Hillary Clinton: Classic or Dud?

yeah id prob skip the intro

in the words of the Democratic candidate and her close associates

but speaking of disgusting

"But her slaves!"

I was wondering when that was gonna cross over

idgi

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/06/the-clintons-had-slaves

Slaves make license plates. Slaves sew products for third-party companies. Slaves cook for other slaves.

The Hillary-Bernie online camp battles get more annoying by the day (even with her mini-comeback tour I don't think she'd run in 2020) but the way she wrote about that is pretty horrifying.

WHO GIVES A FUCK

the Clintons used slave labor when he was governor of Arkansas and his wife was tone deaf about it? Fuck I'm glad to hear this is blowing up on twitter I thought I would have to think about some actual politics shit today

Thank god we didn't elect this woman amirite fellas

Without clicking on that can I just check what slave means in that article pls

Unpaid prison labour, see also that handy loophole in the 13th amendment

If you just want to read the excerpt without the commentary, it can be found here https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DBp4hQYVoAER0g8.jpg

there was also something about a country club they used to golf at too

It's wrong to keep throwing around the word "slave" in reference to this.

Though if you want to go ahead and talk about how Mike Huckabee "freed a slave" and then the "former slave" went to Washington and killed a bunch of cops, go right ahead. At least you'll sound consistent.

it's a more honest way to talk about the prison industrial complex than is generally done imho

WHO GIVES A FUCK

― El Tomboto, Thursday, June 8, 2017 3:47 AM (four hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

LALALALALA

What? You mean we almost elected a racist as president?

Whew! Way to dodge a bullet there USA

It would be great if this was a part of establishing a more honest way to talk about the prison industrial complex, but I suspect it's just a way to shit on Clinton again, and many of the people outraged will be laughing at the new season of Orange is the New Black tomorrow.

I don't care about the excerpt, but the logic/morality pretzels being thrown out there in her defense over it are depressing. Take the L, people.

and yeah obviously this is just one small anecdote indicating a much, much broader issue

I don't think it's that hard to defend her, honestly. It was tradition, and she wasn't the governor so it wasn't her call. There.

to do something would have been a huge inconvenience to them

It's obviously horrific, and if it brings attention to the horror, good, and the Clintons clearly played their part in a horrific system. But are anyone surprised? I've never been to Arkansas, but it strikes me as exactly the kind of thing I would expect to happen in Arkansas, and we've always known Bill Clinton was the governor of Arkansas. So...

It's just fairly typical that this was posted in the thread about Hillary Clinton, and not a thread about race or the prison system or anything else.

Simon OTM.

what would be surprising is if they weren't acquainted w Trump at all during their early 90s real estate golfing with rich people heyday

It was tradition, and she wasn't the governor so it wasn't her call.

She was married to the governor. Do you not think she could have done anything about it if she'd cared to?

Sure. Eleanor Roosevelt passed and signed an anti-lynching law singlehandedly.

I kinda don't think it's a particularly good thing to criticize women for the decisions of their husbands. At the end of the day, it wasn't her call.

She is still implicated in the system, sure, but the guilt of Hillary Clinton is not the main issue here.

she's being criticized more (that I've seen) for the language she used in discussing it than for Bill's role in perpetuating it.

I agree that attacking anyone through their spouse (or any other family member) is below the belt.

she's being criticized more (that I've seen) for the language she used in discussing it than for Bill's role in perpetuating it.

― a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.), 8. juni 2017 18:28 (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Link? What I've seen is mostly 'They owned slaves' and only based on a single excerpt taken out of context. I would love to know why she's even writing about it, it seems to build to a point. For those who don't know, btw, the book is It Takes a Village from 1996.

I don't use twitter at work if I can help it but the first people I saw posting about it were pretty squarely focused on the excerpt and its tone. Since then, yes, there's been plenty of "they owned slaves!" shitposting, but such is the nature of Twitter.

i suspect people on both sides of this issue are going to be making arguments in less than good faith -- "who cares" basically means let's focus on other things here -- but actually excusing the practice and clinton's actions seems...very bad

What actions?

i'm cool w/discussing the reasons why hillary lost, only bc it's interesting to look back at what went wrong strategically and demographically and all, but as far as why the clintons are bad, i mean at this point i just don't want to talk about them as people anymore. though maybe we can't have one w/o the other, idk.

What actions?

― Frederik B, Thursday, June 8, 2017 1:02 PM (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the actually having a slave thing

Unpaid prison labor meets the definition of "involuntary servitude", but it sure as fuck doesn't meet the definition of "slavery". As bad as unpaid prison labor is, equating it with slavery belittles the absolute injustice of slavery, in which innocent people become the property of someone else, who is privileged to abuse them or dispose of them however they see fit.

It really sucks that convicted murderers had to leave the prison workshops for cushy jobs in a mansion.

nice man

saying you'd rather not think about it because we should focus on trump is one thing. finding ways to defend the prison industrial complex is another!

Unpaid prison labor meets the definition of "involuntary servitude", but it sure as fuck doesn't meet the definition of "slavery". As bad as unpaid prison labor is, equating it with slavery belittles the absolute injustice of slavery, in which innocent people become the property of someone else, who is privileged to abuse them or dispose of them however they see fit.

It seems to fit into the definition of "modern slavery" from the US State Dept here and UNESCO here.

saying you'd rather not think about it because we should focus on trump is one thing. finding ways to defend the prison industrial complex is another!

― k3vin k., 8. juni 2017 19:28 (two minutes ago) BookmarkFlag Post Permalink

Nobody here does either.

It really sucks that convicted murderers had to leave the prison workshops for cushy jobs in a mansion.

So long as they didn't step out of line and get "sent back."

note: the criticism I've seen really focused on the way she gleefully wrote about that part.

'gleefully'... At this point you're just making things up.

I checked Sund4r's State Dept. link defining "modern slavery" and the best fit was:

Forced labor, sometimes also referred to as labor trafficking, encompasses the range of activities – recruiting, harboring, transporting, providing, or obtaining – involved when a person uses force or physical threats, psychological coercion, abuse of the legal process, deception, or other coercive means to compel someone to work.

This definitely fits if the prisoners are threatened, beaten, or specifically punished for refusal to participate in the unpaid labor they are asked to perform. However, a prisoner (at least theoretically) has recourse to the court system to challenge this coercion and their lawyer could cite the State Department's definition as part of their case.

I don't know enough detail about Arkansas' penal system to know if it really fits that definition or not. I'm sure it treads awfully close to that line, but if obvious coercion is baked into the system, I can't see how it hasn't been effectively challenged in court.