Lewis2
2d ago
This is an area where I think the typical American approach to class distinctions—defining class solely by income—falls short. (Scott also talked about some of the shortcomings of our usual definitions several years ago.)
I don’t admittedly have as much experience with wealthy blue tribers as I do wealthy red tribers, but based on what experience I do have, I’d say the blue tribers would find it acceptable though perhaps mildly disappointing if one of their children became a schoolteacher, musician, or humanities professor, but they’d be confused and upset if one wanted to become a cop, soldier, or clergyman. Vice versa for the red tribers.
Lewis2
2d ago
Somehow preventing cops with bad records from just transferring to the next town over would be a great start, but the details would need to be thought through carefully and the implementation would be tricky. Having a special state prosecutor investigate all incidents of suspected police misconduct would probably also help, since local police departments and local prosecutors’ offices usually have fairly incestuous relationships.
Lewis2
2d ago
Likewise when Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr., was arrested after getting belligerent when cops asked him to show his ID during a burglary investigation. That was the incident that led Obama to state that he didn’t know the details, but that it was obvious that the police “acted stupidly.” He also strongly implied that the arrest was due to racism from the police.
Lewis2
2d ago
As others pointed out, that phrase is used quite a lot in evangelical/Pentecostal circles, and not to convey “I’m a pacifist.” I don’t know if she was trying to make a joke or whether she was serious, but I can understand why the cops might be nervous either way. I still think the cops’ reaction (or at least one of the cop’s reactions) was extremely poor, though the second video is starting to make me think it might not rise to the level of first degree murder.
Lewis2
2d ago
This is a bad summary, and I’m not sure who you think you’ll convince by it. This:
Don’t worry I’m not threatening you, lol, I a devout pacifist. I disagree strongly with your reaction in the name of Jesus, a famous pacifist you are likely familiar with
is reading a lot into her words that isn’t there.
Lewis2
3d ago
The “moral panic” isn’t just about ignorance, though for many people ignorance of policing conditions no doubt plays a role. It’s also about a severe lack of accountability for the police who do abuse their positions of authority. When police who steal money are awarded immunity from both government prosecution and private lawsuits, or when police officers who shoot unarmed suspects, charge them with resisting arrest, and publicly lie about the whole thing are told “no biggie,” people reasonably get pretty upset. It’s one thing when a cop abuses his position—that’s bad, but you’ll never get a force that’s made up of 100% moral, upstanding officers. It’s quite another thing when a cop abuses his position—and his department, the local prosecutor, and the courts all protect him from punishment. That’s the sort of thing that reduces public support of cops, no different than how the Catholic sex abuse coverup led to greatly reduced trust in bishops and priests. Every time a cop abuses his position and gets a nice paid vacation out of it, protected from any legal or personal financial harm, while the taxpayer pays to settle lawsuits on his behalf, people look at it and say, “The system is broken.” They don’t need to have ever ridden in a squad car to know that.
Lewis2
3d ago
You’re a red triber from Texas, where the police and military are presumably still considered respectable, medium-to-high-status career paths. Of course it doesn’t seem that weird to you. To see the class divisions, you need only look at how many well-off blue tribe sons join the military or police.
Lewis2
3d ago
I had been a regular Reason reader since the early 2010s, so I had seen plenty of stories of police officers getting away with all manner of brutality, theft, murder, etc., directed at people of all races. Thanks to that background, I mostly remember being annoyed that Floyd’s death was instantly chalked up to racism, before being thoroughly pissed at TPTB for siding with the rioters while at the same time enforcing/defending onerous Covid restrictions. I didn’t care enough about the incident itself to bother forming any firm opinions, so my memory of the immediate reactions was apparently pretty hazy. In 2020, my anger about everything Covid-related took precedence over everything else.
Lewis2
3d ago
Republicans, instead of joining the anti-police bandwagon as they were so eager to do in 2020, should simply ignore and move on.
Oh, I was thinking of responses along the line of “Yeah, looks like a bad shot. But the justice system is already on it,” followed by pretty much ignoring it. But I’m starting to reconsider the effectiveness of that approach given that “no controversy, no news” seems to have been dead wrong with regard to George Floyd. I still think quickly agreeing with the complaint and then ignoring it is smarter than defending the shot though.
Lewis2
3d ago
Huh, looking back through old stories and discussion boards, it appears I misremembered the timeline. For example, /r/themotte’s initial thread was pretty unanimously condemnatory. One user’s comment actually makes my original response to @coffee_enjoyer look pretty hopelessly naive (bolding added):
The George Floyd incident is notable in that it appears to be far more uncontroversial than other police-killing-black-man incidents. The use of force depicted in the video seems clearly unwarranted, and the non-controversy appears to be reflected in widespread condemnation across the political spectrum. SSC readers (https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxoplasma-of-rage/) may recognize this as a situation where the story will not last very long in the collective consciousness because there is little controversy to fight over. It will be interesting to see how this plays out, especially if this particular incident is able to spur political reforms more effectively than previous ones over which there was more controversy due to lack of complete video documentation, lack of >99% proof that force was unreasonably used, etc. If that is the case, it may provide the lesson that consensus-building, rather than encouraging controversy and (sometimes seemingly intentionally) alienating others is the surer path to political reforms. I am reminded of the Civil Rights Movement of the 60s, where the events that seemed to have the greatest impact on public were those such as horrific lynching or police brutality against peaceful protestors which couldn’t possibly admit of any mitigating explanation and thus were not open to differential interpretation along partisan lines.
Lewis2
3d ago
Prior to reading this comment, I had assumed that the Democrats’ attempt to make hay from this incident would fail miserably, as no one on the right would defend the shooting. Absent a scissor statement situation, I figured the controversy would die a quick and easy death. Now I’m not so sure.
If the Right is smart, they’ll publicly agree that it was a bad shot regardless of their inner feelings, as that is probably the easiest way to defuse the situation. No controversy, no news; no news, no BLM reboot; no BLM reboot, no electoral benefits to the Democrats.
Lewis2
4d ago
In his interview with Stephanopoulos, Biden said, “Look. I mean, if the Lord Almighty came down and said, ‘Joe, get outta the race,’ I'd get outta the race.”
I think it’s pretty clear what happened.
I think they know that “Trump was shot and survived” makes him seem much more badass than the alternative “Trump was hit by flying glass when one of his supporters was shot and killed.” The former puts him in the same league as Teddy Roosevelt and Andrew Jackson and has the potential to make him much more popular.
Lewis2
4d ago
Maybe I’m misreading Fistfullofcrows, but I didn’t understand him to be connecting Kamala’s sexual past with her Indian heritage, just saying that she, specifically, ended up in a leadership position due to her past sexual activities.
Lewis2
5d ago
Look at what they’ve done to Latin Mass Catholics.
They’ve put some on a watch list. Have they done anything else?
Lewis2
9d ago
We’re actually 18th century English writers, capitalizing important adjectives and keeping unimportant nouns lower-case. I’ll admit, I like it.
Lewis2
10d ago
It is interesting that Rowling seems to have shifted the age of her books’ intended audience at about the same pace that her actual audience aged. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of any other author who did that. But then, I suppose I can’t think of any other children’s authors who had such a massive and devoted following while they were in the middle of publishing a series.
Lewis2
12d ago
To speedrun classic literature, go to the library and check out all the Wishbone books. Then if you like a particular story, you can actually read the original. If you don’t like any of them, at least you’ll know the basic plot line and should pick up on most references. For poetry, find an anthology of famous poems (or snag a list from the Internet) and read one or two per day for three months. Odds are you’ll probably find at least some you like. Rudyard Kipling seems to be popular among many rationalist-adjacent folks, so you might start with him. If you find that you really can’t stand any poetry at all, try reading them aloud. A lot of poems are just better that way. You can also usually find good recordings on YouTube. Both James Earl Jones and Christopher Lee have pretty decent recordings of Poe’s The Raven, for example. If there’s a poem you like well enough to memorize, print it out and read it out loud every night before you go to bed. As long as the poem isn’t Paradise Lost or something ridiculously long like that, you should have it memorized in no time. The routine will also probably help you fall asleep easier, in case you happen to have any trouble with that.
For movies, I’d suggest you keep a list of movie references that people around you make, and then just watch those. You should catch up to speed relatively quickly. Don’t watch all the top 100 films of all time or anything like that. Very few people have actually seen all of them, so you’d be wasting a lot of time.
I would guess that music is probably the least referenced, partly because there’s a relatively small number of universally-known songs. Person A might have grown up on the Beatles, but Person B grew up on Frank Sinatra, Person C on ACDC, Person D on Beethoven, and Persons E through G on jazz, hip hop, and pop, respectively. That said, if you have the time and don’t mind the bother, it wouldn’t hurt to listen once or twice to the top ten songs of each decade from 1950 to the present. Songs are short, and you can do it on your commute. If your coworkers are people of fine breeding and good taste, and they listen to classical music, find a Music Appreciation CD set, and just listen to the songs from the Baroque and Romantic periods. A Music Appreciation CD will only play short excerpts from the longer pieces, which should save you some time. Or just find a “Classical music you know but don’t know the name of” video on YouTube. Watch a few of those, while paying attention to who the composers are, and you should be set.
One final piece of advice: visit an art museum or two, if nothing else to say that you’ve been. New York, D.C., Detroit, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and other major cities have good collections. Pick whichever one is closest to you, spend a day there, and memorize the names and artists’ names of two or three pieces that you particularly like. Then if the subject ever comes up, you can add your two cents and raise your cultural standing.
Lewis2
12d ago
I wouldn’t swear to it, but I think the dissertation is in the public domain. Works published in 1950 (the year Kissinger completed his dissertation) had to be registered and then renewed in the 28th year after publication. I don’t see that work in either the Stanford or U.S. Copyright Office renewal databases. It’s possible he didn’t copyright it to begin with, though you’d need to go through the 1950 and 1951 copyright books on Archive.org to be sure.
Lewis2
13d ago
Already happening. The debate is whether any image of the fist bump can be included under fair use.
The thinking is probably that if people donate, they’ll feel more invested in her campaign and will be more likely to keep supporting her in the future. It also just seems to be a Democrat thing. I’ve seen dozens if not hundreds of ads featuring Harris, Biden, Stacy Abrams, and the parents of a child who was killed in a school shooting. Every single one was a plea for money. In contrast, almost all of the Republican ads I’ve seen have been the usual “vote for me” or “my opponent is bad” type of ads.
More options
Context Copy link