• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2017 |OT2| Well, maybe McMaster isn't a traitor.

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

Wilsongt

Member
Dominican Power said:
Is the orange turd really going to invite Duterte to the white house?
Click to expand...

Yep.

President Trump has extended an offer to Rodrigo Duterte, the president of the Philippines and the architect of a bloody war on drugs that has killed thousands of people, to join him at the White House.

Trump invited Duterte to the White House after the two world leaders had “a very friendly conversation” on the phone, according to a press statement released late Saturday. The president also praised the Philippines for “fighting very hard to rid its country of drugs.”
Click to expand...

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-invite-duterte-white-house-bbaec32a887b

https://mobile.twitter.com/EliStokols/status/858518520925233156

Someone should make a thread. Would be interesting to see the Duterte defense force.
 
K

Kid Kamikaze10

Member
Someday the black progressive vs black liberal fight needs to happen.

It's been rumbling forever, moreso with Obama being around, but I just want us to figure out how we're gonna fight, politically.

Because watching the "upend the system" vs "reform the system" debate is so annoying. Especially now when "get killed by the system" is and will continue to be the most likely outcome.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Crab said:
Okay, so, the US arrests him. Now explain to me as best you can exactly what happens as a result of that action.
Click to expand...

I doubt we'd actually arrest him, because if we made his clear that his actions subjected him to international condemnation, he just wouldn't come to America.

But our position should certainly be that if he comes to America we would arrest him for crimes against humanity.

numble said:
Then the Philippines elects a similar leader given his popularity? And they go closer to China and US loses its largest ally in the South China Sea?
Click to expand...

Crab said:
Basically. By the time you get a Duterte, who, again, is overwhelmingly popular amongst his countrymen, the problem happened a long time ago. Get rid if Duterte and you just get a new Duterte in his place, except now the new one has even less reason to listen to the United States, which probably means an even higher death toll. That didn't help anything; you just got to feel briefly morally superior at the cost of a lot more lives.
Click to expand...

I think these posts represent a lack of understanding of the Philippines.

For example, saying Duterte is overwhelmingly popular is mostly off base. The Philippines is not a First World country and polling is not sophisticated, and Duterte is not significantly more popular than the preceding leader, who was not pro-mass murder. There aren't a whole bunch of other Dutertes waiting in the wings to take over. He's sui generis. So I disagree that removing him wouldn't have meaningful consequences.

Duterte is also, himself, the biggest obstacle to the American alliance. Most Filipino people prefer America to China. Duterte doesn't, and is explicitly unwilling to cooperate with America. A new leader would be more likely to listen to the United States because the Philippines has a bunch of extensive preexisting reasons to want to cooperate with America that Duterte is just ignoring.

Basically, the assumption here is that the Philippines is just a failed state and Filipino lives are worthless because they're ungovernable. Which is more or less what I observed was the argument originally.
 
R

royalan

Member
Kid Kamikaze10 said:
Someday the black progressive vs black liberal fight needs to happen.

It's been rumbling forever, moreso with Obama being around, but I just want us to figure out how we're gonna fight, politically.

Because watching the "upend the system" vs "reform the system" debate is so annoying. Especially now when "get killed by the system" is and will continue to be the most likely outcome.
Click to expand...

I take offense to the idea that Progressive vs. Liberal as labels are all that different, especially with how these fights play out in our politics, AND in the black community. I think liberal policies being pushed by the left right now are incredibly progressive, and that this fight is mostly a war between various figureheads who are incredibly similar ideologically.

And I just don't see that schism playing out in a big way in the black community. We're more or less on the same page.
 
Emerson

Emerson

May contain jokes =>
Kid Kamikaze10 said:
Someday the black progressive vs black liberal fight needs to happen.

It's been rumbling forever, moreso with Obama being around, but I just want us to figure out how we're gonna fight, politically.

Because watching the "upend the system" vs "reform the system" debate is so annoying. Especially now when "get killed by the system" is and will continue to be the most likely outcome.
Click to expand...

How about we fight on our own side once the president from the other side, a literal existential threat to the continuation of human civilization, is gone.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Bonen no Max'd said:
Pigeon what exactly are you advocating the US do here then, other than not invite Duterte (which I think we can all agree is good)?
Click to expand...

I think in this case I'm primarily suggesting that people stop claiming that the idea that crimes against humanity are bad is "imperialist nonsense."
 
Emerson

Emerson

May contain jokes =>
pigeon said:
I think in this case I'm primarily suggesting that people stop claiming that the idea that crimes against humanity are bad is "imperialist nonsense."
Click to expand...

Nobody claimed that. The claim was that the USA unilaterally detaining the leader of a sovereign nation is imperialist. Which is probably true.

You can support the idea if you want but it doesn't change that.
 
A

AntraxSuicide

Banned
I'm also unclear how we should define the pros and cons for people like the Kims or Duterte. In principal, if saving (whatever that means) 10 million people from the Kim family meant sacrificing 10 million and 1 people, the utilitarian stance is to not do it, but I think there are other factors (sending people to die, Kim family victims aren't just sitting around happily, etc)

It's a bit gross but that's the issue with trolley problems that you literally have no choice but to participate in.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Emerson said:
Nobody claimed that. The claim was that the USA unilaterally detaining the leader of a sovereign nation is imperialist. Which is probably true.
Click to expand...

Detaining people for committing crimes against humanity is only "unilateral" if you believe that there is no international consensus that crimes against humanity are bad.

Which is like my whole point.
 
Emerson

Emerson

May contain jokes =>
pigeon said:
Detaining people for committing crimes against humanity is only "unilateral" if you believe that there is no international consensus that crimes against humanity are bad.

Which is like my whole point.
Click to expand...

Then an international body should be doing the detaining. It's really not hard to understand why one nation arresting another's leader is not in any way the ideal solution.
 
S

sphagnum

Banned
Interesting little interview with a former climate denialist who helped form the ideological basis for that movement before switching sides. Most of it is just him talking about how he came to the light and converted, but this stuck out to me:

SL: Having been so central to Republican thought and leadership on energy, what can you say about what doesn’t work to convince conservative climate skeptics that climate change is real and important?

JT: If you talk about the need to transform civilization and to engage in the functional equivalent of World War III, you may as well just forget it. To most conservatives, that’s just nails on a chalkboard. Or if you say, you’re corrupted and a shill and ignorant. That’s no way to convince anybody of anything. What are the chances they’re going to say, Gee, you’re right? All that does is entrench someone in their own position.

SL: So what does work?

JT: In our business, talking to Republican and conservative elites, talking about the science in a dispassionate, reasonable, non-screedy, calm, careful way is powerful, because a lot of these people have no idea that a lot of the things they’re trafficking in are either the sheerest nonsense or utterly disingenuous.

I also make the conservative case for climate change. We don’t call people conservative when they put all their chips on one number of a roulette wheel. That’s not conservative. It’s pretty frigging crazy. It’s dangerous, risky. Conservatives think this way about foreign policy. We know that if North Korea has a nuclear weapon, they’re probably not going to use it. But we don’t act as if that’s a certainty. We hedge our bets. Climate change is like that. We don’t know exactly what’s going to happen. Given that fact, shouldn’t we hedge?

SL: I frequently hear about Republican lawmakers who don’t believe their own climate denials. Do you know many people who are in that camp?

JT: I have talked to many of them in confidence. There are between 40 and 50 in the House and maybe 10 to 12 in the Senate. They’re all looking for a way out of the denialist penitentiary they’ve been put into by the Tea Party. But they’re not sure what the Republican response ought to look like exactly and when the political window is going to open.
Click to expand...

https://theintercept.com/2017/04/28...ed-the-lies-and-decided-to-fight-for-science/
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Emerson said:
Then an international body should be doing the detaining. It's really not hard to understand why one nation arresting another's leader is not in any way the ideal solution.
Click to expand...

Bam Bam Baklava said:
Seems like you're just ignoring the hell out of the unilateral part.
Click to expand...

Okay, a couple questions here.

First, let's assume the United States wanted to detain Duterte, but also wanted it to be multilateral. What steps would we need to take to make that action multilateral? Whose approval would we need?

Second, what's the difference between unilateral and imperialist? When we unilaterally send foreign aid to poorer countries, is that always and without exception imperialist? If not, what distinguishes unilateral but not imperialist actions?
 
T

teiresias

Member
Kevinroc said:
https://twitter.com/jdawsey1/status/858767278896238592

A Politico reporter saying the White House is expecting them to try again this week on Trumpcare.
Click to expand...

The White House can expect many things, but they only bought themselves a week to work out the funding situation, and if they can't keep the government open without dems then both Ryan and McConnell know trying to push this through given the Dem's threats last week is pointless if they don't want shutdown egg on their faces. Trump may be ok with that, but the congress isn't.
 
K

Kid Kamikaze10

Member
royalan said:
I take offense to the idea that Progressive vs. Liberal as labels are all that different, especially with how these fights play out in our politics, AND in the black community. I think liberal policies being pushed by the left right now are incredibly progressive, and that this fight is mostly a war between various figureheads who are incredibly similar ideologically.

And I just don't see that schism playing out in a big way in the black community. We're more or less on the same page.
Click to expand...

I really do hope it doesn't play out in any big way, because you are right, the ideologies aren't far off in the least bit.

But those slight differences: capitalist vs socialist, reform vs destruction of system, etc., tends to lead to some ugly arguments.


And some ashy hoteps, but yeah.
 
S

SatelliteOfLove

Member
sphagnum said:
Interesting little interview with a former climate denialist who helped form the ideological basis for that movement before switching sides. Most of it is just him talking about how he came to the light and converted, but this stuck out to me:



https://theintercept.com/2017/04/28...ed-the-lies-and-decided-to-fight-for-science/
Click to expand...

If this is true, make deals with the Dems and oil/coal companies that make MONEY. The technology is ripened and ready. Hell, they shoulda listened to known Republican T. Boone Pickens on this back in the day but noooooooooooooooooooooooo.
 
T

Team Alucard

Banned
Poodlestrike said:
Socialism isn't the same thing as progressivism tho.
Click to expand...

There are varying definitions of socialism. It doesn't simply mean that you believe in seizing the means of production, most mainstream "socialist" parties don't even advocate for that anymore.

Its just become a catch-all term that means you support labor rights, which imo is a huge part of being a progressive.

I would never consider someone who opposes the minimum wage or the right for workers to organize and collectively bargain to be a progressive, no matter how liberal their views are on hut-button social issues.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
pigeon said:
I doubt we'd actually arrest him, because if we made his clear that his actions subjected him to international condemnation, he just wouldn't come to America.
Click to expand...

Which does absolutely nothing. I doubt he cares. It's like banning me from Tajikistan; I'm just not going to alter my behaviour.

I think these posts represent a lack of understanding of the Philippines.

For example, saying Duterte is overwhelmingly popular is mostly off base. The Philippines is not a First World country and polling is not sophisticated, and Duterte is not significantly more popular than the preceding leader, who was not pro-mass murder. There aren't a whole bunch of other Dutertes waiting in the wings to take over. He's sui generis. So I disagree that removing him wouldn't have meaningful consequences.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. Duterte is overwhelmingly popular. Yes, polling might not be as sophisticated in the Phillipines. However, what polling we do have is showing his net satisfaction in the low 80s and high 70s. Even building in a significant margin of error, you can't tell me he is not more popular than the preceding leader, Aquino III, down in the 40s.

Secondly, Duterte has a clear successor - Pantaleon Alvarez - and is not sui generis.

Your plan sucks and would be worse for Filipinos.
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
Team Alucard said:
There are varying definitions of socialism. It doesn't simply mean that you believe in seizing the means of production, most mainstream "socialist" parties don't even advocate for that anymore.

Its just become a catch-all term that means you support labor rights, which imo is a huge part of being a progressive.

I would never consider someone who opposes the minimum wage or the right for workers to organize and collectively bargain to be a progressive, no matter how liberal their views are on hut-button social issues.
Click to expand...

Is that not what the term "social democracy" is for? Saying that you support workers rights and a strong safety net without being in favor of abolishing private capital or anything near that?

Most people who support the minimum wage would strongly balk at being labeled a socialist.
 
C

Carpe Libertatem

Member
Crab said:
Which does absolutely nothing. I doubt he cares. It's like banning me from Tajikistan; I'm just not going to alter my behaviour.
Click to expand...

I feel like this should go without saying, but you aren't the leader of a country and Tajikistan does not have the same level of influence as the U.S.

so, no, it's not like banning you from Tajikistan
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Carpe Libertatem said:
I feel like this should go without saying, but you aren't the leader of a country and Tajikistan does not have the same level of influence as the U.S.

so, no, it's not like banning you from Tajikistan
Click to expand...

Will refusing Duterte entry to the United States make him any less likely to continue his current policy platform, yes or no?

If you say yes, then you are wrong. If you say no, then you agree with conclusion of my analogy and are being deliberately obtuse. I don't really mind which you choose.
 
C

Carpe Libertatem

Member
Crab said:
Will refusing Duterte entry to the United States make him any less likely to continue his current policy platform, yes or no?

If you say yes, then you are wrong. If you say no, then you agree with conclusion of my analogy and are being deliberately obtuse. I don't really mind which you choose.
Click to expand...

maybe if he thinks it would lead to negative economic consequences? it's certainly not out of the question that the U.S. taking a firm stance against Duterte would result in him reconsidering his policy down the road.

might just be easier for you to admit that your analogy was dumb, tbh??
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Carpe Libertatem said:
maybe if he thinks it would lead to negative economic consequences? it's certainly not out of the question that the U.S. taking a firm stance against Duterte would result in him reconsidering his policy down the road.
Click to expand...

This is blatant goalpost shifting. I literally advocated economic sanctions earlier. What I am arguing against is pigeon's pointless "don't let him enter" policy. In and of itself, not letting him enter has no significant economic consequences. He just doesn't get to go to America. The only consequence of that is his anti-Americanism is reinforced, and he doubles down on what he is currently doing. That means more dead Filipinos, which is why I'm accusing pigeon of imperialism - it's okay if more people die as long as pigeon gets to make a moral song and dance, because they were only Filipinos.

might just be easier for you to admit that your analogy was dumb, tbh??
Click to expand...

Comparing two people getting banned by a country they don't care about and consequently not changing their behaviour is pretty fine with me. It's okay, you'll recover one day.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
No one needs to call people who oppose the right to organise progressive. Because no one really ever gets asked to. It's a matter of degrees on labour rights. And on other issues like WALL ST! It's rare that someone who would seek to reverse progress on these issues would be enthusiastically ascribed such a label. And that's perfectly fine I should note.

That's less so the case for "hot button social issues." This door doesn't seem to swing both ways.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Jason Kander‏Verified account @JasonKander

A 70-year old man who watches 6 hours of TV a day, plays lots of golf, and always seems to be in Florida is a retiree, not a President.
Click to expand...

Ice cold, Jason.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
honestly progressivism is an incredibly shitty label anyway. Almost nobody thinks they're not progressive. Even Trump is progressive from his perspective in that he believes America ought to progress towards certain goals, they're just goals we all in this thread disagree with. It's an entirely contentless label, and the only point of it is to give some people social capital by acting as gatekeepers.

I mean, as long as they're setting up my gates, my annoyance is limited, but I'm pretty open to multilateral disarmament and agreeing just to not use the term for anyone.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Crab said:
honestly progressivism is an incredibly shitty label anyway. Almost nobody thinks they're not progressive. Even Trump is progressive from his perspective in that he believes America ought to progress towards certain goals, they're just goals we all in this thread disagree with. It's an entirely contentless label, and the only point of it is to give some people social capital by acting as gatekeepers.

I mean, as long as they're setting up my gates, my annoyance is limited, but I'm pretty open to multilateral disarmament and agreeing just to not use the term for anyone.
Click to expand...

This is the most pedantic post I've seen in here and I've argued with Meta.
 
S

Slayven

Member
Kid Kamikaze10 said:
Someday the black progressive vs black liberal fight needs to happen.

It's been rumbling forever, moreso with Obama being around, but I just want us to figure out how we're gonna fight, politically.

Because watching the "upend the system" vs "reform the system" debate is so annoying. Especially now when "get killed by the system" is and will continue to be the most likely outcome.
Click to expand...

The Black Guy Who Tips had a great podcast touching on this today . Mainly because he was swatting flys all day on twitter with "Woke" folks about the Obamas and black people
 
V

VendettaRed07

Member
Kevinroc said:
https://twitter.com/jdawsey1/status/858767278896238592



A Politico reporter saying the White House is expecting them to try again this week on Trumpcare.
Click to expand...
Even if they actually have managed to figure out a way to bridge the moderate GOP with the freedom caucus, they can't pass it though budget reconciliation.

So what would be the point of attempting to pass the same bill as before? They could feesabley do the "state lines" idea now. There's no reason to not at the very least push the plan he ran on. Because everything would be subject to a filibuster at this point
 
T

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Crab said:
honestly progressivism is an incredibly shitty label anyway. Almost nobody thinks they're not progressive. Even Trump is progressive from his perspective in that he believes America ought to progress towards certain goals, they're just goals we all in this thread disagree with. It's an entirely contentless label, and the only point of it is to give some people social capital by acting as gatekeepers.

I mean, as long as they're setting up my gates, my annoyance is limited, but I'm pretty open to multilateral disarmament and agreeing just to not use the term for anyone.
Click to expand...

I call myself progressive because its seemingly the one left leaning label I can use that isn't going to make some camp or other yell at me
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
The Democrats are spineless and worthless in opposing Trump & the GOP
8 9 10 11 12
571
58K
sugarhigh4242 replied
  • Locked
This week in Trump’s America: Week 2 by ThinkProgress
8
2K
stuminus3 replied
  • Locked
Hillary Clinton retweets Slate voter guide calling her most corrupt candidate
3
3K
ModBot replied
  • Locked
Blacklist 2014 - Hollywood's most liked scripts of the year
30
6K
Sho_Nuff82 replied
Top Bottom