This is a really interesting one! I think “neutral” was a terrible choice of words, it implies a both sides kind of stance that’s unreasonable to take when one side is transparently evil, and it’s...
This is a really interesting one! I think “neutral” was a terrible choice of words, it implies a both sides kind of stance that’s unreasonable to take when one side is transparently evil, and it’s so, so often used as a wedge by fascists trying to suggest that their bigotry deserves equal time and attention.
But it also sounds like, for once, that wasn’t actually the intention here. They don’t seem like they were trying to do the whole “we’re apolitical, and that means we’re equally OK with being either for or against state sponsored kidnapping and murder” thing, it seems like they were literally saying “guys, can we just stay on topic?!”.
I dunno, maybe the article is painting them in too flattering a light, but the original group comes out sounding surprisingly reasonable here. It doesn’t seem like they were trying to dodge taking a stance on issues where there’s an obvious right and wrong, it sounds like they were trying to keep a parenting group focused on parenting.
It does seem like they chose a bit of a shortsighted and easily misinterpreted way to say that though. I’d rather go with an unambiguous “fuck ICE, fuck fascism, trans rights are human rights - now stick to the goddamn topic and talk about all that somewhere else” if it were me.
This is one of those issues that is going to differ from person to person. The question is, when does the average normal non-political Joe put down everything he's doing, working on et cetera and...
This is one of those issues that is going to differ from person to person. The question is, when does the average normal non-political Joe put down everything he's doing, working on et cetera and go dismantle the facists?
Has the US reached the point where every single resource needs to be re-directed to fighting the government?
The answer to this is personal, and considering that the split in the groups went about 50/50, it's not gotten to the point yet, at the very least in this affluent D.C. neighbourhood, where a rich non-profit board was out of touch with the regular due paying members, even though the president did say some out of touch things, like the nanny comment or saying that the group is "neutral".
This is a DC parents chat. The thing to understand is that in DC literally every person in a cohort to be a parent has either lost their job themselves or directly knows multiple people who have...
This is a DC parents chat. The thing to understand is that in DC literally every person in a cohort to be a parent has either lost their job themselves or directly knows multiple people who have lost their jobs. Their home values have tanked and the city’s municipal budget is constantly being threatened by the federal government. Many of those who are employed are being actively terrorized and intentionally burned out by their management chain in an effort to push them out.
In that context trying to “stay on topic” is like trying to raise kids in Vichy France without being able to talk about the Germans roaming the streets.
You're not wrong, but the groups split down the middle, so it's not a situation of the non-profit board trying to hold on to their imaginary power by screaming no politics while everyone else in...
You're not wrong, but the groups split down the middle, so it's not a situation of the non-profit board trying to hold on to their imaginary power by screaming no politics while everyone else in the group is getting mad at them.
As an interviewee in the article said, there's value in him and his husband being to talk about changing diapers with other parents without having to address everything else for once.
Comparing it to WW2 France really seems a false equivalancy to me. I can't pass judgement on anyone here, nor really form an opinion.
Not sure how this meshes with what you were thinking, but I’d say the US probably has (or should have) already reached that point in my eyes, at least if ensuring free and fair elections in the...
Not sure how this meshes with what you were thinking, but I’d say the US probably has (or should have) already reached that point in my eyes, at least if ensuring free and fair elections in the future is going to be on the table - and I feel like if anything I’m all the more on board with carving out some spaces to hang on to a bit of normalcy in a world where the primary focus is pretty bleak?
I don't live there, and on principle I don't disagree. But it's not like the OG group is trying to silence anyone, they just very crudely said "stay on topic please". Humans have a limited amount...
I don't live there, and on principle I don't disagree. But it's not like the OG group is trying to silence anyone, they just very crudely said "stay on topic please".
Humans have a limited amount of energy to care about stuff outside of the things that immediately affect them. The amount differs from person to person. And I do think that there's value in staying on topic if you're a group organized around a certain subject.
The good ending to this story is that the groups stay somewhat affliated on the core themes, and the parents that want to politically organize are sent to the Free Range group.
I haven’t found one single instance where fascism was eliminated in a country without some other country stepping in. Chances are it’ll take some crazy thing like the US actually invading Canada...
I haven’t found one single instance where fascism was eliminated in a country without some other country stepping in.
Chances are it’ll take some crazy thing like the US actually invading Canada for that to happen.
Spain or Taiwan? Perhaps disputed as to how fascist they were but both were authoritarian regimes that transitioned to democracy with no foreign invasion.
Spain or Taiwan? Perhaps disputed as to how fascist they were but both were authoritarian regimes that transitioned to democracy with no foreign invasion.
This is a really interesting one! I think “neutral” was a terrible choice of words, it implies a both sides kind of stance that’s unreasonable to take when one side is transparently evil, and it’s so, so often used as a wedge by fascists trying to suggest that their bigotry deserves equal time and attention.
But it also sounds like, for once, that wasn’t actually the intention here. They don’t seem like they were trying to do the whole “we’re apolitical, and that means we’re equally OK with being either for or against state sponsored kidnapping and murder” thing, it seems like they were literally saying “guys, can we just stay on topic?!”.
I dunno, maybe the article is painting them in too flattering a light, but the original group comes out sounding surprisingly reasonable here. It doesn’t seem like they were trying to dodge taking a stance on issues where there’s an obvious right and wrong, it sounds like they were trying to keep a parenting group focused on parenting.
It does seem like they chose a bit of a shortsighted and easily misinterpreted way to say that though. I’d rather go with an unambiguous “fuck ICE, fuck fascism, trans rights are human rights - now stick to the goddamn topic and talk about all that somewhere else” if it were me.
This is one of those issues that is going to differ from person to person. The question is, when does the average normal non-political Joe put down everything he's doing, working on et cetera and go dismantle the facists?
Has the US reached the point where every single resource needs to be re-directed to fighting the government?
The answer to this is personal, and considering that the split in the groups went about 50/50, it's not gotten to the point yet, at the very least in this affluent D.C. neighbourhood, where a rich non-profit board was out of touch with the regular due paying members, even though the president did say some out of touch things, like the nanny comment or saying that the group is "neutral".
This is a DC parents chat. The thing to understand is that in DC literally every person in a cohort to be a parent has either lost their job themselves or directly knows multiple people who have lost their jobs. Their home values have tanked and the city’s municipal budget is constantly being threatened by the federal government. Many of those who are employed are being actively terrorized and intentionally burned out by their management chain in an effort to push them out.
In that context trying to “stay on topic” is like trying to raise kids in Vichy France without being able to talk about the Germans roaming the streets.
You're not wrong, but the groups split down the middle, so it's not a situation of the non-profit board trying to hold on to their imaginary power by screaming no politics while everyone else in the group is getting mad at them.
As an interviewee in the article said, there's value in him and his husband being to talk about changing diapers with other parents without having to address everything else for once.
Comparing it to WW2 France really seems a false equivalancy to me. I can't pass judgement on anyone here, nor really form an opinion.
Not sure how this meshes with what you were thinking, but I’d say the US probably has (or should have) already reached that point in my eyes, at least if ensuring free and fair elections in the future is going to be on the table - and I feel like if anything I’m all the more on board with carving out some spaces to hang on to a bit of normalcy in a world where the primary focus is pretty bleak?
[Edit] Clarity
I don't live there, and on principle I don't disagree. But it's not like the OG group is trying to silence anyone, they just very crudely said "stay on topic please".
Humans have a limited amount of energy to care about stuff outside of the things that immediately affect them. The amount differs from person to person. And I do think that there's value in staying on topic if you're a group organized around a certain subject.
The good ending to this story is that the groups stay somewhat affliated on the core themes, and the parents that want to politically organize are sent to the Free Range group.
I haven’t found one single instance where fascism was eliminated in a country without some other country stepping in.
Chances are it’ll take some crazy thing like the US actually invading Canada for that to happen.
Spain or Taiwan? Perhaps disputed as to how fascist they were but both were authoritarian regimes that transitioned to democracy with no foreign invasion.
This is an archived version of the article.