https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1408470743483129857?s=19
The post-WW2 military posture of the US has been endless war.
Correct
To enable that, there must always be an existential threat, a new, fresh enemy that can scare a large enough portion of the population with sufficient intensity.
100%. First it was communism, then it was radical Islam.
That new war target are
Ooh, I know this one! It's China!
"domestic white supremacists."
:agony-limitless:
Wanted to scold our poster: ain't no dunks in this one. Then I read it till the end :chomsky-yes-honey:
we need a deeper-agony-chomsky that is deep fried for this GG dogshit take
100%. First it was communism, then it was radical Islam.
Consider the following: both of your examples originate in the context of internal affairs, if it weren't so there wouldn't be a reason for McCarthyism and anti-terrorism activity. China keeps to itself and doesn't have any relevant ties to domestic actors that could be persecuted, so you can't make the jump from internal problem to external problem and the comparison doesn't make sense. On Greenwald's point, people don't seem to want to admit this because of their attachment to the cultural norms of the Democratic-voting contingent of American society, but there is no contradiction between condemnation of China in the context of external affairs and white supremacy or whatever else in the domestic context. They could even tie it all together and say that the Chinese are doing white supremacy on the Uighurs and it's racist to say they don't need to invade China to free the Uighurs, I bet many people would eat that up too.
there is no contradiction between condemnation of China in the context of external affairs and white supremacy or whatever else in the domestic context. They could even tie it all together and say that the Chinese are doing white supremacy on the Uighurs and it's racist to say they don't need to invade China to free the Uighurs, I bet many people would eat that up too.
Step away from the Lathe of Heaven
There's historical precedent, too. During the Bush years, people would get called misogynists for opposing the Iraq war because the US government was allegedly going to turn Iraq into a modern liberal democracy and liberate the local women from traditionalist religious oppression. And if you didn't think that was doable, you'd get called a racist because you'd be implying Arabs were inherently less capable of being decent people than Americans. At least that's what I hear from people on the internet who say they're old enough to have been aware of politics back then.
You don't have to go back. They're doing that regarding pulling out of Afghanistan right now.
I suppose that's true. It doesn't stop people from saying it though.
Well yeah, but you know how people here are, they'll always say everyone to ever use social justice cultural signifiers to justify something bad in any context was totally cynical because it protects their ability to believe that actually what makes someone a "good" person is sincere attachment to the cultural norms of the Democratic-voting contingent of American society. I do think this is the crux of why they're so upset with Greenwald over this, because he's critical of what they see as "good" people, so it's always good to remind them that that's not actually how the world works.
I'm not sure they even believe it. They're so scared of being labeled "bad" that they just see an article like "You are this kind of bad if you don't support (obviously evil thing)" and they decide to support said evil thing.
Leave the domestic white supremacists alone, they just want to eventually live peacefully in their own united ethnostates of America
Glenn Greenwald is what happens when your entire political ideology starts and ends with hating libs.
he is becoming the embodiment of /r/redscarepod
i have no idea how it works between him and his husband since Glenn has these weird ass takesA lib friend -- record scratches, room gasps, dog covers head with paws under table -- has the theory that Glenn's ideology is opposing the system, which he identifies as Bolsonaro in Brazil and MSNBC in America.
He’s right though, in domestic terms at least. The Dems need a domestic boogeyman that justifies the continued existence of the police state all of their voters were rallying against in the streets last summer. They’re passing laws that were drafted as anti-BLM under the guise of being against white supremacists because they have a new cloak to hide the dagger in. It’s disgusting and the most blatant mask the Dems have used in my lifetime
I mean internationally it’s China now that the war on terror is winding down and no longer felt as a valid justification.
Yeah I don't think this is the hottest take by Glenn. I think it's largely true, just IN ADDITION to the "Chinese threat," which I think he has talked about as well? (Not sure)
I mean, I think that's the reason it's not just domestic white supremacists but "domestic extremists" including the left.
A reply to the tweet...
In other news, the US Navy has announced its new pivot and six carrier battle groups will be deployed to the Great Lakes...
"We must stop the problematic-white-boy alliance of Russia, China, and Iran."
- Anthony Blinken
"a large enough portion of the population with sufficient intensity"
bitch like 30% of the country thinks the biggest threat is white supremacy meanwhile 80% of the US despises China
substack brain will only get worse i fear
Consider the following: as of January 2021, a CBS News poll shows that an overwhelming majority of Americans think the biggest threat to their way of life are other Americans, with only 8% thinking it's foreign countries. Source
What percentage of americans thought white supremacy was the greatest threat to the nation
that's because libs think of conservatives and conservatives think of libs as a threat to their way of life, not because people see white supremacists as a threat. some do obviously, but i'd argue it is not over half of the people who see other americans as a threat
Bingo, and white supremacists = non-establishmentarian "alt-right" conservatives in the current lingo, which is what Greenwald is talking about. Let's not kid ourselves here, there has never been a serious threat to American power felt in the popular imaginary since the fall of the Soviet Union, so naturally the big threats are gonna be domestic. China may be growing, but it consistently keeps to itself.
go ahead. keep screaming "Shut The Fuck Up " at me. it only makes my opinions Worse
The usual disingenuous bullshit from GG. He's not entirely wrong, but it's a sneaky little sleight of hand considering his vocal anti-China rhetoric. Just recently he was pushing the lab leak bullshit.
But old Glenn has always had a bit of that neocon streak in him. Asshole wrote this in regards to the Iraq war in his book:
I had not abandoned my trust in the Bush administration. Between the president's performance in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, the swift removal of the Taliban in Afghanistan, and the fact that I wanted the president to succeed, because my loyalty is to my country and he was the leader of my country, I still gave the administration the benefit of the doubt. I believed then that the president was entitled to have his national security judgment deferred to, and to the extent that I was able to develop a definitive view, I accepted his judgment that American security really would be enhanced by the invasion of this sovereign country.
He's been trying to deny this little bit of history ever since.
Earlier today before I saw this thread - I coincidentially had a quickie look at his Wikipedia page.
Immigration
In 2005, Greenwald criticized illegal immigration, saying that it would result in a "parade of evils". He has since disavowed that belief.
The section is just that sentence: "This section needs to be updated..."
