6 ms·

Another example of the politicisation of everything.... I remember a time when politics was not discussed in polite company.

by wil999 7y ago

SideburnsOfDoom 7y ago
I'm not sure which way you're going with that comment. Ravelry seems to be saying "we are polite company, keep your politics off our knitting site, thx". If anything, it's de-politicisation.
- InvaderFizz 7y ago
  Did I miss something? The linked article looks to me to say that Pro-Trump views are not allowed to be expressed. Not that politics has no place in their community. If anything this is escalating the problem by silencing the opposition and further entrenching both sides.
  - eesmith 7y ago
    Escalating what problem? Their policy is at https://www.ravelry.com/content/no-trump https://www.ravelry.com/content/no-trump . Their argument is "We cannot provide a space that is inclusive of all and also allow support for open white supremacy. Support of the Trump administration is undeniably support for white supremacy." So by "both sides" it seems like you mean the one side in favor of white supremacy, and the other side not in favor of white supremacy? Why should a knitting site allow support for open white supremacy?
    - SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
      That's a bit of a mental leap. I'm no fan of the guy at all but saying that support for Trump == support for white supremacy simply isn't true. If their issue is with white supremacy why not ban that specifically?
      - eesmith 7y ago
        They apparently have banned open discussion of white supremacy, and listed support for the Trump administration as a specific example. I'm sure they'll come up with more, if needed. I disagree with your "simply isn't true." At best, it's "complicatedly isn't true." But I think it's really true. He's a white supremacist, surrounded by white supremacists, product of a country and culture based on white supremacy. Rather than write up a description, I'll vouch for: 1) https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/08/donald-trumps-ties-to-alt-right-white-supremacists-are-extensive.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/08/donald-trumps-ti... from 2017 listing some of his and his administration's connections to the broad category of white supremacy, including his birtherism. 2) https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/01/trump-embraces-white-supremacy/579745/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/01/trump-e... from early 2019 describes more connections, including "his attempts to expel undocumented immigrants who pose no threat to public safety, and their American family members; his elevation of an ostentatious partisan to the Supreme Court; his implementation of a policy of child abuse as a deterrent to illegal immigration; his abandonment of Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria; his Justice Department’s green-lighting of police abuses; his attempts to weaken the political power of minorities targeted by his policies; and other acts of state violence and disapproval against religious and ethnic minorities too numerous to name. ... all of them follow the underlying logic ... that extremism in pursuit of white power is no vice, and defending the rights of those who threaten that power is no virtue." (Similar points made at https://newrepublic.com/article/144390/trumps-white-supremacist-economic-agenda https://newrepublic.com/article/144390/trumps-white-supremac... ) Here's a question - what would Trump and the Trump administration need to do for you to think it supports white supremacy? Why do we have children in concentration camps, repeating the tragedies of the Japanese concentration camps of the 1940s and the Native American concentration camps?
      - ralfn 7y ago
        That's not a mental leap. Thats just how far things have moved politically. White surpremacy is seen as 'extreme' and Trump is seen as 'center'. Truth it, in the US white surpremacy is not a fringe perspective. That's just the reality. The polarisation is because the political divide isn't about tax rates or nuanced trade-off between common good and personal liberty. The political divide is about human rights and rule of law. It's the type of divide that is not resolved by voting, but by civil war or threat of such. The end result is not an election but a constitution
    - InvaderFizz 7y ago
      If your view is that the 60+ million Americans that voted for Trump are, in fact, really voting for white supremacy then we aren't even living in the same reality and any further discussion is completely pointless. It really hurts any credibility someone may have granted you in a conversation when you ascribe to one side of a discussion a world view that is condemned by the vast majority of that side.
      - eesmith 7y ago
        Well, yes, I am saying that the millions of Americans who thought that Obama was a Kenyan-born secret Muslim (something our current president strongly supported), who support the artificial "Lost Cause" interpretation of the Civil War ("you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides"), etc. support white supremacy. I mean, there's still a lot of people alive today who remember - and supported - the social policies of the Jim Crow era. Funny about all the support for cheaply constructed statues in support of the traitors of the Civil War, justified by 'preserving our heritage', and yet "People keep shooting sign marking where Emmett Till died ... people in the community have widely interpreted the act as evidence of persistent racism and avoidance of Till's brutal killing and its legacy" - https://www.al.com/news/2018/08/people_keep_shooting_sign_mark.html https://www.al.com/news/2018/08/people_keep_shooting_sign_ma... .
      - aantthony 7y ago
        When they say "Support of the Trump administration is undeniably support for white supremacy" as if it were an undisputed fact, and without any argument at all, it really shows how they're incapable of considering an alternative worldview. To an ideologically enslaved mind it literally cannot be denied.
        eesmith 7y ago
        "Undisputed" is a needlessly strong statement, don't you think? I mean, do you agree that the Earth is not flat, and not younger than 20,000 years old? Yet there are many Flat-Earthers and Young Earth Creationists who dispute those facts. So, if I said "minimum surface distances between different cities on the Earth can be approximated using spherical trigonometry", would you then complain that I was stating that like an undisputed fact, and therefore incapable of considering an alternative worldview for the shape of the Earth? In which case, I am indeed ideologically enslaved to a non-flat model of the Earth. Aren't you? And, why do you say they don't make any arguments? They wrote: > Much of this policy was first written by a roleplaying game site, not unlike Ravelry but for RPGs, named RPG.net. We thank them for their thoughtful work. For citations/references, see this post on RPG.net: https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/new-ban-do-not-post-in-support-of-trump-or-his-administration.835849/ https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/new-ban-do-not-post-... That in turn lists these "Policy Citations" arguments: > 1. Racism and rhetorical alliance with white supremacist groups. This is a fairly thorough collection of citations in itself, not just a single tweet. https://twitter.com/JuliusGoat/status/1054669092764966912?s=19 https://twitter.com/JuliusGoat/status/1054669092764966912?s=... > 2. Hostility to transgender persons. [ https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/trump-says-transgender-policy-seeks-protect-country-n923266 https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/trump-says-transgend...] > 3. Attempting to ban transgender service members from the military [ https://www.sfchronicle.com/lgbt/article/Trump-ban-on-transgender-military-service-blocked-13086811.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/lgbt/article/Trump-ban-on-transg...] > 4. He is personally hostile to both individual reporters and the very idea of a free press. [ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/09/trump-enemy-of-the-people-media-threats/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/09/trump-enemy-of-... ] > 5. He mocks the disabled. [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX9reO3QnUA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX9reO3QnUA ] > 6. He mocked a sexual assault victim, to applause from his supporters. [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2m00qAeFHaQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2m00qAeFHaQ ] > 7. For the record, “Globalists” is almost always code for “Jews,” particularly if it’s in concert with anything about Soros. [ https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/413356-trump-says-lock-em-up-after-calling-for-unity https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/413356-trump-say... ] > 8. When confronted with the fact that his rhetoric may be encouraging domestic terrorism, he has indicated he should maybe encourage it more, and has implied the press has it coming. [ https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-tone-down-bomb-threats-1190263 https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-tone-down-bomb-threats... ] > 9. He is attempting to stoke fear and violence in other arenas, as well. [ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-midterms-2018-violence-republicans-lose-evangelical-christians-antifa-a8512406.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-midt... ] > 10. It is clear from context that his embrace of “nationalism” is a dog-whistled love note to white nationalists. > 11. There are components of his immigration policy that cannot be supported by persons of good conscience. [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_administration_family_separation_policy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_administration_family_se... ] > 12. Further reading on this and all of the above topics are freely available from any reputable news site. [ https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/i-am-trash-migrant-children-reveal-stories-detention-separation-n895006 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/i-am-trash-migrant-child... ]
    - gemjam 7y ago
      Trump's "white supremacist" policies: Move US Embassy to Jerusalem, acknowledge Israeli control over the Golan Heights, sign an aid package to give Israel $38B, inch towards war with Iran. That doesn't sound like a white supremacist/neo-nazi.
      - eesmith 7y ago
        "Neo-nazi" is irrelevant. There's no reason to include it. The US history of white supremacy is far older than Nazism or even fascism. I feel that you're bringing up international politics in a discussion about US domestic politics is mostly meant to derail the conversation. You realize that more factors are involved than just white supremacy, right? BTW, the $38B 10-year military-assistance Memorandum of Understanding was signed on September 14, 2016 during the Obama administration, and "partly a response to the nuclear deal that the United States and other world powers finalized with Iran". https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/09/united-states-israel-memorandum-of-understanding-military-aid/500192/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/09/un... .
        gemjam 7y ago
        Its not irrelevant, because the terms white supremacist and neo-nazi have merged. Meanwhile Netanyahu campaigns with Trump, names a town in the Golan after Trump... which violates the key characteristic of white supremacy: namely not liking Jews; ergo he is not a white supremacist
        eesmith 7y ago
        Nonsense. White supremacy is the broader term. It's meaningful to characterize the (early) American Federation of Labor policies as being rooted in white supremacy. It's not meaningful to characterize them as neo-Nazis. Several 19th century state constitutions prohibited black people from moving to them. This should be correctly understood as white supremacy. They did not prevent Jews from moving to them. Hence those terms are distinct and have not merged for any serious discussion of the topic. Again, foreign policy != domestic policy. Black slavers and free abolitionists opposed to each others' domestic policies, but some worked together for the foreign policy of having blacks return to Africa, in the American Colonization Society's colonization of Liberia. Or you can see how a Christian Zionist like Pat Robertson can be both anti-Semitic and support the Jewish state. Last I heard, "There is no budgeting, no planning, no location for a settlement, and there is no binding decision to implement the project" for that settlement, says Zvi Hauser at https://www.timesofisrael.com/no-plans-no-budget-trump-heights-inauguration-slammed-as-a-pr-stunt/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/no-plans-no-budget-trump-heigh... , who describes it as a publicity stunt. Ergo, what you point out isn't really germane.
eesmith 7y ago
When was this time? Who were the people who followed this practice? Isn't this policy inherently conservative, in that it ignores any desire for political change? Does it mean that the abolitionists and suffragettes were not polite? Because they sometimes were not. It's part of how they got change.

Another example of the politicisation of everything.... I remember a time when politics was not discussed in polite company.

by wil999 7y ago

Another example of the politicisation of everything.... I remember a time when politics was not discussed in polite company.

SideburnsOfDoom 7y ago

I'm not sure which way you're going with that comment. Ravelry seems to be saying "we are polite company, keep your politics off our knitting site, thx". If anything, it's de-politicisation.

InvaderFizz 7y ago
Did I miss something? The linked article looks to me to say that Pro-Trump views are not allowed to be expressed. Not that politics has no place in their community. If anything this is escalating the problem by silencing the opposition and further entrenching both sides.
- eesmith 7y ago
  Escalating what problem? Their policy is at https://www.ravelry.com/content/no-trump https://www.ravelry.com/content/no-trump . Their argument is "We cannot provide a space that is inclusive of all and also allow support for open white supremacy. Support of the Trump administration is undeniably support for white supremacy." So by "both sides" it seems like you mean the one side in favor of white supremacy, and the other side not in favor of white supremacy? Why should a knitting site allow support for open white supremacy?
  - SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
    That's a bit of a mental leap. I'm no fan of the guy at all but saying that support for Trump == support for white supremacy simply isn't true. If their issue is with white supremacy why not ban that specifically?
    - eesmith 7y ago
      They apparently have banned open discussion of white supremacy, and listed support for the Trump administration as a specific example. I'm sure they'll come up with more, if needed. I disagree with your "simply isn't true." At best, it's "complicatedly isn't true." But I think it's really true. He's a white supremacist, surrounded by white supremacists, product of a country and culture based on white supremacy. Rather than write up a description, I'll vouch for: 1) https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/08/donald-trumps-ties-to-alt-right-white-supremacists-are-extensive.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/08/donald-trumps-ti... from 2017 listing some of his and his administration's connections to the broad category of white supremacy, including his birtherism. 2) https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/01/trump-embraces-white-supremacy/579745/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/01/trump-e... from early 2019 describes more connections, including "his attempts to expel undocumented immigrants who pose no threat to public safety, and their American family members; his elevation of an ostentatious partisan to the Supreme Court; his implementation of a policy of child abuse as a deterrent to illegal immigration; his abandonment of Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria; his Justice Department’s green-lighting of police abuses; his attempts to weaken the political power of minorities targeted by his policies; and other acts of state violence and disapproval against religious and ethnic minorities too numerous to name. ... all of them follow the underlying logic ... that extremism in pursuit of white power is no vice, and defending the rights of those who threaten that power is no virtue." (Similar points made at https://newrepublic.com/article/144390/trumps-white-supremacist-economic-agenda https://newrepublic.com/article/144390/trumps-white-supremac... ) Here's a question - what would Trump and the Trump administration need to do for you to think it supports white supremacy? Why do we have children in concentration camps, repeating the tragedies of the Japanese concentration camps of the 1940s and the Native American concentration camps?
    - ralfn 7y ago
      That's not a mental leap. Thats just how far things have moved politically. White surpremacy is seen as 'extreme' and Trump is seen as 'center'. Truth it, in the US white surpremacy is not a fringe perspective. That's just the reality. The polarisation is because the political divide isn't about tax rates or nuanced trade-off between common good and personal liberty. The political divide is about human rights and rule of law. It's the type of divide that is not resolved by voting, but by civil war or threat of such. The end result is not an election but a constitution
  - InvaderFizz 7y ago
    If your view is that the 60+ million Americans that voted for Trump are, in fact, really voting for white supremacy then we aren't even living in the same reality and any further discussion is completely pointless. It really hurts any credibility someone may have granted you in a conversation when you ascribe to one side of a discussion a world view that is condemned by the vast majority of that side.
    - eesmith 7y ago
      Well, yes, I am saying that the millions of Americans who thought that Obama was a Kenyan-born secret Muslim (something our current president strongly supported), who support the artificial "Lost Cause" interpretation of the Civil War ("you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides"), etc. support white supremacy. I mean, there's still a lot of people alive today who remember - and supported - the social policies of the Jim Crow era. Funny about all the support for cheaply constructed statues in support of the traitors of the Civil War, justified by 'preserving our heritage', and yet "People keep shooting sign marking where Emmett Till died ... people in the community have widely interpreted the act as evidence of persistent racism and avoidance of Till's brutal killing and its legacy" - https://www.al.com/news/2018/08/people_keep_shooting_sign_mark.html https://www.al.com/news/2018/08/people_keep_shooting_sign_ma... .
    - aantthony 7y ago
      When they say "Support of the Trump administration is undeniably support for white supremacy" as if it were an undisputed fact, and without any argument at all, it really shows how they're incapable of considering an alternative worldview. To an ideologically enslaved mind it literally cannot be denied.
      - eesmith 7y ago
        "Undisputed" is a needlessly strong statement, don't you think? I mean, do you agree that the Earth is not flat, and not younger than 20,000 years old? Yet there are many Flat-Earthers and Young Earth Creationists who dispute those facts. So, if I said "minimum surface distances between different cities on the Earth can be approximated using spherical trigonometry", would you then complain that I was stating that like an undisputed fact, and therefore incapable of considering an alternative worldview for the shape of the Earth? In which case, I am indeed ideologically enslaved to a non-flat model of the Earth. Aren't you? And, why do you say they don't make any arguments? They wrote: > Much of this policy was first written by a roleplaying game site, not unlike Ravelry but for RPGs, named RPG.net. We thank them for their thoughtful work. For citations/references, see this post on RPG.net: https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/new-ban-do-not-post-in-support-of-trump-or-his-administration.835849/ https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/new-ban-do-not-post-... That in turn lists these "Policy Citations" arguments: > 1. Racism and rhetorical alliance with white supremacist groups. This is a fairly thorough collection of citations in itself, not just a single tweet. https://twitter.com/JuliusGoat/status/1054669092764966912?s=19 https://twitter.com/JuliusGoat/status/1054669092764966912?s=... > 2. Hostility to transgender persons. [ https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/trump-says-transgender-policy-seeks-protect-country-n923266 https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/trump-says-transgend...] > 3. Attempting to ban transgender service members from the military [ https://www.sfchronicle.com/lgbt/article/Trump-ban-on-transgender-military-service-blocked-13086811.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/lgbt/article/Trump-ban-on-transg...] > 4. He is personally hostile to both individual reporters and the very idea of a free press. [ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/09/trump-enemy-of-the-people-media-threats/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/09/trump-enemy-of-... ] > 5. He mocks the disabled. [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX9reO3QnUA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX9reO3QnUA ] > 6. He mocked a sexual assault victim, to applause from his supporters. [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2m00qAeFHaQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2m00qAeFHaQ ] > 7. For the record, “Globalists” is almost always code for “Jews,” particularly if it’s in concert with anything about Soros. [ https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/413356-trump-says-lock-em-up-after-calling-for-unity https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/413356-trump-say... ] > 8. When confronted with the fact that his rhetoric may be encouraging domestic terrorism, he has indicated he should maybe encourage it more, and has implied the press has it coming. [ https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-tone-down-bomb-threats-1190263 https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-tone-down-bomb-threats... ] > 9. He is attempting to stoke fear and violence in other arenas, as well. [ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-midterms-2018-violence-republicans-lose-evangelical-christians-antifa-a8512406.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-midt... ] > 10. It is clear from context that his embrace of “nationalism” is a dog-whistled love note to white nationalists. > 11. There are components of his immigration policy that cannot be supported by persons of good conscience. [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_administration_family_separation_policy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_administration_family_se... ] > 12. Further reading on this and all of the above topics are freely available from any reputable news site. [ https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/i-am-trash-migrant-children-reveal-stories-detention-separation-n895006 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/i-am-trash-migrant-child... ]
  - gemjam 7y ago
    Trump's "white supremacist" policies: Move US Embassy to Jerusalem, acknowledge Israeli control over the Golan Heights, sign an aid package to give Israel $38B, inch towards war with Iran. That doesn't sound like a white supremacist/neo-nazi.
    - eesmith 7y ago
      "Neo-nazi" is irrelevant. There's no reason to include it. The US history of white supremacy is far older than Nazism or even fascism. I feel that you're bringing up international politics in a discussion about US domestic politics is mostly meant to derail the conversation. You realize that more factors are involved than just white supremacy, right? BTW, the $38B 10-year military-assistance Memorandum of Understanding was signed on September 14, 2016 during the Obama administration, and "partly a response to the nuclear deal that the United States and other world powers finalized with Iran". https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/09/united-states-israel-memorandum-of-understanding-military-aid/500192/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/09/un... .
      - gemjam 7y ago
        Its not irrelevant, because the terms white supremacist and neo-nazi have merged. Meanwhile Netanyahu campaigns with Trump, names a town in the Golan after Trump... which violates the key characteristic of white supremacy: namely not liking Jews; ergo he is not a white supremacist
        eesmith 7y ago
        Nonsense. White supremacy is the broader term. It's meaningful to characterize the (early) American Federation of Labor policies as being rooted in white supremacy. It's not meaningful to characterize them as neo-Nazis. Several 19th century state constitutions prohibited black people from moving to them. This should be correctly understood as white supremacy. They did not prevent Jews from moving to them. Hence those terms are distinct and have not merged for any serious discussion of the topic. Again, foreign policy != domestic policy. Black slavers and free abolitionists opposed to each others' domestic policies, but some worked together for the foreign policy of having blacks return to Africa, in the American Colonization Society's colonization of Liberia. Or you can see how a Christian Zionist like Pat Robertson can be both anti-Semitic and support the Jewish state. Last I heard, "There is no budgeting, no planning, no location for a settlement, and there is no binding decision to implement the project" for that settlement, says Zvi Hauser at https://www.timesofisrael.com/no-plans-no-budget-trump-heights-inauguration-slammed-as-a-pr-stunt/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/no-plans-no-budget-trump-heigh... , who describes it as a publicity stunt. Ergo, what you point out isn't really germane.

eesmith 7y ago

When was this time? Who were the people who followed this practice? Isn't this policy inherently conservative, in that it ignores any desire for political change? Does it mean that the abolitionists and suffragettes were not polite? Because they sometimes were not. It's part of how they got change.