Random political thought thread.

[Virtual ghost]

Actor Donald Sutherland dies aged 88

 

[Coriolis]

As far as I understand it this is not race related but class related. Before industrialization the peasants were out in the fields getting tanned while the nobility stayed much more indoors. With industrialization things changed as the plebs were working in the factories and those with money could travel and relax in the sun. So a tan became the new status symbol.

Then tanning lamps were invented and became increasingly accessable. With that and, above all, an awareness of skin cancer and skin ageing processes the tan dropped out of fashion again. Today I personally associate a tan with the lower social classes, i.e. people who either do physical labor outdoors or who don't know or don't care about the health aspects and still strive for a tan as an outdated former status symbol.

There are countries in Asia where paleness has always been and still is associated with beauty. The whiter the better (probably also class and status related) On the other hand, I happened to see an article today about how the current science is reevaluating the risks of sun light exposure and the pendulum might move away from today's recommendation of sun avoidance (or at least strong sun protection) towards a more balanced approach.

In many spiritual/religious traditions, e.g. Christianity, light is equated with goodness and dark with evil. I have long wondered whether this has anything to do with notions of the superiority of people with lighter skin. It is a short-sighted if pervasive metaphor.

 

[Virtual ghost]

In many spiritual/religious traditions, e.g. Christianity, light is equated with goodness and dark with evil. I have long wondered whether this has anything to do with notions of the superiority of people with lighter skin. It is a short-sighted if pervasive metaphor.

I think this is coming from something that is much more practically minded than this. The religion was invented long time ago and thus long before electricity. In other words before electricity the dark and night were much more of a problem. Since night was indeed the time when society was handicapped in plenty of ways. After all even today it is not uncommon to say "Don't go outside, since it is dark and thus dangerous". While violence in the open daylight is usually considered to be twice as shocking and outrageous as the one made during night.

Therefore I would place my money that this is much more likely to be the primary source. After all typical white Christian from 500 years ago probably never even saw a black person with their own eyes.

 

[The Cat]

Anyone who's had to bathe out in the dark of the night without electricity or shelter can attest that fear of the dark is a primal fear that has nothing to do with race or culture.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Anyone who's had to bathe out in the dark of the night without electricity or shelter can attest that fear of the dark is a primal fear that has nothing to do with race or culture.

Even looking out at a large body of water on a dark night in the city is a little spooky, I think.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Moreover, the Aztecs would sometimes perform human sacrifices to guarantee the sun came back, which means they did not have positive associations with the dark. I'd say it means they were terrified of it.

 

[Coriolis]

Moreover, the Aztecs would sometimes perform human sacrifices to guarantee the sun came back, which means they did not have positive associations with the dark. I'd say it means they were terrified of it.

There is a difference between the complete vanishing of the sun, which would mean true disaster, and the dark of night in the context of a recurring, predictable cycle. There is a quote often attributed to Galileo: "I have loved the stars too fondly to be fearful of the night." We need both. They are two sides of the same coin. Both need to be respected for what they are.

 

[ceecee]

This is a bit random, but something I've wondered about from time to time. I recognize that racism is an ongoing issue that still needs to be addressed in society. I also understand that a lot of the racially dominant groups have been white people.

What is strange to me is that I remember growing up, and especially in the 70's 80's 90's and perhaps less today, it was a huge shame socially to have skin too white. When I was in 8th grade I spent the summer getting a suntan and not because i enjoyed it. I hated laying out in the sun, but knew it would be humiliating to go to school with really white skin. I lived in Wyoming at the time so I was surrounded by white people with a few Hispanic people.

The ideal culturally was tanned skin, but with blonde hair and probably blue eyes like Barbie. I'm not suggesting it is the same thing as having racial prejudice, but it is interesting that there has also been cultural shame to have white skin. Someone recently teased me about having really white skin and I felt defensive and pointed out that mine is a little olive toned implying bright white was shameful. I don't know if everyone realized that or had that experience. Is it about Barbie and images like that? Something else?

This was a cultural thing and keep in mind, knowledge about the sun, skin cancer, UV rays and products to protect skin were few and far between. I don't recall there being a huge shame to have too white skin. I just remember people liking to be tan in the summer. Perhaps this was a regional thing because up north here, you don't have the ability to be out getting a tan all year. I was a lifeguard as a teen, in the early to mid 80's I had the most magnificent summer tan because of it, I never laid out in the sun. My entire adult life I have avoided the sun and/or use as much product and clothing possible to avoid sun damage and in my 50's I'm especially glad I took those steps.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

There is a difference between the complete vanishing of the sun, which would mean true disaster, and the dark of night in the context of a recurring, predictable cycle. There is a quote often attributed to Galileo: "I have loved the stars too fondly to be fearful of the night." We need both. They are two sides of the same coin. Both need to be respected for what they are.

I am reminded of what I was writing earlier today on Discord around the topic of Halloween and how it is unfortunately being watered-down and neutered for kids today. This holiday has been vilified more than any of the others, I think. Growing up and celebrating it, I remember there were times I felt scared going door to door trick-or-treating. There was one street near me with all these gigantic houses dating to the 1890s or something like that. I was afraid to enter many of these houses, but I did it regardless. An experience like that teaches courage (which I could use more of in some situations even today). I think that's a valuable thing for kids to learn. You don't get that if you're just picking candy from the trunk of a car while wearing a costume in broad daylight. The costume aspect also allows for personal expression, which is also good.

I tried to think of what Halloween is really about as a holiday (beyond the rituals we associate with it), and I think it's about celebrating the unordinary or the otherworldly. You'll notice that they don't just show horror movies on Halloween; they also show science fiction films (and probably fantasy too, but I can't remember this). This fits in with the ancient Celtic celebration of Halloween (which I'm sure you know quite a bit about), which centers around a thinning of the veil between our world and the spirit/fae world; the sidhe/Tuatha de Danaan come out from the mounds. Remarkably, I would say it has maintained it's ancient associations, albeit in a modernized form. For modern people, Halloween is a reminder of the possible existence of other worlds, other realities, and this can be scary, but also a lot of fun.

I have also tried to grasp horror movies, and I think they get a bad rap. I think, given the people I know who are extremely into them, that it's not fair to say that they watch them because they are disturbed. There is something else going on with the popularity of horror movies as a phenomenon that's quite fascinating, but I don't know what it is. Perhaps it is similar to getting the courage to go up to those spooky old houses as a kid. For some people, I think it might also be a way of dealing with trauma.

My general point is that I do agree there is a place for the dark alongside the light. When I said that I found large bodies of water on moonless nights "spooky", I should mention that I also found myself compelled to gaze into the abyss. It's like staring at nothing, the best manifestation of it I've ever seen, and yet, I couldn't look away. I am not sure if you agree, but ultimately it is important to wrestle with the dark, rather than turn away. Without that, we can have no truth.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Why RFK Jr. didn't qualify for the first presidential debate


In other words: with this and incoming election based polarization he will probably start to fade in the polls.

 

[The Cat]

Irregular conflict without violence...

​

 

[SensEye]

Leave Stonehenge alone. I've got much less problem with the same crazies painting Taylor Swifts private jet. That at least makes a bit of sense. OTOH, I bet more people get outraged about that than defacing Stonehenge.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Another wave of polls came out in 538 for swing states. However what is obvious is that democratic senators seem to be doing much better than Biden. What is opening all kinds of scenarios.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Another wave of polls came out in 538 for swing states. However what is obvious is that democratic senators seem to be doing much better than Biden. What is opening all kinds of scenarios.

538

After all judge for yourself. The polls are under the June 17th.
The presidential ones have two versions since the one is with 3rd parties in the mix.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Towards the conventional wisdom that should be the case. However there is plenty of factors that can really muddy the issue. Not to mention that many of these are in the domain of foreign policy and global issues. What means that they can't be fully controlled. In other words it can be argued that today there is more of such factors than there was in 2016.


Therefore I am not prone to take things for granted. If the Dems are serious about winning that will evidently require some extra work this time.

No, I think that you are misunderstanding me. I’m not taking things for granted and I still believe democrats need to fight like hell in this election.

What I am seeing firsthand as an American voter is informing my thought here. Biden, despite being unpopular, will trend upwards. This is already slowly happening and I am seeing a lot more nervousness and distaste about Trump, even among people who would and should be diehard Trump supporters. Im also seeing this trend a bit with independents and undecideds. I’m seeing this first hand, as I live near and work with a lot of conservative types. While Biden isn’t terribly popular among these people, many of them just aren’t “feeling” Trump as much as they were in 2016 and 2020. They no longer speak of Trump as a heroic outsider coming in to drain the swamp; I’ve hear many of these types of people speak of him as “just another corrupt businessman/politician”—his conviction did him few favors and I think only his most hardcore supporters really saw him as a political martyr after his conviction. Many “old school” conservatives want nothing to do with a criminal

In “normal” elections, lack of voter enthusiasm (as it translates into low voter turnout) tends to hurt democrats more than republicans, but I have a strong sense that it could actually hurt Trump more than Biden this time around. While there’s a definite danger for Democrats in taking things for granted, the same is true and perhaps to a greater degree with republicans in 2024.

That said, it’s still very early and too soon to tell. A lot can happen between now and November to change the course of events.

But overall I have a sense that things may not go so great for the republicans. But democrats still need to be vigilant and take their opponents seriously.


Another thing is that democrats are starting to play Trump’s own game against the republicans, they’ve had eight years to learn how to play that game, and they have gotten surprisingly good at it. I am noticing that it is throwing the republicans “off their game” a bit and putting republicans more on the defensive, whereas in the past it has almost always been the democrats in defensive default mode. I don’t think republicans are as used to being put in defense mode. And it’s really messing with their heads and they are scrambling to adapt.

I also think some of Trump’s most vocal and extreme supporters are hurting him more than they are helping him. His own sycophants and his most loyal supporters could be his undoing, which would be a sweet form of poetic justice.

Very interesting times.

 

[Virtual ghost]

No, I think that you are misunderstanding me. I’m not taking things for granted and I still believe democrats need to fight like hell in this election.

What I am seeing firsthand as an American voter is informing my thought here. Biden, despite being unpopular, will trend upwards. This is already slowly happening and I am seeing a lot more nervousness and distaste about Trump, even among people who would and should be diehard Trump supporters. Im also seeing this trend a bit with independents and undecideds. I’m seeing this first hand, as I live near and work with a lot of conservative types. While Biden isn’t terribly popular among these people, many of them just aren’t “feeling” Trump as much as they were in 2016 and 2020. They no longer speak of Trump as a heroic outsider coming in to drain the swamp; I’ve hear many of these types of people speak of him as “just another corrupt businessman/politician”—his conviction did him few favors and I think only his most hardcore supporters really saw him as a political martyr after his conviction. Many “old school” conservatives want nothing to do with a criminal

In “normal” elections, lack of voter enthusiasm (as it translates into low voter turnout) tends to hurt democrats more than republicans, but I have a strong sense that it could actually hurt Trump more than Biden this time around. While there’s a definite danger for Democrats in taking things for granted, the same is true and perhaps to a greater degree with republicans in 2024.

That said, it’s still very early and too soon to tell. A lot can happen between now and November to change the course of events.

But overall I have a sense that things may not go so great for the republicans. But democrats still need to be vigilant and take their opponents seriously.


Another thing is that democrats are starting to play Trump’s own game against the republicans, they’ve had eight years to learn how to play that game, and they have gotten surprisingly good at it. I am noticing that it is throwing the republicans “off their game” a bit and putting republicans more on the defensive, whereas in the past it has almost always been the democrats in defensive default mode. I don’t think republicans are as used to being put in defense mode. And it’s really messing with their heads and they are scrambling to adapt.

I also think some of Trump’s most vocal and extreme supporters are hurting him more than they are helping him. His own sycophants and his most loyal supporters could be his undoing, which would be a sweet form of poetic justice.

Very interesting times.

Ok, my whole point was that all of this evidently shouldn't be taken for granted.
Especially while in foreign policy you evidently have HUGE amount of potential problems that can really really complicate things. For example Putin can deliberately few days before the election decide to drop a random nuke on some Ukrainian troops. While Trump goers "WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE! PLEASE LET ME JUST HAVE A TALK WITH THIS GUY FROM POSITION OF POWER! IT REALLY DOESN'T HAVE TO END LIKE THIS!". If that happens and the race is basically a toss up who knows how this literal bombshell would effect the race. However there is about a dozen scenarios around the world that could have similar effect. All I am saying that people should be aware of the fact that these wouldn't fully be the elections like the other. Since under the carpet you have global realignment that can quickly disrupt security or tank the economy.


But as long as people don't take the race for granted that is kind enough in my book.

 

[The Cat]

 

[Virtual ghost]

If you really want to hurt Trump for the next few months you will have to say some things over and over to the people around you (especially young people).



1. If he loses in November that is it. He will never be the president again and his entire cloud will probably lose stream. Since in that case Republicans will have to search for some kind of new ideology and new approaches. Especially since in that case Trump will indeed eventually lose the game against his legal problems.

2. While in contrary if he wins you will have to take a look at him for 4 more years and he will almost surely have some kinds of figure that will continue the story once he is gone.

3. Senate terms are for 6 years. Therefore already in November we are directly defining how post Trump area will look like (even if he actually wins). Therefore we should vote as long term strategy so that we potentially have easier paths and more breathing room on the future. Since already now we are defining structures in which the next president after Trump or Biden will work.

4. In similar fashion: As of now Supreme court will be red one for at least another decade. However if Trump wins that can easily turn into two more decades, or perhaps even more. What will evidently have pretty large impact on how the rest of your life will look like.




This is what every undecided person and none-voter should get into its FACE over the next few months. Therefore If only a chunk of those realize the big picture that should do the trick in November.

 

[The Cat]

 

[ygolo]

Is fascism in the United States almost guaranteed now?