Turns out the Falls Church school board guy from the Koch thinktank, Ilya Shapiro, really is toxic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^ The other thing I'd note is that growing up in an authoritarian regime with bad nationality policy should have made Shapiro LESS likely to support authoritarians and bad nationality policy.

Unfortunately, it did not.

Very well said pp in your post above this one. But how old is this guy? All this focus on his USSR history, but how old was he when the USSR disintegrated? 10 at most, living in Moscow (a huge privilege in USSR days in itself).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ The other thing I'd note is that growing up in an authoritarian regime with bad nationality policy should have made Shapiro LESS likely to support authoritarians and bad nationality policy.

Unfortunately, it did not.

Very well said pp in your post above this one. But how old is this guy? All this focus on his USSR history, but how old was he when the USSR disintegrated? 10 at most, living in Moscow (a huge privilege in USSR days in itself).

He was born around 1976

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ The other thing I'd note is that growing up in an authoritarian regime with bad nationality policy should have made Shapiro LESS likely to support authoritarians and bad nationality policy.

Unfortunately, it did not.

Very well said pp in your post above this one. But how old is this guy? All this focus on his USSR history, but how old was he when the USSR disintegrated? 10 at most, living in Moscow (a huge privilege in USSR days in itself).

I'm the PP who posted about Soviet nationality policy and there are two threads of discussion around his background, both of which would be kind of interesting if folks on DCUM were a little more nuanced:

1) Are Gen X and Boomer generation Soviet immigrants reflexively conservative? Even reactionary at times?

2) Should Mr. Shapiro get a "pass" on racist comments because he was a member of a persecuted minority before his family emigrated from the USSR?


On number 1, I'd say yes, sometimes. This is a hard conversation, but I think the reflexive conservatism of many Soviet emigres (particularly those 50+ right now) stems from genuine trauma but also from frustration about "starting over" in this country and having to work their way up under people who they think are inferior to them, including POC.

On number 2, no. Mr. Shapiro has accessed this country's finest educational institutions, and been given opportunity after opportunity to succeed, including overlooking some past bigoted statements. I am not doubting that his family faced antisemitism in the USSR, and that he may have faced it in North America as well, but that does not give him a "get out of jail free" pass when it comes to public racism. He should own the consequences of his words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bizarrely xenophobic vibe to many comments in this thread . . . .

Agree. Seriously.

Ilya was born in Russia as a Jew.

Do most of you have any clue what that was like back then?

Along with the rest of his family, they were required to carry their “internal passport” whenever they set foot outside their apartment. The police/military could, and often did, demand: “your papers please!” (yeah, Nazi-style).

Only Ilya’s internal passport didn’t list him as “Russian;” only as a “Jew.”

Here: I’m posting this link in light of the obvious ignorance of many of you when it comes to anti-Semitism:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_Soviet_Union

This was a requirement for all in the Soviet Union, and a way for suppressing the rural areas. It was almost impossible for anyone from the rural areas to obtain internal passport or travel papers, and as a result they were effectively prevented from moving outside of the rural poverty. . .

Anti-Semitism in Russia was (and still is) atrocious and commonplace.

When I first met my old friend Vlad, he informed me he was half-Russian. The other half, he explained, was “Jew.” He was not kidding.

His family was banished from Moscow to Novosibirsk. His father was expelled from the university and assigned a mortuary job washing bodies. Vlad’s father was a refusnik and he made Aaliyah the moment he could in late 1989.

You people trying to minimize Russian antiSemitism are deplorable and awful!

We just don’t see how it’s relevant to the discussion. A Russian Jewish male can be a racist against someone he perceived as inferior, like a black woman. Oppression in one context does not make you an ally for the oppressed in another. As PPs have stated, it may even make you more likely to be an oppressor and to revel in the power it gives you.

Not every comment raised this, but there were several comments stating something to the effect of "immigrants from former communist countries are the worst" or insulting Shapiro because, heaven forbid, he really wanted to immigrate to America. This sort of xenophobia is just really bizarre given the supposedly pro-inclusive viewpoint of those attacking Shapiro.

One reason I brought it up (being as I am the one who first did) was precisely to twist you into this Gordian knot: where you have to be outraged about racism. At least, the "wrong" kind of racism. It's racism when it's about me, but not about thee, apparently.

I had a friend Vladimir in high school. (I went to a magnet school in the 80s with lots of immigrants from Russia and Ukraine, btw. Most Jewish.) When Vlad was ten and his family left the Soviet Union, his school held an assembly on his last day denouncing him and his family for being traitors. He had to walk out of the auditorium with his classmates screaming at him.

Despite all that, Vlad isn't actually a Federalist shill. Not everyone is.

Nonetheless, some people are. Like Ilya. I started to notice the trend when I looked at all the Trump appointees. And several of my former co-workers... But that is a tale for another time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ The other thing I'd note is that growing up in an authoritarian regime with bad nationality policy should have made Shapiro LESS likely to support authoritarians and bad nationality policy.

Unfortunately, it did not.

Very well said pp in your post above this one. But how old is this guy? All this focus on his USSR history, but how old was he when the USSR disintegrated? 10 at most, living in Moscow (a huge privilege in USSR days in itself).

I'm the PP who posted about Soviet nationality policy and there are two threads of discussion around his background, both of which would be kind of interesting if folks on DCUM were a little more nuanced:

1) Are Gen X and Boomer generation Soviet immigrants reflexively conservative? Even reactionary at times?

In my experience, as above. Quite a lot of them are. But not all.

2) Should Mr. Shapiro get a "pass" on racist comments because he was a member of a persecuted minority before his family emigrated from the USSR?

Nope. No one should. On the other hand, an apology and acknowledgement of his bias would work wonders. Unfortunately, he likes playing the victim, as do all Federalist betas, so that will not happen.

I'm sorry I called him a beta, as an example of an apology. That was wrong of me. I have some preconceived notions about short little men who squander their intelligence catering to despots and organized crime. And not because they are short. Oops! There I go again.

On number 1, I'd say yes, sometimes. This is a hard conversation, but I think the reflexive conservatism of many Soviet emigres (particularly those 50+ right now) stems from genuine trauma but also from frustration about "starting over" in this country and having to work their way up under people who they think are inferior to them, including POC.

I commend you for taking this argument seriously. I agree there are some serious points in it, although I initiated it from a place of exasperation and disgust with the traitors who keep trying to tear apart our nation under the mistaken opinion that they are masters of the universe.

In my heart I do think it's that simple for a lot of Cato and Federalist types. A burning desire (and fwiw a very masculine one) to prove their own worth at the expense of those they consider lesser. Regarding immigrants, racism is nothing knew, either in the giving or the receiving. Our country has been built on it as much as it has been built on unity and democracy.

Certainly it's not a condition limited to Russian Jewish emigres. But with Cato and the Federalist there does seem to be that odd Putin we love despots thing going. What is that?

My theory? A bunch of boys wanting to play Godfather. That simple. Sad really, that such a pathetic conceit can cause so much harm.

On number 2, no. Mr. Shapiro has accessed this country's finest educational institutions, and been given opportunity after opportunity to succeed, including 0poverlooking some past bigoted statements. I am not doubting that his family faced antisemitism in the USSR, and that he may have faced it in North America as well, but that does not give him a "get out of jail free" pass when it comes to public racism. He should own the consequences of his words.

Again, would that he would, but he gets sooo much traction from playing victim, as someone else pointed out.

That's why you can't take people like him seriously. They want to be serious, but they're not. They're just tin soldiers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ The other thing I'd note is that growing up in an authoritarian regime with bad nationality policy should have made Shapiro LESS likely to support authoritarians and bad nationality policy.

Unfortunately, it did not.

Very well said pp in your post above this one. But how old is this guy? All this focus on his USSR history, but how old was he when the USSR disintegrated? 10 at most, living in Moscow (a huge privilege in USSR days in itself).

I'm the PP who posted about Soviet nationality policy and there are two threads of discussion around his background, both of which would be kind of interesting if folks on DCUM were a little more nuanced:

1) Are Gen X and Boomer generation Soviet immigrants reflexively conservative? Even reactionary at times?

In my experience, as above. Quite a lot of them are. But not all.

2) Should Mr. Shapiro get a "pass" on racist comments because he was a member of a persecuted minority before his family emigrated from the USSR?

Nope. No one should. On the other hand, an apology and acknowledgement of his bias would work wonders. Unfortunately, he likes playing the victim, as do all Federalist betas, so that will not happen.

I'm sorry I called him a beta, as an example of an apology. That was wrong of me. I have some preconceived notions about short little men who squander their intelligence catering to despots and organized crime. And not because they are short. Oops! There I go again.

On number 1, I'd say yes, sometimes. This is a hard conversation, but I think the reflexive conservatism of many Soviet emigres (particularly those 50+ right now) stems from genuine trauma but also from frustration about "starting over" in this country and having to work their way up under people who they think are inferior to them, including POC.

I commend you for taking this argument seriously. I agree there are some serious points in it, although I initiated it from a place of exasperation and disgust with the traitors who keep trying to tear apart our nation under the mistaken opinion that they are masters of the universe.

In my heart I do think it's that simple for a lot of Cato and Federalist types. A burning desire (and fwiw a very masculine one) to prove their own worth at the expense of those they consider lesser. Regarding immigrants, racism is nothing knew, either in the giving or the receiving. Our country has been built on it as much as it has been built on unity and democracy.

Certainly it's not a condition limited to Russian Jewish emigres. But with Cato and the Federalist there does seem to be that odd Putin we love despots thing going. What is that?

My theory? A bunch of boys wanting to play Godfather. That simple. Sad really, that such a pathetic conceit can cause so much harm.

On number 2, no. Mr. Shapiro has accessed this country's finest educational institutions, and been given opportunity after opportunity to succeed, including 0poverlooking some past bigoted statements. I am not doubting that his family faced antisemitism in the USSR, and that he may have faced it in North America as well, but that does not give him a "get out of jail free" pass when it comes to public racism. He should own the consequences of his words.

Again, would that he would, but he gets sooo much traction from playing victim, as someone else pointed out.

That's why you can't take people like him seriously. They want to be serious, but they're not. They're just tin soldiers.

Tin soldiers?

He’s short?

Otherwise I totally agree. These guys who get paid by Koch are mostly just sad little betas.

Do you think they ever admit to each other that they are all pumped up by billionaires and that’s why they are there?

[Anonymous]

Judge Ho beautifully defends Shapiro in talk at Georgetown:

“Equality of opportunity is fundamental to who we are, and to who we aspire to be, as a nation. . . . But here’s the kicker: Once everyone has had full and fair opportunity to be considered, you pick on the merits. Both the Constitution and the Civil Rights Act make clear that it is wrong to hire people based on race.

“That’s the law for a wide range of jobs. But it would be especially wrong to select judges based on race.

“It is true that I am the only Asian American on my court. I’m also the only immigrant on my court.

“But I would never suggest that a wise Asian would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion than a white judge. That would be antithetical to our legal system, and poisonous to civil society. No one should ever assume that I’m more likely to favor Asians or immigrants or anyone else—or that my colleagues are less likely to. Everyone should win or lose based on the law—period. That’s why Lady Justice wears a blindfold. That’s why judges wear black robes. . . .”

So let me be clear: I stand with Ilya on the paramount importance of color-blindness. And that same principle should apply whether we’re talking about getting into college, getting your first job, or receiving an appointment to the highest court in the land.

Racism is a scourge that America has not yet fully extinguished—and the first step in fighting racial discrimination is to stop practicing it.

That’s all Ilya is trying to say. That’s all he has ever tried to say.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-judge-ho-georgetown-racism-ilya-shapiro-cancel-supreme-court-black-woman-justice-11645471956?mod=opinion_major_pos5

[Anonymous]

Ho is a federalist hack. Gross.

[Anonymous]

Yep. What he really wants to say is race doesn’t matter, only your willingness to sell yourself to your corporate overlords. Does anyone really think the FedSoc is getting the best and brightest legal minds on the bench?

[Anonymous]

Has Ilya explained yet why he praised ACB's nomination rather than dismissing her as a lesser woman candidate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ The other thing I'd note is that growing up in an authoritarian regime with bad nationality policy should have made Shapiro LESS likely to support authoritarians and bad nationality policy.

Unfortunately, it did not.

Very well said pp in your post above this one. But how old is this guy? All this focus on his USSR history, but how old was he when the USSR disintegrated? 10 at most, living in Moscow (a huge privilege in USSR days in itself).

I'm the PP who posted about Soviet nationality policy and there are two threads of discussion around his background, both of which would be kind of interesting if folks on DCUM were a little more nuanced:

1) Are Gen X and Boomer generation Soviet immigrants reflexively conservative? Even reactionary at times?

In my experience, as above. Quite a lot of them are. But not all.

2) Should Mr. Shapiro get a "pass" on racist comments because he was a member of a persecuted minority before his family emigrated from the USSR?

Nope. No one should. On the other hand, an apology and acknowledgement of his bias would work wonders. Unfortunately, he likes playing the victim, as do all Federalist betas, so that will not happen.

I'm sorry I called him a beta, as an example of an apology. That was wrong of me. I have some preconceived notions about short little men who squander their intelligence catering to despots and organized crime. And not because they are short. Oops! There I go again.

On number 1, I'd say yes, sometimes. This is a hard conversation, but I think the reflexive conservatism of many Soviet emigres (particularly those 50+ right now) stems from genuine trauma but also from frustration about "starting over" in this country and having to work their way up under people who they think are inferior to them, including POC.

I commend you for taking this argument seriously. I agree there are some serious points in it, although I initiated it from a place of exasperation and disgust with the traitors who keep trying to tear apart our nation under the mistaken opinion that they are masters of the universe.

In my heart I do think it's that simple for a lot of Cato and Federalist types. A burning desire (and fwiw a very masculine one) to prove their own worth at the expense of those they consider lesser. Regarding immigrants, racism is nothing knew, either in the giving or the receiving. Our country has been built on it as much as it has been built on unity and democracy.

Certainly it's not a condition limited to Russian Jewish emigres. But with Cato and the Federalist there does seem to be that odd Putin we love despots thing going. What is that?

My theory? A bunch of boys wanting to play Godfather. That simple. Sad really, that such a pathetic conceit can cause so much harm.

On number 2, no. Mr. Shapiro has accessed this country's finest educational institutions, and been given opportunity after opportunity to succeed, including 0poverlooking some past bigoted statements. I am not doubting that his family faced antisemitism in the USSR, and that he may have faced it in North America as well, but that does not give him a "get out of jail free" pass when it comes to public racism. He should own the consequences of his words.

Again, would that he would, but he gets sooo much traction from playing victim, as someone else pointed out.

That's why you can't take people like him seriously. They want to be serious, but they're not. They're just tin soldiers.

Tin soldiers?

He’s short?

Otherwise I totally agree. These guys who get paid by Koch are mostly just sad little betas.

Do you think they ever admit to each other that they are all pumped up by billionaires and that’s why they are there?

No. I think they all think they will be billionaires like their idols someday because they are Very Special.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ilya was straight up canceled.

Nope. “Canceled” has lost all meaning with you people.

[Anonymous]

The whole saga puts Georgetown Law in a bad light. An actual top law school would never have extended him an offer in the first place and would certainly have figured out a reasonable way to get rid of him while still making donors happy. This just confirms that Georgetown Law is not a top law school, which I think we all already knew.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ilya was straight up canceled.

Nope. “Canceled” has lost all meaning with you people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whole saga puts Georgetown Law in a bad light. An actual top law school would never have extended him an offer in the first place and would certainly have figured out a reasonable way to get rid of him while still making donors happy. This just confirms that Georgetown Law is not a top law school, which I think we all already knew.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ilya was straight up canceled.

Nope. “Canceled” has lost all meaning with you people.

I agree they shouldn’t have hired him but they clearly thought having a “center” with some right wingers would help them. Having hired him there was no way they could get rid of him without looking like a second rate law school. But Georgetown still is clearly a top tier law school and it’s sort of silly to say otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole saga puts Georgetown Law in a bad light. An actual top law school would never have extended him an offer in the first place and would certainly have figured out a reasonable way to get rid of him while still making donors happy. This just confirms that Georgetown Law is not a top law school, which I think we all already knew.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ilya was straight up canceled.

Nope. “Canceled” has lost all meaning with you people.

I agree they shouldn’t have hired him but they clearly thought having a “center” with some right wingers would help them. Having hired him there was no way they could get rid of him without looking like a second rate law school. But Georgetown still is clearly a top tier law school and it’s sort of silly to say otherwise.

Actually, elite institutions are quite savvy about getting rid of people quietly. They still could have that center (I understand it’s Koch-funded). It just didn’t need to be with this specific person. It truly looks like donors are making their employment decisions and that’s not elite. You expect it from George Mason. I would not have expected it from Georgetown but they now look juts as desperate as George Mason and should probably be ranked equivalent.