USPOL: Pulitzer Feeling Increasingly Out Of Place In New York Times Office

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USPOL: Pulitzer Feeling Increasingly Out Of Place In New York Times Office

«‹›995 »

Car Hater: May 7, 2007; wolf. bike.
Wolf. Bike.
Wolf! Bike!
WolfBike!
WolfBike!
ARROOOOOO!

Koalas March posted:

Lmao same and I'm not even ashamed. gently caress your founding slaveowners and rapists, gently caress your Bushes and your racist Lincolns. FDR and Trddy were aight, but I hope I never see a cis straight white male as President again in my lifetime.

How about Princeps Civitas of The Great Lakes Federation? I promise to make Detroit the new cradle of civilization.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:21

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 23, 2024 07:54

Red and Black: Sep 5, 2011

biracial bear for uncut posted:

How about some of you dumb mother fuckers actually read the interview Ta-Nehisi Coates had with Obama where he asked him about this very poo poo you're arguing about (this is not directed at KM, to be clear).

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/ta-nehisi-coates-obama-transcript-ii/511133/

quote:

Coates: But don�t they have some level of distrust towards you? I mean, that�s what I�m hearing: They don�t trust you to ultimately follow through. And isn�t that kind of the mind-set that the activist has to have?

Obama: Well, I think, yes. Which is why I don�t get too hurt. I mean, I think there is a benefit to wanting to hold power�s feet to the fire until you actually see the goods. I get that. And I think it is important. And frankly, sometimes it�s useful for activists just to be out there to keep you mindful and not get complacent, even if ultimately you think some of their criticism is misguided.

I�ll give you an example that�s outside the issues of social justice, but the criticism that some on the left consistently have given us around drone strikes. The truth is that this technology really began to take off right at the beginning of my presidency. And it wasn�t until about a year, year and a half in where I began to realize that the Pentagon and our national-security apparatus and the CIA were all getting too comfortable with the technology as a tool to fight terrorism, and not being mindful enough about how that technology is being used and the dangers of a form of warfare that is so detached from what is actually happening on the ground. And so we initiated this big process to try to get it in a box, and checks and balances, and much higher standards about when they�re used. But the truth is that, in trying to get at terrorists who are in countries that either are unwilling or unable to capture those terrorists or disable them themselves, there are a lot of situations where the use of a drone is going to result in much fewer civilian casualties and much less collateral damage than if I send in a battalion of marines. And I think right now we probably have the balance about right.

Now, you wouldn�t know that if you talked to Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International or some of the international activist organizations. Certainly you wouldn�t know that if you were talking to some of the writers who criticize our drone policy. But I�ve actually told my staff it�s probably good that they stay critical of this policy, even though I think right now we�re doing the best that we can in a dangerous world with terrorists who would gladly blow up a school bus full of American kids if they could. We probably have got it about right. But if suddenly all those organizations said, �Okay, the Obama administration�s got it right, and we don�t have a problem here,� the instinct towards starting to use it more, and then some of those checks and balances that we�ve built up starting to decay�that�s probably what would happen. So there�s an example of where I think, even if the criticism is not always perfectly informed and in some cases I would deem unfair, just the noise, attention, fuss probably keeps powerful officials or agencies on their toes. And they should be on their toes when it comes to the use of deadly force.

Coates: This actually ties right back in. I wanted to ask you about it, so I�m glad you brought that up. You know, you�re a great�and I don�t want this to come of as a �gotcha� question, I want to have a discussion here about this to the extent that we have time, a discussion about this�

Ctrl-F shows this as the only exchange involving drones. Is there another one? Cause the example I'm looking at above more or less vindicates TNC's critics. He let Obama drive the narrative on drone strikes, and didn't even call him out on his condescending dismissal of human rights groups.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:22

Der Waffle Mous: Nov 27, 2009; In the grim future, there is only commerce.

IDK I'm pretty sure West will be fine from the criticism he's getting here.

Brother Trump and Brother Hannity'll have his back.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:23

joepinetree: Apr 5, 2012

The best part about this West-Coates debate is that it makes it clear who has actually read Malcolm X, Coates and West, and who just knows that Coates (who, by the way, voted for Sanders) likes Obama, West likes Sanders, and therefore this must be "centrist-leftist" fight version 1000.

Before people continue this primary chat by proxy nonsense, here's what you have to understand.

Malcolm X's actual writing (as opposed to the view that people have of him) places American and European colonialism and imperialism at the root of all race relations:

http://www.aaihs.org/malcolm-x-and-anti-imperialist-thought/

quote:

Those African Americans who saw their plight as a domestic affair would continue to view themselves as a minority. Those who looked beyond U.S. shores would identify themselves as members of �dark mankind.� The shift to �human rights� signaled this reorientation. Civil rights campaigns left African Americans at the mercy of American legal institutions. By contrast, Malcolm argued, the struggle for human rights enabled independent Africa, Asia, and Latin America to intercede on black America�s behalf at the United Nations.

Now, if Coates was just trying to write about domestic race relations, that would have been one thing. But what Coates goes beyond that. Chapter 4 of "We Were Eight Years in Power" is called the "Legacy of Malcolm X." It's a chapter subtitled "His Vision Lives On in Barack Obama." Why does Malcolm X, who thought that Anti-Imperialism should be the root of Black liberation, have Obama as the fulfillment of his vision?

Here's Coates on page 104 and 105:

quote:

And then I thought about the luxuries that I, and black people writ large, today enjoy. In his Autobiography, Malcolm harks back to his time in middle school, when he was one of the top students in his school and made the mistake of telling his teacher he wanted to be a lawyer. �That�s no realistic goal for a friend of the family,� Malcolm�s teacher told him. Thinking back on that, Malcolm says,

My greatest lack has been, I believe, that I don�t have the kind of academic education I wish I had been able to get � I do believe that I might have made a good lawyer.

What animated Malcolm�s rage was that for all his intellect, and all his ability, and all his reinventions, as a black man in America, he found his ambitions ultimately capped. The right of self-creation had its limits then. But not anymore. Obama became a lawyer, and created himself as president, out of a single-parent home and illicit drug use.

It's as a response to this that West's article was written. Coates sees Obama as the embodiment of Malcolm X's vision because Malcolm X wrote about wanting to be a lawyer and being denied that opportunity, one that Obama was able to achieve. That is why West writes:

quote:

Unfortunately, Coates� allegiance to Obama has produced an impoverished understanding of black history. He reveals this when he writes: �Ossie Davis famously eulogized Malcolm X as �our living, Black manhood� and �our own Black shining prince.� Only one man today could bear those twin honorifics: Barack Obama.�

This gross misunderstanding of who Malcolm X was � the greatest prophetic voice against the American Empire � and who Barack Obama is � the first black head of the American Empire � speaks volumes about Coates� neoliberal view of the world.

It is a fundamentally fair critique of Coates. Malcolm X wrote extensively about Imperialism as the root of domestic race relations. Malcolm X wrote extensively about how the starting point to fixing American race relations should be the formation of an alliance of oppressed people domestically and internationally. In his book Coates reduced Malcolm X to someone frustrated by not being allowed to be a lawyer, and that Obama was the fulfillment of that vision. West's critique of Coates' discussion of Malcolm X is inherently fair and accurate. You may disagree with Malcolm X himself, but there is nothing to question about West's point here. And then West goes on to say that this is part of the sort of neoliberal vision that sees racism as separate from imperialism. At which point you may think that you disagree with West's conception of Neoliberalism, which, fine, but then make that case. But it's obvious that people aren't interested in discussing this. They are interested in continuing their online petty Sanders proxy flame wars.

As for Obama's need to compromise, I'd love to see how the Honduras coup, the blocking of the minimum wage increase in Haiti, the wiretapping of Latin American leaders, the Libyan intervention, the Yemen atrocities or the multiple drone strikes were parts of this need to compromise, as opposed to being part of sincerely held policy positions in support of the empire.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:24

Koalas March: May 21, 2007

self unaware posted:

actually saying you're done with cornell west because he critisized TNC and obama is pretty much the definition of fragility

especially considering his history and contributions

or maybe as a black person who has been accused of not being 'black enough' by yts, I don't agree with him and I am loving done. like context is a thing dude. The things he has are personally offensive, wrong, and incredibly misguided at best and being offended/refusing to deal with colorism isn't the same thing as white fragility. to meet the criteria you have be a white person who reacts negatively to a minimal amount of racial stress. I, a black person in america, am under a poo poo ton of racial stress daily. me refusing to deal with more is self care, not loving fragility and it's so hosed up that you'd equate the two I'm an confident that you don't know poo poo about race in this country or what it's like to poc so keep my goddamn name out our mouth from here on out

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:24

Some Pinko Commie: Jun 9, 2009; CNC! Easy as 1️⃣2️⃣3️⃣!

Chomskyan posted:

Ctrl-F shows this as the only exchange involving drones. Is there another one? Cause the example I'm looking at above more or less vindicates TNC's critics. He let Obama drive the narrative on drone strikes, and didn't even call him out on his condescending dismissal of human rights groups.

I was talking about the broader criticisms of Obama not doing "enough" while he was President (the discussion in this thread at the time I posted that link), not the one issue of his policy regarding Drones.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:25

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Lightning Knight posted:

What? What does that have to do with what Kilroy said?

Any time anyone brings up "we should focus on making sure we have minority candidates and representation in progressive movements/socialism" it is immediately met with "but why can't we just focus on having good candidates? " as if these things are mutually exclusive, or that there aren't literally tens of thousands of progressive/socialist minorities who could and would run for office, or that somehow tons of white dudes won't still find their way into government just fine.

Anyway if we "just" focus on having good candidates POC are already going to be over-represented because they punch way above their weight in that category. What I'm saying here is that Nina Turner needs to take a shot at the Democratic nomination for President in 2020. And she needs to win.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:27

90s Rememberer: Nov 30, 2017; by R. Guyovich

Koalas March posted:

The things he has are personally offensive, wrong, and incredibly misguided at best and being offended/refusing to deal with colorism isn't the same thing as white fragility. to meet the criteria you have be a white person who reacts negatively to a minimal amount of racial stress. I, a black person in america, am under a poo poo ton of racial stress daily. me refusing to deal with more is self care, not loving fragility and it's so hosed up that you'd equate the two I'm an confident that you don't know poo poo about race in this country or what it's like to poc so keep my goddamn name out our mouth from here on out

How about don't post in a debate and discussion forum if you don't want to debate and discuss. Nobody is forcing you to sit here and defend bad opinions.

And don't call people out for fragility if you're living in a glass house for that matter.

I'm sorry Cornell West personally offended you and you feel he's wrong or misguided. He's still one of the greatest black thinkers of the 21st century even if he rubs up against your horrifically bad "obama should be president for life!" take.

Maybe the misguided offensive wrong one is you?

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:27

Der Waffle Mous: Nov 27, 2009; In the grim future, there is only commerce.

When the great ghost dance is complete and turtle island is returned to its rightful stewards I promise things will be dealt with equitably.

White people will be offered a boat ride to Bremen to be with their people. Otherwise they will be welcome to stay in one of our many "gated" "communities".

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:28

Lightning Knight: Feb 24, 2012; Pray for Answer

Grapplejack posted:

Whoa lk is a white dude?

I'm of mixed race Latino background and I have a Spanish first and last name but I effectively pass as white and my background is conservative suburban. Make your own conclusions, I have experienced racism but nothing to the level of most other Hispanic people.

Kilroy posted:

Anyway if we "just" focus on having good candidates POC are already going to be over-represented because they punch way above their weight in that category. What I'm saying here is that Nina Turner needs to take a shot at the Democratic nomination for President in 2020. And she needs to win.

Turner/Ellison or Ellison/Turner 2020.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:32

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

While we're on the subject:

Kilroy posted:

And what the gently caress business does a rich white lawyer have running for state office, as a Democrat, in loving Alabama? This should raise eyebrows.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:33

Nonsense: Jan 26, 2007

TNC quit twitter like Keith Olbermann quit politics.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:33

Some Pinko Commie: Jun 9, 2009; CNC! Easy as 1️⃣2️⃣3️⃣!

some rereg dipshit arguing in bad faith posted:

How about don't post in a debate and discussion forum if you don't want to debate and discuss. Nobody is forcing you to sit here and defend bad opinions.

And don't call people out for fragility if you're living in a glass house for that matter.

I'm sorry Cornell West personally offended you and you feel he's wrong or misguided. He's still one of the greatest black thinkers of the 21st century even if he rubs up against your horrifically bad "obama should be president for life!" take.

Maybe the misguided offensive wrong one is you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPDpcYEdiOg

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:33

Lightning Knight: Feb 24, 2012; Pray for Answer

joepinetree posted:

Coates (who, by the way, voted for Sanders)

This is actually a pretty good post in my opinion but this part makes me lol because I didn't know this and it's funny as gently caress.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:35

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

Der Waffle Mous posted:

When the great ghost dance is complete and turtle island is returned to its rightful stewards I promise things will be dealt with equitably.

White people will be offered a boat ride to Bremen to be with their people. Otherwise they will be welcome to stay in one of our many "gated" "communities".

Hey now. Some of us belong in bogs in Ireland or Russia, not bogs in Germany. :colbert:

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:35

Koalas March: May 21, 2007

Please don't quote the rereg, I am out here trying to live my best life 😂😂😂

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:36

Lightning Knight: Feb 24, 2012; Pray for Answer

Der Waffle Mous posted:

When the great ghost dance is complete and turtle island is returned to its rightful stewards I promise things will be dealt with equitably.

White people will be offered a boat ride to Bremen to be with their people. Otherwise they will be welcome to stay in one of our many "gated" "communities".

pls have mercy and send me somewhere with cheese and bacon. :ohdear:

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:36

RuanGacho: Jun 20, 2002; "You're gunna break it!"

Nonsense posted:

TNC quit twitter like Keith Olbermann quit politics.

That doesn't really scan because politics is a necessary evil where Twitter is a parasite on the human condition.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:37

Red and Black: Sep 5, 2011

biracial bear for uncut posted:

I was talking about the broader criticisms of Obama not doing "enough" while he was President (the discussion in this thread at the time I posted that link), not the one issue of his policy regarding Drones.

Ok but this is a West-vs-Coates slapfight where West is criticizing Coates on specific issues like drones:

quote:

Coates praises Obama as a �deeply moral human being� while remaining silent on the 563 drone strikes, the assassination of US citizens with no trial, the 26,171 bombs dropped on five Muslim-majority countries in 2016 and the 550 Palestinian children killed with US supported planes in 51 days, etc. He calls Obama �one of the greatest presidents in American history,� who for �eight years ... walked on ice and never fell.�

You seem to be more familiar with Coates writings than me so maybe you can address this criticism?

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:38

Der Waffle Mous: Nov 27, 2009; In the grim future, there is only commerce.

Lightning Knight posted:

pls have mercy and send me somewhere with cheese and bacon.

Don't worry the Canadian/Wisconsonite diaspora will be great.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:38

botany: Apr 27, 2013; by Lowtax

joepinetree posted:

Now, if Coates was just trying to write about domestic race relations, that would have been one thing. But what Coates goes beyond that. Chapter 4 of "We Were Eight Years in Power" is called the "Legacy of Malcolm X." It's a chapter subtitled "His Vision Lives On in Barack Obama." Why does Malcolm X, who thought that Anti-Imperialism should be the root of Black liberation, have Obama as the fulfillment of his vision?

Here's Coates on page 104 and 105:

It's as a response to this that West's article was written. Coates sees Obama as the embodiment of Malcolm X's vision because Malcolm X wrote about wanting to be a lawyer and being denied that opportunity, one that Obama was able to achieve. That is why West writes:

It is a fundamentally fair critique of Coates. Malcolm X wrote extensively about Imperialism as the root of domestic race relations. Malcolm X wrote extensively about how the starting point to fixing American race relations should be the formation of an alliance of oppressed people domestically and internationally. In his book Coates reduced Malcolm X to someone frustrated by not being allowed to be a lawyer, and that Obama was the fulfillment of that vision. West's critique of Coates' discussion of Malcolm X is inherently fair and accurate. You may disagree with Malcolm X himself, but there is nothing to question about West's point here.

except both you and west are missing the point. TNC cites ossie davis. when ossie davis talked about malcolm x, he didn't talk about his political analysis of imperialism. he called him "our manhood, our living black manhood". he later explained this as an answer to a letter to the editor:

quote:

Q: Why did you eulogize Malcolm X?

A: You are not the only person curious to know why I would eulogize a man like Malcolm X. Many who know and respect me have written letters. Of these letters I am proudest of those from a sixth-grade class of young white boys and girls who asked me to explain. I appreciate your giving me this chance to do so.

You may anticipate my defense somewhat by considering the following fact: no Negro has yet asked me that question. (My pastor in Grace Baptist Church where I teach Sunday School preached a sermon about Malcolm in which he called him a "giant in a sick world.") Every one of the many letters I got from my own people lauded Malcolm as a man, and commended me for having spoken at his funeral.

At the same time -- and this is important -- most of them took special pains to disagree with much or all of what Malcolm said and what he stood for. That is, with one singing exception, they all, every last, black, glory-hugging one of them, knew that Malcolm -- whatever else he was or was not -- Malcolm was a man!

White folks do not need anybody to remind them that they are men. We do! This was his one incontrovertible benefit to his people.

Protocol and common sense require that Negroes stand back and let the white man speak up for us, defend us, and lead us from behind the scene in our fight. This is the essence of Negro politics. But Malcolm said to hell with that! Get up off your knees and fight your own battles. That's the way to win back your self-respect. That's the way to make the white man respect you. And if he won't let you live like a man, he certainly can't keep you from dying like one!

Malcolm, as you can see, was refreshing excitement; he scared hell out of the rest of us, bred as we are to caution, to hypocrisy in the presence of white folks, to the smile that never fades. Malcolm knew that every white man in America profits directly or indirectly from his position vis-�-vis Negroes, profits from racism even though he does not practice it or believe in it.

He also knew that every Negro who did not challenge on the spot every instance of racism, overt or covert, committed against him and his people, who chose instead to swallow his spit and go on smiling, was an Uncle Tom and a traitor, without balls or guts, or any other commonly accepted aspects of manhood!

Now, we knew all these things as well as Malcolm did, but we also knew what happened to people who stick their necks out and say them. And if all the lies we tell ourselves by way of extenuation were put into print, it would constitute one of the great chapters in the history of man's justifiable cowardice in the face of other men.

But Malcolm kept snatching our lies away. He kept shouting the painful truth we whites and blacks did not want to hear from all the housetops. And he wouldn't stop for love nor money.

You can imagine what a howling, shocking nuisance this man was to both Negroes and whites. Once Malcolm fastened on you, you could not escape. He was one of the most fascinating and charming men I have ever met, and never hesitated to take his attractiveness and beat you to death with it. Yet his irritation, though painful to us, was most salutary. He would make you angry as hell, but he would also make you proud. It was impossible to remain defensive and apologetic about being a Negro in his presence. He wouldn't let you. And you always left his presence with the sneaky suspicion that maybe, after all, you were a man!

But in explaining Malcolm, let me take care not to explain him away. He had been a criminal, an addict, a pimp, and a prisoner; a racist, and a hater, he had really believed the white man was a devil. But all this had changed. Two days before his death, in commenting to Gordon Parks about his past life he said: "That was a mad scene. The sickness and madness of those days! I'm glad to be free of them."

And Malcolm was free. No one who knew him before and after his trip to Mecca could doubt that he had completely abandoned racism, separatism, and hatred. But he had not abandoned his shock-effect statements, his bristling agitation for immediate freedom in this country not only for blacks, but for everybody.

And most of all, in the area of race relations, he still delighted in twisting the white man's tail, and in making Uncle Toms, compromisers, and accommodationists -- I deliberately include myself -- thoroughly ashamed of the urbane and smiling hypocrisy we practice merely to exist in a world whose values we both envy and despise.

But even had Malcolm not changed, he would still have been a relevant figure on the American scene, standing in relation as he does, to the "responsible" civil rights leaders, just about where John Brown stood in relation to the "responsible" abolitionists in the fight against slavery. Almost all disagreed with Brown's mad and fanatical tactics which led him foolishly to attack a Federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry, to lose two sons there, and later to be hanged for treason.

Yet, today the world, and especially the Negro people, proclaim Brown not a traitor, but a hero and a martyr in a noble cause. So in future, I will not be surprised if men come to see that Malcolm X was, within his own limitations, and in his own inimitable style, also a martyr in that cause.

But there is much controversy still about this most controversial American, and I am content to wait for history to make the final decision.

But in personal judgment, there is no appeal from instinct. I knew the man personally, and however much I disagreed with him, I never doubted that Malcolm X, even when he was wrong, was always that rarest thing in the world among us Negroes: a true man.

And if, to protect my relations with the many good white folks who make it possible for me to earn a fairly good living in the entertainment industry, I was too chicken, too cautious, to admit that fact when he was alive, I thought at least that now, when all the white folks are safe from him at last, I could be honest with myself enough to lift my hat for one final salute to that brave, black, ironic gallantry, which was his style and hallmark, that shocking zing of fire-and-be-damned-to-you, so absolutely absent in every other Negro man I know, which brought him, too soon, to his death.

ossie davis talked that way about malcolm x because the man gave black people a way to feel proud of themselves, to stand up and claim their rightful place. his analysis of imperialism has little to do with this. it is absolutely appropriate to compare him in this regard to obama, in a piece on the symbolic value of the obama presidency for black people.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:39

TheScott2K: Oct 26, 2003; I'm just saying, there's a nonzero chance Trump has a really toad penis.

The recount for the deciding vote in the VA House is going on today. The republican was up by 10 and is now up by 4.

https://twitter.com/JWPascale/status/943202491717562369

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:41

botany: Apr 27, 2013; by Lowtax

self unaware posted:

How about don't post in a debate and discussion forum if you don't want to debate and discuss. Nobody is forcing you to sit here and defend bad opinions.

And don't call people out for fragility if you're living in a glass house for that matter.

I'm sorry Cornell West personally offended you and you feel he's wrong or misguided. He's still one of the greatest black thinkers of the 21st century even if he rubs up against your horrifically bad "obama should be president for life!" take.

Maybe the misguided offensive wrong one is you?

oh my god shut the gently caress up

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:41

Democrazy: Oct 16, 2008; If you're not willing to lick the boot, then really why are you in politics lol? Everything is a cycle of just getting stomped on so why do you want to lose to it over and over, just submit like me, I'm very intelligent.

joepinetree posted:

The best part about this West-Coates debate is that it makes it clear who has actually read Malcolm X, Coates and West, and who just knows that Coates (who, by the way, voted for Sanders) likes Obama, West likes Sanders, and therefore this must be "centrist-leftist" fight version 1000.

Before people continue this primary chat by proxy nonsense, here's what you have to understand.

Malcolm X's actual writing (as opposed to the view that people have of him) places American and European colonialism and imperialism at the root of all race relations:

http://www.aaihs.org/malcolm-x-and-anti-imperialist-thought/

Now, if Coates was just trying to write about domestic race relations, that would have been one thing. But what Coates goes beyond that. Chapter 4 of "We Were Eight Years in Power" is called the "Legacy of Malcolm X." It's a chapter subtitled "His Vision Lives On in Barack Obama." Why does Malcolm X, who thought that Anti-Imperialism should be the root of Black liberation, have Obama as the fulfillment of his vision?

Here's Coates on page 104 and 105:

It's as a response to this that West's article was written. Coates sees Obama as the embodiment of Malcolm X's vision because Malcolm X wrote about wanting to be a lawyer and being denied that opportunity, one that Obama was able to achieve. That is why West writes:

It is a fundamentally fair critique of Coates. Malcolm X wrote extensively about Imperialism as the root of domestic race relations. Malcolm X wrote extensively about how the starting point to fixing American race relations should be the formation of an alliance of oppressed people domestically and internationally. In his book Coates reduced Malcolm X to someone frustrated by not being allowed to be a lawyer, and that Obama was the fulfillment of that vision. West's critique of Coates' discussion of Malcolm X is inherently fair and accurate. You may disagree with Malcolm X himself, but there is nothing to question about West's point here. And then West goes on to say that this is part of the sort of neoliberal vision that sees racism as separate from imperialism. At which point you may think that you disagree with West's conception of Neoliberalism, which, fine, but then make that case. But it's obvious that people aren't interested in discussing this. They are interested in continuing their online petty Sanders proxy flame wars.

This is a good and interesting post.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:41

Some Pinko Commie: Jun 9, 2009; CNC! Easy as 1️⃣2️⃣3️⃣!

Chomskyan posted:

Ok but this is a West-vs-Coates slapfight where West is criticizing Coates on specific issues like drones:

Oh, I see. You didn't catch up with the rest of the thread before quoting a post.

It's okay. It happens.

The discussion isn't about specific issues like drones, it's West missing Coates's entire point and shouting into an echo chamber.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:41

Democrazy: Oct 16, 2008; If you're not willing to lick the boot, then really why are you in politics lol? Everything is a cycle of just getting stomped on so why do you want to lose to it over and over, just submit like me, I'm very intelligent.

Kilroy posted:

While we're on the subject:

Because the Democratic voters of Alabama picked him in a primary.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:42

Lightning Knight: Feb 24, 2012; Pray for Answer

Democrazy posted:

Because the Democratic voters of Alabama picked him in a primary.

Jones is far enough into milkshake duck territory that I'm starting to worry, he really is a clueless old white dude and it shows in his approach to politics and rhetoric. Here's hoping he course corrects, but I personally have seen my expectations sink into the ground for him.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:43

Mister Fister: May 17, 2008; D&D: HASBARA SQUAD
KILL-GORE

I love the smell of dead Palestinians in the morning.
You know, one time we had Gaza bombed for 26 days
(and counting!)

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

For a concrete example: if Obama had at any point stopped making every possible effort to be the Reasonable One In the Room in the face of Republican intransigence -- if he had ,at any point, openly called out Republican bullshit and unwillingness to make deals and refusal to compromise -- he'd have been instantly cast and labelled as Angry Scary Black Man.

There's a reason Obama is always so chill. He has to be -- or at least, he taught himself at an early age that he has to be -- because American society doesn't tolerate black rage.

Trump and even Bernie can both get up there on the podium and be angry. Obama couldn't.

Take Republicans out of the equation. If he went after Wall Street, there's no way in hell the 'angry scary black man' label would have been applied to him. He would have been a loving hero.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:44

Some Pinko Commie: Jun 9, 2009; CNC! Easy as 1️⃣2️⃣3️⃣!

Mister Fister posted:

Take Republicans out of the equation. If he went after Wall Street, there's no way in hell the 'angry scary black man' label would have been applied to him. He would have been a loving hero.

You mean, THIS never happened?

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:46

BarbarianElephant: Feb 12, 2015; The fairy of forgiveness has removed your red text.

Lightning Knight posted:

Jones is far enough into milkshake duck territory that I'm starting to worry, he really is a clueless old white dude and it shows in his approach to politics and rhetoric. Here's hoping he course corrects, but I personally have seen my expectations sink into the ground for him.

I'm pretty sure you are all going to hate him within a month of him taking office. An Alabama Democrat is going to be pretty right-wing.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:46

Paracaidas: Sep 24, 2016; Consistently Tedious!

Cerebral Bore posted:

I have to disagree here. If Obama had done popular poo poo from the get-go, you'd most likely have seen better results in 2010, most critically on the state level, which is where the real GOP cheating and voter suppression takes place. There's a definite knock-on effect at play here.

"The people wanted more of the populism that ~~Obama promised~~ I projected on to him," he cried, ignoring the wave of plutocratic businessmen elected to the Senate over folks like Feingold and the (relatively) narrow margins of defeat for Angle and Fiorina.

The idea that Obama could have behaved differently in order to avoid the 2010 backlash is an interesting one that deserves deeper analysis. That the path to victory is the same one that has been consistently rejected in primaries and generals of purple states and districts is utter laziness.

"Dems would have done better in 2010 had Obama prosecuted Wall Street and somehow done more to support unions in situations like Detroit" is an argument that works a hell of a lot better when the backdrop to the counterfactual is the historic wave of bank fellating and union busting Republicans.

self unaware posted:

actually saying you're done with cornell west because he critisized TNC and obama is pretty much the definition of fragility

especially considering his history and contributions

This just in! You are *required* to engage with people who argue that biracial people aren't really black. Ignore the continued pattern of questioning the authenticity and blackness of those he disagrees with.

Der Waffle Mous posted:

Brother Trump and Brother Hannity'll have his back.

I'm sure Tavis can give him directions to Tucker's studio.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:47

sd6: Jan 14, 2008; This has all been posted before, and it will all be posted again

Lightning Knight posted:

Jones is far enough into milkshake duck territory that I'm starting to worry, he really is a clueless old white dude and it shows in his approach to politics and rhetoric. Here's hoping he course corrects, but I personally have seen my expectations sink into the ground for him.

The fact thay he said he "wasnt sure" how he'd vote for the GOP tax bill was just staggering

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:47

Democrazy: Oct 16, 2008; If you're not willing to lick the boot, then really why are you in politics lol? Everything is a cycle of just getting stomped on so why do you want to lose to it over and over, just submit like me, I'm very intelligent.

Lightning Knight posted:

Jones is far enough into milkshake duck territory that I'm starting to worry, he really is a clueless old white dude and it shows in his approach to politics and rhetoric. Here's hoping he course corrects, but I personally have seen my expectations sink into the ground for him.

Yeah, I can see that. But he�s basically a free vote on some important votes when he�s finally seated. It also doesn�t change the fact that he won the primary and running as a sacrificial candidate until basically a month ago.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:48

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Democrazy posted:

Because the Democratic voters of Alabama picked him in a primary.

Pardon me if my confidence in the ability or likelihood of a Democratic primary to capture the spirit of an electorate has been shaken somewhat by recent events.

At any rate if the 2020 Democratic Presidential primary gives us two white dudes on the ticket I doubt this will be your response. Nor should it be.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:49

Lightning Knight: Feb 24, 2012; Pray for Answer

BarbarianElephant posted:

I'm pretty sure you are all going to hate him within a month of him taking office. An Alabama Democrat is going to be pretty right-wing.

I don't think that was a given, especially with his platform. I don't think Jones is intentionally a lovely person, but he's not going to be the kind of senator he needs to be to hold that seat, at this rate.

sd6 posted:

The fact thay he said he "wasnt sure" how he'd vote for the GOP tax bill was just staggering

This was dumb but I don't really give a poo poo about that, he's not going to get to vote on the tax bill. Downplaying the Trump sexual assault accusers is where he's started to enter remarkably stupid and incompetent territory considering the history of his electoral race.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:49

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

Mister Fister posted:

Take Republicans out of the equation. If he went after Wall Street, there's no way in hell the 'angry scary black man' label would have been applied to him. He would have been a loving hero.

Yes, I'm sure the media would go for the boring and truthful angle rather than feeding into the exciting right-wing narratives about Obama ruining the economy with his socialist overreaches.

If the media was willing to call the Bookings-based Obamacare "socialist" they would have declared actual attacks on financial power as the second coming of Marx.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:49

Push El Burrito: May 9, 2006; Soiled Meat

Please don't make fun of my white fragility it is making me sad sometimes.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:49

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Democrazy posted:

It also doesn�t change the fact that he won the primary and running as a sacrificial candidate until basically a month ago.

See? There's the real answer. And that's fine so far as it goes, but the Democrats need to start taking every seat seriously, especially at the national level there's just no excuse.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:51

Democrazy: Oct 16, 2008; If you're not willing to lick the boot, then really why are you in politics lol? Everything is a cycle of just getting stomped on so why do you want to lose to it over and over, just submit like me, I'm very intelligent.

Kilroy posted:

Pardon me if my confidence in the ability or likelihood of a Democratic primary to capture the spirit of an electorate has been shaken somewhat by recent events.

At any rate if the 2020 Democratic Presidential primary gives us two white dudes on the ticket I doubt this will be your response. Nor should it be.

The voters have the ability to pick whoever they like, and no one can justly overrule them. It�s one of the joys of living in a post-1968 world.

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:51

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 23, 2024 07:54

TheScott2K: Oct 26, 2003; I'm just saying, there's a nonzero chance Trump has a really toad penis.

VA House District 94 Recount Update:

https://twitter.com/JWPascale/status/943207039068712967

# ? Dec 19, 2017 20:51

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USPOL: Pulitzer Feeling Increasingly Out Of Place In New York Times Office

«‹›995 »