Why is that all of these posts saying to "take a stand" fail to explain the political process? I'll just quote myself here. If you want to help stop trump the most effective ways are to: 1. Call - Local congresspeople (http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/) - Senators (https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/) - Local officials (https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials) 2. Participate - Get involved in local electi…
Support the ACLU, who have already filed a lawsuit https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/aclu-and-other-groups...
Time to Take a Stand
691–700 of 1001 posts
Re: Time to Take a Stand
#692Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Anyone in a position of power who took a look at Trump and didn't recoil with disgust needs to be exiled from civil society. I don't like Trump, but fighting him isn't worth going against the very principles we fight for. People have a right to their beliefs, even if their beliefs are stupid. If not, than what kind of country are we?
Thiel donated $1.25 MILLION to the Trump campaign. This isn't holding him accountable for his "beliefs" or even his "speech" - this is holding him accountable for helping to cause this mess we're in.
Re: Time to Take a Stand
#693Donald Trump and Steve Bannon's blatant disregard for objective fact is reckless and dangerous. Go too much further and talent will begin to divest from the United States for moral reasons. Your move, America.
I'm already seeing this in Berlin. I know multiple engineers and academics who have abandoned career moves to the US because they "don't want to live in such a toxic environment."
Re: Time to Take a Stand
#694Earlier quoted context omitted.
You know who really needs to take a fucking stand? The low-level workers at these airports who are enforcing this bullshit ban. They need to grow some spines and start ignoring bad orders, no matter who they come from. "I was just following orders" was never an acceptable excuse to do the wrong thing.
I agree, but they often are the ones who have the most to lose. They lose their job and then aren't able to pay rent that month/feed their family etc. A VP or probably even a middle manager taking a similar stand likely has cash saved up/secondary income/investments/other options to withstand this sort of change with fewer catastrophic results.
Re: Time to Take a Stand
#695Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree that this will not be helpful. The old-guard of Democratic Party hails from these hyper liberal areas (Fienstein, Schumer, Pelosi), and based on what we have seen so far, they aren't even showing a slightest hint of resistance to Trump. See the senate democrat's response to Trump nominees for example. Put enough pressure on them, they will at least form a semblance of resistance which can inspire and have…
Wide latitude has been given on cabinet appointments by the senate, historically. And also with a supreme court nominee looming, there's every reason for Democrats to not use their outrage on cabinet nominees where it won't matter anyway.
Re: Time to Take a Stand
#696Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Anyone in a position of power who took a look at Trump and didn't recoil with disgust needs to be exiled from civil society" We don't work like that. If we do the next one exiled will be you.
For some reason I'm thinking of a parable that goes like: "First they came for the Nazis"... Oh wait, maybe not. Because when we finally got around to fighting Nazis it was good fucking riddance.
Re: Time to Take a Stand
#697Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not in Syria and thus can only repeat what other people say, but I've heard that ISIS is committing genocide against Christians, Yazidis, and Shiites. The source of this information is John Kerry.
Exactly. Doesn't it make sense to prioritize those people who are under the most persecution in those countries?
Re: Time to Take a Stand
#698Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, it is supposed to unscaleable. This is how our house of representatives works! The idea is with-in each state there are districts. Representatives from a district are supposed to represent those people within the district. An exchange trader who lives in NYC probably have very different concerns than a farmer in an small district in Nebraska. It is actually a wonderful system when it works. We have grown as a n…
The limit law is something congress enacted. The Constitution has a much higher limit based on population. Granted I don't think the house could function with over 10K members but then again it would make gerrymandering impossible.
Re: Time to Take a Stand
#699Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd respect some of these people (like SamA, and Zuckerberg, and others) much more if they were consistent in their views. These millionaires/billionaires who supported Sec. of State Clinton during her election, fully knowing the loss of Muslim life her actions caused abroad, now virtue signaling about Trump -- I just don't know how to take them seriously.
I'm glad I'm not the only person that picked up on this. It's a little hypocritical to get outraged when the opposition does it and keep silent when your own party does the same thing.
In the age of a non stop stream of content with an unprecedented amount of choice, it can be difficult people to exert the discipline needed to consume in a method that creates a nuanced world view. People have jobs, kids, and things they'd rather do than confronting and synthesizing opposing viewpoints. It's just easier to wrap yourself in a bubble rather than change your worldview. The destruction of the era of responsible, sober journalism due to the economic realities and consumption habits of people is wreaking havoc in our political system. It doesn't help that there are inherent biases in many journalists themselves.
We've placed an increased burden on the American population to sort through a cacophony of bias to create the truth. Is it a small wonder than considering people never had to before, we're falling so short now?
Re: Time to Take a Stand
#700Earlier quoted context omitted.
People in the US have been outraged since Bush's response to 9/11. To torture, to Guantanamo, to black sites, to the invasion of Iraq, to drones, to all manner of things. If you're going to cherry-pick items, be honest about doing so, or come up with a supported thesis as to why your chosen points are different from all these others.
(deleted)
As for what you expect or would like Altman to express in his post, do you agree with his post and your issue is that it doesn't also address other points you'd like it to, or do you disagree with it entirely?