51–60 of 64 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is 38 about?
https://www.adl.org/education/references/hate-symbols/38 Now, that doesn't guarantee it's being used as a nazi dogwhistle, but adding the 88 to it makes it less likely to be a coincidence.
No, just no.
In Europe allowing incarcerated to vote is normal. It isn't even a political issue. The right to vote is valued differently in different nations of course. In some nations it is literally above everything else, while in others it isn't. This "ranking" of rights reflects the values within the societies. Edit: And to add another commonly used argument: If you don't understand the right to vote as a super-right that can…
For example in France they can (though there are no polling stations in jail...), but there is a potential penalty decided by the court in relation to a criminal condition that suspends civic rights for a set duration. During that time the person cannot vote, cannot be elected, and cannot perform some official jobs or be a civil servant whether they are in jail or not.
So it is possible to, say, be sentenced to 2 years in fail, suspended, and in addition to 5 year suspension of civic rights. So the person is not jailed but cannot vote or run for office for 5 years.
Google tells me that 25-30,000 people have their civic rights suspended that way every year in France, when found guilty of a criminal offence. Before 1994 anyone convincted of a serious crime would lose their civic rights automatically for life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US has millions of people incarcerated and a few million more who can't vote because they were formerly incarcerated.
The US has millions of people incarcerated for crimes, not political dissidents.
I see you capitalize every race except "white". I think we know where we stand.
Why are you commenting with multiple very new accounts? https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=TakeMeTo38
Good eye, that was me! "Take me back to 1938"
Sidenote: for those who think it's strange to use the word 'bodies' instead of 'people' (includes me): apparently this originates out of something called Critical Race Theory. An explanation of the term can be found here: https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-bodies/ .
I think this article is different, the context is counting, where there is no humanity to strip away, so “bodies of incarcerated people” may be unexpected phrasing but accurate and without counterproductive effect.
What if they vote predominantly republican? Would The Atlantic still argue in favor?
John Oliver did an anti-gerrymandering special, until he got to a seat where they split apart Blacks and Latinos. Then that was ok -> https://youtu.be/A-4dIImaodQ?t=787
Read more about why it makes no sense to glibly try to dunk on John Oliver with him being OK with this specific Black-Latino split, the "earmuffs" of Chicago's 4th congressional district: https://www.changeil.org/2020/03/why-chicagos-4th-congressio...
From the article:
The [federal] court favored a Republican-sponsored map that created a super-majority Latino congressional district, the 4th, today known as the “earmuffs” district. That map also preserved three super-majority African-American congressional districts in the region.
The Republican map — and this is the heart of the matter — met necessary constitutional and legal criteria to provide “fairness to the voting rights of racial and language minorities,” as mandated by Section 2 of the Federal Voting Rights Act.
People with shared interests do not live in neatly squared areas. The 4th Congressional District was created to reflect that reality.
If the district had been shaped in that way for any reason other than to protect the shared interests of a minority group like Latinos, it probably could be considered an example of cynical, partisan gerrymandering. But, in this case, it gave a strong Latino community the chance to elect someone of their own choosing to Congress.
Sidenote: for those who think it's strange to use the word 'bodies' instead of 'people' (includes me): apparently this originates out of something called Critical Race Theory. An explanation of the term can be found here: https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-bodies/ .
Too often I see use of phrases like “black bodies” as perpetuating the dehumanization the speaker is arguing against. They should speak of the people as they see them not as the system that oppresses them sees them. I think this article is different, the context is counting, where there is no humanity to strip away, so “bodies of incarcerated people” may be unexpected phrasing but accurate and without counterproducti…