Forum Replies Created

Viewing 30 posts - 21,871 through 21,900 (of 47,661 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: tweets … 3/6 thru 3/12 #112211
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: sports & the Coronavirus (Rams, NBA, etc) #112207
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: This President has got to go #112202
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    And why-if you are so SURE Sanders would be the one who could beat Trump- would Yang, Bloomberg, Amy, Pete, Tim, all endorse Biden? And why would Warren not endorse Sanders ?

    Obviously, I can’t speak for ZN. But I can answer that one easily, from my own POV:

    The Dems see Sanders as a bigger threat to their own status/status quo than Trump and the GOP.

    BT is just exactly right. And btw the source of believing Sanders would beat Trump is not my personal beliefs. It’s basically every single poll about which Dem would beat Trump. That’s not me talking. That’s every single poll I’ve seen.

    Anyway why would those wishy-washy right-centrist pro-corporate Dems you name back another one of their own? Cause he’s another one of their own.

    Just consult your own feelings about Sanders. You apparently see him as this crazy radical. So do they.

    Meanwhile no one who backs Sanders–and it’s an amazingly large number–thinks he is radical. That’s just ordinary everyday FDR New Deal style social democracy of a kind that works everywhere it’s used.

    But the corporate world that owns the Dems part naturally sees him as a threat. Of course they do. He would cut back a lot of their power.

    Here’s an example of how this works. Do you know the profiles of the superdelegates that basically would determine the candidate in a brokered election? A high proportion of them are professional paid lobbyists who work for big oil, private insusurance, and so on.

    Naturally THEY see Sanders as radical cause he threatens the basis of their power.

    And so do those sub-candidates you listed for me. They too see Sanders as a threat to the lobbyist-dominated Dem party. It’s who and what they are.

    ….

    in reply to: virus news … (+ some dark humor) #112198
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: Rams new logo confirmed #112174
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Terez Paylor & Charles Robinson open the pod by breaking down the Twitter meltdown over the new Los Angeles Rams logo and how Charles might have helped the franchise in the long run. (00:27)

    in reply to: different political tweets … 3/11 & 3/12 #112171
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: tweets … 3/6 thru 3/12 #112170
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: This President has got to go #112159
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    I simply don’t think that he is capable of beating Trump. If OTOH you, in your heart, believe Biden has a better chance of beating Trump but won’t support him because of your belief in Sanders ideology, then I cannot respect that because that is simply a “statement” vote.

    I do believe Sanders would beat Trump and all the polls back it.

    For a thousand reasons, I don’t think Biden has ANY chance of beating Trump.

    Don’t want to speak for anyone, but, the sense I get from reading this board is that no one here believes Biden has even the slightest chance. I mean outside of you and maybe another.

    I could go further. Leaving me and you out of it, I don’t think anyoneelse here (based on my sense of things just from reading) even believes Biden is a worthy candidate. That’s based on his character and his policies.

    I am not arguing about that–not in this post anyway–just stating how myself and (I think) others see him. I get the impression that he is seen this way: Biden is identified with far too many simply bad policies, and as a person he does not have the mindset, abilities, or character to be a credible leader.

    So you don’t have to worry about people here making an “ideological choice” against a guy they otherwise know to be a solid candidate. Far from it. That is not what’s happening.

    in reply to: different political tweets … 3/11 & 3/12 #112155
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: sports & the Coronavirus (Rams, NBA, etc) #112152
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: tweets … 3/6 thru 3/12 #112149
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    from Joel Corry: “contracts … top defenders should target”

    https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/agents-take-here-are-the-contracts-jadeveon-clowney-byron-jones-and-other-top-defenders-should-target/

    (me note: Joel Corry is a former NFL agent & now a sports writer covering NFL contract issues for CBS. He’s very good & is basically the leader on this kind of topic).

    ILB Cory Littleton

    Contract package: $75 million for five years ($15 million per year)
    Overall guarantees: $40 million
    Fully guaranteed at signing: $33 million
    First three years: $48 million

    Several off-ball linebackers have reaped the benefit of C.J. Mosley dramatically changing the marketplace in free agency last year with his $17 million per year deal from the Jets ($85 million over five years). During last preseason and training camp, Myles Jack and Deion Jones signed four-year extensions with the Jaguars and Falcons averaging $14.25 million per year containing nearly $35 million in guarantees. The most recent data point is the four-year, $53.8 million extension (worth up to $56.8 million with salary escalators) Shaq Thompson received from the Panthers last December. Since the beginning of the 2018 season, Littleton has developed into a three-down linebacker excelling in pass coverage, which could lead to a strong market for his services.

    in reply to: different political tweets … 3/11 & 3/12 #112143
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: eliz warren drops out #112136
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    But for a guy that thinks he’s a ‘realist’ and pragmatic and all, you dont appear to have actually listened to actual black people much.

    I just said this to W…can we reign it in a bit? In terms of the tone we as posters take with one another.

    in reply to: eliz warren drops out #112133
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    We know whats hurting Bernie. Bernie didnt work for an African-American President.

    I didn’t vote for Biden because he worked for Obama. If I was black I would find your comment highly offensive. Not just because it is clearly racist but it also smacks of the very elitism that so many of us find discomforting with the far left. You discount black men and women who might just believe Trump can only be beaten by Biden; that Biden might be able to usher in a democratic controlled Senate; that Biden might be better for the country on issues that we all face. It doesn’t matter whether or not blacks are correct in their views. What matters is that whether you know it or not African Americans actually have VIEWS and OPINIONS. Whites do not have a monopoly on the ability to think. If you want to know what bothers most people about so called “progressives” just re-read the above quote. Its repugnant.

    I think you felt slighted as a Biden voter and lashed out at WV, W, but, I also don’t think you have real cause. Plus it’s a board thing, and given that I ask you to slow down on personalized accusations like the ones you’re making.

    I freely say some African-Americans political figures like Clyburn (who is a big pharma campaign money recipient) advocate policies that hurt most working african-americans. There are of course many african-americans saying that. Abundantly. So I have no more hesitation saying that myself than I have saying that whites who support Trump vote for policies that hurt most working whites.

    In fact I think you are throwing around the word “racist” in an irresponsible way.

    . https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/03/bernie-sanders-black-voters/607789/

    Jackson, Mississippi is where, in June 1963, the famous civil-right activist Medgar Evers—who led economic boycotts and voter-registration drives in the state—was murdered in his driveway by a white supremacist after an NAACP meeting. The city’s mayor is now Chokwe Antar Lumumba….

    When I asked Lumumba about how the primary process could have gone differently for Sanders, he stopped for a moment. Then he considered how Sanders performed in caucuses rather than primaries; perhaps if there were ranked-choice voting, as in the Jackson people’s caucus, Sanders would have won a larger share of black voters. But he kept coming back to a central theme: If only more people knew how radically different their lives could be—perhaps then they would join the revolution.

    Is Lumumba saying that (among many many african-american leaders saying that) bad? He is being racist? Does he deserve to be called a progressive ironically, with that word put in slighting, judgmental quotation marks? Obviously not. Are you going to tell him how you would feel about his comment if YOU were African-American? Obviously not.

    Let’s keep the board productive and refrain from throwing judgmental anger at one another in personalized ways. Debate candidates, parties, ideas, policies, beliefs, and movements. Don’t make that antagonistically personal.

    in reply to: different political tweets … 3/11 & 3/12 #112131
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: different political tweets … 3/11 & 3/12 #112127
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Stained Class Rose #SinglePayer #BernieOrBust@DEMS_R_GOP
    The difference between Republicans and Democrats:

    One kicks in the front door, kills you and steals everything.

    The other befriends you, gets you to put them in your will, buys a life insurance policy on you and then secretly poisons you.

    in reply to: different political tweets … 3/11 & 3/12 #112125
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Liza Featherstone@lfeatherz
    Perhaps it is a positive development that people now seem to feel that calling someone a “neoliberal” “corporate shill” “Establishment” or moderate” is as mean and aggressive as calling them a “cunt.”

    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: tweets … 3/6 thru 3/12 #112123
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: different political tweets … 3/11 & 3/12 #112121
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Paul Botts@Botts1Paul
    I don’t trust any of the results after Iowa. The system is too corrupt to work for the working class people. Both parties that run the elections are corrupt from the local level to the national level. We do not have free and fair elections.

    in reply to: tweets … 3/6 thru 3/12 #112119
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: tweets … 3/6 thru 3/12 #112118
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: the “Bernie’s people dominate negative tweets” myth #112117
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: US health care system costs 4X more than Canada’s M4A #112116
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    20 leading economists just signed a letter arguing Medicare for All would generate massive savings for American families

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/20-leading-economists-just-signed-191514939.html

    Twenty of the nation’s leading economists argued in favor of Medicare for All in an open letter that Business Insider first published on Tuesday.

    They argue that existing research suggests there would be massive savings and it would reduce waste in healthcare.

    “There’s been too much loose talk that Medicare for All is unaffordable. What’s really unaffordable is the current system,” signatory Gerald Friedman said in an interview.

    Twenty of the nation’s leading economists argued in support of Medicare for All in an open letter first published by Business Insider on Tuesday.

    “We believe the available research supports the conclusion that a program of Medicare for All (M4A) could be considerably less expensive than the current system, reducing waste and profiteering inherent in the current system, and could be financed in a way to ensure significant financial savings for the vast majority of American households,” the economists wrote in the open letter.

    “Most important, Medicare for All will reduce morbidity and save tens of thousands of lives each year,” the group of economists said.

    The letter was provided by Business for Medicare for All, an advocacy group pressing for universal healthcare in the US.

    The economists aren’t coming out in favor of a specific candidate, though some have individually consulted with Democratic presidential campaigns (at least one has endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders).

    Instead, they’re making the case that a government-run health insurance system would slash wasteful spending and generate massive savings for most Americans.

    Dr. Gerald Friedman, a professor at the University of Massachussetts Amherst, told Business Insider that the best argument for a universal healthcare system is its potential ability to rein in the skyrocketing costs of healthcare.

    “There’s been too much loose talk that Medicare for All is unaffordable,” Friedman said. “What’s really unaffordable is the current system. We spend about twice the average for affluent countries in the OECD on healthcare,” referring to the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development.

    Friedman also noted that increased spending often leads to worse health outcomes compared to other developed nations.

    Among the letter’s signatories are prominent progressive economists like former Labor secretary Robert Reich; Jeffrey Sachs, a leading expert on poverty; Gabriel Zucman and Emmanuel Saez, two professors at the University of California, Berkeley, who laid out plans for a wealth tax; and Darrick Hamilton, a professor of economics at the Ohio State University and a pioneer in economic inequality research.

    Medicare for All is the signature plan of Sen. Bernie Sanders, the remaining progressive candidate in the Democratic primary. It would set up a new government health insurance system that provides comprehensive benefits to Americans and toss out deductibles, co-pays, and out-of-pocket spending. Private insurance would be eliminated as well.

    Estimates for a system that ensures benefits on the scale Sanders is seeking is upwards of $30 trillion over 10 years. A recent study from the Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning organization, suggested it could increase the wages of workers and boost the development of small businesses.

    The proposal turned into an ideological faultline in the primary, dividing moderates like former Vice President Joe Biden who sought incremental measures to expand coverage and progressives such as Sanders calling to replace the existing system with something entirely new.

    In addition to Sanders, Sen. Elizabeth Warren also rolled out a plan to achieve universal healthcare within four years before dropping out of the race.

    Skeptics of Medicare for All argue it’s a progressive pipe dream that won’t be achieved anytime soon. They note it’d be an enormous lift politically even among Democrats, most of whom don’t support the idea, The New York Times reported.

    An ongoing poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation found that while a slim majority of the public supports Medicare for All, backing flips when respondents learn they could lose their private health insurance or pay more in taxes.

    The economists in the letter, though, say that “shifting the burden” onto taxation of wealthier households would “magnify savings.”

    “A system that cuts costs and shifts financing to income and wealth taxes will dramatically lower this burden, producing significant savings for workers and businesses,” they write.

    in reply to: OL talk, 2020 #112114
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    from PFF: Fixing the 10 worst offensive lines in the NFL
    https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-fixing-the-10-worst-offensive-lines-in-the-nfl

    LOS ANGELES RAMS
    In one of the biggest stories of the 2019 NFL season, the Rams’ offensive line went from strength to weakness almost overnight — it was a huge part of their regression after a 2018 Super Bowl run. The Rams aren’t in the best place to improve the line, either from a cap space or draft capital standpoint, and much of their improvement must come from within. Right tackle Rob Havenstein regressed unexpectedly after four strong seasons to start his career, so the first step is getting him back on track. Left tackle Andrew Whitworth is a free agent, though the 38-year-old is still among the better tackles in the league and he’s worth bringing back in the short-term. With no first-round pick, it will be difficult for Los Angeles to draft an instant starter, though UConn’s Matt Peart is a nice developmental option in the middle rounds, especially if they can bring Whitworth back for at least a year. The Rams’ rebuild will rely a lot on previously productive players returning to form, and center Brian Allen could make a jump, especially given our knowledge that years three and four are the most likely improvements for offensive linemen. If the Rams want a potential upgrade at center, Wisconsin’s Tyler Biadasz is an excellent scheme fit on Day 2, and he would at least add another body to the mix, as the Rams could move players around to find their ideal starting five for 2020.

    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Dave Dameshek is joined in Studio 66 by cornerback Aqib Talib! Shek and Aqib kibitz about playing with Peyton Manning (2:35), Jared Goff’s ability (4:31), his free agency status (10:27), the future of the Miami Dolphins (17:24), Dak Prescott’s contract (21:49) and where Tom Brady will play in 2020 (26:33)?

    in reply to: Rams get a 3rd-round compensatory pick #112111
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: tweets … 3/6 thru 3/12 #112110
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: tweets … 3/6 thru 3/12 #112106
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    from Bad Moon Rising: Racism, Anti-Semitism + the Toxic Bernie Bro Trope

    http://www.redwedgemagazine.com/online-issue/bad-moon-rising?fbclid=IwAR1xGYBnXDEGWzWhxgbAThYq4_NAJAMvRPvNBrwYaoF8QwcnelYKzTHc_EQ

    The point here is to examine the universality of the concept of “toxicity” and its elective affinity with “the Paranoid Style in American Politics”. In the last decade it has been used by all sides in the context of political debate. Someone may be referred to as a “toxic person”, sometimes an innocuous point about a really mean human being, but more often a pathologization. Two years ago, my former union struck against York University but found themselves hemmed in by a narrative that the Left was “toxic”, the ongoing discourse from the right wing of the union. So you literally had people who surreptitiously met with management, recorded in-camera meetings and openly encouraged scabbing, accusing union activists of “toxicity”, much like the employer.

    Yet “toxicity” is not a floating signifier. In the era of Covid-19 and anxious preppers, virus metaphors having become part of the everyday parlance of information technology with its disposability of human beings through the logic of the social industry. “Toxicity,” on one hand, could be shorn of meaning. On the other hand, it can be seen as going beyond de-humanization in order to render a human being as a walking contagion – in other words, as a Jew. And more to the point, a Jew who has not gone through the bourgeois-style assimilation of diction lessons to lose the “sing-songy” voice that middle class Jews in the fifties and sixties tried so desperately to lose. A Jew like Larry David, who like Dave Chappelle (in his pre Transphobia years, at least), people perhaps cringed at for the wrong reason. Or a Jew like Bernie Sanders. Or the many Jews who were for Jeremy Corbyn and specifically targeted – by other Jews no less – as “anti-Semites”. This reaches its apotheosis when German curators ban Jewish speakers for being in favor of the Boycott/Divestment/Sanctions (BDS) movement. In many ways, the very existence of Left-wing Anti-Zionist Jews (Deutscherites, if you will) allow Zionists, Jewish or otherwise, to participate in the grand game of anti-Semitism by shifting around its meaning. Zionism is predicated, after all, on a sort of “Judeo-Pessimism” not dissimilar to the implicit Afro-Pessimism that was a factor in the older black vote for Joe Biden.

    After all, as Terry Southern implies in his script for Dr. Strangelove, anti-communism predicated upon toxicity is a refraction of anti-Semitism. And the way it has been used against Jewish presidential candidate Sanders and the “Bernie Bros” is openly anti-Semitic, the most classic example being the CNN chyron asking whether Bernie Sanders or the fucking Coronavirus could be stopped. That this anti-Semitism isn’t obvious speaks to a broader issue both external to and internal to American Jewish communities in general, and the fissures developing between American liberalism and the Left. On the same night that a Nazi waved the Nazi flag at a Sanders rally in Arizona, the well-known fraud Elizabeth Warren was on the aforementioned network venting to Russiagate’s answer to Glenn Beck, Rachel Maddow, about “Bernie Bros”, making lurid allegations. Indeed, she sounded just like a Massachusetts-liberal version of the fascist military figures in Z and Dr. Strangelove. Not to mention that the animus of the online “Bernie Bros” never approached the gross level of anti-Semitism and anti-black racism often directed towards the Sanders campaign itself.

    A Sidetrack on “Standing”, Hilary Rosen + the telos of White Moderate Liberalism

    A few days after this sordid episode, Democratic Party operative and Biden supporter Hillary Rosen was on CNN alongside Sanders campaign co-chair Nina Turner. As most readers know, Rosen proceeded to have the unmitigated chutzpah to tell Ms. Turner that she was wrong about King’s indictment of “white moderates” in his “Letter From a Birmingham Jail.” What is more, Rosen told Ms. Turner she didn’t have the standing to “criticize Joe Biden using Martin Luther King”. In the self-serving myopia of former BP lobbyist Rosen, the white moderate was not to be feared so much as “brought around” from his “silence”. Thus Martin Luther King is magically transformed into a preacher of respectability politics. In reality, of course, King was pointing out that, in the grand scheme of things, the KKK may have been an immediate risk but white liberals who just wanted things to be “normal” were a greater barrier to emancipation. In what was referred to as an apology on Twitter, Rosen called Turner an “angry black woman”, later to delete the Tweet and tweet out another apology, pathetically drawing attention to herself by claiming Turner wouldn’t take her phone call.

    Rosen evidently thinks she has “standing” to question a Black woman’s right to invoke Martin Luther King against Joseph Biden. What is this “standing” that Rosen is speaking of anyway? Is it the a “standing” that only Black folks unaligned with the Russia/Trump/Commie/Fidelista/Bernie Bro candidate have? How is this related, for example, to Joy Reed’s anti-Semitic use of a “body language” expert to prove that Bernie is objectively disgusting? Or MSNBC contributor and Root editor Jason Johnson who had the audacity to call Black supporters of Sanders the equivalent of k**e lovers from the “island of misfit Black girls”? Of course this echoes the recently departed Chris Matthews who compared Sanders’ victory in Nevada to the Nazi occupation of France which happened during the eclipse of the French Popular Front, in when the French state had been governed by Leon Blum, a Jewish social democrat.

    Rosen, who is often billed as a “Democratic operative” is a perfect example of American liberalism’s degeneration. A founder of “Rock the Vote,” a proud insider who humblebrags about it this status in her official bio, she is a backroom dealer of capitalist realism. She has achievements to her credit, as an early advocate of funding AIDS research, a power broker behind the opposition to George W. Bush’s attempted constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Yet simultaneous to that, she helped destroy the music industry and give birth to “the age of Spotification”. She was head of the Recording Industry Association (RIAA) during the dying days of musicians being able to draw an income from their craft and presided over a massive shift in power from labour to capital. It is no accident that under her helm, music, well, started to suck. As Dave Marsh points out in Rock and Rap Confidential, “under Rosen’s watch, the RIAA launched its vicious war against music fans, making the words “file sharer” synonymous with “criminal.” Rosen shepherded the draconian Digital Millennium Copyright Act through Congress.”

    So what it is that gives Rosen the standing to basically call Nina Turner “uppity” is her experience “doing politics” the way liberals believe one does politics. Rosen sits in her lofty perch as someone who succeeded followed up her destruction of the music industry with lobbying for British Petroleum, Facebook, Viacom, and TransCanada Corporation, among other shady global criminal masterminds. The liberal establishment, indeed even the “left” or Warrenish wing of liberalism, is deathly afraid of any form of politics from below. In turn, they can make a living off other people’s suffering. But they see this just as another part of the “human condition” and thus they can “do right” by becoming a “progressive insider” – the kind who ends up in the tank for Biden after openly participating in an anti-Black, anti-Semitic and anti-communist campaign against the Sanders movement. Rosen, a queer Jewish woman and “lean-in” feminist, is allying with forces that, even on her own terms, don’t serve the “causes” of her Sorkinesque liberalism.

    This is due to her standing as a power broker. She attained this by subsuming some of the artisanal privilege musicians had into a new cultural accumulation regime, and then later sold her oratorical skills to the world’s worst polluter. This kind of standing allows her to walk among these thugs, knowing that in the wilderness of mirrors that constitutes “Washington, DC” as a totality, it’s thug life – but seriously. And the only way to really improve the lot of one’s community, the liberal thug tells themselves, is to be among the thugs and build transactional power, and insofar as that works for everything from progressive social issues and anti-censorship, AIDS funding, and the like, Rosen aligned themselves, to the NRA, Christian Fundamentalism, every intelligence service in the world, oil, fast food, etc. The wilderness of mirrors, or the “deep state” if you will, as I point out in Salvage, can be understood in the sense of Marx’s statement on the state as the the executive committee of the bourgeoisie. But this, as Marx points out, is akin precisely the the Hobbesian war of all against all, that together constitutes capital’s vanguard as a whole. And thus, there will be intrigues within this vanguard, different interests at play, but one has to be a part of it in order to have “standing”. They don’t see it as selling their souls. They are nowhere near as honest as the likes of Donald Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney, relishing power for its own sake.

    They think they are saving the world. And they think anything our side puts forward will inevitably end up in “totalitarianism”. Even if they share “policy goals”, obviously their political horizons differ even from the right-wing of social democracy in a profound sense. They don’t represent capital. Rather, even more so than the cynics around Trump, they personify capital.

    So it’s perfectly OK for them to rile up popular anti-Black or anti-Semitic – or homophobic, Islamophobic, generally racist, even regionalist – sentiment to make their point. As it’s just throwing harmless people red meat. They’re not like TRUMP, who is far too flagrant. They just aren’t above instrumentalizing sentiment, while perhaps financially supporting a group like, say, the ADL or the Human Rights Campaign to assuage their guilt.

    Joe Biden, after all, is exceptionally vulnerable on issues popular to the Democratic base far beyond Sanders’ supporters. Biden is not pro-choice, he is weasely about it and has been on record far more often criticzing Roe vs. Wade then staunchly supporting it. Whether he would enact such changes is less important than the fact that he doesn’t believe abortion is a choice. He, like many liberals, wants to limit abortion. There is no doubt of the legitimacy of Biden’s Black support, but as Elie Mystal points out in The Nation, it is largely due to transactional relationships with power brokers and a certain “celebrity” charisma. It cannot be denied that there is symbolic valiance to a white man who was willing to play second fiddle to a Black man.

    Rosen is the personification of capital in 2020. One doesn’t have to say “they’ll help elect Trump” as who knows, maybe that piece of shit Biden can beat the guy. Though I reckon he can’t. But in instrumentalizing the language of toxicity rooted in anti-Semitism, all the while attacking people of colour in and around the Sanders movement, including “The Squad”, they are contributing to a dangerous situation, a situation that threatens far more than the Sanders movement. They exist in a dyad with the Bannons and Stones of this world, each one accusing the other of collusion with this or that power, each riling up the popular racism, misogyny, homophobia and anti-Semitism of their various social bases and/or pandering to bourgeois sentiment within said clusters. The one thing they all agree on is the most important, the maintenance and continuation of capitalist social property relations.

    Ain’t No Fooling Around

    Leftists like to point out how absurd this all is, a politician with an objectively better record on gender, and certainly on abortion, is denounced strongly by NOW in spite of the high grades they gave him, higher than Biden on some measures. “People are in camps at the border and I can’t pay for my insulin but Bernie Bros were mean to me on the internet” or something along these lines. But it goes beyond that. The animus to Bernie and the people around him, for those who are responsible for, buy into, and thus reproduce the slanders about the Sanders movement is predicated on popular racism and anti-Semitism. Since Bernie is just a “white man”, one does not examine why his gruffness evokes discomfort. One is encouraged to feel this discomfort with his gruffness, yet this gruffness is proletarian gruffness in general, and Jewish gruffness in particular. And the same goes with Turner and “the Squad”, their ascribed identity being absolutely co-constitutive with their embodiment of the proletarian or at least downwardly mobile petit-bourgeois majority of Americans.

    This is why Sanders supporters on the internet are genuinely seen as a bigger deal than a swastika, or even the bombing of mosques, synagogues, churches, abortion clinics, Jewish Community Centres, labour union halls and so on. If you are willing to talk about Trump with regards to these shootings but unwilling to squarely examine the constitutive violence of the American system, it is not that you are “intentionally” as bad as they are. Rather you have signed what the late Marxist theorist Norman Geras called the “Contract of Mutual Indifference”. You are prepared to acknowledge tragedy but are afraid or unwilling to fight it when the species itself is at stake.

    There is implicit naturalization of Nazis interrupting Sanders events and white supremacist violence throughout society, even an implicit naturalization of Trump’s most xenophobic policies, like his concentration camps for migrants or the Muslim ban. All of these things are objectively more preferable to liberals, than electing Bernie Sanders, a moderate social democrat.

    So this absurdism is only absurd insofar as our reality is absurd, a context that the artist Anupam Roy suggests is impossible to represent. But it is an internal logic that in the “fishhook” theory that objectively unites liberals with fascism. This affinity is merely less hidden now. Even if it is disavowed.

    The classic era of right-wing thuggish movements from below instrumentalized by powerful forces has given way, for now, to the era of stochastic violence. The more anti-Semitic innuendo and coding there is about Sanders and his supporters, the more one should become concerned. These dynamics raise serious questions about his safety in the context of right-wing and fascist stochastic terrorism and state intrigue alike.

    But Bernie Bros were mean on the internet.

Viewing 30 posts - 21,871 through 21,900 (of 47,661 total)