Judge orders restoration of Voice of America
apnews.com
apnews.com
"One more victory over Trump and we are completely done for!"
territory.
Despite the naive optimism of liberals like Michelle Obama saying “this is not who we are”, what you are seeing now is who this country has always been.
This is not who we have historically been. Hence why gerrymandering is an issue today, because they are doing it today. But we have to put in the work to challenge the assholes. The world will always have assholes I don't think giving up/burning it all down and hoping they then magically go away is a political philosophy. The current Republican 'dixiecrats' are an extension of their traitor ancestors that WANT to burn it all down. Seems idiotic to help them in their goal. Fuck these loser traitors I'm keeping my country.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Kjah99E1fIo
Edit because I'm throttled:
You completely jumped talking points.
Gerrymandering is an issue today, meaning it is a new issue, that we need to fight, today.
But I got it. You think/see America as irredeemable. I see us as constantly improving things, and don't see how a different country name/system of government would change/fix the horrible things you bring up, or make the worse elements of our society better. I have seen an America that fought to remove the cancer of slavery. That is ashamed of the internment camps. The doesn't give af about interracial marriage. And that America has been steadily winning WHEN PEOPLE FOUGHT FOR IT. But maybe you are right. Destroy the USA, change the name to 'Super Friendly Nice Perfect Land', get rid of democracy, and maybe racists will stop being racist.
Looks like you are a surgeon. You would know we have many Jewish hospitals because Jewish people weren't allowed to be doctors. So Jewish people worked around that and changed things. Our system allows for improvement. There is no indication a random new one will. I have seen videos of Muslims talking about how they won't allow Jewish doctors to treat their kids, so yes, things can go backwards. Doesn't mean we give up. We need to challenge backwards people and backwards thought, not give up because they suck.
You basically support the policy of the crappy 'dixiecrats' that run the Republican party, whose ancestors have been anti-America since they started then lost the civil war of burn it all down.
Edit2: Again, you see America as irredeemable because there are crappy people in the country and because historically people were much crappier than today. I see America as one of the best tools in history for changing things to the better. You aren't going to make me give up/think a name change/rebrand will actually change the issues you have. I think America is the best way to resolve it. How recently were Irish/English killing eachother/hating eachother. 1990s? People love to hate others. You just keep listing 'people suck' as 'America sucks' as if somehow a rebrand/name change will change your complaints. Lots of people just generally suck. We Americans work to improve that. I can see how Black people have given up on it. But I don't see how that is productive for you long term/gives you better results. Better results would be to do what Jews who wanted to be doctors did, bypass the assholes, freeze them out. That is the dixiecrats anger today, they can see they are being left behind. And you want to just give in to them because???
Thank you for responding. It's good to understand you support/promote doomerism because you think the US is just irredeemable as a nation. I always just assume it's someone frustrated with things. Interesting to hear from someone who really thinks destroying it all is a better solution and that we aren't redeemable as a nation.
Final edit I promise. Read my history and you will see I am very against the American justice system. If you look closely you will see I have fallen from the top to the bottom. In that time I have been physically abused by officers and seen how broken the justice system is. I've made friends who were amazing people who never had a chance from day 1 simply because of their race, who opened my eyes to a lot. I have my own personal reasons to hate aspects of this country, but I still think the best option is to work within the system to improve it. I still think this is not who we are. Glad you aren't racist to you daughter in law. My dad didn't pass my mom's parents whiteness test and that sucked.
“This is not who we have historically been.”
Should I start with slavery? Japanese internment camps? Legalized segregation that my still living parents grew up in? Sundown towns that still existed until the 1990s (see Oprah visits Forsyth county)? Laws against interracial marriage? Laws “protecting the sanctity of marriage” because God forbid a same sex couple gets married? How the justice system today still statistically gives harsher penalties to minorities for the same facts? The continued demonization of foreigners and LGBT?
There were places in the south that held their first integrated prom in 2013.
If you have 10 friends and ask them where they want to eat and 6 say let’s go to this nice Mexican restaurant and the other 4 say “let’s kill Bob and eat him”, you still have a shitty group of friends.
> “But I got it. You think/see America as irredeemable. I see us as constantly improving things.”
So tell me how things are better today in 2026 for immigrants than they were a decade ago? Minorities? LGBT? Hell even rural White America who continues to vote against their own interests as long as they can “own the libs”, see the President abuse brown people, and bring God into the school?
> The doesn't give af about interracial marriage.
My (Black) son is engaged to a white woman. You damn sure better believe that people still care. Me personally? I love her to death.
But for a less anecdotal answer.
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/05/18/2-publi...
> That is ashamed of the internment camps.
What do you call what ICE is doing right now?
> I have seen an America that fought to remove the cancer of slavery
Four states still officially consider “Confederate Memorial Day” a state holiday and two others combine MLK and Confederate Memorial Day.
> Like I said, you basically support the policy of the crappy 'dixiecrats' that run the Republican party, whose ancestors have been anti-America since they started then lost the civil war.
They weren’t “anti-American” at all. They fought for the America that had slavery in the constitution, and considered a black person as 3/5th of a person and that enshrined “separate but equal” into law until the 50s.
This is who America always was
> Looks like you are a surgeon. You would know we have many Jewish hospitals because Jewish people weren't allowed to be doctors. So Jewish people worked around that and changed things.
I’m a 52 year old software developer/consultant. Both of my parents went to what we now call a “historically black college” because that’s all they were allowed to go to. My mom was one of the first Black teachers allowed fo teach in a formerly “White” school.
I am not here screaming that I can get ahead in corporate America because of the color of my skin. I’ve had quite a good track record in corporate America from startups, to BigTech to now a customer facing consultant who can “add on to what Becky said” and “step back and look at things from the 1000 foot view” with the best of them and never experienced discrimination.
For instance, when I read stuff such as "I have seen an America that fought to remove the cancer of slavery"... it really makes me wonder with what eyes that "fact" has been seen.
In the last couple of weeks I've been reading a lot of WEB DuBois, who lays out pretty good first-hand material histories on the facts here. Or, for instance, yesterday I read a Frederick Douglas speech about John Brown.
When I read these sources, I don't think that the folks (other than the black folks fighting to free themselves) generally were fighting "to remove the cancer of slavery"... I see folks in power who, as a last resort accepted black folks into their lines.
If you read first person accounts of these things, if you read the literal words that folks were writing at the time, it's very easy to see that the obvious tactical and strategic reasons were almost overpowered by the blatent and deep racism of the folks in power.
It's easy to watch folks who will take the word of their 6th grade "history" teacher over reading, like, 2 books of first-hand sources and trace out the litany of other blatantly false understandings of the world on about every topic.
White supremacy culture is disgustingly sticky and oozes all through out folks' brains so much so that they can't even register the water in which they swim as existing. It's even not difficult to see past it if you just, like, read folks and listen when you feel uncomfortable, but damn, folks will just accept whatever BS propaganda they were given in grade school and wonder how come all these folks out in the world dismiss their idiotic positions.
I guess Robert Gould Shaw grudgingly accepted everyone I guess. I guess elected politicians like Thaddeus Stevens grudgingly accepted everyone and didn't run on a policy of anti-slavery. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thaddeus_Stevens
I guess HN is cool with personal characters attacks like this though because I flagged them for review and they were left up. Good to know what you guys consider meeting your guidelines.
First of all, I don't know you personally. What I wrote about were historical facts.
I understand that often white-bodied folks become very triggered when folks point out that they might have a point of view informed by white supremecy culture. I have no idea what kind of body you have, but you are clearly very upset. I don't say that as a "gotcha, hah triggered ya", I say that as a person who has been often and deeply upset by this culture, and who can recognize similar patterns of hurt and harm in other folks writing. So while I have no actual idea about you or your actual state of mind or body, you read to me like a person who is very upset for reasons that have very little to do with postings on a message board.
On one hand, it's easy for me to say:
a - if you don't like being called out, don't call folks out. If you want to be hypercritical of folks, as you were doing up thread, you're gonna need a thicker skin
b - I believe that when you say "mainstream interpretation" you can pretty easily interpret that as "white", which is what I mean when I write that you specifically are operating from a position of white supremacy. You might not have noticed that in response to references to Frederick Douglass and WEB DuBois you counterpoised a couple of white "leaders", but I certainly did.
Secondly, even if I didn't just do what you're doing to other folks on this board and dismiss your writings out of hand as both based in whatever deep traumas you have around whiteness and general ignorance of the world, your political position is still quite bad.
Your position is what a lot of folks describe as "Blue MAGA", centered on the idea that the US used to be pretty dang good (if flawed) and that we need to work back towards that greatness.
To hold that position you need to ignore a whole lot of real and obvious history, and the way folks in the US have done that is to ignore the actual writings and words of non-white folks.
I am certain that you don't experience that ignorance you are maintaining as a process of de-humanizing those other people (at least until someone points that out, which can be very activating to read).
I don't expect you to be rational about these things, because being made to feel white is very traumatic to folks in white bodies.
I don't expect you to have the capacity to deconstruct your thoughts around race, either.
But if you ever are able to do that work, consider that what I'm describing is a very specific dismissal that you're doing, of a very specific historical selectiveness, and all you have to do to not do that is to read and listen.
That's not a personal attack. This isn't about your personal "character"; that's just the world, and your ignorant and (frankly) dehumanizing political position.
I'm sorry that it feels upsetting and personal to you.
Getting to a position where you can do that work of examining these things may be impossible, and you might find that it makes all the other white-bodied folks around seem quite menacing, but it's certainly work that will liberate you from the need to defend the indefensible.
You didn't call me out you piled on responding to someone else while using low effort/charicture making personal attacks. That's what I took issue with.
I replied to your statement:
" I don't think that the folks (other than the black folks fighting to free themselves) generally were fighting "to remove the cancer of slavery"."
With an example of a white politician who was elected by other white folks fighting "to remove the cancer of slavery" and who was then able to use his political power to sideline United States President Andrew Johnson who was trying to restore the seceded states without guarantees for freedmen, so not some obscure/irrelevant out of power white guy but someone who thwarted the US President's evil attempts. My example specifically countered what you said. Responding to what you say and giving factual examples isn't white centric. It wouldn't make sense to use non-white examples in that response.
I never said we need to work back towards greatness. I said the USA is redeemable and the best way to progress compared to the other options, and gave examples of improvement. I pointed out 'who we are' created children that didn't care about marrying outside race to awful racist parents and Michelle Obama is correct. This historically 'who we are' was directed at pre-Trump America current era America, not our entire history, with the historical reference to show improvement is possible. It's a common way to phrase it (as shown by Michelle Obama's usage), but I think threw the conversation off into something larger than the initial discussion (we need to fight against what Trump and his supporters are doing, and not normalize that they get to define 'who we are'). I'm not trying to whitewash history, I was continuing the original discussion about the Voice of America win and that we need to be positive and build on what wins we can and ham-fistedly referenced the Civil War as showing societal push to improve, and working towards something better.
You are the one who routinely has dehumanized me in this discussion, to the point of talking about me but not too me and labeling me with names/pejoratives and deciding my positions, and defining my motivations.
But you are right, I'm a mess, and I give up. Let Trump America be America now and forever I guess. You all win in your empowering the 40% and getting me as a member of the 60% out of the way.
> I see America as one of the best tools in history for changing things to the better.
Ask that to the people in Iran, Iraq, the Kurds, Venezuela and most of the Muslim world or even Canada and Mexico or any foreign country do they see the world as a tool for good?
> Better results would be to do what Jews who wanted to be doctors did, bypass the assholes, freeze them out.
The government has a “monopoly on [legalized] violence”. You can’t work your way around a corrupt justice system or cops that can shoot you with “qualified immunity”.
Have I given up on America? Yes. I’m planning my exit strategy now and in fact in the country I might retire to now for two months to see what’s it like living here and we have involved ourselves with the local ex-pats community.
But while I’m still working I’m going to extract as much as possible from corporate America and keep “taking things to parking lot” and “double clicking on topics”.
I know you put a lot of effort into typing all that, but I just stopped reading at sentence #2.
Doomerism isn't about fixing things. It is about knowing when you are beaten and just give up. The Serentity Prayer says "God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference."
I really wanted to believe that people were better, but they just aren't. My white brother married a Chinese girl in summer of 2016. My parents were so happy for their first child to finally get married. By 2018, they told him that if he had a "mongrel" baby, they would never come to visit.
People were always this evil, they just hid it better. In 2016, they gave themselves permission to be evil in the open, and they ran with it.
Some people suck, some people will always suck. That doesn't mean we can't aspire to build on the good, to override/reduce the shitiness. That doesn't mean we label the whole irredeemable. Are you the same as them? Doesn't sound like it. And why aren't you? Because it's not who we are.
A system that is getting rid of hate in peoples kids so they don't carry what their parents did IS MAKING THINGS BETTER.
I was jumped and beaten at San Jose State late at night in the 90s because I was white and my friend was Mexican and we were walking around where we weren't allowed I guess. Some Black people hate whites. I don't hate Black people because X out of 10 hate whites or because I was jumped. By your logic I should I guess. That will definitely improve things and build a better society. Thanks for sharing your productive world view.
It's absolutely _not_ a "Doomerism" comment - it's a short, sharp, somewhat wry assessment of exactly where the US currently is on the task of undoing the damage caused by gutting longstanding institutional services.
USAID, VoA, Government overwatch, Environmental monitoring, Departmental independance, the US DoJ, et al ... have all been broken in ways that will take much longer to reverse than the time taken to break them.
See "Arrow of Time" and shattered vase examples that go back long in time.
> Do you want people to just give up?
Which people? I don't think the ones doing that damage will "just give up" - it'll take effort to vote them out, it will likely take more effort to actually remove them if they stay on trend and refuse to follow court orders and established procedures.
> Or are you not willing to build back institutions, and try to make them stronger?
Weird take, I've been backing my people and country for 60 odd years. In that time I've even backed the USofA on the odd occassion.
> I don't understand the point of your comment
Hopefully that has clarified things a little - you may still need to do some work on that on your side.
> other than apathy/negativity?
because takes such as this are way off the mark.
Still, best of luck getting the US reputation back on track - it'll take time and concerted effort.
You can keep your empty disingenuous best of luck. You sound like the guy that tells his neighbor whose house burnt down 'man, you are fucked'. Yeah, no shit. Such insight.
> Got it.
You've said this multiple times to multiple people with little to no evidence on close reading that, in fact, you "got" anything of their positions and viewpoints.
Your PoV is projecting hard on others to the deteriment of any actual useful communication.
I am of the people that happily rebuild their neighbours house routinely.
What I have said, in short, is that reversing the damage done to the US in the past year will take more than simple reversals via court decisions.
It's an observation about the nature of the problem coupled with a hope that sufficient work be done to fix things.
If you want to do something useful, scroll back and perhaps check your own attitude in multiple posts and worry less about the perceived mote in my eye.
Good luck.
Nah go read my historical posting, worse than a troll, I was a believer of trying to make things better. I'm just burnt out. To be told by this individual that I need to go re-read and internalize that I'm a racist, uneducated piece of shit and that the USA in inherently irredeemable because I'm anti the negativity, and that that is somehow positive, productive talk in their culture I am misunderstanding because I'm not culturally understanding (cultural sensitivity now covers crappy British style snark/negativity/dryness)?
I'm a racist, uneducated, and troll now I guess, because I challenged the piling on and felt the US was redeemable? Fuck it. This is just coming from everywhere and has worn me down, I came this article for just a little win. I'm out. Hope you all find some perfect alliance of America sucks I hate it but also lets rebuild it people that also require everything to be perfect day one and any incremental work towards better is the same as awful and not worth it and just pyrrhic victories or whatever the logic here is.
The ultimate resolution will likely have to happen at the Supreme Court.
Don't you want to hear the voice of freedom and democracy ?
Dead internet theory is creeping up on me.
I was going to look at the comments out of curiosity, because I was surprised that there would be any comments at all on an AP article, for several reasons.
https://apnews.com/community-guidelines
Unsure why you jump to "is this a bot" conclusion, seems a little odd.
Seemed a little quick, but not odd. Most news comment sections are bots, I'd expext at least 10% of HN to be, etc.
As the US midterms arrive, I'd expect news comments sections to be 99.99% bots.
Comment by burkej27. 41 MIN AGO No state run media!
Comment by Robertl. 55 MIN AGO Is there anything that Trump does that is legal and won’t be overturned? What a waste of 4 years. They should be held responsible to the 1000 people damaged by his actions. If he can’t then his cabinet.
Comment by Trumpisyourpresident. 1 HR AGO Just like NPR, it's the voice of liberal America, not America, so it should not be funded.
Comment by KendallGrubb. 1 HR AGO We’re not in the 1950’s building Crystal am radios anymore. The cost of this service is unnecessary given today’s media options
I personally don’t see the case for saying the Constitution doesn’t authorize government funded media under the General Welfare clause. I can see where there might be room for disagreement, but that clause is pretty broad. Whereas interstate commerce is a lot clearer, and the reasoning in Wickard v. Filburn is pretty transparent bullshit made to reach a desired conclusion. In terms of Congress exceeding its enumerated powers, the latter is vastly worse.
VOA was established by FDR?
> the General Welfare clause.
the general welfare clause is pretty clearly in the header of article 1 section 8, with the specific enumerated welfare provisions following it.
anything outside of those provisions (e.g. making a non-apporpotioned income tax, making a law that makes alcohol illegal, why not just have those be authorized as "general welfare"?) needs a Constitutional amendment otherwise its just congress creating a power for itself out of whole cloth.
look at this point the government pretty clearly breaks every other part of the Constitution except for the pomp and circumstances around the oath of office, so we know where the real priorities lie.
Are you serious? You mentioned FDR by name.
> You could equally make the argument "it took three generations to unpick and fix the FDR bullshit".
You made the comparison. I made my own comparison. Then you accused me of "whataboutism" for following your lead.
I don't have the energy for this bullshit.
"it took three generations to unpick and fix the FDR bullshit [establishing VOA]".
Actually, in your reply in the other subtree, you added "(among other things)" so it appears I understood it correctly the first time, and it was a reference to New Deal policies more broadly.
The difference is that the New Deal is one of, like, 3 reasons the US isn't a complete shithole. Basically everything you like about the US can be traced back to the New Deal.
like, the fucked up "worst of both both worlds socialism and capitalism" employment-tied healthcare system we have, arguably the #1 biggest problem in contemporary us?
they dont teach history good in this country any more i guess