POTUS/General Election Thread 2020 + Aftermath

[Hooahguy]

There hasn't been much coverage here of US politics since the inauguration. Has the noise quietened down? What's this about Texit?

A bunch of Texas Republicans are saying they want to form an independent republic, going as far as introducing a bill authorizing a referendum to leave the US. Probably won't go anywhere, but just in case it does we will be ready.

We should have burned more of the south during the Civil War.

[Montmorency]

A bunch of Texas Republicans are saying they want to form an independent republic, going as far as introducing a bill authorizing a referendum to leave the US. Probably won't go anywhere, but just in case it does we will be ready.

We should have burned more of the south during the Civil War.

[a completely inoffensive name]

A bunch of Texas Republicans are saying they want to form an independent republic, going as far as introducing a bill authorizing a referendum to leave the US. Probably won't go anywhere, but just in case it does we will be ready.

We should have burned more of the south during the Civil War.

Remember years ago on this forum after that one church shooting (who can keep track of all the shootings amiright?) where I said we needed to bring back Radical Reconstruction to finally root out the racist aspects of southern culture and people got all indignant about it?

[Hooahguy]

Remember years ago on this forum after that one church shooting (who can keep track of all the shootings amiright?) where I said we needed to bring back Radical Reconstruction to finally root out the racist aspects of southern culture and people got all indignant about it?

I completely agree. The failure of Reconstruction led to Jim Crow which arguably led to where we are today. So yeah we need a Reconstruction v2 but I'm not sure what that would even look like.

[Gilrandir]

We should have burned more of the south during the Civil War.

I wonder what would be the reaction of others if someone said "We should have carpet-bombed Vietnam more" or "We should have sent more Jews to concentration camps in 1938" or "We should have dropped a couple of more A-bombs on Japan in 1945" or "We should have raped more German women in 1945"? Still a unanimous acquienscence?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

The "Reconstruction" ended up being a fiasco.

John Wilkes Booth saw to that at Ford's theater. Had Lincoln been in charge of the first 3 years of it, with all of the political clout he had garnered, it would likely have been much less abusive but far firmer in screening out those who had led the rebellion from positions of power.

As it was, Johnson moved too rapidly towards the reformation of civil governments in the former Confederacy, did little to restrict the returned participation of the previous rebel leadership to political life, and actively campaigned against the rights of newly freed Blacks and against the 14th amendment. Many historians rank him among our worst Presidents, generally only according Buchannan a worse performance assessment -- though now both of them have been surpassed.

Following Johnson, Grant took a stance much more in line with the approach historians expected Lincoln to have taken -- but he could not reverse the "olly-olly-oxen-free" that Johnson had done with so many former Confederates. Grant smashed the first iteration of the KKK, but was not able to overturn the various Jim Crow laws that began to sprout up.


Texas likes to claim that they are the only state that was admitted to the union with a proviso that they had the right to secede. Our Civil War, fought (in part) to assert that no state has such a right, seems to mitigate against this belief.

[Idaho]

I wonder what would be the reaction of others if someone said "We should have carpet-bombed Vietnam more" or "We should have sent more Jews to concentration camps in 1938" or "We should have dropped a couple of more A-bombs on Japan in 1945" or "We should have raped more German women in 1945"? Still a unanimous acquienscence?

So you see the destruction of a racist and murderous political construct as morally the same as killing millions of actual people. Interesting.

[Hooahguy]

I dunno, I just think that going around burning all the plantation mansions of slave owners and other icons of slavery would have been a net positive.

[Gilrandir]

So you see the destruction of a racist and murderous political construct as morally the same as killing millions of actual people. Interesting.

You mean the destruction of a racist and murderous political construct didn't involve killing millions of actual people? Or are these inevitable victims that don't deserve any consideration but only "serve them right" attitude?

What I see is glorifying atrocities that accompany any war (and sometimes not only war). It is what they do in Russia now saying "We should have starved more Ukrainians in 1932-33" or "We should have killed all those Crimean Tatars instead of just benevolently sending them out to live in Siberia". And I'm appalled that similar hatetalk is heard from an Amercian who, moreover, is an admin at a social media outlet. And all forumers seem to support it and feel mildly humored. Not much of a stranger in a strange land. Something is really wrong with western values.

[Crandar]

Unilateral secession is illegal in the United States, but condemning so harshly the referendum efforts of Texas seems morally questionable. I don't see why shouldn't every state have the right to self-determination and sovereignty, if it so wishes. California, Texas or Hawaii should have, in my opinion, the chance to declare independence, as long as an absolute majority, as established by a transparent referendum, is in favour of it. I remember Spain being internationally condemned for not allowing the Catalans to hold an independence referendum, a criticism with which I agreed, although I'm against Catalan nationalism.

[Montmorency]

Just in: Anthony Brindisi (D) has conceded to Claudia Tenney (R) in #NY22.

Final 2020 election House result: 222D, 213R. Republicans came within 31,751 [efficient] votes of winning the majority.

You mean the destruction of a racist and murderous political construct didn't involve killing millions of actual people? Or are these inevitable victims that don't deserve any consideration but only "serve them right" attitude?

What I see is glorifying atrocities that accompany any war (and sometimes not only war). It is what they do in Russia now saying "We should have starved more Ukrainians in 1932-33" or "We should have killed all those Crimean Tatars instead of just benevolently sending them out to live in Siberia". And I'm appalled that similar hatetalk is heard from an Amercian who, moreover, is an admin at a social media outlet. And all forumers seem to support it and feel mildly humored. Not much of a stranger in a strange land. Something is really wrong with western values.

Whenever there are whites upholding hegemony over blacks, you appear on their behalf blaring for the baring of the neck for the knife or the bowing of the head for the boot. When can the weak, the innocent, the injured, expect some of your mercy or solace?

The chef's kiss of hypocrisy is lamenting the very "Western" values that most animate the condemnation of the persecution of such peoples as the Ukrainians and Tatars.

American traditional values (tm) and ''Communism'', I suppose? I don't disagree that they are just salty ultra-conservatives (politically correct fascists, we used to call them in the old days) that were disappointed in a centrist winning the bid for the presidency, but I still find the effort to deny the right to self-determination morally questionable. I also find Catalan nationalism vile, perhaps even worse than the cute Red Scare of our Texan cowboys, but I think Madrid should have let them have their stupid referendum anyways.

I don't think you can compare Catalan separatism, whatever its merits by consequence, with American falangism. When we recall that Catalans were particular victims of homegrown fascism, it even becomes perverse.

For the record, the Texas Republican expression of a right to secede has a long history as a publicity stunt and does not contain any substance or actionable intent. Republicans want to dominate the country, not break it up.

And realistically, Puerto Rico is the only territory that could escape US suzerainty, if a Democratic Congress forced the issue of its territorial status through a binding extreme-dichotomy referendum. Although, on the flipside I'm not sure it would be legally available for Congress to mandate a territory to hold a specific referendum. Maybe it could, would need to research the question.

[Montmorency]

Remember years ago on this forum after that one church shooting (who can keep track of all the shootings amiright?) where I said we needed to bring back Radical Reconstruction to finally root out the racist aspects of southern culture and people got all indignant about it?

Are you thinking of the Charlottesville Rally? Cuz the Charleston church shooting was 2015, and I wouldn't recommend reading back through the archives before 2017, for the cringe factor.

I do recall that when I said last year our problem was we didn't burn down enough of the South, you had a strong negative reaction.

[Excerpts of Rebecca Latimer Felton’s speech to the Georgia Agricultural Society, August 11, 1897]

On August 11, 1897 Rebecca Latimer Felton, wife of a Populist leader in Georgia, spoke at the Georgia Agricultural Society about the problems that farm wives faced. She claimed that farm wives faced many dangers but none greater than the threat of black rapists. She argued that charitable donations for overseas missionaries were misspent; funds were better spent educating poor young white girls who had been left unprotected by the poor white men of the South. White men, she said, had failed to protect farm wives from “the black rapist.” Vigilante justice, she declared, was a way for men to restore that protection. According to Felton,

“When there is not enough religion in the pulpit to organize a crusade against sin; nor justice in the court house to promptly punish crime; nor manhood enough in the nation to put a sheltering arm about innocence and virtue----if it needs lynching to protect woman’s dearest possession form the ravening human beasts----then I say lynch, a thousand times a week if necessary.”

Politics was central to Felton’s perspective. North Carolina Republicans who had encouraged African-American men’s success were also to blame for the actions of the “black rapist.” Republicans, Felton insisted, “must find a means to stop the crime that invites lynching by the ignorant and malicious of your supporters, or you cannot escape the responsibility for their actions.” Republicans “encouraged the ignorant Negroes in thinking that the success of the party…insures him against the just penalty of his wrongdoing.” Republicans, who had portrayed white Democrats as blacks’ most bitter enemy, had led African-American men to perform all kinds of outrages against whites. “In his ignorance,” she argued, the African-American man “…has interpreted this to give him license to degrade and debauch.” Speaking to white Republicans, Felton warned, “you are his teacher. You must correct your teachings or you cannot escape the wrath of an outraged people.”

If only the federal response to that stuff had been...




Unrelatedly, an interesting take on US strategy vis-a-vis China:

To Re-Establish U.S. Influence, Biden Should Play Rope-a-Dope, Not Compete Globally
Rather than reclaim global dominance by outspending and overpowering new contenders, U.S. planners should instead simply not contest many of Beijing’s and Moscow’s costly efforts to expand their networks of clients.

I'm familiar with the idea of American retrenchment driven by hard-nosed analysis of our lack of strength, but I wonder how China might be lured into the sorts of imperial over-extensions we have been prone to.

I wonder what would be the reaction of others if someone said "We should have carpet-bombed Vietnam more" or "We should have sent more Jews to concentration camps in 1938" or "We should have dropped a couple of more A-bombs on Japan in 1945" or "We should have raped more German women in 1945"? Still a unanimous acquienscence?

We should have done to the South just as we did to Germany and Japan. Look how they turned out!

[Hooahguy]

Unrelatedly, an interesting take on US strategy vis-a-vis China:

I'm familiar with the idea of American retrenchment driven by hard-nosed analysis of our lack of strength, but I wonder how China might be lured into the sorts of imperial over-extensions we have been prone to.

Probably better to post this in the Biden thread, but trying to lure them into committing more resources in Africa could be a way forward, but Im not sure if that will really have the desired effect, considering China has more resources than Russia does. Its also important to note that while Russia had been committing serious forces into Ukraine and Syria, China was taking a more soft power focus with only sending small numbers of military forces as peacekeepers and letting money do the rest. Their largest deployment is to South Sudan with only about 1,000 soldiers. Compare with Russia in Syria in 2015, they sent about 4,000 soldiers with lots of heavy equipment and aircraft. China seems to be wisely playing it safe in the sense that they don't want to get drawn into an extended conflict like the US and Russia have.

Also I think hegemonic is a better term than imperial in this context, but that's just me.

We should have done to the South just as we did to Germany and Japan. Look how they turned out!

Germany for sure, but there is still unfortunately not a small amount of historical revisionism in Japan regarding various atrocities, such as the comfort women. As with many things, the first step to recovery is admitting one's mistakes, and I feel like large swaths of our country isn't truly repentant over the cause of the Civil War and subsequent oppression. I mean how many still claim it was about state's rights and not slavery?

[Pannonian]

Probably better to post this in the Biden thread, but trying to lure them into committing more resources in Africa could be a way forward, but Im not sure if that will really have the desired effect, considering China has more resources than Russia does. Its also important to note that while Russia had been committing serious forces into Ukraine and Syria, China was taking a more soft power focus with only sending small numbers of military forces as peacekeepers and letting money do the rest. Their largest deployment is to South Sudan with only about 1,000 soldiers. Compare with Russia in Syria in 2015, they sent about 4,000 soldiers with lots of heavy equipment and aircraft. China seems to be wisely playing it safe in the sense that they don't want to get drawn into an extended conflict like the US and Russia have.

Also I think hegemonic is a better term than imperial in this context, but that's just me.


Germany for sure, but there is still unfortunately not a small amount of historical revisionism in Japan regarding various atrocities, such as the comfort women. As with many things, the first step to recovery is admitting one's mistakes, and I feel like large swaths of our country isn't truly repentant over the cause of the Civil War and subsequent oppression. I mean how many still claim it was about state's rights and not slavery?

Why not colonial? They're doing what the East India Company and others of that ilk were doing. They're even sending out Chinese workers to staff the higher echelons of the infrastructure they're creating. The only difference is that modern western countries have liberal scruples, whereas China see their day in the sun.

[Hooahguy]

Why not colonial? They're doing what the East India Company and others of that ilk were doing. They're even sending out Chinese workers to staff the higher echelons of the infrastructure they're creating. The only difference is that modern western countries have liberal scruples, whereas China see their day in the sun.

Thats an interesting take for sure, it would seem to fit the bill with regards to China. Though I was referring to the US when talking about using hegemonic vs imperial.