American "Liberals" Are Dangerous Dimwits

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

My fellow countrymen are afflicted with two serious deficits in forming responses to international news.

First, we have a truly appalling education as to geography, history, etc. I can tell you anything you might like to know about the Hudson River Valley in New York, because it was 1/2 my history and geography class k-12. I can't spot Japan on an unmarked map, because we never covered Asia. At all.

Worse, we are taught by all the influencers that the only consideration in any international conflict is "how will this affect Americans"? That might not be as shockingly stupid as it sounds if we could see, e.g., that forcing our neighbors into slavery might depress our own wages. But we are limited, for the most part, in seeing only that our oil, food, clothing, etc. is "cheap".

Against this background, young "liberals" here are popping up with stupid opinions that Israel is a fascist state, oppresses its Arab citizens and that we need to reconsider whether it should have been formed. Gets worse every year.

Whether you have any sympathy for that POV, I recently asked them to consider how Americans had affected the Troubles. How many billions of American dollars were spent on bombs to kill English civilians? How much harm was done to every nation's security when we looked the other way as the IRA traded money for guns with Mexican and Columbian cartels?

Terrorism is terrorism. One HUGE reason I am not a Catholic any longer is the insufferable hypocrisy of the priests and bishops over here, shilling for the IRA and then telling us young people that we were sinful. Hey, my skirt might be too short, but I haven't killed anyone this week! Bastards.

I am saddened by the news reports that the Good Friday agreement might not hold, as Brexit talks get further along. If that conflict should break out again, I hope someone in a highly visible position in the US stands up against wanton, free-for-funding of the IRA by Irish Americans.

But I do not expect that to happen. We Americans are just too selfish and stupid to reason out how our decisions affect people in other countries.

 

[Idris2002]

I think you need to resit Trolling 101.

 

[Pickman's model]

My fellow countrymen are afflicted with two serious deficits in forming responses to international news.

First, we have a truly appalling education as to geography, history, etc. I can tell you anything you might like to know about the Hudson River Valley in New York, because it was 1/2 my history and geography class k-12. I can't spot Japan on an unmarked map, because we never covered Asia. At all.

Worse, we are taught by all the influencers that the only consideration in any international conflict is "how will this affect Americans"? That might not be as shockingly stupid as it sounds if we could see, e.g., that forcing our neighbors into slavery might depress our own wages. But we are limited, for the most part, in seeing only that our oil, food, clothing, etc. is "cheap".

Against this background, young "liberals" here are popping up with stupid opinions that Israel is a fascist state, oppresses its Arab citizens and that we need to reconsider whether it should have been formed. Gets worse every year.

Whether you have any sympathy for that POV, I recently asked them to consider how Americans had affected the Troubles. How many billions of American dollars were spent on bombs to kill English civilians? How much harm was done to every nation's security when we looked the other way as the IRA traded money for guns with Mexican and Columbian cartels?

Terrorism is terrorism. One HUGE reason I am not a Catholic any longer is the insufferable hypocrisy of the priests and bishops over here, shilling for the IRA and then telling us young people that we were sinful. Hey, my skirt might be too short, but I haven't killed anyone this week! Bastards.

I am saddened by the news reports that the Good Friday agreement might not hold, as Brexit talks get further along. If that conflict should break out again, I hope someone in a highly visible position in the US stands up against wanton, free-for-funding of the IRA by Irish Americans.

But I do not expect that to happen. We Americans are just too selfish and stupid to reason out how our decisions affect people in other countries.

How many billions of us dollars were spent on IRA bombs?

 

[dessiato]

Even if it is trolling there's some interesting points.

 

[likesfish]

I don't think Noraid would be classed by anyone as liberal
Marxist terrorists persuade Conservative Catholics to arm them

 

[Pickman's model]

My fellow countrymen are afflicted with two serious deficits in forming responses to international news.

First, we have a truly appalling education as to geography, history, etc. I can tell you anything you might like to know about the Hudson River Valley in New York, because it was 1/2 my history and geography class k-12. I can't spot Japan on an unmarked map, because we never covered Asia. At all.

Worse, we are taught by all the influencers that the only consideration in any international conflict is "how will this affect Americans"? That might not be as shockingly stupid as it sounds if we could see, e.g., that forcing our neighbors into slavery might depress our own wages. But we are limited, for the most part, in seeing only that our oil, food, clothing, etc. is "cheap".

Against this background, young "liberals" here are popping up with stupid opinions that Israel is a fascist state, oppresses its Arab citizens and that we need to reconsider whether it should have been formed. Gets worse every year.

Whether you have any sympathy for that POV, I recently asked them to consider how Americans had affected the Troubles. How many billions of American dollars were spent on bombs to kill English civilians? How much harm was done to every nation's security when we looked the other way as the IRA traded money for guns with Mexican and Columbian cartels?

Terrorism is terrorism. One HUGE reason I am not a Catholic any longer is the insufferable hypocrisy of the priests and bishops over here, shilling for the IRA and then telling us young people that we were sinful. Hey, my skirt might be too short, but I haven't killed anyone this week! Bastards.

I am saddened by the news reports that the Good Friday agreement might not hold, as Brexit talks get further along. If that conflict should break out again, I hope someone in a highly visible position in the US stands up against wanton, free-for-funding of the IRA by Irish Americans.

But I do not expect that to happen. We Americans are just too selfish and stupid to reason out how our decisions affect people in other countries.

Fellow redundant: your countrymen by definition fellow

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

How many billions of us dollars were spent on IRA bombs?

IDK. The money flowed like wine, though.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

I think you need to resit Trolling 101.

My apologies. If you would prefer not to have an American here (or specifically, me), I would prefer you to say so.

I cannot discuss your nation's politics or history as if I know more, or as much, as you. That would be extremely rude, and stupid.

I can try to find ways the two nations' politics affect one another, but this appears not to have been well-received, either.

I am your guest, and I will be happy to say adios, if this is the most gracious thing to do.

No offense taken, honestly. I have enjoyed meeting you all.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

IDK. The money flowed like wine, though.

Did it?.... I'm living in Eire and if as you say all the "priests" were sending guns 'n' money over from the US...then I think the IRA wouldnt have been using fertilizer and wavin pipes to make bombs....
The North was a war zone.... What started as a human rights campaign rapidly turned into a war and if you know anything about Irish history then you'll know that guerilla warfare was a strong modus operandum.

But think about this for a moment....
How would you feel if someone told you that the American War of Independence was really a bunch of home grown terrorists fighting against the British? Hmm? It's hailed as something great in American history.......and that's because you got your independence....

 

[maomao]

My apologies. If you would prefer not to have an American here (or specifically, me), I would prefer you to say so.

I cannot discuss your nation's politics or history as if I know more, or as much, as you. That would be extremely rude, and stupid.

I can try to find ways the two nations' politics affect one another, but this appears not to have been well-received, either.

I am your guest, and I will be happy to say adios, if this is the most gracious thing to do.

No offense taken, honestly. I have enjoyed meeting you all.

You've got as much right to post here as anyone. And don't worry about being rude. Most of us are ruder.

 

[danny la rouge]

Against this background, young "liberals" here are popping up with stupid opinions that Israel is a fascist state, oppresses its Arab citizens and that we need to reconsider whether it should have been formed. Gets worse every year.

What are your disagreements with this reported view?

Mine are that it's inaccurate to call Israel a fascist state (discussion of fascism elsewhere on the boards in recent days; I can find a link if you're interested). I think closer analogies are Apartheid and the genocide of the native Americans. Obviously it's its own set of circumstances, with its own particular dimensions, but those analogies are pretty close in many respects.

Certainly, anyone who would call themselves "progressive" (although that word is now as tainted as "liberal") would have to have grave criticism of the Israeli state's treatment of Palestinians now and historically.

I can recommend books if you'd like, but the short version is that the Israeli state has perpetrated serious crimes and continues to do so. Would you disagree? And if so, why?

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

Did it?.... I'm living in Eire and if as you say all the "priests" were sending guns 'n' money over from the US...then I think the IRA wouldnt have been using fertilizer and wavin pipes to make bombs....
The North was a war zone.... What started as a human rights campaign rapidly turned into a war and if you know anything about Irish history then you'll know that guerilla warfare was a strong modus operandum.

But think about this for a moment....
How would you feel if someone told you that the American War of Independence was really a bunch of home grown terrorists fighting against the British? Hmm? It's hailed as something great in American history.......and that's because you got your independence....

Now that is interesting. If the dough was collected from Irish Americans singing "O Danny Boy", but never made it to actual IRA fighters for weapons, etc., where did it go?

As I said, the British were shouting at us for DECADES about the money laundering, etc. going on, as terrorists from every sector of the globe, along with every criminal organization, was using US banks to exchange dough -- for drugs, arms, who knows what. It wasn't until 2001, after 9/11, that the US put reasonable restrictions in place (and query whether they are adequate, as to the seriously evil people on this planet.)

Americans STILL cannot accept that terrorism in the ME or Europe, etc. can be replicated here, easily. Probably more easily, as our security and intelligence services are fucking useless.

I think the idea is, the 0.01% deliberately prevent a schoolchild here from acquiring a working knowledge of world geopolitics, and THEN use their influence with US media to prevent adequate coverage of international news. If anyone here WANTS to know what is really happening overseas, they have to dig. Read local newspapers, translated into English. Etc. Which, with the internet is easy. But without it, almost impossible for an average working class person.

And, I think all our nations in the West have the same 0.01%, more or less.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

You've got as much right to post here as anyone. And don't worry about being rude. Most of us are ruder.

You are most kind. I simply do not want to intrude on what is obviously a very intelligent, cohesive online community.

BTW, I belong to a board (surprised, eh?) on American politics. I have not got a sense of whether any of you would be interested, but I could link the odd thread now and again, if you are skeptical as to how backwards Americans can be.

But possibly now that we have elected Trump as POTUS, you already know -- we Americans are very proud of our limitless capacity for The Stupid.

So.....time being, I will stay. If you ever come to find my manners lacking, please say something. I sincerely do not want to annoy.

Thank you for having me, as of now at least.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

Did it?.... I'm living in Eire and if as you say all the "priests" were sending guns 'n' money over from the US...then I think the IRA wouldnt have been using fertilizer and wavin pipes to make bombs....
The North was a war zone.... What started as a human rights campaign rapidly turned into a war and if you know anything about Irish history then you'll know that guerilla warfare was a strong modus operandum.

But think about this for a moment....
How would you feel if someone told you that the American War of Independence was really a bunch of home grown terrorists fighting against the British? Hmm? It's hailed as something great in American history.......and that's because you got your independence....

I have nothing but compassion for Ireland and Irish Catholics. My family were Scottish Catholics, so I assume we are out of the same tribe.

I don't know what is the best way forward for Ireland and the UK. I do know, for Americans to stick their oar in, tossing money on a bonfire of war and terrorism because "it feels good " to "get back at the English" over hurts that WASPs here in flicted on Irish Americans is selfishness on steroids.

I knew there was an anti-Catholic bias in America, growing up. And it was serious; JFK's election did more to open the doors to country clubs, nice neighborhoods, "family owned banks", etc. for people like me than I can express.

Nevertheless, a subway car full of dead English people next week is not a reasonable compensation for childhood pain I barely recall, from 50, 60 years ago. There are ways Americans can participate in conflicts overseas without making matters worse, but they are not found by drinking in Irish pubs and sliding thousands of dollars to the "right" priest.

Note: it was never EVERY priest. Mainly in the Northeast and New York, and then not quite as open as I describe. But some American Bishops did defend donations collected by the Church for the IRA, back in the day.

Not an especially morally astute bunch, American Bishops.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

How many billions of us dollars were spent on IRA bombs?

I'm not sure there's any way to track that dough. It wouldn't have been recorded on anyone's books or taxes here as "IRA donations", and it was very easy to move money out of the US before 1994.

From the American PBS Frontline documentarians:

However impressive it sounds to say that there are, according to the 1990 U.S. Census, some 40 million Irish-Americans, the reality is that most of them think IRA stands for an Individual Retirement Account.

This is true; only those with a strong sense of connection to Ireland were involved in the funding. Not surprisingly, they were frequently also tied into the Irish American mob(s).

It is true that a small portion of Irish-Americans have always supported the Irish Republican Army, but the importance of the money they raised and the weapons they procured for the republican movement tended to be exaggerated - mostly by the British, Irish and American governments in an attempt to persuade Americans not to contribute to IRA support groups.

For years, republican leaders acknowledged what they really wanted was American political influence to put pressure on the British government to seek a settlement. But that influence, especially in the White House, was withheld as long as the IRA was determined to carry on its violent campaign unconditionally. As the leadership of Sinn Fein sought to distance itself from violence, however, many Irish-American supporters of the IRA remained wedded to the idea that only violence would bring about a united Ireland. As the republican movement became increasingly sophisticated politically, there was no corresponding political change among most of the IRA's traditional supporters in the United States.

This seems a little Pollyanna-esque to me. I do not recall any priest ever asking me to lobby the US government to aid in the peace process between Ireland and the UK.

For a quarter century, the IRA attracted a core of followers in the United States who were loyal and dedicated but incapable of delivering the kind of political support that came to be seen as essential in bringing about the IRA ceasefires, first in 1994, then in July 1997. Part of the problem is that American supporters were often as right-wing as the Provisionals were left-wing. Bernadette Devlin scandalized IRA supporters in Boston in the early 1970s when she announced that she was more comfortable with blacks in Roxbury than she was with Irish-Americans in South Boston. The domination of the support groups by older, more conservative Irish-Americans made it impossible to form coalitions with younger, more radical activists who worked for groups in Central America and South Africa.

This is true. And these people were older than I. They may not have passed along their hard attitudes to their children, and might simply not be around themselves anymore to continue to be a factor, going forward.

In 1969, as TV images of Catholics being attacked were beamed back to Irish Catholic enclaves in Boston and New York, hats were literally passed around pubs from Southie to Woodside in Queens. Fundraising for the IRA, or at least for IRA prisoners, peaked whenever the British were seen to do something outrageous, such as when British soldiers shot 14 civil rights marchers dead on Bloody Sunday in 1972 or in 1981 when Margaret Thatcher allowed the hunger strikers to die. But the fundraising was dwarfed by the millions that were raised by the mainstream Irish charities, especially the American Ireland Fund. Contrary to popular belief, the IRA didn't rely on American money or weapons. And they couldn't rely on American political support, which was limited at the beginning of the Troubles and continued to shrink as the IRA campaign dragged on and most influential Irish-Americans, especially politicians, distanced themselves from the IRA.

Maybe. I don't recall this massive charitable giving, but Frontline is extremely well-respected here for its journalism.

*Snip*

[The US government] has acknowledged for the last few years that it is up to the British and Irish governments and the various parties on the ground in Northern Ireland to sort out their differences and reach a compromise. If the Irish, the British and the two traditions in Northern Ireland can demonstrate an ability to carve out a settlement, the Americans will become less relevant, all for the good.

*Snip*

How noble of us, to allow you to settle your own affairs without direct interference from us!

Ay ye ye.







Special Reports - America And The Conflict | The Ira & Sinn Fein | FRONTLINE | PBS

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

The Irish question is and always will be about a united Ireland.....

Don't forget that there were plenty protestants who wanted a united Ireland or at the very least self determination going right back to the late 19th century....with Wolf Tone and the United Irishmen.

Religion became an issue after partition...(a massively stupid error)....religion became an issue because of certain groups who had a monopoly of power, property and political strength...they also happened to be the protestant majority.

What happened in the 70s in Ulster was really a form of revolution. And every revolution has backers. Even the American Revolution had backers from other countries....namely France, Spain and the Dutch Republic.

What with the millions of Irish who ended up on the US, there was bound to be an outpouring of support for the oppressed and marginalised Irish in the North.

It's easy to sit in judgement when looking through the glass of hindsight. But at the time things really were very bad in NI in the late 60s and 70s. Desperate people will turn to rebellion and war when given no alternative. In my opinion, the way the British government at the time viewed what was going on and their abject inability to even acknowledge the human rights violations perpetrated on their own catholic citizens....the sending in of troops....the murder of human rights protesters....the arrogant stubbornness and pure ignorance of Thatcher to the plight of the hunger strikers....who made 5 very simple requests based on their view and belief of their entitlement to political prisoner status.

All added up to a need for what I believe was a revolution.

Context is key to understanding the history of the troubles.

Many people were affected by the troubles in 1970. Many catholics left the north and moved down south...especially those living in the midst of a protestant area. They found life became unbearable as their protestant neighbours began to exclude them and target them. Some protestants left too...either to live in the republic of to move to Britain.

The question of a united Ireland was never about religion....until it was made to be......And I cant wait for the day when a united Ireland comes about through consensus.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

I absolutely do not judge the Irish or any other UK person, then or now.

I only judge Americans, too many of whom will fund virtually any terrorist group on earth, from ISIS to the IRA to Basque separatists, without any detectable appreciation of how their enormous influence might harm people IRL.

I find fault with those Americans who treat people living in other nations as if they were characters in a game of Grand Theft Auto.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

What are your disagreements with this reported view?

Mine are that it's inaccurate to call Israel a fascist state (discussion of fascism elsewhere on the boards in recent days; I can find a link if you're interested). I think closer analogies are Apartheid and the genocide of the native Americans. Obviously it's its own set of circumstances, with its own particular dimensions, but those analogies are pretty close in many respects.

Certainly, anyone who would call themselves "progressive" (although that word is now as tainted as "liberal") would have to have grave criticism of the Israeli state's treatment of Palestinians now and historically.

I can recommend books if you'd like, but the short version is that the Israeli state has perpetrated serious crimes and continues to do so. Would you disagree? And if so, why?

If we are discussing this "academically", just as game theory, the fault appears to lie with the British, who overpromised inconsistent things to the Arabs and the Jews from the 1920's onward, locking them into a death match neither can escape.

So, ya. Israel is imperfect.

However, if I discuss this as an American, whose money and vote and voice in my own government is virtually the entire game between Israeli Jews and Arabs -- and I do -- I emphasize that the Arabs must build a middle class, must bestow human rights on their women and children, must move towards democracy.

There cannot be peace in the ME, for anyone, as long as every Arab leader in the region is chosen almost exclusively for his capacity for violence.

To that end, I am comfortable condemning the practice of spending $150 million a year to pay tribute to the families of Arab suicide bombers, etc.

Lasting peace has to be based on justice for everyone, especially for Arabian women.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

The Americans could have been a force for peace in the ME, all along. We only had to tell OPEC we would not buy their oil unless they made strides as to human rights for their own citizens.

But naturally, that tactic has never even been considered.

Our 0.01% do not value Arabian (or Israeli) lives.

 

[newbie]

telling us young people that we were sinful. Hey, my skirt might be too short, but I haven't killed anyone this week! Bastards.

in your long post with the PBS quotes you 'don't recall' stuff that happened in the 1970s.

How old are you?

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

in your long post with the PBS quotes you 'don't recall' stuff that happened in the 1970s.

How old are you?

64.

I was a HS and college student in the late 1960's/early 1970's.

 

[newbie]

64.

I was a HS and college student in the late 1960's/early 1970's.

ta.

 

[danny la rouge]

If we are discussing this "academically", just as game theory, the fault appears to lie with the British, who overpromised inconsistent things to the Arabs and the Jews from the 1920's onward, locking them into a death match neither can escape.

Well, I wasn't discussing it academically, I was discussing it politically: as a real life situation affecting people's lives; the distribution of power and resources.

It's true that the British state created problems here (as elsewhere), that it now has a responsibility to help to resolve. But events did not end in the 1920s, and it would be incredibly ethnocentric, not to mention racist, to imagine that there are no actors with agency in the world other than "the West". Stopping at the Balfour Letter and imagining that explains everything or is the whole story would be pretty insulting to people in the region. It also lacks historical rigour.

Nor do I think the Palestinians and Israelis (the terms are important) are "locked in a death match neither can escape". This ahistorical, context-free view suggests the whole thing is hopeless, and, further, that its a value-free, inexplicable and equal tit for tat. It is not: the aggression is overwhelmingly from the Israeli state.

I said I might recommend some books. The ones I'd begin with are:

Ilan Pappé, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine.

Neve Gordon, Israel's Occupation.

Norman G. Finkelstein, Image and Reality of the Israel–Palestine Conflict.

All three are in my view important books. (Incidentally, the first two authors are Israelis, the last a Jewish American son of Holocaust survivors. So criticism that their - meticulously evidenced - work is ethnically biased against Israel has to contend with that fact).

So, ya. Israel is imperfect.

The Israeli state is far worse than imperfect.

However, if I discuss this as an American, whose money and vote and voice in my own government is virtually the entire game between Israeli Jews and Arabs

I think you need to step back from that notion. America supports the Israeli state and refuses to condemn its actions, but the Israeli state is responsible.

-- and I do -- I emphasize that the Arabs must build a middle class, must bestow human rights on their women and children, must move towards democracy.

Not sure why you think a middle class is a prerequisite for anything. (Well, I think I have an inkling why, but I think you're wrong about it). Supporting women's struggles, working class empowerment, children's right, and so on should not be dependent upon anything.

You began talking about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, but you're focussing entirely on Palestinian society. It's quite clear from that that you think the Palestinians are the aggressors, and you seem to be implying that this is due to some defect in Palestinian society. You have absolutely everything there back to front.

There cannot be peace in the ME, for anyone, as long as every Arab leader in the region is chosen almost exclusively for his capacity for violence.

It's quite possible to be critical of other Middle East regimes at the same time as being critical of the Israeli state. For example, I despise Bashar al-Assad in Syria, and the "anti-Imperialists" who support him. I support the struggle for women's emancipation in misogynistic Islamic cultures, and despise the cultural relativist cowards who abandon them in the name of "anti-racism". And I support the struggle of the independent workers' organisations and activists in Iran, such as that of Jafar Azimzadeh.

All of this is possible while still condemning the actions of the Israeli state.

 

[danny la rouge]

On the other hand, I do agree that liberals are dangerous dimwits.

 

[danny la rouge]

Israeli conductor Daniel Barenboim visits West Bank - BBC News

 

[Leo2]

I think you need to resit Trolling 101.

And I think you are being unfair to the poster concerned. I have been posting on political fora since I was twelve, and I think I have come to recognise at least some of the characteristics of trolls in that time. Furthermore, I have known Pinkie-Flamingo by another nom de plume on an American political discussion board for a number of years, and have never seen any evidence of the trolling at which you are hinting. Might I suggest, with respect, that you are mistaken?

In fact, the national modesty and self-deprecation she displays is, in my view, atypical of the average American who posts on political fora, and I commend her for it - here and elsewhere. She does not appear to be welded on to a particular political ideology, and I would think any discussion board would value that as a refreshing and intelligent attitude. As Dessiato pointed out - she has raised some interesting points, and I for one, would find the board's opinions upon these matters more than somewhat informative.

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, but as a newbie here myself, I trust you understand why I am a little alarmed at an apparently unfair characterisation (not to mention dismissal).

 

[Leo2]

On the other hand, I do agree that liberals are dangerous dimwits.

Much depends upon your definition of the noun (or indeed, the adjective,) 'liberal'.

 

[danny la rouge]

Much depends upon your definition of the noun (or indeed, the adjective,) 'liberal'.

The word Liberal as an insult.

 

[danny la rouge]

butchersapron has also usefully linked to Raymond Williams' Keywords, which contains a very useful entry on the term: Are you a Marxist

 

[Idris2002]

64.

I was a HS and college student in the late 1960's/early 1970's.

OK. Well with regard to the NI conflict, at its very beginnings, it really did look like Catholics were going to be wiped out. That probably coloured some people's perceptions of the conflict at that time. After the early '70s, though, people should have wised up.

Oh, and Leo2 - cool story bro.