Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

What stupid shit has Trump done today?

People who had medical cover for condition that are treatable are losing that coverage.
People will die.
"Liberals" upset on social media will often know someone who will be in a life of pain or even die because of the changes Trump has brought in.
But the "left" here would rather those people die than "liberal" get credit for something. These are not serious people engaged in a real world struggle. For much of Urban 75's politics posters its all more a roll playing game. They play act the hardline revolutionary in a consequence free environment untroubled by the compromises necessary to change the world and instead dreaming narcissistic dreams of fantasy revolutions and perfect outcomes that can never really be.

Reality and the horrible mess of life is too complex for them.

And in the real world people die.

Its all just a game to them.
Jesus wept. This shit makes me so angry. I'm trying to keep people alive at work. Austerity is literally killing people and I have to read this when I get home.

No mental health support. Not enough ambulances, hospital beds, care home placements or other support. I'm doing all I can putting a plaster on a gaping wound.
 
Liberality, which since C14 had carried the sense of generosity, and later of open-mindedness, was joined by political Liberalism from eC19. Libertarian in 1C18 indicated a believer in free will as againstdeterminism (cf. DETERMINE), but from 1C19 acquired social and political senses, sometimes close to liberal.It is especially common in mC20 in libertarian socialism, which is not liberalism but a form ofSOCIALISM (q.v.) opposed to centralized andBUREAUCRATIC (q.v.) controls.



In the established party-political sense, Liberal is now clear enough. But liberal as a term of political discourse is complex. It has been under regular and heavy attack from conservative positions, where the senses of lack of restraint and lack of discipline have been brought to bear, and also the sense of a (weak and sentimental) generosity. The sense of a lack of rigour has also been drawn on in intellectual disputes. Against this kind of attack, liberal has often been a group term for PROGRESSIVE or RADICAL (qq.v.) opinions, and is still clear in this sense, notably in USA. Butliberal as a pejorative term has also been widely used by socialists and especially Marxists. This use shares the conservative sense of lack of rigour and of weak and sentimental beliefs. Thus far it is interpreted byliberals as a familiar complaint, and there is a special edge in their reply to socialists, that they are concerned with political freedom and that socialists are not. But this masks the most serious sense of the socialist use, which is the historically accurate observation thatliberalism is a doctrine based on INDIVIDUALIST (q.v.) theories of man and society and is thus in fundamental conflict not only with SOCIALIST (q.v.) but with most strictly SOCIAL (q.v.) theories. The further observation, that liberalism is the highest form of thought developed within BOURGEOIS (q.v.) society and in terms of CAPITALISM (q.v.), is also relevant, for when liberal is not being used as a loose swear-word, it is to this mixture of liberating and limiting ideas that it is intended to refer. Liberalism is then a doctrine of certain necessary kinds of freedom but also, and essentially, a doctrine of possessive individualism.


of course we could just link to the OED or mirriam-webster because they really are great when it comes to political definitions, much like wikipedia and your ole fave google
 
I don't speak french but I assumed their was some witticism or echo of french political slogans of the past that I missed. But no, the nearest you can get is 'I want niether'. Highest french spoiled ballot on record as I recall.

I believe it's from a poem.

"I want neither" is something you can say, but it's not something you can choose. So, going back to the analogy, you're not going to end up any less ill.
 
I believe it's from a poem.

"I want neither" is something you can say, but it's not something you can choose. So, going back to the analogy, you're not going to end up any less ill.
lesser evilism then. It only goes so far. We're seeing how far right now, in our own lifetime.
 

Welcome to the First Presidential Election Since Voting Rights Act Gutted
America will vote for president in a country where it's easier to buy a gun than vote in many states

The Gutting of the Voting Rights Act Could Decide the 2016 Election
States with new voting restrictions have 70 percent of the electoral votes needed to win the presidency

The real reason black voters didn’t turn out for Hillary Clinton — and how to fix it
GOP voter suppression efforts are the key to combatting a changing demographic that trends blue

Trump's 'Voter Suppression Operation' Targets Black Voters
Even as the Republican launches a purported African American outreach campaign 12 days before the election, his aides say their goal is to depress turnout in the bloc.

Voting machine problems reported in N.C., Colorado and other states

Weird isn't it?


 
lesser evilism then. It only goes so far. We're seeing how far right now, in our own lifetime.

I'm not necessarily promoting lesser-evilism ( I do believe it is sometimes the right thing, but that's by-the-by). I'm just critiquing the analogy. If it's a binary choice between cholera and plague, you Google the symptoms and take your pick. Who in the world would be indifferent?

What would be better would be an analogy that suggests some positive outcome of refusing to choose.
 
I didn't realize that Ann Coulter was a 'red'?

What's with this 'red', anyway? I said it before, Dottie: the political world is more nuanced than 'us' vs 'them'. Time to grow up and leave behind the simplistic dogmatism of youth.
and yet by conflating her with 'urban75 posters' you are doing the classic wind up- fair enough, it works. I'm aware, more than ever as I age that politics and society as a whole is a very complex and nuanced thing. Despite the hysterical cries of the newly aware liberal left some of us have been examining and living that complexity, from the shit end
 
I'm not necessarily promoting lesser-evilism ( I do believe it is sometimes the right thing, but that's by-the-by). I'm just critiquing the analogy. If it's a binary choice between cholera and plague, you Google the symptoms and take your pick. Who in the world would be indifferent?
27 million french people for starters- but you term utter rejection as indifference. This is a mistake.
 
People who had medical cover for condition that are treatable are losing that coverage.
People will die.
"Liberals" upset on social media will often know someone who will be in a life of pain or even die because of the changes Trump has brought in.
But the "left" here would rather those people die than "liberal" get credit for something. These are not serious people engaged in a real world struggle. For much of Urban 75's politics posters its all more a roll playing game. They play act the hardline revolutionary in a consequence free environment untroubled by the compromises necessary to change the world and instead dreaming narcissistic dreams of fantasy revolutions and perfect outcomes that can never really be.

Reality and the horrible mess of life is too complex for them.

And in the real world people die.

Its all just a game to them.
Erm we do debate on U75 certainly. But there's nothing wrong with that. A lot of people on here do a lot of other real world stuff too though you know. At the sharp end kind of stuff.
 
I didn't realize that Ann Coulter was a 'red'?

What's with this 'red', anyway? I said it before, Dottie: the political world is more nuanced than 'us' vs 'them'. Time to grow up and leave behind the simplistic dogmatism of youth.
Ah, but in America, "red" means Republican and "blue" means Democrat, so yes, she is red, in America at least! :p

I wish they'd have just stuck with Donkeys and Elephants. That was less confusing!
 
Welcome to the First Presidential Election Since Voting Rights Act Gutted
America will vote for president in a country where it's easier to buy a gun than vote in many states

The Gutting of the Voting Rights Act Could Decide the 2016 Election
States with new voting restrictions have 70 percent of the electoral votes needed to win the presidency

The real reason black voters didn’t turn out for Hillary Clinton — and how to fix it
GOP voter suppression efforts are the key to combatting a changing demographic that trends blue

Trump's 'Voter Suppression Operation' Targets Black Voters
Even as the Republican launches a purported African American outreach campaign 12 days before the election, his aides say their goal is to depress turnout in the bloc.

Voting machine problems reported in N.C., Colorado and other states

Weird isn't it?
How do those links map to the Washington Post article I linked to? Or is the Washington Post unreliable?
 
Jesus wept. This shit makes me so angry.
So explaining the consequences of choosing Trump in a Trump vs "Liberals" makes you angry.
Didums. You poor little mite.
If Trump was forced out through popular protest then that would be good, if he was forced out through some combination of liberals
"Liberals" is a meaningless term used by pish artists and jakeys to mean anything from Corbyn to Le Pen and any combination in between.
There are very real consequences for real people in the difference between choosing the best of a bad bunch and the smirking and gloating that rather Trump than "liberals" get credit for something.
Rising racism, attacks on workers rights, losses of health cover and a foreign policy that could result in god knows what. Your choice.
Just so long as no one says anything positive about "liberals" eh champ.
 
So explaining the consequences of choosing Trump in a Trump vs "Liberals" makes you angry.
Didums. You poor little mite.
"Liberals" is a meaningless term used by pish artists and jakeys to mean anything from Corbyn to Le Pen and any combination in between.
There are very real consequences for real people in the difference between choosing the best of a bad bunch and the smirking and gloating that rather Trump than "liberals" get credit for something.
Rising racism, attacks on workers rights, losses of health cover and a foreign policy that could result in god knows what. Your choice.
Just so long as no one says anything positive about "liberals" eh champ.
Seriously fuck off mate. I've waited for ambulances while people have died in my arms. You have no idea about me or what I do.
 
27 million french people for starters- but you term utter rejection as indifference. This is a mistake.

No, that's not what I'm saying. But the utter rejection is symbolic. In the real situation, this might in theory be meaningful and useful. But in the analogy we're dealing with deadly diseases, to which symbolic rejection is not such a useful response. That's a flaw in the analogy, IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRI
Erm we do debate on U75 certainly. But there's nothing wrong with that. A lot of people on here do a lot of other real world stuff too though you know. At the sharp end kind of stuff.
I agree that many here have real world experience of working with folk at the sharp end of austerity and greed, wherever they live. I read the post differently though - that what the current US administration and GOP congress is doing is literally closer to home for some people (i.e. people who live there, have family directly impacted, etc.) than others. The former are likely to be thinking more pragmatically about the limited choices before them, almost "survival mode". For the latter, from a safer distance, it's likely to be more about talking points, political theory and for some maybe, a game.
 
These are not serious people engaged in a real world struggle. For much of Urban 75's politics posters its all more a roll playing game. They play act the hardline revolutionary in a consequence free environment untroubled by the compromises necessary to change the world and instead dreaming narcissistic dreams of fantasy revolutions and perfect outcomes that can never really be.

Reality and the horrible mess of life is too complex for them.

And in the real world people die.

Its all just a game to them.
What is this shit. For much of Urban75. What the very fuck. Get a grip.
 
and yet by conflating her with 'urban75 posters' you are doing the classic wind up- fair enough, it works.

But: it has nothing to do with 'reds', though. It amuses me when you try to apply some sort of simplistic formula whereby, if I'm in disagreement with some U75 posters, it must be because I'm 'anti-red'.

It's so quaint, simplistic and silly, that I have to chuckle.:)

I understand that the world becomes more comprehensible if one is able to fit everyone and everything into nice, well-defined boxes. So it's unfortunate when reality isn't amenable to such simplistic categorization.
 
Seriously fuck off mate. I've waited for ambulances while people
People who had the NHS.
Americans do not have that.
The choice I started by quoting was Trump vs "liberals".
Because Trump and his heath care policies people will die.
Do you not like it being explained to you all that if its more Trump these are the consequences?
Shall we carry on pretending its all just a game and Americans are not actual people.
 
But: it has nothing to do with 'reds', though. It amuses me when you try to apply some sort of simplistic formula whereby, if I'm in disagreement with some U75 posters, it must be because I'm 'anti-red'.

It's so quaint, simplistic and silly, that I have to chuckle.:)

I understand that the world becomes more comprehensible if one is able to fit everyone and everything into nice, well-defined boxes. So it's unfortunate when reality isn't amenable to such simplistic categorization.
well, it does when you are trying to conflate the way liberal is used, not just on urban75. It has a precise political meaning, one which you seem to studiously ignore in favour of horshoe theory type laughing up your sleeve.
So it's unfortunate when reality isn't amenable to such simplistic categorization

isn't it just? Consider it 'childish team picking' all you like. The fact is there is a huge class issue facing us today, rawer than ever now 2008 is catching up in on the ground terms. Guess thats all fake news though
 
I agree that many here have real world experience of working with folk at the sharp end of austerity and greed, wherever they live. I read the post differently though - that what the current US administration and GOP congress is doing is literally closer to home for some people (i.e. people who live there, have family directly impacted, etc.) than others. The former are likely to be thinking more pragmatically about the limited choices before them, almost "survival mode". For the latter, from a safer distance, it's likely to be more about talking points, political theory and for some maybe, a game.
Completely get that and understand. But some British posters have direct experience of the USA. May have lived there etc.

I used to go out with a Korean American who lived in Sacramento. Long distance relationship for 3 years met her through a good friend who lives in Sac. His ex in laws live in the hills on the Californian border. They grow weed and breed pitbulls.

That old cliche rings true though. Two countries divided by the same language. The British are much more European in their ideas and expectations. The whole mentality thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRI
The fact is there is a huge class issue facing us today, rawer than ever now 2008 is catching up in on the ground terms.

Of course there is. But problems of wealth disparity won't be solved by attempting to determine who is 'us', and who is 'them'.

Lining people up and neck shooting them hasn't provided a lasting solution any time it's been tried in the past: it's unlikely to any more successful, should it be tried again in the near future.
 
People who had the NHS.
Americans do not have that.
The choice I started by quoting was Trump vs "liberals".
Because Trump and his heath care policies people will die.
Do you not like it being explained to you all that if its more Trump these are the consequences?
Shall we carry on pretending its all just a game and Americans are not actual people.
And I think the USA ought to have the NHS. A single payer system at least where people have access to health on the basis of need rather than wealth.

Even so the Democrats aren't exactly great. "Are they the party of Wall Street or Occupy?" As they say. A lot of Neo-Liberal reforms were brought in under Clinton for instance.

Are the British somehow unable to make comments about the inadequacies as I see them?
 
Of course there is. But problems of wealth disparity won't be solved by attempting to determine who is 'us', and who is 'them'.

Lining people up and neck shooting them hasn't provided a lasting solution any time it's been tried in the past: it's unlikely to any more successful, should it be tried again in the near future.

In theory, it might. Where I think it falls down is that there are practical limits on how comprehensive you can make the list.
 
How do those links map to the Washington Post article I linked to? Or is the Washington Post unreliable?

They provide some context behind the map - of why voter turnout was lower in many districts that traditionally vote heavily for Democrats - including "swing states" where Trump took key electoral college votes to give him a win.

I've seen SO many reports, like this recent one from Pew Research Centre, reporting the drop in African Americans voting in 2016, without including the context of voter suppression tactics targeting Black communities and redistricting to minimise the impact of Black votes and votes of lower income people in general.

When 88% of African Americans who voted chose Clinton, it's dubious to say that Black people "abandoned" the Democratic party, but I've seen many commentators use maps and figures uncritically to argue just this. And, I've seen some particularly on the left of the Democratic party virtually blame Black people for Trump's election without even acknowledging concerted efforts to prevent them from voting at all.
 
In theory, it might. Where I think it falls down is that there are practical limits on how comprehensive you can make the list.

I don't agree. Imo, any large-scale violent action visited upon a country, be it war, or an attempt at class purging from within, leaves a scar on the national psyche that takes generations to heal - just as family violence can have repercussions through generations.

The purging of 'undesirables', however one defines that term, hasn't been successful - and is usually abhorrent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRI
Back
Top Bottom