Charlottesville protests

A genius! :laughing:

I guess the definition for genius has changed.

He couldn’t even face death like a man. He had to do a sobbing death-bed “I’m so sorry” conversion, so his new feel-good religion would make him feel-good about slandering people and ruining careers. By converting to Catholicism, I wonder if he was trying to confess to something else…hmmmm?

he had a legacy. Karl “John McCain had a black out of wedlock child” Rove learned to play the “Southern Strategy” well.

Caution: May Contain Some Offensive Language. I am linking for reference only.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_8E3ENrKrQ

1 Like

Did you read the article? I got this from Atlantic,

While the president’s budget this year didn’t cut Medicare or Social Security’s core retirement benefits, it did include cuts to Social Security’s supplemental-income and disability programs.

Now think about this for a moment, we’re talking about playing on people’s fears. Who’s fears might this be playing on? The elderly, who are a very sizable voting bloc, but they are not affected and never were before, but Democrats scared them into voting for them, and they did it knowingly.

Besides, I was talking about further in the past, especially around 1995 with the government shutdown and many times after that. The charge to privatize social security is more recent.

Don’t forget about candidate Kerry in that…sperm suit.

What about silk pony and his haircuts?http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/ht_john_edwards_hair_nt_120417_wblog.jpg

Do you research anything before throwing it out there?

Since I am willing to bet you have drank the kool-aid and accept as fact all media that does not praise 45 is liberal media fake news. This is from the Cato institute, and they are no fans of entitlement programs. Or any government at all.

https://www.cato.org/policy-report/marchapril-2010/limiting-government-1980-2010

You need to quote something. There’s nothing there. Said Republicans in 95 wanted to reduce spending by restructuring. That is not the same as taking away social security from senior citizens.

Said Reagan wanted to restrain spending, not sure if you know this but every year when they make budgets, there is a normal increase in everything ostensibly for inflation. When there is effort to reduce that increase (I don’t mean keep it the same or lower than the previous year), in other words the increase will be 200,000 more instead of the expected 300,000 more, Democrats call that a cut. But it is restraining spending even though spending is still growing.

It’s retarded that people reject candidates because they’re windsurfing or look goofy in some photo op. This whole “I’ll vote for the guy I could see myself having a beer with” litmus test gave us W and Trump, the two worst Presidents of the modern era. I don’t want to have a beer with any of these people, but I’ll vote for the person who sounds like they know what the hell they’re talking about.

1 Like

Politics is all about wording. One’s restructuring is another’s cuts.
You may not be aware of the fact that the majority of people in congress are lawyers. Some are doctors, some academics, others somewhere in between. Even if they are not lawyers, they have them on their staff.

Lawyers know that it is best to be as ambiguous in wording as possible to maximize wiggle-worm and maximum plausible deniability.

To be fair, 45 made no claims to cut any entitlement programs. And if I am honest, I would love to see SS, MedicAid/Care slashed and burned. But not for the reasons you think.

I am getting way off target, but my hand was forced. Mods, feel free to split this.

See, the bulk, the overwhelming majority of his support comes from aging boomers who have stayed well past their usefulness. 45, fits this description to a “T.” Literally.

To paraphrase Zhao Ziyang “You’re too old and you do not matter anymore.”

The boomers have voted to block or dismantle every program or policy that would benefit younger generations. Their kids, their grandkids, their great-grandkids. They have voted for a future that is not theirs. And since a good chunk of these boomers will soon be eligible for SS and some already are. I am for immediate elimination of this program, and would not mind it be backdated a decade, meaning they have to pay it back.

They get to work until they die, just like their kids and grandkids.

I know a lot of foreigners in Taiwan who talk about how disgraceful it is America has who we have for a president. They talk about how they disapprove of racism or a lack of women’s rights. They highlight how living in Taiwan has given them better perspective and seem to think that in living in Taiwan, they are some sort of cultural ambassadors or diplomats. They are appalled to the point of tears when they talk about what is happening in America right now, because they disapprove so strongly of it all.

Then I think about what the majority of what these people do here. They live here, long term (6 months or more. Some 20+ years). They get jobs teaching English despite majoring in literally anything but Education, some of them having not gone to college at all. They are paid easily 2x more than local Taiwanese for these jobs, even though the sole qualification they had for their teaching job was the country name on their passport and the color of their skin. Taiwanese flock to and adore them. Virtually every white guy I know is either after an Asian girlfriend or married to an Asian woman within less than one year of meeting her.

Now, one could make the case that the Taiwanese “need” foreign English teachers. One could say that I don’t “understand” relationships or true love and shouldn’t judge what white men do. One could point out that “soft diplomacy” is what the world needs right now. All valid points.

I spent a bit of time in Fulbright, which is supposed to be the “top international exchange program in the world” or something like that. I spent that time surrounded by people who were convinced that we, Fulbrighters, were better than everyone else, because the government “chose us” to come to Taiwan to “promote cross cultural understanding” and serve as “the real diplomats”. Both AIT and MoFA told us this personally, reinforcing the idea. Yeah, we all hung out with (taught) Taiwanese kids at public elementary schools every day, or there was a small handful of researchers who did their research, hopefully engaging with locals. Sure, we “engaged in the community” by volunteering, and some people took classes in cooking or tai chi. But not one American person in the program was expected to be able to communicate in any way in Chinese or with Taiwanese not affiliated with Fulbright. The Taiwanese “helpers” and coordinators were expected to be fully fluent in both Chinese and English, but we Americans were held to no standards at all. The head of the program could only slaughter “shéi-shéi” (his closest approximation to 謝謝), and he’s lived here for years, divorced his American wife and married a Taiwanese one pretty much right when he got here. He even bragged that his only qualification for the job was that he knew some people and no one else wanted it. He is the person who gives orientation to the incredibly small number of Taiwanese who get the opportunity to do Fulbright in the US. A white man who is driven around by a private driver, speaks no Chinese, degrades women, and brags of his lack of qualifications is the head of the “top exchange program” in Taiwan. Sound like any other leaders we know?
In Fulbright, we had to live with each other, other Americans, and were expected to participate in and plan activities with other people in Fulbright, Doing things on our own/not inviting everyone else along to things was frowned upon.
Less than a fourth of the Fulbrighters my year spoke a conversational level of Chinese. Nobody who arrived with no knowledge of Chinese wanted to spend even an hour a week learning some basic survival phrases, but they expected their kindergarteners to communicate their needs in perfect English, and would laugh about how stupid or lazy some of the kids where when their English wasn’t good enough. They expected their school to translate all emails, schedules, and other documents into English for them. They got annoyed with anyone who didn’t speak English, refused to learn how to eat with chopsticks, and spent a lot of time mocking everything, often in loud English and in public, from squatty potties to old men who didn’t wear shirts.
We were in Taiwan on student visa status, but given a salary and working full time in public schools, because we are special privileged Americans and could do that without a work permit or teaching license. Never would America extend the same opportunity to Taiwanese college graduates. Yet everyone still felt they were above everyone else for the “work they are doing”, because simply by existing as an American in Taiwan, we were convinced that we were doing more good for the world. That’s not soft diplomacy. That’s an uncomfortable mix of racism, nationalism, and colonialism.

Anyone who has taken an anthropology class knows that you cannot understand a culture if you’re learning it through a translator. In other words, if you don’t speak Chinese, you will never understand Chinese culture. If you have Taiwanese friends who speak perfect English, that’s great! But, after 6 months of living here, can you order your own bubble tea in Chinese? Do you try your best to talk to shop owners and restaurant owners in Chinese? Maybe take a stab at reading a menu that isn’t in English? Or do you expect everyone you come across to understand your English and use English to respond, or get mad at everyone in the room when no one makes a special effort to translate everything for you, the special American?

If you are a long term resident of Taiwan, holding an English speaking country passport, (are white), and you are teaching English while never taking the time to at least learn AND use Chinese at the level you hold your students to with their English, you are benefiting from the spread of and pushing of white nationalism. If you feel proud of the soft diplomacy you are a part of while teaching English here, think for a moment about what you are actually doing. I know I’m respected more than the other teachers at my school because I’m white. I know I’m paid more because the Taiwanese government wants more white people in the schools. On top of that, I get a housing stipend and a “household goods” allowance, which my Taiwanese coworkers do not. I know that I could get away with doing nothing all day and still get my annual bonus because I’m white. I know my school attracts more students because there is a white American English teacher. Meanwhile, local Taiwanese teachers at my school with higher degrees than me but lower pay and benefits are expected to do more work.

Forget about the Nazi rallies or ANTIFA or Donald Trump and all that stuff happening 7,000+ miles away for a second. What message are YOU sending to the Taiwanese through your expectations and behavior in your daily life, here, in Taiwan? (I’ll help you out: you’re teaching the Taiwanese of all ages and walks of life that white/English speaking people can do less work deserve more pay and special treatment than them. You’re also justifying the behavior and attitudes of anyone who genuinely believes that white people are some sort of supreme race)

As hard as I try to immerse myself in the local culture here, some days I feel like a modern colonist. If you don’t feel that way, you’re not a better or more zen person. You’re choosing to close your eyes to the fact that you’re benefitting from and reinforcing a system that prefers white English speaking people in a Chinese-speaking Asian country. You can’t participate in ani-nationalist rallies in the US, but you sure as heck can check yourself and make sure you’re not helping to spread white nationalism abroad.

A quote to end this post: “Actions speak louder than words”.
(Remember, “learn Chinese”, "remember that your culture does not deserve more respect/ opportunities/ money than others ", and “go home if you’re only here because royal treatment” are all actions)

1 Like

Shouldn’t that make him your pal?

So now being from a rich, powerful country makes you a “white nationalist”? For a Fulbright scholar, you don’t seem very fulbright.

I understand what you’re saying, but if you really can’t find any white people in Taiwan – or in Asia, I might as well say – who don’t fit that stereotype, I think you should try to expand your horizons.

If Fulbright is as awful as you say (and we’ve had a post like that before, about Kinmen iirc), why not start a petition on each side of the Pacific to do something about it? That would be action. :slight_smile:

Not Fulbright scholar, ETA (English Teaching Assistant). Scholars hold PhD and have to prove their research ability to get their awards, ETAs are people who graduated from college, usually within one year of the grant. It wasn’t much of an application process.
Fulbright is a program that was created so we overprivileged Americans could learn about the world outside of our bubbles and bring back a better understanding of those other cultures. All I saw when I was in Fulbright was constant reinforcement that we were better than everyone else because we have, to quote Dr. William Vocke, the head of the program “the Fulbright stamp on our forehead”.
Yes, Fulbright is a well known brand name, but I learned quickly that nobody really knows what Fulbright actually does

You’re weirdly conflating these supposed ails of the Fulbright program with people who are doing a job. People who are doing a job deserve to be evaluated on the basis of their performance, not their country name or the color of their skin or their partner’s or their ability to speak Chinese or what Taiwanese people think of them or if they love the local culture or if they don’t care one whit about it or whatever weird race-based political arguments are the order of the day in the US. Some of the stuff you say is worth mentioning but is well noted and been discussed in hundreds of posts here in the past. This is one of the longest posts to say very little that has been said hundreds of times I’ve ever seen here, and I’ve seen a few.

1 Like

Making sweeping generalizations regarding individuals with whom one has no actual familiarity appears to be one thing.

JSIA

2 Likes

No, I can say from my own experience that Fulbright changes their story of what they do depending on who they talk to. The local government thought we were all teachers or working towards our teaching degrees. (Maybe 10 or the 70+ had any teaching experience). My school thought I was a teacher in the US who was here for the year on exchange. We thought we were here to assist in the classrooms, but no one wanted to pitch a fit that we were full time teachers with our own classes. Back in the US, all anyone I talk to says “wow! Fulbright! That’s really impressive and will help so much with your grad school applications!”. When asking them if they knew what I was doing in TW, all they could say was something vague about learning about Taiwanese culture.
I’d say those stories vary quite a lot.

“White privilege” would be a more apt term. Looking at it further, taking advantage of a niche market would be more correct, and some do not come from “predominantly white” English speaking nations. Also, most learn enough Chinese to function basically, so your ad hoc attack is invalid.

Surprisingly, I am not a fan.

That NYT opinion piece has picked up some attention elsewhere