Republicans keep being massive hypocrites, and the press keeps letting them get away with it, because neither wants to admit the GOP’s real motivation is to maintain rich, straight, white Christian male supremacy.
If they actually cared about religious freedom, law and order, small government, or the Merrick Garland “rule”, they wouldn’t support the Muslim Ban, a serially criminal president*, concentration camps or ACB.
But they can’t openly say what they really want is a rigged system.
Lucky for them, the press doesn’t really want to talk about their hypocrisy. The press has almost as little interest in honest talk about rich, straight white Christian male supremacy as the GOP does.
If you're going to complain about "cancel culture", how do you define it?
Does it apply to online criticism? Losing a gig after a racist rant or ten? Getting ostracized for sexual harassment? Getting arrested for rape?
Does it distinguish between punching up and punching down?
Looking at these discussions through the lens of punching up vs punching down is clarifying. Most arguments against "political correctness", "incivility" and "cancel culture" are just attempts to stop punching up and defend punching down. Defending abuse from a high horse.
The phrase "punching up" is really suboptimal here.
Punching down has real consequences for the target. Punching up usually has few consequences. That's how power dynamics work. It's usually just complaining about abuse. In rare cases, it means consequences for abuse.
I'm sure people will accuse Princeton of "erasing history". That's backwards. Keeping Wilson's name meant ignoring the facts that disqualified him from the honor. Acknowledging history is the opposite of erasing it.
What they call erasing history is always really just people removing the whitewash. And it's striking how many public monuments and history books this applies to. Wilson, Columbus, Confederate generals, Jefferson, Washington...
The "erasing history" argument has a lot of problems, not least of which is that it's stupid. It's not like this erases Wilson from history textbooks. If monuments were simply how we learn about history, we'd need a hell of a lot more statues. With placards. Long placards.
This is the mentality that drives cops to respond to police brutality protests with more brutality. *They* get to decide if we’re safe from them, not us. It’s the abuser logic behind everything in this country that serves white supremacy.
Police brutality is a weapon of white supremacy. People who try to take that weapon away get that weapon pointed at them. The crackdown is white supremacy refusing to give up power, and the right to keep that power through violence and fear.
White supremacy is an occupying force. And the backlash to Kaep was never about respecting the flag. The occupation demands the right to maintain itself through violence.
Free speech, unless you criticize us
Freedom of religion, unless you have the wrong one
The right to vote, unless you're black or Hispanic
Justice, if you're a white male
Democracy, but only for us
That isn't democracy, it's minority rule. It's authoritarianism. And if you believe in it, everything Trump does to torch the real Constitution is justified. dailykos.com/stories/2017/8…
"To them, the government is legal and patriotic when it protects minority rule, and a lawless plot when it doesn't." dailykos.com/stories/2017/8…
Look, I wish the Democratic Party was on whole farther left. Moving it there is an important goal. But we won’t get there by pretending the modern GOP isn’t a racist, kleptocratic, theocratic, fascist dumpster fire. False equivalence is part of the problem, not a solution.
“In Europe, the Democrats would be a center-right party!”
Setting aside how Europe is always the comp (🤔), why do people say that like it’s a criticism of Democrats? It’s an indictment of *America*.
You won’t turn the US into Scandinavia by wishing away the American Right.