this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023
175 points (88.2% liked)

politics

19107 readers
3582 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
 

Eric Clapton helped raise $1 million for Democratic candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s presidential campaign at a private fundraiser on Monday night, Kennedy’s campaign announced Tuesday.

Clapton and his band performed at an event, which raised a total of $2.2 million, including $1 million for Kennedy’s campaign and $1.2 million for a political action committee supporting him.

“I am deeply grateful to Eric Clapton for bringing his musical artistry and rebellious spirit to my gathering in Los Angeles last night,” Kennedy said in the press release, which described the Monday night event as a “once-in-a-lifetime musical performance.”

Kennedy’s campaign announced in late August that Clapton would perform at the private fundraiser, which reportedly offered tickets starting at $3,300, up to a maximum of $6,600.

Kennedy and Clapton have both been outspoken about their skepticism of vaccines, which has resulted in fierce blowback from the public.

In the statement Tuesday, Kennedy praised Clapton but did not mention their shared skepticism about COVID-19 vaccines.

“I sometimes think that in our divided society, it is music rather than any kind of intellectual agreement that has the most potential to bring us together again,” Kennedy said in the press release.

“Eric sings from the depths of the human condition. If he sees in me the possibility of bringing unity to our country, it is only possible because artists like him invoke a buried faith in the limitless power of human beings to overcome any obstacle,” he added.

Kennedy is one of two long-shot Democratic presidential bids to challenge incumbent President Biden for the Democratic nomination. While neither Kennedy nor author Marianne Williamson have made any significant headway against the president, Kennedy has been critical of efforts of establishment Democrats to block any serious threat to Biden’s campaign.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hard disagreement there. Clapton wouldn't have the money or draw for political fundraising if people ignored his racist ass and shamed him and those that support him. Giving anti-social people a microphone lets them use it to detriment of society.

Add to that that he has a history of literally expressing his views during his performance.

[–] Tedesche -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So, everyone who buys an Eric Clapton album is supporting his racism? Would you go and tell someone that to their face? Shame them into not doing that? Would you do the same to someone who buys a Harry Potter book these days? Hows about everyone with an iPhone, because of Apple's horrible business practices in China?

It will never end. Blaming people in this way is totally untenable as a practical way of living. I'm sure you don't actually abide by your own principles here, so what really is your point?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

So, everyone who buys an Eric Clapton album is supporting his racism? Would you go and tell someone that to their face? Shame them into not doing that? Would you do the same to someone who buys a Harry Potter book these days? Hows about everyone with an iPhone, because of Apple's horrible business practices in China?

Well...yes. Art is produced by an artist and giving material support to awful people allows them to keep being awful. Pretending otherwise is, I think, nothing but an attempt at self-delusion to avoid cognitive dissonance. Humans are social creatures and social pressures work - look at the pressure on scabs trying to start filming despite the strikes.

For Harry Potter, in particular, there is a lot of racism, xenophobia, and other problematic stuff. So, discouraging people from giving more money to the transphobic hack who is using her influence to harm people is a good thing.

For goods produced with unethical labor standards, yeah. There's a reason that I buy tools from Lee Valley and PCBs from either OSHPark or Aisler. Who you choose to give your money to has a societal impact.

It will never end. Blaming people in this way is totally untenable as a practical way of living.

As long as there are bad actors, no, it won't end. The price of freedom and universal prosperity is eternal vigilance.

I'm sure you don't actually abide by your own principles here, so what really is your point?

I do indeed put in the effort. Am I 100% successful? Fuck no. I'm a human and humans aren't perfect. But, I try to act in a manner that supports ethical producers of art and goods while not supporting those that are just plain awful, and think it's more than fair to expect that others should do so, if it is within their means.