Chattooga
1yr ago
I understand that you think 2020 had a vast under response. Broadly I agree that there should have been less hand-wringing and more condemnation. But I don’t think that describing politics as Blue Tribe and Red Tribe actually justifies tribal argument. Many ‘blue tribe’ people I know were also outraged at the rioting and destruction.
You describe J6 like it was an overeager group of tourists ducking under a velvet rope. I can’t really figure out what to say to that. Generally I try to respond as genuinely good faith as I can, but this seems like a major break to me.
Members of J6, broadly:
Fought with police instructing them to disperse
Tore down crowd barriers
Broke and climbed in windows
Opened doors to let in others
Went through desks and offices of capital building members
Pressed further into the building, including secured areas.
Babbitt climbed through a broke window directly adjacent to a guard with a drawn weapon.
All of this in one of the most importantly political buildings in the country, second only to the White House. While Congress was in session. With the express intent of stopping the proceedings and in some cases calls for the execution of its members.
What about the situation am I missing that leads you to dismiss it? I don’t think this is comparable to previous protests since to my knowledge no previous protest has led to the occupation of the capital building.
Chattooga
1yr ago
Calling it ‘criminal trespassing’ feels bad faith. Sure, it’s technically true, but it downplays the obvious severity of the situation.
I want to treat people like adults and say that if you are climbing through a broken window into the Capitol of the United States with the express intent of halting proceedings, you are taking on the consequences of that action.
Was all of the sentencing fair relative to 2020? Maybe not, but this was an enormous national and international embarrassment, and I’m not too worried about the government being too harsh on the category of “people who break into the capitol to stop an election”.
Chattooga
1yr ago
What is the worst crime that a J6th rioter committed?
Broke into the capitol building in order to overturn an election? I feel like people really undersell how crazy it is that we had an angry mob break into Congress. For national respect and social cohesion that’s so much worse than burning down a police station.
Chattooga
1yr ago
Speaking directly from personal experience, my life has been notably improved by running and reading ‘serious’ books more often, and playing video games less often.
I don’t think it’s an absolute, there’s nothing wrong with a video game, but it should be more like dessert.
Chattooga
1yr ago
I’m sure if Trump actually had a legally compelling case he would have already filed, but he hasn’t. That implies to me that he wants to reduce libel protections. (I don’t think he wants that for idealogical reasons, or even has strong convictions about it. I think he’s just personally upset.)
Plus, ‘undermining the public’ goes both ways. Should news organizations reporting on ‘Haitians are eating the cats’ be shut down?
Chattooga
1yr ago
I don’t see how this makes him a republican. There’s plenty of issues that differentiate the two parties, and his point in this case is a set of changes/tweaks that the current party should make. It’s not an exhaustive list of what the democrats should be.
Chattooga
1yr ago
He can say whatever he wants, but then he did a bad job last presidency, because they were fighting against him constantly. I’m imaging many more yes men this time around.
Chattooga
1yr ago
But it’s exactly because Tulsi, RFK, and in a way Elon rebelled against the establishment that they need Trump. They have nowhere else to go!
I think Trump picks people for a lot of reasons, not just pure loyalty, I just think loyalty is much higher on his list of requirements than it used to be.
Chattooga
1yr ago
I don’t think you can draw a conclusion that Trump is intentionally doing this. Last presidency he was burned by a lot of his establishment picks when they weren’t loyal enough to him. Now he’s selecting for more loyalists, and that tends to include those who want power but have been kicked out or left behind by the establishment.
Maybe you like the end result of this, but I think it’s largely coincidental. It also means he’s less likely to pick competent people, since competent people are smart enough to stay close to existing power.
Chattooga
1yr ago
Oh yeah, I think he’s quite different than Trump, specifically that he’s actually smart and (seems like) competent. I think he presents a clear vision for America, it’s just one I don’t like.
I think democrats could come up with something that competes with that, but not if they let basic pro-family, pro-health, and pro-community messages become further right-coded.
Chattooga
1yr ago
I think a lot of these are pretty reasonable guesses. What I want to see is a renewed focus on presenting some kind of narrative alternative in opposition to MAGA, particularly Vance who seem like the future of the Republicans.
Right now the Democrats’ vision for America feels like continued management of the existing system, and not only is that boring, it’s incredibly weak against an opponent that has a clear message for what the country should look like. Pointing to specific causes of specific problems beats hand-wavy answers and technocratic tax-credit solutions. (Even if sometimes the hand-wavy answers are correct!)
Bernie style populist policies are definitely a component of that, but I don’t want to flip to the naive “just tax the rich until things are fixed”. I really want to see them push policies that are useful for building secular shared norms and openly present them as such.
Chattooga
1yr ago
What specifically is making you think that FEMA is bungling the response? I see it repeatedly taken as fact in this thread, and that we should trust to random tiktok videos, but very little actual documentation of the situation.
I’m not claiming everything is perfect. I just think that rumors always swirl in the aftermath, and the insane political polarization in this case is making it worse. I expect clearer information to come out in the next few weeks.
Chattooga
1yr ago
It’s because this isn’t a money problem, it’s a logistics problem. Israel and Ukraine are already managing their responses, so it’s easy to give them aid. With the hurricane you have to figure out what goes where, and how to get it there, which is a difficult problem.
Also, I believe the majority of the value of the aid given to Ukraine in particularly is not cash, but arms, ammo, and loans.
Chattooga
1yr ago
If I’m reading it correctly, there’s not really anything wrong? FEMA has access to the funds it needs, and if your issue is with the money being spent on immigration related issues, that’s a directive from Congress.
Chattooga
1yr ago
Well, I don’t think trump’s thinking was influenced by it because I don’t think Trump has coherent thoughts on policy. The less catchy version would be that the people staffing a future Trump administration would be influenced by the agenda outlined in project 2025. I don’t think that’s far off from what’s being said, is it?
Chattooga
1yr ago
I think this is pretty rational, isn’t it? Stability and security are extremely valuable things, especially for people with a lot to lose.
Chattooga
1yr ago
I grew up in a Christian family, not fundamentalist, but I went to church every week and was active in youth programs. I fairly quickly stopped believing around 15, and to be honest I have never looked back.
I’m curious what drew you back to it?
Chattooga
1yr ago
Assuming that there are in fact not reports of Haitian immigrants eating cats, then I think it’s pretty fair to say Vance was lying.
Whether “people who shouldn’t be in this country” was intended to imply illegal immigrants or just immigrants generally is unclear, but it’s also secondary to the eating cats thing. That’s the main thrust of what Vance said and it doesn’t seem to be true.
Chattooga
1yr ago
While I wish public health was actually a large issue, for either party, I don’t see any evidence that Kamala or democrats broadly are celebrating people getting fat.
While ‘body positivity’ is generally supported, ‘Fat acceptance’ is still extremely online. At least, I’m assuming, couldn’t find polling at a glance.
Chattooga
1yr ago
I find it extremely unlikely Walz honestly believes the couch thing. It’s well known that it’s fake, it’s just become a meme.
Chattooga
1yr ago
I haven’t seen anybody notable arguing that Khalif is a trans icon; she’s not trans.
I think ‘Team A’ broadly assumes she has a DSD, but is considering social identity over genetics. And it’s mostly speculation from both sides since nothing is confirmed about her genetics or hormones.
Chattooga
1yr ago
I don’t think you can just say that there’s something wrong with ‘axe’ over ‘ask’. It’s an arbitrary change, and aren’t most changes in language like that?
There are obviously cultural/educational assumptions about person who says axe, and that influences whether or not it’s beneficial to say it, but if tomorrow every English speaker switched and only ever said ‘axe,’ then what’s wrong with that?
If the rules of language change or dialects form, then there will always be intermediate points where people say a mix of things
Chattooga
1yr ago
The sexual revolution is basically a prolonged experiment in what happens when you take away the personal incentive not to be shitty to girls that you want to fuck but don't want to wife.
But isn’t the increased social atomization caused by changes in technology? I don’t think the sexual revolution is what broke down regular social connection
Chattooga
1yr ago
Because it prevents you from having a normal social connection. That type of thing is best mediated through interpersonal contact, because that’s how we evolved to deal with it.
It’s one of the reasons people behave radically differently online than they would in person.
My point is obviously not that “it’s okay for my side to do anything but your side can’t do anything”. I get that you’re frustrated by a double standard but don’t project that onto me.
My point is that widespread generic protests cannot be equivocated to this specific event. It’s unlike anything in recent election history.
J6 was clearly not peaceful, and its goals were not, like almost all major protests in the last century, to influence politics through voicing discontent. It was to upend an election, and for some, to kill specific members of Congress.
Now, of course it was an uncoordinated mess, but it’s incredibly embarrassing, and yes, is bad for cohesion. Especially after Trump pardons all the people involved. Say what you will about left leaders handwringing or outright supporting riots (as you should), but none of those people stood to benefit from the rioting.
Honestly I think it’s fair to still be angry about the lack of response in 2020. What I can’t stand is the complete denial of J6 as a significant and unique event.
More options
Context Copy link