this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2024
696 points (97.8% liked)

politics

18863 readers
3824 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A spokesperson for the Russian government clarified that it has rejected requests to interview Vladimir Putin from reputable media outlets

The Kremlin’s first public response to Tucker Carlson’s announcement that he’s landed an interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin was to fact-check the former Fox News host.

On Wednesday, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov confirmed that Carlson had indeed interviewed Putin, but took issue with Carlson’s claim that “not a single Western journalist has bothered” to interview Russia’s president throughout the nation’s war with Ukraine, which has raged for more than two years.

...

Putin’s refusal to sit down with most Western media outlets likely has less to do with accusations of bias so much as an unwillingness to be subjected to legitimate scrutiny of his government. Russia has been accused of committing atrocities and war crimes in its offensive against Ukraine, including the unlawful executions of civilians. Putin’s government is also infamous for its frequent detainment of political rivals and critics, as well as the cloud of mysterious deaths and poisonings of those in his orbit.

Whether Carlson will question Putin on any of these matters remains to be seen. The former Fox News host’s history of granting softball interviews to controversial influencers, political figures, and authoritarian leaders, indicates this is unlikely. Given everything we know about Putin’s propaganda machine, it’s clear that in Carlson, the Russian government sees a safe opportunity to broadcast its carefully crafted messaging to American viewers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Shiggles 44 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Latinx is not a term used by basically anyone of latin ethnicity. Stop trying to make it happen.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Imo (and my opinion probably doesn't matter as a white man), it's actually more bigoted to ignore the gendered-nature of Spanish and force English language rules onto another culture.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Or at least if they're going to insist anyway go with something like latinae that vaguely follows grammatical rules and is able to be pronounced

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The Latino group I met (college students) said they go with Latinx only because it's the movement that actually gained traction in recognizing the bias.

Now the more important piece they said is how extremely patriarchal Latino communities already are, and it's what they know and we're raised with, so of course "the majority" think it's stupid because the majority are older and Christian and very set in their ways. Similar to so many women stuck in shit marriages because they were raised to think that's their lot in life.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's a fascinating intersectionality issue. The Latino students you met are definitely right about bias and the patriarchy issues. But, it would be incredibly patronizing for someone who isn't Latino to correct someone who is and say they should be using Latinx instead.

I think we have to recognize that unless we're Latino, this isn't our battle. We can help out of course, but it isn't our place to tell them what term they should use. That's something Latinos have to decide on their own, and we use what they ask us to use.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Totally agree! Well said.

I'm just scared that the message "they don't want it. Stop trying" empowers especially white racist people and disenfranchises the youth who are fighting for the change over time (I don't actually know our research how large this movement is. Obviously I still used Latino in my own post). Big right wing media gets their message out that progressives are reverse racist, but the more accurate message you said I think isn't as pervasive, and both sides need to hear it. Especially among minorities who aren't getting representation or getting their voices heard.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

Other thing is, I can't pretend like I'm a cultural expert. When they say it's patriarchal, they might be thinking of completely different examples than me. And the ones I'm thinking of might be benign or have a cultural significance that outweighs anything else. It's better for me to keep my mouth shut on specifics, and let them know I support them and I'll respect whatever terminology they prefer.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

In my head, I pronounce it "luhTinks". I don't know what is intended and I'm pretty sure that's not it, but that only makes it more fun to think of it that way.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

I think the idea is intended as something like "Latin. X.", which isn't really any better, sounds like the monster from a racist 50s B movie or something. La-tinx is where my mind always defaults to too though

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago

~~imo~~ imx

Ftfy

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Latinx comes from students from Columbia or something. It's a Latin American term.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

You are so clearly well read on the topic that you cannot spell the name of a country you are accusing of creating the term. It was Pero Rico scholars that counted the term, and this it is a creation of the USA.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I don't understand what you're trying to say. I spelled a country's name wrong? Ok.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Colombia is a country in South America. Columbia is not.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You are so clearly well read on the topic that you cannot spell the name of a country you are accusing of creating the term. It was Pero Rico scholars that counted the term, and this it is a creation of the USA.

Did you mean Puerto Rico…?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

It's not even an English language rule.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago

And the even dumber part is we already had a way to express the same info with just saying latin

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Latinx was invented by latin ethnicities. Just listen to people when they say what they want to be called, it probably isn't Latinx but it might be.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I do listen to people, and most fucking hate latinx. Maybe you are the one with your ears plugged... One latino person does not speak for all latinos. That's not how race works. That's not how it has ever worked.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Exactly, one person doesn't speak for everyone. Ignore people who say "latins don't like Latinx" because they don't speak for everyone and it's a Latin American term anyways. Listen to those around you and you'll know what to use. We're in agreement.