Pundits: The fact that Ossoff and Warnock are unlikely to both win their elections means Joe Biden needs to court Republican votes rather than push a much-needed progressive agenda
*Ossoff and Warnock win handily*
Pundits: Ah. Nevertheless,
Congressional Republicans balk at Joe Biden\u2019s $1.9 trillion relief plan, complicating push for quick passage https://t.co/npXogXvBHM
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) January 15, 2021
They can stop trying to kill you, but until that happens they are your enemy, and acknowledging that fact isn't what makes that fact true.
To accomplish this, we must refuse to entertain their beliefs about anything.
To accomplish this, we must refuse to entertain their beliefs about anything.
To accomplish this, we must refuse to entertain our enemies' beliefs about anything.
More from Andrew R.R. Moxon
If you ever want to consider how committed our society is to the foundational lie that life must be earned, and those who fail to earn it must die, consider that the proposition “giving everyone money to spend would be bad for the economy” is widely accepted as truth.
“Giving money to people in poverty solves poverty” is an obvious truth, which needs (another) study for proof, for the same reason that this finding will be ignored (again).
We don’t want to fix poverty, even if doing so helps everyone—not if it means life for the “undeserving.”
It’s not about saving money.
There's a great fear in this country that a single dollar might go to someone who might not deserve it; or that a single given dollar might be spent on something we deem unworthy.
We'll spend five dollars to prevent the waste of that one dollar.
The manifestations are everywhere. From the overt, gleefully cruel hostility of conservatism toward people in poverty, of course. But also hidden in almost everyone's assumptions.
Our use of charity as a way of controlling who gets helped, for example.
Even the reversal—a desire to prevent aid from going to "undeserving" wealthy who don't need it (true)—leads us to create obstacles to aid people in poverty often can't overcome, but wealthy people can.
Which is why wealthy people like means
A new study found that giving low-income workers money upfront in their work period helped alleviate the mental burden of their financial problems and allowed them to be more productive \u2014 echoing other findings on the psychological impacts of poverty.https://t.co/zdxItTLDLZ
— NPR (@NPR) February 3, 2021
“Giving money to people in poverty solves poverty” is an obvious truth, which needs (another) study for proof, for the same reason that this finding will be ignored (again).
We don’t want to fix poverty, even if doing so helps everyone—not if it means life for the “undeserving.”
It’s not about saving money.
There's a great fear in this country that a single dollar might go to someone who might not deserve it; or that a single given dollar might be spent on something we deem unworthy.
We'll spend five dollars to prevent the waste of that one dollar.
The manifestations are everywhere. From the overt, gleefully cruel hostility of conservatism toward people in poverty, of course. But also hidden in almost everyone's assumptions.
Our use of charity as a way of controlling who gets helped, for example.
Charity isn't primarily an act.
— A.R. Moxon (@JuliusGoat) November 10, 2019
Before the act comes an alignment.
Charity is the natural fruit of a deep alignment with the virtue of generosity.
It sure shouldn't be a delivery mechanism for one's own beliefs about worthiness.
Even the reversal—a desire to prevent aid from going to "undeserving" wealthy who don't need it (true)—leads us to create obstacles to aid people in poverty often can't overcome, but wealthy people can.
Which is why wealthy people like means
Whenever someone proposes a means-testing solution, it's an indication they've internalized the lie, foundational to the United States, that some people deserve life and others don't.
— A.R. Moxon (@JuliusGoat) December 18, 2020
It's an expensive lie.
The reality is very simple: The Republican Party is no longer participating in democracy. They're running a series of ops against every election cycle, predicated on the notion that only their power is legitimate.
This isn't a failed coup. This is a *continuous* coup that stretches back years. It includes Gingrich's scorched earth methods, Bush v Gore, the politicizing of the Bush DoJ, the judicial obstructionism and nullification of the McConnell Senate, and the entire Trump presidency.
It includes decades of tortured racist gerrymandering and disenfranchisement, Citizens United, the dismantling of the Voting Rights Act, PACs, and deliberately colluding with foreign powers.
This isn't a failed coup. This is a *continuous* coup that stretches back years.
The Republican Party is not participating in democracy. They are quite obviously an organization dedicated to the destruction and overthrow of the government of the U.S. as we know it, and should be treated as such.
There are no legitimate Republican office-holders.
I think there's a distinction to be made. Democrats are often weak/ineffective, and many are complicit because they're those things by choice—but institutionally they aren't authoritarian, and they aren't fascist. They're a corporatist conservative party.
As many as 140 House Republicans and at least one GOP Senator will object to Biden's electors.
— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) January 1, 2021
As @ChrisMurphyCT told me, it's only a matter of time until Rs steal an election.
\u201cThis party has a whole bunch of enemies of democracy inside its top ranks."https://t.co/FlhH0F1SXH
This isn't a failed coup. This is a *continuous* coup that stretches back years. It includes Gingrich's scorched earth methods, Bush v Gore, the politicizing of the Bush DoJ, the judicial obstructionism and nullification of the McConnell Senate, and the entire Trump presidency.
It includes decades of tortured racist gerrymandering and disenfranchisement, Citizens United, the dismantling of the Voting Rights Act, PACs, and deliberately colluding with foreign powers.
This isn't a failed coup. This is a *continuous* coup that stretches back years.
The Republican Party is not participating in democracy. They are quite obviously an organization dedicated to the destruction and overthrow of the government of the U.S. as we know it, and should be treated as such.
There are no legitimate Republican office-holders.
I think there's a distinction to be made. Democrats are often weak/ineffective, and many are complicit because they're those things by choice—but institutionally they aren't authoritarian, and they aren't fascist. They're a corporatist conservative party.
To what extent is the legitimacy of Democratic leadership also questionable? If I have a friend who tells me he\u2019ll help protect me from a bully we both identify, and then steps out of the way of every punch headed for me, don\u2019t I just have two bullies with extra steps?
— Duke \u201cthiiirdperson\u201d Greene (@DukeGreene) January 1, 2021
