people I grew up with who stayed in rural WI, and I think that there were a similar number of people who voted for Trump that were FB friends of theirs who would also vote for a Fetterman type Dem over Trump if that were on offer.
     I don’t think the moderate/liberal divide amongst the political junkies like us maps well onto the independents who are cynical about politics.

333. nous, didn’t realize you were from WI? While every state is own strange bits, Wisconsin has its own flavor, but it is a flavor that contains a lot of notes that other states have. Strange bits, the history of progressive politics there
     https://www.jstor.org/stable/27788006?seq=1
     The higher education system creating islands of left supporters
     https://solidarity-us.org/p3545/
     The rise of a Trumpist candidate
     https://www.wpr.org/derailed/political-winds-change-walker-uses-train-seize-moment
     https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/blogs/wisconsin-voter/2019/01/07/scott-walkers-shock-and-awe-politics-worked-until-didnt/2484838002/
     and the problematic racism of the main city
     https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/30/minneapolis-racial-inequality/

334. nous, didn’t realize you were from WI? While every state is own strange bits, Wisconsin has its own flavor, but it is a flavor that contains a lot of notes that other states have. Strange bits, the history of progressive politics there
     https://www.jstor.org/stable/27788006?seq=1
     The higher education system creating islands of left supporters
     https://solidarity-us.org/p3545/
     The rise of a Trumpist candidate
     https://www.wpr.org/derailed/political-winds-change-walker-uses-train-seize-moment
     https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/blogs/wisconsin-voter/2019/01/07/scott-walkers-shock-and-awe-politics-worked-until-didnt/2484838002/
     and the problematic racism of the main city
     https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/30/minneapolis-racial-inequality/

335. I miss (r)ussell

336. I miss (r)ussell

337. (m)e too

338. (m)e too

339. Pretty much all of my primary and secondary school years were in WI. It was the creamy filling that was sandwiched by pre-school/post secondary years in CO before I landed in CA for grad school.
     WI has a very specific and deep sort of racism and urban/rural divide that runs through its politics, and a paranoid anti-government streak that crosses over into white power territory in some strange ways.

340. Pretty much all of my primary and secondary school years were in WI. It was the creamy filling that was sandwiched by pre-school/post secondary years in CO before I landed in CA for grad school.
     WI has a very specific and deep sort of racism and urban/rural divide that runs through its politics, and a paranoid anti-government streak that crosses over into white power territory in some strange ways.

341. wj: It’s kind of depressing how many people seem to regard slogans as more important than policies.
     “Make America Great Again!” Slogan, or policy?
     “Black Lives Matter!” Slogan, or policy?
     Slogans do motivate voters, I think. On both sides, if you’ll pardon the expression.
     –TP

342. wj: It’s kind of depressing how many people seem to regard slogans as more important than policies.
     “Make America Great Again!” Slogan, or policy?
     “Black Lives Matter!” Slogan, or policy?
     Slogans do motivate voters, I think. On both sides, if you’ll pardon the expression.
     –TP

343. “a very specific and deep sort of racism”
     Yes, it’s quite interesting. My dad chose to go to uni there from Hawai’i, and he was part of a diaspora of Japanese-Americans who went to Big Ten schools. I was at Ohio State in the nataorium which had the swim team pictures and in the post war years, you had names like Oyakawa, Konno and Nakama. I was at UW for a summer session studying Thai and there were several trips to Buddhist gatherings run by the Southeast Asians who had settled there. There is also Clint Eastwood’s film Gran Torino, which has Eastwood befriending a Hmong family, all of which suggests that the Midwest doesn’t have too many problems with Asians, but I agree, it does have a lot of problems with African Americans.
     On August 27, 1967, the local NAACP, led by Father James Groppi, held a march of about a hundred into a white neighborhood in protest of the city’s housing laws. They came up against a crowd of 5,000 who retaliated with racial epithets, stones, and garbage. The following day Groppi addressed a meeting of supporters at St. Boniface Church, and prepared them for what was likely to come:
     If there is any man or woman here who is afraid of going to jail for his freedom, is afraid of getting tear gassed, or is afraid of dying, you should not have come to this meeting tonight.
     On August 29, the curfew was lifted and Groppi led 200 members of the Milwaukee NAACP on a march out of the ghetto and toward Kosciuszko Park, in an area predominately inhabited by white residents.[11][15] The mob they met had grown to 13,000 and the protesters came under sniper fire as they returned to their headquarters. It was burned down later that night or early the next morning. The Mayor issued an order banning such demonstrations, and both Groppi and Phillips were arrested.

344. “a very specific and deep sort of racism”
     Yes, it’s quite interesting. My dad chose to go to uni there from Hawai’i, and he was part of a diaspora of Japanese-Americans who went to Big Ten schools. I was at Ohio State in the nataorium which had the swim team pictures and in the post war years, you had names like Oyakawa, Konno and Nakama. I was at UW for a summer session studying Thai and there were several trips to Buddhist gatherings run by the Southeast Asians who had settled there. There is also Clint Eastwood’s film Gran Torino, which has Eastwood befriending a Hmong family, all of which suggests that the Midwest doesn’t have too many problems with Asians, but I agree, it does have a lot of problems with African Americans.
     On August 27, 1967, the local NAACP, led by Father James Groppi, held a march of about a hundred into a white neighborhood in protest of the city’s housing laws. They came up against a crowd of 5,000 who retaliated with racial epithets, stones, and garbage. The following day Groppi addressed a meeting of supporters at St. Boniface Church, and prepared them for what was likely to come:
     If there is any man or woman here who is afraid of going to jail for his freedom, is afraid of getting tear gassed, or is afraid of dying, you should not have come to this meeting tonight.
     On August 29, the curfew was lifted and Groppi led 200 members of the Milwaukee NAACP on a march out of the ghetto and toward Kosciuszko Park, in an area predominately inhabited by white residents.[11][15] The mob they met had grown to 13,000 and the protesters came under sniper fire as they returned to their headquarters. It was burned down later that night or early the next morning. The Mayor issued an order banning such demonstrations, and both Groppi and Phillips were arrested.

345. Midwest doesn’t have too many problems with Asians, but I agree, it does have a lot of problems with African Americans.
     Problems with Asians tended to be mostly on the West Coast. Specifically California. Especially in the first half of the last century. But by the 1960s it had fallen off amazingly. I have no clear idea why; but I observed it.
     I suspect that, until a few decades ago, the rest of the country simply didn’t see enough Asians to generate serious prejudices. (Negative feeling about Japanese, thanks to WW II, being balanced by the Chinese being our allies then.)

346. Midwest doesn’t have too many problems with Asians, but I agree, it does have a lot of problems with African Americans.
     Problems with Asians tended to be mostly on the West Coast. Specifically California. Especially in the first half of the last century. But by the 1960s it had fallen off amazingly. I have no clear idea why; but I observed it.
     I suspect that, until a few decades ago, the rest of the country simply didn’t see enough Asians to generate serious prejudices. (Negative feeling about Japanese, thanks to WW II, being balanced by the Chinese being our allies then.)

347. A couple of my WI friends were hapa Korean-Americans. Their fathers were veterans who had married Korean women.
     Both of them faced a bit of anti-Asian bigotry in HS, but still ended up with anti-black racial animus. They treat every known person as an individual but their collective narratives are thoroughly racist.
     I’m only FB friends with one of them and I’ve had to hide his feed in order to remain cordial. Don’t even know where to begin.
     Also, he’s convinced that Biden has cognitive issues and that Harris is angling to replace Biden and go Full Socialist on everyone.
     Meanwhile, most of CA isn’t even sure that Harris is actually progressive.
     States are weird.

348. A couple of my WI friends were hapa Korean-Americans. Their fathers were veterans who had married Korean women.
     Both of them faced a bit of anti-Asian bigotry in HS, but still ended up with anti-black racial animus. They treat every known person as an individual but their collective narratives are thoroughly racist.
     I’m only FB friends with one of them and I’ve had to hide his feed in order to remain cordial. Don’t even know where to begin.
     Also, he’s convinced that Biden has cognitive issues and that Harris is angling to replace Biden and go Full Socialist on everyone.
     Meanwhile, most of CA isn’t even sure that Harris is actually progressive.
     States are weird.

349. There is certainly a question of numbers and a tipping point phenomenon. Also, you had war brides from post WW2 and Korea. Women as immigrants are less threatening than men, so it is much easier for them to function as a bridge. Also, the notion about being a concentrator of anti-black racial animus is interesting and sadly true. I have a couple of aunts who have said some pretty horrific things (they’ve all passed pre or during Obama’s admin). But it’s not simply saying it, the impression I got was that they felt physically threatened by the presence of black people. My uncles seemed to not have those problems, so sorry to hear that isn’t universally the case.

350. There is certainly a question of numbers and a tipping point phenomenon. Also, you had war brides from post WW2 and Korea. Women as immigrants are less threatening than men, so it is much easier for them to function as a bridge. Also, the notion about being a concentrator of anti-black racial animus is interesting and sadly true. I have a couple of aunts who have said some pretty horrific things (they’ve all passed pre or during Obama’s admin). But it’s not simply saying it, the impression I got was that they felt physically threatened by the presence of black people. My uncles seemed to not have those problems, so sorry to hear that isn’t universally the case.

351. Slogans are not just a way to focus people on a goal, it’s also a tool of authoritarian governments to distract the population (from the usually rather questionable governing).
     The Nazis had quite some talent in that regard.
     https://www.akg-images.de/Docs/AKG/Media/TR5/f/5/7/0/AKG74216.jpg
     (an iconic election poster: Our Last Hope – Hitler)
     https://weimar.bundesarchiv.de/WEIMAR/DE/Content/Bilder/Wahlmarathon/014-nsdap-reichstagswahl-1933.jpg?__blob=poster
     (rather blatant: “We are tired of voting” the other bold text is: “an extraordinary will, an extraordinary skill (and last but not least) an honest desire”)
     The complete text could be right out of Jabbabonk’s campaign (man of the people, against all odds, help him achieve his great goals…)
     A major slogan of Hitler’s campaigns was also: German Poeple – Give me four years!

352. Slogans are not just a way to focus people on a goal, it’s also a tool of authoritarian governments to distract the population (from the usually rather questionable governing).
     The Nazis had quite some talent in that regard.
     https://www.akg-images.de/Docs/AKG/Media/TR5/f/5/7/0/AKG74216.jpg
     (an iconic election poster: Our Last Hope – Hitler)
     https://weimar.bundesarchiv.de/WEIMAR/DE/Content/Bilder/Wahlmarathon/014-nsdap-reichstagswahl-1933.jpg?__blob=poster
     (rather blatant: “We are tired of voting” the other bold text is: “an extraordinary will, an extraordinary skill (and last but not least) an honest desire”)
     The complete text could be right out of Jabbabonk’s campaign (man of the people, against all odds, help him achieve his great goals…)
     A major slogan of Hitler’s campaigns was also: German Poeple – Give me four years!

353. From Politico this morning. It would be nice if one could blame hydroxychloroquine for Trump’s recent insane behaviour, but unfortunately the record shows that the POTUS has been this unhinged for years.
     Chloroquine and a related compound, hydroxychloroquine, have been associated with cases of psychiatric disturbances and suicidal behavior after being given to COVID-19 patients, warned the EU’s drug regulator today.
     The two medicines were some of the first drugs put forward as possible treatments for the coronavirus, and were famously promoted by controversial French doctor Didier Raoult and U.S. President Donald Trump. However, since then, they haven’t shown to be effective in clinical studies.
     The European Medicines Agency said that it had initiated a review of the drugs after receiving a notification from Spain’s medicines authority, AEMPS, of six cases of mental disturbances linked to coronavirus patients who were given higher than authorized doses of the medicines.

354. From Politico this morning. It would be nice if one could blame hydroxychloroquine for Trump’s recent insane behaviour, but unfortunately the record shows that the POTUS has been this unhinged for years.
     Chloroquine and a related compound, hydroxychloroquine, have been associated with cases of psychiatric disturbances and suicidal behavior after being given to COVID-19 patients, warned the EU’s drug regulator today.
     The two medicines were some of the first drugs put forward as possible treatments for the coronavirus, and were famously promoted by controversial French doctor Didier Raoult and U.S. President Donald Trump. However, since then, they haven’t shown to be effective in clinical studies.
     The European Medicines Agency said that it had initiated a review of the drugs after receiving a notification from Spain’s medicines authority, AEMPS, of six cases of mental disturbances linked to coronavirus patients who were given higher than authorized doses of the medicines.

355. People go bankrupt or alternatively put off care and die under the current system., and I don’t think that kind of thing happens in other Western countries to anything like the extent it happens here. So that suggests that if we insist in having a private system, it needs some drastic improvement. We also spend far more than other counties per capital, so clearly there is tremendous waste.
     I like single payer, but we could in theory accomplish the same goal with private insurance. We are nowhere close and given the amount of wasted money involved, there is going to be ferocious resistance to any plan which actually deals with the problems of both inadequate coverage ( people have insurance and still go broke) and excessive cost. I don’t buy the notion that there is some easy politically pragmatic path forward. No matter which path you pick, if it does the job people will fight like hell to stop it.

356. People go bankrupt or alternatively put off care and die under the current system., and I don’t think that kind of thing happens in other Western countries to anything like the extent it happens here. So that suggests that if we insist in having a private system, it needs some drastic improvement. We also spend far more than other counties per capital, so clearly there is tremendous waste.
     I like single payer, but we could in theory accomplish the same goal with private insurance. We are nowhere close and given the amount of wasted money involved, there is going to be ferocious resistance to any plan which actually deals with the problems of both inadequate coverage ( people have insurance and still go broke) and excessive cost. I don’t buy the notion that there is some easy politically pragmatic path forward. No matter which path you pick, if it does the job people will fight like hell to stop it.

357. Now that the endless recriminations have begun….from today’s Times, an interesting take on the election and political polarization.

358. Now that the endless recriminations have begun….from today’s Times, an interesting take on the election and political polarization.

359. People go bankrupt or alternatively put off care and die under the current system., and I don’t think that kind of thing happens in other Western countries to anything like the extent it happens here.
     Just curious: do other Western countries have anything like our anti-vaxxers? Any of you folks in Europe shed some light on that?
     Seriously. Because if not, we’re looking at significantly different environments.

360. People go bankrupt or alternatively put off care and die under the current system., and I don’t think that kind of thing happens in other Western countries to anything like the extent it happens here.
     Just curious: do other Western countries have anything like our anti-vaxxers? Any of you folks in Europe shed some light on that?
     Seriously. Because if not, we’re looking at significantly different environments.

361. Yes, there are anti-vaxxers in Germany too. We might even have come up with that in the first place in the 19th century. It used to be adventists and Jehovah’s witnesses. And a few hippies (or our equivalent thereof) that believe that childhood diseases are a necessary rite of passage that is prevented by vaccinations. But now it is growing beyond that and with very active support from the US. The RW evangelicals (we have those too) are at the core but the movement gets infused with secular antisemitic conspiracy theories made-in-the-USA about a campaign decades in the making by Soros, Bill Gates and Fauci to implant mind control chips into our bodies via fake vaccination.

362. Yes, there are anti-vaxxers in Germany too. We might even have come up with that in the first place in the 19th century. It used to be adventists and Jehovah’s witnesses. And a few hippies (or our equivalent thereof) that believe that childhood diseases are a necessary rite of passage that is prevented by vaccinations. But now it is growing beyond that and with very active support from the US. The RW evangelicals (we have those too) are at the core but the movement gets infused with secular antisemitic conspiracy theories made-in-the-USA about a campaign decades in the making by Soros, Bill Gates and Fauci to implant mind control chips into our bodies via fake vaccination.

363. I’m clear that it’s traditional for Democrats to agonize over the divisions within their party. While displaying some envy for Republicans’ putative unanimity.
     But then there’s this
     https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-fraud-claims-georgia-republicans-run-offs-perdue-loeffler/2020/11/26/0c4d6b3a-2f30-11eb-bae0-50bb17126614_story.html

     One prominent Trump ally, Atlanta attorney Lin Wood, who unsuccessfully sued Georgia election officials to stop the certification of the vote, has urged Republican voters not to vote in elections with Dominion machines.
     Wood has attacked Perdue and Loeffler for not doing enough to help, and he told his 631,000 Twitter followers last weekend that if the senators don’t step up their support, he would take a pass on Jan. 5.
     “If not fixed, I will NOT vote in GA runoff,” he tweeted.

     If Democrats pull off a double win in Georgia, people like Wood will be part of why.

364. I’m clear that it’s traditional for Democrats to agonize over the divisions within their party. While displaying some envy for Republicans’ putative unanimity.
     But then there’s this
     https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-fraud-claims-georgia-republicans-run-offs-perdue-loeffler/2020/11/26/0c4d6b3a-2f30-11eb-bae0-50bb17126614_story.html

     One prominent Trump ally, Atlanta attorney Lin Wood, who unsuccessfully sued Georgia election officials to stop the certification of the vote, has urged Republican voters not to vote in elections with Dominion machines.
     Wood has attacked Perdue and Loeffler for not doing enough to help, and he told his 631,000 Twitter followers last weekend that if the senators don’t step up their support, he would take a pass on Jan. 5.
     “If not fixed, I will NOT vote in GA runoff,” he tweeted.

     If Democrats pull off a double win in Georgia, people like Wood will be part of why.

365. It is interesting that the other obvious side trail to the discussion is schools, as I believe that both schools and police have many of the same problems–both have too strong public sector unions that create a situation where bad actors are essentially unaccountable. This leads to counter moves where people who see deep institutional rot try to drain funds from the currently existing institutions to fund what they see as better ones.
     In any case I’d suggest that the fact that ‘abolish the police’ cannnot get majority approval even among black people suggests that it isn’t a good way forward (at least rhetorically).

366. It is interesting that the other obvious side trail to the discussion is schools, as I believe that both schools and police have many of the same problems–both have too strong public sector unions that create a situation where bad actors are essentially unaccountable. This leads to counter moves where people who see deep institutional rot try to drain funds from the currently existing institutions to fund what they see as better ones.
     In any case I’d suggest that the fact that ‘abolish the police’ cannnot get majority approval even among black people suggests that it isn’t a good way forward (at least rhetorically).

367. “Defund The Police” combined with a summer of riots and looting, even if all were said/performed with the best of intentions had an effect – people really aren’t interested in worrying about having their shit burned down and they want their police departments funded so that someone can stop their house from getting burned down.

368. “Defund The Police” combined with a summer of riots and looting, even if all were said/performed with the best of intentions had an effect – people really aren’t interested in worrying about having their shit burned down and they want their police departments funded so that someone can stop their house from getting burned down.

369. We have plenty (citation needed) of anti-vaxxers here. I first became aware of them when a corrupt doctor here claimed that the MMR (for measles, mumps and rubella) caused autism. Since thoroughly debunked, I believe this fake controversy injected oxygen into an already explosive international tendency.

370. We have plenty (citation needed) of anti-vaxxers here. I first became aware of them when a corrupt doctor here claimed that the MMR (for measles, mumps and rubella) caused autism. Since thoroughly debunked, I believe this fake controversy injected oxygen into an already explosive international tendency.

371. It is interesting that the other obvious side trail to the discussion is schools, as I believe that both schools and police have many of the same problems–both have too strong public sector unions that create a situation where bad actors are essentially unaccountable.
     Who is it that the teachers unions are making essentially unaccountable? What is the harm that teachers unions are perpetuating by preventing this accountability?
     Do you have some equivalent to The Thin Blue Line to point to among teachers that has them defending other teachers in the face of visible harm to a portion of their students?

372. It is interesting that the other obvious side trail to the discussion is schools, as I believe that both schools and police have many of the same problems–both have too strong public sector unions that create a situation where bad actors are essentially unaccountable.
     Who is it that the teachers unions are making essentially unaccountable? What is the harm that teachers unions are perpetuating by preventing this accountability?
     Do you have some equivalent to The Thin Blue Line to point to among teachers that has them defending other teachers in the face of visible harm to a portion of their students?

373. re “And in other news, regarding Amy Coney Barret’s debut on the SCOTUS decision enabling churches and synagogues to hold superspreader events”
     This isn’t the ruling. I’m not at all sure that the Supreme Court decision is wrong. California has done much better by treating churches as the same as other large venues. NY really did have insane rules where churches were being treated worse than say restaurants. As far as I can tell the Supreme Court is saying you can’t restrict churches more than other venues.
     (As an example, NY said that no matter how large the church, you can’t have more than 10 people in it, at a time when other interior venues were pegged to a percentage of occupancy.)
     If they attack rules where they treat churches the same as other venues THEN it is bad.

374. re “And in other news, regarding Amy Coney Barret’s debut on the SCOTUS decision enabling churches and synagogues to hold superspreader events”
     This isn’t the ruling. I’m not at all sure that the Supreme Court decision is wrong. California has done much better by treating churches as the same as other large venues. NY really did have insane rules where churches were being treated worse than say restaurants. As far as I can tell the Supreme Court is saying you can’t restrict churches more than other venues.
     (As an example, NY said that no matter how large the church, you can’t have more than 10 people in it, at a time when other interior venues were pegged to a percentage of occupancy.)
     If they attack rules where they treat churches the same as other venues THEN it is bad.

375. nous: well, if you follow the RWNJ game plan, and ARM the teachers, then they certainly will need more unaccountability for when they decide to shoot Billy, because he was mouthing off.

376. nous: well, if you follow the RWNJ game plan, and ARM the teachers, then they certainly will need more unaccountability for when they decide to shoot Billy, because he was mouthing off.

377. NY really did have insane rules where churches were being treated worse than say restaurants.
     …
     If they attack rules where they treat churches the same as other venues THEN it is bad.
     Perhaps I was reading a story about somewhere else. But the version I saw said that limitations on churches were looser when it came to how many people they could have gathered inside at an event. Indeed, if memory serves, other events with audiences (like concerts) were totally banned.
     So, admittedly not being treated the same — but being given more freedom. And still not enough, apparently.
     P.S. What I’m waiting for is someone who is charged with child abuse appealing on the grounds that his (Christian**) religion believes “spare the rod and spoil the child.”
     ** And with this Court, it will pretty well have to be Christian to get a favorable ruling on this.

378. NY really did have insane rules where churches were being treated worse than say restaurants.
     …
     If they attack rules where they treat churches the same as other venues THEN it is bad.
     Perhaps I was reading a story about somewhere else. But the version I saw said that limitations on churches were looser when it came to how many people they could have gathered inside at an event. Indeed, if memory serves, other events with audiences (like concerts) were totally banned.
     So, admittedly not being treated the same — but being given more freedom. And still not enough, apparently.
     P.S. What I’m waiting for is someone who is charged with child abuse appealing on the grounds that his (Christian**) religion believes “spare the rod and spoil the child.”
     ** And with this Court, it will pretty well have to be Christian to get a favorable ruling on this.

379. (As an example, NY said that no matter how large the church, you can’t have more than 10 people in it, at a time when other interior venues were pegged to a percentage of occupancy.)
     That seems to be the case.
     “Under Cuomo’s rules, “houses of worship” in state-designated “red” zones were not allowed to admit more than 10 people; the cap in “orange” zones was 25. Those restrictions applied regardless of a building’s capacity. A 1,000-seat church, for example, would be limited to 1 percent of its capacity in a red zone and 2.5 percent of its capacity in an orange zone.
     Cuomo’s restrictions on religious gatherings were much more onerous than the rules for myriad secular activities that pose similar risks of virus transmission. That point was crucial because the Court has held that laws are presumptively unconstitutional when they discriminate against religion. At the same time, it has said the Free Exercise Clause does not require religious exemptions from neutral, generally applicable laws, which obviously would include statutes that prohibit mass poisoning or murder.
     It is undisputed that both the Brooklyn diocese and Agudath Israel, which sued Cuomo on behalf of the Orthodox synagogues it represents, were following strict COVID-19 safety protocols, including face masks and physical distancing. It is also undisputed that no disease clusters have been tied to their institutions since they reopened. The plaintiffs were not asking to carry on as if COVID-19 did not exist. They were instead arguing that Cuomo’s policy singled out houses of worship for especially harsh treatment and was not “narrowly tailored” to serve the “compelling state interest” of curtailing the epidemic.”
     Paul Krugman Thinks Holding Religious Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic Is Like ‘Dumping Neurotoxins Into Public Reservoirs’: The New York Times columnist misconstrues the issues at stake in the challenge to New York’s restrictions on houses of worship.

380. (As an example, NY said that no matter how large the church, you can’t have more than 10 people in it, at a time when other interior venues were pegged to a percentage of occupancy.)
     That seems to be the case.
     “Under Cuomo’s rules, “houses of worship” in state-designated “red” zones were not allowed to admit more than 10 people; the cap in “orange” zones was 25. Those restrictions applied regardless of a building’s capacity. A 1,000-seat church, for example, would be limited to 1 percent of its capacity in a red zone and 2.5 percent of its capacity in an orange zone.
     Cuomo’s restrictions on religious gatherings were much more onerous than the rules for myriad secular activities that pose similar risks of virus transmission. That point was crucial because the Court has held that laws are presumptively unconstitutional when they discriminate against religion. At the same time, it has said the Free Exercise Clause does not require religious exemptions from neutral, generally applicable laws, which obviously would include statutes that prohibit mass poisoning or murder.
     It is undisputed that both the Brooklyn diocese and Agudath Israel, which sued Cuomo on behalf of the Orthodox synagogues it represents, were following strict COVID-19 safety protocols, including face masks and physical distancing. It is also undisputed that no disease clusters have been tied to their institutions since they reopened. The plaintiffs were not asking to carry on as if COVID-19 did not exist. They were instead arguing that Cuomo’s policy singled out houses of worship for especially harsh treatment and was not “narrowly tailored” to serve the “compelling state interest” of curtailing the epidemic.”
     Paul Krugman Thinks Holding Religious Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic Is Like ‘Dumping Neurotoxins Into Public Reservoirs’: The New York Times columnist misconstrues the issues at stake in the challenge to New York’s restrictions on houses of worship.

381. This isn’t the ruling. I’m not at all sure that the Supreme Court decision is wrong. California has done much better by treating churches as the same as other large venues. NY really did have insane rules where churches were being treated worse than say restaurants. As far as I can tell the Supreme Court is saying you can’t restrict churches more than other venues.
     This is a salutary correction, and I was lazily skimming headlines. Obviously, orthodox Jewish celebrations of crowded weddings etc leading to widespread transmission were very worrying, and it is clear that religious types of various stripes (particularly orthodox Jews, and evangelical Christians) have been particularly defiant of public health regulations (God is on their side, after all), but they should not be singled out for particularly harsh rules. If Sebastian is right here, then I agree.

382. This isn’t the ruling. I’m not at all sure that the Supreme Court decision is wrong. California has done much better by treating churches as the same as other large venues. NY really did have insane rules where churches were being treated worse than say restaurants. As far as I can tell the Supreme Court is saying you can’t restrict churches more than other venues.
     This is a salutary correction, and I was lazily skimming headlines. Obviously, orthodox Jewish celebrations of crowded weddings etc leading to widespread transmission were very worrying, and it is clear that religious types of various stripes (particularly orthodox Jews, and evangelical Christians) have been particularly defiant of public health regulations (God is on their side, after all), but they should not be singled out for particularly harsh rules. If Sebastian is right here, then I agree.

383. It is interesting that the other obvious side trail to the discussion is schools, as I believe that both schools and police have many of the same problems
     Hi Sebastian, nice to see you. While I don’t agree completely with your take, I earlier pointed out to wj that the charter school movement was basically a defund movement. The big difference is that it is within the realm of possibilities to privatize your kid’s education, but privatizing your own police protection is a little tougher.
     I also think that “defund the police” is a lot harder to monetize than “charter schools for all”.

384. It is interesting that the other obvious side trail to the discussion is schools, as I believe that both schools and police have many of the same problems
     Hi Sebastian, nice to see you. While I don’t agree completely with your take, I earlier pointed out to wj that the charter school movement was basically a defund movement. The big difference is that it is within the realm of possibilities to privatize your kid’s education, but privatizing your own police protection is a little tougher.
     I also think that “defund the police” is a lot harder to monetize than “charter schools for all”.

385. Perhaps I was reading a story about somewhere else. But the version I saw said that limitations on churches were looser when it came to how many people they could have gathered inside at an event. Indeed, if memory serves, other events with audiences (like concerts) were totally banned.
     No, wj. You are correct. Sebastian is wrong.
     A church is not the same as a liquor store. This should not be hard.

386. Perhaps I was reading a story about somewhere else. But the version I saw said that limitations on churches were looser when it came to how many people they could have gathered inside at an event. Indeed, if memory serves, other events with audiences (like concerts) were totally banned.
     No, wj. You are correct. Sebastian is wrong.
     A church is not the same as a liquor store. This should not be hard.

387. More here.

388. More here.

389. …and here.

390. …and here.

391. Bobbyp, your link is to an LGM post where they don’t like the (non-controlling) Gorsuch concurrence. The factual record is that NYC was holding houses of worship to MUCH stricter standards than other facilities (such as malls and casinos which were allowed to be open in an orange zone while churches *no matter how large* were limited to a total of 25 people). That is text book discrimination against religion. The NYT article headline is wrong. This takes THE SAME approach as previous cases, because it insists that houses of worship be dealt with under the same rules as other facilities.
     I understand that Barrett is not set up to be a well liked justice of the Supreme Court, and I even agree that McConnell ramming her through while *still* ignoring Covid is terrible for our country. But in this specific case, it seems completely correct.

392. Bobbyp, your link is to an LGM post where they don’t like the (non-controlling) Gorsuch concurrence. The factual record is that NYC was holding houses of worship to MUCH stricter standards than other facilities (such as malls and casinos which were allowed to be open in an orange zone while churches *no matter how large* were limited to a total of 25 people). That is text book discrimination against religion. The NYT article headline is wrong. This takes THE SAME approach as previous cases, because it insists that houses of worship be dealt with under the same rules as other facilities.
     I understand that Barrett is not set up to be a well liked justice of the Supreme Court, and I even agree that McConnell ramming her through while *still* ignoring Covid is terrible for our country. But in this specific case, it seems completely correct.

393. To clarify further malls such as the Queens Center and the Queens Palace mall are allowed to operate at 50% capacity under orange rating while houses of worship are limited to 25 people total no matter what the capacity. So for example St. Patrick’s Cathedral (capacity 3000 people) could have a maximum of 25 people, which is less than 1% of its rated capacity. Even if you want to say that church services are more dangerous than mall shopping or casino gaming, the disparity is too huge to justify.

394. To clarify further malls such as the Queens Center and the Queens Palace mall are allowed to operate at 50% capacity under orange rating while houses of worship are limited to 25 people total no matter what the capacity. So for example St. Patrick’s Cathedral (capacity 3000 people) could have a maximum of 25 people, which is less than 1% of its rated capacity. Even if you want to say that church services are more dangerous than mall shopping or casino gaming, the disparity is too huge to justify.

395. I’m not sure how orthodox Jewish church ceremonies work, but Christian ceremonies with choral singing and group recitations of creeds seem to be something that is different from walking around in a mall or even in a casino.
     https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1241/5908276

396. I’m not sure how orthodox Jewish church ceremonies work, but Christian ceremonies with choral singing and group recitations of creeds seem to be something that is different from walking around in a mall or even in a casino.
     https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1241/5908276

397. “ceremonies with choral singing and group recitations of creeds seem to be something that is different from walking around in a mall or even in a casino.”
     Using ‘pre-lockdown’ actual *experience* with Covid super-spreader events, how many were from malls, casinos, or church services?
     (yes, pre-lockdown had more dire results, but certainly shows the potential for transmission in different venues)
     But I guess it’s discriminatory to use actual data.
     Still, opening up the churches is just FINE with me: those fools SHOULD die gasping for air; too bad about the collateral deaths, but omelette/eggs.

398. “ceremonies with choral singing and group recitations of creeds seem to be something that is different from walking around in a mall or even in a casino.”
     Using ‘pre-lockdown’ actual *experience* with Covid super-spreader events, how many were from malls, casinos, or church services?
     (yes, pre-lockdown had more dire results, but certainly shows the potential for transmission in different venues)
     But I guess it’s discriminatory to use actual data.
     Still, opening up the churches is just FINE with me: those fools SHOULD die gasping for air; too bad about the collateral deaths, but omelette/eggs.

399. Here is a summary of NY’s red / orange / yellow zone COVID restrictions.
     I’m sure there is more detail than what is shown here, but based on this summary it strikes me that the restrictions on houses of worship are more lenient than on any other category shown here.
     In a red zone, a religious gathering is limited to ten people. Non-religious gatherings are prohibited, full stop. Restaurants are take-out only, no seating inside or outside. Schools are closed, classes are remote only. Non-essential businesses are closed.
     Ten is more than zero.
     Malls are not discussed in the summary, but I’m not sure malls and churches are equivalent cases.
     As a personal aside, it strikes me that many religious communities in this country are persistently on the lookout for examples of how they are being persecuted and discriminated against. To the point where the free exercise of religion is now considered to encompass the baking of wedding cakes and the provision of health insurance to one’s secular employees.
     All communities of common interest – religious or otherwise – are all trying to figure out how to carry on in the face of COVID. Some meet online, some meet outside, some meet in small groups. Some don’t meet at all and instead look forward to better times.
     Religious communities are not begin picked on, and it’s unseemly for them to act as if they are. There are places where people pay a price, sometimes a very high price, for their faith and/or conscience. This is not one of them. It’s especially unseemly for them to insist on carrying on as if their actions present no risk to others, including people within their communities and without them.
     I don’t see anything in the NY state regs that tells me that houses of worship are being singled out for adverse treatment. if anything, the opposite.
     I don’t see the merit in the ruling.

400. Here is a summary of NY’s red / orange / yellow zone COVID restrictions.
     I’m sure there is more detail than what is shown here, but based on this summary it strikes me that the restrictions on houses of worship are more lenient than on any other category shown here.
     In a red zone, a religious gathering is limited to ten people. Non-religious gatherings are prohibited, full stop. Restaurants are take-out only, no seating inside or outside. Schools are closed, classes are remote only. Non-essential businesses are closed.
     Ten is more than zero.
     Malls are not discussed in the summary, but I’m not sure malls and churches are equivalent cases.
     As a personal aside, it strikes me that many religious communities in this country are persistently on the lookout for examples of how they are being persecuted and discriminated against. To the point where the free exercise of religion is now considered to encompass the baking of wedding cakes and the provision of health insurance to one’s secular employees.
     All communities of common interest – religious or otherwise – are all trying to figure out how to carry on in the face of COVID. Some meet online, some meet outside, some meet in small groups. Some don’t meet at all and instead look forward to better times.
     Religious communities are not begin picked on, and it’s unseemly for them to act as if they are. There are places where people pay a price, sometimes a very high price, for their faith and/or conscience. This is not one of them. It’s especially unseemly for them to insist on carrying on as if their actions present no risk to others, including people within their communities and without them.
     I don’t see anything in the NY state regs that tells me that houses of worship are being singled out for adverse treatment. if anything, the opposite.
     I don’t see the merit in the ruling.

401. Sebastian,
     Under dictator Cuomo’s rules, if Yankee stadium was in a red zone, gatherings there would be prohibited, but St. John’s could still have up to 10 people gather together in a corner for choir practice.
     Please explain to us how this constitutes religious discrimination.

402. Sebastian,
     Under dictator Cuomo’s rules, if Yankee stadium was in a red zone, gatherings there would be prohibited, but St. John’s could still have up to 10 people gather together in a corner for choir practice.
     Please explain to us how this constitutes religious discrimination.

403. Over here in Germany there are cases where people liken themselves to those who resisted the Nazis during the 3rd Reich when they spread anti-vaxxing propaganda. And a mother taught her child that she was like Anne Frank when they celebrated her birthday with many attendants in secret because they feared that someone would inform the authorities that they blatantly violated the regulations for partial lockdown.

404. Over here in Germany there are cases where people liken themselves to those who resisted the Nazis during the 3rd Reich when they spread anti-vaxxing propaganda. And a mother taught her child that she was like Anne Frank when they celebrated her birthday with many attendants in secret because they feared that someone would inform the authorities that they blatantly violated the regulations for partial lockdown.

405. I have to say, I am starting to feel somewhat better about my (admittedly quick and lazy) acceptance of the narrative about the SCOTUS ruling on places of worship and their entitlement to preferential treatment under public health regulations.

406. I have to say, I am starting to feel somewhat better about my (admittedly quick and lazy) acceptance of the narrative about the SCOTUS ruling on places of worship and their entitlement to preferential treatment under public health regulations.

407. Also FWIW: malls in NY are required to have HEPA filtering HVAC systems in place in order to open.
     A mall with no businesses open is basically a place for geezers to get their daily walk when the weather’s bad, and a place for teenagers to hang out and smoke cigarettes and flirt. It’s a very large open place, with HEPA filtered HVAC.
     Per this article, all seating has been removed from the public areas of the Queens Palace Mall. All stores and businesses within the mall have to observe whatever COVID regulations apply to them.
     As a total aside, just want to send a tiny shout-out to Queens NY, land of my birth and ancestral stomping ground of my people on my mother’s side. Home of the Unisphere and the NY Mets, y’all!
     But I digress.
     We’re all just trying to get through this. There are entire sectors of the economy and public life in general that are being crushed like a freaking bug by COVID.
     Nobody’s picking on religious communities. At least, not in particular, certainly not any more than any other demographic. They are being mightily inconvenienced, but they aren’t being singled out.
     We’re all just trying to stay safe and alive until we get to the other side of all of this. Insisting on Your Inalienable Right to do everything exactly the same way you’ve always done it, at a time when that will probably kill some people, is… not attractive.
     Just saying.

408. Also FWIW: malls in NY are required to have HEPA filtering HVAC systems in place in order to open.
     A mall with no businesses open is basically a place for geezers to get their daily walk when the weather’s bad, and a place for teenagers to hang out and smoke cigarettes and flirt. It’s a very large open place, with HEPA filtered HVAC.
     Per this article, all seating has been removed from the public areas of the Queens Palace Mall. All stores and businesses within the mall have to observe whatever COVID regulations apply to them.
     As a total aside, just want to send a tiny shout-out to Queens NY, land of my birth and ancestral stomping ground of my people on my mother’s side. Home of the Unisphere and the NY Mets, y’all!
     But I digress.
     We’re all just trying to get through this. There are entire sectors of the economy and public life in general that are being crushed like a freaking bug by COVID.
     Nobody’s picking on religious communities. At least, not in particular, certainly not any more than any other demographic. They are being mightily inconvenienced, but they aren’t being singled out.
     We’re all just trying to stay safe and alive until we get to the other side of all of this. Insisting on Your Inalienable Right to do everything exactly the same way you’ve always done it, at a time when that will probably kill some people, is… not attractive.
     Just saying.

409. Barrett’s ascension to the Court essentially reversed previous rulings on similar circumstances in Nevada and California. See Robert’s dissent.
     The majority has clearly indicated its proclivity for scientific illiteracy. The dangers of this ideologically driven nonsense are obvious.

410. Barrett’s ascension to the Court essentially reversed previous rulings on similar circumstances in Nevada and California. See Robert’s dissent.
     The majority has clearly indicated its proclivity for scientific illiteracy. The dangers of this ideologically driven nonsense are obvious.

411. and hey, while I’m here, let’s not forget Georgia, incidentally the ancestral stomping ground of my people on my father’s side.
     send $10 or send $100 if you got it. write some postcards, jump on a phone bank.
     50-50 senate will get more done than a (R) majority senate. Not everything, just more.
     every little bit helps.

412. and hey, while I’m here, let’s not forget Georgia, incidentally the ancestral stomping ground of my people on my father’s side.
     send $10 or send $100 if you got it. write some postcards, jump on a phone bank.
     50-50 senate will get more done than a (R) majority senate. Not everything, just more.
     every little bit helps.

413. Just what is this freedom thing anyway?

414. Just what is this freedom thing anyway?

415. Which are more similar to churches:
     – malls and other venues where people are walking around?
     – theaters, concert halls, and stadiums, where people come and sit in one place for a couple of hours?
     Maybe it’s just me, but if I had been writing the rules I would have put churches in the second group. Not even close.
     And, having shut down that group completely, allowing churches to open (with limited attendance) definitely constitutes special treatment. It’s discrimination in their favor.

416. Which are more similar to churches:
     – malls and other venues where people are walking around?
     – theaters, concert halls, and stadiums, where people come and sit in one place for a couple of hours?
     Maybe it’s just me, but if I had been writing the rules I would have put churches in the second group. Not even close.
     And, having shut down that group completely, allowing churches to open (with limited attendance) definitely constitutes special treatment. It’s discrimination in their favor.

417. Christianity and socialism antithetical? Well,
     perhaps not.
     Even if you disagree…a very thoughtful read.

418. Christianity and socialism antithetical? Well,
     perhaps not.
     Even if you disagree…a very thoughtful read.

419. Really hard to decide who to root for on this one….
     https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/527680-donor-sues-pro-trump-group-over-failure-to-prove-voter-fraud
     Maybe a case where cheering for the attorneys on both sides to bankrupt their clients…?

420. Really hard to decide who to root for on this one….
     https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/527680-donor-sues-pro-trump-group-over-failure-to-prove-voter-fraud
     Maybe a case where cheering for the attorneys on both sides to bankrupt their clients…?

421. I have not read much beyond the comments here, so I ask this out of ignorance.
     Did the SCOTUS hold that Cuomo’s intent was to oppress religion? Or did they hold that intent was irrelevant, and only the effect was the problem?
     Not that I expect the McConnell Court to respect its own principles or anything, but this distinction between impermissible intent and impermissible effects might end up figuring in other cases, involving e.g. voting rights, or affirmative action, or the ACA.
     –TP

422. I have not read much beyond the comments here, so I ask this out of ignorance.
     Did the SCOTUS hold that Cuomo’s intent was to oppress religion? Or did they hold that intent was irrelevant, and only the effect was the problem?
     Not that I expect the McConnell Court to respect its own principles or anything, but this distinction between impermissible intent and impermissible effects might end up figuring in other cases, involving e.g. voting rights, or affirmative action, or the ACA.
     –TP

423. the McConnell Court
     I believe it’s now referred to as the Covid Barrett Court.
     The opinion itself says this: “Citing a variety of remarks made by the
     Governor, Agudath Israel argues that the Governor specifically targeted the Orthodox Jewish community and gerrymandered the boundaries of red and orange zones to ensure
     that heavily Orthodox areas were included. ”
     The concurring opinions vary, but who cares.
     Red and orange zones are based on prevalence of cases, so if particular places are targeted, well …
     Anyway, I’m neither a public health expert, nor a statistician, but since Cuomo is a Catholic (although not the Covid Barrett variety), and some of the dissenters are Catholic or Jewish, I’m skeptical.
     I’m also find this quote by Gorsuch somewhat alarming (and telling): “Even if judges may impose emergency restrictions on rights that some of them have found hiding in the Constitution’s penumbras, it does not follow that the same fate should befall the textually explicit right to religious exercise.”
     He’s referring to a case decided in 1905, not Griswald v. US (the famous “penumbra” case, which decided a married couple’s right to contraception based on a right to privacy.)

424. the McConnell Court
     I believe it’s now referred to as the Covid Barrett Court.
     The opinion itself says this: “Citing a variety of remarks made by the
     Governor, Agudath Israel argues that the Governor specifically targeted the Orthodox Jewish community and gerrymandered the boundaries of red and orange zones to ensure
     that heavily Orthodox areas were included. ”
     The concurring opinions vary, but who cares.
     Red and orange zones are based on prevalence of cases, so if particular places are targeted, well …
     Anyway, I’m neither a public health expert, nor a statistician, but since Cuomo is a Catholic (although not the Covid Barrett variety), and some of the dissenters are Catholic or Jewish, I’m skeptical.
     I’m also find this quote by Gorsuch somewhat alarming (and telling): “Even if judges may impose emergency restrictions on rights that some of them have found hiding in the Constitution’s penumbras, it does not follow that the same fate should befall the textually explicit right to religious exercise.”
     He’s referring to a case decided in 1905, not Griswald v. US (the famous “penumbra” case, which decided a married couple’s right to contraception based on a right to privacy.)

425. Agudath Israel argues that the Governor specifically targeted the Orthodox Jewish community
     The most restrictive rules – red zone rules – limit houses of worship to 10 people maximum. Which also happens to be the minimum for a minyan, which in turn is the minimum number required for most forms of public worship in traditional Judaism.
     One could argue that the Orthodox community may have been specifically targeted, but in a supportive way.

426. Agudath Israel argues that the Governor specifically targeted the Orthodox Jewish community
     The most restrictive rules – red zone rules – limit houses of worship to 10 people maximum. Which also happens to be the minimum for a minyan, which in turn is the minimum number required for most forms of public worship in traditional Judaism.
     One could argue that the Orthodox community may have been specifically targeted, but in a supportive way.

427. Not quite Russell, in many Orthodox traditions you need at least 10 men for a minyan, so essentially the rules meant that there would either never be a minyan, or women would not be allowed.

428. Not quite Russell, in many Orthodox traditions you need at least 10 men for a minyan, so essentially the rules meant that there would either never be a minyan, or women would not be allowed.

429. in many Orthodox traditions you need at least 10 men for a minyan, so essentially the rules meant that there would either never be a minyan, or women would not be allowed.
     Yay. Maybe while the men are away, the women can escape. (See the great miniseries “Unorthodox”.)

430. in many Orthodox traditions you need at least 10 men for a minyan, so essentially the rules meant that there would either never be a minyan, or women would not be allowed.
     Yay. Maybe while the men are away, the women can escape. (See the great miniseries “Unorthodox”.)

431. I’ve read about minyan and this article is quite interesting. It’s unfortunate that the orthodox jewish group(s) did not take this as an opportunity to reconsider the practices
     https://sites.google.com/site/hashtaumd/contents-1/minyan

432. I’ve read about minyan and this article is quite interesting. It’s unfortunate that the orthodox jewish group(s) did not take this as an opportunity to reconsider the practices
     https://sites.google.com/site/hashtaumd/contents-1/minyan

433. there would either never be a minyan, or women would not be allowed.
     Just FYI, in many Orthodox traditions, women are already not allowed. To the point that, at an Orthodox wedding, the men and women are together only when the vows are recited outside. Indeed, at the reception, not only are the men and women entirely separate, but the bride and groom dance “together” in separate rooms. (Although the groomsmen do, sometimes, hold the groom up on a table so that the bride can at least see him over the room divider.)
     In short, 10 for a minyan is minimal. But sufficient.

434. there would either never be a minyan, or women would not be allowed.
     Just FYI, in many Orthodox traditions, women are already not allowed. To the point that, at an Orthodox wedding, the men and women are together only when the vows are recited outside. Indeed, at the reception, not only are the men and women entirely separate, but the bride and groom dance “together” in separate rooms. (Although the groomsmen do, sometimes, hold the groom up on a table so that the bride can at least see him over the room divider.)
     In short, 10 for a minyan is minimal. But sufficient.

435. there would either never be a minyan, or women would not be allowed.
     Just FYI, in many Orthodox traditions, women are already not allowed. To the point that, at an Orthodox wedding, the men and women are together only when the vows are recited outside. Indeed, at the reception, not only are the men and women entirely separate, but the bride and groom dance “together” in separate rooms. (Although the groomsmen do, sometimes, hold the groom up on a table so that the bride can at least see him over the room divider.)
     In short, 10 for a minyan is minimal. But sufficient.

436. there would either never be a minyan, or women would not be allowed.
     Just FYI, in many Orthodox traditions, women are already not allowed. To the point that, at an Orthodox wedding, the men and women are together only when the vows are recited outside. Indeed, at the reception, not only are the men and women entirely separate, but the bride and groom dance “together” in separate rooms. (Although the groomsmen do, sometimes, hold the groom up on a table so that the bride can at least see him over the room divider.)
     In short, 10 for a minyan is minimal. But sufficient.

437. No idea how that happened!

438. No idea how that happened!

439. Religious cultures are super interesting – whatever floats people’s boat, I’m for it.
     But there’s a better way – quarantine together all of you congregants! Get food delivered. Live together, die together, etc.
     There are ways to behave besides infecting the rest of us.

440. Religious cultures are super interesting – whatever floats people’s boat, I’m for it.
     But there’s a better way – quarantine together all of you congregants! Get food delivered. Live together, die together, etc.
     There are ways to behave besides infecting the rest of us.

441. Also, enlist your own as medical people. No sharing!

442. Also, enlist your own as medical people. No sharing!

443. Not quite Russell, …
     No women would suck. But neither I nor Cuomo made the rule about it having to be 10 men.
     Look, it’s more than clear to me that COVID has interfered with many parts of life, including worship services. Exercise of religion is constitutionally protected, the communities involved are free to bring their case, and in this instance they prevailed.
     They’re luckier in that regard than all of the other communities that have been clobbered by COVID, but which cannot cite anything in the Bill of Rights to contest the regulations they are obliged to operate under.
     I’m sympathetic to the folks involved, but when I look at what the regulations require, I don’t see religious communities being singled out for adverse treatment. If anything, the opposite.
     So I don’t see that the SCOTUS ruling as having merit. YMMV, obviously, but I’m not seeing a persuasive argument here.

444. Not quite Russell, …
     No women would suck. But neither I nor Cuomo made the rule about it having to be 10 men.
     Look, it’s more than clear to me that COVID has interfered with many parts of life, including worship services. Exercise of religion is constitutionally protected, the communities involved are free to bring their case, and in this instance they prevailed.
     They’re luckier in that regard than all of the other communities that have been clobbered by COVID, but which cannot cite anything in the Bill of Rights to contest the regulations they are obliged to operate under.
     I’m sympathetic to the folks involved, but when I look at what the regulations require, I don’t see religious communities being singled out for adverse treatment. If anything, the opposite.
     So I don’t see that the SCOTUS ruling as having merit. YMMV, obviously, but I’m not seeing a persuasive argument here.

445. not a lawyer, but it sure seems like the majority that decided this was giving a signal to other religious groups that this is going to be the way to go. I wonder if that would provoke pope francis to state his opinions more. I also wonder if this is related
     Guardian, but can’t paste the link from my phone
     https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEDkQFfVomvsEoE4fc3kEtFMqFwgEKg4IACoGCAowl6p7MN-zCTClss0G?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen

446. not a lawyer, but it sure seems like the majority that decided this was giving a signal to other religious groups that this is going to be the way to go. I wonder if that would provoke pope francis to state his opinions more. I also wonder if this is related
     Guardian, but can’t paste the link from my phone
     https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEDkQFfVomvsEoE4fc3kEtFMqFwgEKg4IACoGCAowl6p7MN-zCTClss0G?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen

447. This group doesn’t seem to care much about whether or not they spread disease.

448. This group doesn’t seem to care much about whether or not they spread disease.

449. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-lines-for-covid-19-tests-were-longer-than-the-lines-for-black-friday-shopping-11606507181?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts
     For Amy Covid Barrett:
     https://cavstheblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/laurie-lipton-delusion-dwellers.jpeg
     Then, get in line:
     https://laurielipton.bigcartel.com/product/los-paragueros
     Also, welcome back, Sebastian.

450. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-lines-for-covid-19-tests-were-longer-than-the-lines-for-black-friday-shopping-11606507181?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts
     For Amy Covid Barrett:
     https://cavstheblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/laurie-lipton-delusion-dwellers.jpeg
     Then, get in line:
     https://laurielipton.bigcartel.com/product/los-paragueros
     Also, welcome back, Sebastian.

451. This thread seems to have slid towards different topics and may be winding down, but this NPR piece really gets at the way that all of these different racial structures and institutional approaches interact to create a carceral system that is badly out of balance.
     https://www.npr.org/2020/11/28/933436082/bobby-shmurda-authenticity-conspiracy-flatbush-dream-deferred
     Wish I had more time to give to it, but it’s closing down on finals week more rapidly than I might wish.

452. This thread seems to have slid towards different topics and may be winding down, but this NPR piece really gets at the way that all of these different racial structures and institutional approaches interact to create a carceral system that is badly out of balance.
     https://www.npr.org/2020/11/28/933436082/bobby-shmurda-authenticity-conspiracy-flatbush-dream-deferred
     Wish I had more time to give to it, but it’s closing down on finals week more rapidly than I might wish.

Comments are closed.