Offline
Christians love corruption. Especially the corruption of the core virtues espoused by Jesus Christ and the scripture that they either cannot or are not willing to read. I mean, no one should be obligated to take these stated virtues seriously anyway if they are not of the Christian faith, outside of normal ethical considerations, but when Christians insist on wielding their good book as a weapon on society, their illiteracy becomes even more of an insult. The Bible also has a lot to say about the notion of "hypocrisy", and maybe they might want to look up that word in their biblical concordance, if they even have the slightest idea what such a thing is.
One popular, though aberrant, concept recently floating around the Christian Zealot-sphere involves a corruption of St. Augustine, the so-called "rightly ordered loves". JD Vance has recently invoked this principle, in his corrupted second-hand manner as a 'new Catholic', calling this concept an "old school, very Christian concept". His description of 'rightly ordered loves' follows the same belief of those Christian Nationalists, and more than a few white supremacists, who see it as a divine justification for everything from xenophobia, racism and nationalism itself, all things which Jesus quite explicitly rejected.
You love your family, then you love your neighbor, then you love your community, then you love your fellow citizens in your own country, and then after that, you can focus and prioritize the rest of the world.
Vance continues by inverting American values by saying "America is not just an idea. It is a group of people with a shared history and a common future", ignoring the Founders' conception of American as rooted primarily in the ideas of liberalism, democracy and rule of law - the truths we hold self-evident, all men (not just those with "shared history") are equal, and therefore equally respected under the law of the nation. What Vance is describing instead is an ethnostate nation, and rejecting the notion of the melting pot, where people do not need to share a history in order to forge a "common future" together. And it shouldn't be a surprise that the people most excited by JD Vance's corruption of Christian principle are the racists:
"America is a particular place with a particular people." - Joel Webbon
"This is one of the most important political questions facing America right now. Answer it wrong, we will go the way of Europe, where the native-born populations are being utterly displaced by third world migrants and Muslims. Answer it right, and we can renew America once more." - William Wolfe
"The American nation is an actual historical people, not just a hodgepodge of various ethnicities, but actually a place of settlement and rootedness." - Stephen Wolfe, author of The Case For Christian Nationalism (Native Americans clearly need not apply.)
"Any Christian who denies ‘hierarchy of loves’ has white men at the lowest level of their hierarchy of loves." - Stephen Wolfe (Note how they assume to quote St. Augustine, a Moor, as the basis for this racial heirarchy.)
But all of that simply requires a failure of common sense. Let's not overlook the unfortunate fact that this also represents a failure of comprehension of Biblical scripture. Let's look at what Jesus himself said about the hierarchy of love:
Matthew 22:36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
[37] Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
[38] This is the first and great commandment.
[39] And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
[40] On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
"Love thy neighbor AS thyself", not slightly less than thyself, not slightly less still than one's family.
In fact, let's take a look on Jesus' view of the importance of one's family:
Luke 14:26 If you come to me but will not leave your family, you cannot be my follower.
When asked "who is my neighbor?", to clarify the command to love him as oneself, Jesus tells the classic parable of the Good Samaritan, a tale known to children even outside the Christian faith, a tale of simple Aesopian morality, about three men who passed a victim of a robbery and left for dead on the side of a road. Two of them passed him by, and only the Samaritan stopped to help. Jesus concludes with his answer "Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor? The one who showed him mercy. You go and do likewise."
Or Jesus' view on ethnonationalism:
John 18 [36] My Kingdom is not of this world.
Philippians 3 [20] Our citizenship is in Heaven.
Galatians 3 [28] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
But perhaps the most important aspect concerns the attitude of the proper Christian towards "the rest of the world", those outside either our families, communities or nation's citizenry...what can we call them, maybe....strangers?
Matthew 25:35 "For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me." 25:40 "Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me."
Leviticus 24:22 "You shall have the same rule for the sojourner and for the native."
Leviticus 19:34 "You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt."
Jeremiah 22:3 "Do no wrong or violence to the resident alien."
Malachi 3:5 "I will draw near to you for judgment. I will be a swift witness...against those who thrust aside the sojourner."
Ephesians 2:19 "So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God."
Romans 13:8 "Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law."
Hebrews 13:2 "Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares."
I could go on. But there's a more obvious point. The final example concerns Abraham himself, patriarch of all Western monotheism, as told in Genesis 18. Abraham saw three strangers approaching in the desert, and he bowed to them, offered bread and water and hospitality. As a reward for this indiscriminate kindness, the Lord made Abraham's long barren wife, Sarah, fertile and she gave birth to her first son, Isaac. (The same Lord then asked Abraham to slaughter the child, seemingly, as a test of fate, but let's get into all of that.) The point being that throughout the Bible, Old and New, the common virtue of kindness and acceptence of strangers as one's own family is not a matter of controversy or debate, and can only be denied by those wolves who lead the flocks of wooly-eyed sheep, those who intend to scapegoat the strangers, the sojourners, the meek immigrants in order to push a vicious and racist campaign of worldy power and dominion - exactly what Jesus claimed was not his power or dominion. This movement is literally Anti-Christian.
Offline
Remember when people got mad when Obama put his feet up on the Resolute Desk?
Offline
Jinnistan wrote:
"you won't make it"
That's an old Rotten Tomatoes joke.
It's going to be four years, dude. Relax. Breathe. Pace....
And check this out for some tips.
Thank you LOL, sorry for being such a crybaby, everybody. I figured you RT veterans would know all about it.
Nice rundown; is one of those from the Good Samaritan passage?
I was just provided with some words of reassurance from a professional therapist with 25+ years of experience:
Trump and Elon going full blitzkrieg with their madness (mass deportations, tarriffs, demolishing federal agencies, etc) is the best thing that could have happened, because what finally smashes through the fortress of human denial is the shock of all negative impacts hitting hard and instantly. If they had kept with the slow–creeping, frog boiling approach, it would be different. But because these malignant narcissists can't help themselves, they are going for the full monty blitzkrieg, meaning the negative impacts — rising costs, falling revenues, decreasing labor pool, decreasing healthcare, etc. — are going to hit ordinary people swift and hard. And it's the swift, hard, all–at–once experience that shatters the illusion of denial. Meaning there's hope now that the Cult of MAGA will finally taste disillusionment, and have no choice but recognize they've been sold a lie. By sweeping all three branches of government, then purging all their scapegoats (immigrants, trans athletes, DEI, CRT, etc) the Republicans have painted themselves into a corner. They'll have no one left to blame when their policies backfire, and finally piss off their base. I had imagined having to say "told you so" when it comes to pass, but hearing it from a professional well–versed in narcissism, addiction, and denial, we won't have to say it. Of course we'll still be tempted to indulge in the schadenfreude of saying it over and over and over, but the MAGATs will finally see it for themselves, and the retribution will be swift. As with the alcoholic that finally crashes the school bus with bottle in–hand, or the cult leader who suddenly betrays his followers, friends, family and other enablers will finally snap out of it and see the truth for what it is. And they are gonna be really, really pissed off. That's another thing the pattern tells us. Once the enablers and minions know they've been betrayed, they don't get a little mad. They get all the way irretrievably furious, and they break it the fuck off with the quickness.
But what about Jonestown, I ask? Plenty of cult followers take their denial to the grave.
But Jim Jones didn't lead with the cyanide on day one. He gradually eased his followers to the table. That's the difference. Jones slow–cooked his frogs. And to abuse the metaphor, Trump is going for the lobster–drop. The slow boil works. The shock does not.
It may appear a nasty silver lining because it doesn't mean massive collateral damage will be averted. But it offers more than a mere glimpse of hope that we aren't beyond the point of no return, and may be a lot closer to the 180° than it appears.
Offline
I think this may be one of the last chances for the MAGA fever to at least slightly break, so in that way, i think it's possibly good that they are being so absurd and negatively impactful so quickly into their term. It's a good way to turn the entire world and maybe a little more of America against him.
But, if I'm being honest, I think it's probably more likely that even if Trump's official actions make his supporters suffer, he will still someone likely be able to spin it that it's Joe Biden's fault. Or some other obviously untrue scapegoat. And not only will MAGA faithful eat up the lie, they won't even take issue with that fact that senile Biden is still somehow running things right underneath Trump's nose.
We are long past even stupidity with these people. Not even wisdom could smarten them up at this point.
Offline
As I've already expressed, the Cult of MAGA is beyond reason at this point. They don't care that Trump is a liar, and they're not about to hold it against him. They like the Heel. They don't even mind suffering so long as those they perceive as beneath them suffer more, because they are locked into a terminally zero-sum conception of society, which is why they see "equality" and "inclusion" as compromising to their own social standing. MAGA is beyond reach, and unpersuadable due to their ill-rooted political motivations. About the only people worth persuading are the millions of eligible voters who still think that voting doesn't matter. Maybe, possibly, seeing these real consequences play out will motivate them to take the time every other year to do their civic duty.
But this is basic accelerationism. This kind of cope is just the other side of the coin as denialism, it's all an empty sedative. The fact is that there is real damage being done, institutionally, and these things will not be easy to fix or to reverse. Even if MAGA wakes up and rejects Trump, given the trend of sentiment, they will most likely just fall behind yet another authoritarian, and the damage being done to our institutions is only allowing for the ease of future authoritarianism, with the wealthy further entrenched in their fortified enclaves. I think it's an immature argument to simply let Trump run like a petulant child, have his vengeful tantrum, or, like Musk's feral spawn, start wiping his boogers all over the office furnishings, in hopes that he eventually wears himself out and allows the responsible adults to put him back in his crib. (Incidentally, this appears to be the Democrat party's current strategy which is quite rightfully being popularly derided.) No, we should continue to use the courts to shut down Trump/Musk's agenda where we can, and, like Bernie, continue to loudly advertise to those willing to listen what's truly at stake, because an awful lot is. We don't need to step back and "let Trump show himself who he is" (he's been doing that for 40 years!), we need to figure out the reins of an effective media instrument of our own because between the centrist/business-friendly MSNBC and the pseudo-Marxist leftist pod-sphere, they ain't getting it done. We need to make liberalism, true liberalism, great again.
One of the most damaging aspects is beyond government and will be harder to unroot - the normalization of disinformation. We're already a good 25-30 years (effectively two scholastic generations) past the point where our technology has demanded more rigorous media literacy education standards, and with very little political momentum, on either side, to begin to rectify that. This is almost what the dominance of Elon Musk represents more than anything else, as the globe's leading disinformation propagandist. And we continue to see these lies spread far and wide with very little corporate media pushback. His latest being that "democracy" and "bureaucracy" are opposites or incompatible, all while being the most powerful unelected bureaucrat in American history. This cognitive abuse is what's causing so much of society's psychological damage, and that's the point. The paralysis of reason is the point! It's a game of submission, a mental and moral torture until we collectively cry 'uncle'. This is a full-on epistemic assualt. The demoralization which has accompanied Trump and MAGA's dominance will not be easily healed, and those, like MAGA, who have already submitted their vulnerable minds to the cause will absolutely be willing at this point to take the Kool-Aid to their graves.
Offline
No one wants things to accelerate. It doesn't take long to realize how such damage would likely take decades to reverse, and there would be immediate real world consequences, varying from serious to catastrophic, for both those who did and did not vote for Trump.
Yes, Trump has shown who he was at the very beginning. And he's been doing it since he first became a public figure, long before this presidential nightmare he has created. But what also has been there at the beginning is people consistently calling his bluff, exposing his con artistry and ignorance and inability to learn, making fun of his horrible personality, detailing in great minutia not only what a colossal failure he has been his entire life, but also the kind of damage a guy like this can do if he has enough enablers. And still, millions and millions of people still do not understand why they should care enough to vote against him. How much longer do we have to wait for these people to come to their senses before we realize they aren't going to do anything until it's their own homes that are burning down? And are we sure they will even know they are on fire once they do?
Now hopefully it will just need to be the price of eggs or gasoline or whatever that wakes them up to the fact that Trump and these cocks are never going to help them. But, unfortunately, we all know this misery is going to bleed out much further than that, and it's almost inevitable that they are going to get a whole lot of their malignant 'policies' pushed through.
So the hope isn't necessarily to hope for an acceleration with any of this. Yes, democrats need to be doing more pushing back (as opposed to none). Yes, the judiciary needs to continue holding these wolves at bay for as long as they can. But I'm a cynic and I don't think it's long before this unrelenting force is going to break these barriers down. Hopefully what trickles through before the deluge will be enough to change enough peoples opinions. To realize they have to stop sitting on their hands. But....I'm extremely doubtful. Because it's not just MAGA that is unreachable at this point. I'm starting to feel the simply apathetic have drifted too far away as well.
Offline
crumbsroom wrote:
I'm starting to feel the simply apathetic have drifted too far away as well.
Apathy is another form of submission, and another instrument in the authoritarian demoralization project. You could lay some blame on Dems for this apathy, because of their general cowardice and fecklessness (and corporate power capture), and certainly the left's tendency to score scold points on social media has been extremely alienating as well, but we should also understand how apathy is a desired outcome of the disinformation saturation from people like Trump, Bannon, Musk and that entire anti-factual echo chamber. The first step is helplessness followed by apathy. I think these truths could resonate if someone could articulate them at scale.
Offline
Jinnistan wrote:
I think these truths could resonate if someone could articulate them at scale.
I'd be hard pressed to name five democrats that could even pretend to do this. Not that they aren't more out there somewhere, maybe now considering to enter the political ring. But even if someone does rise to the occassion, the right wing media echo chamber (as well as the Democratic Party itself) would immediately try to blacklist and/or sideline them for being too left wing, socialist, radical (ie. actually attempt to articulate what the majority of Americans actually already want).
There is a reason apathy is such a strong political weapon to wield. You probably already have a vast number of the population right on the brink of it anyways, and so they only just need to mobilize the media to give that last little push with endless Apocalypse news coverage just by threatening to do a bunch of stupid, nonsensical or dangerous things. Then once everyone gives up, they can get to the business of doing the stupid, nonsensical and dangerous things that they actually intend to enact.
Should people just give up and let them do what they want? Obviously not. But this is a full time fight, and I'm sorry, most people couldn't even give enough of a shit to save democracy as a hobby. Right now there is a pretty simple thing most people could do to send a message. Mass organized exoduses from Facebook and absention from purchasing anything through Amazon. But do you really think people could even be arsed to commit to this fairly easy thing? Pfffft. Are we seriously expected to come home and not have piles of packages full of garbage waiting on our doorsteps to be opened? Are we going to have to go through the bother of saving our Facebook photographs to our computers and ask for the phone numbers of the three Facebook friends we actually intend to keep in contact with? Are we supposed to live like animals or something?
Offline
crumbsroom wrote:
But this is a full time fight, and I'm sorry, most people couldn't even give enough of a shit to save democracy as a hobby. Right now there is a pretty simple thing most people could do to send a message. Mass organized exoduses from Facebook and absention from purchasing anything through Amazon. But do you really think people could even be arsed to commit to this fairly easy thing?
Google "Latin Freeze." Also "economic blackout."
It seems to have started with a mere rumor, thus far unsubstantiated, alleging a Coca-Cola bottling plant in Texas invited their Latino staff to a meeting room, fired them all and then turned them over to ICE. There is plenty of reason to doubt the veracity of the allegation and no evidence to support it, but the rumor was allowed to fester for weeks before Coca–Cola finally issued a denial in an email to Reuters on Feb 10. I got sucked into believing it myself after reading a Newsweek article playing up the rumor, egregiously. I figured it was probably to comply with Trump's executive order because Coca-Cola has contracts with the government. ("you're gonna to have to answer to the Coca-Cola company"). Well by the time Coke emailed Reuters and Reuters printed the fact–check debunking the rumor, it was too late. The wheels were in motion and the call to boycott had already grown to signify the outrage over Trump's deportations, absurd ban on DEI, and especially the private companies already caving and dismantling their own DEI initiatives.
Buzz has caught on in the mainstream media about this, which is in–turn drawing more participants, and it should have retailers scared. A one–day boycott is not enough to bring down the system, but it is a warning shot, and it is galvanizing people out of their malaise, fast. More such actions in March and April are gaining momentum.
Enthusiasm for the Feb 28 action has quickly snowballed into a broader gesture of disapproval for all things Trump. This snowballing is leading to wider participation, but the complaint has rightly been raised that it also risks diluting the intended message.
It does seem that the narrative in the public discourse has quickly shifted from an emphasis on firings and deportations of working Latinos to a story focused on "DEI," which has both brought more people on board, and also brought more derision since DEI has become such a loaded term that nobody seems to understand. I suspect this shift in terminology may have been an attempt at race-baiting, since DEI is so often misinterpreted as "black stuff."
To those who doubt, I say don't count the Latinos out. While some popular movements in the US have a habit of fizzling out, mark words, Latin Americans KNOW how to boycott. Consider the example of victories won by the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW) since their inception in 2001. The CIW have absolutely kicked ass, and they've proved they don't need media attention or widespread mainstream support or even a great deal of funding to get things done. Compared the suburban college campus Occupiers, one-day "hey–hos" and stagers of "die-ins" (the laziest form of public protest?) Latino immigrant workers are generally more experienced in, well, hard work. The kind of hard work necessary to sustain a prolonged and effective movement.
But wait, didn't Latinos largely support Trump? Right. And the utter betrayal of being targeted by the guy who wooed your loyalty is just the kind of shock I was talking about earlier, a sudden impact of a magnitude that the seemingly–impervious fortress of Denial simply cannot withstand, which results in people turning on the cult leader and the false promises he has been selling. And turning on him with a vengeance, make no mistake. Not just taking off the hat and sadly walking away, but throwing the hat in his face and calling, ahem, figuratively of course, for his head.
But back to the action. Some are calling for a nationwide full scale "no–shop day," but most are emphasizing a more nuanced version, boycotting big businesses that are doing away with DEI in the wake of Trump's executive order, including Target, Amazon, McDonald's, (you can find a full list online, Forbes provides an in–depth rundown), while supporting locally–owned and small businesses instead. The message being, if you don't want us in your stores, we will take our business elsewhere, and you will feel the impact of our numbers.
Note that the tech company Intel is sometimes unfairly winding up on AI–generated lists of companies doing away with DEI, even though they maintain and defend robust DEI practices. This seems to be because of a confusion between the tech company Intel, and government Intel, since intelligence agencies are halting all DEI initiatives under Trump's executive order. The Intel mixup seems to be another example of the dangers of AI–generated Internet "slop," and the associated risks of lazy news outlets repeating it, as when NPR included Intel on their list of a dozen or–so companies rolling back their DEI initiatives.
Emphasis is also growing for supporting big companies insistent on retaining their DEI initiatives, including Delta, Pinterest, Apple... again more extensive lists can be found online. Costco in particular is garnering a lot of praise and reaping the rewards of firmly refusing to back off from their commitments to ensuring a diverse equitable and inclusive workplace.
These lists may still lead to the boycott coming off as a more blunt instrument than it could be, because "DEI" can means so many things depending on the institution or business in question. Diversity equity and inclusion are supposed to be qualities to strive for in a workplace, and the methods employed to achieve those goals vary wildly from one context to another. DEI can simply mean furnishing an ergonomic chair or keyboard, or the difference between getting a job based on life experience vs. college credit. Something no one seems to remember is that DEI, along with affirmative action, began as efforts to employ returning veterans and people with disabilities, only later expanding to include historically marginalized groups underrepresented in the professional sphere like women and ethnic minorities, thus bringing it to the front lines of contention between competing ideals and legal battles over things like enrollment quotas.
Trump remembers, however, or at least someone in Trumpland does. He has also rescinded Lyndon B. Johnson's historic Executive Order 11246, which has prohibited employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, and national origin by organizations receiving federal contracts and subcontracts, ever since its issuance in 1965.
Dirrrrty poool.
Fast–forward to recent years following George Floyd's murder by Minneapolis cop Derek Chauvin, when emphasis on DEI in the workplace increased dramatically, and we witnessed DEI becoming another whistle word, with racists co-opting the term to refer to any employed person of color as a "DEI hire," and now the current shitshow with Trump and far–right politicians seizing on the opportunity to weaponize the term as race–bait for their political base.
And since diversity equity and inclusion are qualities, in this case qualities to strive for in the workplace, the notion that they can be banned is an absurdity. Thus the inevitable outcome of this executive order is, predictably, chaos, with companies and institutions agonizing over whether or not to simply scrub those words from their printed materials, shut down various initiatives like diversity training and DEI offices created to assist people with disabilities, and a fresh dustclouded, for–or–against fist–fracas over the latest phantom boogieman dangled before average people to turn them against one other.
Standing back to take it all in, smelling the air, the olfactory memory brings back the clarity. It's the familiar taste of Trump–flavored chaos, which he loves to dish out by the deep–fried bucketful. How effectively it serves to distract and divide us while his foxes raid the henhouse, "flooding the zone," to use Steve Bannon's words, with DOGE plundering government programs like Head Start, Medicaid, the Veterans Administration, shutting down a corporate wish–list of agencies that cock–block crooked businesses trying to fuck people over with impunity, especially those who have ever pissed Elon off personally, by taking his toys away from him, holding him responsible for cleaning up his mess, or forcing him to wait his turn in line (CFPB, SEC, USAID, USDA, FCC, DOL, DOT, EPA, DoD, FBI, IRS...holy fuck). "Resilience targeting," a form of hybrid warfare, "an attack on individual and community resilience during disasters through misinformation, confusion, and efforts to overwhelm, in order to prevent communities from recovering and keep them vulnerable."*
But beyond it being a tactic, megalomaniacs like Trump and musk genuinely love to stir up madness like this. It's another form of ego–dope for the power–junkie, civilization itself being just another toy for them to play with until it breaks.
But getting back to the "Latino Freeze" aka "economic blackout" aka "No–Buy Friday" scheduled for Feb 28th.
Personally I think that the DEI "naughty list" and "nice list" warrant even deeper examination, given each institution's unique circumstances. Some are under tangible government pressure to do away with their DEI efforts.
Telecom companies like Comcast, for example, are being actively targeted by the Trump administration to remove DEI or else, because they are regulated by the FCC.
PBS and NPR are in the hot seat because they are publicly funded. Ditto for Amtrak and the Smithsonian Institution, along with any university or business receiving public funding.
But Trump's order also has private businesses scared, as it contains language vaguely hinting that that they might not be safe:
Each federal agency must also identify “up to nine potential civil compliance investigations” of private sector entities, including publicly–traded corporations, nonprofits and foundations, state and local bar and medical associations, and institutes of higher education with endowments over $1 billion. The orders don’t specifically state what type of ramifications private-sector entities could face, but the attorney general must submit a report within 120 days with enforcement recommendations, including potential litigation or regulatory action. The language in the order suggests the directives apply broadly to the private sector, not just entities that contract with the federal government or receive federal funding.
Certain companies seem to be merely rebranding their DEI efforts, retaining things like community outreach, mentorship, and offices dedicated to assisting employees protected under the Americans With Disabilities Act, while merely shuffling the verbiage on official documents. Boeing seems to be an example, having dismantled their global diversity, equity and inclusion department and redirected its staff to their human resources department to focus on talent acquisition and employee experience.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
THIS PORTION ACCIDENTALLY DELETED
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
relief that they'll no longer feel pressured to sign every email with their preferred pronoun.
While I haven't seen any mention of it yet, the idea comes to mind my mind that maybe some of these companies with government contracts, like Coca-Cola, should consider canceling their government contracts rather than cave to Trump's executive order. I may be speaking as an armchair quarterback here, but I dare say the company just might be big enough to withstand the fallout from such a move.
Forbes has been extensively covering this topic ever since Trump's executive order banning DEI has been issued; a couple of in–depth articles I can point to are:
Trump's Diversity Orders Rattle CEOs: What Companies Should Know About New DEI Rules Sara Dorn, Jan 23
Citigroup Rolls Back Diversity Initiatives—Here Are All The Companies Cutting DEI Programs Conor Murray, Feb 21
* Brouillette, Richard, "What Is Resilience Targeting?" Psychology Today, Feb 3, 2025, sourced from
Briggs, Chad M. "Climate Change and Hybrid Warfare Strategies." Journal of Strategic Security 13, no. 4 (2020)
Last edited by Rampop II (2/22/2025 6:45 am)
Offline
...oh yeah, I knew I was leaving out something. DOGE rummaging around our Social Security records.
Offline
well, as you can see, I fucked it up again. There's a huge chunk that just must've gotten accidentally selected and deleted out of there. You are right. I'm not gonna make it. I'm sorry guys, I really am. I worked so goddamn motherfucking hard on that article . I mean hours. I typed it as a note document, I copy pasted, Jesus fucking Christ techno fucking shit.. I'm so sorry. I'm just not cut out for this computer shit. Maybe I'll see you at the park.
Offline
Hey buddy, I cleaned some of them paragraphs up for you. I appreciate any contribution, but if it's causing dismay, maybe don't sweat it so much. I know I've been known to drop a tome of text when I get in a mood, but I'm not trying to make a competition out of it.
Offline
I don't begrudge anyone who sucks at computers since I barely even know what a computer is.
I also am currently incapable of articulating anything in regards to politics outside of blasts of rage. Honestly, just a slightly better option than punching a hole in a wall. But it's about what you can get down, regardless of whatever momentary limitations we have.
Offline
Jinnistan wrote:
Hey buddy, I cleaned some of them paragraphs up for you. I appreciate any contribution, but if it's causing dismay, maybe don't sweat it so much. I know I've been known to drop a tome of text when I get in a mood, but I'm not trying to make a competition out of it.
My work! My precious paragraph breaks! [i][i]Hours [/i] of intensive, meticulous, anal–retentively curated manicure, my poetry, rrraped! My face, my faaace! Skin of my cheeks, melting off my cranial bones, saturated with this scorching salty deluge of endless tears! My bayyyybyyy! Crying hard as babes could cry....
It's irrational, I know. But hey, this is me, folks. Warts and all. Just trying to do my part. What do you mean you wanted the socks on first? They're on, aren't they? The ingratitude... where's my belt and my epsom salts? Ohhh, you'll be sorry, cruel world, it's all up to you now; good luck saving the baby elephants without my inextinguishable fire of enthusiastic, die–with–your–boots–on sense of selfless sacrifice... where's my boots?
Yes, I've been watching Dana Gould. I don't post standup comedy unless it's exceptional, so if nobody watches the video and raves about how exceptionally exceptional my personal favorite thing is, I'll... cry and whine some more.
I know I should stop writing before my meds wear off. But my meds just don't last long enough. They wear off before I do. Then I never come back to finish it. What do they want from me, discipline?
Maybe my digital devices would work better if I didn't punch them so much.
Seriously though, I should include and extra space between paragraphs? I've only finally stopped double–spacing after periods within the past couple years or so. Cranberry juice.
And I'm not even that old. I just don't transition well. "Shifting set," I think the neuropsych test called it, changing the rules in the middle of the game. Telltale symptom of TBI, I'm told. Hell I'm still recovering from my most recent concussion, from the automatic closing liftgate on the Chrysler Pacifica I rented while my beloved biodiesel–powered CRD is in the shop. I mean, why does everything have to be automatic, now? It's worse than having a houseguest who cleans the house while you're gone, worse than a backseat driver, it's more like a backseat driver who actually reaches over and grabs the wheel. Somebody seems to think we're all dying to accelerate the year 4510 when we'll finally have evolved to be the head alien in Invaders from Mars, an expressionless brain in a fist–proof floating goldfish bowl with weightless shoestring tendrils that merely drift past virtual images of pornographic thought suggestions so we can get right to the dopamine rush of prolonged orgasms without all that tedious exertion and mess.
Ain't we allowed to do stuff with our hands anymore? Remember all that backlash against the commercial for whatever technocrap device it was, showing a heap of musical instruments and easels and whatnot getting smashed by a compactor? Even the outrage over that got misinterpreted as mere emotional attachment to our beloved childhood mementos, as if it was merely our nostalgia we saw being crushed, completely missing the point that, sure, we love the smell of cellos, but nobody mentioned the point that, surprise surprise, we actually like doing things with our hands. But oh, wouldn't it be so much more arousing if Demi Moore and Patrick Swayze had sensually merged their eyeballs and hands to a virtual pottery wheel on a zillion–pixel touchscreen instead, to the accompaniment of an autotune pitch–corrected Chained Melody, without all that old... righteousness?
Digressions digressions, OK, spaces between paragraphs. Roger that. I'll get right to work reciprocating, and start tidying up all those paragraphs about non–voters Gaza Sam Seder Hamas Zionism Brandon Sutton the Nakbah Emma Vigeland South African reconciliation Matt Leech–Lick Netanyahu and [Russian–backed, mark my words] anti–AOC sentiment; it's the least I can do.
I'm kidding I'm kidding I'm kidding! Stay in your lane, Rampop, or it'll be the fucking leaches, the boa worms...
[/i]
Offline
Rampop II wrote:
OK, spaces between paragraphs.
It helps. Makes the text less of an eye sore.
Rampop II wrote:
I'll get right to work reciprocating, and start tidying up all those paragraphs about non–voters Gaza Sam Seder Hamas Zionism Brandon Sutton the Nakbah Emma Vigeland South African reconciliation Matt Leech–Lick Netanyahu and [Russian–backed, mark my words] anti–AOC sentiment; it's the least I can do.
I'd maybe calm down, if I were you.
Offline
I think the deleted part wasn't all that much, upon review. Basically it was about how the Trump order banning DEI included instructions to weed out instances like the Boeing example, where DEI hadn't been done away with, only rebranded. Then an example or two of instanced where institutions were relieved to do away with DEI policies that were either ineffective or had served to make matters worse. For example, it was found that mandatory diversity training often had no effect, and being an ESL teacher myself, I bristle at feeling compelled to sign emails with preferred pronoun, especially knowing what I know about linguistics and the futility of the pronoun revolution, as an English teacher. The notion of having a single, gender–free pronoun is a noble one, but trying to forcibly change grammar is entirely different from adopting a new vocabulary item. It's like trying to rip out the bone of your skeleton, as opposed to just changing a shirt. It's not linguistically feasible. I could go into a well thought–out tome about this, but not now and not here on this particular thread. To quote my old gay neighbor's response, "You'd have to re–write the whole fucking language."
But getting back to the main point I was trying to make, which is about the action people are taking. I am very excited about the resurgence of mainstream enthusiasm for employing the power of boycott. I think it's brilliant when applied effectively, far more so than street demonstrations or "like" buttons, and it's galvanizing me to action and out of helplessness. I'm also encouraged by the knowledge that the narcissistic shockwave coming out of the new administration has the real potential to finally turn Trump's base against him. I want to be part of the action.
I need to find a more optimal way of contributing. I keep forgetting that the vision in one of my eyes is distorted (a condition called central serous retinopathy), which leads to a darkened, out–of focus "funhousing" effect, one that aint so fun. But it's fascinating, no? These lines that I type, they sag and distort like hot candle wax. The TBI leads to all kinds of weird bad trip frustrations; send me to the front lines where I can make myself useful. I just don't want to throw my body on the gears of the wrong machine. So I research and research and research, with screen size zoomed to 200%, and I find everything I know is wrong...
...who is calling me at this hour? Dare I answer? Scuse me...
Offline
My mom butt–dialed me LOL.Well anyway, boycott. Um… yeah, I’ll write more later, I think the meds are wearing off. Melting lines of text…melting face… Just to be crystal–clear, that melting face business was supposed to be humorous, in case it wasn’t obvious. I hope that goes without saying but I know intent gets lost in type, sometimes. Interpersonal communication is estimated to be somewhere between 90% and 93% nonverbal, after all. I have no problem with a little editor’s touch.
Offline
It's easy to get confused trying to follow all of the chaos around Musk's constant fire-setting, and I'm sure this is a big part of the point. It's mostly psychological warfare both on federal employees and on the poor citizens daring to keep vigilant. Just in the last few days, you have the Saturday night email demandng federal employees to explain their jobs and why they shouldn't be fired. "Respond by midnight Monday, nonresponses will be taken as resignations". So throughout Sunday, you had most of the federal agencies issuing alerts for their employees to not respond, that any responses will be done by department heads themselves, as proper procedure would dictate. Finally, on Monday, before the deadline, the Office of Personnel Managment, which is one of the offices which has been usurped by Musk's DOGE crew, issued what appeared to be a concession, that responses are in fact "voluntary", and that nonresponses will not resort in termination. But, rabid scamp that he is, Musk then issued a late night post just prior to the deadline: "Failure to respond a second time will result in termination." (For the record, if you don't want to come off as faschy, maybe try not to sound like ED-209.) So what's really going? Tune in tommorow!!! Isn't this exciting?!?
Here's a question - does Elon Musk even have the authority to terminate federal employees? Well, here's the rub....in his most recent missive last night, Musk specifies "Subject to the discretion of the President...". The President does have (limited) authority to fire employees, so the brand new question becomes, "does the President have the authority to delegate this authority to an unconfirmed, unelected "executive officer"? This is Musk saying that Trump is the one who is really pulling the trigger, with Musk merely advising him on who should be fired. But as I say, this power is limited, in most cases the President can only fire federal employees "for cause", meaning he must substantiate the "cause" which can then be challenged in court. Musk's little scheme is to try to claim "nonresponses" as evidence of employment fraud, and therefore sufficient cause, although, again, that doesn't seem legally supportable when the official (aka, "confirmed by the Senate") department heads have explicitly either ordered nonresponses or labeled them as "voluntary". Essentially, this amounts to a bluff. Many federal employees will opt out of the stress and uncertainty and voluntarily move on to other possible employment opportunities. This is psychological warfare, what Trump's new OMB director, and prominent Project 2025 author, Russ Vought described as "we want to put them in trauma".
If that isn't scary enough, note this minor little tidbit from the Health and Human Services' guide to their employees over any given responses to Musk's email: "Assume that what you write will be read by malign foreign actors and tailor your response accordingly." Good to know!!!
Also for clarification, note that in Musk's earlier "fork in the road" memo to federal employees, the one which offered a "deferred resignation" offer (it's been a long month, folks), Musk refers to the public sector as "low-productivity", in contrast to what he deems the high-productivty of the private sector. It never seems to occur to Musk that, in his (admittedly questionable) capacity at DOGE, he is also in this low-productivity business now. Hence the attempt to fashion these mass lay-offs as "liberating", think of all of those possibilities with your free time!!!
So it isn't surprising that, indeed, there's been hundreds of voluntary resignations throughout the federal bureaucracy in response - sometimes stated "in protest" - to these intimidations. Although some have fought back, including the head of the Office of Special Counsel, Hampton Dellinger, whom Trump had fired without cause. Dellinger successfully (for now) challenged this termination and was reinstated to his office by a federal judge. This is significant, as this office's duties include "investigating illegal actions taken against employees, including cases of whistleblower reprisal". In other words, this is the federal office most responsible for defending employees fired without cause. And, unsurprisingly, the OSC has issued a determination that "the probationary firings violate the law governing the civil service, as well as the principles underpinning the merit-based hiring system", which could potentially lead to thousands of recently fired federal employees to be reinstated as well. To add to the...let's call it "hilarity" of the situation, Trump has also recently attempted to remove a judge from the Merit Systems Protection Board, which will ultimately decide on the OSC determination, but that judge, as well, has been reinstated by another federal judge.
So the anxious question: "Where are we now?" Largely in the courts, as many of them have done everything from blocking Trump's edicts, or at least issued injuctions while the process plays out, reinstating federal education grants to historically black colleges (targeted under the 'DEI' ruse), and forcing the government to reopen Trump's freeze on federal aid.
But there's a possible frightening endgame looming which appears to be openly discussed and endorsed in right-wing media, which is the prospect that Trump decides to simply ignore the courts and do as he pleases anyway. What then? Well, a court can hold Trump in contempt of course. But what then? The judiciary has no apparatus to enforce their decisions if the enforcement branch refuses to do so. This is neither academic nor hypotheitcal, but the last (only) time we've seen this potential crack in our three-branch system was nearly 200 years ago when Andrew Jackson blatantly dared the Supreme Court to make him enforce their decision. Jackson may not have said the legendary quote of "let (Chief Justice Marshall) enforce it!", but he did say that the Supreme Court "can not coerce...to yield to its mandate". Like Trump, Andrew Jackson believed in an "imperial presidency", and much like Trump's, it's not ironic that this decision was relevant to forced migration, specifically over tribal rights, and Jackson's plans for the relocation of the Cherokee Indian.
What will happen if Trump chooses to simply ignore and defy the federal judiciary, possibly even including the Supreme Court (if they don't show him the same amount of deference, that is)? Well, we'll see. There's little evidence that such an action would provoke Congress to launch what would be rightful impeachment proceedings, or if they did that these would succeed, or that we can afford to wait until after 2026, assuming these actions lead to necessary voter backlash. For now the only impeachment actions being entertained by Republicans are against the same federal judges who are currently blocking Trump's agenda.
This is an awful lot of chaos for what is barely a month into Trump's days in office, and, of course, I haven't even mentioned stuff like Trump's blaming Ukraine for, I dunno, "wearing that dress" asking for it, after shaking them down for their mineral rights (which Putin is naturally trying to capitalize on), and new Defense Secretary Pete Hogsuck firing all of the military's top lawyers, almost as if they're planing on doing some really crazy shit they don't want to be legally accountable for.
Oh, and Canada. You know you want it. Just lie back and enjoy it. Like Polanski says, "The water's fine".
Offline
The Office of Personnel Management has now made it clear that there will be massive layoffs regardless of judicial decree.
The sentiment is best summed up by Marjorie Taylor Greene: "Those are not real jobs producing federal revenue, by the way. They’re consuming taxpayer dollars....Federal employees do not deserve their jobs. Federal employees do not deserve their paychecks. And these are jobs that can be fired at will." She's under the impression that the US government should be for-profit.
Here's a nice tidbit: "Operatives working for Elon Musk’s DOGE appear to be editing the code of AutoRIF—software designed by the Defense Department that could assist in mass firings of federal workers." Hm, that sounds familiar. It sure starts to seem as if there's about to be an awfully lot of unemployed people in the very near future, not just from the federal government, but across any and all industry sectors utilizing A. I. technology.
At this point, I'm going to go on the record as speculating, because I don't have any hard evidence of any plan to support what I'm about to say. But I am saying....I wonder why exactly there's this perceived need to repeal birthright citizenship. Let me suggest further,....does anyone think that there would be any limitation of whose citizenship would then fall into question? For example, with immigrants, there are already certain standards regarding their economic viability when they apply for citizenship. What if....the same Donald Trump who has just released a "gold card" for "world-class global citizens" (not American citizens, note...much like the Trumped-up Gaza will be inhabited by "the world's people") were to decide to determine citizenship based solely on wealth? "Economic viability"? Or. let's say, America were to invest in a small private (for-profit) industry capable of deporting approximately half a million people per month. Would this profitable industry stop at the illegal and undocumented, when birthright citizenship is no longer the threshold? Or would they continue with the indigent, the poor, the "non-productive" elements of society? Do you think a President who is a certified slumlord wouldn't salivate at this prospective mass-scale gentrification? Because with all of the lay-offs we see coming don the pike, in addition to increasing inflation and housing costs, would these rich bastards want the rest of us close enough to maybe spoil their early morning stroll to the boardroom?
I'm not saying. I'm just saying.
Offline
I briefly watched a Sam Seder bit where he brings attention to an article which claims "Trump's Coup Has Already Failed" and I wanted to punch something.
Would I like to believe this? Of course, I'd like a pleasant balm of an article to read as well. But to act like the Trump administrations current state of blundering and failing is somehow an end of anything, and they just won't continue to ramp up those blunders and failures until something works, or the entire system gets exhausted by the incessant push, is the concern.
And I don't even think Trump cares if the things he does lose him some of those fringe MAGA votes. He knows he will always have his faithful army, he knows he's got enough of the courts softening to his fascistic stances all across the country that eventually he'll catch a break on some of his more egregious actions.
So I'm basically against anything that tries to turn the alarm off at these early stages. While I like momentarily laughing at these fuck ups, and watching people they fire get immediately hired back etc etc....I know they are just going to keep bulldozing ahead.
Just like with these stupid tariffs. He might fake us out another half dozen times, but he's going to keep that threat lingering in the background, and eventually if the mood strikes him, he'll implement them, if only to call everyone's bluff.