Time's Up Disbands Entire Board in the Wake of Cuomo Backlash

gorfias

Unrealistic but happy
Legacy
May 13, 2009
7,115
1,865
118
Country
USA
lmao

the left wanted Cynthia Nixon. We never liked Cuomo.
Maybe we just are using the term Left to describe different people?
The emmy's, for instance, are not dominated by the Right but the "Left" as I would inaccurately describe them (to me, the political compass is very screwed up. Another topic).

 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,282
3,105
118
Country
United States of America
Maybe we just are using the term Left to describe different people?
The emmy's, for instance, are not dominated by the Right but the "Left" as I would inaccurately describe them (to me, the political compass is very screwed up. Another topic).

The emmies are very much the establishment. Centrist dweebs-- Democrats who like to pretend they are better than Republicans-- are behind the nauseating adulation toward Cuomo.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,487
929
118
Country
USA
Nah there wasn’t context in this case I was just making fun of you for being Catholic
I like how Brawlman makes a post about how shameless I am, but then likes your post that's basically "nah, I'm just making fun of you." Way to take the high ground there, @BrawlMan
 
  • Like
Reactions: gorfias

Specter Von Baren

Annoying Green Gadfly
Legacy
Aug 25, 2013
5,632
2,849
118
I don't know, send help!
Country
USA
Gender
Cuttlefish
Oh, you mean all this?


I don't like that douche either. Regardless of which party screwed up where.
I certainly don't know what kind of person Kavanaugh is, though what I saw of him at the trial didn't give the best impression. I still feel that people should be accused and convicted for things they do and not accused of something for the sake of political machinations.
 

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Mar 10, 2016
26,926
11,283
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
I still feel that people should be accused and convicted for things they do and not accused of something for the sake of political machinations.
You would think that, yet it looks like both parties feel the opposite of what you're thinking. They've all done this on some part, but especially the Republican party.
 
Last edited:

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,963
118
A principal charge was that if Kboy did that (that a 15 year old girl successfully fended off 2 rapey 17 year old football players with the help of a magic bed that bounced her to safety and out of a locked room 40 years ago) he had a personality problem that predicts he would still be sexually attacking females to this day.
This is not a reasonable argument.

In practice, many attackers (sexual or otherwise) are not that determined to seriously harm their victim or escalate things beyond a certain point, so sufficient resistance can cause them to recoil or back down. That's why most fights are far short of lethal, because few people want to cause serious injury.

Of course, if you do get attacked by someone with a much higher tolerance for inflicting pain and damage that's when you're in real trouble, and even more trouble if you do escalate.
 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Nov 25, 2007
16,338
8,834
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅
You would think that, yet it looks like both parties feel the opposite of what you're thinking. They've all done this on some part, but especially the Republican party.
The thing is that, when you want to look "tough on crime", you've got to punish someone for the crime that was committed. If you can't find the criminal, then you just find someone who could have done it and punish them. The important part is that someone is punished.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

09philj

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 31, 2015
2,154
947
118
Maybe we just are using the term Left to describe different people?
The emmy's, for instance, are not dominated by the Right but the "Left" as I would inaccurately describe them (to me, the political compass is very screwed up. Another topic).

The Democrats are mostly liberals. Liberalism is a roughly centrist ideology. It espouses liberty and legal equality through a system of mostly free market capitalism. It does not hold generally hold institutions or traditions as inherent goods in and of themselves as conservatism might, but nor does it advocate for the abolition of social and economic hierarchy as left wing political positions do. Different strands of liberal thought identify different things as fundamental rights that must be protected by government intervention. Social liberalism, which is often just called liberalism in the US, will often consider certain material conditions as being human rights which should be provided or subsidised by the government (IE food, water, shelter, healthcare, education, etc.). Classical liberalism, on the other hand, considers only legal rights and civil liberties to be the purview of the government. More expansive social liberal policy may align with social democratic policy. Social democracy advocates for a mixture of public and private enterprise and is the generic centre left policy platform. The main difference is that social democrats consider taking services needed by the whole population into public ownership to be moral in and of itself, whereas for social liberals it is merely a means towards guaranteeing certain rights. Beyond social democracy are ideologies that advocate for the abolition of capitalism and/or the centralised state. Socialism advocates that the means of production should be collectively owned by either the workers that operate them or by the communities they serve. (There are various competing strands of socialism which have different ideas about who should own what and how they should interact) At the far end you've got communism which says that all property should be held in common by all citizens. (There are various strands of thought about how you make that happen, all of them hate each other) On the right everything's a bit less clearly defined but you've mainly got competition between the people who say that capitalism is the best form of hierarchy and others that argue state bureaucracy is the best, with the extremes being anarcho capitalism which wants capitalism with no state, and various ideologies that are built around service of a hierarchal central government often including a strict class system, EG feudal monarchism, fascism, etc.
 

gorfias

Unrealistic but happy
Legacy
May 13, 2009
7,115
1,865
118
Country
USA
The Democrats are mostly liberals. Liberalism is a roughly centrist ideology. It espouses liberty and legal equality through a system of mostly free market capitalism. It does not hold generally hold institutions or traditions as inherent goods in and of themselves as conservatism might, but nor does it advocate for the abolition of social and economic hierarchy as left wing political positions do. Different strands of liberal thought identify different things as fundamental rights that must be protected by government intervention. Social liberalism, which is often just called liberalism in the US, will often consider certain material conditions as being human rights which should be provided or subsidised by the government (IE food, water, shelter, healthcare, education, etc.). Classical liberalism, on the other hand, considers only legal rights and civil liberties to be the purview of the government. More expansive social liberal policy may align with social democratic policy. Social democracy advocates for a mixture of public and private enterprise and is the generic centre left policy platform. The main difference is that social democrats consider taking services needed by the whole population into public ownership to be moral in and of itself, whereas for social liberals it is merely a means towards guaranteeing certain rights. Beyond social democracy are ideologies that advocate for the abolition of capitalism and/or the centralised state. Socialism advocates that the means of production should be collectively owned by either the workers that operate them or by the communities they serve. (There are various competing strands of socialism which have different ideas about who should own what and how they should interact) At the far end you've got communism which says that all property should be held in common by all citizens. (There are various strands of thought about how you make that happen, all of them hate each other) On the right everything's a bit less clearly defined but you've mainly got competition between the people who say that capitalism is the best form of hierarchy and others that argue state bureaucracy is the best, with the extremes being anarcho capitalism which wants capitalism with no state, and various ideologies that are built around service of a hierarchal central government often including a strict class system, EG feudal monarchism, fascism, etc.
I'd write many of your ideas are in flux. Joe Biden, for instance, is far more a Fascist than was Donald Trump IMHO. Fascism is thought to be a right wing ideology that marries big government to big business. That big business despised Trump and helped put Biden in power. Yet Biden is thought to be to the "left" of Trump... which today, I'd argue, is not a helpful distinction.
To me, the political line, Left, Right, is actually a circle. At some point, the extreme right and left meet each other. It doesn't matter if it is the state that controls all means of production, or partners with big business to control virtually all. At the end of the day, you have totalitarians outlawing any hint of independent action or thought. I fear the west has never been closer to that totalitarianism.
More particularly for this thread, what I think we've been discussing is a movement that has used sexual impropiety to enforce this authoritarianism selectively. And a flicker of that dream of liberty is still alive out there, objecting to this.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,963
118
The Democrats are mostly liberals.
This is actually questionable.

Polls suggest 20-25% of Americans define themselves as liberal, and not all liberals vote Democrat. Given that roughly half the USA votes Democrat, we therefore conclude that liberals are less than half the Democratic party. Of course, this doesn't necessarily account for whether people's self-identification is actually correct.
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,282
3,105
118
Country
United States of America
Given that roughly half the USA votes Democrat
About half of those who vote for either a Republican or Democrat, anyway.
If it's general population, it's more like 20%. And Republicans with another 20%.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,963
118
I'd write many of your ideas are in flux. Joe Biden, for instance, is far more a Fascist than was Donald Trump IMHO. Fascism is thought to be a right wing ideology that marries big government to big business.
That's not really a useful description of fascism.

At minimum, one of the key elements of fascism was that big business was completely subordinated to the will of the state. But this is obviously not the case where big business is deciding who runs the country, because that means the state is being subordinated to business. Fascism is really a form of authoritarian, extreme nationalism.

Biden is very plainly not a fascist.

Trump, however, it gets a bit trickier.

The history of fascism is to see fascists playing on the fears and unhappiness of a societal majority, usually by telling them they are under threat, that something has been taken from them, and they are the only people who can fix it. This is invariably conservative-linked because it plays on the past: "You had it so good, then X ruined it - deal with X and you can have it back". Nationalism is the obvious vehicle for this: the sense of national values and national history for the societal majority - their traditions and their beliefs. And X of course naturally becomes the scapegoat, the Other, that must be controlled, defeated and stamped out.

Trump, bluntly, was fascistic. You can see in him all the tricks that fascists used in their rise to power. It's this idea of harnessing a societal majority (white people) with a feeling of being threatened or becoming victims, presenting them with an idealised view of the past that needs to be restored ("Make America Great Again"), and an othered enemy that's causing all this woe (mostly immigrants). Trump then presents himself as the only saviour, assaulting any resistance - even his own party where it failed to suit his ends.

His attempt to subvert the 2020 election is really just the icing on the fascist tactic cake: someone prepared to construct a "big lie" to maintain their power at any and all costs. Fuck democracy, fuck the country, take and hold power. When we talk about lying, note Hannah Arendt's quotation: "Fascists are never content to merely lie; they must transform their lie into a new reality, and they must persuade people to believe in the unreality they’ve created. And if you get people to do that, you can convince them to do anything." Trump's constant lying, and the support of the further elements of the US right wing media in that, cannot be taken without that context.

This attempt to steal an election is also indicative of Trump's authoritarianism, although Trump had made his authoritarian inclinations clear in so many ways before that. This authoritarianism is something his supporters determinedly overlooked, because they never really opposed it. They wanted a "strong leader" who would kick those pesky democratic institutions aside and do what needed to be done, who would crush the media, naysayers in Congress, the government bureaucracy, etc.

If we wanted to ask did Trump govern like a fascist, the answer is no: Trump was pretty inactive. He didn't really have an ambition for the country, he just wanted to be at the top without much desire to do anything with it. But he clearly used the fascist playbook to get to the White House and to try to stay there. He proved that the rhetoric and tactics of fascism works to get elected in the USA, and that's why I would call Trump a proto-fascist. The fact that these have been so effective within the Republican Party means they are probably here to stay for quite some time. The USA just needs to hope that until this phase goes away, no future Republican candidates have fascist policies to go with the fascist rhetoric and tactics.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,963
118
About half of those who vote for either a Republican or Democrat, anyway.
If it's general population, it's more like 20%. And Republicans with another 20%.
More Democrats identify as conservative/moderate than liberal.

When you and other leftists go out on a crusade against alleged shitty liberals, I don't think you're actually recognising the real political make-up of the Democratic Party. It's not progressives versus liberals. It's leftists versus centrists ("moderates").
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,282
3,105
118
Country
United States of America
More Democrats identify as conservative/moderate than liberal.

When you and other leftists go out on a crusade against alleged shitty liberals, I don't think you're actually recognising the real political make-up of the Democratic Party. It's not progressives versus liberals. It's leftists versus centrists ("moderates").
I don't find self-identification as 'liberal' to really mean much in the first place.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,487
929
118
Country
USA
That's not really a useful description of fascism.

Biden is very plainly not a fascist.

Trump, however, it gets a bit trickier.
You've got to be joking. You do understand that you're muddying the waters just to criticize Trump, right? You suggesting Trump is more fascist than Biden is exactly the sort of nonsense that makes people use an utterly useless definition of fascism. No, neither of them are fascist. Neither of them are proto-fascist. Give it a rest.
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,282
3,105
118
Country
United States of America
You've got to be joking. You do understand that you're muddying the waters just to criticize Trump, right? You suggesting Trump is more fascist than Biden is exactly the sort of nonsense that makes people use an utterly useless definition of fascism. No, neither of them are fascist. Neither of them are proto-fascist. Give it a rest.
How racist do you have to be to qualify as fascist? How nationalist? How militarist? How authoritarian?
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,487
929
118
Country
USA
How racist do you have to be to qualify as fascist? How nationalist? How militarist? How authoritarian?
None of those things are what counts. You can have left-wing racists, and left-wing nationalists, and left-wing militarist, and left-wing authoritarians to a degree.

@09philj I would not say was perfectly accurate in post #30, but definitely good enough that I wasn't going to nitpick. There are pretty good descriptions of things in there, notably how left and right are ultimately stances on hierarchy. But there are many types of hierarchy, both real and perceived, and multiple ways to attack or defend them. A right-wing view is a defense or attraction to some sense of hierarchy, and fascism is attraction to a specific view of hierarchy, specifically your view of hierarchy.

Fascism and communism both come out of the idea that all forms of hierarchy are inherently a class conflict. All hierarchy, be it social, professional, economic, military, national, religious... just all of it. All of that is seen as class conflict. The communist says "ok, all hierarchy is conflict, so we should abolish all of it", where the fascist says "ok, all hierarchy is conflict, and conflicts can be won, so lets do that." Neither group ever entertains the idea that hierarchies might ever be cooperative things that help anyone not at the top of them. Given the choice between the two, the communists are clearly less malicious, but both are based on the same delusion. To be a fascist, one must first believe in a society determined by class identities, and then believe that their class identity ought to be dominant over all others. Trump blurred the hell out of the boundaries between "classes" in America. The media and Democrats did everything in their power to try and build the image of Trump into a bigoted authoritarian, because that combined with his sense of "winning" would make a fascist for them to hate, but all of that was nonsense. A white fascist does not brag about how well black people are doing for themselves, does not wave the pride flag, does not negotiate with the Taliban. For all his many, many egregious faults, Donald Trump displayed at least the belief that people from different places and positions were not in inherent conflict with each other just for existing. Which is better than you.
 

gorfias

Unrealistic but happy
Legacy
May 13, 2009
7,115
1,865
118
Country
USA
That's [marriage of State and big business] not really a useful description of fascism.

At minimum, one of the key elements of fascism was that big business was completely subordinated to the will of the state.
I think you are writing of a method of obtaining such a marriage rather than an outcome. As that Princeton study found, the state in the US is not responsive to the governed but to big business and they each do each other's bidding. That same big business despises Donald Trump.

I would agree the way Trump got the nomination from the Republicans was thuggish. He didn't even have his appeal come solely at stopping illegal immigration. Polling data showed a large enough segment of the party wants their own version of (article I read about polling data used this example) Al Sharpton.