Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Wednesday April 12 2017, @03:37PM   Printer-friendly
from the customer-relations dept.

NPR reports

Passengers on a United Express flight from Chicago to Louisville, Ky., were horrified when a man was forcibly removed--violently wrenched from his seat and physically dragged down the aisle. [...] Videos of the scene have prompted calls to boycott United Airlines.

[...] The Chicago Department of Aviation [...] says the actions of the security officers were "not condoned by the Department" and that one individual has been placed on leave pending a review.

[...] Passengers had already boarded on Sunday evening [April 10] at O'Hare International Airport when United asked for volunteers to take another flight the next day to make room for four United staff members who needed seats.

The airline offered $400 and a free hotel, passenger Audra D. Bridges told the Louisville Courier-Journal. When no one volunteered, the offer was doubled to $800. When there were still no bites, the airline selected four passengers to leave the flight--including the man in the video and his wife.

"They told him he had been selected randomly to be taken off the flight", Bridges said.

[...] The man said he was a doctor and that he "needed to work at the hospital the next day", passenger Jayse D. Anspach said.

[...] Both Bridges and Anspach posted videos of three security officers, who appear to be wearing the uniforms of Chicago aviation police, wrenching the man out of his seat, prompting wails. His face appeared to strike an armrest. Then they dragged his limp body down the aisle.

Footage shows the man was bleeding from the mouth as they dragged him away. His glasses were askew and his shirt was riding up over his belly.

"It looked like he was knocked out, because he went limp and quiet and they dragged him out of the plane like a rag doll", Anspach wrote.

Previous: Days After United Settlement, Baggage Handler Locked in Cargo Hold on NC-to-DC Flight


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Flamebait) by Grishnakh on Wednesday April 12 2017, @05:05PM (32 children)

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Wednesday April 12 2017, @05:05PM (#492887)

    Of course there's people agreeing with United. Conservatives are all like that: they thump their chests and scream "law and order!!", so anyone who acts against their authoritarian thugs is deserving of a beating in their worldview.

    What's really funny and ironic is how many of them claim the "leftists" to be the authoritarians. Meanwhile, they're the ones who want the War on Drugs so much.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Flamebait=3, Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Informative=2, Underrated=1, Total=8
    Extra 'Flamebait' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by cubancigar11 on Wednesday April 12 2017, @05:34PM (11 children)

    by cubancigar11 (330) on Wednesday April 12 2017, @05:34PM (#492914) Homepage Journal

    Ugh... I know plenty of conservative people who think United is wrong and I know what leftists do when in power. #IBelieve #KillAllMen

    Could it be that your head is so up your ass all you can see is your own self everywhere?

    • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Wednesday April 12 2017, @05:53PM

      by kaszz (4211) on Wednesday April 12 2017, @05:53PM (#492936) Journal

      Do you think he meant the non-authoritarian Gulag or Pol pot re-education? ;-)

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @06:16PM (9 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @06:16PM (#492962)

      Eh, comparing the extremists on each political side of the spectrum would be more accurate. So you shared the extreme leftists, and I'll respond with the extreme right: bomb clinics, kill minorities, harass innocent people, and violate basic human rights.

      As always humanity is a spectrum, not everyone is crowded into the extreme ends of the spectrum. However there are still statistically common traits, often referred to as stereotypes. Conservatives are often more strictly law abiding folk, nothing wrong about this except in cases such as this. Anyone who comes to the defense of United in this case is a boot-licking authoritarian who can't think for themselves.

      The fact that conservative types are the ones doing so is ironically hypocritical as they are usually the types that cry about violations of their freedoms. But hey, its a corporate entity and they are brainwashed into believing they have the same rights as an individual in their own home.

      • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Wednesday April 12 2017, @08:27PM (8 children)

        by cubancigar11 (330) on Wednesday April 12 2017, @08:27PM (#493048) Homepage Journal

        Which was exactly my point. Elections are over. Time to bury the habit looking at every single thing through the glass of binary. Some poor dude got dragged off of a flight and got a bloody nose for no fault of his own except that he demanded the "system" to stay true to its word. There is a lesson here and it is not about left and right. Who doesn't see any problem here except someone who is full of hate? And to just come up here and start blaming conservatives as if there is some book of conservatives and it condones throwing people off of flights. Something bad happens, suddenly 'personal is political' clique jumps in and starts blaming whoever is their enemy of the month. A disaster is truly an opportunity apparently. Fuck nuance.

        Was united doing something illegal? No. Well, most probably no, since it is debatable whether the flight was technically 'overbooked' or not. I have read some blogs where people claim technically united did break its own policies.
        Will and did united get away with this? Most probably yes and yes. Police obviously agreed to them so the deed already happened under state's purview. And we all know what courts do to erring policemen - Nothing or a slap on the wrist. In this case? Nothing.
        Should united get away with this? But it already did! All the social media cry cannot change the fact that the CEO Oscar Munoz already came out in support of whoever made this bad decision. One month later and nothing will happen. You will still buy the cheapest flight. And all flights will treat you like crap. In this scenario, the focus of concerned citizen should be what to do. What do we do, though? Playing our own pretty political games. There is a nice movie by Satyajit Ray called The Chess Players [wikipedia.org]. Right now it feels like I am in a company of chess players. Apparently getting something done is passe and a ground of ridicule. Even reddit sounds like a better place to talk than here - same old unhinged. I can already see the trajectory of SN - going the way of Kuro5hin.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @12:25AM (7 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @12:25AM (#493160)

          Its not blaming conservatives to observe that to a man everyone defending United is a conservative. #NotAllConservatives

          Over 20 senators wrote a letter to United demanding an accounting. [kfvs12.com]
          Guess which party did not sign the letter?

          • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Thursday April 13 2017, @03:19AM (4 children)

            by cubancigar11 (330) on Thursday April 13 2017, @03:19AM (#493239) Homepage Journal

            What do you expect in a two party system? As I said, the elections are over. If you put the party above the problem, in USA, everything will become binary.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:25AM (3 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:25AM (#493249)

              What do you expect in a two party system? As I said, the elections are over. If you put the party above the problem, in USA, everything will become binary.

              Really? So if the democrats are against murdering babies, the republicans will be for murdering babies?
              Your reductive logic is the failure here.

              Nothing prevented any senator from singing that letter regardless of political party. It would have been such an easy PR move too.
              Hell, they could have written their own letter if they couldn't bear to sign their names to the same piece of paper with the democrats.
              But they chose not to. That's on them alone and it certainly is not on anyone who observes that fact and comments on it.

              • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Thursday April 13 2017, @05:49AM (2 children)

                by cubancigar11 (330) on Thursday April 13 2017, @05:49AM (#493267) Homepage Journal

                I am not defending republicans here. I am defending conservatism. The politicians, rightfully or wrongfully, have decided that this issue is not too big. I am sure murdering babies will be considered big, but then who knows? I think 9/11 was one such issue where they all got together.

                Now I myself consider myself to be left to the center. And I am fully aware that conservatism is less about finding solutions and all about if we all together turn a our collective eyes to the other side, nobody will know about the problem. But in this issue, I am here to defend conservatism because it is larger than a 2-party system. And so is this issue - the flimsy reasons flights take to fsck their customers and just enjoy such a position of power without any repercussions - is not limited to USA. I do welcome the democrats who are signing that letter but again, republicans may be don't see this issue big enough. Plus they have for quite some time been very bad at reading what their voter base. Trump was "the brick through the window" and is, as it seems, not delivering on leadership. I don't know! But you can't blame all of the voter base for it!

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 14 2017, @07:25AM (1 child)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 14 2017, @07:25AM (#493864)

                  > Now I myself consider myself to be left to the center.

                  Clue: You are not. And I'm not referring to your defense of 'conservatism.'
                  I'm referring to all the other times you've come down on the side of anti-egalitarianism.

                  • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Friday April 14 2017, @08:53AM

                    by cubancigar11 (330) on Friday April 14 2017, @08:53AM (#493884) Homepage Journal

                    I am very much on the center of the left. I am always and will always come down against the corrupt criminals who use allegations of anti-egalitarianism to censor their opposition. The shit has hit the fan and blood of dilution of a real concern is purely on the hands leftist and liberals who have failed to do anything new with the power they got. If the world burns tomorrow it is because of the left's failure. You can't wash your lack of introspection on my opposition.

          • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Saturday April 15 2017, @09:47PM (1 child)

            by cubancigar11 (330) on Saturday April 15 2017, @09:47PM (#494564) Homepage Journal

            Here is the rotten meat of your argument:
            Buffett owned 28,951,353 shares of United as of Feb. 14, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. With 9.2% of the shares outstanding, Buffett was by far the carrier’s largest shareholder, according to FactSet.

            and

            Buffett is a notable philanthropist, having pledged to give away 99 percent[10] of his fortune to philanthropic causes, primarily via the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He is also active in contributing to political causes, having endorsed Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton in the 2016 U.S. presidential election;[11] he has publicly opposed the policies, actions, and statements of the current U.S. president, Donald Trump. [wikipedia.org]

            So you drank the cool aid. Thanks for playing.

            By the way, being a philanthropist by giving money to Bill and Melinda Foundation is like being a doctor by prescribing cancer.

  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by bradley13 on Wednesday April 12 2017, @05:43PM (5 children)

    by bradley13 (3053) on Wednesday April 12 2017, @05:43PM (#492925) Homepage Journal

    Conservatives are all like that: they thump their chests and scream "law and order!!"

    You must know some strange conservatives. Maybe they're all neocons? Do consider that conservatives are classically the people who are for gun rights and self-defense. Personally, in this case, my dream would be for the doc to have successfully defended himself. From what I've read (including a couple of articles by people claiming to be lawyers), both United and the cop were acting way beyond the bounds of their authority. The only question is whether United will pay him millions, or tens of millions. The cop, of course, will get a week of administrative leave.

    On which topic: It's time and past time that people stopped accepting illegal actions by government actors. Whenever a cop beats a suspect ("gee, he was resisting arrest"), it *is* swept under the rug. The only reason this incident has turned into a shitstorm is because the abuse was at the behest of a private corporation. If this had been a case of arresting a suspect (but, oops, got the wrong guy, so sorry), it wouldn't have caused a ripple.

    We should ask ourselves: why do we allow government actors to use violence against nonviolent citizens _at_ _all_? (93% of SWAT raids are used for non-dangerous, non-violent situations [washingtonpost.com]). And when it happens, why are the citizens not allowed to defend themselves, including with deadly force? [thefreethoughtproject.com]

    As a pretty conservative guy, I find the United incident appalling, and I hope that it stays in the news and helps spark more public awareness of violence by government actors.

    --
    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
    • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday April 12 2017, @06:09PM (4 children)

      by Grishnakh (2831) on Wednesday April 12 2017, @06:09PM (#492958)

      You must know some strange conservatives. Maybe they're all neocons?

      That's what typical conservatives are these days. If you don't fit that mold, then you're not a typical conservative.

      You complain about violence by cops and unnecessary SWAT raids, but the conservatives who now run our government, and our very conservative Attorney General, don't think police brutality is a problem at all, and are big fans of the War on Drugs (which is responsible for those SWAT raids). So what kind of conservative are you? Obviously not a very good one, and certainly not one in tune with the conservatives who have elected the current conservative government.

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @07:51PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @07:51PM (#493014)

        You're playing their game and you don't even realize that you are being suckered.

        "Conservative" means conserving the status quo.
        If you don't want to conserve the status quo, you are NOT "Conservative".
        As you move away from the "everything is pretty much OK as it is; let's keep it this way" position, you move to a more RADICAL place.
        RADICAL is the -opposite- of "Conservative".

        These people labeling themselves "Conservative" is no different than the Nazis or DPRK naming themselves with non-appropriate terms.
        The fact that Lamestream Media repeats this swill exacerbates the problem.

        The word you seek is Reactionary.
        These people want to go -backwards- in time. [google.com]

        -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

        • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday April 13 2017, @12:23AM (1 child)

          by Grishnakh (2831) on Thursday April 13 2017, @12:23AM (#493158)

          Wrong. No True Scotsman.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @02:24AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @02:24AM (#493223)

            Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Consider the normative authoritarian doofus OriginalOwner's missive carefully: "conservative means preserving the status quo", with the status quo being the collapse of the US economy via Robamacare, mandatory schools that harm US children's ability to think for themselves, oppressive taxation, and rampaging "law" enforcement.

            What, did you think "Conservative" stood for low taxes, small government, and the Bill of Rights? Time to stop using a now-meaningless buzzword and pick a useful descriptor. (Mine is "anti-slavery".)

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @10:09PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @10:09PM (#493098)

        the difference is that the conservatives in office are not the same as the conservatives that routinely vote them in.

        There are certainly examples of the type in question -- gun rights and self defense, but that does not a conservative platform make. That is just individual rights in a small scale.

        The conservatives in office are primarily for big business and the lifting of regulation that can restrict a person from being able to empower oneself--but to allow that to happen via ones own power and hard work, which most people seem to be disallusioned with because of the forces of big business.

        Truly, those that vote for their one or two issues are enabling government officials (republican and democratic) to enable legistlation not in their own personal best interests, because they focused on a narrow few.

        I personally would prefer health insurance over my ability to carry a concealed weapon -- heck I'll strap it on and carry it in the open just to show what I got -- but there's laws about that, too. Ultimately, people often get a lot of what they didn't want when voting for what they do. I think the present administration is just like that.

        Most of it is bankers and rich people, and our OP is clearly concerned with individual rights. I am with him -- but not with who is in office.

  • (Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Wednesday April 12 2017, @05:45PM (13 children)

    by dyingtolive (952) on Wednesday April 12 2017, @05:45PM (#492928)

    Not all. I didn't vote Trump, and wouldn't if I was given the chance a second time, but I've been swinging back conservative pretty hard the last year or two and nothing would make me more gleeful than to see United burn for this. Equally appalling is the hit job the media's done on the doctor. But "he's a felon (maybe)!" as if that makes getting dragged out by jackbooted thugs somehow legitimate.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @07:58PM (12 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @07:58PM (#493019)

      I've been swinging back conservative pretty hard the last year or two

      Can you name a candidate close to your current political position who has anything resembling a plan to expand the number of USAians with full-time jobs at a living wage?

      I've only seen 1 candidate with such an outline. [googleusercontent.com] (orig) [ontheissues.org]
      ...and that plan repeats the method which was successful several generations ago when the economy was again totally in the crapper due to Capitalism: Building/rebuilding infrastructure.

      -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

      • (Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Wednesday April 12 2017, @09:37PM (11 children)

        by dyingtolive (952) on Wednesday April 12 2017, @09:37PM (#493077)

        Hell, man, I'm honestly not sure I can name a candidate close to my current political position. I liked Bernie overall, but the Democrats won't have my interest until they find time to care about something other than identity politics. They don't have to stop caring about identity politics. I just think there's a lot of other important things going on that might be worth taking a look at too.
          From my point of view, the modern republicans aren't conservative. I... I don't know what they are, but it kinda scares me, whatever it is. So I'm adrift in a sea of people, half of which (at best) don't care about my best interests or concerns, and the rest are openly out for themselves and/or utterly batshit. And a goodly part of the first group could be utterly batshit too.

        Interestingly, the person you named was the only one I voted for with any sort of enthusiasm, with her New Deal being a primary reason behind it. Party lines mean nothing to me.

        I was just trying to point out that the GP was spouting bullshit.

        --
        Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @10:39PM (10 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @10:39PM (#493109)

          You're shitting me. You voted Jill Stein and you call yourself a "conservative?"

          You know she's not going to throw the gays in concentration camps, right?

          You know she's going to let men into women's restrooms so they can rape your daughters, right?

          • (Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Thursday April 13 2017, @12:19AM (9 children)

            by dyingtolive (952) on Thursday April 13 2017, @12:19AM (#493155)

            Sigh.

            --
            Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
            • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday April 13 2017, @12:28AM (8 children)

              by Grishnakh (2831) on Thursday April 13 2017, @12:28AM (#493162)

              Why are you sighing? This is what conservatives are like these days, whether you like it or not, and whether you agree with it or not. Look at the way self-described conservatives vote, and what they write on message boards and on social media. They really are up in arms about TG people in the bathrooms, and they really do hate gay people. These aren't some tiny number of extremists, these are regular, everyday conservative voters. You can claim that they're being riled up by alt-right media and are basically following their "leaders", but these people really do believe this stuff, and they vote. If you want to see what "conservatism" stands for these days, go read breitbart.com and other such alt-right sites. This stuff has exploded in popularity in the last few years, so it is entirely valid for me to claim that this type of thinking represents modern conservatism.

              • (Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:07AM (7 children)

                by dyingtolive (952) on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:07AM (#493244)

                What's actually conservative about any of those people? They're psychos come out of the woodwork, much like the crazies on the left. You know, the ones behind such reasonable and intellectually responsible ideas as "#KillAllMen" and "die cis scum"? The ones who are violently pro-free speech until it's speech that they don't like? The ones who are supposed to be against war and the death penalty and stuff? Yeah, the liberals aren't exactly really showing those traits they pat themselves on the back for nowadays either.

                At any rate, they're abusing the label, on both sides. They're not actually representing what they claim. And I assure you that not every single one of them thinks that way.

                --
                Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
                • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:56AM (5 children)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:56AM (#493257)

                  What's actually conservative about any of those people?

                  The fact that the majority of self-identifying conservatives agree with those positions.
                  Laws to enforces those positions are proposed and often passed by conservative state governments on a regular basis.
                  North Carolina's HB2 made a LOT of headlines and even the "repeal" is still off the charts on bigotry.
                  Texas and Arkansas are trying to pass them right now [nbcnews.com] and the votes are practically party line.
                  Mike Pence, the goddamn republican Vice President, signed a law in 2015 to legally validate businesses that discriminate against teh gays. That one got a lot of press too because he caved after enough businesses boycotted.
                  These are mainstream conservative views. [rollingstone.com]
                  Even in 2016 only 29% of conservatives support gay marriage. [pewforum.org]

                  Their psychos come out of the woodwork, much like the crazies on the left.

                  Sorry but the scales are far from balanced. The crazies on the left are a tiny minority that get boosted more by mainstream conservatives looking to rationalize their opposition to all things 'liberal' than they do by their own efforts. You don't see any 'liberal' states even considering "anti cis" laws.

                  I don't know what you think "conservative" means, but in the USA conservative is the big tent that started filling up with the dixiecrats, then the anti-Jimmy-Carter, racist wing of the white evangelicals (which are the majority) and with Donald Grump its pretty much absorbed all the remaining authoritarians. Before 9/11 muslims were about 50/50 republican/democrat, not any more.

                  Even the so-called Libertarians have lost their way as their accommodation of conservative illiberalism has made modern american libertarianism philosophically arbitrary anti-leftism and withered.

                  • (Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Thursday April 13 2017, @05:35AM (3 children)

                    by dyingtolive (952) on Thursday April 13 2017, @05:35AM (#493264)

                    Then I suppose I genuinely don't know what the fuck I am anymore.

                    I'm a godless cynic who generally wants to see the middle/lower-middle class not get stamped out of existence. I'm worried about income equality as I can't envision a way to not see the disparity of wealth as inherently oppressive in a post-Reagan capitalist economy. I generally support the idea of single payer healthcare, but I think the monstrosity that is the ACA was worse that what we had prior. I'd never own a gun, but I don't blame anyone else for wanting one, so I'm generally in support of that.

                    So that seems pretty liberal, but that being said, I'm also an asshole who doesn't give a damn about any identity politicking. Don't get me wrong, I'm not actively against that crap. I just don't care and don't want to hear about it. The gays want to get married? Sure, whatever. Some obnoxious do-gooders from the local college protest about it and it inconveniences me? I'm going to roll my eyes and be utterly snide. I don't really care about the illegals from Mexico coming here, but I'm not going to pretend they're not doing it illegally either. The Wall is a rock opera, not something I want to see along our southern border. At the same time, I also think that globalism is a race to the bottom for everyone except the megacorps. I don't feel I'm entitled to have an honest opinion about abortion one way or another, as I'm a dude and it's never affected me even indirectly. Generally I like "live and let live".

                    Well, that's all the big ones, so what political leaning does that make me closest to? My liberal friends call me conservative; their token Republican. I used to laugh and tell them I don't make enough money for that. But given how we've reached such great heights of crazy, I feel like I could say that about any affiliation.

                    --
                    Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @06:58AM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @06:58AM (#493281)

                      I also think that globalism is a race to the bottom for everyone except the megacorps.

                      This chart [netdna-cdn.com] might change your mind.

                      That doesn't mean there haven't been losers, but on balance there is a lot less misery in the world now.
                      And going forward from where we are today, automation in our own backyard is the greatest risk to working class.

                      Remember the jobs at that Carrier plant that Trump 'saved' from moving to Mexico even before he was inaugurated? He did it by giving them ~7 million in tax dollars.
                      The CEO straight up said he was going to take that money and invest it in automating those people out of their jobs anyway. [businessinsider.com]

                    • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday April 13 2017, @05:03PM

                      by Grishnakh (2831) on Thursday April 13 2017, @05:03PM (#493495)

                      Then it sounds like you're a Bernie-voting progressive in today's political climate. You've basically echoed my own stances on all these issues. But you've let the right-wingers scare you away from the liberal/progressive side by equating them to all the identity-politics nutcases and inflating the perception of that group's size and power.

                      I don't know why your liberal friends would call you "conservative"; you haven't espoused a single conservative viewpoint there at all, perhaps a few centrist ones. Are all your "liberal" friends a bunch of nutty far-left college students or something? The gun thing is the only one that's not super-liberal, but even here remember that Bernie was bashed on this issue by the stridently anti-gun Hillary camp, because he represents rural Vermonters and isn't as strongly anti-gun. But even here, I'd call your position "centrist" from a modern American point-of-view.

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @08:00PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @08:00PM (#493600)

                      First, "middle class" is a bogus term.
                      The term seeks to divide a class in order to weaken it.
                      There are only TWO classes: The Bourgeoisie and The Proletariat i.e the Ownership Class and the Working Class; those who make money from wealth and those who make money from labor.

                      ...and if you settle for "Conservative", the best you'll ever get is something that has already existed. 8-(

                      The AC who replied first pointed to a chart that specifies poverty/extreme poverty.
                      That's interesting and all but...
                      What about the gains that the USAian Working Class made which have been clawed back by The Ownership Class? [nakedcapitalism.com]
                      Productivity vs compensation (whole page) [nakedcapitalism.com]

                      Economist Prof. Thomas Piketty wrote a 696-page analysis of 250 years of Capitalism.
                      What he determined is that that economic system, with its separate Ownership Class, a system which concentrates wealth, leads to a governmental system that is also "owned" by that same group; the gov't is essentially unresponsive to the majority--so, even if there is a veneer of egalitarianism (elections), you can't call that system "Democracy"; it's Oligarchy.

                      One form of this system, which throws in Nationalism, is called "Fascism".
                      If you look around in the USA today, you will recognize many traits of that extremism in play.
                      The 14 Defining Characteristics Of Fascism [ratical.org]

                      The way to avoid this/reclaim Democracy is via broader ownership of the means of production.
                      That economic system is called Socialism.
                      It is a method of production where The Workers and The Owners are the same people and there are no non-productive people in the loop.
                      Socialism, properly defined, is DEMOCRACY EVERYWHERE.

                      Italy instituted a program in 1985 which seeks to turn laid-off people into business owners.
                      They will allow a group of 10 or more to get their unemployment insurance payments in a lump sum to start a worker-owned cooperative.
                      The scheme is called The Marcora Law. [google.com]
                      It has been monumentally successful in northern Italy.
                      A third of the economy in the region of Emilia-Romagna is from co-ops.
                      There are over 8100 of them in that region alone.

                      If you want things to get better, I don't see a way to that that does not involve replacing Capitalism (absentee owners who produce nothing) with Worker-Owned Cooperatives AKA Democracy in the Workplace AKA Socialism.

                      Find a Marcora Law page that you like, blockquote from it, and email that quote/link to your Congresscritters.
                      Next election cycle, repeat that for every candidate on the ballot.
                      If one picks it up and runs with it, throw your support behind him/her.

                      Prof. Richard Wolff has a weekly broadcast/webcast that covers a lot of this.
                      His presentations are not the slightest bit dry.
                      Pacifica Radio station KPFA in Berkeley has an excellent archive of those. [kpfa.org]
                      New downloads become available Fridays, after about 11:15AM.
                      Using a media player with speed control/pitch control, you should be able to get through a 1-hour program in under 40 minutes.

                      -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

                  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:57PM

                    by Grishnakh (2831) on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:57PM (#493492)

                    Excellent post; this makes my point much better than I could have. You really should get yourself a normal account because AC posts are frequently filtered or auto-downmodded (I do it myself as AC comments tend to be trolls); if this is indicative, your comments are too valuable to be lost among a morass of AC trolls.

                • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:53PM

                  by Grishnakh (2831) on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:53PM (#493489)

                  I completely disagree. Please point to any national or state-level Democrat politician who espouses those views. You won't find a single one. You're pointing at some extremists who don't represent the "liberals" who vote Democrat, basically some nutty college students and that's it.

                  On the right, however, you will find plenty of Republican politicians who espouse the views I pointed out before. NC after all did pass a law last year about TGs and bathrooms, and is still messing around with that issue. There's plenty of GOP politicians in various states trying to pass various anti-gay laws. The alt-right even got their own people elected into the White House; what do you think Steve Bannon is?

                  Equating the alt-right with a few fringe loonies is equivocation of the worst kind. The leftist loonies have no power at all, and they sure as hell aren't controlling the White House like the alt-right is.