Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Yup. 100x.
One of my favorites from yesterday was Glenn Thrush's reaction to a speech in which Hillary said point blank that she accepted responsibility for the loss and discussed the many causes. He tweets four points, one of which was along the lines of "it's everyone's fault but hers", the exact opposite of what she said (but, of course, it's the Thrush's NYT's position, its everyone's fault but theirs).
Misogyny was the most looked up word in Webster's yesterday.
|
That's disheartening, as "automation" should hold that title by many multiples of its closest challenger.
I'm not downplaying the seriousness of misogyny. But we're engaged in conversation regarding asteroids at the cost of neglecting a planet sized pile of economic problems and environmental concerns barreling toward us.
Maybe it's time we wake up and stop allowing the tail (real, but still secondary social issues) to stop wagging the dog in terms of policy debate? Maybe use Maslow's Hierarchy as a start:
First we talk economics, which controls everything (and we stop dithering around tired talking-point solutions like 'education,' and directly address automation);
Then we get to civil rights - most notably the emergence of a police state within our borders;
Next on to the environmental crisis (anyone else notice summer came two months early this year?);
Then on to privacy rights, as in the right not to be spied on by domestic agencies, and a woman's absolute right to make all decisions regarding her body AND any fetus within it.
After we tear through all of those, I think it's time to debate the crisis of flyover state misogynists. I'm not saying it isn't problem. I'm saying it appears to me, that if I wanted to divide and conquer people, and keep them from the discussing the more immediate and dire issues, it's the kind of subject I'd encourage the masses to argue.
We need to prioritize a bit better in this country. We allow ourselves to be divided and conquered on so many secondary matters and rarely discuss the really serious shit. Seeing so much ink spilled on the issues lower down the ladder of importance reminds me of listening to gold bugs. One can't help thinking, "If the possible events of which you're so concerned occur, gold won't be worth shit... the currency will be seeds and bullets." If we don't address automation and the environment, in the not too distant future, debating whether a head of state acquired that position via sexism or unfairness of the media will be the most decadent of parlor conversations.
