We have updated our Privacy Notice, you can read the updated document here
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

AOC seems to agree that “eating babies” will save the planet.

«1

Comments

  • #2


    Should this be taken as a Juvenalian satirical expression similar to the Modest Proposal of Jonathan Swift?


  • #2


    To be fair, I would say any kind of nod might have been to defuse the situation as opposed to agreeing with what the protestor was saying.


  • #2


    mzungu wrote: »
    To be fair, I would say any kind of nod might have been to defuse the situation as opposed to agreeing with what the protestor was saying.
    Point of view, as well as interpretation of physical gestures, is qualitative and subject to associated limitations and errors. Content and context may substantially alter meaning, as you have noted above mzungu. Furthermore, AOC is a case of one from a research standpoint, and making generalisations from a case is problematic.

    It should also be noted that AOC has been subject to an ad hominem smear campaign by her political opponents, in their attempt to attack her personally, rather than to address the content of her political positions. This fits with the highly absurd claim that AOC was advocating eating babies. Get real!


  • #2


    Black Swan wrote: »

    It should also be noted that AOC has been subject to an ad hominem smear campaign by her political opponents, in their attempt to attack her personally, rather than to address the content of her political positions. This fits with the highly absurd claim that AOC was advocating eating babies. Get real!

    Typical nonsense smear campaign. No substance. No merit. Too silly to believe. Good for Seph Meyers closer look satire.


  • #2


    Black Swan wrote: »
    Point of view, as well as interpretation of physical gestures, is qualitative and subject to associated limitations and errors. Content and context may substantially alter meaning, as you have noted above mzungu. Furthermore, AOC is a case of one from a research standpoint, and making generalisations from a case is problematic.

    It should also be noted that AOC has been subject to an ad hominem smear campaign by her political opponents, in their attempt to attack her personally, rather than to address the content of her political positions. This fits with the highly absurd claim that AOC was advocating eating babies. Get real!

    An unfortunate sign of the times we live in. It seems to be that headline grabbing and getting clicks are the main focus now, whilst the facts are casually tossed aside.


  • #2


    During a US House investigation AOC questioned Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg regarding whether they fact-checked potential disinformation campaigns paid and hosted on FB during 2016 and forthcoming 2020 general elections.


  • #2


    AOC departs from junior congressperson sit back and be quiet protocols.


  • #2


    Anecdotally discussed AOC with Republicans I know in coffeeshop today and they reacted with the talking points against her often found in social media.


  • #2


    Black Swan wrote: »
    Anecdotally discussed AOC with Republicans I know in coffeeshop today and they reacted with the talking points against her often found in social media.

    An unfortunate byproduct of the times, perhaps? "News" increasingly comes from social media, whereas more reliable traditional outlets are left lagging behind.


  • #2


    mzungu wrote: »
    An unfortunate byproduct of the times, perhaps? "News" increasingly comes from social media, whereas more reliable traditional outlets are left lagging behind.
    The news media is under constant attack with fake news and alternative facts.


  • #2


    Black Swan wrote: »
    The news media is under constant attack with fake news and alternative facts.

    An already existing situation amplified by digital communications, or an entire new phenomenon?


  • #2


    mzungu wrote: »
    An already existing situation amplified by digital communications, or an entire new phenomenon?
    Technological evolution.


  • #2


    If silly attempts to smear the youngest member of Congress with a reference such as this is all her opposition has, then she will easily keep her seat in 2020.


  • #2


    I'm up for it, it would be interesting to chat to aoc over a meal


  • #2


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    I'm up for it, it would be interesting to chat to aoc over a meal
    I would modestly propose to invite Jonathan Swift to dine with ye to offer a bit of satire to your meal.


  • #2


    Black Swan wrote:
    I would modestly propose to invite Jonathan Swift to dine with ye.


    I've no idea who that is, but I'd eat anything


  • #2


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    I've no idea who that is...
    You're kidding? You have never read Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal or Gulliver's Travels? Probably one of Eire's most famous authors and satirist?


  • #2


    He used to attack people who entered his room unannounced and walk for aaaages every day. Apparently.

    AOC of course handled crazy person/troll with gentle aplomb.


  • #2


    Black Swan wrote: »
    You're kidding? You have never read Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal or Gulliver's Travels? Probably one of Eire's most famous authors and satirist?

    im aware of the books, but unfortunately ive issues reading, wish i could to be honest, i even have issues with audiobooks


  • #2


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    im aware of the books, but unfortunately ive issues reading, wish i could to be honest, i even have issues with audiobooks
    Hundreds of years ago Jonathan Swift wrote A Modest Proposal that satirically suggested harvesting Irish babies to satisfy British Royal tastes. Swift was poking fun at the Royals, who got quite angry. When this silly "eating babies" reference was made to smear AOC, I was reminded of our historic Irish hero Swift.


  • #2


    Fathom wrote: »
    Technological evolution.

    Happening at a fast pace and this causes problems.


  • #2


    Unless AOC explicitly says "We should eat babies to solve climate change", or anything like as much, then she has not promoted, or endorsed, this idea or policy.


  • #2


    It was a silly low level smear attempt that no one would take seriously, but never-the-less typical of the childish name calling of her opposition.


  • #2


    Black Swan wrote: »
    It was a silly low level smear attempt that no one would take seriously, but never-the-less typical of the childish name calling of her opposition.

    An unfortunate sign of the times. The wild west internet allows these silly fabrications the light of day.


  • #2


    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was the youngest congresswoman in US history, who failed to observe the old congressional protocols to act like a "junior" member, and be seen, but not heard. Her rather provocative congressional actions have made her a household name across the country, much to the chagrin of both long established Republicans, as well as long standing members of her own party. She symbolises the Me-too movement across the pond, signalling potential changes in women's role expectations, which can be threatening to those accustomed to the generally second class status of women in recorded history. Confident and self-actualized men need not worry, and may find her an attractive alternative to the age old status quo, while those feeling insecure may engage in childish men's locker room smears like the topic of this thread.


  • #2
  • #2


    I liked knock down the house on netflix. Just her bits really, started fast-forwarding through a lot of the other segments after a while. She's very genuine, very good at what she does and a good person imo.


  • #2


    Ipso wrote: »
    This Politifact page 1 of 1 is titled "All statements by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez." Are we to believe that AOC has only made a total of 8 statements between Friday, July 6, 2018 through June 21, 2019? At the least, this single page 1 of 1 title and 8 item list was terribly misleading; or worse, a "Pants on fire!" statement by Politifact themselves. These 8 statements did not in the slightest represent the population of "All statements" by AOC during the time period specified by Politifact.

    How were these 8 statements selected by Politifact out of hundreds, perhaps thousands of statements made by AOC during this time period? An n=8 would fail statistical size calculations for her population of statements, as well as to be so small in number as to be statistically meaningless, and not representative of that population of statements. Consequently, no valid or reliable generalisations can be made from this tiny n=8 for AOC. Rather, this very specific selection of 8 statements out of the population appears to be a convenience sample, and such nonrandom and non-representative samples must be viewed with great caution, and having a great potential for selection bias, abnormal skewedness, and distortions of reported results.

    This page 1 of 1 with only 8 statements appears to be GIGO; i.e., Garbage In, Garbage Out.


  • #2


    Black Swan wrote: »
    This Politifact page 1 of 1 is titled "All statements by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez." Are we to believe that AOC has only made a total of 8 statements between Friday, July 6, 2018 through June 21, 2019? At the least, this single page 1 of 1 title and 8 item list was terribly misleading; or worse, a "Pants on fire!" statement by Politifact themselves. These 8 statements did not in the slightest represent the population of "All statements" by AOC during the time period specified by Politifact.

    How were these 8 statements selected by Politifact out of hundreds, perhaps thousands of statements made by AOC during this time period? An n=8 would fail statistical size calculations for her population of statements, as well as to be so small in number as to be statistically meaningless, and not representative of that population of statements. Consequently, no valid or reliable generalisations can be made from this tiny n=8 for AOC. Rather, this very specific selection of 8 statements out of the population appears to be a convenience sample, and such nonrandom and non-representative samples must be viewed with great caution, and having a great potential for selection bias, abnormal skewedness, and distortions of reported results.

    This page 1 of 1 with only 8 statements appears to be GIGO; i.e., Garbage In, Garbage Out.
    Politifact states that its process for selecting claims to fact check include considering whether the statement seems misleading or like it might be wrong. So having eight claims checked isn't intended to suggest that is representative of everything AOC has said. It's just there were only eight claims that they thought sounded questionable.

    So having few claims on it relative to your profile is a good thing.


  • #2


    Politifact states that its process for selecting claims to fact check include considering whether the statement seems misleading or like it might be wrong.
    Then those 8 statements on page 1 of 1 represented a purposive sample; i.e., statements selected for a specific purpose and not intended to be representative of the population of AOC statements during the year time period. Caution should therefore be exercised for potential selection bias.
    So having eight claims checked isn't intended to suggest that is representative of everything AOC has said. It's just there were only eight claims that they thought sounded questionable.

    So having few claims on it relative to your profile is a good thing.
    Unfortunately, there are persons who will cite this one page as evidence that AOC was not a credible person, as may be the case in an earlier post on this thread.


Society & Culture