The all things Political Topic - For who in this dark, dream-haunted Land dares Resist the righteous flame of Wrath And Doom themselves to despair and death?

[ShadySands]

It's accurate for Texas where it originated.

[Malcador]

3 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

Happy Juneteenth everyone. Oh and before I forget SLAVERY DID NOT END ON JUNE 19th 1865! It was still legal and in practice in several northern states. Why do people refuse to accept that? SLAVERY ENDED ON DECEMBER 6 1865 WHEN THE 13TH AMENDMENT WAS RATIFIED!  There… I said it.

Isn't July 4th the wrong date ? 

[Guard Dog]

8 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Isn't July 4th the wrong date ? 

You’re right. Technically it was July 2.You’re right. Technically it was July 2.

[Guard Dog]

I can’t help it. I have an engineering education which drives me to be exact. Plus I’m a history snob. Put those two things together and you get the guy that rains on everyone’s parade!

[Hurlshort]

4 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

 Plus I’m a history snob. 

I'm going to challenge this a bit because I think too many people get hung up on dates when it comes to history. But honestly that is super low on the list of what is needed to understand historical events. What really needs to be focused on is the order of the events and the cause and effect.

Sorry, it's just I'm constantly drilling into my students how unimportant it is that they managed to rote memorize a bunch of dates. It means nothing if you don't understand how we got there and what the impact was.

So yeah, it's your engineering education.

[BruceVC]

On 6/18/2021 at 5:40 PM, Gromnir said:

am wondering if this is a teachable moment. 

bruce were angered by putin trying to use the response to january 6 in the US as some kinda excuse for suppressing any anti-governmental protest. some o' those russian protesters might have advocated and even used violence, and putin used such as an excuse to suppress any and all protest as well as denying anybody even tangential related to protest groups the right to run for elected office. 

nevertheless, when the US is the example o' potential antigovernmental suppression, bruce immediate sees blm as the potential threat.

...

attorney general barr and president trump sent fed troops to apprehend and detain blm protesters last summer with the excuse the protesters were seditionists. unlike january 6 arrests and prosecutions where d-bags is being arrested and prosecuted for specific acts o' violence, vandalism and trespass, there were literal hundreds of examples o' blm protesters being thrown into unmarked vans, w/o being given right to counsel, held against their will for considerable amounts o' time w/o charges being filed. the blm protesters were arrested and not charged frequent w/o any specific evidence o' violence or vandalism on the part o' the protesters. guilt of being a protester were transitive property guilt of being a seditionist. bruce were ok with such governmental exercises o' power. 

your clear example o' what you find offensive with putin, and you see as potential possible if people don't "bend the knee in reverence to blm," already were happening last year in the US and you supported such at the time. bass ackwards bruce.

HA! Good Fun!

 

I always appreciate people pointing out where I may be wrong about something or misunderstanding an event, I only realized the value of what I  term " the benefit of correcting an incorrect view " in a debate in RL or any forum about 5-6 years ago and sometimes its still hard to admit I am wrong but I have come a long way

But any relevant teaching moment should be based on a basic understanding that you may be wrong about the actual facts about something or in this case my concern about a topic and not concerned about another

And a  teaching moment cant be about a misunderstanding of what point you think a person may be  making and sometimes I joke about topics or dont explain things properly which is my fault  and I always enjoy a debate to clarify things if necessary. 

And I would like to have several  debates about some of the outcomes of BLM but if no American members want to have to these debates I dont feel the need to raise them because the " BLM global developments " are not the same in other countries, . But I am not  opposed to BLM principles or consider them a threat to the stability of the USA or other countries. Its a form of a SJ movement and I generally support SJ movements when they make sense. I consider the attack on the Capitol much worse and more concerning than the totality of BLM protests and violence 

So when you say  I am not concerned with how the  "US is example  potential antigovernmental suppression" I am not  exactly sure what you mean? Are you referring to the Portland  protests and protestors being arrested by Federal agents and how I supported Barr on this ? Or do you mean other examples 

And I very happy to discuss numerous differences between the erosion or differences in freedom in a country like Russia  and what has been happening in the USA but I am not sure if you mean that ?

 

 

[BruceVC]

On 6/18/2021 at 5:39 PM, Hurlsnot said:

This is not new. Young people have always had a naivete about what is right and wrong. Distrust of authority and government and thinking critically about society come with age.

This post is true in my experience in some ways around the natural growth that all young go on  about what is truly right or wrong  but in SA its more older people who support authority and younger people who question some things 

Also this view is rejected in SA by some young people and activists who mean well and say things like " we must have more young people in government and deciding on policy because our currents laws are made by old people who dont understand the youth " 

These groups dismiss the importance of institutional and life experience and conflate issues around corruption and failure of governance with the issue of older people being in positions of power and government

But for me one of the most important considerations to help any young person reach their full potential is mentorship and guidance from older more experienced people and those same older  people correcting any young peoples mistakes in a way that is constructive without being dismissive 

[Guard Dog]

So…. Some singer I’ve never heard of says the US Flag should be replaced with one that is more “inclusive for all Americans”. The Fox News website is just all kinds of triggered over it. Most of the folks I know on FB too. Which is kind of dumb because who cares what one person on Twitter thinks.

But I think it’s a good idea. I nominate this one to replace the ol’ Stars & Stripes. I think it’s VERY inclusive:

Edited June 19, 2021 by Guard Dog

[rjshae]

Smart Talented Unique Person in Demand

[Gromnir]

7 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

You’re right. Technically it was July 2.You’re right. Technically it was July 2.

if ratification is your linchpin for 13th amendment, then vote and sign by enough delegates to make the deceleration something other than thomas jefferson's personal manifesto don't happen 'til august 2, 1776.

HA! Good Fun!

[Gorth]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57522186

 

(never mind that I categorically already refuse to touch anything, chocolate or otherwise I suspect is made by Nestle or its subsidiaries for other reasons)

 

"The US Supreme Court has ruled food giants Nestlé USA and Cargill can't be sued for child slavery on African farms from where they buy their cocoa.

Six African men alleged that they were trafficked from Mali and forced to work on cocoa farms in Ivory Coast.

The group say both companies perpetuated that slave trade to keep cocoa prices low.

The court ruled 8-1 that the group had no standing because the abuse happened outside the US."

 

An interesting situation. I suppose the ruling is technically correct (even if morally wrong). Sort of making you wonder if it was the right place the trial took place (or the wrong kind of trial)?

Is child (slave) labor legal under US law as long as it doesn't happen on US soil? If so, would the laws need changing or are there other laws that apply, which the claimants should have pursued instead?

 

[Hurlshort]

Yeah, I swore off nestle years ago when they had a fight with California over water during a terrible drought.

[Gorth]

7 minutes ago, Hurlsnot said:

Yeah, I swore off nestle years ago when they had a fight with California over water during a terrible drought.

I did when I found out they were behind thousands of infant deaths, because they aggressively marketed a low quality powder milk substitute as better than breastfeeding your newborns in third world countries.

[Gromnir]

3 minutes ago, Gorth said:

 

Is child labor legal under US law as long as it doesn't happen on US soil? 

 

no. the article is a bit misleading. the ruling in the case in question were extreme narrow, and it looks like five (at least) Justices is agreeing that US corporations may be sued under the ATS (alien tort statute), but the particular case in question did not present a justiciable cause o' action. 

in this specific case, a us corporation (nestlé) bought product from private farms operating in the ivory coast, private owned farms not owned or operated by the us corporation. 

ats is old law btw. 1789. might need to be updated to recognize how corporations should not be allowed to avoid responsibility just 'cause they is only tangential involved in wrongdoing or if they maybe knowingly traffic with nogoodniks but do not explicit engage in the tortious behavior from which plaintiffs seek recovery. the Court simple recognized the judiciary lacks authority to create new causes o' action, but again, multiple Justices, in a concurring opinion, made it extreme clear that US corporations is not able to avoid legal responsibility just 'cause wrongdoing happens beyond the borders o' the US. however, because is not the US, Congress needs to create authority to sue and the ats current has a few gaps in coverage.

is another situation where Congress needs fix a problem. don't hold your breath waiting.

HA! Good Fun!

[Zoraptor]

55 minutes ago, Gorth said:

I did when I found out they were behind thousands of infant deaths, because they aggressively marketed a low quality powder milk substitute as better than breastfeeding your newborns in third world countries.

'Aggressively market' is a bit... polite for what they did.

They gave away just enough formula for the mother to stop expressing milk, so after the sample period the mother would have absolutely no option other than to buy milk formula (and they bunged doctors to get them to advise using it, faked research saying it was better than breast feeding and a host of other things).

Pretty difficult to fully avoid Nestlé products though, their corporate structure and brand naming is (deliberately) labyrinthine.

[ComradeYellow]

I like how all these once considered leading companies which demonstrate the superiority of western private market lassaire faire consumerist ultra supremacy are starting to take the socio-dirt nap.  

I may have been on board with that nonsense once upon a time as an American brat in the 1990's but it kinda feels good to be on the 180 as the ship sinks.

I'm just wondering how many of these once liberals of my generation are taking the diametric opposite approach and clinging to American exceptionalism in business and....everything under the sun. 

(Good kids grow up to be bad guys and vice versa etc. etc.)

[Gorth]

For whats its worth, Nestle is a Swiss company, but the US branch is probably the only part of the giant multi-headed monster it is, they could at least try to drag to court (when in the US).

[Gfted1]

Why did the powdered milk kill thousands of infants?

[Gromnir]

@BruceVC

On 6/18/2021 at 5:51 AM, BruceVC said:

I think we should all be very concerned when any Democracy starts saying we are " going to prosecute  anti-government ideology " 

What exactly does that mean and who decides what is "anti government ". Seriously, imagine some worse case scenarios around this like " you must bend the knee in reverence to BLM or you are deemed racist and this government doesnt tolerate racists "  or " everyone in the South must admit being involved in the historical  slave trade and pay reparations to government " ( what was that funny website you sometimes quote that made those jokes about a Muppet TV character )  

am admitted not sure how to dispel your confusion.  the above quoted material were your worst case scenario of the fantasized prosecution o' folks for expressing antigovernmental ideology, a hobgoblin gd conjured outta the internet ether with the help o' an obscure journalist and a red sharpie pen. 

you were also angered by putin's transparent whataboutism regarding january 6. russia declares opposition groups extremist and dangerous and then uses such as an excuse to imprison protesters and prevent anybody even tangential related to the extremist group in question from running for elected office in russia. according to putin is ok though, 'cause look at the chaos o' january 6 and see how the US jailed and prosecuted those individuals bringing their complaints to the Capitol on january 6. cringeworthy, and bruce agreed putin's actions and excuses regarding russian protesters were unjustified.

nevertheless, when barr and trump were engaged in illegal behavior o' suppression, you defended them. barr and trump claimed their authority arose from the fact the protesters, as a group, were engaged in seditious behavior, anti-governmental behavior. blm and antifa were dangerous extremist groups. however, the individuals whisked away in unmarked vans and imprisoned were not subject to any probable cause findings and there were no warrants issued for their arrests. the American Citizens in portland and elsewhere, denied right to counsel and due process, were not committing crimes when they were treated much like russian protesters, and all too frequent subjected to similar levels o' violence and thuggery as part o' their apprehension and detention. the crime the folks whisked away by nameless agents in the dead o' night were guilty of was associating with blm. how do we know this? 'cause none of 'em were actually charged with crimes.  you defended such actions as reasonable, 'cause blm and antifa, in your mind is dangerous. you didn't need proof that the persons denied basic Constitutional rights by trump and barr's stormtroopers actual committed crimes because, according to barr and trump, they were affiliated with blm.

during the summer your were defending the same argument as putin made at his presser and you don't realize it or are purposeful ignoring. for putin, the denial o' basic freedoms and rights is okie dokie 'cause the people being prevented from running for office or who were detained during the recent widespread protests in russia were affiliated with dangerous extremist organizations. is exact same argument made by barr, trump (and bruce) during the summer when it were blm protesters who were being arrested w/o due process o' law. again, barr used sedition laws to claim he had authority to carry out his illegal suppression. blm and antifa, and anybody barr or trump claimed were affiliated with those undeserving o' basic rights o' every other American Citizen.

but again, the proverbial cherry on top is, given an opportunity to imagine a "worse case scenario" o' the government denying freedoms and rights 'cause a person or group embraces the wrong ideology, you latch onto blm... as the source o' oppression. 

is something broken, and am not certain how to fix.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[Elerond]

3 hours ago, Gfted1 said:

Why did the powdered milk kill thousands of infants?

Millions.

infants died in malnutrition, caused by combination of several factors.

• Powdered milk was already lacking some nutriments
• Water in poorer countries contained impurities that caused that powdered milk didn't mix well which caused that babies bodies had difficulties to  adsorb nutrients from the milk and leading to diseases in infants.
• Powdered milk was relatively expensive, lots of people used too much water in order to save powder, causing nutrient amount that babies got from the milk to close to zero.
• Using milk powder often leads in decrease of milk that mother produces

[ComradeYellow]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/20/the-uss-greatest-danger-isnt-china-its-much-closer-to-home

As always, Mr. Reich does a good job putting a magnifying glass on the real issues.

If the U.S. tears itself apart with ala 1860 foreign rivals win!  Proto-fascism is a real thing here (Though I prefer to call it "libertarian-fascism")

[BruceVC]

 

6 hours ago, Gromnir said:

@BruceVC

am admitted not sure how to dispel your confusion.  the above quoted material were your worst case scenario of the fantasized prosecution o' folks for expressing antigovernmental ideology, a hobgoblin gd conjured outta the internet ether with the help o' an obscure journalist and a red sharpie pen. 

you were also angered by putin's transparent whataboutism regarding january 6. russia declares opposition groups extremist and dangerous and then uses such as an excuse to imprison protesters and prevent anybody even tangential related to the extremist group in question from running for elected office in russia. according to putin is ok though, 'cause look at the chaos o' january 6 and see how the US jailed and prosecuted those individuals bringing their complaints to the Capitol on january 6. cringeworthy, and bruce agreed putin's actions and excuses regarding russian protesters were unjustified.

nevertheless, when barr and trump were engaged in illegal behavior o' suppression, you defended them. barr and trump claimed their authority arose from the fact the protesters, as a group, were engaged in seditious behavior, anti-governmental behavior. blm and antifa were dangerous extremist groups. however, the individuals whisked away in unmarked vans and imprisoned were not subject to any probable cause findings and there were no warrants issued for their arrests. the American Citizens in portland and elsewhere, denied right to counsel and due process, were not committing crimes when they were treated much like russian protesters, and all too frequent subjected to similar levels o' violence and thuggery as part o' their apprehension and detention. the crime the folks whisked away by nameless agents in the dead o' night were guilty of was associating with blm. how do we know this? 'cause none of 'em were actually charged with crimes.  you defended such actions as reasonable, 'cause blm and antifa, in your mind is dangerous. you didn't need proof that the persons denied basic Constitutional rights by trump and barr's stormtroopers actual committed crimes because, according to barr and trump, they were affiliated with blm.

during the summer your were defending the same argument as putin made at his presser and you don't realize it or are purposeful ignoring. for putin, the denial o' basic freedoms and rights is okie dokie 'cause the people being prevented from running for office or who were detained during the recent widespread protests in russia were affiliated with dangerous extremist organizations. is exact same argument made by barr, trump (and bruce) during the summer when it were blm protesters who were being arrested w/o due process o' law. again, barr used sedition laws to claim he had authority to carry out his illegal suppression. blm and antifa, and anybody barr or trump claimed were affiliated with those undeserving o' basic rights o' every other American Citizen.

but again, the proverbial cherry on top is, given an opportunity to imagine a "worse case scenario" o' the government denying freedoms and rights 'cause a person or group embraces the wrong ideology, you latch onto blm... as the source o' oppression. 

is something broken, and am not certain how to fix.

HA! Good Fun!

 

I just want to say so that their is no  misunderstanding.  I do support  BLM in its normal objectives and  issues but not the reasons the protests below. 

Gromnir you are conflating  a few points I have made  and also you are making some understandable generalizations around my view on BLM and Antifa but I am glad we are having this debate because I want to clarify and confirm a few things 

I dont consider either BLM or Antifa as extremist groups. I never label groups like this in the wrong way  because I have had real interaction with extremist groups in the place like the ME and its important to understand and define all types of groups in the right way. BLM is a SJ movement and Antifa I have no interest in calling them anything but what they are ...they a psedo-left wing violent  group who must be arrested when they get in involved in the violence they same. They must be treated in the same as violence from the right but they not extremist because their goals are nebulous and defined as the likes of any more extremists groups like ISIS or White Supremacy 

We must separate our views of Putin  and Barr and the reality of who he is and what he believes to ensure Russia is not weakened by Western ideology and attempts to undermine his leadership. Putin is an effective leader for what Russia believes in and  how they practice their own foreign policy and global interests but he is  more than capable using numerous state resources to kill or arrest anyone who he feels is a threat to stability in Russia 

Barr and Trump are not in same level when  it come suppression of freedom, no you mustn't think that. Trump is a dilettante and Barr believes in enforcing laws that directly led to  events in Portland . And yes  Portland Protests  was one of the BLM  protests that had a strange   agenda and it seemed that many of the Protestors were trying to provoke a response from the federal government. 

But I dont have other opinions of Barr and his rulings so I can only  comment on the Portland incident  as  I mentioned. Also I dont consider  Barr an extension of the Trump ideologues who had no   understanding  of the law or constitution. Barr responded to his actions in that Hearing and he faced some direct and serious questions but he responded in a very convincing way.

But end of the day if you feel he acted unconstitutionally    in Portland  and abused his power with deploying federal courts  then yes why hasnt  he been charged?

@rjshae If you dont  mind I really need your  opinion on something that I want to raise with Gromnir and its something I only thought of now and not when we had this debate

Both Portland and Seattle are liberal cities that are not considered racist at all and yet we had  BLM protests that in Seattle led to occupation of the police station. But why would you have a protest about police racism in a city where the police are not.....this literally occurred to me now. Because if  that was true how did someone like you reflect on it because I would have thought you would occupy   a police station where the issue had similar?

But last time you explained it had a slight disruption but it was supported and the police allowed the occupation because they didnt want a violent confrontation with the protestors which I do understand and it is Seattle after all. Did anyone in Seattle seem angered by the fact a police station had been occupied and now that would mean if suddenly their a violent  bank robbery the police response may be less effective ? And if I had to guess I doubt people in Seattle would see it like that because that type of crime is not common but I found link this seems to suggest the overall outcome wasnt something that people seemed happy about 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackbrewster/2020/06/10/seattle-protesters-take-over-city-hall-demand-mayors-resignation/?sh=52fd83ba3caf

 

Edited June 20, 2021 by BruceVC

[Guard Dog]

On 6/19/2021 at 9:33 PM, Gromnir said:

if ratification is your linchpin for 13th amendment, then vote and sign by enough delegates to make the deceleration something other than thomas jefferson's personal manifesto don't happen 'til august 2, 1776.

HA! Good Fun!

Sure there’s ambiguity around that. Several colonies were already at war with England before the declaration. There’s also ambiguity about when the United States actually became what it is. I’m not even 100% sure when the name was adopted. But I’ll tell you about one thing there is no ambiguity. When the sun rose on December 6, 1865 slavery was legal in one state. When the sun set  it was legal in no states.

Edit: just to be clear. I am in no way arguing against Juneteenth being made a holiday. I think that’s a fine idea. I also think it would’ve made more sense if December 6 were made a holiday instead.

Edited June 21, 2021 by Guard Dog

[Guard Dog]

Speaking of freeing slaves...

In N.C.A.A. Case, Supreme Court Backs Payments to Student-Athletes

Another step in the right direction. As I have said in the past, College Sports is a multi-billion dollar business. Without the student athletes it does not exist. They are receiving something valuable for their time and efforts. There is no question there. But be participating in sports they are not permitted or sometimes just hindered from earning money for use on necessary things the scholarships do not cover. That is what this ruling is supposed to remedy.

There is still a very big elephant in the room however. NCAA and institutions still use their likeness and names to sell merchandise. They deserve to get a piece of that. If your name and your likeness are not yours then what is?

[Amentep]

1 hour ago, Guard Dog said:

They are receiving something valuable for their time and efforts.

A student athlete gets tuition and fees, plus room and board, plus their own academic advisors, plus a meal plan, plus their own tutors, plus staff who arrange things for them with various departments around the university for services that the athletics department doesn't provide directly so that the athlete doesn't have to waste their time doing it themselves.  Possibly things like their own nutritionist and medical doctors as well, depending on the institution.  Not to mention the facilities they play and practice in and trainers to assist them in those facilities.  And the coaches.   I can guarantee you they have access to many things that the regular student population does not have.

I get it, I do.  There's a lot of money being thrown around in college athletics.  But despite you saying the receive something valuable for their time and efforts, the impression I get is the fact that they are getting an education, plus a lot more, for free is being treated as valueless in these discussions because it is not cold, hard cash in the hands of the student-athlete.  The same education most of their entire class cohort is probably going into debt to achieve nor do they get the benefits that so many of the athletes do.

Combine that with the fact that I also can't help but feel that some (if not all) of any lost NCAA revenue will be made up by raising fees on the other students - the ones who will be paying their hard earned dollars for the athletes to get more services than they can ever have access to all while those same athletes are also making hundreds of thousands of dollars on top of all the freebies they get - and I can't help but feel that a very big point has been missed in these discussions.