"... Coercive power is the curse of the universe; co-active power, the enrichment and advancement of every human soul.” A woman ahead of all of us. I found this quoted in Peter Coleman’s The Way Out: How to Overcome Toxic Polarization
"It seems to me that whereas power usually means power-over, the power of some person or group over some other person or group, it is possible to develop the conception of power-with, a jointly developed power, a co-active, not a coercive power…
Who else is interested in the concept of "power-with," as opposed to the model of power we are used to, power-over? I always thought Starhawk coined the phrase. But today I learned that a woman named Mary P. Follett coined the term in 1924! Quote to follow...
is this related to the eating cats business? www.facebook.com/reel/4909387...
Reclaim witchcraft.
There it is! I’ve been waiting for Trump’s godbotherers to accuse Kamala of using witchcraft to destroy Yam Tits in the debate. Careful there, motherfuckers! If she can do it to your Golden Calf, she can do it to you, too! 😹 www.newsweek.com/maga-pastor-...
The pastor said the vice president was able to use "occult-empowered deception" against Trump.
Love this: "performative fairness." "But why does the media sanewash Trump? It’s all a part of the false-equivalence I’ve been writing about here in which candidates are equalized as an ongoing gesture of performative fairness."
“Like whitewashing a fence, sanewashing a speech covers a multitude of problems. The Urban Dictionary definition: Attempting to downplay a person or idea’s radicality to make it more palatable to the general public … a portmanteau of “sane” plus “whitewashing.””
It's 'sanewashing' — and it's what journalists keep doing for Trump
And at least in the interviews with Undecideds I've seen, they at least claim to favor "facts" over opinions. In other words, the "sanewashing" of newsrooms is likely over-riding the well-written words of opinion columnists.
Note the important distinction between so-called "hard news" and the opinion section. Many opinion writers are doing a great job. But "hard news" articles can be extremely biased, through the headlines editors write, the facts reporters chose to include or exclude, etc.
But then add to that the way corporate, so-called mainstream media newsrooms are engaging in 'misinformation lite' by airbrushing Trump's unhinged rants - well, is it really 'lite?' Mightn't it tip the scale in Trump's favor just enough to lose it all?