-
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@nostrildamus said in US Politics:
Many things the left says about Trump are untrue. And many things they say about his record over the past four years are untrue. They have contributed more than their fair share to the poison running through American democracy today. But since November 3, Trump has fully lived down to the worst expectations of his critics.
Excellent summary.
Rubbish summary.
Many things the left says about Trump are untrue.
Show me. Then let me point you to the fact checkers on what Trump says.
-
Free speech is critically important to the functioning of a democracy, but it's not unfettered, and some types of speech are criminal, and consequently not protected. In particular, incitement to commit crimes (particularly violence) and conspiracy to commit crimes (i.e. two or more people planning crimes) are long-standing criminal offences.
There are also specific crimes around speech being used to incite the overthrow of a government in some manner. Cornell University has a database of US law, and this section seems highly relevant to recent activities. Advocating the overthrow of a government is in that list, as is rebellion or insurrection, since the definition of the latter includes incitement, not just any actions taken.
If Twitter (and Facebook) have reached a conclusion that Trump has potentially crossed that threshold, I can see why they removed him from their platform. Normally censorship is something governments do rather than private corporations, but in either case, it's not censorship to stop publishing messages and content which is actually criminal in its own right, not just unpopular. As a private corporation, the likely standard here if it reached a court would be preponderance of evidence, so more likely than not, rather than reasonable doubt as in a criminal case.
-
@nostrildamus said in US Politics:
Many things the left says about Trump are untrue.
Show me. Then let me point you to the fact checkers on what Trump says.
I'm not diving into that but it is possible that many things the left say about him are true and many things they say about him are untrue.
And are "the fact checkers" unbiased?
-
@JC said in US Politics:
@nostrildamus I think you’re being disingenuous. It doesn’t really count that Biden himself isn’t a radical leftist, because one thing we know about American politicians of all stripes is that it matters less who you are and more who you are beholden, and to. The soft left and mainstream Democrats have much quieter voices than the radicals. They won’t be dictating the agenda; that will be the authoritarians and the theoreticians. And, as ever, the pork-barrel operatives with their hands out, but that’s hardly a phenomenon solely of the left.
No, you are. I gave examples of actual people rather than waving around vague hard left phrases. Sheriden has deliberately brushed all the Democrat party as being effectively hard left, they are not. The power in the Democrats is/are currently centrist.
The soft left and mainstream Democrats have much quieter voices than the radicals.
Biden is in power, Pelosi was elected Speaker of the House. Their cabinet is full of Biden/Obama era people. Show me the hard left officials they chose.Sheridan has also implied the left media has lied as much as the Trump party, Trumps and Republicans. I want to see hard cold evidence for that. Sheridan has become a right-wing shrill for the Murdoch/Morrison government, even contaminating his Indonesian reputation to do so... I have spoken to Indonesian journalists about him, he has eroded his reputation there, and you can see what he is like/become if you watch him on Australian tv/news. I say this having been a reader of the Australian for 30 years, it has gone downhill so far and fast previous editors have spoken out about it. I enjoy reading conservative viewpoints with some degree of insight and evidence. IMO Sheridan lost that some time ago.
-
@booboo said in US Politics:
@nostrildamus said in US Politics:
Many things the left says about Trump are untrue.
Show me. Then let me point you to the fact checkers on what Trump says.
I'm not diving into that but it is possible that many things the left say about him are true and many things they say about him are untrue.
And are "the fact checkers" unbiased?
Also without getting into what is true / untrue, I would think that most of us would agree that the left don't give Trump any credit at all for many of the things he did well. For eg, his foreign policy record is actually not bad over the 4yrs he was in power, but you wouldn't ever hear the left say that.
But that's human nature. It's very difficult to give any level of praise to a total wankstain who is barely worthy of conversation.
-
@nostrildamus said in US Politics:
@JC said in US Politics:
@nostrildamus I think you’re being disingenuous. It doesn’t really count that Biden himself isn’t a radical leftist, because one thing we know about American politicians of all stripes is that it matters less who you are and more who you are beholden, and to. The soft left and mainstream Democrats have much quieter voices than the radicals. They won’t be dictating the agenda; that will be the authoritarians and the theoreticians. And, as ever, the pork-barrel operatives with their hands out, but that’s hardly a phenomenon solely of the left.
No, you are. I gave examples of actual people rather than waving around vague hard left phrases. Sheriden has deliberately brushed all the Democrat party as being effectively hard left, they are not. The power in the Democrats is/are currently centrist.
The soft left and mainstream Democrats have much quieter voices than the radicals.
Biden is in power, Pelosi was elected Speaker of the House. Their cabinet is full of Biden/Obama era people. Show me the hard left officials they chose.Sheridan has also implied the left media has lied as much as the Trump party, Trumps and Republicans. I want to see hard cold evidence for that. Sheridan has become a right-wing shrill for the Murdoch/Morrison government, even contaminating his Indonesian reputation to do so... I have spoken to Indonesian journalists about him, he has eroded his reputation there, and you can see what he is like/become if you watch him on Australian tv/news. I say this having been a reader of the Australian for 30 years, it has gone downhill so far and fast previous editors have spoken out about it. I enjoy reading conservative viewpoints with some degree of insight and evidence. IMO Sheridan lost that some time ago.
I dont agree with your view on this Sheridan article, I'd still maintain its a fair assessment.
But as a consumer of primarily Australian media for 20+yrs now, I would agree that there has a been a huge divergence. I used to read the Australian as the bastion of the centre, fair debate, well presented discussion on both sides. It has definitely lurched to the right, particularly regarding energy policy.
Its disappointing, as it leaves little media here that presents both sides. Certainly not SMH or the Tele, really only the AFR .
Internationally, the Economist is really the only thing I trust to present a fair assessment, and I'm sure someone here will tell me that I'm a mug for believing that too!
-
@booboo any decent ones should provide the source and you can check yourself.\
"it is possible that many things the left say about him are true and many things they say about him are untrue."
I don't doubt the left have said things about Trump that are untrue.
I object to journalists using misleading phrasing to imply one side is as bad as the other.
"Many things the left says about Trump are untrue" was deliberately written to brush serious investigation of the President under the table.
I personally don't have much truck with left-right divides (many people differ in how they view society, independence, and the creation and distribution of wealth), and I don't think Trump is essentially left-right, Republican or traitor Democrat...these labels may help some but they are usually included to avoid a serious investigation. First warning sign for me is when these terms are used without defining or contextualising them.
Take the case of Bernie Sanders-radical socialist? Not in some European countries. Hillary Clinton, leftwinger? Not in some parts of Europe or possibly Australia. NZ National Party, right-wing? Not when compared to the Australian Liberal Party or some of the National Party of Australia. And Sheridan is explaining US politics to Australians (I assume). -
@nostrildamus said in US Politics:
And Sheridan is explaining US politics to Australians (I assume).
To mostly conservatives, given the known readership of his paper
-
@voodoo it's a bit confusing for me now as threads have different posters contribute.
Fine, you think it is fair. I am glad you have a different opinion to me. And I am happy to disclose I may have an auto-bias against Sheridan. I am sure I enjoyed his foreign politics articles some years ago (or, perhaps I am turning into a dangerous socialist, perhaps even a neo-Hegelian).
I still think he uses crummy rhetorical devices and could have been more insightful.
I am overly interested in Trump because his PR/crowd control is totally unorthodox and verges on brilliance but in most other aspects he seems, IMO, to be inept. Particularly in who he hires. He may well be undone by that Trump junior video and Trump apparently wearing a boxing glove, Trump also had an amazing ability to avoid personal punishment but his love of being foremost/a celebrity keeps bumping up against his Stainless Steel Rat-like capacity to avoid accountability.Foreign affairs: in my humble opinion, the US has been close to nuclear war, and lost its importance with major allies and dumped others (the Kurds), something a traditional conservative government would never do. I grant the issues with China are complex and far-reaching, but I personally think the US has lost its standing and influence internationally. You may well disagree, your right. I'd be interested in what you think the major triumphs, are, I am sure there are some.
And yes it would be great to have a good conservative viewpoint to read, happy to take suggestions.
-
-
@Tim said in US Politics:
Buzzfeed. FFS. I despair for the Wests future when I read garbage like this.
Re Parlar. They were mugs to ever rely on Amazon
Amazon on Saturday kicked Parler off its Web hosting services. Parler, a social network favored by conservative politicians and extremists, was used to help plan and coordinate the January 6 attempted coup on Washington D.C. It has recently been overrun with messages encouraging “Patriots” to march on Washington D.C. with weapons on January 19.
-
@NTA said in US Politics:
@nostrildamus said in US Politics:
And Sheridan is explaining US politics to Australians (I assume).
To mostly conservatives, given the known readership of his paper
True, but it is the national paper! Apparently.
Australians confuse me, they seem to portray themselves as centrist or slightly left-wing on issues (whatever that may be) but vote right-wing. Perhaps my antennae need fixing, and I don't live in Queensland, which seems to have disproportionate political influence.
Which other state had a premier from Dannevirke NZ? -
@Tim said in US Politics:
Saw that.
We're now seeing where corporations think the point of accountability could be decided. Do AWS think reputational damage is the likely outcome of hosting Parler?
Do Parler think their aims to be a platform could result in legal damage? To the earlier point about gaining popularity: can they handle the administration retired to moderate content? How much responsibility is too much?
-
@nostrildamus said in US Politics:
Apparently.
Australians confuse me, they seem to portray themselves as centrist or slightly left-wing on issues (whatever that may be) but vote right-wing.The Federal department being a fingernail into conservative leadership - results in a lot of pandering to the right faction of the conservative coalition.
The issue is the progressives are almost identical. As you imply above: compared to the US, we are very narrow, politically
-
@nostrildamus said in US Politics:
@JC said in US Politics:
@nostrildamus I think you’re being disingenuous. It doesn’t really count that Biden himself isn’t a radical leftist, because one thing we know about American politicians of all stripes is that it matters less who you are and more who you are beholden, and to. The soft left and mainstream Democrats have much quieter voices than the radicals. They won’t be dictating the agenda; that will be the authoritarians and the theoreticians. And, as ever, the pork-barrel operatives with their hands out, but that’s hardly a phenomenon solely of the left.
No, you are. I gave examples of actual people rather than waving around vague hard left phrases. Sheriden has deliberately brushed all the Democrat party as being effectively hard left, they are not. The power in the Democrats is/are currently centrist.
The soft left and mainstream Democrats have much quieter voices than the radicals.
Biden is in power, Pelosi was elected Speaker of the House. Their cabinet is full of Biden/Obama era people. Show me the hard left officials they chose.Sheridan has also implied the left media has lied as much as the Trump party, Trumps and Republicans. I want to see hard cold evidence for that. Sheridan has become a right-wing shrill for the Murdoch/Morrison government, even contaminating his Indonesian reputation to do so... I have spoken to Indonesian journalists about him, he has eroded his reputation there, and you can see what he is like/become if you watch him on Australian tv/news. I say this having been a reader of the Australian for 30 years, it has gone downhill so far and fast previous editors have spoken out about it. I enjoy reading conservative viewpoints with some degree of insight and evidence. IMO Sheridan lost that some time ago.
First, I’m not familiar with Sheridan, so won’t be commenting on him. Perhaps I should have been a little clearer on the part of your comment I disagreed with, so I will be now. You said “ The contemporary Democratic party, led by septuagenarians who aren't Bernie, are NOT radical left”. And I responded that there are progressives, who will expect Biden to enact the agenda they believe they have been promised.
Among the elected these include the likes of Representatives Ocasio-Cortez, Bowman, Tlaib, Omar and Jones, but also activists like Alicia Garza and Michael Kazin. These people have every right to be heard and to use such influence as they have to effect the changes they believe are necessary. There is no doubt that many of their policies are radical. Tlaib and AOC’s public banking bill, AOC’s proposed 70% marginal tax rate, defunding and abolishing the Immigration Service, support for BDS and defunding the police are radical positions. What is disingenuous is pretending that Biden and Harris will be able to govern without including many of these.
-
@NTA said in US Politics:
@Tim said in US Politics:
Saw that.
We're now seeing where corporations think the point of accountability could be decided. Do AWS think reputational damage is the likely outcome of hosting Parler?
Do Parler think their aims to be a platform could result in legal damage? To the earlier point about gaining popularity: can they handle the administration retired to moderate content? How much responsibility is too much?
I think the Techs have mis-stepped to be honest. They had 230 to hide behind, but have chosen to moderate content. They can’t unfuck that back to virginity. They have demonstrated they can and will moderate, so the only question now is how well they do it. And deficiencies there will be actionable more often than not. They can expect a torrent of lawsuits based on their being either negligent or complicit, and they can’t defend their actions or inactions on the grounds of being too hard or not their responsibility because they have just demonstrated they can if they want.
-
A large problem any platform will run into if they don't remove anything or anyone is that the paradox of tolerance will squash their platform eventually because more reasonable people will leave because they get horrified by extremism, authoritarianism, nasty epithets etc., and go somewhere with less nazis.
US Politics