Make China Great Again!
+10
A diversity of view-points needs to be considered in civic life. IMHO, there is a crisis in the US currently regarding free speech. For example, most college students (other than ultra-liberals) are intentionally not speaking out in college class-rooms regarding controversial issues. Many leftists continue to deny that there is free speech crisis on US campuses (thinking ml1 here). NYU professor, Jonathan Haidt, has responded to the deniers. See https://heterodoxacademy.org/the-skeptics-are-wrong-part-2/
PS Trump's disregard for truth and reason is abhorrent; yet group think and self-righteousness on the left present a unique danger of their own.
==============================================
Excerpt from Forbes article on Campus Free Speech:
"If our students are deprived of the growth opportunities provided by encountering and debating ideas with which they disagree, they will come to lack the qualities essential to informed, effective citizenship. The philosopher Francis Bacon clarifies this for us when he lists what is required for a genuine education: reading, writing, and debate. He writes that “Reading maketh a full man; conference a ready man; and writing an exact man.” In other words, education seeks to make our minds 'full' or broad through reading; 'exact' or precise in our reasoning through writing; and 'ready,' that is, prepared, through 'conference,' or debate. These qualities define not only good learners but good citizens. Democracy depends on a citizenry so endowed."
===============================================
Here is an excerpt from the Haidt posting (linked above):
The skeptics were reacting to a wave of commentary among pundits who took it as an established fact that something is changing on American college campuses. The skeptics were right to demand evidence beyond the anecdotes, and they were right to turn to nationally representative surveys for that evidence. We thank them for waking us all up and making us refine our arguments and check our empirical claims. We agree with Yglesias that “The PC debate would benefit from more facts and rigor.”
We have tried in this post to add facts and rigor. Our overall conclusion is that the speech climate is changing on many American college campuses in the years after 2015, compared to the years before. Even if many campuses are unaffected, the changes are large enough to be picked up in nationally representative surveys. We have shown evidence supporting three specific claims:
1) The majority of current American college students perceive that the climate on their campus prevents some people from speaking up, and they perceive this to be more true in 2017 than they did in 2016.
2) Left-wing views are more socially acceptable (“politically correct”) than right wing views, as shown by the findings that students across the spectrum agree that conservatives are less free to speak openly; conservatives say that they self-censor more than progressives; and conservatives are more concerned than progressives about suffering negative consequences from their professors and from fellow students if they were to share their views openly.
3) Before 2009, students on the left and right were not very different in their tendencies to try to disinvite speakers they found offensive. But after 2009 and especially after 2013, the left and right began to diverge; students on the left began to attempt many more disinvitations, to succeed more often in those disinvitations, and to disrupt more of the talks that they failed to stop by disinvitation.
Our analysis is, of course, not definitive. We expect that some of the skeptics will point out potential flaws in our analyses or our logic. Participants on each side of the debate will be influenced by motivated reasoning and the confirmation bias (as we surely were). But, by the magic of viewpoint diversity operating within a community of scholars governed by norms of civility, each side’s motivated exertions will cancel out the confirmation biases of the other, and, over time, we will converge on the truth. Or, at least, we’ll get nearer to it than we are today.
Smedley said:
gerritn said:For background, I consider myself middle-of-the-road politically. I (held my nose and) voted for Hillary in 2016, and I voted for Obama twice. So hardly a Fox News person.
Yes, you are right, this is MOL, and we are Liberals and we hate Trump. What are you doing here Why don't you go post on Fox News online?
But of course this is MOL, where whatever Trump does automatically gets panned.
As to your reply, at least you're upfront about your political views. But, I will say this type of intolerance and close-mindedness regarding other views isn't helping the liberal cause these days, and it may well help Trump win re-election.
I think he's giving a giant hole for the Chinese to enter. Just read that China now has built a train line to Iran and will continue trading with them.
The US reign is over, which I'm pleased about.
Smedley said:
He's made remarkable diplomatic progress on North Korea. I don't know how anyone can dispute that. Has been a major and seemingly intractable issue for ages.
The economy is doing well and unemployment is low. Certainly Obama was a good economic president on balance but Trump must be doing something right here as well.
He's turned back the pendulum on regulation which I think had swung too far in the direction of regulation in my opinion. He does risk going too far in the other direction toward deregulation, but hopefully he doesn't.
Trump approval rating up 6 points from December, according to fivethirtyeight.com. Shows he must be doing something right.
Overall, 1/3 into his term, predictions of disaster haven't happened. There's still time of course, and I remain skeptical, but I can acknowledge that I like at least some of the things I'm seeing. I'd have to say I still disapprove overall, but not stridently so.
I'll meet you half way.
Hopeful about NK but not ready to use the word "remarkable," if by that you mean progress towards denuclearization. We'll see about that. It is remarkable that a U.S. Prez is meeting the brutal dictator of NK (I'm not necessarily against a meeting).
The economy is doing well but to the extent its the tax cuts, isn't because we are borrowing from the future? Something conservatives have decried forever. Debt is ballooning big time.
No singular disaster like an economic meltdown or big war but I believe his election is a broader, more long term disaster if it means people like him are legitimized as national political figures. He is a corrosive to our political culture and institutions, not that they were ideal before.
Smedley said:
He's made remarkable diplomatic progress on North Korea. I don't know how anyone can dispute that. Has been a major and seemingly intractable issue for ages.
The economy is doing well and unemployment is low. Certainly Obama was a good economic president on balance but Trump must be doing something right here as well.
He's turned back the pendulum on regulation which I think had swung too far in the direction of regulation in my opinion. He does risk going too far in the other direction toward deregulation, but hopefully he doesn't.
Trump approval rating up 6 points from December, according to fivethirtyeight.com. Shows he must be doing something right.
Overall, 1/3 into his term, predictions of disaster haven't happened. There's still time of course, and I remain skeptical, but I can acknowledge that I like at least some of the things I'm seeing. I'd have to say I still disapprove overall, but not stridently so.
I disagree that inviting NK to the big-boy table is "remarkable diplomatic progress"--and I think praising as he has an awful despot like Kim is a terrible mistake. But I do think ratcheting down the tensions (after ratcheting them up) is a good thing. The irony of increasing tensions with Iran at the same time isn't lost on me.
Trump inherited a strong economy--after complaining how awful it was--and hasn't screwed it up. That is true. (He apparently is now focused on helping China's unemployment rate.)
I strongly disagree on the regulations front.
Whatever positives there are (yours is a very short list) are strongly outweighed by the massive amount of corruption and instability he's brought into the White House. I don't think it's "closed-minded" to consider Trump's almost exclusive focus on what he thinks benefits him to be contrary to what a POTUS should be doing. And I don't think it's closed-minded to oppose the the fraud and graft within this administration. And I don't think it's closed-minded to consider his race-baiting and clear support of white supremacists to be bad.
Being intolerant of these things is not what would get Trump reelected. It's support of these things on the right that got him elected and could get him reelected. There is a normalization happening among the "open-minded" that ignore the traits and acts that would get most presidents hauled in front of the Senate. On a nearly daily basis, Trump does or says something that would be a scandal with any other president--R or D. But it's suddenly considered intolerant to not be okay with those things.
from where I sit, a lot of so-called centrists are trying to tout their own supposed open-mindedness by giving Trump far more credit than he deserves for events that other people are driving. Progress in Korea has been made by Moon and Kim. And Trump's "success" so far has been in not disrupting that progress. I'm not really in favor of bilateral US-North Korea talks, but if it doesn't derail the process, I don't have an issue with it.
I've asked this before, and no one seems to be able to answer it. Aside from empty threats of fire and fury, and taunting tweets, what has Trump actually done to move the process forward in Korea. People point to the positive things that have happened like the hostages being freed, but don't seem to be able to point to Trump actions that precipitated those events. Just because something good happened doesn't mean Trump caused it. So far he (and the "centrist" pundits) seem to be like the rooster who believes his crowing caused the sun to rise.
I'll be happy if South Korea and North Korean can move toward reconciliation. And if Trump wants to take credit, let him. As long as its a positive outcome, we can all celebrate.
I don't have some inner need to have other people see me as "above the partisan fray" or "open minded" just for the sake of appearing open minded. So I'm going to be skeptical until I see real proof that Trump is actually engaged, informed, and acting in good faith before I give him credit for any outcomes.
I think the President of South Korea has made remarkable progress with North Korea.
I haven't heard any example of how Trump has, however.
The bar is so low that scheduling a meeting is considered "remarkable." Trump gets a participation award for not having screwed it up (yet).
dave23 said:
The bar is so low that scheduling a meeting is considered "remarkable." Trump gets a participation award for not having screwed it up (yet).
No sitting U.S. president has ever met a NK leader. It's true nothing has happened yet, but this could potentially break tensions that have existed since the 1950s. You can consider this just "scheduling a meeting", but I'll still call it remarkable.
Smedley said:
dave23 said:No sitting U.S. president has ever met a NK leader. It's true nothing has happened yet, but this could potentially break tensions that have existed since the 1950s. You can consider this just "scheduling a meeting", but I'll still call it remarkable.
The bar is so low that scheduling a meeting is considered "remarkable." Trump gets a participation award for not having screwed it up (yet).
It's remarkable in the sense that it's worth remarking on. Every NK leader has wanted to meet with their counterpart in the US, but we've always declined that notion. It's a change in policy--and I'm fine with them chatting. Trump's rich praise of Kim--who starves his people, imprisons or kills his opponents--is remarkable too.
Smedley said:
dave23 said:No sitting U.S. president has ever met a NK leader. It's true nothing has happened yet, but this could potentially break tensions that have existed since the 1950s. You can consider this just "scheduling a meeting", but I'll still call it remarkable.
The bar is so low that scheduling a meeting is considered "remarkable." Trump gets a participation award for not having screwed it up (yet).
Trump isn't the first US President to get a North Korean invite. But he's the first to accept.
The article goes into the circumstances.
dave23 said:
Smedley said:It's remarkable in the sense that it's worth remarking on. Every NK leader has wanted to meet with their counterpart in the US, but we've always declined that notion. It's a change in policy--and I'm fine with them chatting. Trump's rich praise of Kim--who starves his people, imprisons or kills his opponents--is remarkable too.
dave23 said:No sitting U.S. president has ever met a NK leader. It's true nothing has happened yet, but this could potentially break tensions that have existed since the 1950s. You can consider this just "scheduling a meeting", but I'll still call it remarkable.
The bar is so low that scheduling a meeting is considered "remarkable." Trump gets a participation award for not having screwed it up (yet).
Trump recently said Kim appears "open and honorable", in the context of how their negotiations are proceeding.
Trump has also made remarks previously that HRC jumped on, but FactCheck.org undercut her argument.
https://www.factcheck.org/2016/05/did-trump-praise-kim-jong-un/
Does your "rich praise" assessment refer back to one or both of these? Because IMO it's really a stretch to call either "rich praise." Or is there something else?
it's not mindless Trump bashing to be concerned ahead of this meeting. Few people would deny that the president is ignorant, lazy and impulsive. The notion that he'll actually prepare for this meeting is dubious. And as a result, it's likely that he'll say anything that pops into his mind in the moment. Trump being Trump, there is a fairly high probability that his administration will have to frantically work to undo something he does at this meeting.
Smedley said:
dave23 said:Trump recently said Kim appears "open and honorable", in the context of how their negotiations are proceeding.
It's remarkable in the sense that it's worth remarking on. Every NK leader has wanted to meet with their counterpart in the US, but we've always declined that notion. It's a change in policy--and I'm fine with them chatting. Trump's rich praise of Kim--who starves his people, imprisons or kills his opponents--is remarkable too.
Trump has also made remarks previously that HRC jumped on, but FactCheck.org undercut.
https://www.factcheck.org/2016/05/did-trump-praise-kim-jong-un/
Does your "rich praise" assessment refer back to one or both of these? Because IMO it's really a stretch to call either "rich praise." Or is there something else?
"We want to thank Kim Jong-un, who really was excellent to these three incredible people."
nohero said:
Smedley said:"We want to thank Kim Jong-un, who really was excellent to these three incredible people."
dave23 said:Trump recently said Kim appears "open and honorable", in the context of how their negotiations are proceeding.
It's remarkable in the sense that it's worth remarking on. Every NK leader has wanted to meet with their counterpart in the US, but we've always declined that notion. It's a change in policy--and I'm fine with them chatting. Trump's rich praise of Kim--who starves his people, imprisons or kills his opponents--is remarkable too.
Trump has also made remarks previously that HRC jumped on, but FactCheck.org undercut.
https://www.factcheck.org/2016/05/did-trump-praise-kim-jong-un/
Does your "rich praise" assessment refer back to one or both of these? Because IMO it's really a stretch to call either "rich praise." Or is there something else?
Geez, Trump can't do freed hostages right either.
I think this reply makes my broader point better than my own words ever could.
I'm out, at least for this thread.
And now back to your regularly scheduled echo chamber.
Smedley said:Does your "rich praise" assessment refer back to one or both of these? Because IMO it's really a stretch to call either "rich praise." Or is there something else?
Praising Kim about how well Kim's kidnap victims were treated is grotesque.
Smedley said:
Geez, Trump can't do freed hostages right either.
It is amazing, but that's right. The guy snatches three Americans and you can't see that praising him for treating them so well is a bit off-base?
Smedley said:
nohero said:Geez, Trump can't do freed hostages right either.
Smedley said:"We want to thank Kim Jong-un, who really was excellent to these three incredible people."
Trump recently said Kim appears "open and honorable", in the context of how their negotiations are proceeding.
Trump has also made remarks previously that HRC jumped on, but FactCheck.org undercut.
https://www.factcheck.org/2016/05/did-trump-praise-kim-jong-un/
Does your "rich praise" assessment refer back to one or both of these? Because IMO it's really a stretch to call either "rich praise." Or is there something else?
I think this reply makes my broader point better than my own words ever could.
I'm out, at least for this thread.
And now back to your regularly scheduled echo chamber.
Sorry you feel you have to leave, just because I provided an answer to your question, and gave you an example of praise, different from the two you mentioned. I don't know what "broader point" you think was made by my giving that example.
dave23 said:
The bar is so low that scheduling a meeting is considered "remarkable." Trump gets a participation award for not having screwed it up (yet).
Exactly. Even in this thread, people seem to forget that the meeting was not Trump's idea.
And I read that yesterday Pompeo said that the goal is not denuclearization anymore. It's just to insure that NK can't hit the US with a nuke. That doesn't sound like that would be very comforting to SK and Japan.
ml1 said:
So I'm going to be skeptical until I see real proof that Trump is actually engaged, informed, and acting in good faith before I give him credit for any outcomes.
How is it that this sentence formed in your mind, was typed by your fingers, and then released to this forum? Clearly you are missing some kind of internal nonsense avoidance mechanism.
Smedley said:
dave23 said:No sitting U.S. president has ever met a NK leader. It's true nothing has happened yet, but this could potentially break tensions that have existed since the 1950s. You can consider this just "scheduling a meeting", but I'll still call it remarkable.
The bar is so low that scheduling a meeting is considered "remarkable." Trump gets a participation award for not having screwed it up (yet).
Something has damn sure happened. NK has completed successful testing of nukes. That is the only reason any of this is happening.
Red_Barchetta said:
ml1 said:How is it that this sentence formed in your mind, was typed by your fingers, and then released to this forum? Clearly you are missing some kind of internal nonsense avoidance mechanism.
So I'm going to be skeptical until I see real proof that Trump is actually engaged, informed, and acting in good faith before I give him credit for any outcomes.
Irony alert
BG9 said:
jamie said:The Chinese govt may now smooth the Trump's organization hotel expansion.
From the article:
President Trump wrote on Twitter on Sunday that he was working with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, to prevent the collapse of the Chinese electronics giant ZTE, which shut down major operations after being sanctioned by the United States Department of Commerce last month. “Too many jobs in China lost,” Mr. Trump wrote. “Commerce Department has been instructed to get it done!”(Please include some context when starting a new discussion - not only a link)
It's just plain odd that Trump wants to help.
Could instead be Trump's Indonesian deal. Trump hotels, etc., with China lending 500 million US dollars.
A billion-dollar Indonesian property development with ties to Donald Trump has become the latest project in China’s globe-spanning Belt and Road infrastructure project – just as Washington and Beijing are tussling over trade.
The park – expected to be backed with up to US$500 million in Chinese government loans – is part of an “integrated lifestyle resort”, known as MNC Lido City.
The project includes Trump-branded hotels, residences and a golf course, as well as other hotel, shopping and residential developments.
BG9 said:
BG9 said:Could instead be Trump's Indonesian deal. Trump hotels, etc., with China lending 500 million US dollars.
jamie said:The Chinese govt may now smooth the Trump's organization hotel expansion.
From the article:
President Trump wrote on Twitter on Sunday that he was working with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, to prevent the collapse of the Chinese electronics giant ZTE, which shut down major operations after being sanctioned by the United States Department of Commerce last month. “Too many jobs in China lost,” Mr. Trump wrote. “Commerce Department has been instructed to get it done!”(Please include some context when starting a new discussion - not only a link)
It's just plain odd that Trump wants to help.
A billion-dollar Indonesian property development with ties to Donald Trump has become the latest project in China’s globe-spanning Belt and Road infrastructure project – just as Washington and Beijing are tussling over trade.http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southeast-asia/article/2145808/trump-indonesia-project-latest-stop-chinas-belt-and-road
The park – expected to be backed with up to US$500 million in Chinese government loans – is part of an “integrated lifestyle resort”, known as MNC Lido City.
The project includes Trump-branded hotels, residences and a golf course, as well as other hotel, shopping and residential developments.
In other words, "How's that swampey drainey thing workin' out for ya'?"
BG9 said:
BG9 said:Could instead be Trump's Indonesian deal. Trump hotels, etc., with China lending 500 million US dollars.
jamie said:The Chinese govt may now smooth the Trump's organization hotel expansion.
From the article:
President Trump wrote on Twitter on Sunday that he was working with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, to prevent the collapse of the Chinese electronics giant ZTE, which shut down major operations after being sanctioned by the United States Department of Commerce last month. “Too many jobs in China lost,” Mr. Trump wrote. “Commerce Department has been instructed to get it done!”(Please include some context when starting a new discussion - not only a link)
It's just plain odd that Trump wants to help.
A billion-dollar Indonesian property development with ties to Donald Trump has become the latest project in China’s globe-spanning Belt and Road infrastructure project – just as Washington and Beijing are tussling over trade.http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southeast-asia/article/2145808/trump-indonesia-project-latest-stop-chinas-belt-and-road
The park – expected to be backed with up to US$500 million in Chinese government loans – is part of an “integrated lifestyle resort”, known as MNC Lido City.
The project includes Trump-branded hotels, residences and a golf course, as well as other hotel, shopping and residential developments.
Krugman just wrote about this possible bribe:
ml1 said:
nohero said:^this
Smedley said:Saying "this is MOL, and we are Liberals and we hate Trump. What are you doing here Why don't you go post on Fox News online?"I thought it was being satirical responding to your generalization.
Is not being close-minded?
Personally, I'm getting really tired of the accusations of close-mindedness regarding Trump. Trump has been a public figure for 5 decades. He has shown himself repeatedly to be dishonest, misogynistic, bigoted, ignorant, and incompetent. It's not close-minded to be very suspicious that he's going to suddenly turn himself around and become honest, competent and virtuous. In my mind, anyone whose mind doesn't immediately go to suspicion regarding Trump is being exactly what I indicated above -- a sucker.
I have learned over the years stupid people remain stupid because they refuse to learn. Now they have a leader they deserve. They are suckers.
Smedley said:
He's made remarkable diplomatic progress on North Korea. I don't know how anyone can dispute that.
I still dispute that.
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
He's made remarkable diplomatic progress on North Korea. I don't know how anyone can dispute that. Has been a major and seemingly intractable issue for ages.
The economy is doing well and unemployment is low. Certainly Obama was a good economic president on balance but Trump must be doing something right here as well.
He's turned back the pendulum on regulation which I think had swung too far in the direction of regulation in my opinion. He does risk going too far in the other direction toward deregulation, but hopefully he doesn't.
Trump approval rating up 6 points from December, according to fivethirtyeight.com. Shows he must be doing something right.
Overall, 1/3 into his term, predictions of disaster haven't happened. There's still time of course, and I remain skeptical, but I can acknowledge that I like at least some of the things I'm seeing. I'd have to say I still disapprove overall, but not stridently so.