Quote :

"have any libertarians explained why ron paul's tweet wasn't insanely racist or nah?"

The cartoon is unambiguously racist.

I have a tough time believing that Ron Paul looked at the cartoon, processed the image, and thought, "yeah, this should be fine." I also have a hard time believing that any intern could look at this and think it's acceptable.

This is the sort of cartoon that you want to keep in the confines of the Republican/libertarian racist enclaves where we refine our advanced dog whistling strategy. As soon as you put this shit out in the open, everyone knows what we're really about and we go back to square one.

7/2/2018 6:57:12 PM

Yeah, I mean who among us hasn't accidentally authored a racust tweet

7/3/2018 7:09:04 AM

I really don't get that tweet though. Why post it? I don't see how that could have been an accident, but I also don't see how anyone in their right mind looked at it and thought it would be a good idea.

Could it have been sabotage on the part of someone in the Ron Paul campaign who's pissed at something?

Even if Ron Paul and his entire staff are closet racists, Jesus that cartoon is bad press.

7/3/2018 9:18:27 AM

Not in Trump's America it isn't. Just riles up the left, which keeps the right engaged to keep the militant hate-mongering socialist liberals at bay.

7/3/2018 9:58:20 AM

#secondcivilwarletters are great

7/3/2018 10:12:49 AM

Quote :

"Could it have been sabotage"

Is this a serious question?

7/3/2018 11:19:18 AM

Sadly, yes.

7/3/2018 11:27:09 AM

Quote :

"I really don't get that tweet though. Why post it? "

Maybe because he's an old white dude who has racist tendencies and feels empowered to raise his racist flag high because a bigoted racist xenophobe was elected as POTUS by the American People and said POTUS continues to do racist shit every fucking day and his stupid base eats it up every fucking day which further empowers other racist white dudes with platforms to share similar racist opinions for all to see? Maybe that's it?

7/3/2018 11:42:26 AM

Great, that sounds like an even-handed explanation.

I'm not asking anyone to agree with the guy. Ron Paul is probably becoming senile and not suited to manage any kind of organization at this point, but if you think he looked at the cartoon and said "hey, a Jew, black guy, and an Asian are the ones being portrayed here, I'm sure this won't hurt my reputation", then I don't know what to tell you.

7/3/2018 11:55:23 AM

Quote :

"Great, that sounds like an even-handed explanation."

It's just a guess...

7/3/2018 12:15:07 PM

funny how he keeps making those same lapses in judgement, or has people around him who keep doing that.


Or........maybe libertarianism as an ideology and the fascination with preserving private property has always been a vehicle for people who hold these latent racial biases and who just wanted an intellectual framework to preserve existing racial hierarchies


Turns out the guy who was against the civil right's act might actually not be great on issues of equality


[Edited on July 3, 2018 at 12:56 PM. Reason : ]

7/3/2018 12:35:45 PM

Quote :

"Quote : "Could it have been sabotage" Is this a serious question? "

I just find it hard to believe that someone would wreck their reputation with such forceful purpose.

7/3/2018 1:01:12 PM

His son did that for him long ago.

7/3/2018 1:03:34 PM

how many more “I just find it hard to believe that“‘s will it take before some realize that their party is chock full of racists?

7/3/2018 3:16:56 PM

The hits keep coming: https://trib.al/VdfFwkQ

Quote :

"Kristin Mink was having lunch with her toddler in Washington, D.C., when she noticed who was sitting three tables over: EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt..."

7/3/2018 3:47:50 PM

Have you ever heard the tragedy of Alan Dershowitz in Martha's Vineyard?

7/3/2018 4:04:53 PM

Quote :

"Or........maybe libertarianism as an ideology and the fascination with preserving private property has always been a vehicle for people who hold these latent racial biases and who just wanted an intellectual framework to preserve existing racial hierarchies"

Maybe socialism/communism/""""anarchism"""", as ideologies, are just ways for people that don't like working and don't actually have any capacity - intellectually or emotionally - to produce meaningful contributions that other people in the world will enjoy, and so the next best thing is to create a framework that glorifies victimhood and stealing. Maybe this whole paragraph is just one big ad hominem to express my belief that leftists are degenerate losers, effectively otherizing them and shutting down debate.

Or maybe there's some nuance to this stuff and people come to different conclusions in different ways, and maybe it's not good for me to use the least charitable explanation possible when attempting to understand other people and where they're coming from.

7/3/2018 5:03:34 PM

Quote :

"Maybe this whole paragraph is just one big ad hominem to express my belief that leftists are degenerate losers, effectively otherizing them and shutting down debate."

Except you don't just stop your smear at leftists. You apply that same outlook toward co-workers, who you think are lazy sacks of shit. And you think that you belong to some sort of "elite" group and therefore don't need collective representation. This is an ideology that opens you up to accepting social hierarchies as "natural" or "deserved," or somehow necessary to save "western culture". This inevitably aligns you with people like Ron fucking Paul who posts literal nazi and confederate propaganda. If you actually believed in "liberty," you would want to break down these hierarchies, not defend them.

7/3/2018 5:58:42 PM

Quote :

"Except you don't just stop your smear at leftists. You apply that same outlook toward co-workers, who you think are lazy sacks of shit. And you think that you belong to some sort of "elite" group and therefore don't need collective representation. "

I don't think that way of co-workers at all (at least in the past when I've had co-workers) - unless they are actually lazy, which some of them have been. I've also worked with people that were just plain dumb and people that were geniuses. I've also seen industriousness vary independently from apparent intelligence.

Something socialists don't seem to understand or grapple with at least, is the Pareto principle (80/20 rule), e.g. 80% of the output is produced by 20% of the people. Anyone that has ever had a real job that involves real skills should be able to acknowledge this principle. Not all employees are created equal - some workers really are better. The desire to flatten that hierarchy and just pay everyone equally for what is not the same amount of work is not something that the high productivity worker is likely to support.

7/3/2018 6:27:29 PM

Ron Paul is a kook and sucks. That is not a valid indictment of libertarianism as an ideology.

7/3/2018 6:28:17 PM

Quote :

"socialists don't seem to understand or grapple with at least, is the Pareto principle (80/20 rule), e.g. 80% of the output is produced by 20% of the people. Anyone that has ever had a real job that involves real skills should be able to acknowledge this principle. Not all employees are created equal - some workers really are better"

Let's set aside that this lays the groundwork for open discrimination (that 20% of people should rule over the other 80% because they're just better or more deserving). But guess what? The person who benefits the most from your overproduction of labor is not your co-worker. It's your boss. This is the workplace hierarchy that you should be challenging, not the micro one that exists between you and your co-worker. Your boss's entire lifestyle is subsidized from your (and your co-workers) uncompensated labor


[Edited on July 3, 2018 at 6:52 PM. Reason : ]

7/3/2018 6:47:16 PM

Quote :

"Let's set aside that this lays the groundwork for open discrimination (that 20% of people should rule over the other 80% because they're just better or more deserving)."

I'm not saying they should rule, I'm saying they shouldn't be paid the same.

Even the purest communist alive wants the best possible heart surgeon. They don't want the guy that cheated his way through school and can't be bothered to learn about the latest techniques - they want an elite surgeon. The market rewards competence which implies a hierarchy. Everyone agrees that this is desirable, even the people that are the least competent.

Quote :

"The person who benefits the most from your overproduction of labor is not your co-worker. It's your boss. This is the workplace hierarchy that you should be challenging, not the micro one that exists between you and your co-worker. Your boss's entire lifestyle is subsidized from your (and your co-workers) uncompensated labor"

I don't have a boss. You don't have to work for anyone (except the government, of course). So, I did challenge the hierarchy...by quitting my job and figuring out another way to make money that would better reward productivity. Maybe socialist activists should prioritize entrepreneurship and sustainable, worker-owner businesses instead of shitting on all markets and "work" in general.

7/3/2018 7:15:02 PM

Quote :

"The market rewards competence which implies a hierarchy"

lololol......Donald Trump is the head of a real estate empire. Ain't nobody in the world gonna convince me its because that motherfucker is competent.

Quote :

"You don't have to work for anyone"

Yes you do, if you are born at the bottom of a social hierarchy. You can either choose to work or you can choose to starve. That's not a choice. If you don't have capital, the only thing you can offer is your labor. The rest of your post is a justification of this system that rewards those with access to capital (regardless of merit) and the rest just uh...need bootstraps, I guess.

Again, you would be way cooler if you were an anarchist

7/3/2018 7:21:10 PM

did everyone make it through the 2nd civil war? any casualties?

7/5/2018 9:06:25 AM

Quote :

"The hits keep coming: https://trib.al/VdfFwkQ"

I guess that was the last straw?

7/5/2018 5:05:54 PM

^^ I think Soros’ long game got Jim Jordan but that would mean an assumption that sexual abuse is a disqualifying thing in the GOP.

7/5/2018 9:34:11 PM

^^ probably. fuck that guy.

the sad part is they'll replace him with someone who is equally destructive without all the stupid scandals to shine a light on his/her destructiveness.

7/5/2018 10:13:01 PM

Quote :

"funny how he keepsmaking those same lapses in judgement, or has people around him who keep doing that. Or........maybe libertarianism as an ideology and the fascination with preserving private property has always been a vehicle for people who hold these latent racial biases and who just wanted an intellectual framework to preserve existing racial hierarchies Turns out the guy who was against the civil right's act might actually not be great on issues of equality"

I think that Ron Paul is a kook, but I find it hard to see him as a racist. That said, there is a trend of things that suggest he at least has an ongoing stream of racists in his midst. I don’t find that hard to believe. I don’t think that libertarianism has any affinity for racism, but I do think that there is a certain minority of those who, if not true libertarians (whatever that means), at least harbor deep suspicion of the government and in particular resent government action against their racist views, which libertarianism broadly is not hostile to in the sense of taking direct action. Rights often are in conflict; that’s largley what SCOTUS spends its time resolving—and when they are, libertarianism often errs in their side of government staying out of it, irrespective of what right and wrong is.

So, in short, even as a registered (L), I’m not much of a fan of Ron Paul and am agreeing with a lot of what you’re saying, but not as an indictment of broader libertarianism or even that Paul specifically is a racist, or even that his opposition to the Civil Rights Act—correct or incorrect—constitutes a racist position.

[Edited on July 6, 2018 at 12:36 AM. Reason : I’m a very centrist, pragmatic, non-ideologue (L)...the rarest of political creatures, haha]

7/6/2018 12:32:07 AM

Quote :

" think that Ron Paul is a kook, but I find it hard to see him as a racist. That said, there is a trend of things that suggest he at least has an ongoing stream of racists in his midst."

So your position is the man is not responsible for his own tweets? Share your data plz.

Quote :

" I don’t think that libertarianism has any affinity for racism, but I do think that there is a certain minority of those who, if not true libertarians (whatever that means), at least harbor deep suspicion of the government and in particular resent government action against their racist views,"

That looks like a pretty uncomfortable pretzal you've bent yourself into. There are actual racists out there. It's ok to call them out for that stupidity. We don't need to cloak their ingornance with the shield of "government is bad"

Quote :

"his opposition to the Civil Rights Act"

Is wildly inexcusable, especially with 50+ years of data to consider. It's great to be principled. It's dumb to sacrifice facts at that altar.

7/6/2018 12:55:26 AM

Quote :

"So your position is the man is not responsible for his own tweets?"

No, he's absolutely responsible for his own tweets. The buck stops with Ron Paul for Ron Paul's tweets. I'm not even saying he's definitely not racist. I just find it more likely that racists are attracted to him, and he has not, on an ongoing basis--not just now, done a sufficient job of rooting them out and making them unwelcome (as opposed to him being a racist himself). I have no data, it's just my gut feeling, for whatever that's worth.

Quote :

"That looks like a pretty uncomfortable pretzal you've bent yourself into. There are actual racists out there. It's ok to call them out for that stupidity. We don't need to cloak their ingornance with the shield of "government is bad""

Dude, I'm very much aware of actual racists. If you'd seen where I grew up...hahahaha. I remember a dude down the road talking about MLK day when I was a kid, who said "I think we oughta kill 4 more niggers and take the whole week off." My granddad was very much an outright, bigoted racist. He pulled my dad out of public school when schools were integrated, put him in a little fundamentalist school, and he had the son of a KKK Grand Wizard in his graduating class of 20 people or whatever. I remember farmhands who lived in shacks less than a half-mile down the road who were...maybe not like slaves, but for all practical purposes, pretty much indentured servants. For God's sake, I've lived 8 years of my life now 20 minutes from the Alabama state line. I am acutely aware that racism is not just some abstract phenomenon.

I am not cloaking them with "government is bad." Just the opposite. I am saying that racism is antithetical to libertarianism, but that racists find relatively safe harbor within some corners of the libertarian tent, due to the ideology often loathing government action more than it loathes wrongdoing. You've gotta draw the line somewhere, and Libertarians in general are often guilty of being puritanical ideologues in the face of what ought to be common sense, or at the very least being so concerned with being coherence and not setting bad precedent, that they--through sins of omission--set even worse precedents. It's the whole positive vs negative liberty, but that's a whole new thread.

Quote :

"Is wildly inexcusable, especially with 50+ years of data to consider. It's great to be principled. It's dumb to sacrifice facts at that altar."

I think we're largely saying the same thing. I would stop short of "wildly inexcusable"; I think there's a valid argument there, and I think that in 2018, their argument that market forces could regulate it sufficiently might hold more water than it would have in 1964. I don't even have a problem with outlawing discrimination based on race, even by private entities, so much as I dislike having protected classes. That said, I also think it's dumb to sacrifice facts at that alter; I'm a pragmatist above all else and am somewhat more comfortable with making my best judgment on individual cases, even if it lacks perfect ideological coherence. That's a pretty near impossible goal.

7/6/2018 1:35:34 AM

Quote :

"I am saying that racism is antithetical to libertarianism, but that racists find relatively safe harbor within some corners of the libertarian tent, due to the ideology often loathing government action more than it loathes wrongdoing. You've gotta draw the line somewhere, and Libertarians in general are often guilty of being puritanical ideologues in the face of what ought to be common sense, or at the very least being so concerned with being coherence and not setting bad precedent, that they--through sins of omission--set even worse precedents. It's the whole positive vs negative liberty, but that's a whole new thread."

I know I keep saying it (mostly to be an ass to destroyer, who I find dull yet tedious), but I actually do mean it: Anarchism as a political thought is probably more in line with your ideals of upholding individual liberty than American Libertarianism. It would actually benefit the "old farmhands" who are basically wage slaves to the landowners whom they work for the most. And as a political ideology, it seeks to break down societal hierarchies such as religion, racism, sexism, government, etc. But you'd have to let go of the one thing that American Libertarian's obsess over: The love of private property. This is the bug-a-boo that Libertarian's can't shake, which is what attracts racist sentiment (because who does the land-owning class mostly consist of? Rich whites.) The writings of Emma Goldman might interest you more than you might think.

One of her more famous quotes is pretty goddamn gangster:

Quote :

"“Ask for work. If they don't give you work, ask for bread. If they do not give you work or bread, then take bread.”"

----



Annyyyywaaaayyy.....We're going to be hearing some pretty gut-wrenching stories about survivors of this child separation policy soon.

Quote :

"— Olivia Caceres was separated from her 1-year-old son in November at a legal point of entry. The boy’s father, who was seeking asylum, remains detained, Caceres said. It took three months for Caceres to get her son back from government custody. According to her testimony, she said that after reuniting with her toddler, “he continued to cry when we got home and would hold on to my leg and would not let me go. When I took off his clothes he was full of dirt and lice. It seemed like they had not bathed him the 85 days he was away from us.”"

tl;dr: Infants and toddlers are being left on their own for months without basic hygiene and are going to end up getting diseases.



https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/my-son-is-not-the-same-new-testimony-paints-bleak-picture-of-family-separation

7/6/2018 3:49:17 AM

those toddlers are allowed to represent themselves in court, they have due process!
https://www.texastribune.org/2018/06/27/immigrant-toddlers-ordered-appear-court-alone/
https://www.thecut.com/2018/06/toddlers-ordered-to-appear-in-immigration-court-alone.html

7/6/2018 8:38:51 AM

This one is for all the GOP defenders still out there, listen to the cheers. They are fucked in the head.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QXPFI1bhzk

7/6/2018 10:37:04 AM

(If they’re still defending the GOP, they can’t be reached.)

7/6/2018 10:55:37 AM

he was so pleased with himself

7/6/2018 11:39:08 AM

https://www.tpusa.com/hsls2018/

Pretty good list of speakers tbh.

[Edited on July 6, 2018 at 6:17 PM. Reason : Diap up and get after it]

7/6/2018 6:17:15 PM

[Edited on July 6, 2018 at 6:21 PM. Reason : "Diap up and get after it" loled]

7/6/2018 6:20:34 PM

Quote :

"I’m a very centrist, pragmatic, non-ideologue (L)...the rarest of political creatures, haha"

Pragmatic enough to vote for all democrats at the federal level in November?

7/7/2018 9:10:45 AM

i was planning on doing a lot of "D" voting, but now that the party keeps hurtling left, we'll see. I need to read up on what my choices are like.

but yeah, i'm definitely hoping the Dems gain ground.

7/7/2018 7:32:57 PM

yeah god forbid we provide everyone healthcare and stop killing middle eastern civilians

7/7/2018 9:42:43 PM

Quote :

"i was planning on doing a lot of "D" voting, but now that the party keeps hurtling left, "

I was planning on voting D....but only if they make no attempt to intact their stated principles.

....but only if they cater first to the highest donor

...but only if they resist Trump with wagging fingers and no real action

7/7/2018 10:45:41 PM

Centrism, for the next few election cycles, is basically dead

Trump won by pulling in non voters with white identity populism

White people are the majority group so there’s lots of these people around to be picked off

Voting non-whites shifted heavily democratic after Bush, there’s not much turnout to mine here

The remaining group left for boosting turn out is the people motivated by a message of “socialism”, and this is inherently going to drag more communists out

However this is going to be a good thing for Democrats because there’s a HUGE gulf between mainstream DNC/Hillary/obama policies and actual socialist/communist policies. So the more communists that come out, the more people are going to see democrats aren’t actually “socialists” like the GOP has been screeching about, and democrats will get both left-leaning centrists and far left socialists.

This is sort of how the GOP works now, they get both evangelical nut jobs and the libertarian types, which are groups that should hate each other.

7/8/2018 5:15:51 AM

I'll agree with most of that. I just hope it's only dead for the next few cycles, and our country isn't permanently fucked, on an irrevocable slide. Even if not, I have dim hopes for me personally ever not being politically homeless in America--even if the GOP turned into the party of Jon Huntsman somehow...man, I'd have a really hard time accepting people who had been waving Trump signs a decade earlier as part of "my team." It's so indicative of such deep lack of judgment and critical thinking, not to mention morals and ethics, that I don't know how much I can let that slide going forward. Like, you have to be fundamentally fucked up to the core to be a Trump true-believer, let alone a superfan.

HRC/President Obama/etc are dirty commies. That others are worse doesn't make them "good." It's just that HRC was a competent evil that we could recover from like we have many times before, whereas Trump is utterly incompetent and somehow even more disgusting both in policies and the necrosis behind them.

7/8/2018 11:20:09 AM

Quote :

"HRC/President Obama/etc are dirty commies"

you can't be serious dude

7/8/2018 11:31:34 AM

Quote :

"I am not cloaking them with "government is bad." Just the opposite. I am saying that racism is antithetical to libertarianism, but that racists find relatively safe harbor within some corners of the libertarian tent, due to the ideology often loathing government action more than it loathes wrongdoing. You've gotta draw the line somewhere, and Libertarians in general are often guilty of being puritanical ideologues in the face of what ought to be common sense, or at the very least being so concerned with being coherence and not setting bad precedent, that they--through sins of omission--set even worse precedents. It's the whole positive vs negative liberty, but that's a whole new thread. "

Maybe you aren't, but as you pointed out your very own post, plenty of libertarians have a very "I got mine, good luck with getting yours, now leave me the fuck alone attitude." I have an uncle who's a diehard libertarian (he's a self proclaimed gun nut too) that makes all kinds of racist comments, but then he pats himself on the back for having one black friend- as if it excuses/erases his racist tendencies. He honestly thinks he's not a racist and it genuinely bothers him when people insinuate/hint at his overt prejudice- as if it's an unfounded personal attack on him, like calling him stupid/lazy/selfish/whatever. The problem with racists is that so many of them are in deep denial about what being a racist actually means. You don't have to spew racial slurs at the grocery store, tell racist jokes in public, or even write racist diatribes on the internet to be a racist. A huge portion of it doesn't even stem from one's actions; it's the thoughts themselves that are the larger issue. Ironically, it's a similar side of the coin for so many Christians, who pride themselves on having deep and profound "Christian Values/beliefs" yet they do jack shit in the world to practice the teachings of Christ. See: ZERO pro-lifers getting up in arms about baby jails, while still devoting time to shame people in line at the abortion clinic.

[Edited on July 8, 2018 at 12:19 PM. Reason : .]

7/8/2018 12:18:08 PM

I agree with all of that except:

-that the "leave me the fuck alone" attitude is bad, or that it is necessarily related to racism in any way, which was the whole point of my previous statement,

and

-I wouldn't say that ZERO pro-lifers got up-in-arms about "baby jails." I'm generally unsympathetic to the religious right, and there's a broader issue with their mind-blowing hypocrisy with being complicit at best and often supportive of Trump, but to the insufficient extent that Trump gets GOP pushback for the worst of his policies against immigrants and refugees, it is largely from the religious-right types (the remnants of the business wing are also resistant, but they're not as fervent--they're more adamant about tax and regulatory policy).

7/8/2018 12:53:38 PM

^^^right?

If Obama was a commie he'd have pushed for Medicare for all/single payer. Obamacare is about as capitalist as it gets. The subsidies go straight to the insurance companies.

7/8/2018 1:36:19 PM

Quote :

"See: ZERO pro-lifers getting up in arms about baby jails, while still devoting time to shame people in line at the abortion clinic."

there were plenty of pro-lifers who were vocal against baby jails

7/8/2018 1:54:50 PM

Duke, I'm just wondering what far left policies you're worried about that democratic socialists might support?

7/8/2018 2:26:27 PM

Quote :

"I agree with all of that except: -that the "leave me the fuck alone" attitude is bad, or that it is necessarily related to racism in any way, which was the whole point of my previous statement, and -I wouldn't say that ZERO pro-lifers got up-in-arms about "baby jails." I'm generally unsympathetic to the religious right, and there's a broader issue with their mind-blowing hypocrisy with being complicit at best and often supportive of Trump, but to the insufficient extent that Trump gets GOP pushback for the worst of his policies against immigrants and refugees, it is largely from the religious-right types (the remnants of the business wing are also resistant, but they're not as fervent--they're more adamant about tax and regulatory policy)."

1. At the very least, this type of attitude can seem short-sighted, given that it has helped to create some of the widest income inequality in America since the 1920s. Maybe my bleeding liberal heart is showing, but I don't think it's 'good' that basic things like housing/education/healthcare are prohibitively expensive for a huge percentage of Americans- especially when the preceding generations were arguably less skilled/educated and they've left a pretty big mess for their kids and grandkids to sort out on their own. Also, advocating for personal responsibility doesn't present an either/or dilemma where one's only options are to be self-reliant, or to have a communist country where everyone is miserable and poor. We probably won't agree on what extent society and the government should have in taking care of its most vulnerable members (ie the uneducated, the disabled, the poor, the oppressed, etc), but I would hope that you would at least consider the notion that simply ignoring these folks isn't going to make them and their expensive 'problems' completely disappear. I won't get into the inverse hypothetical where everyone gets 'everything for free' ala the overblown Scandinavian utopian myth, because that's another can of worms that's moving fast and far away from the original discussion (libertarianism and racism)

2. Yeah, ZERO is factually incorrect and even if I was being hyperbolic/dramatic. AND FWIW, I wasn't really talking about libertarians anyway (at least in the context of baby jails vs. abortions), since they're typically the first to not give a shit about what people do in their personal lives (again, abortions). But I will point out that "live and let live" isn't quite the same thing as "I got mine, good luck, and fuck off." There are definitely some pro-lifers who have remained consistent in their steadfast aims to protect children in a variety of situations- so glad somebody is thinking of them!!!. But my hunches tell me that these people probably aren't picketing abortion clinics for part of the day and heading off to a rally to decry baby jails later. Shame on me for stereotyping the religious right!

Worth reading (even if it's a pinko commie NYT opinion fluff piece)
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/06/16/opinion/sunday/pro-life-immigrant-children-separation.html

Quote :

"In standing by President Trump and his administration — and, indeed, in now honoring him as their standard-bearer — traditional pro-life leaders have put short-term and uncertain political gain ahead of consistent moral principle. Because of their support of the president and general silence on his administration’s actions, the major players in the pro-life movement are now tethered to his horrific border policies. This presents a real threat to the broader movement’s capacity to be taken seriously by young people and people of color. The silence on the border policies is not a simple question of groups keeping a focus solely on abortion. Many pro-life organizations also do extensive work opposing euthanasia. There is nothing in principle compelling such organizations to ignore anti-life and anti-family border policies. If the traditional pro-life movement is to regain credibility as something other than a tool of the Trump administration, it must speak out clearly and forcefully against harming innocent children as a means of deterring undocumented immigration. These groups have extraordinary access and influence in the White House. They have to use it. "

7/8/2018 7:25:57 PM