Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Wow. I guess the new norm when a republican politician dies is to cheer on the fact it was a painful one. Or just straight out equate them to Osama bin Laden.
Mc Cain refuted the birther conspiracies in front of his supporters, always hated the extremism of Trump, preserved Obamacare. I really wish I wasn't in the minority. Guess I'll just have to skip some pages when H.W. Bush dies.
Life is unfair...![]()
Nobody has cheered that it was a painful death, the Bin Laden comparison was made by someone from a region where thousands of innocents are dead because of policies Mc Cain pushed.
I don’t like gravedancing but as someone who’s privileged enough to have not been seriously harmed by certain people, I’m not sure I (or others in my positon) have the right to tell thouse who were harmed to not gravedance. Be the situation be miners at the death of Thatcher, Americans at the death of Bin Laden, Middle Easterners at the death/eventual of Mc Cain/Bush junior/Dick Cheney, South/Central Americans at the eventual death of Kissinger, ect...
It’s made more complicated by the fact that Mc Cain was still politically active (simply by the fact that he was a sitting senator, sitting in that seat alone was a political statement) and that his political activities were actively harming people right until the end.
Yeah actully I think I can out my thoughts into words. I’m glad that he’s no longer doing harm to people both in the US and globally, it’s sad that the way he stopped doing harm was by dying instead of retiring, I’m disturbed by the fact that it’s highly likely he will be replaced by someone who will do even more harm.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranSay what you will about the Republican party's policies, but there is a respect and professional decorum with which they cherish one another that cannot be denied. At this time, I would like to read a few words from Sarah Huckabee Sanders that I believe truly show how loved and valued the man was.
Ahem.
"[John McCain's opposition to our torture bill] doesn't matter. He's dying anyway."
Brave words, Sarah. Truly a testament to how valued the man was in the final years of his life.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.What exactly is supposed to be the difference between liberal and progressive? Before anyone asks, no, I did not want to Google this because the results would either be some Greenwald-esque whining or conservative think-pieces calling both of them "unpatriotic" or some shit like that.
"Somehow the hated have to walk a tightrope, while those who hate do not."So apparently Trump also put his Tweet on his Instagram account... but it's overlaying a picture of
himself rather than McCain.
![]()
![]()
Basically there's an arbitrary list of things you need to be openly advocating (not simply supporting, but talking about) for in order to count as progressive. If you haven't checked off just one thing on that list, you cannot be a True Progressive™ and are merely a lowly liberal.
Mc Cain refuted the birther conspiracies in front of his supporters, always hated the extremism of Trump, preserved Obamacare. I really wish I wasn't in the minority. Guess I'll just have to skip some pages when H.W. Bush dies.
No. Just no, no-one here has cheered on his pain and the 'worst' opinion has just been indifference to his death.
John Mc Cain was not a good man, he occasionally did good things but his history was one of selfishness, harm, and the lack of consistent values beyond self-aggrandizement and occasional mindless Jingoism.
If you want to have a accurate view of the man then I would recommend reading this
Rolling Stone's article on him and his career. It's long but extremely informative.
Mc Cain was not someone to admire but with his passing the Republican Party will just continue to march on and do what they do best, nothing of value was gained or lost by his passing. Thus grave dancing is pointless and tasteless.
Since most of the progressives are just Soc Dems this isn't true, there is no relevant progressive voice that proposes replacing capitalism. It's simply a question of how much you think it should be restrained, and often that's just cosmetic.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Aug 26th 2018 at 11:16:44 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangOn the other hand, I do come from a family that was directly harmed by Thatcher's policies, and I still abhor the grave-dancing that happened after she died. I understood where the sentiment came from, but I never once condoned it. Ding Dong the Witch is Dead? reaching #2 on the Singles Chart? Not our finest hour.
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.A better explanation would be "Socialism means the state is taking care of you, Communism means that the state is trying to control you."
This is naturally referring to what happens when those theories are put in practice...the approaches in itself are a little bit more complex, as is the thought process behind it. But you can't expect that someone understands the intricacies between different political theories So I guess the best way to convince them is to simply point to all the European countries which have some form of social democracy and proper just fine. Arguable even better than the US does.
Still wrong, Socialism is the workers controlling the means of production and the state representing them democratically or via a vanguard party. Communism is a classless and stateless society that was the endpoint of various State Socialists who are commonly called Communists.
The state taking care of you is literally any state, they exist to take of people by at the bare minimum maintaining social order and the monopoly of violence.
The Roman state had a pseudo-welfare system where the poor were given IIRC grain, that hardly made them Socialist.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Aug 26th 2018 at 1:21:54 PM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangI would define Socialism as "Wealth redistributed so that the poorer classes maintain the most control over the economy" and Communism as "Trying to dissolve social classes and/or private property".
Neither should necessarily be associated with more state control. Anarcho-communism and socialism both exist, for example.
Leviticus 19:34Since this was in response to something I said, I will explain my point of view on how I changed my beliefs and the way I define myself.
During college, I shifted into the bare minimum liberal package of abortion is still bad, but not my decision to make for someone else, maybe we should have some regulation on capitalism, racism still kinda exists and is a problem, feminism is not done and there is still work to do, that sort of thing.
So for me, I would define that as liberal. Not having a problem with current power structures, per se, so much as abuse of those power structures and problems that need attention.
Over the last four or five years, however, as I have done more reading and more listening to activists, I’ve become much more educated on abortion, on intersectionality, on the pervasive violence of racism, homophobia, sexism, and classism, on how our power structures have white supremacy baked in. The problem isn’t just a few bad apples, it’s our entire systemic power structure. I’ve also become much more aware on labor and healthcare issues.
So, to sum up, I’d say I define liberal as “we’re mostly great with some blips, and things need fixing but they aren’t THAT bad” versus “our high points do not excuse our low points, our entire power structure is the problem, and we need massive change to create a society which actually lives up to the ideals the constitution purports to stand for.”
I’m also going to note that liberal and progressive do not necessarily mean someone doesn’t have blind spots. Someone could be mostly liberal but really great on race issues, with blind spots on economic inequality, while someone else could be progressive and great on economic inequality but have a big blind spot on race issues.
Edited by wisewillow on Aug 26th 2018 at 1:26:24 PM
![]()
Very good point, Socialism hardly needs to mean more state control. Though I would point out that while stateless versions of Socialism exist they've hardly been proven to be especially viable, thus most Socialist ideologies include a state of one form or another.

Palin opened the door to what we are currently facing now. It's a lot less funny when you consider that.