Kamala Harris makes it official

[anon61221983]

None of which I disagree with. However, we have to make choices based on domestic policy as well, and dismantling white supremacy is at the top of my list. We need people in power who will help do that, and her record as AG indicates she might not be on board with that agenda. Note, too, that I strongly believe (based on reading a fair number of histories of US foreign policy) US racism gets translated into us foreign policy regularly, so dismantling that here will have positive consequences abroad, too.

Last, I don’t at all take issue with people from other countries weighing in on our domestic politics. I do tend to welcome the perspective… I do take issue with being told that I’m entirely ignorant of global politics or that my own priorities for our political future are entirely irrelevant. And I take issue with being condescended to, of course.

[Avyctes]

@anon61833566

So you decided to come and parrot what I actually said as if I hadn’t said it

This was not my intention. Simply answering your question, I’m sorry we agree? Confused now.

[anon61833566]

No, that’s fine. I didn’t/don’t think we disagree. But might I suggest a “Hey totally agree” clarification.

[LurksNoMore]

@anon61221983

Foreign policy is a complicated game and you can’t predict outcomes. We DO know now that many of our cold war era policies led to some pretty negative blowback. We can look at history and make some more informed choices that doesn’t continue to create similar outcomes.

Oh, definitely. I’m not saying that it doesn’t matter if America elects war hawks; it obviously does, and I’d really like to see more calm and rational actors driving the US foreign policy!

I guess what I’m doing here is (possibly over)reacting to an attitude I so often see from American leftists online (not so often, but occasionally here on BB, too) where all bad things are seen as the result of bad American actions, simplifying things and stripping foreign actors of agency / absolving them of their bad choices and actions. That is, the line between explaining the historical context and excusing the results blurs or fades away entirely.

[anon61221983]

@LurksNoMore

where all bad things are seen as the result of bad American actions, simplifying things and stripping foreign actors of agency / absolving them of their bad choices and actions. That is, the line between explaining the historical context and excusing the results blurs or fades away entirely.

Yes, and I don’t believe that I generally do that. I do understand that other actors besides the US have agency and shape events on the ground. It’s a big part of writing better histories.

[anon86154871]

small break, it would be a real shame if all we heard about each prospective candidate was their oppo research file:
SF DA:

• created Hate Crimes unit
• created Back on Track program to assist people imprisoned on low-level drug offenses, later signed into law as the state-wide model for re-entry programs

CA AG:

• sponsored bill banning Gay Panic defense
• brought $12B settlement to California as litigant in lawsuit against banks
• sponsored bill banning foreclosure dual-tracking and bank robo-signing (people blame her for not prosecuting Mnuchin, but the problem with what the banks were doing before / during the crisis is that a lot of it wasn’t technically illegal)
• indicted oil companies for failures that led to 2015 Santa Barbara oil spill
• instructed state LEO to ignore Obama admin ICE requests authorized under Secure Communities
• launched OpenJustice platform making arrest and LEO actions transparent
• wrote Memorandum of Understanding with UC President establishing robust procedures for investigating sexual assaults that happen on college campuses

[nojaboja]

@anon61833566

If you aren’t an American or you reside elsewhere in the world…Then why in the fuck are you so god damn blasted interested and opinionated about our politics?!

Please, let me answer:

I have a graduate degree in American Studies and have for years lived in the US (among many other places) in addition I am of the school of thought that in an interconnected global world it is helpful to have a healthy diversity of voices and opinions and that outsiders with interest and knowledge can often shed new perspective on an old problem.

Just as @anon61221983 is qualified to comment on matters European I also am qualified to comment on matters US. Most of us Europeans don’t tend to tell US commentators on here to

@anon61833566

Mind yer fucking business and shut the fuck up.

in quite in the same tone. But that might just be a cultural nuance.

Re Discussion’s on Democratic Candidates:

I have kept myself out of BBS threads on Democratic candidates after witnessing some painful discussions along the lines of whether or not wearing a £ 7000 coat was a disqualifying offence for a First Lady and Secretary of State, all while her opponent is shitting on a f***ing gilded toilet.

Truthfully, it reads like a lot of people dare not comment on here, and I am not surprised.

When I saw this thread on Harris and the vitriol with which she seemed to be dismissed without any actual discussion on what the woman has done / not done in her various roles as a prosecutor (which could have looked something like what @anon86154871 offered) and in addition the way she seems to be pitted against AOC (an experienced old hack who sold her soul vs a dynamic newcomer who will never knowingly make a mistake) I felt, in spite my better judgement, that maybe this time, I’ll be lucky… and can influence / open up the discussion towards more substantial issues.

It wasn’t to be. The Mob mentality with which a group of Americans circled around and put few Europeans in their place on what really matters and what is legitimate to think, doesn’t bode particularly well for the future understanding among nations:

Re Foreign Policy:

I don’t know which particular aspect of transnational history @anon61221983 has written her PhD on and don’t know whether her expertise are on Eastern Europe / Soviet Block, but in any case it would be nice to think that the expertise of the people who actually lived and escaped those countries cold stand alongside academic expertise. Especially, at a time when old Soviet structures and actors are playing an increasingly significant role in US politics.

@anon61221983

I do understand that other actors besides the US have agency and shape events on the ground. It’s a big part of writing better histories.

US foreign policy is in the main marked by an incapacity to listen to the locals and as a consequence stubbornly backing the wrong horse. Most recent globally devastating example is the US facilitated rise of Orban. The meddling without listening is consistently the case with both the left and the right. And if the exchange above is anything to go by this is unlikely to change anytime soon.

Re Overtone window:

@Melz2

the window of discourse, describes the range of ideas tolerated in public discourse.

Anti-gun campaigner Lucy McBath’s election victory in Georgian fits well within that definition. Between the 2016 and 2018 election cycle the overtone window on gun control has shifted to such a degree that a Mother who turned to politics after the racist shooting of her 17 year old son is now a Congresswoman. This pretty much is the definition of a shifting overtone window.

None of us know where the 2020 election cycle will take the US and the world. We don’t know how far the overtone window has shifted and whether significant justice reform addressing the systematic incarceration of POC is on the horizon. We can hope and we will see.

The question remains whether Harris’ background as DA and AG and her association (collusion) with the criminal justice system will be a disqualifying for a presidential candidate. However, there doesn’t seem to be any evidence that Harris is any worse than any other AG in the land.

[gracchus]

@nojaboja

Truthfully, it reads like a lot of people dare not comment on here, and I am not surprised.

Oh, please. Break out the violins. If you’re dragging out the same complaint here that right-wing trollies do you’re on the wrong track.

I have no problem with anyone, anywhere, commenting on U.S. politics and society as long as they demonstrate that they know what they’re talking about and as long as their primary agenda isn’t “der U.S. is und alvays haz been der most evilist country of dem all, especially in comparison to my ffabulous country.” So I have no issue with you in particular opining.

What I do have a problem with is people dismissing any discussion of a Democratic establishment candidate’s unprogressive policy positions, career history or campaign missteps (or arrogant unwillingness to apologise for them) because she’s a woman. “If you criticise her then you’re a misogynist” is just as tiresome in 2019 as it was in 2016, especially when it’s aimed at progressives and women who’ve established their feminist bona fides.

I’m hoping for a good crop of Dem candidates, and think Harris is a strong contender who’s worthy of consideration. However, if she and her supporters don’t learn from the mistakes Clinton and her supporters made in 2016 (and in 2008) then she’s setting herself up for a similar fate in 2020. The same goes for any other Dem contender of any gender or age.

[anon61221983]

@nojaboja

is qualified to comment on matters European I also am qualified to comment on matters US. Most of us Europeans don’t tend to tell US commentators on here to

My problem isn’t that you commented. As I said in several places, I understand and welcome it for the exact reasons you noted. But when you completely dismiss domestic issues that many of us feel should be at the top of the agenda and then condescendingly act like I don’t know anything about American politics (foreign and domestic), that’s what pisses me off. I actually DO know something about american foreign policy from a broader perspective, because I actually have read a variety of perspectives for the past 10 years or so. I also understand the nuances of race in America and how white supremacy is being reinforced through policies supported by both parties. I believe that you change racist policies here, that helps in foreign policy as well. Re-electing the same kind of candidates will not change policies here or abroad.

[nojaboja]

@gracchus

If you’re dragging out the same complaint here that right-wing trollies do you’re on the wrong track.

No, just clumsily making the point that we are all humans and as such prone to group think. Unsurprisingly, bbs is not free from it and when it comes to discussions on the Democratic establishment it can be pretty intimidating and of-putting here. My hope is that the discourse will shift and not stay stuck where we left it in 2016. That was the reason I threw in my 2 penny’s worth.

There is no template for being a successful woman candidate. Mistakes are inevitable. How they are dealt with is what matters. But let’s give the candidates a chance.

[gracchus]

@nojaboja

No, just clumsily making the point that we are all humans and as such prone to group think.

Very clumsily. Really, you don’t want to be the kind of person who whinges about a “BB bubble” that excludes “unpopular” opinions. Leave that to the Libertarians and sexists and white supremacists.

@nojaboja

Unsurprisingly, bbs is not free from it and when it comes to discussions on the Democratic establishment it can be pretty intimidating and of-putting here.

We have plenty of regular and vocal commenters who constantly defer to the authority of the Democratic establishment and who can be counted on to make apologies for it. That they consistently fail to make their cases does nothing to stop them from returning again and again with the same tired “destroy the village to save it” talking points. To their credit, though, they don’t complain about a mythical groupthink here, if only because expressing that sort of “disappointment in BoingBoing” inevetibly results in a timeout or ban handed down by the mods or the publisher.

@nojaboja

Mistakes are inevitable. How they are dealt with is what matters.

True. What’s being pointed out is that Clinton dealt with them horribly and that Harris and other establishment candidates should take a lesson from that. That’s how we’ll truly get unstuck from 2016.

[nojaboja]

@anon61221983

But when you completely dismiss domestic issues

Where have I done so? I actually interjected because the discussion descended into how awful Harris’ dancing was.

I followed this up with pointing towards the racialised attacks on Harris. I think I was the first to link to the birtherism shenanigans, the right’s first response to her candidacy.

Surely, that is the kind of thing (given the Obama, Trump history) that needs discussion in on Harris’ ‘official’ candidacy in the first place, more so than her dancing skills.

@anon61221983

and then condescendingly act like I don’t know anything about American politics (foreign and domestic), that’s what pisses me off. I

I think, we might have to disagree on who condescended whom. I felt pretty condescended to.

@anon61221983

I actually DO know something about american foreign policy from a broader perspective, because I actually have read a variety of perspectives for the past 10 years or so.

Where did I doubt this? Being well versed in academic papers on a region’s history does not necessarily equate being familiar with people’s life experience in that region. I would be generally curious to know the ratio of papers written by non US born and educated academics. The nature of the game is that US voices dominate the academic discourse on pretty much every subject, which is a huge part of the problem when it comes to history.

@anon61221983

I believe that you change racist policies here, that helps in foreign policy as well. Re-electing the same kind of candidates will not change policies here or abroad.

Discussing the vile nature of birtherism seems to fit that bill.

@gracchus

To their credit, though, they don’t complain about a mythical groupthink here,

Nothing particularly mythical about group think, pretty level headed folk like NASA scientist fall victim to it with fatal consequences see Challenger disaster and Feynman’s dissenting report.

The issue here is not censorship from the group, but self-censorship of potential participants who feel put off.

@gracchus

What’s being pointed out is that Clinton dealt with them horribly

or in my reading like ‘a human’. It feels like the expectation on these women is to be at once super-human levelheaded and detached while simultaneously being touchy feel down with the people.

[gracchus]

@nojaboja

The issue here is not censorship from the group, but self-censorship of potential participants who feel put off.

This is not Putin’s Russia. If ones goes against the community’s general consensus but debate and respectfully and in good faith, the worst that happens is that people dismantle one’s argument line-by-line.

The DNC establishment apologists who persist here despite that “unbearable” situation that supposedly puts off so many others may be annoying, but they aren’t prone to whinging or resorting to bad-faith or ludicrously fact-challenged arguments. That’s why they manage to stick around while others are “put off” by BB’s more educated and liberal community (AKA the “reality-based community”) and stick to Facebook or YouTube comments and other forums where the standards of discourse are lower.

@nojaboja

or in my reading like ‘a human’

An arrogant, tone-deaf, out-of-touch human who regularly refused to admit to mistakes, yes. That would be true whatever her gender. No-one ever expected her to be a warm and fuzzy candidate or a folksy one, but her fatal flaws ultimately had nothing to do with that.

[anon61221983]

@nojaboja

I actually interjected because the discussion descended into how awful Harris’ dancing was.

Again, you’ve completely misinterpreted @knoxblox’s original comment, which had nothing to do with KH dancing ability and everything to do with politicians putting out cute videos designed to make them seem with it instead of putting out policy statements that resonate.

@nojaboja

I followed this up with pointing towards the racialised attacks on Harris.

None of here did that. We pointed out her actual track record on issues of law enforcement tied to race.

@nojaboja

I think I was the first to link to the birtherism shenanigans, the right’s first response to her candidacy.

Stop lumping us all into that bullshit, because no one here discussing it with you is making those kinds of comments. We’re pulling on actual real stuff here, not conspiracy theories.

@nojaboja

that is the kind of thing (given the Obama, Trump history) that needs discussion in on Harris’ ‘official’ candidacy in the first place, more so than her dancing skills.

We NEED to talk about her record and her policy proposals.

@nojaboja

I think, we might have to disagree on who condescended whom. I felt pretty condescended to.

If you felt so, I apologize. But you were completely distorting what we were saying to you.

@nojaboja

Where did I doubt this?

When you indicated that you felt I was entirely ignorant of history?

@nojaboja

Being well versed in academic papers on a region’s history does not necessarily equate being familiar with people’s life experience in that region.

And live experience doesn’t necessarily mean you know the entire picture. Historical accounts are full of people not knowing what the larger picture is, precisely because it’s impossible for any of us to know the entire story from our own singular existence. Lived experience matters, but we all have to realize that so do the experiences of others, and it’s only in bringing those together that we’ll know what’s happening. I’m not suggesting that your experience is wrong, because it’s not. I’m suggesting that it’s a more complicated picture, especially historically.

@nojaboja

The nature of the game is that US voices dominate the academic discourse on pretty much every subject

This will come to a huge surprise to the historians writing books about US imperialism for the past 60 or so years…

[fnordius]

@knoxblox

The main problem? She’s a war-hawk and a profiteer, still connected to past presidents who did the same. No amount of goodwill can make up for the US’s horrendous record of colonialism.

You know, I never really saw much evidence of this, other than that she played Riker to Obama’s Picard. The bad cop to Obama’s good cop. And of course she has connections to past presidents, as she is married to one!

Sheesh.

[anon61221983]

I mean, the entire debacle in Libya was primarily from her advocacy yeah? The French, too of course, who’ve long had a strong desire to come back in and dominate north Africa. So, yeah, she’s a war hawk, I’m afraid. But it’s the mainstream of the democratic party, so she’s not outside the mainstream of that mindset, at least.

[Melz2]

@nojaboja

Re Overtone window:

You made a mistake, and you keep repeating it;

It’s OVERTON WINDOW NOT “OVERTONE.”
There is only one ‘E’ in that word.

Now again, good day.

[anon61221983]

I regret I only have one like to give to this post.

[Melz2]

I regret that I am completely out of ‘likes’ to give, right now.

Have an unofficial one:

[knoxblox]

@anon61221983

@knoxblox’s original comment, which had nothing to do with KH dancing ability and everything to do with politicians putting out cute videos designed to make them seem with it instead of putting out policy statements that resonate.

https://reactiongifs.com/r/2013/11/THANK-YOU-ONE-PERSON.gif(image larger than 4 MB)

I think part of what kicked off the whole “social media” kerfuffle is when AOC began connecting with her constituents to discuss policy and their concerns on platforms like Instagram while eating macaroni & cheese for dinner in her kitchen, because she didn’t have an office yet.
Emphasis on discussing policy and her constituents’ concerns.