Wright Chat

 
FAQ FAQ Register Register
Search Search Profile Profile
Memberlist Memberlist Log in to check your private messages Log in to check your private messages
Usergroups Usergroups Log in Log in

>> Return to SaveWright Home Page

fake Shingle Style Atrocity: An architectural criticism
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Wright Chat Forum Index -> Click Here for General Discussion Posts
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16136
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2018 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Modmom's post illustrates an element of the problem: one has difficulty distinguishing between "our" conspiracy theories, and "their" conspiracy
theories. Naturally, each side believes -- based on some combination of actual, reliable journalism, and fake news generated by who knows whom -- that his
or her beliefs are reliable, while the other side is either deluded or dishonest, or maybe both.

M Albright, in "Fascism: A Warning," points to a classic ploy of the would-be dictator: damage or destroy the ability of the citizenry to distinguish truth
from fiction. Whether Mr Trump is doing so -- by repeatedly and insistently labeling the work of the legitimate press "fake news" -- using his gut instinct,
or by design, the result is the same: Americans are divided in their estimation of the President, the Administration, and Congress, either trusting or
distrusting these institutions based on "religion" (I mean, political affiliation).

One way, perhaps the only way, to bring these factions into some sort of workable unanimity, would be to encourage each half to "walk in the shoes
of the other," metaphorically -- to come to some appreciation of the thinking and feeling on the other side. How can this be accomplished ?

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
peterm



Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 5828
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2018 8:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In normal times, I would agree with that. But I think it’s naive to think that there is any sort of equivalence between the psychotic conspiracy theories being waged by people like Hannity, or Alex Jones and his Info Wars, and legitimate journalists (admittedly with biases) like Amy Goodman or Rachel Maddow. Trump is at over 4000 lies, averaging now something like 7.5 a day. And he determines what is “fake news?” An olive branch to the defenders of liars, thieves and fascists? If people choose to believe lies, it’s difficult, if not impossible to sway them with facts, science or statistics. When asked to provide facts to support their opinions, one inevitably comes up empty.

We now have a racist and authoritarian in the White House. (Can anyone recall this man ever uttering the word Democracy? It’s only Nation, Country, I, Me, Mine, and an occasional God thrown in to appease the Evangelicals. Democracy means nothing to the narcissist.) David Duke, (“Thank God for Trump! That’s why we love him!”), Richard Spencer and his hateful Alt Right, the KKK, American Nazi Party, and 600 other White Extremist groups also love, feel emboldened and endorse this guy. (Southern Poverty Law Center)

People who claim to support him for other reasons and choose to ignore these basic facts are no longer friends of mine. Those who are educated and turn a blind eye are more to blame than undereducated and indoctrinated folks poisoned by endless propaganda from the right. Trump attorneys are now filling in for Hannity on Faux News.

This is in addition to the rampant corruption and criminality within the White House, cabinet members and their cronies. For those who say they “wanted things shaken up”, you got what you asked for. The question becomes: Is there a way out of this mess before time is up?


Last edited by peterm on Fri Aug 10, 2018 9:14 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16136
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2018 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well said. I didn't mean to suggest that there is equivalence between verifiable truths and false beliefs, only that (as you say) it is difficult or impossible to tell
someone a fact which he believes to be wrong, or to unburden her of a falsity. The challenge is to find a way to do that, or at least to facilitate discussion that
might lead to some revelations -- on both sides.

We need a calm voice -- say, that of Bill Moyers, or better yet someone trusted by a wide swath of the public, as Walter Cronkite used to be (it is said) in his
day. That a shrinking percentage of the nation -- well under 50 percent -- now trusts government, or the media, or [name your institution], should scare the
bejeebers out of us. Trump is the perfect man for the job of lowering those numbers even further -- and fast.

As for someone telling us that "it's always been this way," what possible good can that do ? We need an answer, not a palliative . . .

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
peterm



Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 5828
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2018 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Right. And that lame “it’s always been this way” rationale for accepting the status quo is simply not true. History shows us that things are always changing and in flux.

Are we sure that a calm voice would have had an effect on Mussolini or Hitler’s supporters in the 1920s? The calm voices were of the Social Democrats who naively made one concession after the next to attempt to appease the rabid hunger of fascism, thinking that it would play itself out. We see how that worked out. (Of course, a sizable chunk of Trump’s supporters deny the existence of the Holocaust, so these are not arguments that have any effect whatsoever!

“Headache for the GOP”:

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-the-gop-has-a-nazi-problem-and-it-just-got-a-whole-lot-worse-1.5937282

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/20/nazis-and-anti-semites-slip-through-gop-primaries-causing-headaches-for-party.html

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/4/12/15270970/trump-administration-holocaust-denial-sean-spicer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Modmom1



Joined: 03 Dec 2017
Posts: 47

PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2018 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

On lighter news...The AIA condemned the deregulation of asbestos.

https://www.curbed.com/2018/8/9/17671336/asbestos-trump-epa-architects-aia

I agree with Peter, these are not normal times, not politically or environmentally. Get involved for change at the local level. We can't change minds set in their beliefs but we can motivate non-voters for the need to get involved, demand action and get out to vote.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16136
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2018 10:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's so: a sizable jump on votership, on either side, would undoubtedly make a substantial difference in the outcome of the coming election, considering our deplorable history.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/21/u-s-voter-turnout-trails-most-developed-countries/

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
peterm



Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 5828
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2018 9:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Since an earlier poster brought up LBJ as a culprit, I thought it only fair to take a closer look at Ronald Reagan, a hero still to many, including some here. After Nixon’s “Southern Strategy”, Reagan took it a step further, capitalizing even more on Southern white racism.

Ronald Reagan opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (calling it "humiliating to the South"), and ran for governor of California in 1966 promising to wipe the Fair Housing Act off the books. "If an individual wants to discriminate against Negroes or others in selling or renting his house," he said, "he has a right to do so." After the Republican convention in 1980, Reagan travelled to the county fair in Neshoba, Mississippi, where, in 1964, three Freedom Riders had been slain by the Ku Klux Klan. Before an all-white crowd of tens of thousands, Reagan declared: "I believe in states' rights".

As president, Reagan aligned his justice department on the side of segregation, supporting the fundamentalist Bob Jones University in its case seeking federal funds for institutions that discriminate on the basis of race. In 1983, when the supreme court decided against Bob Jones, Reagan, under fire from the Right, gutted the Civil Rights Commission.

The Republican Party of Lincoln is gone. It ended with Nixon’s Southern strategy. Thank goodness for LBJ. He sent the Dixiecrat racists scrambling to find a party that would have them...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8523

PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2018 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

*yawn*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peterm



Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 5828
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2018 1:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry that evidence tires you out, or bores you. Better to stick with opinions, I guess. They’re much less exhausting, since they require no research, facts or reflection.

A year ago, the head of the GOP said there were really fine people on both sides in regards to the racist Alt Right torch bearers, one who was a brutal murderer. There was an opportunity to disavow these knuckle draggers. Intellectuals like George Will, Steve Schmidt, David Jolly, and Michael Steele have all denounced this party due to its current off the rails direction and leadership.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/conservative-george-will-says-vote-against-republicans-in-midterms-2018-06-23
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8523

PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2018 6:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When 2 entities are at odds, it often obtains that the one on the ropes gets louder, more insistent, more wide-ranging, existentialist, sky-is-falling, in hopes of finding that one spaghetto that sticks to the wall. It reeks of desperation. Wait until January 20, 2025, then we can talk.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16136
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2018 7:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Groups in power tend to revel in their temporary ascendance, crapping on those they defeated and forgetting that tables turn with remarkable speed. Hubris versus karma ?


There are signs, outside of the political realm, of self-correction. The local corporate-sponsored daily ran this opinion piece today:

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

SILICON VALLEY NEEDS TO LIVE UP TO RHETORIC

For years, Silicon Valley has been promising us a beautiful technological future.

The summer of 2018 appears to be the moment when everyone woke up to the fact that the future is here — and it’s ugly, mean and decidedly
unfuturistic.

Consider the case of Alex Jones. Jones is a notorious right-wing conspiracy theorist, probably most famous for spreading the false claim that the 2012
Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting was a hoax. Jones has amassed millions of followers across his social media platforms. The grieving families
who lost their children in that massacre have been inundated with death threats and harassment from Jones’ fans.

For years, social media users have begged major tech companies to stop offering Jones the opportunity to spread lies and misinformation.

For years, these companies declined to do so. They cited techno-utopian platitudes like their free speech principles and the necessary neutrality of
their platforms when it came to content.

The bottom fell out of those arguments this week. The Sandy Hook families dragged Jones into court to hold him accountable, and online activists did
the same with the platforms that have kept him in business.

Early this week, Apple, Facebook, Spotify and YouTube all booted Jones either completely or partially from their services. The companies said Jones
violated their guidelines by posting hate speech, but it’s not hard to imagine that the cascade of cancellations had something to do with Jones’ legal
problems and a whole lot of public pressure.

One platform’s response to the firestorm stood out. On Tuesday, Aug. 7, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey tweeted that his company hadn’t banned Jones
because “he hasn’t violated our rules.” Dorsey added that Twitter couldn’t “succumb and simply react to outside pressure,” because it needed to
remain a service based on “straightforward principles we enforce (and evolve) impartially regardless of political viewpoints.”

This is classic tech utopian thinking: earnest, high-minded and irresponsible.

It would’ve gone over brilliantly in 2010. It would’ve been more grating, but still acceptable, in 2016.

In the summer of 2018, it did not go over well at all.

Twitter users responded by creating and amplifying a nasty conspiracy theory about Dorsey. Activists announced a day of Twitter silence on Dec.
14, the anniversary of the Sandy Hook school shooting. Journalists jumped all over Dorsey for the audacity of his suggestion that it was their job to
clean up after bad actors like Jones used social media platforms to spread lies.

Dorsey had to walk back his pontificating about principles and fairness — “Definitely not happy with where our policies are,” he tweeted on
Wednesday, Aug. 8.

He’s not the only one.

Silicon Valley has to face the fact that it has failed to live up to its own rhetoric. For years, social media platforms have fought the idea that they
share some responsibility for their role in public discourse.

Now, regular users who bought into those myths are starting to grow exhausted with the reality that what we have are not democratic platforms
but an endless barrage of bad actors, trolls, bots, bigotry, misinformation and manipulation. I’m seeing users increasingly respond in two different
ways:

1) Giving up on social media altogether: Facebook can’t give away accounts anymore. (After a long losing streak on privacy and election security, new
users are no longer signing up for Facebook in the U.S. and Canada. The company lost users in Europe last quarter.) Snap, which makes the
Snapchat app, used to be a teen sensation. Now it’s bleeding users.

Finding old tweets with racist jokes, offensive comments or off-the-cuff stupidity has become a decent way for people to get fired — so one of the
hottest trends this summer is deleting one’s entire Twitter history.

Tech CEOs can talk all they want about the platforms they’re trying to create. People are looking around at the platforms we have right now and
leaving them — and their stock prices — in the dust.

2) Demanding that social media behave like any other business: What Jones’ and Dorsey’s stories show us this week is a simple thing: People know that
social media companies are businesses, and they’d like them to act that way.

Businesses dissociate themselves from bad actors. They do so because bad actors are ... bad for business. They don’t need to check “evolving”
rulebooks. They don’t say they can’t achieve “scalable” results. They listen to the customers who are paying their bills.

The interesting thing about social media is that we, the users, have been the product.

Social media companies seem to have gotten so busy trying to sell our attention to advertisers that they forgot that we’re still, well, consumers —
capable of leaving, protesting or boycotting when the environment gets too toxic.

In the summer of 2018, Big Tech’s got to learn that lesson for the future, or get left behind in the past.

Caille Millner is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email:
cmillner@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @caillemillner


______________________________________________________________________________________


For the first time that I'm aware of, the PBS NewsHour gave their audience a look at Alex Jones this week. Perhaps if more of us on the left saw the kinds
of things our friends on the right are subjected to, we might experience both sympathy and outrage, while gaining a better idea of what we're up against:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/why-kicking-alex-jones-off-social-media-is-not-legally-censorship

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
peterm



Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 5828
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

PostPosted: Sun Aug 12, 2018 8:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Roderick Grant wrote:
When 2 entities are at odds, it often obtains that the one on the ropes gets louder, more insistent, more wide-ranging, existentialist, sky-is-falling, in hopes of finding that one spaghetto that sticks to the wall. It reeks of desperation. Wait until January 20, 2025, then we can talk.


Who’s on the ropes now, and who will be on the ropes by 2025 if “so much winning” continues? https://youtu.be/kXCu6CsgOts

There is always hope: http://time.com/5363553/epa-chlorpyrifos-ban-pesticide/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wrightasrain



Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Sun Aug 12, 2018 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Isn't this supposed to be a chat site about Frank Lloyd Wright?

There are plenty of political outlets on the web to post this kind of "running in place and getting nowhere" type of discussion.

Can we get back to Wright?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peterm



Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 5828
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

PostPosted: Sun Aug 12, 2018 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wrightasrain- I notice from your Wright Chat profile you have posted a total of 12 times, and not one of those is in any way remotely related to the topic of Frank Lloyd Wright. They are, in fact only in reference to these political topics.

I have shared hundreds of photos, links to Wright related topics plus detailed documention of the restoration of our Lamberson house and many other topics. I recently shared a post concerning a Mark Mills house, an architect in Wright’s circle.

Please feel free to share something Wright related, too!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DRN



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3558
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ

PostPosted: Sun Aug 12, 2018 3:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not exactly Wright related, but relevant to some of the issues surrounding the current spate of very high-end residential development seen in major cities and resort locales:
https://www.architectmagazine.com/design/editorial/dirty-money-shiny-architecture_o
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Wright Chat Forum Index -> Click Here for General Discussion Posts All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Protected by Anti-Spam ACP