Elon Musk: Always A Douche

[Berkut]

Well, you - and I do mean you - could start by not copying the language of the right when you attack the left - or at least those you perceive as far left.

You get that this is the very definition of an ad hominem attack, right?

You're not engaging with what Berkut said - just that what he is saying [copies] the language of the right".

Ah heck, who am I kidding.  Of course you don't realize that.  Either that or you realize it and don't care.

Have you not been reading Berkut's posts and his use of the word "woke"?  Its a lot like how Pollivre is starting all his campaign rallies where is first line is to attack those who are woke.  Which is of course simply copying the Fox talking points.

Its funny, because I don't actually use the word woke. At least, it isn't any real part of my arguments, and I've even made it a point to simply avoid using the term. 

Not that "facts" matter to you, of course.

[Berkut]

Yes, we're all crazy Fox News viewers.  There is zero problem with wokism in our society.  No university teacher has ever been disciplined for discussing historical and contemporary subjects, no journalist has ever been suspended for reading a book's title, no one ever has been accused of being "too white" for something.  It's all our collective imagination, derived of watching too much of Fox News, even when we don't subscribe to this particular channel.

It's not that those things don't happen - they do.  But if you mention them you're secretly helping the political right, so you need to ignore these things.

Is "woke" now one of those forbidden words you cannot say?

[Razgovory]

I have no idea what viper is even talking about.  I don't think Angela Davis is pretending to be black or sacrificing goats.

It's ok Raz, I know you're fine with this concept too.  As long as it's from the left, intolerance is a-ok.

I'm fine with Angela Davis sacrificing goats?  What in the hell are you talking about?

[Tamas]

The moderate wing of the Democratic coalition has staked and defended their position; they are in fact dominant in the party.  That's why we have an infrastructure plan and no BBB.  "Defund the police" is actually a good example: it was rejected overwhelmingly by the national party.  Clyburn basically made the 2020 primary a referendum on defund the police and assorted snowflakery and once defined that way, Biden cruised.  Even though notably, the most leftist candidate - Bernie Sanders - also flatly rejected defund the police.  On a national level, the policy has as much support among Democrats as using a military coup to reinstall Trump as President has in the GOP.

The right is running against schools teaching that white people are inherently evil racists and "grooming" first graders.  There is literally no one advocating this; it is invented hysteria.  The moderate left can stand up, sit down, sway side to side or do the hokey-pokey: it will make not one bit of difference.  When the right talks about the "radical left" they don't mean the actual people and positions on the left wing of the Democratic party, they are referring to something completely made up.  That's why GOP talkers can speak with a straight face about Joe "No Busing" Biden as being "radical left"; the other day someone was tarring Liz Cheney as "radical left."

Sure there are excesses on the left - there are people on the left that say or do foolish or anti-liberal things that will be grist for the Limbaughs and the Carlsons.  In a country of 330 million people there always will be such people and there will always be episodes that feed the other side's propaganda.  Just as there have always been John Birchers on the right ranting lunacy about precious bodily fluids.  The difference is that the snowflake left has little clout beyond a few city councils whereas the loony right has effectively taken over the GOP.

Minsky summarised it perfectly and y'all ignored it so you could continue arguing.

[Admiral Yi]

Well, if you're interested in winning you may want to consider ways to move away from circular execution squads within your own side. And while the people on the other side of the circle surely are to blame, you primarily have control over where you're aiming and where you source your ammunition.

Fair enough.

Of course, in the US system you can't kick someone out of the party.  Voters are free to choose party affiliation and vote in whichever primary they want, and AFAIK no candidate can be blocked from running in a Democratic primary as a Democratic candidate.

[PJL]

Well, if you're interested in winning you may want to consider ways to move away from circular execution squads within your own side. And while the people on the other side of the circle surely are to blame, you primarily have control over where you're aiming and where you source your ammunition.

Fair enough.

Of course, in the US system you can't kick someone out of the party.  Voters are free to choose party affiliation and vote in whichever primary they want, and AFAIK no candidate can be blocked from running in a Democratic primary as a Democratic candidate.

A grave, maybe even fatal weakness in the US system IMO.

[Admiral Yi]

A grave, maybe even fatal weakness in the US system IMO.

Make your case.

[Eddie Teach]

I have no idea what viper is even talking about.  I don't think Angela Davis is pretending to be black or sacrificing goats.

It's ok Raz, I know you're fine with this concept too.  As long as it's from the left, intolerance is a-ok.

I'm fine with Angela Davis sacrificing goats?  What in the hell are you talking about?

Freedom of religion? 

[PJL]

A grave, maybe even fatal weakness in the US system IMO.

Make your case.

It all seems very decentralised to me, which is a mistake IMO. There should be a mechanism whereby the national  leadership can suspend & expel party members at the federal level & local state leaders do the same at state level if they break a code of conduct drawn up by the party. Also party candidates for local/state/federal elections should be elected by party members only.

[Admiral Yi]

It all seems very decentralised to me, which is a mistake IMO. There should be a mechanism whereby the national  leadership can suspend & expel party members at the federal level & local state leaders do the same at state level if they break a code of conduct drawn up by the party. Also party candidates for local/state/federal elections should be elected by party members only.

It would grind my gears to have a tiny in group decide who can and can't run and what positions are kosher and which aren't.  I'm comfortable with the US's bottom up system.  What is beyond the pale should be decided by voters, not handed down at Mt. Sinai.

[The Minsky Moment]

There is zero problem with wokism in our society.

No you've proven there is a problem.  Out of 1700 people far enough to the Left to turn out for the Communist Party USA's Presidential candidate, there are 10 reverse racists.  That's more than the total number of good people in Sodom, so sound the alarms.

[Sheilbh]

Fair enough.

Of course, in the US system you can't kick someone out of the party.  Voters are free to choose party affiliation and vote in whichever primary they want, and AFAIK no candidate can be blocked from running in a Democratic primary as a Democratic candidate.

I think the Republicans are pretty good at party discipline/disciplining people who step out of line with party opinion.

It would grind my gears to have a tiny in group decide who can and can't run and what positions are kosher and which aren't.  I'm comfortable with the US's bottom up system.  What is beyond the pale should be decided by voters, not handed down at Mt. Sinai.

The origin of those sort of controls - at least in the UK, and I imagine the rest of Europe - is protecting political parties from anti-democratic entryists of one form or other. On the left there have been consistent attempts for the last 70 years for Trots with a party-within-a-party discipline to infiltrate the mainstream party. There have been similar, though normally less organised (because if there's one thing Trots love it's a committee) attempts from the far-right in right-wing parties.

It has been one of the main firewalls against anti-democratic politics - but in Europe in the 20th century our system was party democracy which I don't think has ever been true in the US. Party democracy has now largely declined and we're another phase (since the 90s), which I'm not sure what is yet.

[Josquius]

You haven't seen the most well known study on this topic?
https://blogs.bmj.com/bjsm/2021/01/22/testosterone-and-transgender-athletic-performance-finding-a-path-for-inclusion-for-transgender-athletes/

I had not.  Eye opening.  I will have to square that with the other things I've been reading, but until I do I will have to put my lobbying on this issue on hold.

That's the ideal world outcome. Probably not possible in every situation with current technology however.

FYI Squeeze, not many people are going to see this as a particularly nuanced, subtle solution that threads its way between two extremes.

Which is where the true reasons the right are keen on pushing this comes out. Its not about protecting women or anything like that, its purely about punishing people who are different. Protecting women is just a handy shield that lets them scream "No you're the bigot!" and win over moderates.
If we assume a magic pill that instantly flips your gender in every way then there'd be simply no reason to exclude trans people other than bigotry.

[Valmy]

A grave, maybe even fatal weakness in the US system IMO.

Make your case.

It all seems very decentralised to me, which is a mistake IMO. There should be a mechanism whereby the national  leadership can suspend & expel party members at the federal level & local state leaders do the same at state level if they break a code of conduct drawn up by the party. Also party candidates for local/state/federal elections should be elected by party members only.

If we had a big multy party system I would probably be ok with this. In our system this would be a disaster.

[viper37]

I have no idea what viper is even talking about.  I don't think Angela Davis is pretending to be black or sacrificing goats.

It's ok Raz, I know you're fine with this concept too.  As long as it's from the left, intolerance is a-ok.

I'm fine with Angela Davis sacrificing goats?  What in the hell are you talking about?

Come on, stop playing idiot and we can discuss.  You value freedom of religion above everything else, when it comes from non Christians.  When Christians are the intolerant ones, you suddenly become against their freedom to discriminate.  At least try to be consistent.