Comments
-
The American Gun Control DebateGiven the last and the current US presidents, and the recent propensity in the US and the world towards authoritarianism, I'd say keep the second amendment right where it is. — Tzeentch
Civilians with guns are not going to stop the US military, there have been a number of militia uprisings within the US in the last two decades and they have all been handily defeated by federal forces. This is just role-playing fantasy. -
The American Gun Control Debate"Few crimes are more harshly forbidden in the Old Testament than sacrifice to the god Moloch (for which see Leviticus 18.21, 20.1-5). The sacrifice referred to was of living children consumed in the fires of offering to Moloch...The gun is our Moloch." — Maw
-
Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West BankOk these have been up for 2 hours where are the mods
-
Currently ReadingWhat did you think of Smith and Suwandi? — Streetlight
I enjoyed them both very much, thanks for the recommendation. I found Smith's work very informative, albeit highly technical and dense at times, as you mention in your short review. Suwandi painted a clearer picture (she's a better writer too) that offered a more material understanding of some of the more abstract concepts Smith provided, e.g. concrete examples of global labor arbitrage, or labor flexibility, and the interviews she conducted with Indonesian factory managers, etc.. -
The Death of Roe v Wade? The birth of a new Liberalism?
With a simple majority vote (50 plus 1 from Kamala), Democrats could change the filibuster that would allow for a legislative codification of Roe v. Wade to pass with another simple majority, rather than the current rule that requires 60, which, to be clear, the Democrats will likely never achieve in decades. Democrats technically have the votes to accomplish the above, but nominal Democrats Manchin and Sinema have stated explicitly that they will not vote to end the 60 vote filibuster and there doesn't seem to be much pressure from Biden, who campaigned on the promise to codify Roe v. Wade, or from the Democratic party at large to get them to do so.
I can't help but compare the Democrats apathy towards their two congressional colleagues unwillingness to conform to party lines with the reaction to GOP congressman Madison Cawthorn's accusations that members of his party engage in Eyes Wide Shut orgies and coke binges; the subsequent photo and video leaks was certainly done by GOP operatives to punish an insubordinate party member.
It's all probably moot anyway, since whatever legislature the Democrats could pass would likely be struck down by a hostile Supreme Court. -
The Death of Roe v Wade? The birth of a new Liberalism?I'm certainly not laying all the blame on RBG. That would be absurd. Her culpability, however, is inescapable and I resent the hagiography that surrounds her, particular that which developed within the last decade of her life - spawned, in part due to her resistance to retire under Obama.
-
The Death of Roe v Wade? The birth of a new Liberalism?(1) The US Senate had a GOP-majority from 2011-2021; Moscow Mitch denied "44" one SC nominee in 2016 and there's no reason to believe he wouldn't have denied another in 2013-2014. (2) Dems have failed to codify protections for reproduction right's for over four decades. (3) As a member of a co-equal branch of government, no SC Justice is or has ever been obligated to resign her lifetime appointment for partisan political expedience – sexist double standard via hindsight bias! — 180 Proof
1) The GOP did not have a senate majority until 2014, not 2011. Democrats controlled the Senate under Obama from 2009-2013 during which Ginsburg, having recently undergone pancreatic cancer surgery, could have retired and safely been replaced by a liberal judge.
2) Yes maybe their inability to do so would have been a red flag for RBG to retire strategically. Of course the Democrats also suck, I'm happy to distribute blame beyond RBG. Like the sword of Damocles the Dems have dangled the GOP threat towards abortion rights for years as a paramount reason to vote for them. This is where the strategy has lead them.
3) This is simply not true, Breyer faced pressure to retire, and fortunately had the good sense to do so. Trump/GOP also worked to convince the ~80 year old Anthony Kennedy to retire and be replaced by a raging alcoholic Federalist Society member in his 50s, surely for overt political purposes. Nothing to do with sexism; I'm baffled by that connection. Regardless, she was a public servant within an increasingly partisan and increasingly powerful branch of Government and it was selfish to treat her lifetime appointment with such a self-serving attitude.
a proven champion of women's civil/human rights and tireless, life-long public servant, is fucking shameful, Maw. — 180 Proof
Yes wonderful, and due to her explicit stubbornness not only will we see a rollback of women's rights, likely gay rights, continued rollback of civil rights, etc., but Ketanji Brown Jackson, the fifth woman to serve on the Supreme Court, will likely be writing dissents for the rest of her career on the bench. What's really more shameful here? -
The Death of Roe v Wade? The birth of a new Liberalism?Christian Taliban — Baden
This Christian Evangelical movement predates the Taliban. It's completely home grown, no need to transpose it. -
The Death of Roe v Wade? The birth of a new Liberalism?GFY, man — 180 Proof
Obama met with Ginsburg in 2013 to encourage her to retire before the midterm election. Instead, she resisted pressure from the President and other liberals, remained on the bench, and the rest is history; she was replaced by Amy Coney Barrett who voted to overturn Roe v. Wade and roll back women's rights so that mothers had more rights than their daughters do today. That's inescapably RBG's legacy. She had the opportunity to retire and allow a Democratic President with a Democratic controlled senate pick her replacement. Instead she allowed egotistical arrogance to take precedence over political imperative. Had she died during her surgery for pancreatic cancer in 2009 Roe v. Wade would not have been overturned, given that Roberts likely sided with the liberal wing and the vote is 5-4, and therefore millions of women would have retained a fundamental bodily right (not to mention how the ruling places gay marriage, and contraceptives on the chopping block). I would much rather prefer a Supreme Court Justice die of cancer in her then mid-70s then the overturning of Roe v. Wade and the cataclysmic political and social consequences we're about to face. -
Currently ReadingCaliban and the Witch: Women, the Body, and Primative Accumulation by Silvia Federici
40% off Verso books until May 16th -
Currently Reading:up:
Imperialism in the Twenty-First Century: Globalization, Super-Exploitation, and Capitalism’s Final Crisis by John Smith -
Currently Reading@StreetlightX which should I start first Value Chains: The New Economic Imperialism or Imperialism in the Twenty-First Century
-
Currently ReadingIf you can, let me know how you find the Traverso book — StreetlightX
I'm a bit mixed on it. The thesis wasn't as compact as, say, Dienstag's Pessimism: Philosophy, Ethic, Spirit; it bounces around a lot between history of left-wing political defeat, memory, the relationship, both personal and philosophical, between particular Western Marxists, imagery (movies, art), Bohemianism. And I would say that at least 25% of the material was very thinly connected to melancholia. Otherwise, some of the material was certainly interesting, but I was left wanted a lot more.
The Mooers book sounds great, I'll add it to my Verso cart. -
Cancel Culture doesn't existIt's 2022 why are people still whining about cancel culture, go outside, breath fresh air, watch a movie, go to the bar and grab a beer.
-
Cancel Culture doesn't existInteresting, but quoting Maw on anything is about as useful as quoting one of those action man dolls with the pull cord on the back, and the other is yourself. — Isaac
Who are you? -
What are you listening to right now?Another awesome band. My aesthetics professor in Montreal actually played in a band with some of the Godspeed members. Weird guy, but a good philosophy professor and an ace trumpet player. — Seppo
That's very cool, yeah I love GY!BE, I saw them live in 2011 in Los Angeles - stood right in the front by Efrim. -
What Are You Watching Right Now?Just incredible R.I.P. I remember the opening to Blade Runner blowing my teenage mind in the mid-2000s
-
Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West BankThese people are dumb as hell and not worth the time
-
Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West BankImpressive numbers. So I took a look online myself. And what do I find but that the suicide bombings of Israeli citizens ran from 1989 to - you will never guess - 2008. Just a coincidence, I guess, that the dates you chose omitted the bombings. Coincidence, yes? — tim wood
I guess in your mad scramble to see how you could cover your ass through a Wikipedia search to make what amounts to an immaterial point, you missed the second chart showing that between December 1987 - May 2021 87% of the 14,000 dead were Palestinian. Here I'll post it again so you don't miss it
And the overall point is that it all is not simple. The to-date inexhaustible source of heat is the friction between the combined neighbors' desires to annihilate the Jews, and the Jews' desire not to be annihilated. Rodney King's lament, "Why can't we all just get along?" resonant here. And as long as they don't, bad things will happen, and that lamentable. And if and when they do decide to get along, the world will be a better place for all. — tim wood
Perfect example of vague moral equivocation. Maybe log off and turn on Sesame Street? Sounds like that's more your speed. -
Black woman on Supreme CourtJews make up about 2.4% of the American population but there have been eight Jews on the Supreme Court. Hell, 33% of the Supreme Court was Jewish up until Ginsberg's death. So do we think right-wingers are sincerely concerned about aligning political make-up (particularly non-electable positions) with demographic make-up (a stupid argument regardless), or are they just being racist fucks with bad faith concerns as is their M.O.
-
Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West BankThe apologists for the state of Israel are required to discuss the on-going apartheid in vague equivocations and abstractions. Even its common designation as a "conflict" obscures the reality of one-sided brutality and power. Sure, Israel may restrict and deny Palestinian movement, however, Palestinians might be "teaching their children that Jews murder Arab babies and drink their blood". Sure, sure, Israel forcefully seizes Palestinian property, appropriates land, and transfers Palestinians against their will, but "have the Palestinians made any substantive efforts to live peacefully with the Israelis?" Which is worse? Who is to say?! I mean, yeah ok, from 2008 - 2020, the Israeli government killed ~22x as many Palestinians as the number of Israeli's killed, "but have they [Palestinians] not earned it many times over? Or even can the Israelis afford to be less vigilant?"
The below charts divulge the palpable one-sidedness of the "conflict", the atrocity of which stems all the way back to 1917 with the Balfour Declaration. Disputants can only hide behind aforementioned moral equivocations to mask their historical and contemporary ignorance combined with a general stupidity.
Maw
Start FollowingSend a Message
- Other sites we like
- Social media
- Terms of Service
- Sign In
- Created with PlushForums
- © 2025 The Philosophy Forum