This is just some magical rule you made up. Someone not saying something doesn’t mean there is some vacant space where you get to assume what they believe. What they believe is what they believe. If they haven’t stated it specifically or clearly enough, then it is an unknown. You can’t magically decide that someone supports something because they have yet to explicitly not support it.
If I make a comment about the new Pokemon game, but don’t specifically say whether I hate or love it, you don’t get to magically assume some default stance and put that opinion in my mouth.
She may have made comments elsewhere, but based on that tweet alone we know only that she supports new free and fair elections, which seems reasonable. We do not know if she recognizes the legitimacy of the original election or the coup, because she has not explicitly commented on that.
You can say you are disappointed that she did not come out strongly against the coup, at least not yet. That’s fair to say. To say that she supports the coup is putting words in someone else’s mouth.
You’re not running for president, Scott. Being pro-fascist-coup-in-Latin-America isn’t some magical position I made up, it’s been the standard position of the US (both parties) for decades. It absolutely should be the assumed position of anyone who refuses to explicitly state otherwise.
Regardless, prior to this comment I didn’t say anything about how she actually felt. Her comment itself is a failing. It perpetuates the narrative that the election was rigged and legitimizes the coup government as being capable of holding a “fair and free election”. Is this the kind of shitty take I should expect from her as president?
Warren calling for the fascist coup government to hold “free and fair elections” legitimizes a group that should not be legitimized. They cannot, under any circumstances, hold free and fair elections because
Fascist
Coup
Brutal suppression of indigenous groups
Even if they stopped doing 3 going forward, it wouldn’t undo the harm it’s done and it’s effect on any elections going forward. And calling for any new elections at all means supporting the ouster of Morales, who already won a free and fair election.
Seriously, how low are your standards for a candidate that this tweet is acceptable?
EDIT: candidates (and senators) should be criticized for only trying to improve society somewhat
Yeah politicians don’t start from a neutral position. They have an obligation above and beyond that of everyone else. Politicians who try to improve society somewhat are politicians who aren’t trying to improve society significantly. Silence is not an acceptable alternative, either.
could Warren have called it better? Absolutely. What level of opposition would have satisfied you? Declaring the interim Bolivian government completely illegitimate and thus…America should invade to depose them?
As a prominent Democratic candidate, Warren is obligated to weigh in, and she has chosen a response that stresses the importance of safety and respect towards the citizens. She’s not really in a position to be rallying civil unrest for another country, I’m sure the wokescolds would then be calling her out for continuing American imperialistic influence and white people forcing themselves into nonwhite issues. For comparison, how has Bernie responded? Best I can find is he called the situation a coup, and that was that. That’s equally as empty a weigh-in as Warren.
I have made my opinion pretty clear before, but jesus christ why are we ramping up this ridiculous Warren vs. Bernie debate when there are still like a dozen other trash options on the table? I get seriously worried with the current leftist debates because this level of invective is exactly the fracturing attitude that allows the right to rally and win. I have issues with Warren, I also have issues with Bernie; regardless I will be supporting whichever one ends up running.
This amount of tone and intent policing is not productive. I get it, Warren is a crypto-capitalist and she’s not as woke as Bernie. Shes still better than everyone else, and we’re not gonna create a platform when we spend this much vitriol tearing down #2 instead of the trash heap of conservatives. Optics matter, and this kind of infighting is exactly the shit that normal folks watch and line up with “the left is eating itself” propaganda. I’m not asking anyone to support Warren if they don’t agree with her. But I would say she’s far enough beyond the dividing line to put her in our camp, and we need to give a much fairer shake to people in our camp than we do now.
Bernie and Warren’s responses are very different. Bernie actually uses the word “coup”, like you said, and he didn’t call for new elections. As I’ve said over and over again, this is extremely important.
Where did the idea of military intervention come from? Nothing I said would give that impression.
Because no one here supports any other candidates. What value is there in us discussing Biden? We all agree he sucks.
Today was the first time I ever read the word “wokescold” or, in this case, “woke scold” and now I see it again a few hours later.
I’ll copy the email in full here:
“ You’ve Become a Woke Scold
Luke,
I’ve been a fan of your podcast for years, but your latest episode reviewing “A Deepness in the Sky”, is the last straw.
You’ve become a virtue signaling woke scold.
You are finding racism, sexism, and misogyny in any work that doesn’t meet your political standard of political correctness.
I’d respectfully suggest that you simply stop reading any book that wasn’t written in the last few years, and don’t ever read a book that was written by a cis gendered male. Stick with womyn, transsexuals, and other wokescolds who share your political POV.
I’ll leave you with a quote from Larry Niven, a cis gendered, rich, baby boomer male:
“There is a technical, literary term for those who mistake the opinions and beliefs of characters in a novel for those of the author. The term is ‘idiot’.”
Sincerely,”
“Podcast listener.”
Now I’m thinking this use of the womyn spelling is something I need to google as well.
I think there’s an effect name for that, like where you hear something once or learn something new and all of a sudden you start seeing it everywhere. I know the feeling.
I tend to assume what they’re calling for is on the more extreme side, because they’re using the more extreme language and making shit tons of assumptions based on a tweet.
Actually ya know what?
If all you actually want is a better tweet that uses a magic word ‘coup’ then why are we even discussing this? We all agree the tweet should have used the magic word.
