Monday's Most Active Threads

The most active thread yesterday was titled, "Rich Men North of Richmond" and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. I can't believe that anyone has escaped knowledge of this song by Oliver Anthony that is being discussed nearly everywhere. Indeed prior to this thread there was already a 3 page thread in the "Entertainment and Pop Culture" forum that I locked because it had turned into a political discussion. This song is widely seen as a rallying cry for the lower and middle classes and has been adopted by conservatives as almost an anthem. It turns out that the song's popularity has not grown completely organically, but rather as a result of a well-funded conservative campaign to promote the song. Because of the song's association with the right-wing and the tribal nature of today's society, liberals immediately attacked the song, which does touch on a number right-wing clichés. But Anthony himself says that politically he is in the middle of the road. Read carefully, the song's lyrics do have some lines that appear critical of the right-wing. For instance a line about protecting miners instead of "minors on an island" is seen as criticizing those more interested in Jeffrey Epstein than US mine workers. It is very clearly those to the right, as well as QAnon, who are most obsessed with Epstein whereas Democrats are generally more concerned with workplace safety, including in mines. In fact, the current Republican Governor of West Virginia who is also a US Senate candidate, Jim Justice, is the head of a coal mine empire that has hundreds of safety violations. Whether in the Governor's mansion in Charleston or his home in Lewisburg, Justice is a very rich man who is, if just barely, north of Richmond. Anthony also rails against fat people on welfare eating junk food. One of the ironies of both our food and wellfare systems is that unhealthy foods that lead to obesity are cheaper and more widely available than healthy foods. Our government would have to spend more to enable poor people to eat healthy. Moreover, Anthony — who describes himself as a farmer with a 90 acre farm — is likely eligible for, if not the beneficiary of, many government support programs himself. Regardless of the details, the song has resonated with a large audience. The song's lyrics are such that there is a bit for everyone included. As such, the right-wing has clearly embraced the song and others, including posters in this thread, find messages that would appeal to Bernie Sanders followers.

The next most active thread yesterday was also posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. This one was titled, "GA Case" and was started on Saturday by a poster asking why Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney Fani Willis was "dragging out" the expected indictment of former President Donald Trump. As if in response to this query, last night Trump and several of his associates were indicted. The thread has added 14 pages since the indictment was announced and is currently at 26 pages. I haven't read much of this thread but what I have read suggests that there is little of difference between this thread and previous threads about other Trump indictments. For the most part, conservatives see the indictments as political efforts to damage Trump's reelection chances and see little validity in the charges. Liberals, especially in this case, see Trump's violations of the law as obvious and deserving of prosecution. The only thing different about this case are the details and the large number of others involved. While Republicans predictably insist that this is a "liberal witch hunt", posters in the thread pointed out that many, if not most, of those providing testimony against Trump before the grand jury were Republicans. As in other cases, conservatives attack the prosecutor, making personal attacks against Fani Willis. Trump famously said that he could shoot someone in the middle of 5th Avenue and his supporters would still back him. In this case, he has been recorded breaking the law and everyone has been able to hear him doing it. Yet, his defenders still rally in support and refuse to accept the legitimacy of the prosecution. One interesting aspect of this thread is discussion around the idea that this could be the case that leads to Trump losing support within the Republican Party. Much of this is driven by Georgian Republicans who have been openly anti-Trump. For instance, former Lieutenant Governor Geoff Duncan told CNN that this is Republican's opportunity to get rid of Trump. This leads to some posters in the thread seeing this as the beginning of an effort by Republican leaders to dump Trump.

Third yesterday was a thread titled, "UPS TO pay drivers $170,000" and posted in the "Jobs and Careers" forum. The original poster probably deserves some sort of award for writing one of the most brain-dead posts I've seen in a while. The poster begins by linking to an article by CBS News that is apparently supposed to support the claim made in the title, but actually doesn't. The poster then goes on to declare this "crazy" and saying that she might quit her job and work at UPS. She then says that she doesn't understand "why people are okay with this". This thread is interesting in context with the first thread I discussed today. In that one, a singer was complaining about the plight of the working class. In this one, a poster is upset that members of the working class are getting a decent paycheck. Posters respond asking why the original poster is not okay with this, a question she is unable to answer. Others point out that the figure includes benefits (and also represents compensation at the end of the contract after annual increases). Posters argue that the amount is deserved and that the drivers have earned it. A few posters also point out that this is the benefit of a labor union. But, not everyone is onboard with the contract. One poster says that this is overcompensation for unskilled labor and will accelerate the adoption of automation. Similarly, this poster and others like him see this as the beginning of spiraling wage inflation that will increase costs for everyone. Some posters don't think such compensation is deserved because the drivers are uneducated (at least according to these posters) and don't think the salaries should be comparable to those that require college degrees. On the other hand, some posters argue that this demonstrates that college degrees are not as valuable as they are believed to be. There are quite a few aspects of this labor agreement that are subject to discussion, including the role of unions, salaries in other fields, and benefits such as pensions. There are a number of posters who are deeply resentful of any pay or benefit that goes to anyone other then themselves.

The final thread at which I'll look today was posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. Titled, "NY Times on new application essays dabbling in so-called ‘identities’", the original poster may have seized the award for the most brain-dead post right out of the grasp of the original poster of the previous thread I discussed. This post is so astonishing, that I have to quote most of it verbatim:

For those of us whose children do not partake in so-called ‘identification,’ this is a terrible development. They might as well be asking if you're still beating your wife.

Several of those responding, like me, have no idea what this poster is trying to say. Or, maybe that is not quite accurate. I think we have some idea what this poster is trying to say, it's just that what he is trying to say doesn't make a lot of sense. As one poster writes, "Everyone I know identifies as something." Later the original poster clarifies a bit by saying, "Race, religion, gender, sports, volunteer work are nonacademic issues that have no relevance." Basically, this poster wants to ignore almost everything that makes someone unique and boil college admissions down to nothing more than a high school transcript and a test score. The original poster doesn't offer much in the way of description of his children, but it is likely that they are fairly mainstream in all of the characteristics he disdains. But other posters are more straightforward saying that for a straight, white, cis-gendered male of European heritage going back many generations in the US, there is nothing to say. Other posters point out that this is not true. There are things that are unique, or at least interesting, about everyone. One poster lists a number of potential characteristics including such things as being "a dog person" or "a good cook" that could conceivably impact an individual's identity. Basically, this all goes back to straight white men being convinced that they are unfairly treated by colleges due to advantages given to minorities. Some posters write that they see this trend by colleges as "thumbing their noses" at the Supreme Court's prohibition of using race as a factor in admissions. But, as other posters note, the Supreme Court ruling explicitly allowed this sort of thing.