lollol
1mo ago
I will try to illustrate my frustration with this argument. This is like two groups of kids in a playground where one group is building this sandcastle and yes those kids have these weird rules or behaviors or rituals that ranges from annoying to abhorrent for the other group of kids. But then the other group of kids come and just destroys the sandcastle. I think my feelings about gutting the IMLS would mirror some gun range enthusiast’s feeling if a liberal president went and hampered the Pittman-Robertson Act with regards to federal grants to gun education.
PS: I’m extra frustrated because conservatives do demonstrate their ability to grow and nurture their own ideologues of specific professions such as the Federalist Society. But then I can’t think of a reverse equivalent (other than liberal gun owners which isn’t a profession) so my argument isn’t going anywhere.
lollol
1mo ago
I think this is a big stretch in argument, very far away from what I am arguing for or against. I don’t know the right terms but I do believe this is along the lines of a “strawman argument” or “moving the goalpost” or “dodging the arguments” or, to borrow another commenter that pointed out to me what I was doing, “retreating from the bailey to the motte”. I do not think the IMLS budget is remotely within the realm of comparison or analogy with the totality of US debt. I was rebutting on the characterization with which @phailyoor was describing the three line items. That if I apply their criteria on whether that was government waste, I found at least 2/3 not a waste, and definitely satisfy their criteria of providing “books or computers or printers or anything”. Emphasis on “I” and “their” because obviously they did not find the same conclusions.
lollol
1mo ago
Yes, I realize that now and that my initial 3 points weren’t enough. I will now attempt to not dodge your question. I don’t know what the maximum number of line items is. I probably start to get dizzy when things add up to about a few billion dolllars. But I do know my minimums. And that if comparing between two slices of salami to cut, yes I would look for the qualitative difference. And I would find my a way to cut $266m somewhere else than the IMLS without a replacement.
lollol
1mo ago
Ok, well since the Trump Administration is in power, seems to me like instead of shutting things down, why don't they just....change how they grant the money? Yes, do just that, grant more directly to the state library services so that the regional politicians can be more judicious and be capricious with how the money should be spent. Take a step further and give all the money to the red states so they can go build some beautiful civic architecture, I am very much in agreement with that. What I disagree with is cutting the funding and that libraries and museums would have to reduce hours etc.
lollol
1mo ago
After knowing that none of this money actually goes to books or computers or printers or anything
I'm going to take your exact examples without looking at the links.
a tribal college in northern Michigan to continue offering library services during a building renovation.
This looks to me exactly like books, computers, or printers cause it seems with the funding absence, there will be less books/computers/printers available for that area.
a historically Black university in Virginia $52,000 to digitize an archival collection about the women’s college it absorbed in 1932.
This is literally about creating more books. Or at the very least, making the books more accessible.
a $150,000 grant to help school librarians better support students who are autistic.
Ok, don't know what exactly that is, I will concede on this example.
I think 2/3 is a good score.
lollol
1mo ago
well, seeing that I feel strongly about this 1.59, then yes I am doing budgetary salami slicing, and yes I am taking issue over one slice of salami. I think it's this exact freedom with which American citizens can feel strongly about their slice of salami that makes Americans great. We can argue over everything, we will fight (reasonably and without violence) over anything, and that's fine. I think this salami is important and I'm speaking up about it. I feel strongly that this slice of salami has great public utility, that decreasing this slice is not good for the American people, now or in the future. I do not feel that America is at the bottom of the warned cost as I can envision far worse use for America's money in far greater amounts (special military operation in Canada, let's say) leading to way more slices of salami being sacrificed than I am comfortable with.
lollol
1mo ago
I would counter-argue that this is the slippery slope argument/fallacy. That I definitely can make a choice that of the various $1.59s line items on a receipt, I want this particular line item to stay $1.59 and/or even increase it. Now let's say the IMLS was not just dismantled but replaced by something similar to the Pittman–Robertson Act I would support it even more.
lollol
1mo ago
You've replied to my comment here so I do believe you see the numbers there too. $268m/168m taxpayers = $1.59/taxpayer that goes to the IMLS. I would argue that:
- $1.59/taxpayer is a very small price for US citizens to help each other, even if it's across state lines or 1000 miles away.
- As explained in that comment, most of library funding is already local, and in the case of Alabama, you pointed out that Alabama effectively got $0 from the federal government for 2024.
- Since we want to encourage local and regional brilliance, shouldn't that be argument that more funds should be given to states and local municipalities to do what they will? Seems to me like the major funding from IMLS are exactly just that.
lollol
1mo ago
Right, I think this furthers prove my point that in terms of "economic and social policy", regional governors and politicians often have far more control over their library system than the federal government.
lollol
1mo ago
Looking at this federal funding data sheet, I am reading that IMLS funding in 2024 was $268 million, with $211m distributed through the Library Services and Technology Act, which based on this 2022 factsheet by the American Libraries Association is the "only source of dedicated federal funding for the more than 116,000 public, school, academic, government, and special libraries across the nation."
I would agree that damn, look at that $268m - $211m, there is waste here of $67m somehow. And yes, for the 168million people that live in America that file taxes, they should either get their $0.40 back or DOGE can get it better spent.
But let's circle back to the federal disbursement of funds to libraries. Let's assume that $211m was equally distributed among the states, that's $211m/50 = $4.22m per state. Let's pick a random state, like Alabama, and look at their state budget for 2024. Specifically we can go to page 66 on the pdf (or 61 by the page numbering) to see that $18.3m was the total appropriation and $6.6m of that going to "amount earmarked for state aid to local libraries". I'm going to assume $4.22 would have been extra to the above, which would account for 4.22/(18.3 + 4.22) = 18.7% of funding for libraries in Alabama.
Is 18.7% a lot? Maybe. Is 81.3% a lot more? Absolutely. We can see that a lot of library funding is already dominated by local spending. I don't see how libraries are examples of where there is federal overreach or forcing the hand of states in terms of state-federal relationships. In fact if we look at the budget of Alabama on page 6 of the pdf (or 1 by the page numbering), the state had on hand 8.8b + 3b = $11.8b, which is then supplemented by 18.6b + 15b = 33.6b from elsewhere. This is the total inverse relationship where local funding is dwarfed by federal funding.
Actually, I found this pdf from Auburn University at Montgomery from 2022 which on page 7 has a diagram of 2019 funding where it shows 0.9% of Alabama funding for libraries was from the federal government. That in 2022, Alabama received $2.7m, which is way less than the $4.22m assumption I made above.
I can understand where you're coming from with regards to the balance of powers between national/federal and regional/state actors or the power of the purse and the carrot/stick strategy every administration uses against the state governments. But in this particular situation about library funding, I don't see how it holds water.
lollol
1mo ago
giving indigenous tribes veto power over exhibit contents
I'm going to assume you're referring to what is discussed here, which is really covered by NYT here. From my read of it, it wasn't that the museums system went full woke, it was the Biden administration that went full woke, given that:
The process started in 1990 with the passage of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, or NAGPRA, which established protocols for museums and other institutions to return human remains, funerary objects and other holdings to tribes. But as those efforts have dragged on for decades, the law was criticized by tribal representatives as being too slow and too susceptible to institutional resistance.
To me, it doesn't seem like the museums themselves are really trying their hardest at compliance in the last 35 years. It took the wokest administration so far to lay down new regulations for:
Museums around the country have been covering up displays as curators scramble to determine whether they can be shown under the new regulations
I would imagine that if the museums went full woke they would have already done it willingly and without being asked instead of the "scramble" that's mentioned. I don't see anything that is intelligent or creative about shuttering museums. If we talk about the indigenious tribes veto power specifically, seems like simply reversing the situation is already enough, why must go as far as shutting off funding for the museums themselves?
Also I would like to hear your arguments on why libraries should also receive less funding and possibly need closing.
lollol
1mo ago
/r/fednews is going wild about what's going on with the Institute of Museum and Library Services. This is in-line with this executive order. If this really does goes forward and a significant chunk of federal funding is cut from museums and libraries nationwide, I might really just start go kick a rock somewhere. I love libraries, I love museums, and I really don't think they're that wasteful either. I've read and somewhat understand where other posters are coming from with regards to institutional-ideological-capture, but on this I am struggling to see how that weighs so much compared to the good being provided.
Literally over the weekend on a day trip, my wife and I stopped at the local town's library for a midtrip break and I was absolutely astound at the many services this small town library provided. There was weekly notary service, children activities, a display of locally important quilts, a plethora of tax-season offerings, etc. Personally, in my childhood, my school library was open on Saturday and it was common for my mum to unload us kids there for the day and let us roam the stacks as we please. As a middle schooler, the library was great for a socially anxious kid. And in adulthood, on every exploration walk I've made, if there's a library open, I'm walking in.
For any trip to any world-class city, museums are the first thing on my list. The artifacts, the stories, the experience of seeing things you've only seen in books or through the internet with your own eyes, letting those electrons hit those retinas. Washington DC would be a lot less inviting or exciting without the many museums that dot its map. Even the small libraries can be a great experience as they often document a subject I've never thought of before.
The US greatest treasures are its national parks and forests and public land. Thankfully at least that nature would survive when there are less humans, though I still fear for the actual long term consequences. Not so the libraries and museums. Can someone explains to me why this is a good thing?
lollol
1mo ago
Many times, I think any explanation of the authoritarian regime, of trying to understand it, and therefore explains its actions, will just boil down to "because they want to keep their power" and "because they want to exercise their power". I don't think it's necessary to have to dive into youthful childhoods, psychological makeups, sociological contexts, religo-ideological-cultural histories, politico-economic analyses, and all the different litanies of explanation for why authoritarian regimes are the way they are because what they are and what they want are so nakedly obvious.
Musings on "because they want to keep their power"
In 2021, the Minister of Public Security To Lam ate some $1000 steak wrapped in gold at the height of the pandemic. Well, now that he's the most powerful person in the country, it would be nice if no one keep mentioning that anymore or else the people might actually go and remember that they're the People. And it doesn't have to be just that guy, there are more than 5.3million Party members, and all those military leaders, and industrial leaders. And they're all the same people, they hang out with each other, they go on vacations together, their kids marry each other. They too have a vested interest keeping the bad news off the minds of the masses. It's the same with China and Jack Ma really, "oh you want to get rich? sure sure, give us a cut, but always remember that it's under our whims". Unfortunate for Vietnam but we didn't have a Deng and we definitely did not get a Shenzen out of that deal.
Musings on "because they want to exercise their power"
Marcus Aurelius is a stoic. Marcus Aurelius also happens to be the Emperor of the greatest Empire West of the Himalayans in history (at the time). Through his Meditations, which is really only his diary, we see a man constantly repeating to himself multiple times the same thing, self-restraining himself, reminding himself of the core values of what constitutes eudaimonia. Now Rome was no doubt an authoritarian regime, and that's exactly why we still revere Marcus Aurelius. Because he could have been violent, he could have been depraved, he could have been egoistical, etc. and etc, but he didn't and continually refused to succumb to the baser instincts of man. Do I believe that To Lam is a smart man, absolutely, at the very least it has to be some kind of low cunning to beat out 5.3 million people for the top spot. Do I believe he is an effective leader, also absolutely, how could someone be not when they have to manage the hounds of a state, an authoritarian one at that. Let's even give him the benefit of the doubt that he didn't choose to eat a golden-steak, it was a gift, a surprise by the restaurant owner. But did he succumb to his baser instinct? I bet goddamn he did. And now he and all the other golden-steak eating cadres just want to continue to be able to do that.
Last musings
Now of course, all those "litanies" mentioned in the beginning make for quite good reading, but I am not sure if all that matters in terms of real-life tactics and strategies. Fuel for propaganda, yes. Maybe even in a know-yourself-know-your-enemy kind of way if you're some kind of on-the-ground tactician. But in the end, the authoritarian motivations are very simple, no matter the trappings we or they heap upon themselves for why they do the things they do.
lollol
1mo ago
Bringing some less than stellar news out of Vietnam. Prominent journalist Truong Huy San (first name: San, family name: Truong) was indicted for "abusing democratic freedoms to infringe upon the interests of the State, lawful rights, and interests of organizations and/or citizens". To paint who Truong Huy San is, we can look at his wikipedia link. An army veteran that served in wartime for his country, was a fellow at Harvard, wrote a book that is called "perhaps the first critical, comprehensive history of Vietnam since 1975 by someone inside the country.", interviewed by Ken Burns (and others). Honestly, I like the guy even if I haven't read his blog, which I'm sure is not even dissident-writing but just critical of the government or the corruption he sees. It is a worrying sign, and I'm glad I'm in the US (unless they kick me out). But things seem to be clamping down in Vietnam, mirroring changes in China in the last decade. Again, I am reminded that ugly-authoritarian can very quickly rear its head. If you are a citizen in such countries, life is probably alright, generally, averagely. Things aren't good, but they aren't bad bad either. But then one day you can wake up and there's a policeman knocking on your door "inviting you to some tea". Personally, I myself notice that I self-censor for fear of somehow endangering the relatives I have at home. Journalists are probably even more fearful.
“They know exactly how many stories we published on a particular day about a particular topic. How intensive we cover Ukraine, Phương Hằng, etc. They show the data at the [briefing] meeting. They do not only [give] you editorial directions [like before], but also [dictate] the scale of your reporting, or its positive - negative ratio. Briefing meetings nowadays are intensively involved with data.”
- An anonymous editor, talking about weekly meetings between press regulators and executives from media houses.
taken from 2024 Report — Censorship in Vietnam: State Media Under Unprecedented Attack
More could be said, but I guess I'm just sad for my home country.
lollol
1mo ago
To add color to this analysis, Peter Thiel and David Sacks also grew up in South Africa, but significantly less time in their childhood compared to Musk. Nevertheless, the adults that raised them probably imparted their own opinions, world views, and aspirations to these future billionaires.
lollol
1mo ago
You briefly mentioned it with "This is a duty that falls to families and local communities", and I'm interested in hearing what are the solutions you advocate for. I suppose maybe we can define the problem as "people/families/communities with food insecurity". FWIW, I'm interested to hear your opinion cause it seems you've thought quite a bit about this and because I've recently gotten involved in weekly volunteer session at the local soup kitchen. I've never really thought about the macro/root-cause-analysis/solution-space of this issue.
lollol
1mo ago
Here's another motive. Zelensky might be surrounded by people who are anti-Russia and they might just make him "a devastating mistake made in the chaos of war."
lollol
1mo ago
Sounds like the same story as this video: https://youtube.com/watch?v=9I_u4oZqF8c
lollol
2mo ago
Is it really that repulsive? Seems like Americans find Nazi imagery repulsive but most still hold their nose about it and not saying anything. I suppose the argument here is how fast to stretch and maybe the reactionary right is stretching it too quick. It's still early days, I think the full repercussions of what's happening hasn't really engendered a backlash yet.
lollol
2mo ago
Right right, but that's the thing with the Chinese protagonists, they are moral and have their own moral system, they're just not Western morals.
lollol
2mo ago
hahaha, yeah, had to do it manually. chatgpt just uppercase almost all the words https://chatgpt.com/share/67b8d1a9-6784-8003-a263-feb006d87a81
lollol
2mo ago
I had to recreate it but chatgpt's output just uppercase almost all the words https://chatgpt.com/share/67b8d1a9-6784-8003-a263-feb006d87a81
Pretty much what @SigurdsSilverSword said. I guess maybe a better term might be free-roaming?
More options
Context Copy link