“Party unity uber alles! No attacks during the primaries! Any Dem will do!”
I find him to be right up there, in terms of promoting dangerous ideologies and hiding it with a populist view.
No, but as someone with a powerful media prescence, he does actively promote ideas that make their continuation possible.
You don’t have to cater to them and tell them that they’re views are acceptable, though. If they can’t come around to voting for someone who supports equal rights for all of us, then they are not my ally. Full stop. It should not be about making women or LBGQT+ people or people of color second class citizens to bring them in.
Not calling them out on these other issues betrays that. Again, if they can’t see me as a person, they are not here to help, but to hurt.
I’m okay with Sanders going on his show, especialy if he pushed him on his bigotry. Did he do that?
Erasing issues that have a real world effect in order to bring in bigots is dangerous. How is health care working for me, if there are things I can’t access that I need? If I can’t get birth control or abortion, or a trans person does not have access to care for their transition, because our shiny new health care system bans such things to bring in bigots who want universal health care. It will still lead to deaths, just for a smaller population.
Because they have blind spots, perhaps?
These issues are not tradable or negotiable, because it just continues to perpetuate inequality. If we get health care or wealth redistribtuion for pretty much ONLY white men, then nothing has changed, really.
I like Sanders, he’s my guy, but he can often ignore his own blind spots, and that concerns me a lot. I hope that he continues to focus on intersectionality as opposed to a “socialist silver bullet”.
Astounding. Well, it should be a surprise but not when you consider the source.
The idea that people like David Frum should have any audience at all is still perplexing to me.
They still have an audience because the establishment Dems and their media surrogates have spent the last few years enthusiastically rehabilitating and promoting them.
Which they did because they are, as always, attempting to shift the Overton window as far right as possible. The further right it goes, the more freedom they have to fuck over their voters.
TLDW: the Nazis didn’t tighten gun laws, they loosened them…for non-Jewish white Germans. There were more civilian guns in Germany after the rise of Hitler than before.
They confiscated guns from their victims, but this happened after the Nazis started their persecutions, not before. Gun seizure was a late-stage event, not an early warning flag.
The fascist approach to gun control isn’t prohibition, it’s selective militarism. The danger in gun regulation isn’t total disarmament, it’s selective persecution.
Usually focused on underclass minorities, usually justified by claims of criminality or danger to the state, applied selectively and with prejudice.
Once again…