Political quotes of the moment

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Corey Robin, using the power of political science to troll his students:

Every once in a while I teach constitutional law, and when I do, I pose to my students the following question: What if the Senate apportioned votes not on the basis of states but on the basis of race? That is, rather than each state getting two votes in the Senate, what if each racial or ethnic group listed in the US Census got two votes instead?

Regardless of race, almost all of the students freak out at the suggestion. It's undemocratic, they cry! When I point out that the Senate is already undemocratic—the vote of any Wyomian is worth vastly more than the vote of each New Yorker—they say, yeah, but that's different: small states need protection from large states. And what about historically subjugated or oppressed minorities, I ask? Or what about the fact that one of the major intellectual moves, if not completely successful coups, of Madison and some of the Framers was to disaggregate or disassemble the interests of a state into the interests of its individual citizens. As Ben Franklin said at the Constitutional Convention, "The Interest of a State is made up of the interests of its individual members.  If they are not injured, the State is not injured." The students are seldom moved.

Then I point out that the very opposition they're drawing—between representation on the basis of race versus representation on the basis of states—is itself confounded by the history of the ratification debate over the Constitution and the development of slavery and white supremacy in this country.

As Jack Rakove argued in Original Meanings, one of the reasons some delegates from large states ultimately came around to the idea of protecting the interests of small states was that they realized that an equal, if not more powerful, interest than mere population size bound delegate to delegate, state to state: slavery. Virginia had far more in common with South Carolina than it did with Massachussets, a fact that later events would go onto confirm.

DAMN that's good.

[Juana]

Relevant to VZ's turdery:
"We are often told that the poor are grateful for charity. Some of them are, no doubt, but the best amongst the poor are never grateful. They are ungrateful, discontented, disobedient, and rebellious. They are quite right to be so. Charity they feel to be a ridiculously inadequate mode of partial restitution, or a sentimental dole, usually accompanied by some impertinent attempt on the part of the sentimentalist to tyrannise over their private lives. Why should they be grateful for the crumbs that fall from the rich man's table? They should be seated at the board, and are beginning to know it. As for being discontented, a man who would not be discontented with such surroundings and such a low mode of life would be a perfect brute. Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man's original virtue."
---Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man Under Socialism

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Relevant to VZ's turdery:
"We are often told that the poor are grateful for charity. Some of them are, no doubt, but the best amongst the poor are never grateful. They are ungrateful, discontented, disobedient, and rebellious. They are quite right to be so. Charity they feel to be a ridiculously inadequate mode of partial restitution, or a sentimental dole, usually accompanied by some impertinent attempt on the part of the sentimentalist to tyrannise over their private lives. Why should they be grateful for the crumbs that fall from the rich man's table? They should be seated at the board, and are beginning to know it. As for being discontented, a man who would not be discontented with such surroundings and such a low mode of life would be a perfect brute. Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man's original virtue."
---Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man Under Socialism

NICE.

Also:

"Trickle down theory states that the sparrow may feed on the undigested oats in any given pile of horseshit."

[Cain]

The man formerly known as IOZ

If you asked me to describe in one word a culture that dispatches the black helicopters and assault vehicles in response to a dyadic pair of wayward, violent youth, I'd say, decadent. London kept the dance halls open during the Blitz, but Boston shut Fenway because of a pipe bomb. There's some truth to the claim that Americans are uniquely deferential to authority and prone to authoritarian solutions, but we've also become a culture that's largely adopted the values of an aristocracy: we want perfect safety and perfect comfort, although we'll complain mightily about the cost of service these days. For all the John McCains looking up from their thin soup to demand that we Torquemadize the surviving brother in order to discover whether or not this was all part of Cobra Commander's plot, the predominant sentiment behind the desire to prevent the kid from "lawyering up" and fitting him for concrete boots instead seems to me to be that putting him to trial would just be such a bother, and so expensive.

For all the praetorian hoo-hah on display all day in Boston, the thing that broke the case was some dude going outside to burn a square once the cops gave everyone the all clear. What purpose, then, did the lockdown serve? Well, yinz ever hear of a little thing called The Society of Spectacle? A culture of universal surveillance is a karaoke civilization; the lockdown of Boston was demanded by its own image; CNN's et al.'s fake reporting wasn't just the result of an immense, confused official response, but also in a very real sense its cause. Not for nothing does the footage resemble an action flick. The line between reality and fantasy is blurring, yes, but which is really shading into the other?

[LMNO]

That was some good shit, right there.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Kind of tangentially related: http://www.ted.com/talks/philip_zimbardo_on_the_psychology_of_evil.html

Say what you want about TED, Zimbardo is a brilliant researcher and his insights are invaluable. One thing I'm really excited about is that after researching evil for the last 40 years or so, he's changing his focus to the study of heroism, which is an area we know very little about.

[P3nT4gR4m]

The man formerly known as IOZ

If you asked me to describe in one word a culture that dispatches the black helicopters and assault vehicles in response to a dyadic pair of wayward, violent youth, I'd say, decadent. London kept the dance halls open during the Blitz, but Boston shut Fenway because of a pipe bomb. There's some truth to the claim that Americans are uniquely deferential to authority and prone to authoritarian solutions, but we've also become a culture that's largely adopted the values of an aristocracy: we want perfect safety and perfect comfort, although we'll complain mightily about the cost of service these days. For all the John McCains looking up from their thin soup to demand that we Torquemadize the surviving brother in order to discover whether or not this was all part of Cobra Commander's plot, the predominant sentiment behind the desire to prevent the kid from "lawyering up" and fitting him for concrete boots instead seems to me to be that putting him to trial would just be such a bother, and so expensive.

For all the praetorian hoo-hah on display all day in Boston, the thing that broke the case was some dude going outside to burn a square once the cops gave everyone the all clear. What purpose, then, did the lockdown serve? Well, yinz ever hear of a little thing called The Society of Spectacle? A culture of universal surveillance is a karaoke civilization; the lockdown of Boston was demanded by its own image; CNN's et al.'s fake reporting wasn't just the result of an immense, confused official response, but also in a very real sense its cause. Not for nothing does the footage resemble an action flick. The line between reality and fantasy is blurring, yes, but which is really shading into the other?

The rest of the world, outside the Retarded States of America. Pissing themselves laughing at a couple of teenagers with some firecrackers, putting a whole city on lockdown. There's only one way to go from here, guys. Some day soon a  preschooler will drop a bubblegum wrapper on the sidewalk and your whole country will sink!

[Cain]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/25/online-sales-tax-senate_n_3153669.html

As one moderate Democratic senator put it during the swipe fee fight, "I'm surprised at how much of our time is spent trying to divide up the spoils between various economic interests. I had no idea. I thought we'd be focused on civil liberties, on education policy, energy policy and so on."

"The fights down here can be put in two or three categories: The big greedy bastards against the big greedy bastards; the big greedy bastards against the little greedy bastards; and some cases even the other little greedy bastards against the other little greedy bastards," the senator said, requesting anonymity so as not to alienate any of the bastards, regardless of size.

[Cain]

Next time someone argues for the US intervening in some strategic and geopolitical backwater because it will "lose credibility" otherwise, feel free to quote this at them:

For their part, the French were indeed worried, but not because they doubted U.S. credibility. Instead, they feared that American resolve would lead to a major war over a strategically inconsequential piece of territory. Later, once the war was underway, Acheson feared that Chinese leaders thought the United States was "too feeble or hesitant to make a genuine stand," as the CIA put it, and could therefore "be bullied or bluffed into backing down before Communist might." In fact, Mao thought no such thing. He believed that the Americans intended to destroy his revolution, perhaps with nuclear weapons.

Similarly, Ted Hopf, a professor of political science at the National University of Singapore, has found that the Soviet Union did not think the United States was irresolute for abandoning Vietnam; instead, Soviet officials were surprised that Americans would sacrifice so much for something the Soviets viewed as tangential to U.S. interests.

But, you know, South Sudan is a critical American ally who cannot be abandoned, lest other US allies also fear for their safety!

[LMNO]

Heh.  It's amazing how much pundits "know" about the intentions of other countries without, you know, asking them.

[Cain]

Well, you know, failing to intervene in Syria will show the US lacks resolve and credibility and OMGWTFROFL, suddenly Iran is Germany, Amadinejad is Hitler, and it is 1938.  We are all attendees at the Munich Conference now.

[Lenin McCarthy]

Translated a pretty amusing radio interview with the leader of the right-wing Progress Party in Norway, Siv Jensen.

Bjørn Myklebust: What is Norwegian culture?

Siv Jensen: Heh. We've often had this debate. What is the basis of the report that we're going to discuss today is that the Norwegian immigration policy is not sustainable. Therefore, we have had an internal committee that has been working to look at various measures to strengthen Norway's ability to cope with this in the future, to reduce costs. We must, in other words, turn all stones.

Many of the proposals put forth by the committee are Progress Party policy already, but some of them are new. And these are measures that we intend to discuss thoroughly and see whether - and if - and when, we plan to implement [them] as the Progress Party's policies.

But I am very happy to see that someone dares to try out new ideas, and I'm not very surprised, then, that our proposals get dismissed almost without anyone having had time to think through what they actually imply.

It's always been like this in the discussion about Norwegian asylum and immigration policy, every time we've gone ahead and thought new thoughts, the others compete to denounce it, then ten-fifteen-twenty years afterwards they all agree anyway.

BM: That was a long answer to something that was not the question. What is Norwegian culture?

SJ: Yes, well, the baseline in this report is that we must dare to be proud of the Norwegian simultaneous to being generous with other cultures. I think it is an important starting point. We must dare to highlight our heritage, our uniqueness, our origins, our history. I think it strengthens every nation, in their encounter with other cultures.

BM: But Siv Jensen, this is also an answer to a question I didn't ask. I asked: What is Norwegian culture?

SJ: But I don't really understand why you're asking about that...

BM: [Interrupts] Because a central concept in this report that you have ordered is "cultural sustainability". And then maybe you have to define what Norwegian culture actually is?

SJ: No, that is a contribution that has come to us in this process, and which we gladly will discuss. But what is the Progress Party's starting point in this discussion, is that we highlight and dare to be proud of our origins. And that's what culture discussion is about. It's about our cultural history, our identity, our ancestry. And unfortunately, it has been ...

BM: [Interrupts] But what Norwegian culture is, you don't want to say?

SJ: Yes, but, hehe, that's the definition we have of our cultural heritage that has evolved over many generations ...

BM: But what is it?

SJ: ...that very many now believe that is okay to put aside in a sort of misunderstood tolerance towards other cultures.

BM: But what is it?

SJ: Norwegian culture is defined by our longstanding background and history, that is ... that maybe ... highlights Norway and Norwegians more than one will find corresponding features in other countries.

BM: Is Norwegian culture threatened?

SJ: It is certainly so that the more we focus on putting this aside, the less we think, maybe, of the importance of remembering our own history. And I hear more and more politicians who say that this is not so important. The Progress Party believes that is important to be proud of one's history, one's origins and one's culture.

[LMNO]

How dare that journalist repeatedly ask questions he does not want to answer!

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Translated a pretty amusing radio interview with the leader of the right-wing Progress Party in Norway, Siv Jensen.

Bjørn Myklebust: What is Norwegian culture?

Siv Jensen: Heh. We've often had this debate. What is the basis of the report that we're going to discuss today is that the Norwegian immigration policy is not sustainable. Therefore, we have had an internal committee that has been working to look at various measures to strengthen Norway's ability to cope with this in the future, to reduce costs. We must, in other words, turn all stones.

Many of the proposals put forth by the committee are Progress Party policy already, but some of them are new. And these are measures that we intend to discuss thoroughly and see whether - and if - and when, we plan to implement [them] as the Progress Party's policies.

But I am very happy to see that someone dares to try out new ideas, and I'm not very surprised, then, that our proposals get dismissed almost without anyone having had time to think through what they actually imply.

It's always been like this in the discussion about Norwegian asylum and immigration policy, every time we've gone ahead and thought new thoughts, the others compete to denounce it, then ten-fifteen-twenty years afterwards they all agree anyway.

BM: That was a long answer to something that was not the question. What is Norwegian culture?

SJ: Yes, well, the baseline in this report is that we must dare to be proud of the Norwegian simultaneous to being generous with other cultures. I think it is an important starting point. We must dare to highlight our heritage, our uniqueness, our origins, our history. I think it strengthens every nation, in their encounter with other cultures.

BM: But Siv Jensen, this is also an answer to a question I didn't ask. I asked: What is Norwegian culture?

SJ: But I don't really understand why you're asking about that...

BM: [Interrupts] Because a central concept in this report that you have ordered is "cultural sustainability". And then maybe you have to define what Norwegian culture actually is?

SJ: No, that is a contribution that has come to us in this process, and which we gladly will discuss. But what is the Progress Party's starting point in this discussion, is that we highlight and dare to be proud of our origins. And that's what culture discussion is about. It's about our cultural history, our identity, our ancestry. And unfortunately, it has been ...

BM: [Interrupts] But what Norwegian culture is, you don't want to say?

SJ: Yes, but, hehe, that's the definition we have of our cultural heritage that has evolved over many generations ...

BM: But what is it?

SJ: ...that very many now believe that is okay to put aside in a sort of misunderstood tolerance towards other cultures.

BM: But what is it?

SJ: Norwegian culture is defined by our longstanding background and history, that is ... that maybe ... highlights Norway and Norwegians more than one will find corresponding features in other countries.

BM: Is Norwegian culture threatened?

SJ: It is certainly so that the more we focus on putting this aside, the less we think, maybe, of the importance of remembering our own history. And I hear more and more politicians who say that this is not so important. The Progress Party believes that is important to be proud of one's history, one's origins and one's culture.

Wowwwww.....

Also, he seems to be under the impression that history and culture are static things, and that the present and future should reflect those static things. Wasn't that the same rationale that Varg Vikernes used to defend his arson spree? This is a Heathen country, Christianity is an alien religion?

[EK WAFFLR]

 

Oh Siv, y u no smrt?