TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

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

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#287001: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:23:12 PM

Uh, yes, it does make the person who is afraid safer.

It means you're going to be in a state of heightened fear and anxiety surrounded by a large portion of the population. White women and men who are in such a state around blacks, Latinos, gays, poor people, or atheists are inflicting damage on themselves by being prejudiced.

It lowers their quality of life.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Aug 8th 2019 at 4:23:33 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Robrecht Your friendly neighbourhood Regent from The Netherlands Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: They can't hide forever. We've got satellites.
Your friendly neighbourhood Regent
#287002: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:23:42 PM

[up][up][up] And while that's admirable... You and me, we still benefit from white privilege and we're still both in the dark as to just how phenomenally shitty not being seen as white can be in Kyriarchy.

Edited by Robrecht on Aug 8th 2019 at 1:24:07 PM

Angry gets shit done.
wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#287003: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:24:05 PM

[up][up] You’re implying that fear of white people by people of color is just as bad as white people being racist. Charles, I am very baffled and disappointed to see you say such a cruel, victim-blaming thing.

Edited by wisewillow on Aug 8th 2019 at 4:25:57 AM

megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#287004: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:26:13 PM

I feel like this is getting off topic.

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#287005: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:26:27 PM

I don't like being this position and the last 200 years has given no reason to have minorities believe that things are going to be good anytime soon. But it's awful to state that you should assume the people around you are to be watched by the basis of the color of their skin or sex.

You’re implying that fear of white people by people of color is just as bad as white people being racist. Charles, I am very baffled and disappointed to see you say such a cruel, victim-blaming thing.

Nope. Not even close. It's just accepting the normality of white supremecist beliefs.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Aug 8th 2019 at 4:28:39 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#287006: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:26:49 PM

@wisewillow: Statistically, more people voted for Hillary than Trump. But it was areas with poor, rural, white, Republican majorities that decided the election.

tclittle Professional Forum Ninja from Somewhere Down in Texas Since: Apr, 2010
Professional Forum Ninja
#287007: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:27:09 PM

Yahoo News article on Trump tweets: Trump wants Federal Reserve to weaken the US dollar.

"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#287008: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:28:12 PM

Statistically, more people voted for Hillary than Trump. But it was areas with poor, rural, white, Republican majorities that decided the election.

I also feel the need, again, to point out the poor rural whites as often as not voted for Hillary.

The votes were carried by the rich people in rural districts.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#287009: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:28:14 PM

It means you're going to be in a state of heightened fear and anxiety surrounded by a large portion of the population. White women and men who are in such a state around blacks, Latinos, gays, poor people, or atheists are inflicting damage on themselves by being prejudiced.

It lowers their quality of life.

Worrying about quality of life is a privilege.

Millions of Americans have legitimate worries about continuity of life.

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#287010: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:28:17 PM

i don't really think whiteness as a concept is going to be deconstructed unless people start being honest about what it is and what the results of it are. As a part of this, I think it's important to acknowledge that unfortunately sometimes employing some wariness about random white people you don't know is a self-preservation tactic that minorities have to employ if they don't want to run into some major trouble or well, death.

Robrecht Your friendly neighbourhood Regent from The Netherlands Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: They can't hide forever. We've got satellites.
Your friendly neighbourhood Regent
#287011: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:28:56 PM

The reason they should be watched is not based on their skin or gender, Charles.

It's based on the fact that they've gone without being watched at all, which was based on their skin and gender, for way too long and they fucking well need watching now, because of that.

Edited by Robrecht on Aug 8th 2019 at 1:30:22 PM

Angry gets shit done.
Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#287012: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:30:06 PM

[up][up][up][up]Hm, interesting and surprising.

Edited by Ramidel on Aug 8th 2019 at 3:30:15 AM

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#287013: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:30:09 PM

Yep, I'm in no position to state what it is like to be a minority in America. It's why I don't buy into the belief suspicion of whites is any way equivalent to suspicion of blacks.

But I believe that all interactions must begin in a state of neutrality to friendliness until proven otherwise.

It's based on the fact that they've gone without being watched at all, which was based on their skin and gender, for way too long and they fucking well need watching now, because of that.

I support a massive crusade against white nationalism, online terrorist groups, the implementation of hate speech laws, and law suits for fake news.

Timothy Mc Veigh was a white male. It was not that status that made him a monster.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Aug 8th 2019 at 4:31:26 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Protagonist506 from Oregon Since: Dec, 2013 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
#287014: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:30:38 PM

@Wisewillow We should probably move this to the race relations thread, but I would argue the fallacy being committed is Appeal to Worse Problems. Yeah, whites are the ones who are harmed least by racism and black people (and other groups) are harmed much worse-but that doesn't actually mean every mention of racism against whites is invalid or that it doesn't exist. I will concede a few things, though:

-I probably should have made it clear I think of them as being equivalent on an individual level, rather than a societal level.

-Many people do bring up racism against whites legitimately are attempting to distract from other issues, which is essentially an "appeal to less bad problems".

@Beary Scary I would say it's accurate and fair to say that as a general trend white people simply don't empathize with victims of racism, simply because racism against minorities is much worse than racism against white people.

@Tobias Drake Well, with some of those they're ideological signifiers. For example, if someone's wearing a "Make America Great Again" shirt or carrying a Confederate Flag, avoiding them is very reasonable. Hell, I'd avoid someone like that, and I'm white male.

Leviticus 19:34
Robrecht Your friendly neighbourhood Regent from The Netherlands Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: They can't hide forever. We've got satellites.
Your friendly neighbourhood Regent
#287015: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:32:51 PM

Say it with me now: Scrutiny is not suspicion. It's not hostility. It's not fear.

It's taking notice of what people are doing and thinking about what it means.

Angry gets shit done.
Protagonist506 from Oregon Since: Dec, 2013 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
#287016: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:34:45 PM

@Robrecht That's a bit more fair, to be honest, though I will say that was rather unclear. I will confess you said it a few times but I didn't quite get what you meant by that.

Edited by Protagonist506 on Aug 8th 2019 at 4:35:10 AM

Leviticus 19:34
Robrecht Your friendly neighbourhood Regent from The Netherlands Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: They can't hide forever. We've got satellites.
Your friendly neighbourhood Regent
#287017: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:36:47 PM

[up] This could have been solved by you looking up what the word scrutiny means instead of arguing for two pages against what you think it means.

Angry gets shit done.
wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#287018: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:39:57 PM

[up][up]I’d like to gently note that asking people to clarify what they meant is generally a good use of time.

[up]Edit: [nja]’d sorta although that’s a tad rude.

Edited by wisewillow on Aug 8th 2019 at 4:41:02 AM

Protagonist506 from Oregon Since: Dec, 2013 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
#287019: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:40:09 PM

I was technically arguing with someone else for the most part, and while I do have a definition of it on-hand I know its connotations as well.

Leviticus 19:34
Robrecht Your friendly neighbourhood Regent from The Netherlands Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: They can't hide forever. We've got satellites.
Your friendly neighbourhood Regent
#287020: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:46:17 PM

[up][up] Yeah, a symptom of fatigue. I'm calling it a night.

Angry gets shit done.
PresidentStalkeyes Eats moldy bread and flies into windows from United Kingdom of England-land Since: Feb, 2016 Relationship Status: Do you like me? (Yes ⎕ Definitely ⎕ Absolutely!!! ⎕)
Eats moldy bread and flies into windows
#287021: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:49:05 PM

It seems to me that what's being said here isn't 'we need to start assuming every white person we come across in the street is a racist sexist homophobe that will screw you over at the first opportunity, so we should never ever even think of interacting with them', but rather 'we shouldn't give people the benefit of the doubt if they're doing or saying blatantly shitty things, just because they're white', which isn't racist, it's just common sense.

Or at least, it sounds like common sense to me, since I was raised to generally believe that discrimination is bad, but I understand there's a lot of communities out there where people expect a sort of 'howdy neighbour!' attitude from everyone they meet and demand passes for everything like they're talking to lifelong friends, and therefore take it as a personal affront when total strangers treat them with wariness. And when those same communities are mostly if not entirely white, that's a recipe for bigotry when running into minorities.

I'm obviously not suggesting it's impossible for the same thing to happen with minority communities - especially if they live in a heavily-segregated environment - but I'd say since they're minorities they're almost statistically certain to run into white people on a regular basis and are therefore less likely to think that a perceived 'snub' is indicative of all white people, whereas it's entirely possible for a white person to go most of their lives without interacting with a single minority, especially if they live in a very rural area.

Edited by PresidentStalkeyes on Aug 8th 2019 at 12:50:19 PM

Those sell-by-dates won't stop me because I can't read!
LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#287022: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:54:57 PM

There are undeniably different circumstances that make going "I'm wary of white people, especially men" different from going "I'm wary of {insert other group}" but I do understand why that language can come off as really unappealing, even beyond reasons of white fragility.

I think often times people just phrase the point they're trying to make badly or in a way that doesn't endear people to listen to them. Like, I think I get what Wisewillow means when she says "most white people being racist is a fact", but I also get why people would resent that and think it could be phrased in a different, less inflammatory way. It's part of why words and phrasing are important.

Edited by LSBK on Aug 8th 2019 at 6:57:44 AM

wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#287023: Aug 8th 2019 at 4:58:09 PM

[up] We grow up in a white supremacist society; it’s hard not to be. Obviously the degree varies widely from awkward and ignorant but well-intentioned to violent Neo-Nazis. Here’s an article on implicit bias.

Interesting article here on why gun manufacturers are currently immune to liability for mass shootings.

If a single person were killed by a water pistol, you would expect the company that manufactured and sold the toy to face a massive lawsuit. Yet, after 31 people were murdered with semi-automatic weapons in Dayton and El Paso in a single weekend, gun manufacturers will likely face little liability.

That’s because Congress specifically exempted gun manufacturers from most lawsuits in the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). Toy gun manufacturers are accountable to the public when their products cause harm. Real gun manufacturers often aren’t.

...

The lack of dialogue around PLCAA isn’t exactly surprising. Gun violence in the United States is a rolling crisis, and it’s difficult to focus on all the ways that our system is broken. Civil litigation is long, difficult, and complicated, and change via that process can be slow. It makes sense that people focus more on immediate, muscular policies like banning certain categories of guns.

But PLCAA should get more attention. For one thing, civil law targets manufacturers directly, while criminal laws can result in disproportionate policing and incarceration of people of color. Second, pre-PLCAA litigation was beginning to push gun manufacturers, slowly but promisingly, toward reform.

In the late ’90s and early 2000s, an increasing number of civil lawsuits against gun manufacturers were seriously worrying the gun lobby. These lawsuits were based on a number of legal theories. Some plaintiffs argued that guns were unsafe due to defective design. Manufacturers, they asserted, had an obligation to include safety features such as chamber load indicators that would warn users when guns were loaded, or personalization technology that would prevent guns from firing for unauthorized users. Other suits alleged that gun manufacturers negligently marketed and distributed firearms in ways intended to get guns into the hands of illegal users. For example, in Hamilton v. Beretta, plaintiffs accused manufacturers of oversupplying guns to places with lax gun laws in the Southeast with the knowledge that those guns would be illegally distributed to people in New York and other states with tougher gun restrictions.

The court decided against the plaintiffs in Hamilton, and in general, gun manufacturers fared well in court. But lawsuits — especially those by municipalities like Chicago and Cincinnati charging manufacturers with creating a public nuisance — did have an effect. In 1999, Davis Industries, which produced cheap “Saturday night special” handguns often used in crimes, was forced to file for bankruptcy because of costs associated with lawsuits. The next year, Smith & Wesson agreed to add hidden serial numbers to make its guns easier to track and to develop smart technology to restrict operation to authorized users. Other manufacturers were worried they might be forced to follow suit — which is why they lobbied hard, and successfully, for PLCAA.

In general, civil common law and liability are the two legal mechanisms by which manufacturers can best be held accountable. BB gun manufacturers know they can’t produce products that can accidentally kill someone, because if they did, they’d face lawsuits. They know they can’t market their products to people who shouldn’t have them — like very young children — without facing consequences in court. But gun manufacturers have little incentive to prevent accidents, or to try to keep their products in safe hands. Without the risk of legal action, negligent companies have no reason to ensure the safety of their products and to act responsibly. Stock prices of gun manufacturers often go up after mass shootings, so certain are investors that manufacturers will face no economic consequences.

PLCAA mostly ended the wave of municipal lawsuits against the gun industry. Given the special status of gun manufacturers, and the high bar for litigation, many plaintiffs simply don’t bother to bring suit. Some cases have moved forward, but only slowly and precariously. For example, the families of the victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting sued gun manufacturer Remington, alleging its marketing tactics contributed to the deaths. The case is still making its way through the court seven years later, and may yet be thrown out under PLCAA.

Before 2005, municipalities and individuals tried to use civil lawsuits to get manufacturers to change gun designs and to try to prevent illegal gun sales. Perhaps lawsuits to force manufacturers to stop producing especially dangerous weapons could even be possible. While there have been efforts to repeal PLCAA — California Rep. Adam Schiff in particular has repeatedly pushed efforts to repeal the law — it nevertheless remains on the books.

Edited by wisewillow on Aug 8th 2019 at 5:00:46 AM

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#287024: Aug 8th 2019 at 5:02:53 PM

[up]I said nothing to the contrary there.

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#287025: Aug 8th 2019 at 5:03:42 PM

I believe the argument is literally that people should be scrutinized by what they say and do versus the fact white males should be under increased scrutiny as a whole.

Everyone here agrees that white males get away with a lot more in terms of what they say and do.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Aug 8th 2019 at 5:04:54 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.

Total posts: 417,856
Top