4 ms·

I agree that her history of activity really does play a part in being re-elected. I find the parent comment a bit shocking. It seems unreasonable to claim an e

I agree that her history of activity really does play a part in being re-elected. I find the parent comment a bit shocking. It seems unreasonable to claim an elected U.S. representative is somehow not allowed to engage in foreign policy discourse by visiting a country or by suggesting that they aren’t representing their constituent’s views because they do political work outside of the (U.S.) country? Shall we hazard a guess about unelected Americans? Are those people allowed to exercise their right to freedom of movement and freedom of speech? Obviously yes and yes, but partisan polarization makes all of these norms, rights even, a point of contention. The Department of State is not the only group of American bureaucrats who are allowed to travel and engage in public actions that are considered political. America isn’t a dictatorship where only specific party members are allowed to engage in foreign policy discussions. When any American is threatened by members of an actual dictatorship (of the proletariat, literally), it might be worth considering that these issues transcend party politics. The parent comment strongly implies that there isn’t a long history of elected American officials visiting other countries, often with controversial media coverage and/or overt political threats from less than liberal societies. That history also extends to normal Americans speaking in foreign parliaments and speaking in public squares. It is a good thing that everyone has these rights, even if everything said isn’t always good. With that said, Pelosi might be provoking world war three, but the reason to argue against her actions isn’t because she doesn’t have the right to travel or speak or engage in politics abroad. As a side note: Taiwan probably should be defended by people who support democracy, though I understand this might not be seen as defense but as unnecessary provocation. Related though and on display in this thread is a kind of cynicism against America doing positive political actions abroad. This is part of a larger trend perceived from inside and certainly outside of America about some Americans: the light of liberty is going out in America, and most of the world has noticed. It isn’t particularly partisan and has really accelerated since 9/11 under both parties in different ways. It is really sad. America should be a light of liberty in the world, we should bring hope to democracies under threat from illiberal societies. I understand that this is now controversial in America in some political circles and it is really terrible. As polarization increases, all sides will find friends in exile or worse - peaceful resolution requires political discourse regardless of geographical location. Put another way: Ensure your political “enemies” have basic rights or you too might find that you are without rights, if and likely when, other people run the show…

hackinthebochs 4y ago
It's a bit silly to frame a Congressperson visiting Taiwan as merely "visiting a country" given the known sensitivity and the near military standoff over its political status. She has more responsibility than that as a representative of the U.S. She should not be willfully undermining U.S. foreign policy for any reason outside of the legal mechanisms available as a member of Congress. The fact that there was no real purpose to the visit aside from political grandstanding just makes it so much worse.
- throwaway654329 4y ago
  Do you deny she has the right to do it? Or do I misunderstand your position? We both probably agree it’s politically risky, perhaps even stupid. I understood your original comment to be a denial of her right to freely travel there. From my perspective she has the right to do it. Do you disagree? Additionally I don’t believe you have shown that she is undermining U.S. policy, merely that she disagrees with the executive. Why is that a problem? We have a separation of powers and she is part of the legislative body, not the executive. By design these branches can and should disagree when there is disagreement. This is a basic check and balance issue. By the way, Congress has the exclusive power to declare war and controls the power of the purse as well. So if anything is a bit silly, it’s a bit silly to pretend that she isn’t allowed to see the situation on the ground before discussing and perhaps even voting on going or not going to war. She is doing this legally and entirely within her authorities. She is not in the hierarchy of the State Department, and I think it is clear that she has voting constituents in Taiwan that are overseas voters. I know several California voters who live there and she is their duly elected representative. Your position appears to be simply suggesting that the separation of powers doesn’t exist and that she is out of line. I encourage you to cite the line you believe she has crossed. Party affiliation doesn’t mean iron clad agreement. Dissent against the U.S. President’s policy is a right of all Americans. If it’s a problem in her role, censure her and sanction her in the U.S. House of Representatives. This won’t happen but I do encourage you to work for it politically if you disagree with my analysis. My understanding is that Biden seems to personally agree with her about supporting Taiwan. I don’t know but it seems reasonable to suspect he may even privately be happy she can do what he can’t. It’s too bad American policy with regard to supporting democracy abroad is only widely supported when it’s an imperial, illegal invasion. Here is a chance to do it peacefully and to ignore the Saber rattling of the Chinese dictatorship. I understand some people are too afraid to do this now, or they don’t care about people outside of America. As someone with (American) friends in Taiwan, that isn’t my position. As someone proud of the good things about American democracy, defending and supporting nascent democracy around the world is a good thing. I understand this is going out of fashion. As someone who has lived in and traveled frequently to less than free societies, I implore others to not give up the support for democracy, especially when it is peaceful political discourse under violent threats from illiberal bullies.

hackinthebochs 4y ago

It's a bit silly to frame a Congressperson visiting Taiwan as merely "visiting a country" given the known sensitivity and the near military standoff over its political status. She has more responsibility than that as a representative of the U.S. She should not be willfully undermining U.S. foreign policy for any reason outside of the legal mechanisms available as a member of Congress. The fact that there was no real purpose to the visit aside from political grandstanding just makes it so much worse.

throwaway654329 4y ago
Do you deny she has the right to do it? Or do I misunderstand your position? We both probably agree it’s politically risky, perhaps even stupid. I understood your original comment to be a denial of her right to freely travel there. From my perspective she has the right to do it. Do you disagree? Additionally I don’t believe you have shown that she is undermining U.S. policy, merely that she disagrees with the executive. Why is that a problem? We have a separation of powers and she is part of the legislative body, not the executive. By design these branches can and should disagree when there is disagreement. This is a basic check and balance issue. By the way, Congress has the exclusive power to declare war and controls the power of the purse as well. So if anything is a bit silly, it’s a bit silly to pretend that she isn’t allowed to see the situation on the ground before discussing and perhaps even voting on going or not going to war. She is doing this legally and entirely within her authorities. She is not in the hierarchy of the State Department, and I think it is clear that she has voting constituents in Taiwan that are overseas voters. I know several California voters who live there and she is their duly elected representative. Your position appears to be simply suggesting that the separation of powers doesn’t exist and that she is out of line. I encourage you to cite the line you believe she has crossed. Party affiliation doesn’t mean iron clad agreement. Dissent against the U.S. President’s policy is a right of all Americans. If it’s a problem in her role, censure her and sanction her in the U.S. House of Representatives. This won’t happen but I do encourage you to work for it politically if you disagree with my analysis. My understanding is that Biden seems to personally agree with her about supporting Taiwan. I don’t know but it seems reasonable to suspect he may even privately be happy she can do what he can’t. It’s too bad American policy with regard to supporting democracy abroad is only widely supported when it’s an imperial, illegal invasion. Here is a chance to do it peacefully and to ignore the Saber rattling of the Chinese dictatorship. I understand some people are too afraid to do this now, or they don’t care about people outside of America. As someone with (American) friends in Taiwan, that isn’t my position. As someone proud of the good things about American democracy, defending and supporting nascent democracy around the world is a good thing. I understand this is going out of fashion. As someone who has lived in and traveled frequently to less than free societies, I implore others to not give up the support for democracy, especially when it is peaceful political discourse under violent threats from illiberal bullies.