troosevelt

Do you imagine that people in the US aren't familiar with the concept? We've been debating it since the time of Teddy Roosevelt.

The countries listed here, they largely did make those decisions and were not kicked out.

The US could have pretty easily annexed Cuba in 1902 or held onto the Philippines.

I've heard the term imperialism used in context with the US plenty. It is very, very common online.

That's why I have ahrd time getting mad at doctors. What else are they supposed to do besides charge absurd rates?

I really don't think this is the issue.

I've been overweight in my life and I hate it. You know how I lost weight and kept if off? I ate healthier, I walk a lot (to the grocery store, for example). US grocery stores have all the same healthy foods as every other country. You can eat healthy at restaurants too, if you must.

It's just people don't. There's nothing inehrently bad about food in the US. We at eat too much and don't exericse (walk). Now, if you'll look at all the other countries joining us in this because it isn't a US thing anymore.

You've added all these extra explanations (corn syrup, antibiotics, growth hormones) but it really isn't that complicated. BTW, I'm sure if you ate konbini foods every day in Japan and didn't exercise enough you'd get fat, too. There's nothing different about that food than a lot of junk/fast food in the US, it's just the Japanese seem to walk a lot more and I don't know how many people only eat out of 7/11.

Yes, but I'd argue those people are victims as much as anybody else. To truly be ignorant is to not know, and if you are in a situation where you've never been trained to need to know or you simply don't know there's another world out there, that's not a choice, that's a situation you've been placed in.

You have to win these people to fix the system. Casting them as hateful rubes only voting because they are racist is wrong, not on a moral level but on an intellectual one. We've got large chunks of of the country that haven't been effectively educated for decades, no wonder they are ignorant.

For the record, I choose not to vote not because I accept Trump's racism but I think a valid way of signaling you are not happy with either party (but especially Trumpsim) is to not engage in the system. If the system isn't offering better it isn't the people at fault, it is the system. Non-votes are as valid as any other. If I vote for a process that I believe is fraudulent, that politician will see that as an indicator they have some kind of mandate (see Bush in 2004). I'm not giving it to them, it's the job of either party to be better not to just not be worse.

The Dems must be better and the biggest part of that to me is to engage and understand working class people and not do what they did in 2024 and say everything is fine because it wasn't and it certainly isn't today (and that's Trump's fault). I was never especially leftist but as I've grown older I think the economy is the biggst driver of artificial divides. When people hurt, they look for others to blame. If both parties (or either) were genuinely focused on helping the poor to get a foot up, a lot of this discourse wouldn't be happening. I hate Trumpism but I don't think the corporatism that has captured the Democratic party is much better.

It's really a problem of the system, being forced into an artificial duopoly. If you want to lose me further by saying I'm choosing that platform by not voting, then you're just further disengaging people and I argue you're choosing not to understand my posittion. You need the "racists" and the non-voters to win.

Voters don't pay attention to or they justify their votes. That doesn't mean they are inherently racist, it means they don't care enough about politics or they care about other issues to the point where they either aren't aware of it or they excuse it away. People pay attention to or remember a lot less about politics than that blog posts suggests.

The majority of people are seeing a variety of headlines from news sources they may not trust (for good reason and bad) and remember a few events over the year, some have such a strong attachment to party that that's the defining thing above all that they're voting for. They're being propagandized and lied to as part of a political campiagn. That they are making the I'd argue wrong choice does not mean they are racist or even intend to be. That racism isn't the defining thing for the majority of them.

It goes back to the original claim, I still think it's obvious that most people aren't voting for a guy because racism. That's inverting how people operate, which is seeing their own needs as the center of the world. If you're unemployed and hurting for money and you are racist, what is your primary motivation for voting? It's probably to get you a job because that's the fastest path to improving your life. But that's presupposing a lot of people are racist, and living around Trump voters, or knowing Trump voters that are minorities, something else is happening other than racism.

I don't think individuals care more about other people than they do themselves. Some people are that spiteful but the majority of people are not because they cannot afford to be.

I don't mean to over argue this but I think it's important that we understand people as they understand themselves.

Sure, but the original claim was this:

> 40% of the people in the US would rather starve to death themselves than live in a world where people they hate for their skin color get anything without toiling for it.

Do we truly believe that's 40% of people in the US? 33% of US voters even voted for him, so you're saying it's pretty much all of them and another 7%. I just don't see it, it's rhetoric and it's not helpful because if your goal is to win over the people that need to be won over, you can't call them racists when they really aren't.

It's a misshaped worldview formed in bubbles. People don't work that way because you're literally assuming that their hate for somebody else overrides their own well-being. Their actions might end up with that result, but I've interacted with enough people from all over the spectrum to know that imagining that many people have that much hate is just wrong. People care about themselves first and foremost, it's a necessity.

If people had jobs, a lot of of this division would disappear but the govt for years has treated low income workers as people that don't matter and can just be displaced without any answers. It's whey the Democratic party which was traditionally the working class party has struggled against Trumpism, because he pretends to care.

Yes, I've talked to Trump voters and I know people who aren't especially strong Trump supporters that voted for him because the economy was shit. Their reasoning wasn't racism. There is a huge chunk where that is their reasoning, sure.

Once again, if you think it's 40% of 33%, you're wrong. Not everybody who voted for Trump is a racist, it's just not how people work.

I think we're gonna see some def Democratic gains because the economy is shit and that's how voting always happens.

The only argument I was making is it's no where near 40% of people that are voting for somebody cause they're racist. If you believe that then you're not going to see the world accurately. It's not how people work.

But it goes back to my main point, Dem gains won't be what they should be because politics are a very vague and murky thing and people make all kinds of justifications for why they vote for their person. See the stat where most people rate Congress poorly but their Congressperson highly. It's not racism, it's that politics are inherently pretty stupid.

But it's not even approaching 40%, nor did I tie the two together. If you think the 33% of people who voted from Trump did it because they are racist you are wrong. Some did, a lot that wasn't their primary concern. It's viewing pepole wrong to think that.

What's the point of being that pedantic, Mike?

I appreciate that there is a significant chunk of people that are like this, but I think if you really believe the 40% number or anything like it, you're giving yourself a false worldview.

The majority of people aren't racist nor do they have a problem with government helping them out. What was happening (are you referencing 2024?) in 2024 and today was a government saying the economy was fine when it is not. When that happens, people are going to pick the person that isn't in power, who says they are going to fix it, even if they aren't. "It's the economy stupid". People care about their own well-being above pretty much everything else most of the time.

I don't think putting this on racism or anything else (though it is a smaller factor) helps, it's just rhetoric. 40% of the people in the US aren't dedicateed racists, they are, however, in working groups that the government has ignored for decades.

It doesn't take responsibility. The defining theme seems to be their political views. She says the reason she was uninvited from a talk is not at all the given reason (political) that the reason she directly links to is. She's either dishonest or just unaware. The fact that she posted this here and won't respond to anything tells me she knows that it is indeed her past and political views that are harming her reputation but she either won't reject them or cannot because she holds them.

She's asking for money to fly private and live in a nice neighborhood in one of the more expensive places in the world. She has a massive ego, saying that donating to her does more for open source than anything else. She cites issue after issue she's had with people including governments saying she hasn't paid taxes. Sometimes when nobody likes you it is because something you are doing, and this post doesn't do any soul-searching. None of this registers to you?

I almost don't want to post this because I've posted twice here and I don't wan to come off as a Justine-hater, but I truly don't get how you don't read this in th epost.