Log in

No account? Create an account
07 February 2017 @ 08:23 pm
Linky Links  
deborah | Information literacy: No, Trump did not craft White House policy that "women dress like women"

I said in my last link roundup that I was finding it very difficult to judge which of Trump's actions were genuinely exceptional and worrying and which were business as normal for a Republication President. This kind of thing is part of the problem. There are far too many people in my filter bubble that share stuff like this without due diligence even while complaining about fake news in almost the same breath.

- - - - -

Did Neil Gorsuch Found a High School 'Fascism Forever' Club? : snopes.com


More of the same.

- - - - -

Yes, I know the Trump administration are telling mind-boggling whoppers, but where I tend to hang out on the Internet those get shredded in minutes while this kind of stuff slips through.

This entry was originally posted at http://purplecat.dreamwidth.org/235789.html.
shivver13: drawn oh!shivver13 on February 7th, 2017 08:43 pm (UTC)
One of my friends, who I've known for probably a dozen years now, is a particularly rabid anti-Trump person, spending an amazing amount of time posting every little thing he can find about Trump on his Facebook and ranting about it. Of course, he especially loves pointing out the lies and misinformation. Now, I am not a Trump supporter in any sense of the phrase, but I've sincerely considered removing my friend from Facebook because honestly, he is toxic.

Yesterday, he posted a status update that said, "Trump lambasts the media for not reporting on the Bowling Green Massacre." (In case you aren't aware, the Bowling Green Massacre isn't real - Kellyanne Conway mentioned it and tried to cover it up when it was pointed out that there never was such a massacre.) One of his friends replied, "Really?" and he replied back, "No. Trump just complained about the media for underreporting terrorist attacks."

So basically, my friend, in complaining about Trump's misrepresentation of things to paint his opponents in a bad light, did exactly the same thing. I think that people in general are quick to criticize others of things they don't recognize that they're doing themselves.
louisedennislouisedennis on February 7th, 2017 08:54 pm (UTC)
I nearly shared a "Bowling Green" link as well because she didn't pull that particular location out of nowhere. I strongly suspect the issue there is that Trump's team don't prepare properly for the Press - so she throws out "Bowling Green Massacre" because she half remembers something to do with terrorists at Bowling Green had something to do with Obama limiting visas. I mean that kind of unprofessionalism at this level of government is alarming in its own way and there is a fair bit of malice mixed in with the generation incompetence.

But like you, I am concerned that an awful lot of people are fighting fire with fire and I tend to believe that if you do that there's a good chance you'll just burn the house down quicker.
philmophlegm: freedom is in perilphilmophlegm on February 7th, 2017 10:58 pm (UTC)
I wish more people would realise that it is possible in politics for there to be more than two possible opinions. That it is, for example, possible to disapprove of Mr Trump's policies and also disapprove of, say, the Berkeley rioters.

I also wish more people would realise that it is possible in politics to agree with a politician on some policies and disagree on others.

Much internet comment on recent American politics seems to me to breach rules 1, 2, 3 (that's your point above I think), 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 21, 29, 30, 34, 35 (especially 35), 36, 51 and 55 (especially also 55). That's a lot.
louisedennislouisedennis on February 8th, 2017 10:37 am (UTC)
Well I don't agree with all your rules. Or at least, I do agree depending upon interpetation? For instance I consider myself a left-leaning liberal - sometimes a situation would seem to require a compromise between the two (for instance while there are numerous problems with the Welfare state I do believe it is important to have a safety net of some kind and that relying on localism and charity to provide such a safety net is insufficient particularly since the safety net is generally more expensive in areas with fewer resources) - I don't think such compromises mean I can't describe myself as liberal.

My views on 32 are very complex. I believe positive discrimination is an incredibly blunt tool with many serious problems (including that, as it says on the tin, it discriminates and not on the basis of ability), but unconscious bias is a real phenomena as is a tendency for cliques of various kinds to self-reinforce by only recruiting from the same pool and sometimes a blunt tool is the only one you've got (or the least bad of those on offer). I don't think in and of itself it is automatically morally wrong - though I don't think you can deploy it morally without thinking long and hard about what alternatives there may be and being certain that there isn't a better way to achieve your end.