COVID-19 #2 The Mutation

[FoolofaTook]

In Heretic, yes:

[myosis]

Originally Posted by redbreegull

This argument seems to be more about semantics and lack of defined terms than actual disagreement tbh.

I don't think ovary is making the case at all that things aren't really fucked right now. My interpretation is that he's saying historically speaking, saying America is decaying or in decline at this current moment seems dubious when you consider this is a country founded on genocide, slavery, racial caste systems, colonialism and imperial wars, a country which had a civil war over the right of one human to own another, a great depression, etc etc etc etc. So what exactly are we "decaying" from? If anything what is happening right now seems more like a reversion to the mean.

And I feel like the objections to this are actually more saying, "things are really bad right now so it's not right to point out that things have been really bad before." And then also digging into what "rich country" means, like does it mean a country with a lot of concentrated wealth or does it mean a country where wealth is used to take care of its citizens

*shrug* I'm just not actually sure what everyone is arguing over

I dunno I just see people like buzzard and disco king having an honest debate with ovary, meanwhile someone comes along with "Fuck off", "you are part of the problem", and "here this must be your favorite shirt". Very constructive.

[FoolofaTook]

you forgot "eat a dick"

[LaBelle]

#respectabilitypolitics

[Squish Squash]

Originally Posted by ovary

please tell me how racism, health-care, and poverty are worse now than they were in 1800, 1850, 1900, 1950, and 2000. again, i'll give you income inequality--that one is particularly bad right now and has been getting worse.

Better doesn’t mean good enough. Black people aren’t slaves anymore, but no rational person thinks they are treated well in America.

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by Squish Squash

Better doesn’t mean good enough. Black people aren’t slaves anymore, but no rational person thinks they are treated well in America.

I don’t think he ever made the argument that what is happening to black people in the US is good enough though. The argument started over the use of the word decayed

[MyOneAndOnly]

The only thing not decaying in this country are billionaires fortunes. Everything else is shit

[FoolofaTook]

Also my dick. That's definitely not decaying.

[LaBelle]

To say things haven't gotten patently worse in the last 4 years is just trying to justify own's political apathy.

[MyOneAndOnly]

Trump is pulling the USA out of the World Health Association because he says it's controlled by China.

The United States has always had more control over the WHO than any other country on Earth. This is insane. We need to be able to communicate with the rest of the world to contain this.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/05/tru...ational-group/

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by LaBelle

To say things haven't gotten patently worse in the last 4 years is just trying to justify own's political apathy.

now that fuzzy, toc, and poots are gone I don't think anyone on netphoria would say that

[FoolofaTook]

Originally Posted by MyOneAndOnly

Trump is pulling the USA out of the World Health Association because he says it's controlled by China.

The United States has always had more control over the WHO than any other country on Earth. This is insane. We need to be able to communicate with the rest of the world to contain this.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/05/tru...ational-group/

this is just a small part of it. decline? try a fucking nosedive.

[yo soy el mejor]

i hope they burn more police stations to the ground. that's the content we need.

[FoolofaTook]

fuck that they should just burn the white house

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by FoolofaTook

fuck that they should just burn the white house

The British were way ahead of their time in that way

[buzzard]

The effort to combat the decay/decline assertion ultimately boiled down to just expanding the year range in our hypothetical Quality of America Over Time line graph — the moment ironically becoming the best curve flattening feat ever achieved by an American — while pointing out that worse conditions do exist in countries the US has never competed with for preeminence at any point in time.

It's just ridiculous when refuting the claim of America in decline literally includes contrasting the blatant corruption of the presidency or 100,000 avoidable deaths against contracting cholera and being shot by a redcoat in the War of 1812. How do things look when we examine the last three decades?

[Squish Squash]

Originally Posted by yo soy el mejor

i hope they burn more police stations to the ground. that's the content we need.

[ovary]

Originally Posted by buzzard

The effort to combat the decay/decline assertion ultimately boiled down to just expanding the year range in our hypothetical Quality of America Over Time line graph — the moment ironically becoming the best curve flattening feat ever achieved by an American — while pointing out that worse conditions do exist in countries the US has never competed with for preeminence at any point in time.

It's just ridiculous when refuting the claim of America in decline literally includes contrasting the blatant corruption of the presidency or 100,000 avoidable deaths against contracting cholera and being shot by a redcoat in the War of 1812. How do things look when we examine the last three decades?

Saying "America is in decline" or "America is decaying" is an historical claim! The historical component to the question was baked into West's assertion before my refutation.

The last three decades I would still argue that social issues like racism, health-care, and poverty have generally gotten better, not worse. And America remains a better country to live in than the majority of other countries, both by financial measures and general ones of peace, happiness, and well-being. Sure, that is purchased by fucking up those other countries, but that is beyond the question of "decay." I am not particularly attached to that opinion and I'd be happy to entertain any evidence to the contrary, but so far all I've gotten is "eat dicks" and "you're a priviliged fucking monster." Citing nasty current events doesn't count as "decline" unless you can prove them worse than the past!

[ovary]

if you want to change the time scale to 5 years ill give you "decline" but i think that is too small a frame to really indicate "decay" on a national scale

[buzzard]

Historical claim or not, a decline or the onset of decay would only require that the nation be beyond its peak. A rough earlier period is kind of par for the course when looking at any nation over the period you're now discussing because human society in general has come a long way in the last two centuries. This doesn't therefore mean America cannot reasonably be described as decaying or in decline until it begins forcing minorities to work the fields for food and bedding again.

To make either that or your handy comparisons to countries that have always been worse off than America your prerequisite in this for acknowledging a downward shift would be incredibly disingenuous. It'd be about as bad as shifting the burden of proof after being the one to seek to limit what words we can use to describe the state of affairs, though not as bad as doing both things while effectively waving off current events as nothings in the process.

[Disco King]

Economists define "decay" as 12 consecutive economic quarters of decline in the recent spectrum of time.

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by buzzard

Historical claim or not, a decline or the onset of decay would only require that the nation be beyond its peak. A rough earlier period is kind of par for the course when looking at any nation over the period you're now discussing because human society in general has come a long way in the last two centuries. This doesn't therefore mean America cannot reasonably be described as decaying or in decline until it begins forcing minorities to work the fields for food and bedding again.

To make either that or your handy comparisons to countries that have always been worse off than America your prerequisite in this for acknowledging a downward shift would be incredibly disingenuous. It'd be about as bad as shifting the burden of proof after being the one to seek to limit what words we can use to describe the state of affairs, though not as bad as doing both things while effectively waving off current events as nothings in the process.

So America's peak was five years ago and that is widely enough agreed upon that a claim that America is in decay is obviously correct and it's disingenuous to look at larger timeframes? I really do not understand what is happening itt.

[redbreegull]

also the West quote says America is "decayed," not "decaying," which at least to me implies it is thoroughly rotted through, not in the beginning stages of decay, which I think is part of what ovary is disagreeing with. IMHO it's part of West's rhetorical style, but I don't think that means we should take it literally as in America is near the nadir of its existence

[redbreegull]

"a decayed empire that is unable to meet the basic needs of its people"

my issue with this sense of history is that there has never been a time when America met the basic needs of its people, and I do think it is correct to say that for most people, the past was still worse than the present

[LaBelle]

Because shifting the focus from the actual message to how it's being delivered and appealing to historical "it's been worse before" rhetoric are common tactics for silencing minorities.
It's baffling that you wouldn't see this RBG.

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by LaBelle

Because shifting the focus from the actual message to how it's being delivered and appealing to historical "it's been worse before" rhetoric are common tactics for silencing minorities.
It's baffling that you wouldn't see this RBG.

Well this is my last response to this conversation because this is seriously the stupidest argument I have seen on the internet in recent weeks and that is impressive.

I do not see an argument over how the message is being delivered. The argument is over the accuracy of the message. Like I said, I think it's part of West's rhetorical style. I don't think it is thusly wrong to take issue with a historical claim he's making. I also know for certain that ovary is on the same page as everyone else here and would not debate that things are going downhill versus 4 years ago especially for minorities. I feel personally that there is the sense that people just don't want to hear any critique of any kind of leftist message whatsoever, and that's a bit too bandwaggony for me and is a problem I encounter a lot personally trying to figure where I fit in on the left. So. The end.

[redbreegull]

Ok, one more.

But again, like I said three times already, the argument here is about the definition of terms and then everyone is veiling that argument within other arguments that aren't even happening. If the issue is "it's not appropriate to critique West's point for accuracy when you understand his bigger point because it introduces unnecessary doubt and obscures the claim," I don't understand why that can't just be stated instead of arguing via strawmen like "how can anyone say things aren't worse now than four years ago?" (when no one said that)

now I'm off my soap box. carry on

[redbreegull]

is this the politics thread now? is anyone else protesting tonight? I might go to the White House but I have to figure out how to get down there since I'm sans automocar right now

[LaBelle]

Originally Posted by redbreegull

Well this is my last response to this conversation because this is seriously the stupidest argument I have seen on the internet in recent weeks and that is impressive.

I do not see an argument over how the message is being delivered. The argument is over the accuracy of the message. Like I said, I think it's part of West's rhetorical style. I don't think it is thusly wrong to take issue with a historical claim he's making. I also know for certain that ovary is on the same page as everyone else here and would not debate that things are going downhill versus 4 years ago especially for minorities. I feel personally that there is the sense that people just don't want to hear any critique of any kind of leftist message whatsoever, and that's a bit too bandwaggony for me and is a problem I encounter a lot personally trying to figure where I fit in on the left. So. The end.

No, i'm all for critique of leftist messages because they still fail to address the issues they purport to care about for the most part.

Which is also why I think commenting how West's statement is "historically inaccurate" is disingenuous when it's message is actually commenting on how the virus is disproportionally affecting minorities right now not if the average quality of life is better than before.

[LaBelle]

Anyway, Mr. West actually contextualizes the whole thing pretty darn well.