Trump Thread

[CrossLOPER]

some results which were very questionable (defacing Churchill...uhh?), some results which were ideas with a certain intent but with a horrendously bad implementation (defunding the police).

Churchill had a fetishistic love of maintaining colonies, which is inherently racist. "Defunding" the police is more of a rallying cry to solve the issue of why a massive chunk of a city's budget goes into creating a poorly trained, heavily armed police force.

[Gilrandir]

Churchill had a fetishistic love of maintaining colonies, which is inherently racist. "Defunding" the police is more of a rallying cry to solve the issue of why a massive chunk of a city's budget goes into creating a poorly trained, heavily armed police force.

AFAIK, all Founding Fathers were slave owners. Let's burn all the money that have their portraits.

[rory_20_uk]

Is there anything that has been created by any culture that would be acceptable to the current culture? I can't think of anything - even things that were viewed as OK a decade or so ago now are viewed as an issue.

I can't think of anything. Is there anything?

[Gilrandir]

Is there anything that has been created by any culture that would be acceptable to the current culture? I can't think of anything - even things that were viewed as OK a decade or so ago now are viewed as an issue.

I can't think of anything. Is there anything?

Tolerance and acceptance of homosexuality by Greeks and extensive tattooing of the body by Maoris.

[edyzmedieval]

Tolerance and acceptance of homosexuality by Greeks and extensive tattooing of the body by Maoris.

Roman circuses, Greek theatres, English love of a sport played with a pig's bladder... so, we also got football?

"Defunding" the police is more of a rallying cry to solve the issue of why a massive chunk of a city's budget goes into creating a poorly trained, heavily armed police force.

And herein lies the problem - heavily militarised police have nothing in common with democracy, why do I need my local riot police to wear automatic rifles?

But defunding the police completely, how do you solve it? Who do you replace them with?

[Montmorency]

Recent Wall Street Journal Trump interview.

Mr. Bender: There may be people who are critical of you no matter what. But why didn’t you pray? Why didn’t you read something from scripture? Why didn’t you bring someone from the black community? Or a parishioner?

Mr. Trump: Well, I was standing outside on a sidewalk. It was very, very noisy, as you can imagine. The protesters, who, the day before tried to burn down the church…You know, everyone was saying, Oh, they were so wonderful. They weren’t wonderful. They tried to burn down the church. And it was, they told me, the same group. A similar group. So you have people screaming all over the place. And I didn’t think it was exactly the right time to pray. I’m on the sidewalk. And the church itself, I didn’t want to go in because they had a lot of insurance reasons. You know, the church was boarded up. The entire church was boarded up, and I knew that. So I went there, stood there, held up the Bible, talked to a few people and then we left. I came back and I got bad publicity.

But I also, if you think about it, I went to West Point over the weekend, made a very good speech, according to everybody. They said the speech was one of the best. The kids thought it was one of the best they’d ever heard. Stood up there for a long time saluting. Were you there?

Mr. Bender: No, but I watched. It looked like a really nice day.

Mr. Trump: Yeah. After the helicopters came over, the hats went up, the general said, Sir, Are you ready? I said, I’m ready. And he led me to a ramp that was long and steep and slippery. And I said, I got a problem because I wear, you know, the leather bottom shoes. I can show them to you if you like. Same pair. And you know what I mea, they’re slippery. I like them better than the rubber because they don’t catch. So they’re better for this. But they’re not good for ramps. I said, General, I got a problem here. That ramp is slippery.…

So I’m going to go real easy. So I did. And then the last 10 feet I ran down. They always stop it just before I ran, they always stop it. So, I spent three hours between speeches and saluting people and they end up, all they talked about is ramp. … If you would have seen this ramp, it was like an ice skating rink. So I’m the only one that can happen. But the church is an interesting thing. I mean, here I spent three hours on stage, the sun pouring in and I saluted 1,106 cadets, and that’s not easy. Even the general said, That’s amazing. Other presidents would never have been able to do it. Because usually they do the first 10. They do 10 honor rolls, and then they go home. I stayed there for hours. And what do I do? I get publicity about walking down a ramp. And does he have Parkinson’s? I don’t think so.

What it is to experience a man as a spiritual phenomenon.

AFAIK, all Founding Fathers were slave owners. Let's burn all the money that have their portraits.

Maybe someday. Though we were set to exchange Andrew Jackson Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill until Trump delayed the implementation indefinitely.

Is there anything that has been created by any culture that would be acceptable to the current culture? I can't think of anything - even things that were viewed as OK a decade or so ago now are viewed as an issue.

I can't think of anything. Is there anything?

Leaving aside that there are champions of liberty in every era, do you really think that anyone with a demerit is the same as everyone else? These things can and must be decided on a case-by-case basis. The odious come before the merely problematic in the weighing of honor and disgrace.

Now, if you really wanted to get into it, you could instantiate the debate on memorialization, e.g. should we memorialize political figures at all vs. should we memorialize significant figures who have a mixed record.

And herein lies the problem - heavily militarised police have nothing in common with democracy, why do I need my local riot police to wear automatic rifles?

But defunding the police completely, how do you solve it? Who do you replace them with?

There are naturally a few steps down from dissolving all offices of the policing, investigative, and security functions. I'm glad for the abolitionist voices, they help the rest move the ball forward.


More relevant to Trump news, the White House just fired Geoffrey Berman, the US Attorney for the court of the Southern District of New York, also known as the "Sovereign District." SDNY has been the been the federal jurisdiction most heavily involved in investigating Trump and many of his associates, as well as Turkish and Russian chicanery (that Trump promised to end*), securing multiple convictions. This follows the many other firings this year of civil servants who have investigated or testified against Trump.

*Man, Trump sure loves canoodling with dictators, such as in the other recent revelation that in a meeting with Xi Jinping he approved of his War-on-Terror-modeled Uighur black sites, in addition to asking for electoral favors in the form of Chinese state subsidies to American farmers.

[Hooahguy]

More relevant to Trump news, the White House just fired Geoffrey Berman, the US Attorney for the court of the Southern District of New York, also known as the "Sovereign District." SDNY has been the been the federal jurisdiction most heavily involved in investigating Trump and many of his associates, as well as Turkish and Russian chicanery (that Trump promised to end*), securing multiple convictions. This follows the many other firings this year of civil servants who have investigated or testified against Trump.

Definitely an impeachable offense by Barr. It was quite the debacle that Barr put out a notice that Berman was stepping down, which Berman denied stating that only Trump could fire him. Then the WH said that Berman was fired for making a scene, saying that it came from Trump, who promptly said that he wasnt involved. Just another day in the Trump administration. Wondering what the House will do about it. A hearing is being held on Wednesday but I really dont like Nadler at the head of House Judiciary. We need a stronger person leading this, like how Schiff leads House Intel.



^{Also Nadler is just an unpleasant person to deal with while Schiff is pretty great.}

[rory_20_uk]

Tolerance and acceptance of homosexuality by Greeks and extensive tattooing of the body by Maoris.

I don't think there is any link between the Greek / Roman / elsewhere tolerance of homosexuality and that of the modern era.

Tatoos from maoris? Sounds like cultural appropriation...

Leaving aside that there are champions of liberty in every era, do you really think that anyone with a demerit is the same as everyone else? These things can and must be decided on a case-by-case basis. The odious come before the merely problematic in the weighing of honor and disgrace.

Now, if you really wanted to get into it, you could instantiate the debate on memorialization, e.g. should we memorialize political figures at all vs. should we memorialize significant figures who have a mixed record.

I think Jim Jeffries did something on this issue

What is a "demerit" changes over time. I imagine most in the West would view Turing as a hero, and not care that he was gay (more likely to be outraged that it was a problem) and only slightly care he was left-leaning. At the time these two were far more important than what he achieved in maths and to the winning of the war. 100 years ago those who were gay were criminals, and probably mentally ill. Now it is accepted by most people. Paedophiles are reviled as evil, criminals and probably mentally ill - even looking at pictures where no abuse is taking place is sufficient to be branded a deviant criminal, although I doubt most wish to have the desires they have.

On memorisation, I think that museums (or of course online) are most appropriate to enable their whole selves to be reflected - to humanise them rather than turn into something close to idolatry and to infantilise the complexity of humans.

[Gilrandir]

I don't think there is any link between the Greek / Roman / elsewhere tolerance of homosexuality and that of the modern era.

Tatoos from maoris? Sounds like cultural appropriation...

You didn't ask for any links. Your question was

Is there anything that has been created by any culture that would be acceptable to the current culture?

Evidently, a lot of is bad for memory.

[Montmorency]

I don't think there is any link between the Greek / Roman / elsewhere tolerance of homosexuality and that of the modern era.

Just to be pedantic, the Greco-Romans denigrated adult homoeroticism.

What is a "demerit" changes over time.

Tough though it may be to hear - it's admittedly fantastic to not have to think about these things, no skin off my back - but measure is unceasing; there is no embalming a zeitgeist. Part of being a mature polity is constantly reassessing historical personages, especially the metaphorically monumental. You can't immanentize an eschaton without an eschaton. If in the course of time we should discover that Harriet Tubman was a serial killer who tortured and cannibalized fugitive slaves along the Underground Railroad, she'll lose some of her stature.

I imagine most in the West would view Turing as a hero, and not care that he was gay (more likely to be outraged that it was a problem) and only slightly care he was left-leaning. At the time these two were far more important than what he achieved in maths and to the winning of the war.

I don't understand your point vis-a-vis Alan Turing. It sounds like you think other people (who are "these two?") are more deserving of statues? For all I know, maybe - but I'm not sure anyone has the position of honoring Alan Turing to the exclusion of others who may warrant public recognition.

Paedophiles are reviled as evil, criminals and probably mentally ill - even looking at pictures where no abuse is taking place is sufficient to be branded a deviant criminal, although I doubt most wish to have the desires they have.

We tend to emphasize the fact of the act over the mens in evaluating people, I believe. We don't excuse someone for killing just because they really really want to, and might even condemn them more for it (certain popular media notwithstanding). Moreover, most people are especially sensitive toward (sex) crimes against children. While an erotic attraction in itself might arguably be morally neutral, and crimes against persons are conceptually and practically distinct from crimes of consumption/possession (of pornographic content), it is AFAIK the case that viewers and collectors of this content are very disproportionately likely to also be abusers and producers, and that the consumption and collection of the content is often implicated in mutual, material support to primary producers and distributors of original content. Furthermore there are implications of the transference of values from consumption generating future or subtle harms by the viewer such that it may in be society's interest to regulate even without components of support to primary producers or concurrent interpersonal crimes. There are edge cases in terms of the application of law, such as the theoretical isolated viewing of a nudie, or the existence of the vast body of auto-erotica by teenagers, but these cases don't make up a large part of the facts behind prosecutorial decisions I believe. The cases that do tend to receive attention therefore are the ones that more clearly have a corrupted moral standing and nexus to harm.