HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » ck4829 » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Sat Mar 20, 2004, 11:37 AM
Number of posts: 29,767

About Me

The Burn Notice - http://burnoatus.freeforums.net Right Wing Infopedia - http://rw-infopedia.pbworks.com LIVKI Ops - https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/livkiops/info

Journal Archives

A lot of people, a lot of institutes believe in nature over nurture in the nature vs nurture debate

That's the point of genetic testing for example

That's the point of "racial science"

That's the point of calling something "human nature"

It's the backbone of racism, sexism, and classism

When we hear that homosexuality isn't natural, it's because the people who do say it believe that heterosexuality is natural and that non-heterosexuality is a "learned perversion"

Could go on with more examples of how nature in the nature vs nurture debate is gets a head start in our rhetoric, policies, history, debates, etc. (Full disclosure: As you can probably tell, I'm biased for nurture in the nature vs nurture debate and another reason I think nature gets this head start is because I consider "nature" to be conducive to the status quo, but that's another story for another time)

So then it makes me wonder, why then, when it comes to rape and women carrying their rapist's babies and the recent debates we've been having now that the right to abortion could end soon, does the nature vs nurture debate suddenly stop? We can use gene editing, the CRISPR for example, to make sure a rapist's genes are not passed on by making them so different the baby might as well not be the rapist's baby anymore. If I was on the nature side, I wouldn't want this to happen, a rapist shouldn't be rewarded with having a contribution to the gene pool and did so using anti-social acts.

It makes me think of two reasons:

We use the CRISPR gene editor to get rapist genes out of the gene pool and we'll have to use it for everything. Universal healthcare. Can't have that now!

Perhaps worse. People don't care. A lot of people in power and on the street may not want to admit it, but they see rape as more "normal" than perhaps they would care to admit. It is an exercise of power of men over women. It's domination. It's functional even. A rapist's baby is a feature, not a bug, of the gender power status quo.

It's baffling why people vote GOP when it's quite clear that Democrats have SUPERPOWERS!

Let's go over the roster of some of these superpowered Democrats...

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez AKA The 30% Destructor - Whatever she does, a chunk of the population will become diametrically opposed to it to the point of them not even knowing why they do it. She wants a clean environment, the chunk will resist it! She wants progressive taxation, this chunk will THROW their own money at CEOs! She makes a statement against cannibalism, well... Amazing!

Hillary Clinton AKA Miss President - Has numerous superpowers. Constructed emails that Republicans are UNABLE to get over. SHOCKING psionic powers that helped her escape Republican inquisitors several times. However, taken out of commission when she apparently manipulated reality to somehow make 63 million greater than 65 million! How did she do it though?!

Rep. Ilhan Omar AKA Doctor Muslim - She has the superpower where ANYTHING she says becomes Pro-Terrorist, Anti-American, and Anti-Israel all at the same time! Incredible!

(Identity Unknown) AKA The Future Democratic President - Right now, impeachment of a President is impossible with a moving goalpost that will not stop and a bar that is unattainable. The Future Democratic President will have a shrink ray though that will shrink the measure of what is needed for impeachment down to practically nothing. When the standard is shrunk, impeachment will not be about high crimes and misdemeanors, but about "cleansing the office", according to Senator Lindsey Graham. Unbelievable!

I used to say the Republican Party at the federal level is not legitimate, now...

I'm starting to move that belief to the state level as well.

For example: I will not under any circumstances contact a legislator if that legislator is Republican, doing so would say that they represent me, they do not.

Why you ask? How about this...

A new bill would ban most private insurance coverage for abortions. But opponents say it would also ban effective methods of birth control.

One fifth of the representatives in the House have signed on to a bill sponsored by Republican John Becker that would prohibit most insurance companies from offering coverage for abortion services.


And Becker says the bill also speaks to coverage of ectopic or tubal pregnancies where the fertilized egg attaches outside of the womb. “Part of that treatment would be removing that embryo from the fallopian tube and reinserting it in the uterus so that is defined as not an abortion under this bill," Becker explains. (That's not a thing, there's no medical procedure where this happens. That's not how medical procedures work)

Becker (also) insists his bill does not target birth control. “When you get into the contraception and abortifacients, that’s clearly not my area of expertise (How telling) but I suppose, if it were true that what we typically known as the pill would be classified as an abortifacient, then I would imagine the drug manufacturers would reformulate it so it’s no longer an abortifacient and is strictly a contraceptive," Becker says. (So just change the formula from X to Y and it will have a different desired effect? That's not how biochemistry works, that's not how chemistry works period)


This man is where he is today because we continue to view the increasingly dangerous Republican Party as a legitimate political party, that was an error on our part, it's time to fix it.

I'm sorry, but the only way to stop authoritarianism is through disobedience

Voting won't fix this mess, it's that bad, this will require other actions by the people.

It will require the usage of direct action and disobedience. And it needs get to the point where today's authoritarians give up, future potential authoritarians will feel uneasy about trying it, and people resisting other authoritarian regimes in places like Russia, Brazil, or Hungary feel inspiration and solidarity from what we do.

Now I understand lots of people are afraid of that... that they don't want to be seen as troublemakers, they are afraid of what it means when it comes to employment, that they will run afoul of that family member they only meet at Holidays who talks about waiting "day when all the Democrats, queers, and Muslims get executed", and so on. It's time to erase that fear; it's not just Trump's authoritarianism that needs to be stopped, but it needs to be destroyed in general. Time to stand up.

Fortunately, our reality is not black and white, and this applies to obedience vs disobedience to authoritarianism as well, there is nuance. There are things people already do and are willing to learn more every day, let's all learn and apply this, it's time to shut that whole authoritarian thing down.

Things other than obedience:

Reluctant and slow compliance
-Pay your taxes, if we get Trumpcare then medical bills as slowly as possible

Nonobedience in absence of direct supervision
-When the authoritarian says "Jump", you ask "How high? In centimeters?"

Popular nonobedience
-Make it into a campaign, "Not Paying" if Trumpcare makes medical bills higher and deceases access to service

Disguised disobedience
-Pay your taxes with pennies or one dollar bills

Refusal of an assemblage or meeting to disperse

-Civil rights movement of the past did this one

Noncooperation with conscription and deportation
-Support counter-recruitment.
-Don't sign up for Operation Iranian Liberation

Hiding, escape, and false identities
-My name? It's... Jacob Wohl.

Civil disobedience of "illegitimate" laws


We say it a lot, but for them it is 100% true. No reason for any medical professional to vote GOP

Republicans are pretty much attacking the whole practice of medicine every day now.

"Vaccines are a conspiracy!"
"Nurses sit around playing cards all day!"
"They deliver the baby and then the doctor and mother decide if the baby should be executed!"
"We have the greatest healthcare system in the world... and it will all come crashing down if we let immigrants in with their DISEASES! It's that weak!"

This isn't ribbing, this isn't teasing, this isn't joking around, and it's not even political anymore... this is outright hostility to the calling and profession of medicine itself.

Nobody who works in a hospital or clinic should vote for the Republicans and if they want to come out against the Republican Party and the right wing ideology supporting this hostility against them, then we need to support them.

Once again: Race is a social construct

There is nothing natural, biological, divine, and even physically real other than the color of skin about "race" and even that has limits... the black race, the asian race, and the white race.

Social constructs, we have power over them. We can ignore them. We can tinker with them. We can expand them. We can destroy them, obliterate them completely. We can also let them control us... as white nationalists and the angry white/right wing people we're seeing under Trump are being controlled by. But it's something we let happen!

When we're seeing these people all but declare an unqualified white man is somehow "better" than an eminently qualified non-white person, when violence by white people is seen as somehow more acceptable than violence by immigrants, when white people "deserve their welfare" but non-white people are all lazy junkies, etc. You know what that is? That is being controlled by the social construct rather than controlling the social construct.

We need to control this social construct; this white nationalism, this angry white/right wing male syndrome needs to be called what it is... weakness.

A reading from Gene Sharp's "From Dictatorship to Democracy"

Necessary sources of political power

The principle is simple. Dictators require the assistance of the people they rule, without which they cannot secure and maintain the sources of political power. These sources of political power include:

•Authority, the belief among the people that the regime is legitimate, and that they have a moral duty to obey it;

•Human resources, the number and importance of the persons and groups which are obeying, cooperating, or providing assistance to the rulers;

•Skills and knowledge, needed by the regime to perform specific actions and supplied by the cooperating persons and groups;

•Intangible factors, psychological and ideological factors that may induce people to obey and assist the rulers;

•Material resources, the degree to which the rulers control or have access to property, natural resources, financial resources,the economic system, and means of communication and transportation; and

•Sanctions, punishments, threatened or applied, against the disobedient and noncooperative to ensure the submission and cooperation that are needed for the regime to exist and carry out its policies.


Trump may not be a dictator (yet), but his administration relies on these same sources of power, this also goes to show that Trump is just a symptom, not the root problem. Many of these sources of power are entities unto themselves and working together to keep Trump in place. Right wing evangelicals, white nationalism, the Republican Party, the erroneous belief that being rich makes you more of an expert on everything, prosperity gospel, IOKIYAR, etc.

They all need to go.

It seems like whenever someone is going on about "Cultural Marxism" and it's not online...

That someone is murdering people.

This is 4chan-created bull.

Both parties and leaders across the ideological spectrum need to come out against this conspiracy theory... how racist it is, how nonsensical it is, how it's not connected to civility and debate but murdering people, etc.

We need a test for our leaders and pundits:

"If you do not denounce the "Cultural Marxism" conspiracy theory, then you are not fit to serve. Do you denounce this conspiracy theory?"

Maybe there should be a "Trump Bar" when it comes to impeachment of future presidents?

One of the things I am advocating is the wholesale removal of "impeachment" from the political landscape. Not having impeachment for the POTUS would have several benefits, it would increase the value of every vote (As in if we're stuck with that potus, then maybe we collectively won't vote for the joke candidate or for the candidate who won't disclose everything. And in the case of Trump, then it's both. Your vote will not be something to throw away now) and I am also a Democrat... I know that when a Democrat is potus, impeachment won't become this last-resort option that we should never actually use, but there will be people who are OK with using impeachment as a way to "cleanse" the office rather than removing a president for "high crimes and misdemeanors", I don't like double standards, maybe we should remove the standard.

In my studies of doing this, I have found out that there is 'hard removal' and 'soft removal'.

Hard removal - Actually amending the Constitution to remove impeachment from it

Soft removal - Make the bar as a whole harder to reach

I am OK with both ways of hard removal and soft removal of impeachment, a way of soft removal is maybe there should be a "Trump Bar" for impeachment of a future potus.

As in... "Do the actions of this president exceed the Trump Bar?"

If the answer is "No", then impeachment is not on the table. Discussion ends there.

This has a couple of benefits:

1. We raise the bar for impeachment, this is one of many potential ways of getting soft removal and I've got people who don't want impeachment removed but yet agreeing with me that impeachment is broken. This is how we can do it.

2. We protect a future Democratic president from impeachment, it is no longer something that can be wielded as a petty weapon against a 'radical' potus that a future right wing House and Senate would not like.

3. This uses Trump as a standard for corruption, Trump becomes the line where corruption becomes too much. This would be an unwanted version of Trump's face on Mt. Rushmore or on the dollar bill. If you don't like the cult of personality associated with Trump, then this is a good counterattack against that cult.

Hard removal and soft removal... Both of these things need to happen to protect the party and to patch a hole in the rule of law.

It starts here, it starts today. Let's repair the political landscape.

It's time to begin discussion of amending the Constitution - To remove impeachment from it

I don't think the framers of the Constitution envisioned the partisan risk that could come with wielding impeachment as a weapon.

To see that the bar of "high crimes and misdemeanors" change simply because of the parties in Congress and who is in the White House change, I don't think that is what the serious charge of impeachment is supposed to be about.

Nothing will get Trump impeached today, what if years from now, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is president, what will be the bar? Will it be in the words of Senator Lindsey Graham in 1999, in his own words that "impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office", do you want to wait for President Ocasio-Cortez's mere presence in the White House to be enough to become worthy of impeachment, to "cleanse" her from the office?

The law should not be a partisan game, remove impeachment from the Constitution if we're not going to use it for Trump and have lawmakers who will be more than willing to use it for a president who will do much less than he has already done.

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »