Author Topic: coronavirus  (Read 349970 times)

edgmatt

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4250 on: January 26, 2022, 09:20:38 AM »
I'm one.  I'd rather he just play (or retire in his case) instead of commenting on anything outside of football (though this is arguably something any football player could legitimately comment on, particularly if they are asked since it *is* about them.)  Especially if he starts interrupting pieces of the games.

But you make a good point about being consistent and having actual integrity.  Most people are far too willing to throw everything they SAY they stand for out the window when the shoe is on the other foot.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4251 on: January 26, 2022, 09:36:33 AM »
I am for that.  I am not saying he should be quiet.  Athletes are allowed to have opinions about things that affect their lives and when they are put on pedestals, people get to listen.

I just find it interesting that when a black man does a silent protest that does not violate any laws of the country or the rules of the game, he gets cancelled. But when a white player violates league rules not much happens to him.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4252 on: January 26, 2022, 11:55:29 AM »
I think you're missing the fact that Aaron Rodgers is an elite quarterback, Kaepernick when he got canned just finished a 1-10 season as a starter and ranked 26th and 29th in completion percentage and passing yards. If Kaep had been a future hall of famer, they would have overlooked his notoriety. Or guaranteed some team would have. Nobody is going to eat up that kind of criticism for a mediocre backup. You think if Sam Darnold mouthed off about covid protocols and vaccines that he gets the same free pass?

It's always stupid, the "just shut up" crowd. Be quiet you're just an athlete/entertainer! Until one of them says something they agree with and then they turn into a conservative meme. The "just shut up" crowd apparently thinks that their job somehow qualifies them to speak long and hard. I'm not really sure why an athlete or entertainer has a less valid political voice than truck drivers.

edgmatt

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4253 on: January 26, 2022, 12:37:38 PM »
I think that they are portrayed as having a "more important" voice than the typical person, which isn't true, but they do have a much louder voice and they *are* influencers.  People idolize idols.  It's how Michael Jordan sneakers sell, and it's why I have a signed helmet from Pat Mahomes four feet away from where I'm typing this.

And there is something to that argument: That for the very reason that they have such a big soap box to stand on, they ought to use it for what they believe is a noble cause.  And that's part of why Kapernick did the things he did.  And I have a hard time arguing with that.  It's noble, and it can do some good in the world.

The counter argument, and I tend to lean this way, is keep the thing, whatever it is....a football game, a baseball game, a concert, an award show.....keep it in the context of what it is.  I don't give a damn at all what any musician has to say about politics, or about football, or baseball, or China.  If Taylor Swift stopped her concert to talk about the overtime coin flip rule in football, it'd be considered ridiculous.  If Ben Afleck started talking about the music industries practices, I'd change channels, and when athletes start talkin to me about politics, it's a turn off.

There's a lot to be said for "stay in your lane" too.

edgmatt

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4254 on: January 26, 2022, 12:46:04 PM »
Quote
It's always stupid, the "just shut up" crowd. Be quiet you're just an athlete/entertainer! Until one of them says something they agree with and then they turn into a conservative meme. The "just shut up" crowd apparently thinks that their job somehow qualifies them to speak long and hard. I'm not really sure why an athlete or entertainer has a less valid political voice than truck drivers

And the "listen to what THIS guy has to say about it" crowd disappears real fast when that guy says something they don't like.  Hypocrisy is on both sides and there is no lack of it.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4255 on: January 26, 2022, 12:49:38 PM »
Quote
I don't give a damn at all what any musician has to say about politics

A lot of music IS political speech, you know. Do you mean except in their lyrics? :)

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4256 on: January 26, 2022, 01:58:04 PM »
I've always like what the Stoics had to say about taking offence. That it requires participation and a person doesn't have to play if they don't want to.  I apply the same rule with such - slow day 'celebrity news' crap.

We 'pay' attention to what those with a platform have to say because we want to. We like to talk about it. I suspect we even like to be offended by it for multiple reasons - unconscious bias maybe the biggest one.

The weight and value we give to such persons opinions has nothing to do with the person. That application of weight and value belongs to the individual.

Does anyone on this forum really care what Eric Clapton has to say about the covid? I suspect the only people who care are those that already think the same things and or those that find some pleasurer in being 'outraged' and upset.

Sure anyone lacking the skills of discernment might be overly influenced by his comments but my bet is that such people are already in the choir. 

When it comes to music a person enjoys and spend money to listen to... a song with a political message you don't already agree with is probably not going to make the list. That doesn't mean the artist  with the 'platform' has any more authority as any other joe on subjects they don't work in.   

When it comes to knowledge how much time should a person invest in those saying thing with little to back up thier claims. 
« Last Edit: January 26, 2022, 02:04:30 PM by rightleft22 »

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4257 on: January 26, 2022, 02:06:04 PM »
Heh, I had to look up his views. I suspect that the "mass psychosis" folks don't want him to shut up. As you say. I don't think anyone on this forum would cite him though.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4258 on: January 26, 2022, 07:35:10 PM »
Love me some Clapton but I'm unaware of his political views, which is as it should be. Assuming they're anti-establishment, I hope there's not a petition to remove his content from Spotify too. Not that his estate would care much at this point.

edgmatt

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4259 on: January 26, 2022, 08:47:10 PM »
Quote
A lot of music IS political speech, you know. Do you mean except in their lyrics?

A lot?  I can only think of Greenday songs that are political, and I still like em because the music is good.  Oh, i guess Rage against the Machine is on that list too.

Unless you're talking about songs that are very intentionally patriotic like Lee Greendwoods proud to be an American?  I mean I like the song, but I'm not playing those sorts of things in my car on the way to work.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4260 on: January 26, 2022, 08:54:56 PM »
Quote
A lot of music IS political speech, you know. Do you mean except in their lyrics?

A lot?  I can only think of Greenday songs that are political, and I still like em because the music is good.  Oh, i guess Rage against the Machine is on that list too.

Unless you're talking about songs that are very intentionally patriotic like Lee Greendwoods proud to be an American?  I mean I like the song, but I'm not playing those sorts of things in my car on the way to work.

Granted I don't listen to pop music playing now, but it's very easy to find plenty of groups writing music with political overtones or outright statements going back. Pink Floyd's The Wall comes to mind immediately, and several genres including punk, ska, metal, rap, and others are very clearly political by their very nature, even if the song's literal lyrics are about something else. You have to consider that the very texture of some genres, and the overtones in their material, is meant to directly be a backlash against 'the system'. Nine Inch Nails, Marylin Manson, and other such as this channel some of the downer vibes, others like punk can be more upbeat. They're not political punditry, backing some party or candidate; they're political in the proper sense of the term, meaning being about human social interactions and how those are represented systemically and in the authority structure. And then you have the other kind of social political commentary, like glam rock, some country, and some other kinds of metal, which are about how people present in society, how they're seen vis a vis 'society', and the pressures put on them to be a certain way. This is all political, some of it very contentious. So I think when Seriati is talking about banning political speech he means the sorts of social commentaries, statements of value, and even pushback against authority that these genres encompass. I don't think he meant people talking about C-SPAN.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4261 on: January 26, 2022, 09:25:57 PM »
Unless you're talking about songs that are very intentionally patriotic like Lee Greendwoods proud to be an American?
Officially called "God Bless the U.S.A."  Don't be pandering to the vast radical-Marxist secular conspiracy to remove god from the title!

"And I'm proud to be an American \\
Where at least I know I'm free"

Can't hear that lyric without reaching for my blue pencil.  Or my red one, indeed.  English teachers everywhere sobbing about long-lost referents...

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4262 on: January 26, 2022, 10:25:59 PM »
Love me some Clapton but I'm unaware of his political views, which is as it should be. Assuming they're anti-establishment, I hope there's not a petition to remove his content from Spotify too. Not that his estate would care much at this point.
He's not been especially politically active that I'm aware of, but if I were to make a hot take on his political stance over time, it'd be on the lines of, drug-addled racist rocker turned conspiracy-theorist member of the squirarchy.  So depends how you're defining "the establishment", which everyone has their own take on these days.

Heh, I had to look up his views. I suspect that the "mass psychosis" folks don't want him to shut up. As you say. I don't think anyone on this forum would cite him though.
Does seem like the sort of source that if you were influenced by, you'd rather want to launder that by upgrading to a slightly fancier version.  Or do the "I'm hearing that" or "everyone's telling me..." thing.

It's how Michael Jordan sneakers sell, and it's why I have a signed helmet from Pat Mahomes four feet away from where I'm typing this.
How bout them Chieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeefs.  (Though for the record I'm a recovering Bears fan.)

I'm one.  I'd rather he just play (or retire in his case) instead of commenting on anything outside of football (though this is arguably something any football player could legitimately comment on, particularly if they are asked since it *is* about them.) 
He was indeed asked in with his "day job" (woolly green bobble) hat on.  In a sense it's a legit question, as the league has different rules for the differently coviddy.  And clearly it puts him in an awkward position as if he refuses to answer it, we're immediately in the Novak Djokovic zone of smelling a rat, if he answers it truthfully there goes his medical privacy, and if he lies then he's a liar.  Or worse, he tries a "I'm the cleverest guy in the room" sort of answer, and it turns out he wasn't.

But when he starts banging on about the "fake White House" and scoffing that "it does look like" Biden got 81m votes, that's an unforced error.  To slightly mix sporting metaphors.  Obviously he's free to speak out what whatever he wants to, but whether he's wise to do so is another matter.  Then again, FL has three handegg teams, maybe one of them, perhaps one with an extremely old fly-half, might be in the market in the future...

edgmatt

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4263 on: January 27, 2022, 08:46:08 AM »
Quote
They're not political punditry

That was the word I was looking for, thank you.  That was the difference that I couldn't articulate.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4264 on: January 27, 2022, 11:03:59 AM »
Quote
A lot of music IS political speech, you know. Do you mean except in their lyrics?

A lot?  I can only think of Greenday songs that are political, and I still like em because the music is good.  Oh, i guess Rage against the Machine is on that list too.

Unless you're talking about songs that are very intentionally patriotic like Lee Greendwoods proud to be an American?  I mean I like the song, but I'm not playing those sorts of things in my car on the way to work.

The Beatles. Bob Dylan. Crosby Stills Nash & Young. U2. Public Enemy. Now, not every song by them is political, but they have political songs.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4265 on: January 27, 2022, 11:06:59 AM »
Quote
A lot of music IS political speech, you know. Do you mean except in their lyrics?

A lot?  I can only think of Greenday songs that are political, and I still like em because the music is good.  Oh, i guess Rage against the Machine is on that list too.

Unless you're talking about songs that are very intentionally patriotic like Lee Greendwoods proud to be an American?  I mean I like the song, but I'm not playing those sorts of things in my car on the way to work.

The Beatles. Bob Dylan. Crosby Stills Nash & Young. U2. Public Enemy. Now, not every song by them is political, but they have political songs.

This is a fact. It was common to have anti-establishment narratives in popular music. Not so much anymore.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4266 on: January 27, 2022, 11:17:18 AM »
I think it is more a reflection of the fact that I don't know much current music.

A brief amount of research turns up 22 BLM Protest Anthems

Beyonce, Victoria Monet, Ariana Grande, Lauryn Hill, Janelle Monae

15 LGBTQ Protest Songs

Pet Shop Boys, Melissa Etheridge, Pussy Riot

13 Anti-trump songs

Carole King, Tribe Called Quest, Fiona Apple

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4267 on: January 27, 2022, 11:26:35 AM »
Lol. Is the establishment anti-BLM and anti-LGBT? Just because you agree with the cause doesn't mean it's not the establishment. That, or someone needs to tell Apple, Starbucks and every other major corporation inside silicon valley that they're apparently counter-culture now.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4268 on: January 27, 2022, 11:31:39 AM »
Who said anything about establishment versus not? That was your red herring. My statement was that politics and art are inextricably linked.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4269 on: January 27, 2022, 11:37:37 AM »
Who said anything about establishment versus not? That was your red herring. My statement was that politics and art are inextricably linked.

Ok. Your reply seemed to be a direct response to my comment about anti-establishment.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4270 on: January 27, 2022, 11:54:34 AM »
If the "establishment" were pro-BLM, the police would have actually been defunded somewhere. Putting up a statement in stark black and white text doesn't actually make an organization pro-BLM.

Parts of the establishment are definitely still hostile to queer people. Just because corporations want our money now doesn't mean that the struggle is over.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4271 on: January 27, 2022, 12:02:29 PM »
Newsflash!!!

Police departments were defunded in alot of places.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4272 on: January 27, 2022, 12:06:25 PM »
And then quickly re-funded when it became apparent the cure was drastically worse than the disease.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4273 on: January 27, 2022, 12:28:16 PM »
'Defund the Police' the worst slogan ever - the  right are great at rallying behind slogans that are easily used against them.

I can just imagine the meeting:
What about 'Defund the Police'
- Great... What do we mean by that
Lots of things
- Should we be more specific about what we mean
naa people will know what we mean, even if were not sure. How could it go wrong
- Right silly me

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4274 on: January 27, 2022, 01:49:20 PM »
Which ones were defunded and then refunded?

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4275 on: January 27, 2022, 01:55:48 PM »
Quick google and it looks like New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Baltimore and have reduced police spending. Not clear if that is due to defund the police or if that included a change in policing - moving the funding to address Mental health homeless issues away being policing issues.

As expected people hear reduced spending  as a all or nothing reaction without looking at the details

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4276 on: January 27, 2022, 02:02:20 PM »
So a quick google shows that police weren't defunded, as I said.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4277 on: January 27, 2022, 03:07:20 PM »
Quote
Austin, Texas, is the latest city to announce a police defunding effort, with the City Council on Thursday voting unanimously to cut $150 million (roughly one third) from the police budget, reinvesting much of that sum in social programs, including food access, violence prevention and abortion access.

Austin’s announcement closely follows the sweeping budget change approved by Seattle—a $3.5 million budget cut and the reinvestment of over $17 million—that resulted in the resignation of Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best, a 28-year veteran of the department and Seattle’s first Black police leader.

The country’s two largest cities, New York and Los Angeles, approved budget cuts weeks after protests began—New York slashed $1 billion from its 2021 budget totaling $88.9 billion (reallocating $354 million to mental health, homelessness and education services) while Los Angeles approved a $150 million budget cut from its $1.86 billion proposed budget.

Also in California, San Francisco approved a $120 million cut to the police and sheriff’s department, promising investments in Black residents, and Oakland passed its own $14.6 million budget reduction.

A $15 million police budget cut also hit the nation’s capital, Washington D.C., in July, where the Defund the Police movement has become a hot button issue in the run-up to the 2020 election, with President Trump erroneously accusing competitor Joe Biden of supporting closing police departments.

Baltimore eliminated roughly $22 million from its police budget; Portland, Oregon, cut nearly $16 million; Philadelphia reduced police funding by $33 million; Hartford, Conn. cut $1 million from its $40 million budget; Norman, Oklahoma slashed $865,000; and Salt Lake City reduced its police budget by $5.3 from that previously proposed by the mayor.

Is your argument that anything short of elimination of the police department counts as "Defunding the Police"?

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4278 on: January 27, 2022, 03:12:59 PM »
a tangent on a tangent, what is that a subtangent or a hypertangent?

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4279 on: January 27, 2022, 03:15:50 PM »
Is your argument that anything short of elimination of the police department counts as "Defunding the Police"?

That would be BLM's argument, yes.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4280 on: January 27, 2022, 04:11:30 PM »
I'm beginning to think that all the fervent religious folks wanting Jesus to heal their unvaxxed selves actually are hoping that Covid will send them to the kingdom of heaven ahead of schedule. Hopefully for them St. Peter isn't asking for proof of vaccination.

Seriously, though, I wonder how much a belief in an afterlife - any afterlife - might impact the "I'm not afraid" bunch. Well, if Jesus calls me home at least I'll get to see Mom again!

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4281 on: January 27, 2022, 04:34:15 PM »
I'm beginning to think that all the fervent religious folks wanting Jesus to heal their unvaxxed selves actually are hoping that Covid will send them to the kingdom of heaven ahead of schedule. Hopefully for them St. Peter isn't asking for proof of vaccination.

Seriously, though, I wonder how much a belief in an afterlife - any afterlife - might impact the "I'm not afraid" bunch. Well, if Jesus calls me home at least I'll get to see Mom again!

I think you have to break that down more level - how much a belief in after life and 'miracles' not involving medical science...  Not accepting help because god doesn't need help or work through others... unless he does (the 'correct' people need only apply, unless god is working through the unbeliever to bring about his plan... it gets confusing )   

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4282 on: January 27, 2022, 04:58:55 PM »
Lots of people have irrational beliefs and then apply those beliefs to irrational actions.

For example, a significant portion of the population believes that you have a 50% chance of being hospitalized if you get covid and they behave as if those beliefs were true. I've met a few of those. I've yet to meet anyone who claims they're invincible, or that Jesus will protect them from covid but it's a big world so I don't doubt they're out there.


TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4283 on: January 27, 2022, 05:07:59 PM »
I'm just saying that I'm curious about the apparent correlation between religious faith and anti-vax sentiment. We've already covered the whole hospitalization and outcome beliefs and how that correlates with getting a vaccine.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4284 on: January 27, 2022, 05:38:41 PM »
Anti-vax or anti mandate? It matters which we're talking about. There's probably a direct correlation between religiosity and anti-vax sentiment. I suspect that correlation gets really thin when it gets to anti-mandate views but don't have any data to back that hunch.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4285 on: January 27, 2022, 05:53:38 PM »
In this case, I'm talking about anti-vax. Meaning the particular sentiment of:

meme suggesting that you shouldn't trust vaccine because you trust jesus instead

Remember its not the shot or the mask keeping us alive, it's God almighty.

I don't know how common these are, but they are definitely out there and legitimate.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4286 on: January 27, 2022, 08:53:43 PM »
For example, a significant portion of the population believes that you have a 50% chance of being hospitalized if you get covid and they behave as if those beliefs were true.
A significant portion of your posts reiterate that first talking point.  If "believe" means "guess when asked", then I recommend you don't watch any quiz shows, or you'll lose any remaining faith you might have in humanity.

The second is a blatant overreach.  Gallup didn't ask those people if they were the same ones enraging you -- sorry, no, eliciting your deep sympathy! -- by wearing masks outdoors, etc.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4287 on: January 27, 2022, 08:56:17 PM »
I'm just saying that I'm curious about the apparent correlation between religious faith and anti-vax sentiment. We've already covered the whole hospitalization and outcome beliefs and how that correlates with getting a vaccine.

You'll probably see a better connection between conservative vs liberal type people, or more specifically people who fall in certain ways on the big 5 (or other such evaluation systems). It's probably got a big genetic component, which I doubt very much religion has (we are all mentally wired up for religion). I know that some rather conservative religious groups seem to resist vaccination, but they also resist a lot of other stuff that has nothing to do with illnesses. Likewise, I think you'd probably find a lot of anti-vax in the spiritual/granola/organic group, which is highly left-wing socially and politically, and yet 'conservative' in certain ways insomuch as they are very intolerant of things that interfere with their bubble and are very careful about what they eat, etc. And while you'd hardly call this latter group religious formally speaking, they share the trait of having unusually strong beliefs about esoteric things, and clinging to it as a way of life. So your suggestion is, I think, narrowing too much and on the wrong axis.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #4288 on: January 27, 2022, 09:12:00 PM »
Anti-vax or anti mandate? It matters which we're talking about. There's probably a direct correlation between religiosity and anti-vax sentiment. I suspect that correlation gets really thin when it gets to anti-mandate views but don't have any data to back that hunch.
If there were any logical consistency, the "we'd like a Christian theocracy, please" people wouldn't have any issue with the "mandating things" aspect, and that angle might be more associated with people that see themselves as more Libertarian, "small-government", and so on.

In practice people's beliefs are such a mishmash that I'd guess that the correlations are likely going to be less than the noise, beyond it being seen as a rather broadly partisan thing.

Likewise, I think you'd probably find a lot of anti-vax in the spiritual/granola/organic group, which is highly left-wing socially and politically, and yet 'conservative' in certain ways insomuch as they are very intolerant of things that interfere with their bubble and are very careful about what they eat, etc.
Definitely.  Though that association is getting weirder too.  These days you can be a vegan and a right-wing ethno-nationalist -- not even that original, that one, at the risk of Godwinning myself -- or a Capitol-storming organic-food neo-animist by religion.