United States Politics Thread 46

[MacAnDàil]

The makers of South Park are members of Republican and Libertarian parties. I stopped watching South Park as a 17 year old after their 'trash the rainforest' episode. They explicitly advocated the awful destruction that some right-wingers just do by accident while being greedy. They end up more destructive while claiming to be in the middle.

I thought they both identified as libertarian. Actually belonging to a political party seems dangerous close to the "caring too much" they so clearly despise.

What we're sick of—and it's getting even worse—is: you either like Michael Moore or you wanna fuckin' go overseas and shoot Iraqis. There can't be a middle ground. Basically, if you think Michael Moore's full of shit, then you are a super-Christian right-wing whatever. And we're both just pretty middle-ground guys. We find just as many things to rip on on the left as we do on the right. People on the far left and the far right are the same exact person to us.

I hate conservatives, but I really fucking hate liberals.

Yes, of course. There are libertarians in the Republican Party. I had found sources for their membership of Republican and Libertarian parties, but I can't seem to find it. I now only find the Daily Mail and Rebel Media, which are not reliable.

[Travis B.]

Even if you make that difference, it still hates us. It's just somewhat less explicit about it.

Mainstream indifference and racism are terrible thing, they are hatred and they need to be fought. There's no question about it.
There is, though, such a thing as a lesser evil. Believe me the latest brand of fascism is orders of magnitude worse. What these folk are considering is nothing less than military dictatorship and mass deportations of tens of millions. If these guys come into power, getting rid of them will take civil war. They won't deport tens of millions but they will sure give it their worst.

Saying that mainstream racism and fascists are both racist is like saying that Churchill and Hitler were both imperialist bigots.

[Ares Land]

Saying that mainstream racism and fascists are both racist
is like saying that Churchill and Hitler were both imperialist bigots.

I wouldn't go quite that far. Mainstream racists are rather analogous to Hindenburg.

[Travis B.]

Saying that mainstream racism and fascists are both racist
is like saying that Churchill and Hitler were both imperialist bigots.

I wouldn't go quite that far. Mainstream racists are rather analogous to Hindenburg.

Point taken.

[Travis B.]

The key thing here, though, is that if we treat mainstream racism and fascism as if they were one and the same, we run the risk of normalizing fascism, and allowing fascists to say that they aren't much different from mainstream racists and like.

[Ares Land]

Tell me about it. And the next thing you know, your main opposition party was founded by a torture technician and an ex-Waffen SS.

[MacAnDàil]

And while this is the US Politics Thread, your post is directed at a European - to be specific, a European from a country where outright fascists seem to be very close to taking power next year. How are long-term demographic trends going to help with that?

It's all right, we're talking US politics here
The demographic panic here is very real, and perhaps even more palpable than in the US, even though it's entirely unfounded. I suppose these things are getting increasingly global.

Édouard Drumont for example was already going on about Italians or Jews would supposedly replace the French at the end of the 19th century. I think that he got what he actually wanted under Vichy.

[MacAnDàil]

Also, while looking for the white genocide conspiracy nonsense, I found this debunking (as if it should be needed): https://whistlinginthewind.org/2017/05/ ... -nonsense/. Other pages on the same site are interesting like All Politics Is Identity Politics: https://whistlinginthewind.org/2017/05/ ... -politics/. Maybe slightly exaggerated, but certainly true that identity politics is wider than what is sometimes claimed. And https://whistlinginthewind.org/2015/07/ ... -theories/

[Travis B.]

Also, while looking for the white genocide conspiracy nonsense, I found this debunking (as if it should be needed): https://whistlinginthewind.org/2017/05/ ... -nonsense/. Other pages on the same site are interesting like All Politics Is Identity Politics: https://whistlinginthewind.org/2017/05/ ... -politics/. Maybe slightly exaggerated, but certainly true that identity politics is wider than what is sometimes claimed. And https://whistlinginthewind.org/2015/07/ ... -theories/

"White genocide" is exactly the kind of thing I was talking about - fascism is spread by getting people to A) identify with a group, which is easier if said people are already alienated, and B) getting them to feel that some Other threatens that group, however nonsensically.

[Linguoboy]

Since Ares Land was talking about "the left", and "the left" doesn't consist just of queer trans women, I don't really see how your point applies here. What's wrong with asking the more privileged ones among the people on the left to do what Ares Land is asking for?

Nothing--but it's not what he did.

(I didn't know that, um, charming slur though nor do I think it's a great idea to use it.)

The great thing about a diverse movement is that you don't have to. If you think you can reach a similar audience using different means, then I encourage you to do so.

The coming generation is the brownest and queerest yet. It makes a lot of sense to concentrate our efforts into making spaces where these folks can thrive without continually worrying about catering to the whims and prejudices of a shrinking population of denialists.

Privilege being what it is, it's likely to stay where it is. And there's nothing impossible about a privileged class being in the minority. There is a strong chance straight cis white males are still going to run the show for the foreseeable future.
Plus, what Raphael said about demographics not translating neatly into polical position.
I don't know how things are in the US in that respect; what I do know is that we sure got a lot of conservative queer folk. Black people, or people of North African ancestry are very socially conservative, for a wide variety of reasons.

Yeah, this is a big issue in the USA as well. Although there are still plenty of (mostly religious) conservatives who rail against homosexuality, the most have accepted that this is a lost cause. Nearly half of all Republicans are pro-same sex marriage now, so voting Republican isn't necessarily an unthinkable choice for some QUILTBAGers now. This tendency is most pronounced among gay white cis men, who still partake of almost all of the privilege of being white, male, and cis. On average, we make more money not only than other queerfolk but also 10% more than our straight counterparts (largely due to higher levels of education), which means we have more property to hoard and defend.

There was also a significant shift in the Hispanic vote in several parts of the country (notably South Texas), which could be a harbinger. Or not--the last couple nation elections have been exceptional in a lot of ways, so it's hard to know how predictive they'll be of future trends.

Besides, I'm not talking about catering to the whims and prejudice of denialists. I'm talking about informing and educating people. Leaving centrists or right-winger in a separate bubble is precisely what you don't want.

If being in a "bubble" means that we get to live our lives without being subjected to constant harassment from rightwingers, then I am kind of in favour of that. I want to make a bubble and then expand it to include those who see the value of empathy and reason and can be educated out of their prejudices. But if we don't do this carefully, the people we let in will end up dominating the space and driving out those for whom it was originally created. I've seen this happen before on a small scale so I think any larger strategy needs to incorporate a means for avoiding it.

What South Park is a great example of is how, if you don't make a conscious effort to be progressive, you'll end up conservative by default.

I had figured it was always meant to be conservative. Well, libertarian. Same difference.

I guess that's the parallax effect from across the Atlantic?

It was always strongly antiauthoritarian, which puts it at odds with many strands of conservativism in the USA. But its creators are prey to the common false equivalence of viewing the "intolerant left" as little better than Stalinism, which is why they make it their mission to take it with the same vehemence they do Nazis.

[Linguoboy]

One thing to take into consideration is that using terms like "cis", "straight", "white" and "men" (in any combination) as if they were almost derogatory, that there being fewer cis straight white men (proportionally) in the world is a good thing, as if one ought to be ashamed of being a cis straight white man, does not help the problem of cis straight white men turning into fascists. If anything, it pushes them in that direction, as being told that mainstream society hates you for things you had no choice in is a good way to turn one into an extremist of any sort.

This is exactly what I was getting at when I remarked to Ares Land about "catering to the whims and prejudice of denialists". I'm not going to blunt my messages to coddle the fee-fees of fragile white men who thrive in abusive subcultures. If you want to take on the role of bro whisperer. be my guest. I already have my hands full getting all the other rich white faggots around me to care about poor people and POC.

[Travis B.]

One thing to take into consideration is that using terms like "cis", "straight", "white" and "men" (in any combination) as if they were almost derogatory, that there being fewer cis straight white men (proportionally) in the world is a good thing, as if one ought to be ashamed of being a cis straight white man, does not help the problem of cis straight white men turning into fascists. If anything, it pushes them in that direction, as being told that mainstream society hates you for things you had no choice in is a good way to turn one into an extremist of any sort.

This is exactly what I was getting at when I remarked to Ares Land about "catering to the whims and prejudice of denialists". I'm not going to blunt my messages to coddle the fee-fees of fragile white men who thrive in abusive subcultures. If you want to take on the role of bro whisperer. be my guest. I already have my hands full getting all the other rich white faggots around me to care about poor people and POC.

My point is that, since cis straight white men, aka "bros", are the most likely people to become fascists, one should target them if one doesn't want another generation of fascists; writing them off basically guarantees that they will become subject to the influence of fascists and become fascists themselves. It is not about "coddling" them - it is about engaging them and giving them ideas and an identity such that the need they have for such will not be filled by the fascists. They could be antifascist/antiracist if you want them to be that and are willing to put in the effort rather than just dismissing them as "bros".

[Ares Land]

If being in a "bubble" means that we get to live our lives without being subjected to constant harassment from rightwingers, then I am kind of in favour of that. I want to make a bubble and then expand it to include those who see the value of empathy and reason and can be educated out of their prejudices. But if we don't do this carefully, the people we let in will end up dominating the space and driving out those for whom it was originally created. I've seen this happen before on a small scale so I think any larger strategy needs to incorporate a means for avoiding it.

]
This is exactly what I was getting at when I remarked to Ares Land about "catering to the whims and prejudice of denialists". I'm not going to blunt my messages to coddle the fee-fees of fragile white men who thrive in abusive subcultures. If you want to take on the role of bro whisperer. be my guest. I already have my hands full getting all the other rich white faggots around me to care about poor people and POC.

Thinking about this some more, a big part of that is that most of the harassment is that most of the activist work is left to more vulnerable people. (Think about it, when did anyone else than an abused woman ever call out sexual abuse?)

[Vijay]

Believe me the latest brand of fascism is orders of magnitude worse.

I am aware. I hope to find a way to get my family to escape this country (ideally long) before they can get killed.

Saying that mainstream racism and fascists are both racist is like saying that Churchill and Hitler were both imperialist bigots.

Yes, because one wanted to take over the world and the other already controlled almost a quarter of it.

The key thing here, though, is that if we treat mainstream racism and fascism as if they were one and the same, we run the risk of normalizing fascism, and allowing fascists to say that they aren't much different from mainstream racists and like.

It has always been normalized from the very beginning; it's just never gained all that much political power because it directly threatens the social organization of the US. As soon as the government threatened to denormalize it, half the country violently seceded.

My point is that, since cis straight white men, aka "bros", are the most likely people to become fascists, one should target them if one doesn't want another generation of fascists

Do you not see how far gone the problem already is? This is like looking at Nazi Germany and saying, "Gee, someone should write Hitler a letter telling him genocide is not very nice, or else he'll keep doing it!"

[Travis B.]

Believe me the latest brand of fascism is orders of magnitude worse.

I am aware. I hope to find a way to get my family to escape this country (ideally long) before they can get killed.

I see nothing that even hints at anything regarding Indian(-American)s in the US that compares to the situation with Jews in Germany just before the Machtergreifung.

Saying that mainstream racism and fascists are both racist is like saying that Churchill and Hitler were both imperialist bigots.

Yes, because one wanted to take over the world and the other already controlled almost a quarter of it.

You seriously believe that Churchill and Hitler were equivalent?!

The key thing here, though, is that if we treat mainstream racism and fascism as if they were one and the same, we run the risk of normalizing fascism, and allowing fascists to say that they aren't much different from mainstream racists and like.

It has always been normalized from the very beginning; it's just never gained all that much political power because it directly threatens the social organization of the US. As soon as the government threatened to denormalize it, half the country violently seceded.

And now you can't see the difference between mainstream conservatism, with its associated everyday racism, and fascism.... sigh.

My point is that, since cis straight white men, aka "bros", are the most likely people to become fascists, one should target them if one doesn't want another generation of fascists

Do you not see how far gone the problem already is? This is like looking at Nazi Germany and saying, "Gee, someone should write Hitler a letter telling him genocide is not very nice, or else he'll keep doing it!"

No, I think you are severely overstating the situation. Also, this is like doing the work to convince potential brownshirts to become leftists instead rather than just giving up and saying that oh, they're bros, so they'll become brownshirts no matter what, we might as not even bother.

[Vijay]

Believe me the latest brand of fascism is orders of magnitude worse.

I am aware. I hope to find a way to get my family to escape this country (ideally long) before they can get killed.

I see nothing that even hints at anything regarding Indian(-American)s in the US that compares to the situation with Jews in Germany just before the Machtergreifung.

Who said anything about "just before the Machtergreifung"?

You seriously believe that Churchill and Hitler were equivalent?!

If by that you mean I seriously believe they were similarly evil, yes.

And now you can't see the difference between mainstream conservatism, with its associated everyday racism, and fascism.... sigh.

I think it's you who can't see how incredibly similar they are!

No, I think you are severely overstating the situation. Also, this is like doing the work to convince potential brownshirts to become leftists instead rather than just giving up and saying that oh, they're bros, so they'll become brownshirts no matter what, we might as not even bother.

Um, yeah, that's not how that works.

[Travis B.]

I am aware. I hope to find a way to get my family to escape this country (ideally long) before they can get killed.

I see nothing that even hints at anything regarding Indian(-American)s in the US that compares to the situation with Jews in Germany just before the Machtergreifung.

Who said anything about "just before the Machtergreifung"?

What, do you think we are "after the Machtergreifung"?

You seriously believe that Churchill and Hitler were equivalent?!

If by that you mean I seriously believe they were similarly evil, yes.

Okay, one can say that up to 3 million people died because of the Bengal famine, which Churchill's policies did contribute to at least in part... while Hitler's policies directly led to the murder of 6 million Jews, approximately 7 million Soviet civilians (of which 1.3 million were Jews and thus counted in the previous number), 3 million Soviet POW's (of which 50,000 were Jews and thus already counted), 1.8 million ethnic Poles, 312,000 Serb civilians, up to 250,000 disabled individuals, between 250,000 and 500,000 Roma, 70,000 "asocials", 1,900 Jehovah's Witnesses, hundreds to thousands of homosexuals, and an indeterminate number of political enemies. So let's say that Churchill directly murdered each and every person who died in the Bengal famine, Hitler still is way past him on sheer body count.

And now you can't see the difference between mainstream conservatism, with its associated everyday racism, and fascism.... sigh.

I think it's you who can't see how incredibly similar they are!

You essentially proposing that we abandon any distinction between fascists and anyone who happens to be right of center (and who may happen to be racist, which is far, far more common than actually holding fascist beliefs).

No, I think you are severely overstating the situation. Also, this is like doing the work to convince potential brownshirts to become leftists instead rather than just giving up and saying that oh, they're bros, so they'll become brownshirts no matter what, we might as not even bother.

Um, yeah, that's not how that works.

So how would you propose to check the increasing fascist population, if there is no point in attempting to prevent people from becoming fascists in the first place?

[Moose-tache]

Didn't we already split "Travis and Vijay shout the same thing back and forth forever" into its own thread?

[Ares Land]

If by that you mean I seriously believe they were similarly evil, yes.

I think it's you who can't see how incredibly similar they are!

Oh dear. Nope, nope, nope. Seriously, nope.

Churchill was incredibly racist and took many terrible decisions. The colonial system in India (or, for that matter, anywhere) was an atrocity.

But even then, no, the Nazis were unquestionably a lot worse.

[Vijay]

I see nothing that even hints at anything regarding Indian(-American)s in the US that compares to the situation with Jews in Germany just before the Machtergreifung.

Who said anything about "just before the Machtergreifung"?

What, do you think we are "after the Machtergreifung"?

Those are not the only two possibilities, you know.

You seriously believe that Churchill and Hitler were equivalent?!

If by that you mean I seriously believe they were similarly evil, yes.

Okay, one can say that up to 3 million people died because of the Bengal famine, which Churchill's policies did contribute to at least in part... while Hitler's policies directly led to the murder of 6 million Jews, approximately 7 million Soviet civilians (of which 1.3 million were Jews and thus counted in the previous number), 3 million Soviet POW's (of which 50,000 were Jews and thus already counted), 1.8 million ethnic Poles, 312,000 Serb civilians, up to 250,000 disabled individuals, between 250,000 and 500,000 Roma, 70,000 "asocials", 1,900 Jehovah's Witnesses, hundreds to thousands of homosexuals, and an indeterminate number of political enemies. So let's say that Churchill directly murdered each and every person who died in the Bengal famine, Hitler still is way past him on sheer body count.

What is with white men's obsession with pissing contests for quantifying evil? For that matter, all of these crimes were limited to Europe, one of the smallest continents in the world. Churchill's victims were worldwide. He even murdered people outside the bounds of the British Empire for the sake of yet another colonial empire when he was younger than either of us are now.

One controlled large swaths of the world and committed genocide, and the other controlled large swaths of the world and committed genocide. Both equally bad. We should stop wasting our time pitting minorities against each other and start working towards the common good of all of us so that minorities will never again fall victim to racism.

You essentially proposing that we abandon any distinction between fascists and anyone who happens to be right of center (and who may happen to be racist

Yes.

which is far, far more common than actually holding fascist beliefs).

What exactly do you think fascist beliefs are?

So how would you propose to check the increasing fascist population, if there is no point in attempting to prevent people from becoming fascists in the first place?

It's too late to prevent people from becoming fascists. They always were.

EDIT: The only way to prevent racism from getting worse is for more honest discussion to happen between white people and people of color so that white people stop being trapped into a one-sided perspective on us that excludes us. In reality, it is not happening enough as most white people do not have ears to listen, so what I believe will actually happen is that the problem will get worse and worse until it finally ruins the Western world for good and is no longer treated as a remotely plausible ideology.

Didn't we already split "Travis and Vijay shout the same thing back and forth forever" into its own thread?

Wouldn't it be nice if people like you kept their mouths shut and listened to minorities so we would never have to have arguments like this in the first place?