Gen Z got hit with a 1-2 punch. First was the GFC and then the pandemic and subsequent inflation. I'm Gen X and was certainly influenced by the Oil Crisis and Recession of 1981-2, but the next major event in our lives that had an impact was 9/11. Yeah, the crash of 1987 was there, but more of a on-off. And the Rodney King civil unrest was not a widespread influence - I would even argue that the WC94 was a bigger influence than Rodney King.
That's putting it mildly. Liberalism is the focus of my writing class this semester. We start Patrick Deneen's Why Liberalism Failed one week from today. After that, we read a defense of Liberalism against lefty attacks, then the students are on their own.
There are two parts to that. The is the culture of enforcement, which is ICE, and the culture of justice, which I'm assuming you are getting at as being under the DOJ. Regarding the latter, I've said a few times that there needs to be an increase in funding for courts and attorneys for the undocumented. But it doesn't stop the enforcement process, which is what we are seeing in the streets. And that is the culture I'm talking about being so problematic. And there are other issues as well, such as why people want to come to the US in the first place.
So...liberalism failed and liberalism is under attack, and you tell your students to go be free? Man, you are setting them up to go live in a cabin in the forests of Montana.
What the hell are you talking about? Ohio = 44,825 square miles France = 248,573 square miles France is roughly 5.5 times bigger than Ohio. (edit: France is only a little smaller than Texas, the second biggest US state)
The 'Russians' is perhaps not the correct term, since large parts (can't remember the % but it's pretty high) of the Red army were composed of Ukrainians and other nationalities of the Soviet Union. Anyway, my grandfather was a POW during the war. He was captured in northern France in may 1940 by Rommel's panzer division. He spent the 5 following years in Silesia in a prisonner camp. From 1941 to 1945, he saw an increasing number of Soviet prisoners arrive at his camp. They were held in a separate section of the camp, separated by a simple barrier from the French, Belgians, Yugoslavs, and later the British and Americans. He always told me that the most harrowing thing was seeing the Soviet soldiers—unlike the others, not protected by the Geneva Conventions—starve to death. I later read that 15,000 Soviet soldiers had died in that camp. Not a concentration camp, just a regular prisoner-of-war camp. At the end he was liberated by the Soviets. I don't know if we can say that the USSR defeated the Nazis. That's probably an exaggeration. But it's undoubtedly true that the sacrifice of their soldiers has been somewhat forgotten.
Wait, what? The oldest of Gen Z during the GFC would be 15 years old at the time. Millennials were the one who got shafted by the GFC (ask how I know). Pandemic? Sure but thing is the economy post pandemic was in much better shape compared to the GFC.
Ehh. Again, the process by which the FBI operates is completely different than the process by which ICE operates. I doubt we would see what ICE is doing if it were being conducted by FBI. Because the bar for ICE is so low, it allows them to operate in the manner that they are conducting themselves. Put them under the DoJ and the bar they need to conduct raids changes completely and there actually is a focus on criminal undocumented rather the door to door operations like there currently is in Minnesota. ICE is separate from USCIS. USCIS is responsible for managing the why people are coming into the US and the mechanism by which they can enter and stay in the us (Visas, green cards, citizenship).
If you are talking about putting all of the enforcement under DOJ, that might work. But that is assuming the DOJ isn't operating in a way that intentionally devalues brown, Spanish speaking immigrants. But it only deals with part of culture issue. The other part is our larger society where we dehumanize immigrants, particularly those what don't speak (fluent) English. Yeah, it does. I guess I wasn't clear (to you, I was to me ) that when I mentioned the "why coming to the US," I was thinking more along the lines of why they choose to leave their home country as opposed to why they choose to arrive to the US. They are linked, but there are different motivations.
It's essentially Fight Club. The issue Fight Club didn't cover is kind of like the joke about the dog chasing the moving car - what is it going to do when it actually bites it? Because while the causes then and now are the similar, the movement isn't the same. What we have now isn't even a movement - only a tiny percent of the population are filled with revolutionary zeal and capacity to act. Without revolutionary zeal, are they going to keep up the memey, jokey transgressiveness that passes for a movement these days when they finally get what they voted for? The world after Fight Club doesn't have ennui and Ikea-induced despair because you don't have time for such things when you are barely surviving. Constant struggle is romanticized by those that don't have to do it.
What ICE is doing across the country is a completely different beast than the structural issues within the US justice system... I don't think it particularly matters why they chose to leave their home country. The US has a worker shortage and our birthrate has been below replacement rate since the 70s. The only reason why the US's population has been growing is because of immigration and if we want to keep it growing, the only option is to attract people from other countries.
do you think any of the shit that's raining down on less fortunate mother ********ers than yourself would be happening if Kamala had won? Whatever you see going on that you don't think you'd see under a Harris administration is where she differs from Trump.
It does matter why they chose to leave, for two reasons: 1 - The PR that we send out into the world is that our country is better than your country, and if you come here you will succeed. 2 - We are responsible - directly or indirectly - for a lot of the instability in the countries from which immigrants leave. IOW, we are problem, we are also the solution, but we won't take responsibility for either.
Damn. In my head I mix things up sometimes. I think I knew Texas was the right answer. When I'm wrong; I'm wrong. Thanks for the correction.
Historians attribute the explosive growth of Christianity in the second century AD to a number of things, one of which is that Christians took care of their own in a way that impressed non Christians. Which brings me to a point I’ve made before, and can tie in to our present crisis. If one looked at the Roman Empire in say 90 AD, it wasn’t clear that Christianity would boom and eventually dwarf Judaism. At the time their numbers and geographic spread were similar enough that it could have gone either way. Various actors made individual and collective decisions that tilted things completely to the side of Christianity dominating Judaism in terms of numbers. (If anyone wants to argue big numbers inevitably leads to weak adherence, to large numbers of unserious practitioners of a religion, I will co sign.) It’s the same with whether and how America will or won’t recover from Trump. The future is unwritten. Pessimism and optimism are each poor alternatives to clear mindedness.
Well first is the vast scale and length of the conflict in the east. While the US army in europe amounted to 90 divisions by the end of the war, the Red army had 300 divisions in 1941 It's also due to how they fought. The Soviet style was disasterous in the first year, but even after that, extremely profligate. 360K casualties in the battle of Berlin - against a defeated enemy! The Wehrmacht operational doctrine of repeated counterattack also resulted in significant attrition
Right - for instance the Rzhev meatgrinder - a vast series of battles most people have never heard of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Rzhev German operational doctrine of schwerpunkt was supposed to deliver strategic victory via cauldron battles like the huge encirclement at Minsk. The failure of it was mostly supply - they couldn't get enough tanks and ammo and fuel forward to Moscow fast enough After that there was no practical opportunity to land a decisive blow - so it settled into a mostly attritional conflict This is why Manstein recommended to give up most of the territory in the east to return to a mobile defence in depth - his idea was it might be possible to destroy soviet formations so completely as to stop the Red Army - but only if the Wehrmacht gave itself maximum advantages instead of holding pointless territory
Of course, there were military reasons. But there was also the ideological aspect: for the Nazis, the war in the East was a racial war. This led to a gradual radicalization, a "barbarization" (Omer Bartov) of the German army, which was not systematically observed in the West (although there were tragic examples: the massacres at Villeneuve d'Ascq, Tulle, and Oradour-sur-Glane in 1944, where SS units brought to the West the practices they had learned in the East). Naturally, the radicalization of the German army (not just the SS, by the way) led, in turn, to a similar radicalization of the Red Army.
I have so many thoughts about this! However one that jumps out was something Anne Applebaum said years back when asked why Tucker Carlson and co had all turned MAGA/fascist Her view was the disappointment of liberalism. it's hard work to gain support for meaningful change, pass a legislative agenda etc etc. But the risks of it are just as your boy describes. In your glee to usher in your white christian nationalist utopia, you allow in something horrific.