And I'm sorry, folks but linking a list of books is not research. I'm curious of BelleSorciere, how many police abolition books you've read and can personally vouch for?
Enough to convince me. But you're incorrect - linking a list of books isn't research when you refuse to even look. I have done the research because the matter of police violence has been important to me for quite some time now.
I don't see the point in doing more than making it clear that I am in favor of police and prison abolition as well as making it clear that no we do not need "pushback" against that viewpoint. You've made it clear that you're hostile to that idea, so I don't know why you keep asking for further explanation.
And I'm sorry, folks but linking a list of books is not research. I'm curious of BelleSorciere, how many police abolition books you've read and can personally vouch for?
Enough to convince me. But you're incorrect - linking a list of books isn't research when you refuse to even look. I have done the research because the matter of police violence has been important to me for quite some time now.
I don't see the point in doing more than making it clear that I am in favor of police and prison abolition as well as making it clear that no we do not need "pushback" against that viewpoint. You've made it clear that you're hostile to that idea, so I don't know why you keep asking for further explanation.
Regarding your points, I think we should
Abolish the police
Abolish prisons
No caveats, no exceptions, no special cases.
You're not going to find many people in your corner I'm afraid. Personally I find abolishing the police a hopelessly naïve goal with about a 0% chance of ever being implemented. But if it makes you happy, keep aiming for the stars...
Wait, you want all sorts of predators to roam through your society unchecked?
That only makes sense of you live on a desolate utopian island of something, but even then, if they destroy the world around you it will still affect you.
On the other hand, abolishing the police would solve our climate change problem. Given the moronic and irresponsible behavior of the general public, as witnessed here in the UK recently, the human race wouldn't last long at all.
If you think the UK has moronic behavior, take a look at Florida. But this brings up another point, which is that certain types of moronic behavior are viewed a perfectly fine, while others will get you locked up for various amounts of time. Willfully help spread a deadly virus?? It's your right as an American. Smoke a blunt?? At a minimum you're making a court appearance and paying a massive fine.
Speaking of Florida, Trump just sent out a tweet about his "silent majority" supporters in The Villages, Florida (who aren't really that silent anymore). The first thing in the video imbedded in the tweet is one of his supporters in a golf cart screaming "white power". I guess we're saying the quiet part out loud at this point. He also spent all of yesterday tweeting out about a dozen "wanted" posters of pictures of people who tore down an inanimate object. He's basically the old guy who sits around listening to the police scanner all day at this point.
Nevermind the fact that it was revealed yesterday that Russia has bounties on our soldiers in Afghanistan and Trump and Pence are claiming they "didn't know" (which defies all belief). Putin's reward for this behavior was for Trump to push for him to be in the G7. Sorta puts "Benghazi!!!" into perspective, doesn't it??
Oh, and the Administration also pushed flawed anti-body tests out the door on purpose to skew the actual scope of the COVID-19 outbreak. Watch 60 Minutes tonight if you're interested. This Administration is guilty of mass negligent homicide at this point. There is no other way to look at it. It's the biggest shit-show in American history, and we're just getting started. Even assuming Biden wins, it's a LONG way to January. As I saw someone mention yesterday, the dystopian government in "V for Vendetta" was responsible for less civilian death in a virus they released ON PURPOSE than this one has been responsible for by sheer incompetence and negligence.
John Roberts has sided with the liberal justices on abortion restrictions in Louisiana in a 5-4 decision. If the LGBTQ rights case had the religious right up in arms, this one is going to send them into a frothing rage. They had gambled EVERYTHING and sold their souls to get justices on the Supreme Court, and now it's not paying off. Oh, don't get me wrong, Roberts is still going to side with the right-wing block in almost all cases when it comes to continuing to entrench oligarchical money and corporate interests. But this is a clear indication that Roberts has actively and deliberately assumed the role that vacated when Anthony Kennedy retired, and is going to block the extreme positions the religious right has been expecting a payout on for decades. Basically, Roberts is channeling Michael Corleone to the Senator in Godfather 2, "my offer is this.......nothing." You hate to see it.
Let's also get real here. Republicans want the issue when it comes to abortion. They are happy to kick this can down the road for another 3 or 4 decades so they can continue to send fundraising letters about it. The moment they lose it as a rallying cry is the moment the lose the enthusiasm of about half their base. The grifters in the religious right leadership have been selling the flock on the courts being the only way to force their agenda on a wide scale for 40 years. The last few weeks have basically been finding out you thought your retirement was set and your pension checks start bouncing.
I don't understand what you mean. You have extra restrictions on abortion now or less?
It was essentially in regards to laws passed in Louisiana (and other states) that were trying to circumvent the legality of abortion by placing regulations on clinics that were impossible to meet and totally unnecessary as a way to force them to close while maintaining some sort of plausible deniability in the eyes of the law.
Roberts is going with the reasoning that "we already decided this 4 years ago with a case in Texas, we aren't going to keep relitigating this every year". Roberts voted the OTHER way in that case, but is now respecting precedent.
There aren't more or less rights. It's just a strike against bad faith attempts at regulation that are clearly aimed to make it impossible to obtian one in certain states while maintaining a veneer of still being technically legal.
Many states have exactly ONE clinic that provides abortions, including the one I live in. I am intimately familar with it since it's next door to a restaurant I order take-out from. It has outdoor cameras on every corner. Women need to have volunteer escorts help them into the building to shield against harassment. What Republican legislatures in these states are telling these surviving clinics is "you have to do this, this, this and this to be in compliance", the parameters of which are purposefully designed to be financially and logistically unfeasible.
A series of hate subs on Reddit have been banned today, including the well-known pro-Trump subreddit r/The_Donald. Apparently Reddit made the move in response to criticism that it wasn't reigning in hate speech on the platform. The recent protests over police brutality might have played a role in pushing the change.
A well-known anti-trans subreddit, r/gendercritical, was also banned. There are a handful of other communities dedicated to anti-trans hate (they operate under the veneer of "gender critical feminism," appropriating the name "feminism" for PR reasons), and while I'm sure a lot of folks will just migrate to the other subs, the ban will slow down the hate train.
One of the remaining subs, r/itsafetish, is actually the reason my out-of-state trans friend first started seriously considering suicide. I'm hoping that sub gets taken down as well; I already know one person who nearly died because of the abuse she got on that subreddit.
A series of hate subs on Reddit have been banned today, including the well-known pro-Trump subreddit r/The_Donald. Apparently Reddit made the move in response to criticism that it wasn't reigning in hate speech on the platform. The recent protests over police brutality might have played a role in pushing the change.
A well-known anti-trans subreddit, r/gendercritical, was also banned. There are a handful of other communities dedicated to anti-trans hate (they operate under the veneer of "gender critical feminism," appropriating the name "feminism" for PR reasons), and while I'm sure a lot of folks will just migrate to the other subs, the ban will slow down the hate train.
One of the remaining subs, r/itsafetish, is actually the reason my out-of-state trans friend first started seriously considering suicide. I'm hoping that sub gets taken down as well; I already know one person who nearly died because of the abuse she got on that subreddit.
That's interesting. I was actually recent looking into banned and quarantined reddit subs the other day. I was trying to do some research on the sexual abuse by twitch streamers scandal that went down about a week ago, and stumbled into a pro-gamer gate reddit sub.
I got the impression from reading about it that The_Donald was pretty ugly with regard to racism, which was a bit surprising only because it was so popular (and therefore, quasi mainstream). Shows I dont really know a lot about reddit sub cultures.
A question about your post: You said your friend suffered abuse on r/itsafetish - which I dont understand only because I dont understand why your friend would go there if its such a hostile place to her?
I guess I'm thinking about how I'd handle that situation. It's not the same thing (at all. Not even close) - but once I realized I was in a misogynist subreddit about gamer gate, I noped on out of there havent looked again. I dont think I can reasonably learn anything valuable from a place like that.
It's not just a Reddit subculture. It's an internet-wide subculture. As I've said before, any internet site (including this one) can moderate their site however they see fit. I read the same comments every time this happens. "Twitch/Twitter/Youtube/Reddit is dying, this is going to make everyone wake up and see, wait til Gab/Parler/Mixer takes off, these companies are all on life support" There are hundreds of thousands if not millions of these young men out there, but they are SO insulated and isolated in the bubble they have created for themselves that they actually believe every one of these ban waves or moves is some cataclysmic societal event, when it's really nothing more than a bunch of angry guys jerking each other off about shit 95% of people couldn't care less about.
It's so tiresome at this point. Whatever game comes out that week is picked apart for any HINT of something that can be construed as "politically correct". A bunch of people then pledge about how they're never going to play that game, how women and minorities are ruining everything, and how they're eventually going to be victorious in this inane crusade to reclaim their "hobby" from whatever it is they think stole it from them. Rinse and repeat. It never changes. It's been the same topics and complaints for the last 5 years. This is by far the best commentary I've ever seen on the subject and the culture it created (he also happens to be the best damn video game reviewer on Youtube):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4SnO5U2G4w
Well worth the time to watch, if only for the line that sums up the main problem this counter-culture has, "One of the hardest lessons of my life was learning that you have to be lovable to be loved."
A question about your post: You said your friend suffered abuse on r/itsafetish - which I dont understand only because I dont understand why your friend would go there if its such a hostile place to her?
I think she visited anti-trans subs out of morbid curiosity, self-doubt, or self-hatred. I do know she absorbed a LOT of ideas from communities that were hostile to trans people. Unfortunately, when young trans people go on Reddit for guidance, for every trans person who wants to help them figure things out, there are a lot of non-trans folks who are shouting out that there's only one way to live your life, and anything else is shameful
I think she visited those places because she was still questioning and looking for answers wherever she could find them. And for questioning teens,
being trans is an ideology and trans people are crazy
which is the standard answer on a hate sub, is a lot simpler and easier to process as an answer than
1. the only person who can decide your gender identity is you
2. this is my story but you might be different
3. here's a list of questions that might help you figure things out
4. go visit this Discord/subreddit and meet other trans people
5. try experimenting with your appearance and think about who you want to be if you had the choice
which is what questioning folks tend to get when they ask questions on trans-friendly subs.
Whatever game comes out that week is picked apart for any HINT of something that can be construed as "politically correct". A bunch of people then pledge about how they're never going to play that game, how women and minorities are ruining everything, and how they're eventually going to be victorious in this inane crusade to reclaim their "hobby" from whatever it is they think stole it from them.
I was just reading the comments on Reddit's announcement, and all the top comments are the same: "If Reddit's going to ban subreddits, why aren't they targeting women, liberals, and minorities?" and accusing Reddit's leadership of being hypocritical unless Reddit cracks down on their enemies (Incidentally, r/ChapoTrapHouse was also banned, which apparently is a far-left sub). It's like they can't decide whether they want to urge Reddit to be more lenient or more strict--unless the only goal is to make sure "their side" doesn't lose ground in some culture war.
I've personally criticized anti-white sentiment and anti-male sentiment on many occasions, sometimes in this very thread. But there's a difference between calling out anti-white/male sentiment when it appears, and bringing it up just to complain about anti-women/minority sentiment disappearing.
Kind of amazing that they are still getting this special treatment by their local governments. I can't even imagine having so much power you can make corporations and governments kneel before you while you murder kids in your autonomous playground.
Kind of amazing that they are still getting this special treatment by their local governments. I can't even imagine having so much power you can make corporations and governments kneel before you while you murder kids in your autonomous playground.
Kind of amazing that they are still getting this special treatment by their local governments. I can't even imagine having so much power you can make corporations and governments kneel before you while you murder kids in your autonomous playground.
I am completely sympathetic to China in this situation with Hong Kong. The West and their proxies, especially the Americans, have no moral authority. You could easily argue this was never the case; the empire was never good to those outside of it's borders. But the social model it represented was compelling to many. Now that could not be further from the truth. It is a nation of petty bullies and status climbers, focusing on minor cruelties, deluding themselves into believing the opposite. It uses fear as its weapon and delights in targeting the powerless, using the rhetoric of justice while doing so, with the full cooperation of every institution of note. Any and all influence they have in the world is as poisonous as its internal culture. Any and all rights and freedoms westerners believed they had clearly do not exist in practice any more, and adopting a failed model isn't a recipe for success. Modern America is as much of a petty ideological authoritarian state as any other, it simply has a better propaganda system. I see no reason to want anyone else to adopt its deluded way of thinking.
The sheer consistency and coordination on ideological matters between every variety of American institution, to say nothing of the national focus on disciplining and punishing the labor class while ignoring the capitalists, should be the first clue that this isn't a free society. We would criticize foriegn countries for this level of naked institutional corruption yet we seem blind to it ourselves.
I am completely sympathetic to China in this situation with Hong Kong. The West and their proxies, especially the Americans, have no moral authority. You could easily argue this was never the case; the empire was never good to those outside of it's borders. But the social model it represented was compelling to many. Now that could not be further from the truth. It is a nation of petty bullies and status climbers, focusing on minor cruelties, deluding themselves into believing the opposite. It uses fear as its weapon and delights in targeting the powerless, using the rhetoric of justice while doing so, with the full cooperation of every institution of note. Any and all influence they have in the world is as poisonous as its internal culture. Any and all rights and freedoms westerners believed they had clearly do not exist in practice any more, and adopting a failed model isn't a recipe for success. Modern America is as much of a petty ideological authoritarian state as any other, it simply has a better propaganda system. I see no reason to want anyone else to adopt its deluded way of thinking.
The sheer consistency and coordination on ideological matters between every variety of American institution, to say nothing of the national focus on disciplining and punishing the labor class while ignoring the capitalists, should be the first clue that this isn't a free society. We would criticize foriegn countries for this level of naked institutional corruption yet we seem blind to it ourselves.
I understand why the current Chinese leadership want this law. They've been gradually tightening social controls over mainland China and that has meant a growing rift with the situation in Hong Kong. However, the editorial you quote boils down to 'might makes right', i.e. the US and other western countries are so preoccupied with their own affairs at the moment, they won't be willing to defend the interests of Hong Kong.
As I've said before, I'm generally a believer in following international laws and abiding by international agreements. China signed an agreement with the UK which gave them huge advantages - they took control not just of the New Territories, which were leased to the UK for 99 years ending in 1997, but also the core parts of Hong Kong which had been UK territories in perpetuity. The quid pro quo for taking back the whole of Hong Kong was the 'one country, two systems' agreement set out in the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1985. It was agreed that would apply until 2047 - maintaining the capitalist system and separate legal framework of Hong Kong.
The new law does not seem consistent with the 1985 agreement, so this effectively represents a repudiation by China of that agreement. I've been very critical of the way the US has been ignoring or repudiating binding international agreements in recent years and I'm equally critical of China's action here.
I am completely sympathetic to China in this situation with Hong Kong. The West and their proxies, especially the Americans, have no moral authority. You could easily argue this was never the case; the empire was never good to those outside of it's borders. But the social model it represented was compelling to many. Now that could not be further from the truth. It is a nation of petty bullies and status climbers, focusing on minor cruelties, deluding themselves into believing the opposite. It uses fear as its weapon and delights in targeting the powerless, using the rhetoric of justice while doing so, with the full cooperation of every institution of note. Any and all influence they have in the world is as poisonous as its internal culture. Any and all rights and freedoms westerners believed they had clearly do not exist in practice any more, and adopting a failed model isn't a recipe for success. Modern America is as much of a petty ideological authoritarian state as any other, it simply has a better propaganda system. I see no reason to want anyone else to adopt its deluded way of thinking.
The sheer consistency and coordination on ideological matters between every variety of American institution, to say nothing of the national focus on disciplining and punishing the labor class while ignoring the capitalists, should be the first clue that this isn't a free society. We would criticize foriegn countries for this level of naked institutional corruption yet we seem blind to it ourselves.
I understand why the current Chinese leadership want this law. They've been gradually tightening social controls over mainland China and that has meant a growing rift with the situation in Hong Kong. However, the editorial you quote boils down to 'might makes right', i.e. the US and other western countries are so preoccupied with their own affairs at the moment, they won't be willing to defend the interests of Hong Kong.
As I've said before, I'm generally a believer in following international laws and abiding by international agreements. China signed an agreement with the UK which gave them huge advantages - they took control not just of the New Territories, which were leased to the UK for 99 years ending in 1997, but also the core parts of Hong Kong which had been UK territories in perpetuity. The quid pro quo for taking back the whole of Hong Kong was the 'one country, two systems' agreement set out in the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1985. It was agreed that would apply until 2047 - maintaining the capitalist system and separate legal framework of Hong Kong.
The new law does not seem consistent with the 1985 agreement, so this effectively represents a repudiation by China of that agreement. I've been very critical of the way the US has been ignoring or repudiating binding international agreements in recent years and I'm equally critical of China's action here.
Yeesh, that article sounds like it was written by a Soviet commissar back in Stalin's days...
I am completely sympathetic to China in this situation with Hong Kong. The West and their proxies, especially the Americans, have no moral authority. You could easily argue this was never the case; the empire was never good to those outside of it's borders. But the social model it represented was compelling to many. Now that could not be further from the truth. It is a nation of petty bullies and status climbers, focusing on minor cruelties, deluding themselves into believing the opposite. It uses fear as its weapon and delights in targeting the powerless, using the rhetoric of justice while doing so, with the full cooperation of every institution of note. Any and all influence they have in the world is as poisonous as its internal culture. Any and all rights and freedoms westerners believed they had clearly do not exist in practice any more, and adopting a failed model isn't a recipe for success. Modern America is as much of a petty ideological authoritarian state as any other, it simply has a better propaganda system. I see no reason to want anyone else to adopt its deluded way of thinking.
The sheer consistency and coordination on ideological matters between every variety of American institution, to say nothing of the national focus on disciplining and punishing the labor class while ignoring the capitalists, should be the first clue that this isn't a free society. We would criticize foriegn countries for this level of naked institutional corruption yet we seem blind to it ourselves.
I understand why the current Chinese leadership want this law. They've been gradually tightening social controls over mainland China and that has meant a growing rift with the situation in Hong Kong. However, the editorial you quote boils down to 'might makes right', i.e. the US and other western countries are so preoccupied with their own affairs at the moment, they won't be willing to defend the interests of Hong Kong.
As I've said before, I'm generally a believer in following international laws and abiding by international agreements. China signed an agreement with the UK which gave them huge advantages - they took control not just of the New Territories, which were leased to the UK for 99 years ending in 1997, but also the core parts of Hong Kong which had been UK territories in perpetuity. The quid pro quo for taking back the whole of Hong Kong was the 'one country, two systems' agreement set out in the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1985. It was agreed that would apply until 2047 - maintaining the capitalist system and separate legal framework of Hong Kong.
The new law does not seem consistent with the 1985 agreement, so this effectively represents a repudiation by China of that agreement. I've been very critical of the way the US has been ignoring or repudiating binding international agreements in recent years and I'm equally critical of China's action here.
Yeesh, that article sounds like it was written by a Soviet commissar back in Stalin's days...
It seems to me the argument is that if Hong Kong isn't under Chinese control, it will fall prey to western exploitation instead. I'm not sure I agree we're as bad as China, but there is validity to that concern. And the US certainly has no moral authority on the world stage anymore. But the crackdown on Hong Kong protesters caused major US corporations like the NBA and Blizzard to do major mea culpas earlier this year.
I'm just surprised to see this view coming from a right-leaning poster. Most of the pushback I saw against these companies earlier in the year WAS from the right, though alot of that was just playing opportunistic gotcha with outspoken athletes and coaches.
@semiticgod is the China expert. I'll wait to hear from that corner before making a judgment.
I am completely sympathetic to China in this situation with Hong Kong. The West and their proxies, especially the Americans, have no moral authority. You could easily argue this was never the case; the empire was never good to those outside of it's borders. But the social model it represented was compelling to many. Now that could not be further from the truth. It is a nation of petty bullies and status climbers, focusing on minor cruelties, deluding themselves into believing the opposite. It uses fear as its weapon and delights in targeting the powerless, using the rhetoric of justice while doing so, with the full cooperation of every institution of note. Any and all influence they have in the world is as poisonous as its internal culture. Any and all rights and freedoms westerners believed they had clearly do not exist in practice any more, and adopting a failed model isn't a recipe for success. Modern America is as much of a petty ideological authoritarian state as any other, it simply has a better propaganda system. I see no reason to want anyone else to adopt its deluded way of thinking.
The sheer consistency and coordination on ideological matters between every variety of American institution, to say nothing of the national focus on disciplining and punishing the labor class while ignoring the capitalists, should be the first clue that this isn't a free society. We would criticize foriegn countries for this level of naked institutional corruption yet we seem blind to it ourselves.
I understand why the current Chinese leadership want this law. They've been gradually tightening social controls over mainland China and that has meant a growing rift with the situation in Hong Kong. However, the editorial you quote boils down to 'might makes right', i.e. the US and other western countries are so preoccupied with their own affairs at the moment, they won't be willing to defend the interests of Hong Kong.
As I've said before, I'm generally a believer in following international laws and abiding by international agreements. China signed an agreement with the UK which gave them huge advantages - they took control not just of the New Territories, which were leased to the UK for 99 years ending in 1997, but also the core parts of Hong Kong which had been UK territories in perpetuity. The quid pro quo for taking back the whole of Hong Kong was the 'one country, two systems' agreement set out in the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1985. It was agreed that would apply until 2047 - maintaining the capitalist system and separate legal framework of Hong Kong.
The new law does not seem consistent with the 1985 agreement, so this effectively represents a repudiation by China of that agreement. I've been very critical of the way the US has been ignoring or repudiating binding international agreements in recent years and I'm equally critical of China's action here.
Yeesh, that article sounds like it was written by a Soviet commissar back in Stalin's days...
It seems to me the argument is that if Hong Kong isn't under Chinese control, it will fall prey to western exploitation instead. I'm not sure I agree we're as bad as China, but there is validity to that concern. And the US certainly has no moral authority on the world stage anymore. But the crackdown on Hong Kong protesters caused major US corporations like the NBA and Blizzard to do major mea culpas earlier this year.
I'm just surprised to see this view coming from a right-leaning poster. Most of the pushback I saw against these companies earlier in the year WAS from the right, though alot of that was just playing opportunistic gotcha with outspoken athletes and coaches.
@semiticgod is the China expert. I'll wait to hear from that corner before making a judgment.
@WarChiefZeke is hard to peg. That's why I like him. Reminds me of myself in some ways. Conservative but not a zealot, and clearly not a Trump sycophant. And he hasn't been banned yet. A big plus on this thread...
The sheer consistency and coordination on ideological matters between every variety of American institution, to say nothing of the national focus on disciplining and punishing the labor class while ignoring the capitalists, should be the first clue that this isn't a free society. We would criticize foriegn countries for this level of naked institutional corruption yet we seem blind to it ourselves.
I have plenty of criticism for the current system of the United States, both at the structural level and for this administration, but this article is really just jumping on American unrest to justify cracking down on dissidents at home.
The Global Times is under the direct control of the Chinese Communist Party; this is a press release by a government far more blatantly corrupt than our own, even compared to the Trump administration specifically. It blames the United States for unrest in Hong Kong, but I can't think of a time where the U.S. government was less invested in promoting democracy abroad. I doubt the current administration cares at all about the fate of Hong Kong.
Accusing political dissidents of being American pawns is a long-running meme in essentially every undemocratic country on the planet, and the Trump administration's total disinterest in foreign affairs belies just how false the claim is. The Chinese government is accusing the United States of fomenting unrest because it doesn't like to acknowledge the fact that the people of Hong Kong know what it's like to live under a democratic government and profoundly don't want Beijing to seize control of their home.
The Chinese government knows it's only popular where it has power over the press and a lockdown on historical memory. Foreign meddling is an excuse for that unpopularity outside the Party bubble.
If we believed every accusation of American meddling in foreign countries, the U.S. would have more spies on its payroll than it has citizens. "American pawns" is just a tired old accusation from governments too uncreative to think of anything else.
I am completely sympathetic to China in this situation with Hong Kong. The West and their proxies, especially the Americans, have no moral authority. You could easily argue this was never the case; the empire was never good to those outside of it's borders. But the social model it represented was compelling to many. Now that could not be further from the truth. It is a nation of petty bullies and status climbers, focusing on minor cruelties, deluding themselves into believing the opposite. It uses fear as its weapon and delights in targeting the powerless, using the rhetoric of justice while doing so, with the full cooperation of every institution of note. Any and all influence they have in the world is as poisonous as its internal culture. Any and all rights and freedoms westerners believed they had clearly do not exist in practice any more, and adopting a failed model isn't a recipe for success. Modern America is as much of a petty ideological authoritarian state as any other, it simply has a better propaganda system. I see no reason to want anyone else to adopt its deluded way of thinking.
The sheer consistency and coordination on ideological matters between every variety of American institution, to say nothing of the national focus on disciplining and punishing the labor class while ignoring the capitalists, should be the first clue that this isn't a free society. We would criticize foriegn countries for this level of naked institutional corruption yet we seem blind to it ourselves.
I understand why the current Chinese leadership want this law. They've been gradually tightening social controls over mainland China and that has meant a growing rift with the situation in Hong Kong. However, the editorial you quote boils down to 'might makes right', i.e. the US and other western countries are so preoccupied with their own affairs at the moment, they won't be willing to defend the interests of Hong Kong.
As I've said before, I'm generally a believer in following international laws and abiding by international agreements. China signed an agreement with the UK which gave them huge advantages - they took control not just of the New Territories, which were leased to the UK for 99 years ending in 1997, but also the core parts of Hong Kong which had been UK territories in perpetuity. The quid pro quo for taking back the whole of Hong Kong was the 'one country, two systems' agreement set out in the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1985. It was agreed that would apply until 2047 - maintaining the capitalist system and separate legal framework of Hong Kong.
The new law does not seem consistent with the 1985 agreement, so this effectively represents a repudiation by China of that agreement. I've been very critical of the way the US has been ignoring or repudiating binding international agreements in recent years and I'm equally critical of China's action here.
Yeesh, that article sounds like it was written by a Soviet commissar back in Stalin's days...
It seems to me the argument is that if Hong Kong isn't under Chinese control, it will fall prey to western exploitation instead. I'm not sure I agree we're as bad as China, but there is validity to that concern. And the US certainly has no moral authority on the world stage anymore. But the crackdown on Hong Kong protesters caused major US corporations like the NBA and Blizzard to do major mea culpas earlier this year.
I'm just surprised to see this view coming from a right-leaning poster. Most of the pushback I saw against these companies earlier in the year WAS from the right, though alot of that was just playing opportunistic gotcha with outspoken athletes and coaches.
@semiticgod is the China expert. I'll wait to hear from that corner before making a judgment.
Seems to me like much of the working class in mainland China already suffers under exploitation via western capitalism.
FWIW I think it's bad to couple arguments about economic well being with arguments about self-government. There are theoretical arguments there to be sure, but I don't think they're salient here. Protesters in Hong Kong want self government. That's a good thing, imo, and should be supported. We should never favor autocracy over self government because of concerns about capitalist exploitation -- or be neutral about it either. Global economic exploitation is orthogonal to questions of self government, imo. But at least under self-government, people can organize and get change.
As I said above, what hope do the masses of factory workers in mainland China have for petitioning for change?
The UK is to offer about 3m people from Hong Kong the right to settle in the UK. That's the response to the new Chinese law that undermines the level of autonomy promised to Hong Kong as part of the 1997 transfer arrangements.
This action has been signaled as a possibility previously, but it's a significant step for the Johnson government to take. Remember that he took the leadership of the Conservative party on the back of the Brexit vote and concerns about immigration were a significant element in that. For years there was considerable criticism of the government for failing to meet their 100k annual target for immigration, so the possibility of 3m additional immigrants won't go down well with many of Johnson's supporters. However, I think it is the right thing to do given the history of the UK involvement in Hong Kong.
The action may also have a greater impact on China than their leaders believe:
- one result of the Covid-19 pandemic is that it is likely to lead many countries to review their international links. The US has already been attempting for some time to persuade other countries to reduce ties with China and the situation with Hong Kong may help them make more progress with that. The special trading status given to Hong Kong by many countries is one of the likely casualties.
- if large numbers of people from Hong Kong do go to the UK, that is likely to be part of a wider flight of both people and money, reducing Hong Kong's ability to function as a commercial center.
A series of hate subs on Reddit have been banned today, including the well-known pro-Trump subreddit r/The_Donald. Apparently Reddit made the move in response to criticism that it wasn't reigning in hate speech on the platform. The recent protests over police brutality might have played a role in pushing the change...
This is all well and good but those nutty hateful people don't magically disappear just because their gathering place disappears.
I'm not sure how effective this is. I suppose it's something useful to keep them away from feeding in to each others extremism where they likely one-up each other in the hate Olympics. They were normalizing and accepting each other's behavior. But again, now these people don't just magically disappear just because their safe space goes away.
A series of hate subs on Reddit have been banned today, including the well-known pro-Trump subreddit r/The_Donald. Apparently Reddit made the move in response to criticism that it wasn't reigning in hate speech on the platform. The recent protests over police brutality might have played a role in pushing the change...
But again, now these people don't just magically disappear just because their safe space goes away.
Of course they do. Just like Covid-19 is going to magically disappear. Just ask Trump...
A series of hate subs on Reddit have been banned today, including the well-known pro-Trump subreddit r/The_Donald. Apparently Reddit made the move in response to criticism that it wasn't reigning in hate speech on the platform. The recent protests over police brutality might have played a role in pushing the change...
This is all well and good but those nutty hateful people don't magically disappear just because their gathering place disappears.
I'm not sure how effective this is. I suppose it's something useful to keep them away from feeding in to each others extremism where they likely one-up each other in the hate Olympics. They were normalizing and accepting each other's behavior. But again, now these people don't just magically disappear just because their safe space goes away.
I think it's probably very effective long-term. These ideologies come from somewhere, but they propagate and spread on platforms and communities. The existence of subreddits like the late r/gendercritical allowed people with the same feelings to congregate together and normalize them, just like on any hate sub. In the absence of that community, those prejudices will go unfed, spreading to fewer people and being less important to the identities of the people who held them.
R/gendercritical has already moved someplace else, but they'll get less traffic than they did on Reddit, and many folks in that community won't actually follow, because Reddit is otherwise their main outlet. There are other trans hate subs still on Reddit where redditors can migrate, but r/itsafetish and similar places will likely have to choose between toning down the rhetoric or risking their sub getting banned, too.
Let's say the inverse happened and trans-friendly spaces were banned. Gender dysphoria would still be just as common, but almost nobody would have the courage to transition if they had no social support or resources to help them do so. Trans people would be just as common; we'd just be stuck in the closet, unable to reach out to each other or encourage each other to be ourselves.
Fewer people would play the BG games, after all, if this community wasn't there to keep interest alive and share stories.
Comments
Enough to convince me. But you're incorrect - linking a list of books isn't research when you refuse to even look. I have done the research because the matter of police violence has been important to me for quite some time now.
I don't see the point in doing more than making it clear that I am in favor of police and prison abolition as well as making it clear that no we do not need "pushback" against that viewpoint. You've made it clear that you're hostile to that idea, so I don't know why you keep asking for further explanation.
Regarding your points, I think we should
No caveats, no exceptions, no special cases.
You're not going to find many people in your corner I'm afraid. Personally I find abolishing the police a hopelessly naïve goal with about a 0% chance of ever being implemented. But if it makes you happy, keep aiming for the stars...
That only makes sense of you live on a desolate utopian island of something, but even then, if they destroy the world around you it will still affect you.
This would be going back to the dark ages.
Speaking of Florida, Trump just sent out a tweet about his "silent majority" supporters in The Villages, Florida (who aren't really that silent anymore). The first thing in the video imbedded in the tweet is one of his supporters in a golf cart screaming "white power". I guess we're saying the quiet part out loud at this point. He also spent all of yesterday tweeting out about a dozen "wanted" posters of pictures of people who tore down an inanimate object. He's basically the old guy who sits around listening to the police scanner all day at this point.
Nevermind the fact that it was revealed yesterday that Russia has bounties on our soldiers in Afghanistan and Trump and Pence are claiming they "didn't know" (which defies all belief). Putin's reward for this behavior was for Trump to push for him to be in the G7. Sorta puts "Benghazi!!!" into perspective, doesn't it??
Oh, and the Administration also pushed flawed anti-body tests out the door on purpose to skew the actual scope of the COVID-19 outbreak. Watch 60 Minutes tonight if you're interested. This Administration is guilty of mass negligent homicide at this point. There is no other way to look at it. It's the biggest shit-show in American history, and we're just getting started. Even assuming Biden wins, it's a LONG way to January. As I saw someone mention yesterday, the dystopian government in "V for Vendetta" was responsible for less civilian death in a virus they released ON PURPOSE than this one has been responsible for by sheer incompetence and negligence.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/06/iran-issues-arrest-warrant-trump-asks-interpol-200629104710662.html
Don’t be surprised if Trump uses this to his advantage by saying anyone who wants him arrested or impeached is aligned with radical Islam Iran.
Let's also get real here. Republicans want the issue when it comes to abortion. They are happy to kick this can down the road for another 3 or 4 decades so they can continue to send fundraising letters about it. The moment they lose it as a rallying cry is the moment the lose the enthusiasm of about half their base. The grifters in the religious right leadership have been selling the flock on the courts being the only way to force their agenda on a wide scale for 40 years. The last few weeks have basically been finding out you thought your retirement was set and your pension checks start bouncing.
It was essentially in regards to laws passed in Louisiana (and other states) that were trying to circumvent the legality of abortion by placing regulations on clinics that were impossible to meet and totally unnecessary as a way to force them to close while maintaining some sort of plausible deniability in the eyes of the law.
Roberts is going with the reasoning that "we already decided this 4 years ago with a case in Texas, we aren't going to keep relitigating this every year". Roberts voted the OTHER way in that case, but is now respecting precedent.
There aren't more or less rights. It's just a strike against bad faith attempts at regulation that are clearly aimed to make it impossible to obtian one in certain states while maintaining a veneer of still being technically legal.
Many states have exactly ONE clinic that provides abortions, including the one I live in. I am intimately familar with it since it's next door to a restaurant I order take-out from. It has outdoor cameras on every corner. Women need to have volunteer escorts help them into the building to shield against harassment. What Republican legislatures in these states are telling these surviving clinics is "you have to do this, this, this and this to be in compliance", the parameters of which are purposefully designed to be financially and logistically unfeasible.
A well-known anti-trans subreddit, r/gendercritical, was also banned. There are a handful of other communities dedicated to anti-trans hate (they operate under the veneer of "gender critical feminism," appropriating the name "feminism" for PR reasons), and while I'm sure a lot of folks will just migrate to the other subs, the ban will slow down the hate train.
One of the remaining subs, r/itsafetish, is actually the reason my out-of-state trans friend first started seriously considering suicide. I'm hoping that sub gets taken down as well; I already know one person who nearly died because of the abuse she got on that subreddit.
That's interesting. I was actually recent looking into banned and quarantined reddit subs the other day. I was trying to do some research on the sexual abuse by twitch streamers scandal that went down about a week ago, and stumbled into a pro-gamer gate reddit sub.
I got the impression from reading about it that The_Donald was pretty ugly with regard to racism, which was a bit surprising only because it was so popular (and therefore, quasi mainstream). Shows I dont really know a lot about reddit sub cultures.
A question about your post: You said your friend suffered abuse on r/itsafetish - which I dont understand only because I dont understand why your friend would go there if its such a hostile place to her?
I guess I'm thinking about how I'd handle that situation. It's not the same thing (at all. Not even close) - but once I realized I was in a misogynist subreddit about gamer gate, I noped on out of there havent looked again. I dont think I can reasonably learn anything valuable from a place like that.
It's so tiresome at this point. Whatever game comes out that week is picked apart for any HINT of something that can be construed as "politically correct". A bunch of people then pledge about how they're never going to play that game, how women and minorities are ruining everything, and how they're eventually going to be victorious in this inane crusade to reclaim their "hobby" from whatever it is they think stole it from them. Rinse and repeat. It never changes. It's been the same topics and complaints for the last 5 years. This is by far the best commentary I've ever seen on the subject and the culture it created (he also happens to be the best damn video game reviewer on Youtube):
Well worth the time to watch, if only for the line that sums up the main problem this counter-culture has, "One of the hardest lessons of my life was learning that you have to be lovable to be loved."
I think she visited those places because she was still questioning and looking for answers wherever she could find them. And for questioning teens, which is the standard answer on a hate sub, is a lot simpler and easier to process as an answer than which is what questioning folks tend to get when they ask questions on trans-friendly subs.
I've personally criticized anti-white sentiment and anti-male sentiment on many occasions, sometimes in this very thread. But there's a difference between calling out anti-white/male sentiment when it appears, and bringing it up just to complain about anti-women/minority sentiment disappearing.
The parents of Travis Martin share the exact same sentiment.
So do the parents of Tamil Rice and Antwon Rose.
Their deaths matter so much I suppose any amount of child murder is an acceptable response.
The sheer consistency and coordination on ideological matters between every variety of American institution, to say nothing of the national focus on disciplining and punishing the labor class while ignoring the capitalists, should be the first clue that this isn't a free society. We would criticize foriegn countries for this level of naked institutional corruption yet we seem blind to it ourselves.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1192992.shtml
I understand why the current Chinese leadership want this law. They've been gradually tightening social controls over mainland China and that has meant a growing rift with the situation in Hong Kong. However, the editorial you quote boils down to 'might makes right', i.e. the US and other western countries are so preoccupied with their own affairs at the moment, they won't be willing to defend the interests of Hong Kong.
As I've said before, I'm generally a believer in following international laws and abiding by international agreements. China signed an agreement with the UK which gave them huge advantages - they took control not just of the New Territories, which were leased to the UK for 99 years ending in 1997, but also the core parts of Hong Kong which had been UK territories in perpetuity. The quid pro quo for taking back the whole of Hong Kong was the 'one country, two systems' agreement set out in the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1985. It was agreed that would apply until 2047 - maintaining the capitalist system and separate legal framework of Hong Kong.
The new law does not seem consistent with the 1985 agreement, so this effectively represents a repudiation by China of that agreement. I've been very critical of the way the US has been ignoring or repudiating binding international agreements in recent years and I'm equally critical of China's action here.
Yeesh, that article sounds like it was written by a Soviet commissar back in Stalin's days...
It seems to me the argument is that if Hong Kong isn't under Chinese control, it will fall prey to western exploitation instead. I'm not sure I agree we're as bad as China, but there is validity to that concern. And the US certainly has no moral authority on the world stage anymore. But the crackdown on Hong Kong protesters caused major US corporations like the NBA and Blizzard to do major mea culpas earlier this year.
I'm just surprised to see this view coming from a right-leaning poster. Most of the pushback I saw against these companies earlier in the year WAS from the right, though alot of that was just playing opportunistic gotcha with outspoken athletes and coaches.
@semiticgod is the China expert. I'll wait to hear from that corner before making a judgment.
@WarChiefZeke is hard to peg. That's why I like him. Reminds me of myself in some ways. Conservative but not a zealot, and clearly not a Trump sycophant. And he hasn't been banned yet. A big plus on this thread...
The Global Times is under the direct control of the Chinese Communist Party; this is a press release by a government far more blatantly corrupt than our own, even compared to the Trump administration specifically. It blames the United States for unrest in Hong Kong, but I can't think of a time where the U.S. government was less invested in promoting democracy abroad. I doubt the current administration cares at all about the fate of Hong Kong.
Accusing political dissidents of being American pawns is a long-running meme in essentially every undemocratic country on the planet, and the Trump administration's total disinterest in foreign affairs belies just how false the claim is. The Chinese government is accusing the United States of fomenting unrest because it doesn't like to acknowledge the fact that the people of Hong Kong know what it's like to live under a democratic government and profoundly don't want Beijing to seize control of their home.
The Chinese government knows it's only popular where it has power over the press and a lockdown on historical memory. Foreign meddling is an excuse for that unpopularity outside the Party bubble.
If we believed every accusation of American meddling in foreign countries, the U.S. would have more spies on its payroll than it has citizens. "American pawns" is just a tired old accusation from governments too uncreative to think of anything else.
Seems to me like much of the working class in mainland China already suffers under exploitation via western capitalism.
FWIW I think it's bad to couple arguments about economic well being with arguments about self-government. There are theoretical arguments there to be sure, but I don't think they're salient here. Protesters in Hong Kong want self government. That's a good thing, imo, and should be supported. We should never favor autocracy over self government because of concerns about capitalist exploitation -- or be neutral about it either. Global economic exploitation is orthogonal to questions of self government, imo. But at least under self-government, people can organize and get change.
As I said above, what hope do the masses of factory workers in mainland China have for petitioning for change?
This action has been signaled as a possibility previously, but it's a significant step for the Johnson government to take. Remember that he took the leadership of the Conservative party on the back of the Brexit vote and concerns about immigration were a significant element in that. For years there was considerable criticism of the government for failing to meet their 100k annual target for immigration, so the possibility of 3m additional immigrants won't go down well with many of Johnson's supporters. However, I think it is the right thing to do given the history of the UK involvement in Hong Kong.
The action may also have a greater impact on China than their leaders believe:
- one result of the Covid-19 pandemic is that it is likely to lead many countries to review their international links. The US has already been attempting for some time to persuade other countries to reduce ties with China and the situation with Hong Kong may help them make more progress with that. The special trading status given to Hong Kong by many countries is one of the likely casualties.
- if large numbers of people from Hong Kong do go to the UK, that is likely to be part of a wider flight of both people and money, reducing Hong Kong's ability to function as a commercial center.
This is all well and good but those nutty hateful people don't magically disappear just because their gathering place disappears.
I'm not sure how effective this is. I suppose it's something useful to keep them away from feeding in to each others extremism where they likely one-up each other in the hate Olympics. They were normalizing and accepting each other's behavior. But again, now these people don't just magically disappear just because their safe space goes away.
Of course they do. Just like Covid-19 is going to magically disappear. Just ask Trump...
R/gendercritical has already moved someplace else, but they'll get less traffic than they did on Reddit, and many folks in that community won't actually follow, because Reddit is otherwise their main outlet. There are other trans hate subs still on Reddit where redditors can migrate, but r/itsafetish and similar places will likely have to choose between toning down the rhetoric or risking their sub getting banned, too.
Let's say the inverse happened and trans-friendly spaces were banned. Gender dysphoria would still be just as common, but almost nobody would have the courage to transition if they had no social support or resources to help them do so. Trans people would be just as common; we'd just be stuck in the closet, unable to reach out to each other or encourage each other to be ourselves.
Fewer people would play the BG games, after all, if this community wasn't there to keep interest alive and share stories.