UK governments?

More blundering than most   2 votes - 100 %
Averagely blundering   0 votes - 0 %
Less blundering than most   0 votes - 0 %
 
2 Total Votes
On ministers by wumpus (4.00 / 1) #1 Sun Nov 23, 2014 at 10:26:16 AM EST
I really don't know what is going on in Britain, but for any sufficiently large organisation in the US, expect policy to be controlled by a bungee boss. The idea is that an executive has to show results as fast as possible in order to move up and advance his/her career. This typically involve massive changes in order to game the most easily moved and visible metrics (the more it fits in a sound bite or power point bullet, the better). In the end, the goal of the worker in such a bureaucracy is to somehow keep a somewhat steady workflow regardless of the attention-seeking boss's flavor of the month.

One side effect of a Republican controlled Senate (note: Republican "control" for this case means 41 votes or more) is that since no replacements can be expected to be "advised and consented to", those serving at the president's pleasure are unlikely to be in this position.

Wumpus

Hunger Games by Vulch (4.00 / 1) #2 Sun Nov 23, 2014 at 02:18:48 PM EST
First two films are pretty good adaptations of the books by Hollywood standards. Usual problems of what to leave out to get a sensible running time but watching the first film before reading the book and vice versa for the second didn't leave me going "Argh" too often.



The feminism article by iGrrrl (4.00 / 3) #3 Sun Nov 23, 2014 at 03:53:30 PM EST
Someone did an analysis that I wish I had bookmarked. They looked at all the critical tweets on the shirt, and only three could be construed as personal attacks. Most of them were along the lines of, "That shirt? Really?!"

By contrast, the number of men who answered these with some variation of "Shut up, bitch" was appalling.

When women tell me they aren't feminist, I ask them two questions. "Do you want to be able to decide who you have sex with?" and "Do you want to own things." If the answer to those questions is "Yes," then I tell them they're feminists. That's it.

"Beautiful wine, talking of scattered everythings"
(and thanks to Scrymarch)

(Comment Deleted) by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #4 Sun Nov 23, 2014 at 07:37:26 PM EST

This comment has been deleted by the mariner



[ Parent ]
cool analysis. by the mariner (4.00 / 1) #5 Sun Nov 23, 2014 at 07:38:57 PM EST
https://twitter.com/roseveleth/status/532539812855959552

you don't have to look hard to find more along those lines. that's not some random idiot, except to the extent that the atlantic employs random idiots to write for them.

the problem with the picture you're suggesting here is that you're placing the opinions of random idiots, in the sense of people who hang around their houses all day posting their neurotic ramblings on the internet, on the same level as those of people who write for major publications. almost everyone, even the troglodytes at national review, agree that the guy shouldn't have worn the shirt. the disagreement is on whether he's the worst thing that has ever happened to science (which everyone fucking loves, by the way).

i think you have to grapple with the fact that the loudest voices on twitter (and worse, tumblr) among feminists and the social justice movement more generally are increasingly dealing in very personal scandal-mongering whose broader significance is at best symbolic and which is deeply alienating to anyone who doesn't obviously fit into their ideas about who the good guys are. add to this the appearance that it is all really about social competition and drawing page views to outrage journalism they write for various corporate media outlets and you've got an explosive, toxic new front in the culture wars in which almost everyone is an enemy of the left.

but freddie deboer says it better than me:

http://fredrikdeboer.com/2014/11/19/its-pretty-simple-really/

“Social justice” is an awkward term for an immensely important project, perhaps the most important project, which is to make the world a more equitable, fair, and compassionate place. But the project for social justice has been captured by an elite strata of post-collegiate, digitally-enabled children of privilege, who do not pursue that project as an end, but rather use it as a means with which to compete, socially and professionally, with each other. In that use, they value not speech or actions that actually result in a better world, but rather those that result in greater social reward, which in the digital world is obvious and explicit. That means that they prefer engagement that creates a) outrage and b) jokes, rather than engagement that leads to positive change. In this disregard for actual political success, they reveal their own privilege, as it’s only the privileged who could ever have so little regard for actual, material progress. As long as they are allowed to co-opt the movement for social justice for their own personal aggrandizement, the world will not improve, not for women, people of color, gay and transgender people, or the poor.

impressionable youth growing up reloading facebook and whatever see this stuff and they're like, oh hells ya OR they're like, jesus, these [insert whatever type of twitter activist/clickbait author] people are really going nuts over something unimportant, maybe i shouldn't identify with them or people will think that's what i'm all about too. of course a lot of people who believe in the broad goals of feminism, anti-racism, etc. blanch when they see things they at least thought they believed in being represented this way online.

[ Parent ]
"loudest voices on twitter'' by lm (4.00 / 1) #10 Mon Nov 24, 2014 at 08:50:39 AM EST
You must have an odd twitter feed.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
wow. by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #12 Mon Nov 24, 2014 at 09:19:48 AM EST
cluelessness as argument.

[ Parent ]
That was one of the three by iGrrrl (4.00 / 2) #14 Mon Nov 24, 2014 at 01:51:35 PM EST
And it still doesn't mean she deserved to be doxxed, told to die, or issued death and rape threats.

"Beautiful wine, talking of scattered everythings"
(and thanks to Scrymarch)

[ Parent ]
hm, that's a good point. by the mariner (4.00 / 1) #16 Mon Nov 24, 2014 at 02:29:08 PM EST
at least someone out there opposes death and rape threats.

interestingly, freddie deboer has more to say about this (in response to a similarly brave stance taken by matt zoeller seitz):

http://fredrikdeboer.com/2014/11/11/performative-morality-part-a-zillion/

So: what is the active moral question, here? What is the issue before us that has actual ethical valence? Is it “should there be harassment of people online”? Are there a lot of people who are pro-online harassment? No. Instead, a question of actual moral valence is how to oppose threats and harassment constructively, and how to do so in a way that does not invite ugly unforeseen consequences. For example, the campus Zionist movements in the United States have been very effective in squelching the free speech rights of pro-Palestinian students and activists, using left-wing argumentative strategies about harassment and hate speech to silence perfectly legitimate and fair political expression. Does Seitz have any concerns about that? Does he think that the institutions that he’d set against harassment and threats would be so virtuous and so effective that they would never work to silence controversial political opinions? Does he just not care? Does he see that as a necessary evil, a matter of breaking a few eggs to make an omelet? Does he have some sort of moral calculus in mind, trying to reach the least-bad outcome? I have no idea. All I know is that he thinks harassment is bad. Provocative take, there.

What questions of genuine controversy are being considered, here? No one is being challenged. Nothing is being hashed out. No moral progress can emerge from this kind of interaction. It is utterly inert as an ethical engagement. And yet Seitz has received the requisite digital strokes for it, ensuring that he will repeat the behavior in the future and that other people will emulate him. Meanwhile, the actual work of meaningful political engagement– wrestling with complex questions that are neither practically nor morally simple, by people of equally good faith, recognizing that often all options are suboptimal and the consequences of any action may be ugly — that is not sexy and it is not easy. All we’ve learned here is that Matt Zoller Seitz is more moral than you are, buster. Praise him!

So too with questions of sexual assault. Is “should there be less rape” a question of particular moral difficulty? Are people walking around saying “we probably shouldn’t try to reduce the amount of rapes happening”? No. Nobody is saying that. What some of us are saying is that in a country of hideous over-incarceration, with a ravenous police state and prison industrial complex, where we know the laws are never enforced equally, but are instead deeply unequal along lines of race and class, and where many police departments and prosecutors offices have routinely shown themselves to be racist, corrupt, or incompetent, attacking due process and contributing to the rush to prosecute and imprison is a terrible idea. That’s a debate we can have. That’s a debate with stakes. It’s an active moral question. “Should we reduce rape? Circle ‘Yes’ or ‘No'” is not. So which one do you want to spend your effort on?

I cannot understand smart liberal people who are so enamored with their own good intentions that they seem not to care at all about the potential for unforeseen negative consequences. I cannot understand  adults who think that meaningful moral questions have black-and-white, simplistic, right-or-wrong answers. I just will never understand that.



[ Parent ]
That's a lot of words for tone policing by iGrrrl (4.00 / 2) #18 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 12:23:32 AM EST
And speaking up usually has more consequences, no matter how "politely" done, on the person speaking that it ever does on the behavior/statement/policy that the speaker is calling out.

I'm fucking tired of being polite, when an, "Excuse me, but..." is met over, and over and over again, with "Shut up, bitch."

"Beautiful wine, talking of scattered everythings"
(and thanks to Scrymarch)

[ Parent ]
it's not tone policing. by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #19 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 08:05:04 AM EST
what i've heard from you so far in this thread is: everyone says "shut up, bitch" to professional feminist twitter commentators (except other professional commentators who are in broad, almost unanimous agreement that the shirt is a bad thing and who disagree only on how bad it is) and that no matter how vehemently professional twitter commentators express their views, they should not receive death threats. who says differently?

internet commenters say "shut up, bitch" to 3 year-olds on youtube. they're mentally unbalanced nobodies. their conduct does not prove anything one way or another.

[ Parent ]
You're creating an interesting category by iGrrrl (4.00 / 1) #21 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 08:27:11 AM EST
This idea of "professional twitter commenters" is something you created to cover every person who has an opinion on Twitters? Fascinating. And did I say (look at my sentences, go ahead) that everyone says, "Shut up, bitch"? I did not. Just that the imbalance in response is real, quantifiable, and with a little bit of research you can find the data. No, I'm not doing your homework for you. You appear to prefer opinions. I prefer data.

Normal people, with fewer than 100 tweets or followers, got pounced on as soon as they used any hashtag associated with that shirt. Quantification of the tweets about the shirt revealed three personal attacks.

And yes, that was tone policing. "If you'd just say things politely, we'd listen." Years of experience tell women otherwise.

"Beautiful wine, talking of scattered everythings"
(and thanks to Scrymarch)

[ Parent ]
re: consequences of speaking up by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #20 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 08:18:40 AM EST
given how little was at stake in this instance, this is pretty rich, but it is abundantly clear in this instance that the consequences were much worse for the target of "speaking up" than the speakers.

no one cares if you're polite. the question is: if you think online harassment is a serious issue, what do you think ought to be done about it. by the way, there is a position on this that you take up by using this rhetoric. it is the position that has brought WAM! into twitter moderation, resulting in silencing of legitimate, though obnoxious, political speech.

and get real. the professional twitter social justice movement does not say "excuse me, but..." they have considerable media influence and the power to drive media narratives against random individuals, which they use fairly mercilessly.

[ Parent ]
Do on line death threats count as free speech? by iGrrrl (4.00 / 1) #22 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 08:28:54 AM EST
Interesting NYT perspective.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/30/magazine/do-online-death-threats-count-as-free-speech.html

What do you do about it? MEN, call out objectionable behavior in other men. Don't leave the work to women and the people harassed and threatened.

"Beautiful wine, talking of scattered everythings"
(and thanks to Scrymarch)

[ Parent ]
i'll respond to both comments here... by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #23 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 09:14:21 AM EST
your suggestion is that men should escalate encounters with random people who camp out trending twitter hashtags. okay, but this is the online equivalent of going out on the street and getting in shouting matches with the guy yelling about the bible on the corner.

i would suggest that we should be less naive about what a trending activist/culture war hashtag really is: a huge public forum full of contention, both from professional political activists and crazy people, two categories with considerable overlap, i would add.

regarding the ny times piece: there's a crucial difference between the situation contemplated there and the situations that transpire on twitter in connection with online activism. this is not a random stranger and murder cases involving husbands, boyfriends, wives, and exes are common (even the majority?). by contrast instances in which some random idiot actually carries out a death threat against a stranger online are unheard of (as far as i know -- and remember, this is not a new thing, it's just recently become part of the activist media strategy to publicize threats to short circuit debate). even so, death threats are still bad and everyone's against them. they should be pursued as a criminal matter and robust protections against threats and intimation of violence should exist on twitter etc. see previous comment. this doesn't strike me as seriously grappling with the issues surrounding online harassment in connection with online social justice though.

(notice how in order to address the point about threats, i have to spend a half of a long paragraph writing disclaimers -- this makes it is impossible for people with even mildly differing views to effectively address anyone on twitter deploying this rhetorical tactic.)

perhaps you consider it just as obvious as i do that legitimate political speech must be protected, even when it is obnoxious, but again i have no idea because that is not the default position taken by people making arguments similar to yours these days.

anyway, it sounds like we agree that elite opinion, i.e. the kind of opinion that actually matters, is overwhelmingly against the shirt and disagreement exists primarily about how bad the shirt is and whether this guy should be an international news story over it.

finally, uh-uh, it's not tone policing. no one says it's "impolite" to post vacuous, sanctimonious moralizing. the point is that it crowds out considerations of actual controversy and importance.

[ Parent ]
crowding out is desirable by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #25 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 09:23:54 AM EST
Our culture (shut the women up, keep the darkies out) fucking sucks.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
well, i'm a liberal. by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #27 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 09:27:17 AM EST
you're not. i respect that.

[ Parent ]
ihbt by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #28 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 09:28:07 AM EST
ihl, hand.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
wow, asserting enlightenment values by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #29 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 09:30:14 AM EST
is trolling these days... what a long way we've come.

[ Parent ]
okay, you're right, i lied. by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #37 Wed Nov 26, 2014 at 10:45:19 AM EST
i don't actually respect anarchism as a political philosophy.

[ Parent ]
that's ok by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #39 Wed Nov 26, 2014 at 05:08:16 PM EST
You're in good company (nathan).

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
yeah, and everyone else who thinks politics by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #42 Mon Dec 01, 2014 at 02:54:24 PM EST
matters and is worth thinking about...

[ Parent ]
So funny by iGrrrl (4.00 / 1) #32 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 09:40:59 AM EST
The extremity of your arguments and your willful mischaracterizing of my statements is hilarious.

Many of the people who called out that shirt were neither "professional" activists, nor crazy.

They were women with PhDs, working as active and productive scientists, who collectively sighed out loud that they had to put up with the objectification and sexualized language yet again.

And I'm out. I'm a woman with a PhD, an opinion based primarily on data, and work to do.

"Beautiful wine, talking of scattered everythings"
(and thanks to Scrymarch)

[ Parent ]
yes, but first ones who did were by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #33 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 09:43:26 AM EST
and the reason it caught fire was the professional activists.

cool re: the phd. i don't know anyone with a phd.

[ Parent ]
There have been a few here. by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #35 Wed Nov 26, 2014 at 05:26:12 AM EST
I'm not one of them.

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

[ Parent ]
* smiles politely * by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #36 Wed Nov 26, 2014 at 10:11:45 AM EST


[ Parent ]
Neuroscience (n.t.) by iGrrrl (2.00 / 0) #38 Wed Nov 26, 2014 at 02:09:08 PM EST

"Beautiful wine, talking of scattered everythings"
(and thanks to Scrymarch)

[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #40 Sun Nov 30, 2014 at 01:08:00 PM EST

This comment has been deleted by the mariner



[ Parent ]
... by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #41 Sun Nov 30, 2014 at 01:11:05 PM EST

[sorry, wrong gif in prev comment]

[ Parent ]
i realize you're always partly trolling.. by infinitera (4.00 / 1) #24 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 09:16:57 AM EST
But 'random internet speech' is personal. And the personal is political. So bring on the culture war, until exercises of power & privilege (e.g. "Shut up bitch") are no longer acceptable culturally speaking. "Scandal" is a minimizing word for normative behavior that "shouldn't" result in outrage. Of course it should - that's the whole fucking point, that the culture is the root cause.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
how do you minimize a bowling shirt? by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #26 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 09:26:27 AM EST
the privilege of being able to say "shut up bitch" on the internet to a woman who writes for the atlantic is the privilege of being no one, having nothing to lose.

the culture is not the root cause, except to the extent that people are allowed, by the culture, to have differing opinions and the freedom to express them vehemently.

i think you should also reckon with the very real possibility that your side will lose the culture war. i didn't believe this was possible until recently with the rise of clickbait activism.

[ Parent ]
losing is fine by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #30 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 09:37:14 AM EST
Does away with polite fictions.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
losing would be disasterous. by the mariner (4.00 / 1) #31 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 09:38:20 AM EST
the indecisive wins of the 60s and 70s were bad enough.

[ Parent ]
huh? by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #43 Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 05:12:31 PM EST
> the culture is not the root cause,

of course the culture is the root cause, as otherwise there wouldn't be this tremendous disconnect between the number of people who think it's appropriate to say "shut up, bitch" to a woman and the number of people who think it's appropriate to say "shut up, dickface" to a man.

Women online are routinely subject to things that men online are rarely subject to; that's a cultural problem.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

[ Parent ]
obviously there are possibilities besides culture. by the mariner (4.00 / 1) #44 Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:11:10 PM EST
but culture is a big part of the problem: young people from upper middle class backgrounds with advanced degrees and/or degrees from fancy schools are coming into contact with the truck stop public via twitter, youtube, and whatever else and don't know what to make of it when they don't share the same pieties you and i have been raised with. then they crow about how all of this proves their points about the patriarchy, systemic racism, etc.

here's a clue: these people calling writers for the atlantic "biches" are powerless. they don't hire people, they don't sit on admissions boards, they don't have much money, they won't be elected to public office, and they don't grow up to be CEOs. they're people who have little education, people who work jobs you would never take, people who have children with five different people and listen to insane clown posse.

women are not being raped on campuses by people who work at waffle house. and i'm sorry, but these people are not silicon valley vc bros, manhattan finance bros, or any other kind of bro its fashionable to whine about on tumblr.

the dynamic here is very simple: if you have a controversial opinion (and yes, many feminist commentators on twitter and tumblr do, whether or not you and i agree with their opponents) and you have a large audience, you will get angry responses from all over the map. source: been having controversial opinions on the internet for years, been called all kinds of things. that doesn't make it okay to call women "bitches" or any other variant spelling of the word. to reiterate: it is my considered opinion that stuff is NOT OK. but it doesn't prove anything a reasonable person doesn't know: there are still a lot of coarse, uneducated people and it is important to remember that if you have the sensibilities to be offended by their conduct, you probably have it a lot better in life than they do. (something about privilege comes to mind.)

however incomprehensible it is to you and i that there's a segment of society we have almost no contact with and which has almost no say in how the world works, they exist and they have twitter accounts. this doesn't mean they're going to roll back any social progress made in the last 50 years, no matter how many megachurches they give their paychecks to.

the dominant culture, which will be the one in which future generations are at least educated and in which those who rise to positions of power will have come up in is uniformly against calling women bitches. what more do you want?

[ Parent ]
what do I want? by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #45 Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:48:49 PM EST
> the dominant culture, which will be the one in which future generations are at least educated and in which those who rise to positions of power will have come up in is uniformly against calling women bitches. what more do you want?

I want women to be able to express opinions online and receive the same kind of abuse in response that men do.

That's not the case today.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

[ Parent ]
if you go online right now by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #46 Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:16:20 PM EST
and start posting about how some demographic, especially one that contains a lot of downtrodden, fucking pathetic people, is full of rapists, rape apologists, and privileged sociopaths, foisting a culture of chauvinist domination on everyone else, you will get a lot of violently angry pushback. just pick your demographic, indians, cubs fans, the amish. think of it as a social experiment. they won't even stop to ask if you're a man or a woman. #yesallenglish

[ Parent ]
true and yet by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #48 Sat Dec 06, 2014 at 04:17:29 PM EST
a woman does not need to post the kinds of things you are talking about in order to be the victim of vicious abuse online.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]
no one needs to. by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #49 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 08:57:11 AM EST
people are abused viciously online for no reason at all quite regularly, as you know perfectly well.

maybe you just want to make an abstract argument that women should be free of harassment online. fine, of course they should, but this is a question that is unconnected with any current event and it's somewhat vacuous when you offer no elaboration on what measures you think are warranted (and i remind you that there are proposals on the table put forward by the people from whom the rhetorical stance of merely stating "such and such is not okay" and leaving everyone else to either agree wholeheartedly or feel the shame of opposing social progress -- these proposals are remarkably illiberal and heavy handed) women who are currently and prominently complaining about online abuse are doing so within the context of the call out activism on twitter and tumblr. when you join a mob screaming for the head of some guy who wore the wrong shirt to work, you are not innocently minding your own business. of course it is their right to do so, but they should also expect pushback, not all of which will measured or civil.

[ Parent ]
your entire argument is: by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #54 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 01:41:15 PM EST
"lol stupid feminists, trolled by rubes"

I'm sorry, but all elite consensus has ever done is shifted labor practices. Everything else is a long hard fight.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
no, that's not what i think is going on. by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #57 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 01:59:18 PM EST
trolls are part of the savvy online feminist's media strategy. what i'm saying is that the rubes are powerless, their opinions are indicative of nothing important, and buying into the idea that their angry comments against the feminist hashtag du jour are indicative of a) an actual threat to feminists or b) powerful opposition to feminist ideology is foolish.

re: all elite consensus has ever done, tell it to the courts.

[ Parent ]
these courts? by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #58 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 02:02:42 PM EST
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/08/opinion/pregnant-and-no-civil-rights.html

Elites don't give a shit. This is a function of popular attitudes towards fetal parasites, not elite consensus.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
the abortion issue is a mechanism of control by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #61 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 02:10:15 PM EST
used to turn the poor against each other and render them incapable of collective action. i agree that elites don't give a shit about this issue because it never had any impact on them in the first place. it's always been possible to get an abortion if you have money and it will remain so, whatever stupid shit these people manage to foist on each other.

[ Parent ]
and so we're back at the beginning by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #63 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 02:12:11 PM EST
Mechanism of control is the exact thing happening through social media.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
go on... by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #64 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 02:13:23 PM EST


[ Parent ]
i think you believe in an effective technocracy by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #47 Sat Dec 06, 2014 at 12:35:29 PM EST
Which doesn't actually exist. Our governance is a joke, that makes culture all the more relevant.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
i don't think there's any question of governance by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #50 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 10:24:44 AM EST
here. the point is that feminists who don't like dealing with the hoi polloi on twitter can do what the rest of do in real life: pretend they don't exist.

(except when 400 lbs. of them are parked in front of a grocery store self-checkout kiosk trying to figure out how to work that dern thing.)

yes, maybe this means some of the fragile souls of tumblr can't participate in feminist twitter action/strategy. political engagement isn't for the faint-hearted.

[ Parent ]
i try to convert people RL.. by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #51 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 11:51:51 AM EST
At every opportunity.

Evangelical feminism.

Our consciousness as a nation does not exist except in regional hoi polloi. How do you think civil rights for gay people have happened except through change of that consciousness?

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
our 'consciousness' doesn't matter. by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #52 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 12:39:38 PM EST
and i didn't realize you eat at waffle house.

what matters is the elite consensus, which is what drove the gay rights movement to its recent successes. this is the source of received wisdom for lawyers and jurists, media and advertising professionals, the management and consulting elite, etc., i.e. the people who actually wield theoretically independent power in the system. it's true that there's some opportunity for populism to delay the inevitable or profit from it (see karl rove on gay marriage) but elite cultural values always win in the end.

that is to say: you don't have to convince the ham planets. their opinions don't matter in the long run.

[ Parent ]
i think we disagree by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #53 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 01:14:53 PM EST
Both on the respect to be granted any people around us and the impact of a mass of a people.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
oh, you're a real humanitarian. by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #55 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 01:50:56 PM EST
the guy who professes not to care about outcomes of political conflicts (since if we lose, it will at least clear the air about what people really think!) blanches at frank descriptions of his beloved masses. understandable. they are the good guys in all the books.

[ Parent ]
you've misidentified the target of said blanching by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #56 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 01:54:20 PM EST
Your "Great Man"/elites theory of history.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
whatever that means. by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #59 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 02:03:42 PM EST
trotsky felt comfortable saying the russian peasantry had no ability to exert political agency. i say the same thing of the american working class and now i'm somewhere between nietzsche and mussolini.

both statements seem obviously true to me, particularly with the decline of labor unionism in the US.

[ Parent ]
false to me, I'll close with Debs by infinitera (4.00 / 1) #60 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 02:09:25 PM EST
"Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind then that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it; and while there is a criminal element, I am of it; and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
a stirring quote. by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #62 Sun Dec 07, 2014 at 02:11:51 PM EST
it's funny how people who embrace the rhetoric of privilege have so little concept of what it is. i'm sure your solidarity is appreciated.

[ Parent ]
I can't think of any place I've worked by wiredog (4.00 / 2) #6 Mon Nov 24, 2014 at 07:30:49 AM EST
where that shirt would have been tolerated.

Earth First!
(We can strip mine the rest later.)

[ Parent ]
That's probably an indication by anonimouse (4.00 / 1) #8 Mon Nov 24, 2014 at 08:15:43 AM EST
...of how far feminism has succeeded since (say) the 1970s.


Girls come and go but a mortgage is for 25 years -- JtL
[ Parent ]
Maybe by lm (4.00 / 2) #9 Mon Nov 24, 2014 at 08:48:46 AM EST
... or maybe it's an indication about how uptight the US is about sex.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Not really by anonimouse (4.00 / 1) #11 Mon Nov 24, 2014 at 08:55:18 AM EST
I can't think of many workplaces in the UK where that shirt would have been acceptable either. 

Girls come and go but a mortgage is for 25 years -- JtL
[ Parent ]
I work at a "controversial" TV channel by jump the ladder (4.00 / 2) #13 Mon Nov 24, 2014 at 09:38:18 AM EST
And you can wear pretty much anything to work, piercings and tattoos friendly as well but no way would you get away with that shirt.

[ Parent ]
Sexualizing a space that shouldn't be sexualized by iGrrrl (4.00 / 4) #15 Mon Nov 24, 2014 at 01:54:11 PM EST
That's what his language and his shirt did. Even people who are very sex positive know that there are spaces where sexualized language, behavior and clothing are not appropriate.

"Beautiful wine, talking of scattered everythings"
(and thanks to Scrymarch)

[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by wiredog (2.00 / 0) #7 Mon Nov 24, 2014 at 07:32:06 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by wiredog



[ Parent ]
Interesting how... by Metatone (4.00 / 4) #17 Mon Nov 24, 2014 at 05:44:22 PM EST
many of the sensible complaints from Dominic Cummings overlap with the Blunder book. (As opposed to his knee-jerk libertarian stuff.)

Does the lack of MP oversight start with Thatcher (possibly in 83 due to the large majority gained?) or is it already in place?

Interesting to me how the structural problem with civil service promotions is similar to that in tech firms. If you're good at something and want more money, your main option is to go for a new role. So techs become managers and (for example) Education civil servants move to Defence.

The Lansley stuff is cited by DC as well as evidence of the weakness of the PM office, but I think the problem is wider (and perhaps echoes the deficit issues.) There were many people, many respected people, who could and did say that the Lansley reforms were a road to spending a lot of money and not achieving very much. Fundamentally it would only have been the work of a single evening to collate some hard questions that Lansley couldn't answer.

The problem, as with the economy, is that Lansley's proposals fitted the ideological prejudices at hand - and in passing, most of the civil service (certainly in my experience of the DoH) has been successfully brainwashed with similar prejudices. I spent a lot of time researching the Lansley bill and the way it was written, passed and implemented as I was part of a group considering entering the support service market it created. (In the end I concluded that the political settlement was unstable and so it wasn't the right time to invest in such a venture.) Anyway, part of the story of the Lansley bill is partly that he created it out of his (and his think-tank aides) knee-jerk beliefs - but what was depressing is how much knee-jerk support it got from DoH civil servants. They were largely committed to the same ideological stance.

As another short example, most high ranking civil servants fully believe in outsourcing. They are ideologically committed to some weird pseudo-market strategy for government. They don't even try to answer critiques about knowledge as in your excerpt, the ideology trumps all critique.

Thanks! by infinitera (4.00 / 1) #34 Tue Nov 25, 2014 at 10:06:36 AM EST
The Blunders books sounds interesting. Not too surprising, hierarchies being what they are (yes, predictable anarchist response), but interesting. ;)

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown