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
For today and least, you want to know what the GOP’s position on Native Rights are? I can give that in two words:
Trump has done more against Native Americans than the vast majority of Presidents in recent memory. Oddly, the last President to make improving Native American conditions a priority of his agenda was Nixon.
One of those weird little quirks of history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_policy_of_the_Richard_Nixon_administration
Nixon adopted a policy of self-determination for them and actually compensated land for oil in Alaska. He wasn't beloved by everyone but it's notable very few other Presidents have paid them any attention.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Oct 27th 2018 at 11:17:54 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.Look, the democrats have made progress, obviously. But. They have not taken up the flag of native rights. They aren’t waving it around, promising change the instant they regain power. Vague good intentions are not enough to earn redemption.
To be blunt: you don't need to accept it. You're already a Democrat. Apologizing to the Cherokee isn't about you.
The perspective that "Other people should just stop being wrong" is academically sympathetic but politically useless.
Edited by TobiasDrake on Oct 27th 2018 at 12:19:46 PM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.I
yeah, while I feel that a formal apology on behalf of the United States itself would be better, as to be frank, while the Republican Party didn’t exist yet, I can’t imagine the other existing party protesting too hard at the idea note , it would be good idea (and as a bonus positive PR) for the Democrats to do so at least.
Edited by megaeliz on Oct 27th 2018 at 2:24:44 PM
I mean, it's good they're not doing that because it would be an obvious lie, because that's not how progress works.
If we're talking about marginalization and acknowledging your part in that and an apologize can/should be a part of that, okay. But this whole thing started with a discussion of many Cherokee people still seeing the Democratic Party of today as the same as during Jackson's time. I'd hope you'd be able to admit that's obviously not true, even while feeling all of the above.
Otherwise I'd probably have to agree with Spartan's accusation of intentional dishonesty on your part.
Edited by LSBK on Oct 27th 2018 at 1:27:08 PM
If it was just an empty apology with no effort to actually take Native American issues under consideration, then yes, you're probably right. Nobody benefits from a "Sorry you were offended" speech.
Ideally it would be coupled with, as wisewillow has pointed out, a transition towards actually helping Native Americans and incorporating their issues into our platform, rather than simply being the party that does less harm to them in the present day.
You don't win forgiveness from someone by only kicking them once after the other guy shoves them to the ground.
Edited by TobiasDrake on Oct 27th 2018 at 12:29:17 PM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.![]()
I think the best option is to transition to helping them with no apology.
Frankly, there’s no apology that could be sincere enough, and by its very nature a public apology will be viewed as a political stunt. There’s no way it’ll go over well, and it runs the risk of tainting any good work that is done.
Edited by archonspeaks on Oct 27th 2018 at 11:33:47 AM
They should have sent a poet.![]()
![]()
I do not appreciate the accusation that saying the Democrats aren’t doing enough is the exact same as saying that they are still the same, and that I am therefore being intentionally dishonest. I have said, multiple times, that they have made progress, and are not the same as in Jackson’s time. However, that does not give them a complete pass on needing to advocate for Native American rights.
The entire concept of political campaigning is making policy proposals which you intend to support/implement if you win. Obviously, you should inform your prospective constituents that you won’t be able to get everything you want, at least not immediately, and that progress may be slow. That doesn’t mean you can just totally ignore issues because you can’t do anything about them immediately.
Edited by wisewillow on Oct 27th 2018 at 2:36:35 PM
![]()
You and fourthspartan accused me of dishonesty for stating I don’t think the democrats have done enough for native rights. I literally never said the democrats are still genocidal monsters like Jackson, or that they are as bad as current republicans. I just said they need to do more.
So yeah, that’s not a problem with my phrasing.
Edited by wisewillow on Oct 27th 2018 at 2:47:48 PM
Though I'll still say that Willow is being unhelpfully rigid about this. I think that's phrased better.
I feel like the issue is that literally no one has said they don't need to be better. You're arguing against a position that (it seems to me) no one has advocated.
Edited by LSBK on Oct 27th 2018 at 1:50:40 PM
You say Rigid, I'd say Passionate, neither comes even close to Intellectual Dishonesty.
But since I feel we are closing in on the 'Discussing Participants and not the Topic' thing the mods tend to be a bit sensitive about...
Edited by 3of4 on Oct 27th 2018 at 8:51:12 PM
"You can reply to this Message!"The entire concept of political campaigning is making policy proposals which you intend to support/implement if you win. Obviously, you should inform your prospective constituents that you won’t be able to get everything you want, at least not immediately, and that progress may be slow. That doesn’t mean you can just totally ignore issues because you can’t do anything about them immediately.
I, uh...wasn't trying to make that accusation? I was agreeing with the idea that we need to make Native American rights a part of our party platform rather than coasting on, as some have suggested, "Well, the REPUBLICANS are doing xyz".
My ideal goal would be:
- Removal of Jackson from his place of prestige within the party. Like, it's kinda asinine that we're tearing down Confederate statues but still naming shit after Jackson. Like we're saying we care about minority rights BUUUUUUT that the genocide of Native Americans is no big deal.
- Formal apology for Jackson and the Trail of Tears.
- Outreach to Native American tribes like the Cherokee to hear directly from them what we can be doing to help them. Bringing those ideas into the party.
- Supporting Native Americans for public office. Who better to champion the cause of Native American rights than, say, Senator Kanuna?
Edited by TobiasDrake on Oct 27th 2018 at 12:53:11 PM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
That post was directed at me, not you.
Anyway, I feel like discussions like this tend to turn into arguments because people who mostly agree with the same things get stuck on one or two points and basically makes it seem like they're talking about different things.
I generally try to stay out of discussions like that. Willow, sorry if I went over the line.
Edited by LSBK on Oct 27th 2018 at 1:54:31 PM
![]()
I agree on those 4 points.
On another topic:
Trump laments Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, then suggests victims should have protected themselves
The cycle from 'empty sympathy' to 'political statements' gets shorter and shorter.
Edited by 3of4 on Oct 27th 2018 at 8:55:18 PM
"You can reply to this Message!"![]()
![]()
Accepted, thanks.
![]()
Yeah, about that proposal to have more guns in synagogues....
Twitter thread
on a concept I’ve never heard of before, Stochastic terrorism: “The use of mass, public communication, usually against a particular individual or group, which incites or inspires acts of terrorism which are statistically probable but happen seemingly at random.”
Edited by wisewillow on Oct 27th 2018 at 3:03:15 PM

If the party is not redeemed from the good work that it has done and the good work it will due further then that definition of redemption is worthless, I categorically reject the idea that the Democratic Party needs to be redeemed just because something awful happened 192 years ago.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang