Whenever I hear someone complain about polarization in US politics, I reach a level of annoyance that, if allowed to sit for too long, could only be alleviated by applying LSD directly to my exposed brain. One example of just how small the difference between parties is comes amid a Glenn Greenwald post about foreign policy hypocrisy: someone at Kos — y’know, that site that the self-proclaimed Serious minds out there constantly refer to as a rabid left-wing fever swamp — posted a video clip of Joe Biden endorsing the view that questioning a war makes one a pussy.
The Kossack who put it up saw it as a positive, and endorsed Biden for the Democratic veep slot.
See, the acceptable range of discourse has long been narrow, especially on foreign policy. It’s to the point where you can either outright express love for the concept of indiscriminately raining down death, or complain about strategy while not questioning the reasoning that led to the conflict in the first place — and you’ll still get called a damned dirty hippie for holding the latter view. But arguing that it’s pointless to police the world is automatically fringe, and gets no representation.
I’ve long had my issues with surveys, and don’t see majoritarianism as any sort of salve, but I’d be willing to bet that if the global dominance strategy were put to a public vote it’d lose.
Clearly, the problem is not polarization, but the amount of things both halves of the ruling class agree with on which they are both dead wrong. The portrayal of deep division is a tool to encourage the unintentional co-signing to what they REALLY want to do to continue, by making it seem like everyone has their stake in the outcomes. These things aren’t normally aired in public because the cumulative effect of such questioning is to undermine politics itself — which I’d argue is and should be the point.
Jake Sullum, re: the “America is getting too mixed!” crowd:
We’ve become so accustomed to this arbitrary definition of “ethnic and racial minorities” that it’s easy to lose sight of how bizarre it is. Is there a single objective criterion that unites these particular ethnic and racial minorities while distinguishing them from all the excluded groups? Is there any rational reason why a descendant of Spaniards, say, should count as a real minority, whether or not his ancestors spent time in Latin America, while a descendant of Italians does not?
How quickly people forget those “no dogs, blacks or irish allowed” signs…
A Christian fundamentalist group is praying for a deluge to drown out Barack Obama at the Democratic National Convention in two weeks’ time.
Focus on the Family is asking for “abundant, torrential” downpours to flood Denver and silence Senator Obama when he accepts the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination on August 28.
“Would it be wrong to ask people to pray for rain of Biblical proportins,” asks an umbrella wielding Stuard Shepard in a video put out by the ultra conservative evangelical group. He asks for the rain to start “two minutes before the acceptance speech begins.”
It must be tiring to sustain such irrational fear, especially when you consider how obviouslylittleshiftif any could realistically come of Obama as president. That groups’ slogan might as well be “my brain hurts”.
This dude must get money out the ass on tour, because I could never see myself pounding that ferociously on an MPC unless I could afford to just go get another one if I broke it.
The cost remains high, and a good lawyer is essential. Yet despite complications, the idea of becoming a biological dad with help from a surrogate mother is gaining allure among gay men as the status of “married with children” grows ever more possible.
With same-sex marriage now legal in California even to nonresidents, and Massachusetts extending its 4-year-old gay-marriage policy to out-of-staters, in-wedlock parenting is suddenly a realistic option for gays and lesbians nationwide, even if their home state won’t recognize the union.
Fertility clinics and surrogacy programs report increased interest from gay men, while couples who already have children are getting married — or considering it — to provide more security for those kids. (emphasis mine)
Gee, that sounds rather…conventional, doesn’t it?
So despite the mass soiling of pants among the Right, and talk of deviancy and undermining the “tradition”, in fact gays are embracing it more than most of us straight folk. Open gays are settling down and starting families, meanwhile republican congressmen are trolling airport toilets and chat rooms for random sex opportunities. I’ve long held a belief concerning the War on Drugs that there was an element among statists who smoked and snorted their way to Mars in secret and merely didn’t want the taboo associated with doing so yanked away (for their own pleasure), now it seems it wouldn’t be far-fetched to suspect the same of anti-gay politics. See, when the popular image of homosexuality fails to match the reckless stereotype they’ve been offering, then the operative question with future scandals will be their lack of tact, and not who they happen to be doing whatever with. More directly, when gays are accepted to such a degree, where are America’s sexual hypocrites going to get a date?
When I say that the behavior of the US government towards Iran might as well be encouragement for them to build a nuke, I’m not just blowing smoke. Turns out they have a template to go off of, thanks to North Korea.
…to really bang home that the concept of the modern nation-state SUCKS.
Part of Georgia (the eastern European country, not the southern state) doesn’t want to be part of Georgia. They want to either become independent or merge with a related region that’s politically part of Russia. The (political leadership of the) rest of Georgia doesn’t like this, so they sent troops to peacefully argue their case crack down on the separatists. Russia didn’t like THAT, so they sent in troops. Predictably, the result is a heap o’ death.
Why do they do this? Simple: because the State by its nature can’t accept division. The just thing to do when someone doesn’t want to be part of your particular group is to not require them to be, but if a government does this then in the long run it concedes the argument against their legitimacy. The political leadership of Georgia thinks that if that group splits then everyone’s going to want to do it. I doubt their particular reasons for separation make any sense, but in principle it’s not up to anyone else. If they don’t want to stay, then let ‘em go, fuck it.
Considering the obscurity of the region of the world where this is happening, and the numerous hard to pronounce names involved, this would actually be amusing if only it didn’t involve loss of innocent lives. Like a nightmare Monty Python skit.
The mayor of Detroit is currently charged with multiple felonies, including lying under oath. Recently, he violated his bond agreement, and is being jailed.
First thought I had: “Gee, you’ll never see that happen with the president…”
