If you doubt that progress has been made, consider what the chances would have been, in 1960, of a major political party nominating a black man for President. Let alone of him winning. “Inconceivable” is the word.
I'm not sure how much we can bang that drum to indicate our inherent goodness. The fact that he was the first nominated (by a major political party) and went directly on to being elected makes him seem more like an outlier than a true indicator.
1 week ago
This is by no means to suggest we not make heroic efforts regarding climate change. Just to say, when it comes to immigration, that’s not going to be part of the solution (supposing that we need one). Economics and safety will. And addressing those is the right thing to do, regardless of your views on immigration.
In a better world, we would be putting our resources into the Global South to help them address climate change. Reducing desertification, creating off grid power, mangrove and rain forest protection and restoration would all have an impact. Unfortunately, the Western model has us look at these sorts of things as extractive, and to be accepted, they have to generate a profit for the people putting money into them.
1 week ago
I quickly dashed off my comment before bed, so let me expand on it a bit.
I can understand cleek's reaction, and the acceptance of Ukrainians was/is a humanitarian impulse. But would we have the same time for the person who points to accepting white South Africans to the US as springing from the same sort of impulse?
Because of the disjunction of the Trump presidency, anecdotes don't really work here. And with the example of Reagan, who I detest, perhaps the only way to move forward is to turn away from what actually happened and come up with bullshit narratives about our past and how we somehow are 'the greatest" of nations.
1 week ago
I took it as allowing the Ukrainians on the background of keeping out all the rest.
If you doubt that progress has been made, consider what the chances would have been, in 1960, of a major political party nominating a black man for President. Let alone of him winning. “Inconceivable” is the word.
I'm not sure how much we can bang that drum to indicate our inherent goodness. The fact that he was the first nominated (by a major political party) and went directly on to being elected makes him seem more like an outlier than a true indicator.
This is by no means to suggest we not make heroic efforts regarding climate change. Just to say, when it comes to immigration, that’s not going to be part of the solution (supposing that we need one). Economics and safety will. And addressing those is the right thing to do, regardless of your views on immigration.
In a better world, we would be putting our resources into the Global South to help them address climate change. Reducing desertification, creating off grid power, mangrove and rain forest protection and restoration would all have an impact. Unfortunately, the Western model has us look at these sorts of things as extractive, and to be accepted, they have to generate a profit for the people putting money into them.
I quickly dashed off my comment before bed, so let me expand on it a bit.
I can understand cleek's reaction, and the acceptance of Ukrainians was/is a humanitarian impulse. But would we have the same time for the person who points to accepting white South Africans to the US as springing from the same sort of impulse?
Because of the disjunction of the Trump presidency, anecdotes don't really work here. And with the example of Reagan, who I detest, perhaps the only way to move forward is to turn away from what actually happened and come up with bullshit narratives about our past and how we somehow are 'the greatest" of nations.
I took it as allowing the Ukrainians on the background of keeping out all the rest.