I haven't been able to find any actual confirmation of a planned event. Does the KKK use Facebook events?

8/18/2017 1:26:27 PM

It certainly appears to be a social media nonsense rumor... but still good idea for Durham businesses to take no chances.

[Edited on August 18, 2017 at 1:33 PM. Reason : And we got my son from his daycare near downtown]

8/18/2017 1:33:04 PM

hopefully this doesn't affect my 6 o'clock reservation at Dames

8/18/2017 1:57:34 PM

You were still going to wait forever anyway. Made a reservation there once and still had to wait like 45 min.

For overrated chicken and waffles.

8/18/2017 2:39:53 PM

Durham said they requested a permit but it was not granted

8/18/2017 3:07:41 PM

good to see that protests that aren't full of nazi's turn into dance parties

Durham, ftw

8/18/2017 4:12:21 PM

anarchists have shown up and it's getting a bit more tense as roads are blocked, it won't stay peaceful when cops break it up

8/18/2017 4:43:06 PM

riot police showed up, might not be good. for a little while it looked like cops were pulling back

8/18/2017 6:10:13 PM

where are you getting this info from? are you there? pics?

8/18/2017 6:47:23 PM

http://www.newsobserver.com/

8/18/2017 9:38:35 PM

^^ i was there for a bit, then watching periscope feeds

8/18/2017 10:21:18 PM

Quote :

"It's a question of hierarchy management - how do you keep this thing from getting so lopsided that the people at the bottom of the hierarchy just say fuck it, let's kill the guy on top."

Posting my response in this thread because it seems more appropes.

Fascism is the literal merging of corporate power and the state. It is the natural conclusion of un-checked, un-regulated capitalism. Or, as Lenin put it, "Fascism is capitalism in decay." Capitalism in decay always leads to fascism before there is ever the willpower and organization to carry out a working class revolt.

It is the final concession of the bourgeoisie to the petite bourgeoisie (i.e. ruling class to managerial class) wish to maintain their privilege in a society that is competing for fewer and fewer resources. When capitalism begins to fail (as it has here in the US, marked most notably by the 2008 financial meltdown), the members of the shrinking middle class are confronted with downward mobility. If we do not give them a socialist alternative that ameliorates their impending downward mobility into poverty, they will be drawn to fascist ideology.

It is important to note that the guys who went to Charlottesville were college-aged, middle class white males (i.e., members of the "petite bourgeoisie") who see their relative economic/patriarchal/societal privilege slipping. They aspire to be (and view themselves) as members of the ruling elite (which they most certainly are not), but are deathly afraid of being thrown into the proletariat. These are the vanguard members of fascist movements. They have not yet been pushed down into poverty, but they are familiar enough with the poverty around them to be correctly terrified of it. As a response, they opt to use their diminishing resources to create groups that think they can exercise their societal privilege in order to ascend to a higher economic position.

Poor people don't vote and have zero political power. The neo-fascist, however, still has political power, and is willing to exercise it to secure access to future economic resources and to protect his already ill-gotten gains. However, because he has zero class consciousness and zero understanding of working class solidarity, he resorts to cultural signifiers (whiteness, maleness, religon, "europeaness," etc.) to declare his superiority and to justify his provocations and acts of terror.

These guys all look like fucking imbeciles, but they are incredibly dangerous. And if they can convince enough people in power (i.e, Bannon, Gorka, Miller, etc) that their ideals are worth carrying out, then they can ascend to power quite rapidly in a decaying liberal democracy whose institutions have been thoroughly hollowed out, and which are utterly incapable of correcting themselves. This is our current political moment. There will be more Charlottesvilles. There will be more BLM protests where white nationalists will use ANY form of resistance from oppressed classes and political dissenters as a justification for carrying out their planned acts of terrorism.

If moderate coastal liberals make the mistake of framing this as a "battle for decency," or fall into the trap of trying to protect "identities" rather than forming class solidarity, then we will lose this battle.

Fascists play identity politics better than liberals. They openly declare that only one identity is worth protecting. Liberals get lost in their own labyrinth of identities and ignore the only key to winning the ideological battle: Class consciousness.

Fascists can convince the ethnic/religious majorities to stand idly by while they commit their atrocities (don't counter protest, eat cake instead!). The moderates can take comfort that they will likely not fall victim to their crimes. The ruling elite will align with fascists for the simple fact that fascists will take glee in eliminating the only political force that can defeat them: The left.

There's a reason why Martin Niemoller's famous poem begins with:

Quote :

"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Socialist."

Fascists take out the left first, because the left is the only political force that recognizes the fascist strategy and is the only political force that can coherently unite a strong and effective resistance to rising fascism across diverse ethnic and religious lines. Working class solidarity and sustained disobedience is our best fighting chance. If the left is defeated, then the fascist right is free to carry out their atrocities unopposed, and Martin Niemoller's poem will be carried out to its conclusion.




[Edited on August 18, 2017 at 10:33 PM. Reason : ]

8/18/2017 10:25:59 PM

I'm willing to grant that there's never been real communism, or any communism on a scale that matters. USSR, Mao China, Cuba, Venezuela - all state capitalism. I understand, I think.

The problem is that these examples all *started* as legitimate Marxist revolutions. It's not like capitalists were secretly running the show, they actually believed in these leftist ideals. But then, with all their class consciousness, they failed. I'm assuming you believe they failed because the capitalist imperialists interfered with their development or sabotaged the effort in some way.

If that is the case, what makes this time different? Communism is so fragile that it can only work if the worker class in every class gains class consciousness at the same time, and then coordinates globally to seize the means of production? When has *anything* ever worked that flawlessly? It just seems completely unrealistic.

So, I reject your Marxian analysis on the basis that the left is empirically too weak to counter fascists or any other group. The American left treats weakness as a virtue as inflammatory as that sounds. These are the people that are going to launch the revolution? No. The boneheads you need to make this revolution a relative success are all on the right.

And class consciousness isn't going to do shit. Class consciousness is at an all time high. Never before in history has every person been so aware of where they sit in the social hierarchy. It's never been so readily observable, but there also have never been so many distractions and comforts.

8/19/2017 12:03:24 AM

hardcore hipster communists would probably agree with your "dirty capitalist dogs won't let me have muh communizms" theory. Not me, though. The consolidation of power and access to capital (either from the left or the right) can only be maintained through the monopoly of force (the state). The state exercises this force to crush the working poor, or they use their power to crush dissent and put them in gulags (the soviet method). One of the only effective unions left in the united state belongs to the police. Think about that for a second. "Blue lives matter" is a slogan that is endorsed fully by the rabid right wing. They endorse them for a reason. That is a scary combination.


Anyway, we are so dangerously close to full-blown state authorized fascism that I fail to see why you would even bother to muse about the communist boogeyman right now. We are so fucking far away from a communist uprising that it is irrational to fear it. We would have to first go back to simply being a liberal democracy first, then go through social democracy, then democratic socialism, and THEN communism would be the end result. It will never happen, so there's no reason for you to fear it. It could only occur through a genuine revolution as a response to the rapid and prolonged plummeting of the material conditions of most citizens before they considered it a reasonable alternative. And even then, I could argue that communism only becomes a reasonable alternative after years of experienced fascist control. State authorized fascism, on the other hand, is only a few tinkers away in our current landscape. That is the immediate threat to democracy that we currently face. That is why I think a genuine socialist counter ideology needs to immerge immediately. This can be achieved temporarily through unionization in the work environment as a quick way to resist the growing fascist elements. Depriving the state of our collective labor is a means of resistance that we'll probably all become amenable to in the near future. Because the alternative is barbaric.

And the "class consciousness" you speak of is not as self evident as you claim. The petite bourgeoisie never see themselves as being middle class. They aspire to be wealthy, but almost always think they are at the edge of poverty (and in many respects, this fear is legitimate). And I'm not sure why you reject a Marxist interpretation of political epocs. Almost every ascending fascist regime immediately followed years of economic stagnation and an overall loss of material wealth in the respective countries. And those regimes ALWAYS push austerity as the solution to the sudden loss of wealth. Turn on any mainstream cable outlet that is interviewing someone with a hint of social democratatic reforms, and the anchors will immediately hit the viewer with high numbers about the national debt, or scare them with tax increases, or resort to red-baiting scare tactics. It's laughably predictable. They only resort to those scare tactics because most of their viewership thinks that they are the "makers" of society, rather than the "takers" that they actually are.

Quote :

"So, I reject your Marxian analysis on the basis that the left is empirically too weak to counter fascists or any other group. The American left treats weakness as a virtue as inflammatory as that sounds."

I'm making a clear distinction between Liberals and the Left. Your assessment is absolutely correct with regards to liberal democrats. Not so much with the Left. But the Left absolutely lacks the numbers. I'll grant you that. That's a real problem. It's also why I spend so much time punching liberals on this forum, because I genuinely think that they are an impediment and a liability to both economic and societal reform. The ones who think a wonkish, technocratic understanding of half-measured policy is a substitute for genuine reform are often the ones preventing the left's message from being received from working class people. Those people end up being swept up by the right because the left's message keeps being intercepted by do-nothing-liberals, and then the right radicalizes them and it's fucking terrifying what follows.


[Edited on August 19, 2017 at 12:55 AM. Reason : ]

8/19/2017 12:33:16 AM

One day the silent majority (who is all left) will reach a tipping point that causes them to wake up. only then will we create a revolution but it will happen quite suddenly and the majority is so large that it wont really matter that we are already so far to the right. the flip will happen suddenly behind the demands of the people.

8/19/2017 7:40:38 AM

If there is hope it lies in the proles

8/19/2017 10:25:48 PM

^^ lol if there's anything the Left is, it's not silent. The silent majority ready spoke dude.

[Edited on August 20, 2017 at 12:14 AM. Reason : Shit I got Earl'd. Happens to the best of us.]

8/20/2017 12:13:26 AM

Arnold's message to Trump

https://www.facebook.com/attn/videos/1475398805828907

Arnie for Pres 2020!

<3

8/20/2017 5:02:31 AM

the left that you hear from is obviously not the majority. we are like 2-10% of the country at best. most of the country is thebsilent majority because they are not politically active and do not identify or know that they hold the same left values. big events bring those people out.

8/20/2017 5:12:09 AM

Identifying politics brings those people out in large part and most of them are the same centrists that the Democratic Party caters to. That's why you see women's march's and responses to nazism/white supremacy (not that these arent important).

The actual progressive left, as you know, is likely concerned with that because it's the decent thing to do but more concerned with labor, corporatism and trade. But you almost never see rally's like we've seen recently for that simply because of the sheer number of centrists. Those causes get drowned out.

[Edited on August 20, 2017 at 10:23 AM. Reason : actually you may be saying that. The last line is worded weird and I can't tell who it refers to]

8/20/2017 10:21:58 AM

o i meant big events like the great depression, industrial revolution, and the proliferation of information access. All of which might be currently taking place.

no human who hasnt been fed propaganda of societal constraints or an advantageous starting position would disagree with what you consider "far left" values.

[Edited on August 20, 2017 at 12:00 PM. Reason : its haaaapppppeningggg]

8/20/2017 11:38:12 AM

^^Union membership in the US has declined from ~30% of people being in unions to around 10% of people being in unions today (and mostly only public employees, mainly police). The decimation of the UAW (see the recent unionization effort defeat with Nissan in Mississippi) and other unions seriously dealt a blow to the American Left. Organizations such as IWW (the wobblies, with whom Heather Heyer was marching) have seen serious decline. Unions, as much as conservatives loathe them, are critical activists for workers rights. They have a strong history of marching and protesting to protect many issues that affect all workers, and are openly antagonistic toward the negative sides of capitalism. The night before he was assassinated, Martin Luther King met with the union of sanitation workers in Memphis, where he told them, "We’ve got to give ourselves to this struggle until the end." At this point in his life, he had moved beyond racial activism, and had aligned himself with the cause of class struggle as well as racial equality. The two causes walk hand in hand. When we progressives finally realize this, we can build a stronger united alliance moving forward.

My biggest beef with moderate Democrats is that they think that issues of oppressed classes (police brutality, gay rights, trans rights, women's rights, etc) can be fought for on an individual basis against a corporate class that seeks to exploit all of them. This is a losing strategy. Without a strong labor component, these minority classes will not have the solidarity needed to fight back on a unified front.

8/20/2017 4:36:24 PM

Also, this is worth reading if your interested in a leftist take on the Weimar Republic and the parallels to today:

Quote :

"Former Nazi official Albert Krebs described the scene in his memoirs: “Not all capitalists were particularly enthusiastic about the Nazis, but their skepticism was relative and ended as soon as it became clear that Hitler was the only person capable of destroying the labor movement.” Terrified by the prospect of further gains for the labor movement, capital’s support for Hitler grew rapidly. Trotsky illustrated the dynamic colorfully: “The big bourgeoisie likes fascism as little as a man with aching molars likes to have his teeth pulled” — that is to say, it was ugly, but it was necessary. Hitler kept his promise to capital. After being declared Chancellor in January 1933 he outlawed both workers’ parties and the trade unions within a few months. Thousands of Social Democrats, Communists and trade unionists were arrested and murdered."

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/11/nuremberg-trials-hitler-goebbels-himmler-german-communist-social-democrats/

It's a long read, but there's some good stuff in there.

8/20/2017 5:45:04 PM

Quote :

"The consolidation of power and access to capital (either from the left or the right) can only be maintained through the monopoly of force (the state)."

Arguably, there could be many things that can only be maintained by the state. We don't actually know which things those are because there's no good way to test it. Like, maybe private property or capital ownership only can exist with the state. But mandatory education, universal healthcare, all the stuff that the left loves? That can't exist without the state either.

If you want to go without a state, and you also don't want private organizations to take over state functions, then you should be prepared for all that entails. My guess is that it doesn't go well for folks like you and me. The fact that you're even here, writing about and considering abstract ideas, practically guarantees that you'll be killed in the first round of purges. For the record though, I'm mostly bullshitting here - I have no idea what happens without a state or how we even get there or if we should get there. Maybe I would have given you a roadmap a few years ago, now I completely reject that anyone knows how to reform the system; it's unknowable.

The gist of your other statements seems to be that unionization is the thing that saves the middle class. If you're hitching your wagon to unions, then I see a lot of practical issues, the primary issue being that...well, people don't really like unions unless they're in one.

Unions are low status. Maybe it didn't have to be that way, but that's how it is now. Today, in the U.S., if you're in a union, it's either because you work for the government (teachers, police, prison guard, etc), or because you work in a dying industry that may pay an above market wage today, but will soon pay you nothing because the jobs are going away or they were shit jobs to begin with. There are some exceptions, but generally, high status professions don't unionize. Sometimes people in high status industries talk about unionization, but it's not a popular opinion. Unionization is a taint that people - especially the petite bourgeois as you'd call them - do not want to be associated with.

Now, you may say this is all wrong, actually unions are great and a big misunderstanding. I'm not even arguing that point, I'm describing what seems to be the general sentiment. If you want unions to make a comeback, then you or people like you will have to sell them to the public. Maybe call them something other than unions. Unions make people think they're working class, and that's just gross.

You also need to convince people in general that the blessings of the market were either totally not because of the market, or could be achieved without the market. This is a point which seems completely indefensible to me, although I've been told that the market doesn't equal capitalism. When I've tried to unravel that point it seems to be turtles all the way down.

Quote :

"One day the silent majority (who is all left) will reach a tipping point that causes them to wake up. only then will we create a revolution but it will happen quite suddenly and the majority is so large that it wont really matter that we are already so far to the right."

Mainstream conservative aren't left obviously. Paleo-cons, neo-cons, right libertarians aren't left and will never be on the left. Then there's all the vaguely liberal/centrist/alt-center people, which is your begrudging democratic voter base, although perhaps not for long. And then there's your white working class folks, who were at one point tied to the democrats, but it's looking like that might not last forever.

Where are these true believers in far left politics? You're telling me that the SJW commies are like, fake left, or confused, or whatever, but those people will never have any power because they're a joke. What proof do you have that there's a silent majority? What makes a lot more sense is that there is a silent majority of Trumpians (fascists, as JFC would point out) who have been bullied into staying silent, but their resentment is boiling below the surface. That's the silent majority you should be worried about.

[Edited on August 21, 2017 at 12:12 AM. Reason : ]

8/21/2017 12:00:37 AM

we are talkimg about 40% who dont vote and 60% who dont relate witg either party. trumps language is populist at times and was more populist than anyone in my life so he drew a ton of our people. especially bernie people. that doesn't make then trunpian. those people had nowhere else to go so they were vulnerable and he knew it. "what the hell do you have to lose?". the answer was nothing.

some may seem trumpian but they have been confused by media and other Trumpians. I am a high school teacher who has taught around the country and can tell you from experience that most core values are on the left. if you ask them to identify and thats it, sure they would be repulsed by the word "left "but that is only because they dont know how to identify their own core values. When you lay the situations out in front of them, and they dont have time to get their parents take, they are overwhwlmingly leftist. I always end up having to play devil's advocate from the right and they always shoot it down.

this also goes for people i talk to around tge world. on a human level, we are all hold these values until society poisons our mind.

[Edited on August 21, 2017 at 6:17 AM. Reason : ok]

8/21/2017 6:13:09 AM

forgot to throw in the large number of democrats who are only moderate because theyve been convinced their leftist goals are unrealistic because not enough supporters

also the republicans who hold the same leftist views but are voting with the temporarily good economic position. in a crash, they will switch fast.

8/21/2017 6:21:49 AM

The fact that Earl has such radical views and is teaching our youth is a pretty scary thought. One that makes me want to *cringe* think about private school.

8/21/2017 7:24:58 AM

rest assured a much larger portion of the nation is still being taught the traditional alt right/ evangelical/white supremacy/american exceptionalism.

i dont teach anyone what to think but i and every other great teacher teaches students how to think and reach fact based conclusions. and its something parents around the country are eager to put 6 figures into even though they could get a "good" education for free.

[Edited on August 21, 2017 at 7:35 AM. Reason : point is they arent radical views, they are just not in line with how you've been indoctrinated ]

8/21/2017 7:33:48 AM

People with your views find it hard to hold back in the classroom. I taught alongside a teacher in Wake county during the Bush administration who was about as anti-Bush as you could get, and he never let a moment pass by that he could work that into his students somehow.

My dad taught for 35 years and has worked with teachers on the far-left who would try their best to get in some politics into their lesson plans.

Sure, these are anecdotes, but if one person has 3 or 4 incidents where they've seen it, then it's happening elsehwere. You should leave your own politics out of the classroom. If that view makes you think I'm some kind of nazi sympathizer, then so be it, but there are places to go to get indoctrinated. Public schools shouldn't be one of them.

And I really don't want to pay for private school.

8/21/2017 7:49:48 AM

teachers/schools have a responsibility in the moral development of their students. sometimes you do have to stop and do that. thats one of the main reasons surveyed parents choose private schools. our top notch academics is like 5th on their list.

some subjects can be taught without any politics. maths and languages come to mind but in most classes it is impossible not to inject some sort of bias. even if you dont, good students will ask for your thoughts. My political views are only based on science which is what i am teaching anyway.

another example is we also take out the overwhelming focus on historical white men most schools have embedded into every subject.

8/21/2017 8:04:39 AM

^^ I understand the overall point you are making on teachers compartmentalizing political views. It's a fine point but also completely undermined when you consider that, likely even during your father's time teaching, there was active suppression on issues such as evolution vs. creationism. In a private school environment it is likely this is still being done is some areas - even outside strict religious institutions.

You cannot call out left leaning teachers for injecting their political views and not remember the larger picture where a balanced education - regardless of belief - was so vehemently fought.


^ Actually a good point in that science is meant to question what we already know/ think we know. There is no "political leaning" in science.

[Edited on August 21, 2017 at 8:26 AM. Reason : don't make me regret this...]

8/21/2017 8:19:58 AM

^One of the reasons I do not want to look at private schools is because I'm afraid many of them still teach creationism. And the ones that don't - we probably can't afford them. So there's the other end of the spectrum as well. When going over evolution, I don't want a fundamentalist Christian teacher teaching my child creationism. And when it comes to world history, I don't want a right wing teacher just glossing over Islam because they think brown=bad.

So many places for political (and religious) ideals to work their way into lesson plans.

The only other option is home-schooling, and we've set ourselves up to be a two-income household, so that's out.

8/21/2017 9:22:37 AM

Do you live in Texas?

8/21/2017 9:25:11 AM

No, why do you ask?

If you are going to talk about private schools teaching evolution - I haven't fully researched all of the private schools in Wake county, but the secular ones tend to be a lot more expensive than those that spring from faith-based institutions.

8/21/2017 9:28:45 AM

Just because they "spring from faith-based institutions" doesn't mean they teach creationism and brown people are bad.

Oh wait this is obviously your main point.

Quote :

" I really don't want to pay for private school."

[Edited on August 21, 2017 at 9:33 AM. Reason : ]

8/21/2017 9:30:57 AM

Oh. I think you may be conflating what I said in a previous post - I don't believe that all private schools are going to push those types of agendas, even the faith based ones. My concern is getting teachers that push those right/left agendas in public schools.

8/21/2017 9:32:47 AM

No, I'm not conflating anything.

8/21/2017 9:36:01 AM

^^ Generally speaking, especially somewhere like Wake Co., teachers of either leaning that push personal agendas would:
A) likely not last very long due to the diverse nature of the system already (due to the complaints that would arise due to their agendas)
B) would likely not have a measurable affect on the overall student population for the same reason - plus the fact that there are so many other factors that determine a person's core values.

I don't disagree with the core of your argument at all - i just don't see the issue with it in a system as robust as Wake County schools or similar.

edit: teachers typically have way more to worry about/deal with than instilling their views on their students. And worrying that you kid may see a different view point is rather like have blinders on a horse... (edit edit: Yes i see how this last statement could be seen as contradictory to agreeing with the core argument- so I'll emphasize the 'core' part.)

[Edited on August 21, 2017 at 10:18 AM. Reason : edit.]

[Edited on August 21, 2017 at 10:25 AM. Reason : edit edit.]

8/21/2017 10:02:02 AM

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2012/06/21/how-texas-inflicts-bad-textbooks-on-us/

this is the thing that you need to fear

not your kid having a teacher that's politically different than you

8/21/2017 10:04:57 AM

Lol, I don't know if that article says it but for a time Texas called slaves fucking "imported workers."

8/21/2017 10:30:54 AM

Quote :

"There is no "political leaning" in science. "

You sure about that?

8/21/2017 10:52:14 AM

^ Absolutely. Science has no political leanings.

Those who conduct it, however, can and do - be it from outside (funding, etc) or internal influences.

8/21/2017 10:57:19 AM

^^please expand, I'm curious where you're going with that.

I think science is science, it has not political leaning. But it can be politicized.

8/21/2017 11:48:47 AM

The tl;dr version of that article about textbooks can be summed up here:

Quote :

"Study of the first part of the twentieth century should include not only the Spanish-American War and Theodore Roosevelt but also Sanford B. Dole, a Hawaiian lawyer and son of missionaries. When teachers get to Clarence Darrow, Henry Ford, and Charles Lindbergh, they’d also better not forget Glenn Curtiss, who broke early motorcycle speed records. For the modern era, they needed to study “the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s,” including Equal Rights Amendment opponent Phyllis Schlafly, the Contract With America, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority, and the National Rifle Association. And when students learn how to describe the impact of cultural movements like “Tin Pan Alley, the Harlem Renaissance, the Beat Generation, rock and roll,” the board demanded that they also look into “country and western music.”"

These are some of the recommendations that this board required of social studies textbooks.

8/21/2017 11:49:21 AM

Quote :

"People with your views find it hard to hold back in the classroom. I taught alongside a teacher in Wake county during the Bush administration who was about as anti-Bush as you could get, and he never let a moment pass by that he could work that into his students somehow. My dad taught for 35 years and has worked with teachers on the far-left who would try their best to get in some politics into their lesson plans. Sure, these are anecdotes, but if one person has 3 or 4 incidents where they've seen it, then it's happening elsehwere. You should leave your own politics out of the classroom. If that view makes you think I'm some kind of nazi sympathizer, then so be it, but there are places to go to get indoctrinated. Public schools shouldn't be one of them. "

and there are plenty of teachers on the other side politically. I encountered plenty of right-leaning teachers during the Bush presidency who were happy bring their views to class. I didn't want to leave them for a teacher who shared my politica views, though. I had honest discussions with those teachers. diversity of thought is a very, very good thing.

[Edited on August 21, 2017 at 11:59 AM. Reason : .]

8/21/2017 11:56:09 AM

^ I acknowledged those in a later post. Just as bad.

8/21/2017 12:05:36 PM

not if you trust your kid to think for themself

8/21/2017 12:07:49 PM

Quote :

"I think science is science, it has not political leaning. But it can be politicized."

That's where I was going with it. We all know science doesn't have political leanings, but at the same time, if that were a universal truth, then there wouldn't be such a political debate about climate change for example.

8/21/2017 12:36:27 PM

there are political debates about everything. i incorporate these and randomly assign positions to defend with scientific evidence.

there is no scientific debate about climate change, evolution, or gender binary.

unless you are talking about debating the effectiveness of potential climate change policies, coping strategies

just like you could debate the evolutionary hisotry of a particular trait but everyone accepts evolution on a large scale.

ethics debates are awesome in science as well

8/21/2017 1:00:34 PM

Quote :

"https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/11/nuremberg-trials-hitler-goebbels-himmler-german-communist-social-democrats/"

Anymore reading on this or good reads in general on this type of stuff ITT?

8/21/2017 5:48:15 PM