Octopus Overlords

stimpy wrote: ↑Sat Jul 25, 2020 11:58 am How come job training and mental health counseling are the same flavor?

Not everything that is brown is the same.

I know. It depends what you eat.

Coming out as pro-slavery seems like a bold move, but I suppose that Cotton knows his base better than I do.

Arkansas senator describes slavery as 'necessary evil'

A senator for the state of Arkansas has described slavery as a "necessary evil" on which the American nation was built.

In a local newspaper interview, Republican Tom Cotton said he rejected the idea that the US was a systemically racist country to its core.

He is introducing legislation to ban federal funds for a project by the New York Times newspaper, aimed at revising the historical view of slavery.

Max Peck wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 7:40 am Coming out as pro-slavery seems like a bold move, but I suppose that Cotton knows his base better than I do.

Arkansas senator describes slavery as 'necessary evil'

A senator for the state of Arkansas has described slavery as a "necessary evil" on which the American nation was built.

In a local newspaper interview, Republican Tom Cotton said he rejected the idea that the US was a systemically racist country to its core.

He is introducing legislation to ban federal funds for a project by the New York Times newspaper, aimed at revising the historical view of slavery.

He followed up with a ridiculous claim that the Founders in their wisdom set up America so that slavery would eventually go away (despite the spine-bending efforts they made to avoid anything that could threaten slavery or the political power of slave-holders).

He then claimed that Lincoln knew this and was the eventual agent of the Founders' great plan (despite Lincoln depicting slavery as America's original sin and, you know, the Civil War).

Oh, and of course the whole point of Cotton's claim was to threaten the funding of any school that decided to include the 1619 Project in its curriculum. Because, you know, Liberty.

Cotton has pushed back saying he didn't think that it was a 'necessary evil' but that he was saying the Founding Father's saw it that way. He needs to re-visit his own statement.

"We have to study the history of slavery and its role and impact on the development of our country because otherwise we can't understand our country," Cotton conceded. But, he added: "As the Founding Fathers said, it was the necessary evil upon which the union was built, but the union was built in a way, as Lincoln said, to put slavery on the course to its ultimate extinction."

He was wrapping the statements in the approval of the Founding Fathers. It also has the problem that even though several were slave owners it was never framed as a 'necessary evil' by the Founding Fathers. There wasn't some unsaid handshake agreement that they had to live with it to found a great nation as Cotton is implying. They just didn't solve it and AFAIK there is not evidence that the design of the Republic had some 'plan' to end it eventually.

Red dot indicates a slave-holder.

(Fact check.)

I seem to recall Thomas Jefferson once said that slavery would just disappear with the warmer weather.

malchior wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 8:39 amHe was wrapping the statements in the approval of the Founding Fathers. It also has the problem that even though several were slave owners it was never framed as a 'necessary evil' by the Founding Fathers. There wasn't some unsaid handshake agreement that they had to live with it to found a great nation as Cotton is implying. They just didn't solve it and AFAIK there is not evidence that the design of the Republic had some 'plan' to end it eventually.

They were almost ALL slave-holders in one form or fashion, because almost everyone in the Colonies who had any money at all was connected to the slave trade. It was almost impossible to avoid.

And there's plenty of evidence that many of the Founding Fathers viewed slavery as a necessary evil. To quote Jefferson in regards to the practice "But as it is, we have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other." It wasn't unsaid because they said it, constantly. However, you are correct there was (AFAIK) never any kind of "design" that would lead to the end of slavery. As smart as they were, the Founding Fathers couldn't see any way to end the practice without dissolving the Union....which, of course, is eventually what happened.

It's worth noting why it was a "necessary" evil. It was purely about continued prosperity and profits and not about any kind of systemic collapse. The Canadian model worked just fine albeit at a lower profit margin.

Little Raven wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 12:13 pm

malchior wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 8:39 amHe was wrapping the statements in the approval of the Founding Fathers. It also has the problem that even though several were slave owners it was never framed as a 'necessary evil' by the Founding Fathers. There wasn't some unsaid handshake agreement that they had to live with it to found a great nation as Cotton is implying. They just didn't solve it and AFAIK there is not evidence that the design of the Republic had some 'plan' to end it eventually.

They were almost ALL slave-holders in one form or fashion, because almost everyone in the Colonies who had any money at all was connected to the slave trade. It was almost impossible to avoid.

And there's plenty of evidence that many of the Founding Fathers viewed slavery as a necessary evil. To quote Jefferson in regards to the practice "But as it is, we have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other." It wasn't unsaid because they said it, constantly. However, you are correct there was (AFAIK) never any kind of "design" that would lead to the end of slavery. As smart as they were, the Founding Fathers couldn't see any way to end the practice without dissolving the Union....which, of course, is eventually what happened.

Plenty of evidence is quite different than 'they said' which is what he claimed. This whole system was implicitly built on slavery which is what he could have said. However, he needs the distinction to maintain his attack on the 1619 project. This was a dog whistle in service of that. He is vying for Trump's seat as chairman of the white racists and this was no mistake.

It makes you wonder how long slavery would have lasted were there no Civil War. WW2? 1950's? 1980s?

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 12:21 pm It's worth noting why it was a "necessary" evil. It was purely about continued prosperity and profits and not about any kind of systemic collapse. The Canadian model worked just fine albeit at a lower profit margin.

This has always interested me because the argument is often that the southern way of life depended on slavery. However, what really powered American prosperity was flexibility and invention. Without slavery would we instead have been pushed to adopt technology sooner and faster?

malchior wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 12:23 pmPlenty of evidence is quite different than 'they said' which is what he claimed. This whole system was implicitly built on slavery which is what he could have said. However, he needs the distinction to maintain his attack on the 1619 project. This was a dog whistle in service of that. He is vying for Trump's seat as chairman of the white racists and this was no mistake.

I'm well aware of Cotton's motives and distortions. But even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and I don't have any problem with the first part of his statement...the part that reads "As the Founding Fathers said, it was the necessary evil upon which the union was built..." Sure, we add nuance to that, but plenty of Founding Fathers did, in fact, say that exact thing in their letters, and even the Founding Fathers who rigorously opposed slavery ended up putting the issue aside in favor of creating the Union. It's the second part of his statement that bothers me. "but the union was built in a way, as Lincoln said, to put slavery on the course to its ultimate extinction." He appears to referencing Lincoln's oft-quoted speculation that stopping the expansion of slavery into the territories would lead to it's "ultimate extinction" but that was just Lincoln spitballing....there was certainly no plan by anyone, much less the Founding Fathers, to bring that about. And of course, Lincoln ended up being wrong about that particular matter anyway.

Little Raven wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 12:59 pm

malchior wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 12:23 pmPlenty of evidence is quite different than 'they said' which is what he claimed. This whole system was implicitly built on slavery which is what he could have said. However, he needs the distinction to maintain his attack on the 1619 project. This was a dog whistle in service of that. He is vying for Trump's seat as chairman of the white racists and this was no mistake.

I'm well aware of Cotton's motives and distortions. But even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and I don't have any problem with the first part of his statement...the part that reads "As the Founding Fathers said, it was the necessary evil upon which the union was built..." Sure, we add nuance to that, but plenty of Founding Fathers did, in fact, say that exact thing in their letters, and even the Founding Fathers who rigorously opposed slavery ended up putting the issue aside in favor of creating the Union.

The nuance is what matters here. They may have indeed justified slavery. They may have dismissed real concerns out of necessity. They even had what we'd now call racist beliefs about the people involved.

However, his statement claims it was part of some plan to make sure the burgeoning nation survived. As far as I know that never was a contemporary argument. And that is the framing that we should have issue with. It's especially odd since the second part as you actually take issue with is intrinsically linked with the first part. They are *Cotton's* framing of the events. The poison pill built into the system only exists in the context of a conflicted slave owner who knew he was doing wrong but had a plan to end it. It is white washing at some of its worst.

It's the second part of his statement that bothers me. "but the union was built in a way, as Lincoln said, to put slavery on the course to its ultimate extinction." He appears to referencing Lincoln's oft-quoted speculation that stopping the expansion of slavery into the territories would lead to it's "ultimate extinction" but that was just Lincoln spitballing....there was certainly no plan by anyone, much less the Founding Fathers, to bring that about. And of course, Lincoln ended up being wrong about that particular matter anyway.

In other racist news, Trump is declining to visit the Capitol and pay respects to John Lewis as he lies in state.

I'm sure he's tired out from all the golfing he did in NJ this weekend.

Incidentally, this weekend was the second time I've heard fighter jets scrambling over my home because of Trump being 35+ miles away golfing.

What, are they napalming the tree lines when he loses a ball?

Holman wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 2:53 pm In other racist news, Trump is declining to visit the Capitol and pay respects to John Lewis as he lies in state.

Not that it's surprising. I'd bet my house that Trump has no idea who Lewis is, other than someone who was opposed to him and therefore bad.

In a way, I'm glad he's not going. It's yet another megaphone that broadcasts his true colors as a complete shitstain of a human being.

BREAKING: Asked if he planned to pay his respects to late civil rights icon Rep. John Lewis, who will lie in state at the U.S. Capitol, Pres. Trump says, “No, I won’t be going. No.” http://abcn.ws/32YPNvL

Freyland wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 3:20 pm What, are they napalming the tree lines when he loses a ball?

Nah. They needed the Eagles to chase away 2 Cessnas. Seriously.

Skinypupy wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 3:22 pm

Holman wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 2:53 pm In other racist news, Trump is declining to visit the Capitol and pay respects to John Lewis as he lies in state.

Not that it's surprising. I'd bet my house that Trump has no idea who Lewis is, other than someone who was opposed to him and therefore bad.

In a way, I'm glad he's not going. It's yet another megaphone that broadcasts his true colors as a complete shitstain of a human being.

BREAKING: Asked if he planned to pay his respects to late civil rights icon Rep. John Lewis, who will lie in state at the U.S. Capitol, Pres. Trump says, “No, I won’t be going. No.” http://abcn.ws/32YPNvL

As if his "respects" were wanted or would be accepted as honest.

Also I would hate the job of painting POTUS every day.

Freyland wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 3:20 pm What, are they napalming the tree lines when he loses a ball?

Firefox is always advertising advert reading and this headline caught me by the booboo. "At 88 he is a historical rarity - the living son of a slave." That's how close we still are to slavery, the Trail of Tears, internment camps, and the like those directly impacted by it. How these are still "modern" events even though they happened (mostly) over a century ago.

LordMortis wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:31 am Firefox is always advertising advert reading and this headline caught me by the booboo. "At 88 he is a historical rarity - the living son of a slave." That's how close we still are to slavery, the Trail of Tears, internment camps, and the like those directly impacted by it. How these are still "modern" events even though they happened (mostly) over a century ago.

MUCH more over a century ago. Is this guy Sylvester Magee's son or something?

LordMortis wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:31 am internment camps,

George Takei was in an internment camp. I found it the most interesting part of his autobiography as I had no idea we had internment camps - and I was a good student and loved learning about World War 2.

Two podcasts I really liked this week -

An older one from around July 4th - The Flying Coach with Pete Carroll and Steve Kerr spoke with Corey Booker. I had no idea about Booker's background and he was a really good storyteller.

Another from The Ringer, Bakari Sellers spoke with Hillary Clinton. It was just nice to hear rational discourse about current issues. Finally, in the most recent episode, Sellers spoke with his Dad about John Lewis and CT Vivian. While his father rambles a bit, it was a very interesting look at the early Civil Rights movement from someone who was a crucial part of it.

Little Raven wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:35 am

LordMortis wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:31 am Firefox is always advertising advert reading and this headline caught me by the booboo. "At 88 he is a historical rarity - the living son of a slave." That's how close we still are to slavery, the Trail of Tears, internment camps, and the like those directly impacted by it. How these are still "modern" events even though they happened (mostly) over a century ago.

MUCH more over a century ago. Is this guy Sylvester Magee's son or something?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/ ... rge-floyd/

Long after leaving Massies Mill, Va., and moving up North as a young man in his 20s, Smith’s father, Abram Smith, married a woman who was decades younger and fathered six children. Dan, the fifth, was born in 1932 when Abram was 70. Only one sibling besides Dan — Abe, 92 — is still alive.

So the father was born around 1862, which would make him a toddler when slavery officially ended.

This just in - the umbrella man from the original George Floyd protests wasn't a local cop or Antifa.

This is no surprise to me. I expect anyone who wants a war is out there pushing to get one.

Paingod wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:12 pm This is no surprise to me. I expect anyone who wants a war is out there pushing to get one.

Yup between this and Richmond and other reports that right-wing agitators are behind a lot of the violence, the Antifa cries from Bill Barr and his ilk really sounds ominous to me. There is no evidence of it yet they keep saying it. Barr said it again *today* in front of Congress.

malchior wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:20 pm

Paingod wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:12 pm This is no surprise to me. I expect anyone who wants a war is out there pushing to get one.

Yup between this and Richmond and other reports that right-wing agitators are behind a lot of the violence, the Antifa cries from Bill Barr and his ilk really sounds ominous to me. There is no evidence of it yet they keep saying it. Barr said it again *today* in front of Congress.

As I said, anyone who wants a war...

War is good for business. War keeps politicians in office. War gets gears turning. War makes emergencies that give extra power. Waging war on America seems to be the only war Trump can start without approval from Congress.

malchior wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:11 pm This just in - the umbrella man from the original George Floyd protests wasn't a local cop or Antifa.

Everbody who doxxed that cop and had him convicted on day one needs to have a long, careful think.

Umbrella man appears on page *2* of this thread on May 29th. Feels like a million years ago now; in fact it feels like the longest year ever.

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 2:00 pmEverbody who doxxed that cop and had him convicted on day one needs to have a long, careful think.

I'll take "things that will never happen" for $200, Alex.

malchior wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 2:12 pm Umbrella man appears on page *2* of this thread on May 29th. Feels like a million years ago now; in fact it feels like the longest year ever.

Thanks to 2020, we're experiencing what eternity might feel like and I'm not entirely enjoying it.

New development in Portland. It seems that maybe the Federales are strapped for gas and using expired DM Gas... which decomposes into stronger chlorine and arsenic compounds. Apparently people were vomiting in the streets from this stuff.

Lots of various links to pics and videos of it being used in a Reddit thread.

Why do they even have expired canisters?

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jul 29, 2020 10:14 amWhy do they even have expired canisters?

Poor inventory control?

I've heard that in some places, police gassed protesters so hard they almost ran out of the stuff. They're probably digging into the back of the cupboards.

Paingod wrote: ↑Wed Jul 29, 2020 10:15 am

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jul 29, 2020 10:14 amWhy do they even have expired canisters?

Poor inventory control?

I've heard that in some places, police gassed protesters so hard they almost ran out of the stuff. They're probably digging into the back of the cupboards.

They shouldn't even have it on the back shelf. Not at the federal level, anyway. That's why the local police are so geared up, the feds dump off all the surplus before expiration/EoL.


Unless they are saving it specifically for this reason, as a way to get around restrictions. Where "expired" just means "ripe".

Jeez. That's pretty grim. It also speaks to the high regard to public safety these guys seem to hold.

I seeing reports from Cleveland, at least, that things have been quiet and protest actions have been peaceful.

Is Barr just trying to occupy Dem strongholds in swing states?