Your points are well taken on D's and other MAGA opponents AWOL (Away Without Leadership)
Re: Obama. A friend with a biracial family pushed back when I shared your criticism of Obama. She noted too many tin his country would have tolerated a black man snubbing Trump.
I think Anand's statement that we (who are not Trumpers or MAGA fans) are feeling "un-led" and undefended against the various dangerous threats we see coming from the new Presidential administration is accurate. ...
I think Anand's statement that we (who are not Trumpers or MAGA fans) are feeling "un-led" and undefended against the various dangerous threats we see coming from the new Presidential administration. So, at the very least I would want to see something like Timothy Snyder's proposal of a "People's Cabinet" that would vocally, forthrightly critique and organize opposition to whatever harmful actions Trump's administrative officials start undertaking.
I recognize that, to do that, Democratic or independent leaders would have to articulate an alternative vision to the sort of thing that's in Project 2025. But so far they show no signs of taking those steps.
This concern about our larger situation dissuades me from engaging in what Anand has rightly called "proxy fights" over smaller things. I don't feel, emotionally or intellectually, like I have time for or interest in those sorts of fights.
This hypothesis of people feeling undefended rings very true for me. Here in this comment section and in lots of other online spaces I am seeing a lot of talk about shrinking our sphere of influence and doubling down on trying to take care of each other within local communities. I'm down with that response. It feels like the best we can do in the circumstances. Personally, I've been thinking of trying to start a weekly, outdoor gathering of people we're the only rule is YOU DON'T BRING YOUR CELLPHONE. I understand that online spaces have both positive and negative impacts but I feel we have lost a lot of skills interacting with each other in real life and that is what needs to be strengthened right now.
PS: I'm in Canada so it feels less dire but with the saber rattling coming from Trump and our own country rapidly drifting right I'm trying to stay ahead of the curve here.
Ditto for Kamala Harris and the Second Gentleman who demonstrated how to cope with known criminals who have attacked you with smears, insults, and demeaning stereotypes. No basis for civility there. Don’t normalize the miscreant.
Leadership is important and we should look for and encourage that talent in service to the common good and the principles in the founding documents. Rather than pine for a hero it’s important to remember the importance of our own personal integrity. Alienating people is not a superpower. Everyone is entitled to respect. That being said, Mrs. Pence did the right thing. How else could it register with the perp in chief that he didn’t really get away with it? It was a form of resistance and not a mere slight. It took courage, resolve, and dignity to remain seated and self possessed under the public glare and in the presence of power.
I think this discussion is and the topic is just more sane washing. “We told them what we thought and the didn’t follow. Maybe they will just forget about it, if we let it go!!!”
No one but Liz Cheney and her cadre are actually standing tall by against the wind. Joe and Mica are just actors in the play being directed by the Oligarchy. Blah
The Democratic Party’s former leaders are all co-opted just like former Republican leaderless. We have no one to rally progressive Democrats in the fight to save democracy, to restore the rule of law and fight the billionaire oligarchy. If we the people are to resist the well coordinated efforts of U.S. billionaires to resurrect the robber Barron era of the 1900’s, we need national leaders. We also need to embrace civil disobedience and not behave timidly. Civility is not a requisite for sustaining this constitutional democracy. It may be a hindrance. Ending the Vietnam War, Civil rights and Union rights were not achieved in this nation through civility but through bold often disobedient acts. While Martin Luther King advocated peaceful protests, the Black Panthers were a welcome counter approach that brought fear into the consciousness. I am looking for leaders, probably not politicians, who will organize and mobilize an active and feared resistance movement.
Also, by the way, I think the idea that people shouldn't talk to Trump is silly. Trump is massively disregulated. More social contact can help with that. It's absolutely a public service to help with that if you have access. This idea that we should just be awful to people we disagree with is just making the world a worse place. Imagine if Trump were perfectly happy. Like, really, truly happy, not just happy with his latest endorphin hit. Would he be talking about invading Greenland?
Sadly, I have known people in the past who are, at best, 'consistently inconsistent' - or in old money, two-faced. The challenge is to find a clear path through ...
I apologize for my obtuseness, but I can't see how what you have said here connects to what I said. Not disagreeing with you, just not understanding.
To respond to what you've said, though, the idea that a person should be consistent seems wrong to me. When we get angry at someone for changing their minds, we are making a mistake. And we have all experienced the challenge of having two possibly diametrically opposed sets of feelings about a dilemma we face. Indeed, that's what makes it a dilemma.
So if the idea that people should be consistent is wrong in cases we're familiar with and associate as characteristic of being a good person, analyzing someone's bad behavior on the basis of whether or not it is consistent with their past behavior is equally fallacious. The problem isn't that they are inconsistent—it's that they are behaving in a way that is harmful. We want someone like that to be inconsistent, by changing their mind about being harmful. If we criticize them for being inconsistent, we are practically begging them not to change.
Fair comment "If we criticise them for being inconsistent, then we are practically begging them not to change."
What concerns me is something different, although horribly familiar: People (particularly politicians) who say one thing to get elected, and the opposite as soon as they get their hands on the keys to 'office'. Empty promises. Also known more colloquially as BS.
And people who are wilfully harmful - there's a simple word for that too, "Trolls" - from the fables of the classics.
And there is a simple rule to apply to that: "don't feed the Troll" - or don't give the oxygen of publicity to wilful disruptors. (From online Open Source etiquette - from the time before the Internet - the time of 'bulletin boards', decades ago.)
We live in a world of amplification - nothing new (all media tend to amplify - literally or figuratively), its just that we live in 'weird' world where amplifying hatred and stupidity is 'automatically' monetised, and 'algorithm-ised' - i.e. (anti-) social media is deliberately programmed to do just that, with no prospect of anyone (least of all the US Congress) changing any of that, anytime soon.
Clause 230 of the CDA of 1996 is the (worst) problem, and it doesn't help for the Department of Justice to say that the 'time is right for the scope of this clause (of the the CDA) to be reconsidered.' Silicon Valley executives and all their shareholders have far too much money at stake to ever let that happen. (Call me cynical if you like!)
I think it's silly to talk about this for at least a year. The current Democratic national leadership are .. I don't even know what to say about them. I think they are more the problem than Trump is, and that's really damning them with faint praise. Until they get out of the way, all we can do is work locally. And since they keep spending tons of money to screw up local races, even that is an uphill battle.
I don't really want to hear what they have to say. The time for that is past. If Kamala Harris had issued a mea culpa, if Blinken had admitted he was wrong about Gaza, etc, then maybe I'd be willing to hear something from them. As it is, I still care about them as human beings. E.g., I hope Kamala Harris is okay, and her husband is okay. But as politicians, what I want most from them is that they GTFO.
I'm all about Tim Walz, though. I just wish he hadn't let them muzzle him during the campaign.
BTW, to be super clear about this, I don't watch TV news or read the NYT, so even if they were talking, I might now have heard what they said. I read De Volkskrant. They are kind of a footnote from that perspective.
The question is what is wrong with Trump that he feels no embarrassment or shame about how he talked about ALL of these people. He is the one who should be sheepish and embarrassed. His lack of moral or shame is his superpower.
The Democratic leaders who told us that democracy was dead and Trump was Hitler are now saying.. Nah... Didn't really mean that. And, by the way, we will be holding our "resistances" from Martha's Vineyard and Caribbean islands.
This is an important discussion that I completely relate to. I was very conflicted about Obama's chumminess with Trump. On the one hand, I can see him trying to foster a rapport for potential future negotiations to reign in his worst impulses if necessary. On the other hand, W-T-F? I seriously doubt Michelle would have been that gracious (and notice she didn't bother to go.) I don't agree that they were "all" doing that. From what I saw, the Clintons, Bushes, Kamala and Doug, and the Bidens all ignored Trump and Melania. Trump tried to get Kamala's attention and she deliberately did not look at him. Is that enough? No, but this was a state funeral after all. Should they "boycott?" Maybe the family should not have invited him. He wasn't at Barbara Bush's funeral, and if you saw the official photo the Carter Center released, they literally cropped him out of the photo of the assembled dignitaries. Pence shook his hand which is sickening, given that his life was in danger but I don't really expect anything of him. The only person who was "satisfying" was Karen Pence of all people, rebuffing their outreach with contemptuous silence. One black woman in a private group I am in said "Black people have to do this all the time!" so I can respect I have no experience of being in that position in this racist society but I'm also not a former POTUS looked to for leadership. I also appreciate Anand articulating what is underneath the debate. WHERE ARE THE VOCAL, PASSIONATE LEADERS FOR THIS MOMENT? Who is guiding us as we careen toward autocracy? The threats and actions are happening in plain sight and those who warned us don't seem to be doing anything consequential. We're supposed to rely on Chuck Schumer?! Andrew Weissman said it would be "unseemly" for Garland to release the report without permission. We're still talking about politeness in the face of this madness, as climate change rages, burning homes to the ground in CA (including my BF's house?)? I'm glad Anand is here speaking into this because it is vital at this juncture and if someone with the right skills and calling stepped forward, I believe a movement will rapidly coalesce. That's part of the reason why people rallied instantly behind Kamala. Just give us SOMEONE with a backbone to push back against this insanity! /end rant/
Jimmy Carter, bless his soul, always spoke kindly and shared pleasantries with friends and foes alike. That is how he made the most amazing international peace arrangement that was considered impossible, but it still stands, years later.
I am a Canadian living in Canada, I am very deeply angered and insulted by Rrump’s increasing rhetoric about taking over Canada, Greenland, and the Osnsma Canal. If he stops the two wars that are using American munitions, where will he send the USA weaponry, to the Canadian border perhaps? We in Canada hope most people in the USA will support the integrity and sovereignty of Canada, and continue to be allies and friends. The war and power mongers need to be prevented from destroying a centuries long peaceful friendship.
This reminded me of an interview Biden gave a little while before dropping out of the race- when asked about the prospect of trump winning and what that would mean, he essentially answered "well at least I'll have tried my best."
I couldn't stop thinking about that when he pardoned Hunter. I understand the paternal pull to protect his son, but I couldn't stop thinking about that interview. He's done his best, and now he was confident that his family was going to be fine, relatively speaking. He could shield his son, but what have he and his team been doing to protect people not named Biden from the worst impulses of "America's Hitler" (not my phrase, I forget who said it first though 🤔)? They're preparing for a smooth and efficient transition.
And then Obama sits there, chatting it up with trump and I can't get that interview out of my head. Like I'm watching the end of a little league game, and all the presidents are hi fiving, telling each other good game while the referees bulldoze the ballfield and california burns.
It's not a proxy fight, it's class warfare and none of them are on our side.
I think Obama responding to Trump's overtures with bonhomie has to do with his personality traits. He doesn't have anything to defend, and can just be, in his embodied experience. I imagine he'd josh around with anyone who tugged at him like Trump did at that moment, because Obama at ease is gracious, open and up with people.
Would he josh around with Putin that way? Given what they've all said about him - and what he himself says about his agenda - how different is he than that? He is proposing military attacks on allies for god's sake!
I don't think he would, but that's on Putin, who is an exceptional prick. So Fox News is up in arms about this encounter between Obama and Trump too, calling it a bromance, predicting he'll come over to their side now. He won't. Obama knows what he knows and isn't about to lose himself. He demonstrates this cognitive flexibility when his base prefers intransigence. He's always teaching.
Your points are well taken on D's and other MAGA opponents AWOL (Away Without Leadership)
Re: Obama. A friend with a biracial family pushed back when I shared your criticism of Obama. She noted too many tin his country would have tolerated a black man snubbing Trump.
Apologies. I left my first sentence incomplete:
I think Anand's statement that we (who are not Trumpers or MAGA fans) are feeling "un-led" and undefended against the various dangerous threats we see coming from the new Presidential administration is accurate. ...
I think Anand's statement that we (who are not Trumpers or MAGA fans) are feeling "un-led" and undefended against the various dangerous threats we see coming from the new Presidential administration. So, at the very least I would want to see something like Timothy Snyder's proposal of a "People's Cabinet" that would vocally, forthrightly critique and organize opposition to whatever harmful actions Trump's administrative officials start undertaking.
I recognize that, to do that, Democratic or independent leaders would have to articulate an alternative vision to the sort of thing that's in Project 2025. But so far they show no signs of taking those steps.
This concern about our larger situation dissuades me from engaging in what Anand has rightly called "proxy fights" over smaller things. I don't feel, emotionally or intellectually, like I have time for or interest in those sorts of fights.
This hypothesis of people feeling undefended rings very true for me. Here in this comment section and in lots of other online spaces I am seeing a lot of talk about shrinking our sphere of influence and doubling down on trying to take care of each other within local communities. I'm down with that response. It feels like the best we can do in the circumstances. Personally, I've been thinking of trying to start a weekly, outdoor gathering of people we're the only rule is YOU DON'T BRING YOUR CELLPHONE. I understand that online spaces have both positive and negative impacts but I feel we have lost a lot of skills interacting with each other in real life and that is what needs to be strengthened right now.
PS: I'm in Canada so it feels less dire but with the saber rattling coming from Trump and our own country rapidly drifting right I'm trying to stay ahead of the curve here.
Ditto for Kamala Harris and the Second Gentleman who demonstrated how to cope with known criminals who have attacked you with smears, insults, and demeaning stereotypes. No basis for civility there. Don’t normalize the miscreant.
Leadership is important and we should look for and encourage that talent in service to the common good and the principles in the founding documents. Rather than pine for a hero it’s important to remember the importance of our own personal integrity. Alienating people is not a superpower. Everyone is entitled to respect. That being said, Mrs. Pence did the right thing. How else could it register with the perp in chief that he didn’t really get away with it? It was a form of resistance and not a mere slight. It took courage, resolve, and dignity to remain seated and self possessed under the public glare and in the presence of power.
I think this discussion is and the topic is just more sane washing. “We told them what we thought and the didn’t follow. Maybe they will just forget about it, if we let it go!!!”
No one but Liz Cheney and her cadre are actually standing tall by against the wind. Joe and Mica are just actors in the play being directed by the Oligarchy. Blah
The Democratic Party’s former leaders are all co-opted just like former Republican leaderless. We have no one to rally progressive Democrats in the fight to save democracy, to restore the rule of law and fight the billionaire oligarchy. If we the people are to resist the well coordinated efforts of U.S. billionaires to resurrect the robber Barron era of the 1900’s, we need national leaders. We also need to embrace civil disobedience and not behave timidly. Civility is not a requisite for sustaining this constitutional democracy. It may be a hindrance. Ending the Vietnam War, Civil rights and Union rights were not achieved in this nation through civility but through bold often disobedient acts. While Martin Luther King advocated peaceful protests, the Black Panthers were a welcome counter approach that brought fear into the consciousness. I am looking for leaders, probably not politicians, who will organize and mobilize an active and feared resistance movement.
You speak clearly and to the point. We (right across the 'West') face our own timidity as the key stumbling block to our own liberation.
Also, by the way, I think the idea that people shouldn't talk to Trump is silly. Trump is massively disregulated. More social contact can help with that. It's absolutely a public service to help with that if you have access. This idea that we should just be awful to people we disagree with is just making the world a worse place. Imagine if Trump were perfectly happy. Like, really, truly happy, not just happy with his latest endorphin hit. Would he be talking about invading Greenland?
Sadly, I have known people in the past who are, at best, 'consistently inconsistent' - or in old money, two-faced. The challenge is to find a clear path through ...
I apologize for my obtuseness, but I can't see how what you have said here connects to what I said. Not disagreeing with you, just not understanding.
To respond to what you've said, though, the idea that a person should be consistent seems wrong to me. When we get angry at someone for changing their minds, we are making a mistake. And we have all experienced the challenge of having two possibly diametrically opposed sets of feelings about a dilemma we face. Indeed, that's what makes it a dilemma.
So if the idea that people should be consistent is wrong in cases we're familiar with and associate as characteristic of being a good person, analyzing someone's bad behavior on the basis of whether or not it is consistent with their past behavior is equally fallacious. The problem isn't that they are inconsistent—it's that they are behaving in a way that is harmful. We want someone like that to be inconsistent, by changing their mind about being harmful. If we criticize them for being inconsistent, we are practically begging them not to change.
Fair comment "If we criticise them for being inconsistent, then we are practically begging them not to change."
What concerns me is something different, although horribly familiar: People (particularly politicians) who say one thing to get elected, and the opposite as soon as they get their hands on the keys to 'office'. Empty promises. Also known more colloquially as BS.
And people who are wilfully harmful - there's a simple word for that too, "Trolls" - from the fables of the classics.
And there is a simple rule to apply to that: "don't feed the Troll" - or don't give the oxygen of publicity to wilful disruptors. (From online Open Source etiquette - from the time before the Internet - the time of 'bulletin boards', decades ago.)
We live in a world of amplification - nothing new (all media tend to amplify - literally or figuratively), its just that we live in 'weird' world where amplifying hatred and stupidity is 'automatically' monetised, and 'algorithm-ised' - i.e. (anti-) social media is deliberately programmed to do just that, with no prospect of anyone (least of all the US Congress) changing any of that, anytime soon.
Clause 230 of the CDA of 1996 is the (worst) problem, and it doesn't help for the Department of Justice to say that the 'time is right for the scope of this clause (of the the CDA) to be reconsidered.' Silicon Valley executives and all their shareholders have far too much money at stake to ever let that happen. (Call me cynical if you like!)
How is being nice to Trump when you are sitting next to him at a funeral "feeding the trolls?"
I think it's silly to talk about this for at least a year. The current Democratic national leadership are .. I don't even know what to say about them. I think they are more the problem than Trump is, and that's really damning them with faint praise. Until they get out of the way, all we can do is work locally. And since they keep spending tons of money to screw up local races, even that is an uphill battle.
I don't really want to hear what they have to say. The time for that is past. If Kamala Harris had issued a mea culpa, if Blinken had admitted he was wrong about Gaza, etc, then maybe I'd be willing to hear something from them. As it is, I still care about them as human beings. E.g., I hope Kamala Harris is okay, and her husband is okay. But as politicians, what I want most from them is that they GTFO.
I'm all about Tim Walz, though. I just wish he hadn't let them muzzle him during the campaign.
BTW, to be super clear about this, I don't watch TV news or read the NYT, so even if they were talking, I might now have heard what they said. I read De Volkskrant. They are kind of a footnote from that perspective.
The question is what is wrong with Trump that he feels no embarrassment or shame about how he talked about ALL of these people. He is the one who should be sheepish and embarrassed. His lack of moral or shame is his superpower.
The Democratic leaders who told us that democracy was dead and Trump was Hitler are now saying.. Nah... Didn't really mean that. And, by the way, we will be holding our "resistances" from Martha's Vineyard and Caribbean islands.
This is an important discussion that I completely relate to. I was very conflicted about Obama's chumminess with Trump. On the one hand, I can see him trying to foster a rapport for potential future negotiations to reign in his worst impulses if necessary. On the other hand, W-T-F? I seriously doubt Michelle would have been that gracious (and notice she didn't bother to go.) I don't agree that they were "all" doing that. From what I saw, the Clintons, Bushes, Kamala and Doug, and the Bidens all ignored Trump and Melania. Trump tried to get Kamala's attention and she deliberately did not look at him. Is that enough? No, but this was a state funeral after all. Should they "boycott?" Maybe the family should not have invited him. He wasn't at Barbara Bush's funeral, and if you saw the official photo the Carter Center released, they literally cropped him out of the photo of the assembled dignitaries. Pence shook his hand which is sickening, given that his life was in danger but I don't really expect anything of him. The only person who was "satisfying" was Karen Pence of all people, rebuffing their outreach with contemptuous silence. One black woman in a private group I am in said "Black people have to do this all the time!" so I can respect I have no experience of being in that position in this racist society but I'm also not a former POTUS looked to for leadership. I also appreciate Anand articulating what is underneath the debate. WHERE ARE THE VOCAL, PASSIONATE LEADERS FOR THIS MOMENT? Who is guiding us as we careen toward autocracy? The threats and actions are happening in plain sight and those who warned us don't seem to be doing anything consequential. We're supposed to rely on Chuck Schumer?! Andrew Weissman said it would be "unseemly" for Garland to release the report without permission. We're still talking about politeness in the face of this madness, as climate change rages, burning homes to the ground in CA (including my BF's house?)? I'm glad Anand is here speaking into this because it is vital at this juncture and if someone with the right skills and calling stepped forward, I believe a movement will rapidly coalesce. That's part of the reason why people rallied instantly behind Kamala. Just give us SOMEONE with a backbone to push back against this insanity! /end rant/
Jimmy Carter, bless his soul, always spoke kindly and shared pleasantries with friends and foes alike. That is how he made the most amazing international peace arrangement that was considered impossible, but it still stands, years later.
I am a Canadian living in Canada, I am very deeply angered and insulted by Rrump’s increasing rhetoric about taking over Canada, Greenland, and the Osnsma Canal. If he stops the two wars that are using American munitions, where will he send the USA weaponry, to the Canadian border perhaps? We in Canada hope most people in the USA will support the integrity and sovereignty of Canada, and continue to be allies and friends. The war and power mongers need to be prevented from destroying a centuries long peaceful friendship.
Sorry for misspelling Trump as well as the Panama Canal.
This reminded me of an interview Biden gave a little while before dropping out of the race- when asked about the prospect of trump winning and what that would mean, he essentially answered "well at least I'll have tried my best."
I couldn't stop thinking about that when he pardoned Hunter. I understand the paternal pull to protect his son, but I couldn't stop thinking about that interview. He's done his best, and now he was confident that his family was going to be fine, relatively speaking. He could shield his son, but what have he and his team been doing to protect people not named Biden from the worst impulses of "America's Hitler" (not my phrase, I forget who said it first though 🤔)? They're preparing for a smooth and efficient transition.
And then Obama sits there, chatting it up with trump and I can't get that interview out of my head. Like I'm watching the end of a little league game, and all the presidents are hi fiving, telling each other good game while the referees bulldoze the ballfield and california burns.
It's not a proxy fight, it's class warfare and none of them are on our side.
I think Obama responding to Trump's overtures with bonhomie has to do with his personality traits. He doesn't have anything to defend, and can just be, in his embodied experience. I imagine he'd josh around with anyone who tugged at him like Trump did at that moment, because Obama at ease is gracious, open and up with people.
Would he josh around with Putin that way? Given what they've all said about him - and what he himself says about his agenda - how different is he than that? He is proposing military attacks on allies for god's sake!
I don't think he would, but that's on Putin, who is an exceptional prick. So Fox News is up in arms about this encounter between Obama and Trump too, calling it a bromance, predicting he'll come over to their side now. He won't. Obama knows what he knows and isn't about to lose himself. He demonstrates this cognitive flexibility when his base prefers intransigence. He's always teaching.