THURSDAY, AUGUST 3, 2023
Drum's ideas and ours: As Chekhov once had it, "The appearance on the front of a new arrival...became the topic of general conversation."
On Tuesday evening of this very week, the new arrival was Jack Smith's indictment of Donald J. Trump. Understandably, conversation about Florida's new Black history course of study instantly came to an end.
Until that point, thought leaders from our own blue trube had settled on a talking point. They complained about one tiny point in the course of study, speaking bitterly, and in glorious unison, as they went.
(We humans are the memorized animal. As a general matter, we love to repeat whatever it is our last tribal leader just said.)
According to Kevin Drum, that one small point in Florida's K-12 course of study was no gigantic big deal. As we noted on Monday, we agree with him on that point.
That said, what was wrong with Florida's new course of study? We tend to disagree with Drum's view on that matter, but here's what the gentleman said:
DRUM (7/23/23): The real scandal of the Florida standards comes into focus only if you read the whole document. In the high school section, for example, instruction for the antebellum period includes 28 separate standards, of which more than a third (10 of 28) are related to abolition and other efforts to restrain slavery. Only two—if I'm counting generously—have anything to say about the conditions of slavery. Only one is about conditions in America itself, and it's deliberately phrased to make it seem like Southern plantations were not so bad, comparatively speaking:
[...]
To read these standards as a whole, you'd think Black slaves were mostly a bunch of cobblers and blacksmiths, not cotton pickers, and early American history was largely a story of Quakers, abolitionists, and patriots working diligently to end slavery. Conversely, the appalling conditions of Black slavery are barely even acknowledged. There's mention of slave codes, but no mention of families broken up; brutal punishments meted out; women raped; slaves worked to death; rampant disease; miserable diets; and a life expectancy of 22...
In Drum's view, a real scandal does obtain within the new course of study. In his assessment, "the appalling conditions of Black slavery are barely even acknowledged."
He says this after posting a pair of excerpts from the course of study itself. One of those excerpts instructs teachers to "examine the conditions for Africans during their passage to America"—i.e., during the vicious "Middle Passage" which brought enslaved people to these shores.
The other excerpt reads exactly like this:
Compare the living conditions of slaves in British North American colonies, the Caribbean, Central America and South America, including infant mortality rates.
Benchmark Clarifications:
Clarification 1: Examine the harsh conditions and their consequences on British American plantations (e.g., undernourishment, climate conditions, infant and child mortality rates of the enslaved vs. the free).
Clarification 2: Instruction includes the harsh conditions in the Caribbean plantations (i.e., poor nutrition, rigorous labor, disease).
Clarification 3: Instruction includes how slavery was sustained in the Carribbean, Dutch Guiana and Brazil despite overwhelming death rates.
It's true that rape isn't mentioned.
On the other hand, it would be hard to describe conditions of the Middle Passage, and the overwhelming death rates around the Americas, without conveying the astonishing viciousness with which our human race was widely involved not so long ago.
To our ear, Kevin almost seems to "protest too much" in his stated objections. Especially within the context of modern liberal / progressive culture, there's little chance that Florida students won't hear about the vicious practices which obtained in those British American colonies and elsewhere in the western hemisphere.
If teachers teach the Middle Passage, then move on to the undernourishment and the child mortality rates of the enslaved right here on this very continent, it's hard to imagine that students will come away thinking that this emerging nation's Southern plantations just really weren't so bad.
There's no perfect way to teach this part of American history. Also, there's no perfect way to critique Florida's barebones overview of what students should be taught.
For ourselves, we think back to the question we were asked in January 1977—the question we were asked as a bunch of black kids here in Baltimore talked about the nightly broadcast of the widely-viewed Roots TV show.
Within the limits allowed by network TV, Roots portrayed the massive cruelty which drove this brutal system. As the weeklong program aired, the kids in our fifth-grade class discussed what we'd all seen the night before.
Eventually, in what we regard as a sacred moment, one of those children said something very much like this:
Why would anyone ever have been willing to treat other people that way?
In our view, it's one of the best questions anyone ever asked. We recall the general outlines of our answer, though we always said that we were just telling them what we thought, and that they would decide what they themselves thought about such questions as they got older.
Also, that they should consider the views of their parents and guardians first. We were just their teacher, we said, though we would tell them what we thought.
There's no perfect way to tell this history. That said, we're not inclined to agree with Kevin's reaction to Florida's course of study.
There's a lot to say about this topic, and about the tribal impulses which may guide our own blue tribe's morally perfect reactions. Tomorrow, we'll tell you what we ourselves would have stressed had we been sketching that new course of study.
We'll also show you what Rachel Maddow said, and we'll fear for where our tribal impulses may take us as these discussions unfurl.
At any rate, the Middle Passage was "no crystal stair." The same is true, as students will know, of those death-ridden Southern plantations. Was "the greatest generation" them—these brilliant American ancestors?
Tomorrow: You must never behave in such ways
"Understandably, conversation about Florida's new Black history course of study instantly came to an end."
ReplyDeleteExcept among those affected by the standards, black historians and black politicians, parents of black children, and the teachers who will have to implement the standards.
This is just a lie. Trump will be indicted today but his indictment was released two days ago (the indictment was filed on Aug 1). Since then, I can find NBC and many newspapers talking about Harris refusing to debate DeSantis, an article about the College Board disagreeing that the FL standards are like those the AP produced, CBS reporting on a protest of the standards in Jacksonville. All since the announcement of Trump's indictment.
So, no, Trump's problems have not made the FL standards controversy go away, pushed it off the radar. People can apparently hold several thoughts in their minds at one time.
"They complained about one tiny point in the course of study, speaking bitterly, and in glorious unison, as they went."
ReplyDeleteThis too is a lie. Critics of the standards have made multiple criticisms of different parts of the African American history standard. The only person focusing on one tiny part, which he calls a footnote, is Somerby himself, in unison with those trying to minimize the controversy over whitewashing slavery.
Why does Somerby propose such things when all of us can (1) read the standards ourselves, (2) google what is in the news and hear what cable news and other pundits are talking about, (3) are witnesses to current events as fully as Somerby pretends to be. We all have access to the same reality and ours is not the same as what Somerby describes -- a purported lack of interest in FL curriculum except for one tiny nitpick. No, that is a gross distortion of the criticism of the standards, which is ongoing no matter what is happening in Trump's life.
It angers me that not only is Somerby minimizing the content of the standards, but he is minimizing the criticism and the extent of concern among critics. That is wrong and people will not go away, simply because white guys like Drum and Somerby declare their concerns "no big deal" and "of no further interest" because Trump is in trouble.
"As a general matter, we love to repeat whatever it is our last tribal leader just said.)"
ReplyDeleteMuch as they might wish it, Somerby and Drum are not tribal leaders. They don't get to declare a controversy over just because they think it is "no big deal."
Somerby rarely states who he considers to be tribal leaders, who is leading our supposedly unison chant, but it sure as hell isn't him. Republicans tried to pass off white Southern historical revisionism as historical consensus but they aren't getting away with it. Drum doesn't know what he is talking about and Somerby is motivated to repeat Republican talking points, while pretending to be a liberal. They have so far done nothing to refute the concens of critics. I believe they don't have the history knowledge, the chops, to do that effectively, but Somerby isn't even trying.
Even black Republican politicians are upset about the FL standards, but Somerby declares this over, as if he and Drum are the arbiters of what anyone else cares about. At least this controversy provides a touchstone for identifying white bigots who don't care whether black kids are taught their true history.
Bob seems to be of a tribal order who loves to repeat what Kevin Drum just said. And then he loves to repeat it again.
ReplyDeleteAfter a speech in which Michelle Obama mentioned that slaves helped build the Capitol, O”Reilly countered that the slaves were “well treated.” Bob’s old pal was pretty mildly rebuffed.
That, it seems to me, is what this is about. It’s why lefties are (perhaps) a bit touchy in this matter. It’s similar to Trump’s response to MLK’s and LBJ’s accomplishment in getting the voting rights bill passed ( “what did THAT get you?)
The MAGA world Bob thinks are just great will be more than happy to distort or just forget all about Slavery and its place in US History. And you can count on that not phasing Bob.
"On the other hand, it would be hard to describe conditions of the Middle Passage, and the overwhelming death rates around the Americas, without conveying the astonishing viciousness with which our human race was widely involved not so long ago."
ReplyDeleteSomerby quips that rape wasn't mentioned, as if that were Drum's or anyone else's complaint. Somerby fails to notice how many places in the standards (which are about US African American history) displace harsh conditions onto other places and times:
"Clarification 2: Instruction includes the harsh conditions in the Caribbean plantations (i.e., poor nutrition, rigorous labor, disease).
Clarification 3: Instruction includes how slavery was sustained in the Carribbean, Dutch Guiana and Brazil despite overwhelming death rates."
This extends the impression that everyone was doing it and that these other places and times were worse than what occurred in the USA. Brazil did it and they were worse than us, is extended to salve white feelings in the South. This is a theme throughout the standards. Just as Somerby broadens the discussion himself to encompass the whole human race, evading the specific responsibility of the South, ongoing to the present as white Republicans try to suppress the black vote and conditions for African Americans remain atrocious in comparison to white citizens. Yes, including infant mortality, earning ability, poverty and living conditions. Rape can be mentioned too.
Somerby should be ashamed of essays like this one, but he probably isn't. It may be because he didn't encounter the truth about our brutal racial history in a form that he could personally identify with. Or maybe he just absorbed Southern attitudes with a receptive mind, after seeing his relatives and neighbors violently oppose desegregation in his Boston neighborhood. It is time to stop propagating bigotry and that is why people are upset about these FL standards. And no, no one is forgetting about them just because Trump received the expected indictment a few days ago.
I was around too when Roots aired. It was the Disney version of slavery.
ReplyDelete"Within the limits allowed by network TV, Roots portrayed the massive cruelty which drove this brutal system."
No, the limits of network TV did not allow the massive cruelty to be portrayed. Yet facts were available. W.E.B. Du Bois recorded them in his Souls of Black Folk in 1903. They were presented in White Over Black: American Attitudes Toward the Negro 1550-1812 by Winthrop Jordan. It was a ground-breaking book about the realities of slavery published in 1969.
https://uncpress.org/book/9780807871416/white-over-black/
Or try this one: Born in Slavery: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers' Project, 1936 to 1938
It consists of transcripts of interviews with former slaves conducted by interviewers in the 1930s, part of the National Archives. It tells the realities of slavery from an individual perspective without Southern white revisionist whitewashing, of the kind found in the FL standards.
https://www.loc.gov/collections/slave-narratives-from-the-federal-writers-project-1936-to-1938/about-this-collection/
Even children need to know the truth about lynchings. Not just that they occurred as a form of terrorism to keep black people "in their place", but that they were watched as a form of entertainment by crowds of white people, who bought memorial postcards of the event. Seeing those postcards makes the practice of lynching seem more real, and it raises the question of why Congress refused over and over to pass a federal anti-lynching law, despite ongoing black activism around that cause.
Wilkerson's recent book Caste: the Origins of our
Discontents sugar coats this history for white people, telling new white audiences what has long been known by "woke" black people.
Children need to know this because it costs black people too much to go on suffering because of the ignorance of white people who do not know their own nation's history.
This is what American children, white and black, deserve to hear about. It is time for everyone to know and acknowledge our brutal racial past. Including Somerby, who thinks this is all no big deal, because Kevin Drum, a white guy in a white housind development in white Irvine said so.
Bob is saying the limits or Network TV could not show inhuman cruelty of Slavery, but that it conveyed its awfulness to some extent. I think that is fair. I was in High School, and simply the portrayal of human beings owning other human beings was intensely uncomfortable. I probably also understood brutality was involved they couldn’t dwell on.
ReplyDeleteWhen is a kid old enough to handle the German Holocaust, American Slavery, or other historic horrors? . No doubt, it depends on the kid. Disregarding the concern does not seem wiser than trying to whitewash the horrors out of history lessons in general. Bottom line: a person who develops a serious interest in history will seek out their own answers with the available tools.
In other times and places, children were exposed first-hand to such cruelties. They witnessed executions and expected to be beaten as part of their education (as apprentices or students in schools). This belief that children are too delicate for reality is a new invention, largely afforded the upper classes. From Wikipedia:
Delete"The history of childhood has been a topic of interest in social history since the highly influential book Centuries of Childhood, published by French historian Philippe Ariès in 1960. He argued "childhood" as a concept was created by modern society. Ariès studied paintings, gravestones, furniture, and school records."
Children drank alcohol, wore miniature versions of adult clothing, slept in the same room with adults making love, were expected to work alongside adults, and we not shielded from unpleasantness as they are today, when Somerby muses about how children "handle" the watered down history they receive in modern schools. Brutality was learned in early childhood through experience.
This should be part of Somerby's answer when a child asked how people could be so brutal. Vestiges of brutality remain in our current society. Some people embrace them and others work to eradicate them. Somerby has chosen his side. He seems to think that brutality is part of being human and not something learned, so the goal is to protect children from it until that can no longer be avoided (boys are expected to toughen up gradually). I disagree. I see the huge changes in behavior across centuries and believe better values are taught because people do not wish to live with cruelty and aversives like hunger, pain (physical and emotional) and callous disregard for others. It isn't necessary to survival in our times and certainly isn't a benefit to anyone except the brutal. I believe strongly that children should encounter this history unvarnished and should be taught simultaneously that we do not behave this way any more and that expectations are for better behavior, as nations and as individuals or institutions.
Somerby was callow to pass this discussion off on parents. The right wing in general doesn't want schools to teach morality and values to children, even though that has always been part of what teachers do (especially when schools were religious). Children were taught to be good. Somerby's mealy-mouthed response to this responsibility is odd and reflects a failure to understand much less embrace his role as a teacher. Yay for Teach for America! NOT
In essence, Somerby won't really say that slavery was wrong. He seems to be saying it is a matter of opinion. Why?
Delete12:07 do I understand you to say you think children witnessing exactions is a good idea?
DeleteOf course not. I am saying that you do not make children moral and humane by sheltering them from reality. You do it by teaching them what is right and wrong using examples from our own past. Somerby won’t tell kids slavery is wrong. He wants to leave that to parents, in case they are bigots who might be upset by truth. Sanitizing lynchings is wrong becauseit throwsblack people under the bus to present a false view of white Southern morality. This deprives all kids of a long overdue learning opportunity. Instead, they learn that white fragility is a thing.
Delete@11:26
DeleteSomerby has been arguing that slavery and other bad behavior is part of human nature. He presents imaginary anthropologists to support such claims, with no evidence and no sources cited. He wants us to pity Trump not punish his bad behavior, because we are all human.
How do we know that Somerby is wrong about this? The past shows us that children were permitted to watch lynchings of black people along with adults who enjoyed them. People in that time period thought that brutalizing children and adults was the way to get proper, god-fearing behavior from them. Those lynchings were considered a warning to others, instructive, a learning experience, as well as a festive occasion for those present. And what did those spectators learn?
We no longer engage in any number of inhumane behaviors, including child beating, whipping adults, torture of prisoners or torture as religious practice, most states have eliminated state-sanctioned executions. Our society has shown that people can learn better behavior without brutality, so the amount of brutality in everyday life in the USA has been greatly reduced. That has also happened in many countries worldwide, but not in others. That suggests not that there is some universal human nature at work, but that people can and do adjust to changing circumstances and that they can learn to conform behavior and teach children in better ways that are much less brutal.
A major difference between the right and the left today concerns legitimate uses of violence. The right thinks it is OK to hit kids in order to raise them as good Christians and save their souls. There are deaths of young children when that is taken too far, often religiously motivated, to beat out a demon. Red states want to return to whipping and other extreme punishments of convicts, harsh work conditions, police that shoot first, shooting illegals at the border, and they support vigilante justice (from Karens to lynching or stand-your-ground shootings like Kyle Rittenhouse engaged in as he stalked and shot BLM protesters). The threats used by the right to attack political opponents are another example of the tolerance for violence, including to achieve political goals.
That people can and do conform their behavior without violence shows that learning can and does mediate behavior using rewards and positive motivators, not just through fear, punishment, and even elimination. The wide difference in how people live in different societies shows that Somerby is wrong about universal human nature, and wrong about the ability of people to change, grow and behave better.
Right wingers do not want the schools to teach their kids how to regulate emotion (social-emotional learning), how to get along with others, how to respect the individuality and cultural differences of others (multiculturalism), how to get what they want without resorting to violence (how to use their words), how to avoid fighting, and they especially don't want their kids to be taught to value things like other people's well-being, art music and literature, cooperation (rather than competition) and the ability to work in groups toward a common goal, psychological understanding (FL has now banned the psychology AP course), all the things that make this a better society with less shooting, hitting, yelling and conflict.
Cont.
DeleteSomerby won't even advocate telling young kids that slavery was wrong, it was abolished and it shouldn't be happening anywhere, even though it still happens in a non-institutional and criminal way. He wants to leave that to parents and just shrug and say that some people do bad things. No reference to what has been learned by psychologists and economists and historians about why slavery exists anywhere and what can be done to address it. But those references to how our world has changed for the better is exactly what would give kids hope for the future and make them feel better about how we have addressed slavery in our lifetimes. Somerby's approach that suggests humans are flawed and sliding into the sea because of human nature, is profoundly depressing, aside from being wrong. If that's the way people are, we are shoved back into the Catholic embrace that says there is no cure for humanity's sin besides purgatory and hell and Jesus's sacrifice. And Q-Anon is no better, nor are the Baptists.
So this is a real philosophical divide, not just a political fight. Somerby hides that terminology, but it may be that his recent surgery has brought mortality to mind and he has been sliding into an existential despair that can only be cured by God because of a fear of death. That is also a current theory about why Republicans seek the dark side in human nature, as they do.
Personally, I think it feels bad to engage in brutal acts and thoughts, to excuse violence and pursue strength in the form of hurting others. Those negative feelings motivate a lot of ugly behavior on the right, tolerance of wrongdoing by others, and a distorted view of manhood (and female virtue). That creates a vicious circle. The more our society presents a secular, psychological understanding of human behavior, the sooner we can escape the trap that the right has fallen into. Meanwhile, we cannot tolerate the reintroduction of brutality into our lives, no matter how troubled those on the right might be psychologically speaking.
"...one of those children said something very much like this:
ReplyDelete'Why would anyone ever have been willing to treat other people that way?'"
Sadly, history tells us that slavery is normal. Human cultures all over the world, and even into modern times, practiced slavery. So, another good question is: " Why did most modern cultures stop treating other people that way?"
The answer is that British and Americans and the Christian church took the lead in making slavery morally unacceptable, in their own countries and worldwide. The US can be rightly blamed for slavery. However, American children should also be taught that the US deserves credit for ending slavery.
They should also be taught the fight against fascism is never over. That's why schoolchildren need to hear the truth about our nation's history, stay vigilant, and call out fascism when they see it. Even if it makes the 501(c) political groups masquerading as "concerned parents" at school board meetings angry.
DeleteDavid you have it backwards.
DeleteHistory tells us that the type racist chattel slavery perpetrated by the US was an innovation and had not existed prior.
This innovation continues to this day with wage slavery, something Lincoln warned us about.
Anthropology tells us that modern humans are inherently communal and predisposed to treat each other equally, and that these traits ruled our existence for over a hundred thousand years.
The question is: why did humans then transition to a society based on hierarchy and dominance for the last 10k years? And we generally know the answer, indeed an earlier comment discusses an important aspect, which is, how we treat our children.
Christianity lies at the heart of how racist chattel slavery began; it was Christians that innovated a peculiar style of colonialism, in order to ostensibly save savages from their demonic ways, but in reality as a way to increase their power and influence. Christians vehemently defended slavery, using text from the Bible.
Slaves took the lead in abolishing slavery in the US, and some abolitionists where Christian but that was not what predicated their actions.
Since the Enlightenment, humans have slowly diminished the importance of the role that religion plays in our society, as science has revealed religion to be little more than ignorance and hokum.
Democracy is majority rule; the US runs on democracy as well as protections for those in the minority that are suffering from oppression. The right wingers that go to school board meetings are a minority, but they are coming as oppressors, attempting to force their will onto the government and onto people who have voted otherwise; this is the opposite of democracy, and is in fact fascism.
Cool story, David.
DeleteCare to enlighten us about how Right-wing voter suppression supports democracy.
How is it democratic or fair when a parent (or someone who is an activist and doesn't even have children in a school district) complains about a book he or she has probably not even read and bullies administrators into pulling that book from shelves (or getting teachers and librarians fired) so that no one else's children can have access to that book, even if the parents of those other children really want them to study it in school because they value it?
DeleteThese so-called parent activists are being funded by deep money Republicans (like those who fund Republican candidates and Trump) to engage in politically motivated culture-war actions with the goal of gaining publicity. They are being directed by Republican operatives to engage in actions that will attract publicity and make liberals appear to be subverting the schools when the teachers in question and the schools themselves are apolitical and generally trying to help educate children the best they know how. There is no corresponding left-wing advocacy campaign that is like what the right wing is doing now. Teachers are caught in the middle (including those who are conservative) and quitting the profession because they do not know whether they will have continuity of employment or be embarrassed nationally in the media, just for doing their jobs as directed by their districts and supervisors. This is bad for education but Republicans engaged in such culture wars don't give a damn what happens to the kids or the teachers and staff.
This is not about parental rights, because nearly all school districts will respond positively to a parent's desire to exempt their own child from an assignment or classroom activity. Parents already have the right to monitor and intervene in what happens to their child in a classroom. All of the so-called conservative parents who complained had already received permission to exempt their children from whatever activities they were complaining about. This is about determining what happens to other people's children and I, as a liberal parent, would not want my child to be dictated to by Republican bullies in my school district. I trust my child's teachers and administrators to do their jobs competently without interference by Republican kooks, religious extremists, or any other cranks in my community, no matter how loudly they yell. What the Republicans are doing to our kids is wrong.
Cool story, David.
DeleteCare to enlighten us about how Right-wing voter suppression supports democracy.
This is where David, Exits, Stage Left.
Bob is terrible on this issue, it's embarassing. So let's look at something else.
ReplyDeleteI know we have a lost soul on here that claims, what was it? Republicans care about nothing except bigotry.
So here's some recent responses to someone, apparently sincerely, asking What Right Wing Positions are Good?
Not every problem needs to be legislated.
Smaller government is typically good.
Tighter immigration.
Fiscal responsibility, limited government waste.
Functioning police system, lower taxes, a small government, national patriotism.
Controlling borders, pro free speech, pro industry/hydrocarbons, color blindness, delegating more power to states, law and order.
-----
Now, the gentle readers of Reddit go on to debate some of the fine points here, like pointing out the terrible fiscal track record of Republicans, etc. But these were the answers given. Discuss!
Source:
https://www.reddit.com/r/centrist/comments/15grkhn/what_rightwing_positions_are_good/
Smaller government is typically good, so you'll never see Republicans support the state making reproductive decisions for women. (Sarcasm font here).
DeleteFortunately, other small government programs Republicans support---such as tighter immigration, a functioning police department, and controlling borders--- will be funded by the budget fairy who find funding by lowering taxes and reducing revenues. This is what Republicans like to call their commitment to "fiscal responsibility".
They stand firmly for freedom of speech, unless you want to point out the USA was built on the backs of slave labor.
Their pro-industry/ hydrocarbon stance I at least get. If they're correct that there is no such thing as climate change, we celebrate. If they're wrong, we raise the top income tax rate back to 90% to fund FEMA. What kind of patriot wouldn't support that?
BTW, I didn't see anything about the social safety net. Do they support that now? I used to like their calls for a merit-based society, where the Estate Tax rate is 100%, and their lazy, deadbeat, good-for-nothing, layabout kids, get jobs, like I did.
Just don't agree with their bigotry, because unlike the other things listed on that Redditt site, that's something they actually believe in.
"Controlling borders" is in response to "illegal" immigration, which they think is a huge problem. I like to ask them what they are doing to make "legal" immigration easier. The lost soul wouldn't be surprised by their replies.
DeleteYes, the Republicans are irresponsible fiscally. So, are the Democrats. That's why Fitch just reduced the credit rating of the United States. IMO disaster is almost inevitable. The national debt will continue rise at a trillion dollars or more dollars a year. Interest on the National Debt will soar, due to the higher debt, the rising interest rates, and our country's deteriorating credit rating. This cannot go on forever.
DeleteAt best, interest on the national debt will eat up more and more of federal spending. At worst, foreign banks will, at some point, suddenly re-think lending to the US. That will result in a sudden crash, possible hyperinflation and a depression.
The irresponsibility of those in government gives me little hope that this disaster will be avoided. The only question is when it will hit. The question for each of us is how to try to protect ourselves and our families against the coming disaster.
Trump gave corporations and the rich huge tax breaks, which blew-up our debt. Certainly, you remember the "economically anxious" Republican voters, who definitely aren't just a shit-pile of bigots (hat tip/ corporate-owned media), were so incensed they descended on Washington DC and tried to take over the Capitol.
DeleteOr am I confusing that with the time black people's votes counted in the 2020 Presidential election?
There's the poster I was referring to. Wishing you well, you're so bitter and sarcastic! I suspect you are able to laugh about it at least some of the time. Hopefully not a nasty, fake laugh but a good hearty one.
DeleteAnyway, I like the discussion so thank you.
There's a common misconception about taxing and spending. When goverment money is well spent on things like infrastructure or making more jobs with public projects, that money can just be printed. Doesn't mean taxes have to be raised. Inflation will not occur. That's what my genius economist buddy tells me.
DeleteWhat he says about taxes is that the government doesn't need that money. The reason for taxes is to get people working and participating in the economy. See the British colonial Hut Tax for further explanation. The government could literally just throw the money they receive from taxpayers away.
Delete2:14,
DeleteYes, that's me. Thanks for the kind words.
I keep it light, by never taking their buzzwords seriously. (It's the main thing I have in common with them).
David said: "That's why Fitch just reduced the credit rating of the United States. "
DeleteActually, Fitch said it reduced the credit rating because of the insurrection and the repeated fights over raising the debt ceiling, funding the government and passing budgets. These are all attributable to the Republicans, not the Democrats in Congress.
Many of those positions have broad support, including on the Left (generally everybody is pro freedom and anti waste, duh); furthermore, there is no such thing as right wing ideology, they are just people obsessed with dominance, so any position they claim to support is transitory and transactional - they support it as long as it serves their singular goal of dominance.
DeleteBob is terrible because he built his reputation and audience pandering to “liberals” and then switched to attacking “liberals” while promoting right wing notions. Also he seems to be an unrepentant racist.
Parting thought: patriotism as it is typically practiced, is little more than taking credit for other people’s actions; now sit down and take a breath, this is also a reasonably decent definition of “culture”.
The Republican party under Trump in 2020 had no platform, policy or position statements. Platitudes like those David listed are not a political position. The Republican Party felt it didn't need one because the party IS Trump. That makes it a cult, not a group of people with coherent views about how to run the country.
DeleteIn modern times, all inflation is essentially just profiteering.
DeleteWithin the context of our modern economy, Dick Cheney, for once, was correct, deficits do not matter.
For further assurance from David’s doom and gloom, check out MMT.
Taxes, particularly with reference to the US, has roots in imperialism.
What is MMT?
DeleteControlling borders isn't only with respect to illegal immigrants. Trump cut way back on legal immigration, asylum seeking, and travel by people from certain countries he deemed shitholes. That was interference with the will of the people, since the laws Trump failed to administer properly were enacted by representatives in Congress as part of existing immigration laws. This hurt legal immigrants, their families, and the businesses who employ them.
DeleteAnd then there were the policies that illegally separated parents from children and then lost the records that would have permitted those families to be reunited wherever they were residing. That is evil and had nothing to do with reducing illegal immigration.
I am quite familiar with modern monetary theory. IMO it's a joke -- a sick joke. It tells politicians that it's OK to run any deficit. The pols love it. It will bite you and me in the ass big time.
DeleteOh yes David, I remember your outrage when Trump added 7 Trillion to the deficit.
DeleteTrump didn't pay his taxes, and the people who want to impeach Joe Biden, because his son didn't pay his taxes, called Trump "smart".
DeleteNo, David. The national debt will not continue to rise, republicans will continue to cut taxes on the 1% which will generate more revenue as they claim and then they can raid the SS Trust Fund, just because.
DeleteAccept a big hug from a nasty both-sider centrist. You'll have to disinfect afterwards. I'm actually an old school liberal, feeling a little lost in today's political climate.
ReplyDeleteRightfully so, your political position is not seen as effective, useful, or viable.
DeleteYou may find stability by focusing on other things besides politics - your friends and family, perhaps a musical instrument, etc.
The thing about politics is that circumstances change and you need to keep up. People become centrists because they take a nap at some point and come back to what is happening without a clue. The things centrists are saying sound, superficially, like common sense or a sane middle ground, but they are actually pernicious because they hide radical view that would be harmful if enacted.
DeleteUnless you know that No Labels (a purportedly centrist group) is actually funded by Republicans who think a third party will drag votes from Biden, and led by Joe Lieberman, who left the Democratic party because his conservatism was out-of-step with his CT voters, you may be misled by their seemingly moderate approach. One problem, is that the centrists and no labels people have no actual platform and cannot tell you what they stand for, in specific terms. When you look at who they are, they are not a postion halfway between progressives and conservatives, but they represent a third approach that has nothing to do with either side and may reflect interests you would not want to be associated with. Like Bush in 2000, they are campaigning under false pretenses when they call themselves moderate.
"Rightfully so, your political position is not seen as effective, useful, or viable.
DeleteYou may find stability by focusing on other things besides politics - your friends and family, perhaps a musical instrument, etc."
These are the types of comments that keep me away from political discussion. Such a load of passive agressive projection here, it is a bit sickening. Of course there's ~some~ reasonable, unemotional discussion to be had out there, if one looks.
People who don't know what the term "passive aggressive" means shouldn't be using it.
DeleteI agree with the commenter who suggested that voters who are seeking stability should look outside politics to satisfy emotional needs, whether for a return to the seeming normalcy of the past (illusory) or balance in a polarized political environment (also illusory). The both-siderist approach is false empirically and what-aboutism is nothing ore tha a refusal to deal with the complexities of our society. And this is going to get worse because of climate change and other problems associated with it. There is no return to idyllic calmer times to be had by choosing those peddling moderation that is unachievable in today's political climate.
The way to feel better about today's politics is to focus on family, outside pursuits and hobbies (fishing, chess, whatever you enjoy), engage in charity work that helps other people, walk in nature, get a pet, read a classic novel. Stay off the internet.
The attractio to "reasonable, unemotional discussion" suggests that anxiety is getting to you and the balance will not come from the hucksters selling moderate, centrist candidates (without any clear ideas about how to fix anything). Those people are exploiting political anxiety for money (now) and perhaps political power if they can gain traction that can be bartered for a position in someone else's administration. Don't be taken in by those folks who are promoting their own gain at the expense of those who are feeling overwhelmed by modern times. A lot of Republicans are also in that category, not just a bunch of so-called moderates writing op-eds and trying to edge into politics via a third party.
Ozzie and Harriet didn't even exist during the time their show was originally aired. Leave it to Beaver was never real. For a clearer picture of those times, see Martin Ritt's excellent film "No Down Payment" about suburban life in the aftermath of WWII. It is not possible to return to a time that didn't exist. And there is no magic solution to the split between left and right in our country, no middle-ground occupied by the silent majority, no reasonable unemotional discussion, no religious uprising that will solve all of our problems with a hero (especially not a criminal hero). Beware of the desire to be rescued from hyped problems (culture wars, adrenochrome monsters) that leads you and your money straight into the arms of opportunists willing to promise calmness.
Would like Dave in Cal to get back to us on why Dems auto increased the debt ceiling after Reagan, Bush Jr., and Trump tax cuts for the rich exploded the deficit; while responsible spending Presidents Clinto, Obama, and Biden were all sandbagged by Congressional Republicans? Repubs efforts to destroy the economy to hurt Dem Presidents have been the only reasons for the downgrades.
ReplyDeleteI just saw the movie "Sound of Freedom". In a statement made during the credits, it is said that more people are enslaved today than were enslaved when slavery was legal. Also, millions of these slaves are children.
ReplyDeleteInstead of quibbling over precisely how slavery is taught, would it not be worthwhile to devote some energy to fighting actual slavery that exists right now.
Most human trafficking is voluntary. And most of the trafficking that isn't has people close to the victim being the perps. So the idea of some mass organized kidnapping conspiracy is a bit of a boogeyman. Also one of the main funders was just charged with, you guessed it felony child kidnapping.
DeleteHow do you fight slavery without telling children that it is wrong?
DeleteComparing absolute numbers of anything, with an increasing worldwide population, is idiotic. This should be a clue that you are being manipulated, David.
This film is (1) fiction, (2) a propaganda effort by supporters of Q-Anon, (3) disavowed by the real-life person it is supposedly based on, (4) not supported by organizations working to reduce human trafficking, (5) considered detrimental to that effort to stop human trafficking, (6) inconsistent with Republican statements and actions with respect to asylum-seeking and government efforts to stop human trafficking as well as other human rights violations in the US and worldwide. For example, when have Republicans supported the government in its efforts to reduce human rights abuses in China and Saudi Arabia? Is it helpful when Republicans tell asylum-seekers fleeing such abuses to fix problems in their own countries instead of trying to come to the USA? Should children fleeing such abuses in Latin America (where this film is set) be put into cages in the USA?
https://www.npr.org/2023/07/19/1188405402/qanon-supporters-are-promoting-sound-of-freedom-heres-why
Tim Ballard is fabulist.
DeleteAnd yet Republicans are the ones supporting lowering child labor law ages and even letting kids serve alcohol in bars and restaurants. Does anyone think kids work for the fun of it?
DeleteAt the heart of slavery and trafficking is poverty. Republicans are the ones who most strongly resist efforts to address poverty in the US and worldwide. Instead of fighting human trafficking, Republicans have politicized it.
It is mind boggling that red states are not only lowering the age allowed for work but also allowing children to work night shifts.
DeleteIt's over for the Right.
ReplyDeleteEven country music stars are recording pro-Socialism songs, nowadays.