The omnipresent Chase who? There’s a difference between using an elected office to spread unreasoning fear and resentment based on a lie and the positions of activist / interest groups. To claim equivalence might be called, well...
The omnipresent Chase who? There’s a difference between using an elected office to spread unreasoning fear and resentment based on a lie and the positions of activist / interest groups. To claim equivalence might be called, well...
Same. I’d never heard of Chase and I’m a pretty progressive individual. Someone active on Twitter and someone who actually has the ability to pass laws are not equivalents.
Who's banning new gas-stove hookups in several gigantic cities if not politicians in elected offices? The equivalence might be out of balance, but it's still there. And several cities, like Minneapolis, DID slash police budgets under the Defund banner until the good solons watched crime rocket. Only then did they Defund Defund. Again, not equivalent to the GOP baloney, but we have it on our side as well.
I agree. Big difference. Not the least of which is that elected officials can be voted out, but there's no way to "vote out" a private citizen. Goes to show that JVL is right -- the problem is the voters.
Yes, look at the scale. Find Chase a bunch of mainstream friends. You can't. This was the original premise of Al Franken's books, that lying is tremendously asymmetrical. Now gaslighting, cruelty, plutocracy, white supremacy, and bigotry are tremendously asymmetrical. A "balanced view" (bothsidesism) is sort of how we got here, treating well-meaning politicians as part of the problem against an entire party acting in bad faith.
Exactly. Honestly, I expect more out of Bulwark. Even the gas stove thing has a basis in science, and whatever any municipality has done it's not like Joe Biden wants to personally lead an army of bureaucrats as they maraud through kitchens.
Right, how many consumer products have been banned because research uncovered how harmful they were? Banning CFCs, lead, and asbestos affected a massive segment of consumer goods.
Totally agree. It probably would be better to limit the use of natural gas and all fossil fuels. Thank goodness, it seems we are headed that way. However, no one is telling anyone they have to abandon their gas heating or gas stoves. It really perturbs me when Charlie feels the need to present some type of false equivalence. A few Democrats and leftists cried "defund the Police". But most people, Dems and Rs know that would be a ridiculous solution to the police violence problem and more nuanced solutions are required.
I've been cooling on the Bulwark recently. Not gonna find the exits, but when it's the non-expert types bloviating I move on. Only listened to the Gen Hertling pod this week. Let's see who the other guests are
It feels like they got angry emails from some of the older, legacy conservative types and are pivoting (not unlike Fox in reaction to Newsmax). If I had to hazard a guess.
I really wish Bulwark walked the walk for anti-fascist action. The Leuders piece on the Wisconsin Supreme Court elections shows what a razors edge democracy is on, and we all need to do our small parts. One of the lessons from fascism, including our recent US experiences, is that we can't wait to form someone else to solve our problems. I'll be phone banking into Wisconsin, will you join me?
One of the geniuses of the GOP propaganda machine is that they are excellent at nutpicking and the media is often only too happy to go along. Some random, chronically online, college student filled with intensity and passion has a direct line to Biden and Schumer even if said college student probably considers both to be neoliberal shills. Never mind that it was only Trump who called twitter and asked for tweets to be censored.
Since gaslighting is now becoming mainstream knowledge let's now let the rest of the world know about nutpicking.
In fairness I'm not deep enough in the trans world to name a lot of names, so maybe in trans circles this Chase person feels omnipresent. But I'd never heard of them.
But really a lawyer at the ACLU vs Alex Jones or a state governor? Or the "head" of BLM, when for most people Black Lives Matter is a statement of belief and not an official club they count themselves as dues-paying members of?
I agree. Saying that Democrats are for defunding the police because BLM has taken that position is incorrect. Bernie Sanders when asked if he supported defunding the Police said, absolutely not! He said he was for giving more money to the Police. That is the Democrats and Independents position. The Democrats don't follow BLM.
What's even more annoying is that ninety percent of the argument is attacking the quality of the bumper sticker slogan without even addressing the conceptual framework behind the Defund concept.
Yes, "Defund the police" was a disastrous slogan and Charlie correctly identified it as bad news. It likely contributed to Biden's anti-coattails in the 20 election.
But the actual villains of the piece are not the Democratic party or the proggies who weren't in on the idea, nor even the Defunders themselves. It's the right wing distortion machine that took a niche movement slogan, completely misrepresented the argument behind it, and smeared that misrepresentation across the entire party.
It's one thing to tell somebody on team that they're being counterproductive to the cause and another thing altogether to victim blame the whole group for, I dunno, failing to suppress the free speech rights of one faction?
Josh, I agree. And the same analysis can be applied to the slogan "Black Lives Matter" which the right wing has distorted to be an anti white sentiment and was the precursor to the CRT controversy, another right wing distortion concerning race. These distortions are clearly intentional, as the right wing "thought" leaders take advantage of the aggrieved base's lack of critical thinking skills and/or willful ignorance to fundraise and solidify political support through outrage over perceived racism against white people.
I could say that people saying "All Lives Matter" would be protesting over George Floyd as well, but "All Lives Matter" was simply a polite label for people who in their hearts don't care if eggs are broken while making omelets in controlling black communities. They won't come out and say, but basically the attitude is Floyd's death by extrajudicial murder was just a risk that criminals should have for being criminals, and stretching over a little further, Philando Castile was regrettable collateral damage. Oh and Daniel Shaver just flat never happened.
You nailed it Josh. A few radicals said Defund the Police in response to the murder of George Floyd and the Rs turn that it the major policy of the Democrats. They are very good at doing that since they lie continually.
Like if an oncologist started marketing chemotherapy as the "Toxic Injection Tumor Standard" would we yell at every oncologist in the country and refuse to ever use it again?
Asking for a couple friends who've already reserved a domain and business cards.
I’m trying to figure out if it was intentional on Charlie’s part to prove his point, even as he pooh-pooh’d “both sidesism” when he basically made equivalence with a fringe figure maybe >1% of lefties have ever heard of, with Alex Jones and a significant number of elected Republicans seriously coming after SS & Medicare.
When Democrats nominate Chase Strangio for President or pick him to give the SOTU response, we can start talking. You see Chris Rufo on Fox all the time. How often is Chase Strangio on MSNBC? This piece today veered into the absurd, unfortunately.
Chase Strangio is quoted in Charlie's piece today. He's a lawyer for the ACLU who specializes in trans matters and is often their public voice on such matters. He is himself a transman, and is about as far to the left as you can get when it comes to any sort of controversial issues like transwomen in sports, affirmative care at any age, medicalization at any age, etc.
Right. He's a cartoon character that the right uses to mischaracterize Democrats because he works at the ACLU. He's a leftwing activist and does not represent the Democratic party.
The omnipresent Chase who? There’s a difference between using an elected office to spread unreasoning fear and resentment based on a lie and the positions of activist / interest groups. To claim equivalence might be called, well...
Same. I’d never heard of Chase and I’m a pretty progressive individual. Someone active on Twitter and someone who actually has the ability to pass laws are not equivalents.
Who's banning new gas-stove hookups in several gigantic cities if not politicians in elected offices? The equivalence might be out of balance, but it's still there. And several cities, like Minneapolis, DID slash police budgets under the Defund banner until the good solons watched crime rocket. Only then did they Defund Defund. Again, not equivalent to the GOP baloney, but we have it on our side as well.
Well put Paul
Beat me to it.
I agree. Big difference. Not the least of which is that elected officials can be voted out, but there's no way to "vote out" a private citizen. Goes to show that JVL is right -- the problem is the voters.
Yes, look at the scale. Find Chase a bunch of mainstream friends. You can't. This was the original premise of Al Franken's books, that lying is tremendously asymmetrical. Now gaslighting, cruelty, plutocracy, white supremacy, and bigotry are tremendously asymmetrical. A "balanced view" (bothsidesism) is sort of how we got here, treating well-meaning politicians as part of the problem against an entire party acting in bad faith.
Exactly. Honestly, I expect more out of Bulwark. Even the gas stove thing has a basis in science, and whatever any municipality has done it's not like Joe Biden wants to personally lead an army of bureaucrats as they maraud through kitchens.
Right, how many consumer products have been banned because research uncovered how harmful they were? Banning CFCs, lead, and asbestos affected a massive segment of consumer goods.
Totally agree. It probably would be better to limit the use of natural gas and all fossil fuels. Thank goodness, it seems we are headed that way. However, no one is telling anyone they have to abandon their gas heating or gas stoves. It really perturbs me when Charlie feels the need to present some type of false equivalence. A few Democrats and leftists cried "defund the Police". But most people, Dems and Rs know that would be a ridiculous solution to the police violence problem and more nuanced solutions are required.
I've been cooling on the Bulwark recently. Not gonna find the exits, but when it's the non-expert types bloviating I move on. Only listened to the Gen Hertling pod this week. Let's see who the other guests are
I don't expect the writers to be progressives. But their calling card is intellectual honesty, and I don't see it here.
It feels like they got angry emails from some of the older, legacy conservative types and are pivoting (not unlike Fox in reaction to Newsmax). If I had to hazard a guess.
I really wish Bulwark walked the walk for anti-fascist action. The Leuders piece on the Wisconsin Supreme Court elections shows what a razors edge democracy is on, and we all need to do our small parts. One of the lessons from fascism, including our recent US experiences, is that we can't wait to form someone else to solve our problems. I'll be phone banking into Wisconsin, will you join me?
https://www.mobilize.us/call4change/event/550109/?referring_vol=4593579&rname=Robert×lot=3842844&referring_participation=22706045&referring_data_signature=v1-4a2007de82c955f5&share_medium=copy_link&share_context=signup-form-modal
One of the geniuses of the GOP propaganda machine is that they are excellent at nutpicking and the media is often only too happy to go along. Some random, chronically online, college student filled with intensity and passion has a direct line to Biden and Schumer even if said college student probably considers both to be neoliberal shills. Never mind that it was only Trump who called twitter and asked for tweets to be censored.
Since gaslighting is now becoming mainstream knowledge let's now let the rest of the world know about nutpicking.
In fairness I'm not deep enough in the trans world to name a lot of names, so maybe in trans circles this Chase person feels omnipresent. But I'd never heard of them.
But really a lawyer at the ACLU vs Alex Jones or a state governor? Or the "head" of BLM, when for most people Black Lives Matter is a statement of belief and not an official club they count themselves as dues-paying members of?
I agree. Saying that Democrats are for defunding the police because BLM has taken that position is incorrect. Bernie Sanders when asked if he supported defunding the Police said, absolutely not! He said he was for giving more money to the Police. That is the Democrats and Independents position. The Democrats don't follow BLM.
What's even more annoying is that ninety percent of the argument is attacking the quality of the bumper sticker slogan without even addressing the conceptual framework behind the Defund concept.
Yes, "Defund the police" was a disastrous slogan and Charlie correctly identified it as bad news. It likely contributed to Biden's anti-coattails in the 20 election.
But the actual villains of the piece are not the Democratic party or the proggies who weren't in on the idea, nor even the Defunders themselves. It's the right wing distortion machine that took a niche movement slogan, completely misrepresented the argument behind it, and smeared that misrepresentation across the entire party.
It's one thing to tell somebody on team that they're being counterproductive to the cause and another thing altogether to victim blame the whole group for, I dunno, failing to suppress the free speech rights of one faction?
Josh, I agree. And the same analysis can be applied to the slogan "Black Lives Matter" which the right wing has distorted to be an anti white sentiment and was the precursor to the CRT controversy, another right wing distortion concerning race. These distortions are clearly intentional, as the right wing "thought" leaders take advantage of the aggrieved base's lack of critical thinking skills and/or willful ignorance to fundraise and solidify political support through outrage over perceived racism against white people.
Yup.
I could say that people saying "All Lives Matter" would be protesting over George Floyd as well, but "All Lives Matter" was simply a polite label for people who in their hearts don't care if eggs are broken while making omelets in controlling black communities. They won't come out and say, but basically the attitude is Floyd's death by extrajudicial murder was just a risk that criminals should have for being criminals, and stretching over a little further, Philando Castile was regrettable collateral damage. Oh and Daniel Shaver just flat never happened.
You nailed it Josh. A few radicals said Defund the Police in response to the murder of George Floyd and the Rs turn that it the major policy of the Democrats. They are very good at doing that since they lie continually.
Like if an oncologist started marketing chemotherapy as the "Toxic Injection Tumor Standard" would we yell at every oncologist in the country and refuse to ever use it again?
Asking for a couple friends who've already reserved a domain and business cards.
Nutpicking, either a typo for nitpicking or a brilliant trans locution.
I see it a lot. I think people don't realize what a nit is so assume it must be nutpicking.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpicking
Wow I always learn something new in the comments section!
Ah.
Totally agree. These lefties being quoted are fringe figures, not the core of the party.
I’m trying to figure out if it was intentional on Charlie’s part to prove his point, even as he pooh-pooh’d “both sidesism” when he basically made equivalence with a fringe figure maybe >1% of lefties have ever heard of, with Alex Jones and a significant number of elected Republicans seriously coming after SS & Medicare.
When Democrats nominate Chase Strangio for President or pick him to give the SOTU response, we can start talking. You see Chris Rufo on Fox all the time. How often is Chase Strangio on MSNBC? This piece today veered into the absurd, unfortunately.
Who is Chase Stranglo?
Exactly.
Chase Strangio is quoted in Charlie's piece today. He's a lawyer for the ACLU who specializes in trans matters and is often their public voice on such matters. He is himself a transman, and is about as far to the left as you can get when it comes to any sort of controversial issues like transwomen in sports, affirmative care at any age, medicalization at any age, etc.
So it's just his opinion. It is not the Democratic platform.
Right. He's a cartoon character that the right uses to mischaracterize Democrats because he works at the ACLU. He's a leftwing activist and does not represent the Democratic party.
Unfortunately, he represents the ACLU, which deserves the appropriate scorn it is receiving these days.
Agree. And while I generally liked Mrs Donnelly's piece I had the same thoughts on her including that Strangio quote
A Strangio by any other name is still...strange.
Good point. But "asymmetry" is a Berkley faculty lounge term. Can we think of a word that could resonate more broadly?