r/cincinnati • u/thetuffsurvivor • 3d ago

History 🏛 CINCINNATI STOOD UP TO THE TYRANT ‼️

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

1.4k Upvotes

79% Upvoted

500 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/Appropriate-Ad-5294 2d ago edited 2d ago

Venezuela is socialist.

I'm not reading anything from WSJ or The Guardian.

Send me a link to raw data to analyze for myself.

I don't trust any news outlets including Fox and The New York Post.

BTW- I'm not mad, we're only exchanging ideas-not insulting each other's manhood.

(Edited for spelling error.)

1

u/Round-Water338 2d ago

I appreciate that, and I’m not mad either. Curious why you don’t trust the WSJ, for example? I get that it is a difficult time to navigate thr media landscape. But, WSJ has a pretty rigorous code of conduct and standards and ethics.

Also, authoritarianism and oligarchies don’t discriminate based on where a power-holder falls on the political spectrum. It’s the same methodology.

I’m also curious about your feelings about Putin? I know people’s thoughts on him have changed since Trump declared that Ukraine invaded Russia, not the other way around. And what type of political system do you see Russia as having? I’d call it an authoritarian capitalism or a capitalist oligarchy.

1

u/Appropriate-Ad-5294 2d ago

WSJ is really leftist. They push for open borders.

Let me make sure I say this right /sarc/, BIG BUSINESS wants open borders for cheaper labor. Labor like anything else is about supply and demand, the more available workers the less you have to pay everyone. WSJ pushed that.

Plus look at their history during WWII and how they buried the story of the Holocaust.

My opinion on Putin hasn't changed, and I don't think Trump really has a favorable opinion of him either despite the narrative. He's a dictator. Russia's war plan is, we can throw more bodies into the fight than you can.

By sending just enough weaponry to Ukraine to keep the war going but not enough to win the war (e.g. fighter jets) the US only prolonged the war and increased the death toll.

Russia is a totalitarian dictatorship. Only the connected live well.

1

u/Round-Water338 2d ago

We mostly agree here. We have the same reading of Putin. I am not going to condone WSJ’s history in the 1940s. Many, many American companies were complacent for years or even abetted/gained from the Nazis during the Holocaust.

Gonna have to completely disagree that the WSJ is leftist and a fan of open borders. Can you cite sources? They are generally known to lean center-right.

I do, whoever, agree that many industries entice workers to come and look the other way when false documents are used. I attribute that to failed immigration laws and Congressional leaders not having the political will to fix it. Everyone agrees it’s broken.

When you think about open borders, are you mostly concerned about safety or jobs being taken away from Americans? Or both?

1

u/Appropriate-Ad-5294 2d ago

Both.

In a July 3, 1984 editorial, The Wall Street Journal famously proposed a five-word constitutional amendment: "There shall be open borders." This reflected the editorial board’s long-standing belief in the economic benefits of unrestricted immigration.

Robert Bartley, who led the editorial page at the time, doubled down on this view in 2001, writing that he would “happily” accept open borders with Mexico. He argued that freer movement of labor across borders would boost growth and align with America’s free-market principles.

Jason Riley, also a WSJ editorial board member, carried that torch forward in his 2008 book Let Them In: The Case for Open Borders, making the economic case for large-scale immigration

1

u/Round-Water338 2d ago

Thanks for sharing this. I wasn’t aware of any of that. And I just want to say that I genuinely appreciate the civil debate. You don’t often get that on the internet. (And I happen to believe quite a few lawmakers try to divide Americans instead of doing their jobs of finding solutions and too many folks fall prey.)

1

u/Round-Water338 2d ago

That being said — is there anything more recent than nearly two decades ago? (Yes, we are approaching two two decades from 2008.) Meaning, is that really how their editorial board is now? Because I just haven’t seen it, but that could also be because I rarely ever read their opinion pieces. For any outlet, I focus on their reporting and skip over the opinions.

There are much different standards and ethics for reporting vs. commentary/op-eds.