|
Fister Roboto posted:Fighting fascism is not fascism. I'm really sick of seeing this stupid take come up any time the Dems are criticized for not doing enough. Fighting fascism is not fascism. But, just going straight to military occupation and mass execution of political enemies is literally part of the dictionary definition of fascism. Your civil war example is even sillier. The US was in the process of limiting slavery. That was the entire reason Fort Sumter happened. The South were the ones who decided to attack instead of allowing the process to happen. You're literally making the argument in favor of the Confederacy. The law is in court and there has already been an injunction to prevent them from actually enforcing it. They are going to lose because the supremacy clause exists and needs a constitutional amendment to replace or repeal; just like every other time this has happened.
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 19:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 11:35 |
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The Air Force is now literally airlifting people with trans kids out of Texas, Florida, and Mississippi.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 19:18
|
|
|
NYC just had a press conference: - The subway shooter has been arrested. - The earlier report that the officer's radio wasn't working was incorrect. The radio worked, but the officer had not switched frequency to go down on the platforms and asked someone else to call 911 while he ran instead of waiting to adjust it. - There were no camera in the train, but the camera in the station was broken. - The suspect was arrested after he stabbed someone else today. https://twitter.com/KatyTurNBC/status/1514302452274802697
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 19:23
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Crisis in the availability of infant formula, thanks to a couple large recalls: Just want to add a personal note that my city as well as my association has made it incredibly difficult to remotely rent units. First the city has a generous homestead exception that allows huge discounts if you live in the place you own and will give smaller discounts for renting if you also live there (studies of shown better tenant/owner relationships in this arrangement as well as lower rents and quicker problem resolutions, etc.). The association signs off on all rental arraignments, and will not allow LCCs or businesses to rent out units, only personal rentals, and the association sets the rents based on market with strict rules on how raising rents works and occupancy standards. Those owner posts in the article could be almost verbatim at the owners annual meetings and I laugh (as well as others) every time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 19:24
|
|
ever on the response by vulture landlords:
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Did you read the article that was copy and pasted or the 140 character tweet summary? Because they are literally doing that. The army is guarding anyone who wants to go as they go through field hospitals or whatever they've set up? The army is being stationed outside schools to protect people? Of course people in the military get military healthcare, good for them! Harold Fjord posted:The article suggests that the Air Force is only doing it for its own members not random residents of Texas. These are very different things and saying "they already do that" is disingenuous at best. Yeah really, I agree with this take that the claim "they already do that" is disingenuous, at best. Baronash posted:And while they're there, the army can help you move those goalposts clear across the field. What goalposts? There's a ton of poo poo they could do! Sharkie fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Apr 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 19:27
|
|
|
The article suggests that the Air Force is only doing it for its own members not random residents of Texas. These are very different things and saying "they already do that" is disingenuous at best.
Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 19:32 on Apr 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 19:30
|
|
|
LorneReams posted:Just want to add a personal note that my city as well as my association has made it incredibly difficult to remotely rent units. First the city has a generous homestead exception that allows huge discounts if you live in the place you own and will give smaller discounts for renting if you also live there (studies of shown better tenant/owner relationships in this arrangement as well as lower rents and quicker problem resolutions, etc.). The association signs off on all rental arraignments, and will not allow LCCs or businesses to rent out units, only personal rentals, and the association sets the rents based on market with strict rules on how raising rents works and occupancy standards. That sounds like a good rule (allowing individual homeowners to rent but not LLCs or vulture investors), as does the rent control. I've read that institutional investors have doubled their purchase of single-family homes (from around 10 percent of the SFH market a few years ago to around 20 percent today), and they've already taken over about half the multifamily home market. Anything that restricts them from further gobbling up housing is an unmitigated good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 19:31
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Fighting fascism is not fascism. So the argument is that fascists should be allowed to exist in society, hold positions of power, harm vulnerable communities until a lengthy legal process ostensibly forces them to stop; because using force against them is a small part of the definition of fascism? This entire argument is sidestepping the political reality that Republicans will hold a permanent majority in congress after midterms, and almost certainly the presidency in 2024. What is the plan when the republican-controlled DOJ is no longer interested in stopping human rights violations at the state level? What is the plan when SCOTUS gives the green light to state-level abuses? This is exactly like when Trump was in power, we had Democrats allowing the abuses to occur and holding their breath waiting for Trump to trip up on a rule so he could be removed from power, and of course that never worked. Because the rules aren't sufficient and even if they were, they don't work at all when half of the government decides it doesn't want to do the job. Anyone who argues that fascistic abuses of vulnerable populations will be stopped by the legal framework of America hasn't looked at our southern border or our prisons lately. Bishyaler fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Apr 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 19:34
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:So the argument is that fascists should be allowed to exist in society, hold positions of power, harm vulnerable communities until a lengthy legal process ostensibly forces them to stop; because using force against them is a small part of the definition of fascism? They have already been stopped from enforcing it via an injunction. You don't need to wait the entire legal process to put a stop to it. Also, I think if you polled most people, then very few people would support the idea of mass executions and arrests without charges to stop something that has already been stopped by an injunction and going through the courts. Nobody is going to think that the party committing to mass executions and life imprisonments to stop a law passed by a legislature and going through the legal process are not fascist; so even from a purely utilitarian perspective, you are just going to quickly turn almost everyone in the country against you and fail to actually achieve anything in order for you to personally feel good instead of just allowing it to be shut down like every other supremacy clause case has been for the last 100 years.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 19:43
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:They have already been stopped from enforcing it via an injunction. You don't need to wait the entire legal process to put a stop to it. This whole argument is a microcosm of the larger ideologies being represented here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 19:45
|
|
|
I feel like there’s a word for using force to enact regime change, it’s just not quite coming to mind right now
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 19:47
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Your civil war example is even sillier. The US was in the process of limiting slavery. That was the entire reason Fort Sumter happened. The South were the ones who decided to attack instead of allowing the process to happen. You're literally making the argument in favor of the Confederacy. Good reminder that it was the courts that stopped the Confederate army. Just politely handling civil suits and in no way were troops involved. The Sean fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Apr 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 19:52
|
|
|
Abner Assington posted:This feels kind of wild given that the USAF is, like, hyper Christian, and not in the "actually does the Christ-like thing" kind, either. Above all the Air Force absolutely has to retain people that know how to maintain not just the new high tech airplanes but more importantly the poo poo they insist on keeping in the air for 40 or 50 years. They don't really have the choice but to treat the service people's living situation as a major concern.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 19:53
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:They have already been stopped from enforcing it via an injunction. You don't need to wait the entire legal process to put a stop to it. If you remember correctly, leftists were arguing using force to stop them from stealing children and/or putting them in jail. Then liberals said "well that's only temporary, you should put them in prison for life or execute them" in a way to punch back at leftists saying that "legal methods are only temporary". Leftists said "okay fine". Now we see liberals arguing that life imprisonments and mass executions have been the leftists' initial ask all along, as if it wasn't brought up ironically to argue that using any force was too extreme. Anyway, to your argument of "injunction and now its solved" doesn't address two issues: 1) the aforementioned situation where republicans control congress/presidency. 2) what happens when one of these states says "injunction? Yeah, we're going to ignore that". None of these legal rulings from desk-sitters and computer-touchers in Washington mean jack poo poo unless someone is willing to go down there with a gun and enforce them. If you'd like another example, look how well it goes when a municipality forbids police from using certain chokeholds. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 20:00
|
|
|
The Sean posted:Good reminder that it was the courts that stopped the Confederate army. Just politely handling civil suits and in no way were troops involved. Feels like the answer might have flown over your head a bit. Why did the confederates start the war in the first place? Also, the courts wouldn't be issuing civil suits. A civil suit would be limited in jurisdiction to two individual parties and not have the force of law beyond restitution requirements. They could only issue a civil judgement and collection would be up to the individual.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 20:03
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:what happens when one of these states says "injunction? Yeah, we're going to ignore that". None of these legal rulings from desk-sitters and computer-touchers in Washington mean jack poo poo unless someone is willing to go down there with a gun and enforce them. Yeah, you've pretty much got it figured out - that is what happens if they do ignore it. They are authorized to enforce compliance just like they did in the many dozens of other times it has happened throughout history.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 20:07
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Yeah, you've pretty much got it figured out - that is what happens if they do ignore it. And what happens to trans kids in Texas when Republicans control the Presidency/Congress/DOJ? You edited that part out of my quote. Bishyaler fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Apr 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 20:13
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:And what happens to trans kids in Texas when Republicans control the Presidency/Congress/DOJ? You edited that part out of my quote. Much like the immigrant children in Texas in January 2020, their treatment goes from an unconscionable stain on the national conscience to an acceptable sacrifice to preserve the status quo. I wonder what the PG euphemism will be, we've already seen concentration camps become "decompression centers."
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 20:20
|
|
|
Gotta hold up that rule of law. Saving them too soon would be fascism. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) The Sean fucked around with this message at 04:19 on Apr 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 20:21
|
|
|
you have to admire it, in a way: liberal ideology has reached an endpoint where the concept of acting even in its own self defense is treated as anathema we cannot defend our most vulnerable, we cannot rebuild our infrastructure, we cannot even preserve our voters' ability to vote. because fascism is when the government does things, and the more things it does, the more fascist it is. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 20:24
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:And what happens to trans kids in Texas when Republicans control the Presidency/Congress/DOJ? You edited that part out of my quote. Same thing that happened in every single other instance of this. Unless they are amending the constitution to remove the supremacy clause, then they have no basis to do so. If every federal judge, state court, executive office at the state level, seat of Congress, the Presidency, and DOJ are all in lock-step, they have amended the constitution, and they are enforcing individual compliance on doctors and individuals through force, then your only options are to leave the state or take up armed resistance. Seems pretty unlikely, but If you reach the point where that has happened, then you probably have bigger problems than a state-level law governing medical practitioners because society has either completely united behind this idea or collapsed and you'd get to implement your original idea anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 20:27
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:you have to admire it, in a way: liberal ideology has reached an endpoint where the concept of acting even in its own self defense is treated as anathema I read it somewhere else on here, but the thought has stuck with me: Liberalism has accomplished all its goals and logically shifted its priorities to preserving the socioeconomic state it created. Liberals are conservative by every definition. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 20:38
|
|
|
Sarcastr0 posted:So then martial law and arresting Texas officials is the only moral and antifascist position, here? What did you think of the feds putting Kim Davis in jail
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 20:38
|
|
|
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/california-lawyer-quits-over-allegation-newsom-meddled-in-activision-case-1.1751800quote:Proctor said in the email to staff that in recent weeks, California Governor Gavin Newsom and his office “began to interfere” with the Activision suit. “The Office of the Governor repeatedly demanded advance notice of litigation strategy and of next steps in the litigation,” Proctor wrote in the email, which was seen by Bloomberg. “As we continued to win in state court, this interference increased, mimicking the interests of Activision’s counsel.” Not particularly surprising considering how much of a shitbag Newsom has been. All he needs is a blackface photo to come out to truly be our Trudeau.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 20:39
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:This entire argument is sidestepping the political reality that Republicans will hold a permanent majority in congress after midterms, and almost certainly the presidency in 2024. What is the plan when the republican-controlled DOJ is no longer interested in stopping human rights violations at the state level? What is the plan when SCOTUS gives the green light to state-level abuses? You’re arguing that the system doesn’t work by citing a case study of the system working. Trump was removed from office by voters, and lost both houses of Congress in the process. It was a historic loss of power. There’s always a temptation to overstate the significance of a political win or loss, and it’s never as good or bad as stated. 2008 was supposed to mark 20 years in the political wilderness for the Republicans, 2016 was a death knell for centrist liberalism. None of it came out that way. You get 2-4 years to get something done, then gridlock, then it flips.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 20:42
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:you have to admire it, in a way: liberal ideology has reached an endpoint where the concept of acting even in its own self defense is treated as anathema Also pretending that "we're doing all we can do!" and "I'm good for supporting the right side."
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 20:56
|
|
|
koolkal posted:https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/california-lawyer-quits-over-allegation-newsom-meddled-in-activision-case-1.1751800
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 21:08
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Do you think using federal troops to support the Little Rock 9 was martial law or a bad thing to do? The federal troops were dispatched to enforce a court decision and uphold the laws. Eisenhower didn't describe his dispatch of federal troops as being justified by moral considerations, he described it as “Mob rule cannot be allowed to override the decisions of the courts”. He wasn't sending in the troops because he supported racial equality (something he was reluctant to take a public stance on), he was sending them in to enforce a court order and prevent the state government from defying that court order. And even then, the lawsuits and legal wrangling continued for years afterward, including one year in which the public schools were shut down completely in order to evade the requirement to integrate public schools. If the Texas law were to be appealed up to the Supreme Court, and then the Supreme Court clearly struck down the law, and then the state not only refused to abide by the court ruling but actually sent in the National Guard to block local governments from following the court ruling, then we could start making Little Rock Nine comparisons. Bishyaler posted:So the argument is that fascists should be allowed to exist in society, hold positions of power, harm vulnerable communities until a lengthy legal process ostensibly forces them to stop; because using force against them is a small part of the definition of fascism? Who decides who qualifies as a fascist and deserves to be summarily removed from power by military force? What kind of process is going to be put in place, and what kind of oversight? Are we just going to declare that the president of the United States has unlimited authority to overrule any state law he doesn't like and unilaterally oust any elected official at any level of government? Are we gonna let some executive official or agency run the political purge-and-imprison list the same way they run the no-fly list? Or should we endow a House committee with the power to investigate these kinds of Un-American Activities? Without real answers to these questions, all this talk is just pointless fantasy - or worse. After all, there's an ongoing humanitarian disaster right now involving someone who claimed the authority to send in the military to purge fascists from a government, and then used that power to massacre Nazis and non-Nazis alike.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 21:45
|
|
|
Manager Hoyden posted:Liberals are conservative by every definition. This is what happens when language is allowed to be abused. If someone who is labeled as a "liberal" is holding conservative ideals, then we already have a word for that, it's called conservative. BY EVERY DEFINITION. I feel like I'm reading Free Republic circa early 2000s when everything that was bad was called liberal. Keep your powder dry.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 21:55
|
|
|
If I can state something that seems obvious without cheerleading or putting words in people's mouths, I think some arguments are being made towards our systems being bad and not meant to protect people (or at least not as effective at doing that as preserving a profitable system). So counter arguments about what the rules allow for aren't likely to find purchase. Not sure how this fits in with the rules and spirit of debate and discussion. Also Main Paineframe posted:Without real answers to these questions, all this talk is just pointless fantasy - or worse. Yeah it's the worse, I think people just want this world that we are born into and responsible for to work towards good. Or maybe at this point at least stop destroying the planet and grinding human life into profits.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 23:45
|
|
|
LorneReams posted:This is what happens when language is allowed to be abused. If someone who is labeled as a "liberal" is holding conservative ideals, then we already have a word for that, it's called conservative. BY EVERY DEFINITION. I feel like I'm reading DND circa late 2000s when the lolbert contingent that was the majority had protracted, tedious arguments about the origins of the term "classically liberal," which indeed did encompass their conservative views. But "liberals" has been a handy descriptor since liberals co-opted the term "progressive," imo, just as "lefties" is handy so as to distinguish from a generic "the left," as in: "Everyone in dnd is on the left. Can't we just all get along?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 00:05
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Who decides who qualifies as a fascist and deserves to be summarily removed from power by military force? What kind of process is going to be put in place, and what kind of oversight? Are we just going to declare that the president of the United States has unlimited authority to overrule any state law he doesn't like and unilaterally oust any elected official at any level of government? Are we gonna let some executive official or agency run the political purge-and-imprison list the same way they run the no-fly list? Or should we endow a House committee with the power to investigate these kinds of Un-American Activities? The government is currently applying this very process to remove extremists from the military, a model already exists. You have a million questions about how this can be done fairly, what will the rules be, unfair comparisons to witchhunts for groups who weren't trying to overthrow the government. At some point liberal handwringing and demands for bureaucracy are legitimizing fascists and the positions they hold: "It would be too complicated to identify or dislodge them so we shouldn't try." or "Someone did this in bad faith, so we can't attempt this in good faith." The bottom line is this is what leftists are talking about when we say liberals are complicit in the coming fascist takeover. There are means to stop whats happening and what's coming, but liberals refuse to help because doing so would break the rules. And we can't rely on liberals after a fascist takeover either. Fascists promise order and rules and leftists promise justice through chaos. Guess which liberals side with historically?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 00:49
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:The government is currently applying this very process to remove extremists from the military, a model already exists. You have a million questions about how this can be done fairly, what will the rules be, unfair comparisons to witchhunts for groups who weren't trying to overthrow the government. At some point liberal handwringing and demands for bureaucracy are legitimizing fascists and the positions they hold: "It would be too complicated to identify or dislodge them so we shouldn't try." or "Someone did this in bad faith, so we can't attempt this in good faith." This is an extremely good point and I'm really kind of tired of so many people still doing the thing where they insist that there are only two sides to anything, liberal and conservative, and they identify as liberal so they're part of the Good Guy team and the conservatives are the Bad Guy team therefore the liberal can't possibly be bad or support bad things. It blows my mind that leftists are the ones actually calling for something meaningful to be done to create some semblance of justice in this world and the very first thing liberals do is start asking "Well hang on a second what exactly do you mean by 'justice'? We have to spend an agonizing amount of time arguing over the definitions of words before we can even think about taking any kind of action. Also please fill out this form in triplicate with your exact perfect plans to replace the current system with a better one that I plan to pick apart and constantly ask gotcha questions about in order to discourage and demoralize you. Yes I am aware that these arguments will never end because you can't please everyone and arguing forever to prevent action is the whole point". This is exactly why we're in the situation we're in. People who live comfortable lives don't want any kind of justice that might even remotely effect their lifestyles so they resist it by blowing verbal and written smokescreens. Nothing gets done and we're now being condescendingly told that the justice system is infallible and has always worked and has always solved every similar problem and we just have to wait and have faith in the system. The system is the problem, not the solution. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) Elephant Ambush fucked around with this message at 01:08 on Apr 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 01:05
|
|
|
Abner Assington posted:This feels kind of wild given that the USAF is, like, hyper Christian, and not in the "actually does the Christ-like thing" kind, either. The US military had, for a surprisingly long time, been much more supportive of trans soldiers and particularly of transitioning soldiers than would seem likely. Not to say it was great, but the branches had at least been providing care and somewhat looking out for trans service members, at least until Trump instituted the transgender service members ban. Army Navy and Air Force all had substantial numbers of trans service members. marines had some, but substantially fewer. Why? 1) a ton of people with extremely useful skills for the military are transgender and there's literally zero conceivable impact that treated feelings of gender dysphoria have on someone's ability to do their job and 2) there's a quite strong push for the military to have surgeons who are good at fixing up genitals and basically every person getting gender confirmation surgery is extremely valuable experience for military surgeons. basically it's a win-win for everyone involved. there's also an element of idealism and probably some pride in the legacy of the military's role in ending slavery and forcibly integrating segregated schools, but I think it's more because of the practical factors above than the idealism
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 01:54
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:The government is currently applying this very process to remove extremists from the military, a model already exists. You have a million questions about how this can be done fairly, what will the rules be, unfair comparisons to witchhunts for groups who weren't trying to overthrow the government. At some point liberal handwringing and demands for bureaucracy are legitimizing fascists and the positions they hold: "It would be too complicated to identify or dislodge them so we shouldn't try." or "Someone did this in bad faith, so we can't attempt this in good faith." Yes, I have questions about how "this" can be done fairly, what the rules will be, and so on. It'd be nice if you could actually answer them, instead of accusing me of "liberal handwringing" and "demands for bureaucracy". See, we're talking about "this" here, but the "this" in question involves using military force to conduct political purges on state governments, ousting elected officials at gunpoint and banning them indefinitely from politics. When you're proposing something like that, it's kind of important to have answers for at least basic questions like "who decides what qualifies as purge-able" (because it sure as hell isn't going to be you), "is there an appeals process", or "what kind of oversight will be in place to prevent abuse and corruption". If you really sit back and think seriously about it, you're basically proposing that Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and a 50-50 split Senate engage in a nationwide unilateral political purge at a scale not seen since the end of the US Civil War. Saying "fascists" a bunch isn't a magic spell to make the considerable practical and political difficulties disappear, and you really ought to know better than to assume that these powers will unerringly be used only against people you personally disapprove of.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 02:21
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:This is an extremely good point and I'm really kind of tired of so many people still doing the thing where they insist that there are only two sides to anything, liberal and conservative, and they identify as liberal so they're part of the Good Guy team and the conservatives are the Bad Guy team therefore the liberal can't possibly be bad or support bad things. It's not really a good point at all. You're suggesting something that will you make you personally feel good, but will actually harm the people you claim you are doing it to benefit. If your hypothetical situation makes a certain outcome inevitable, then obviously nothing matters regardless in that scenario. Putting aside the impossibility and the fact that you would end up hurting a lot of people, what exactly is your actual plan here? Occupy a dozen states militarily and just kind of wait for them to try something to crack down on it? If they never do try anything, then do you just keep them under martial law forever waiting? What do you do when the exact people who elected the first batch elect another group to do the exact same thing? Are you just disbanding the government at gunpoint over and over? To prevent the hypothetical Trump DOJ from pulling out of it are you cancelling the Presidential election? Because, if you assume that a Republican DOJ and courts will replace every federal judge with someone whose only goal in life is to allow states to just blatantly ignore the supremacy clause and congress will pass a constitutional amendment to allow them, then it doesn't matter what you do beforehand, because it will just go away once they take power anyway. You're taking the idea that every stoner in the freshman dorm has - "Dude, what if society only exists because we think it does?" - and treating it like you have made an incredible revelation that nobody else realizes. I don't think you seriously want to start executing people or imprisoning millions of people without charging them with crimes and are probably just saying what feels the most righteous, but you have to realize on some level that it would actually accomplish the opposite of what you are claiming to want. Condemning tens of millions of people to martial law, death, or imprisonment for an indeterminate amount of time because some of their elected leaders might commit potential future crime seems like a bad precedent to establish. Especially when the original issue has already been prevented. You're advocating doing all of this on the basis that it might be possible in 3 to 7 years for the entire political, legal, and social system to collapse. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Apr 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 02:23
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:You're advocating doing all of this on the basis that it might be possible in 3 to 7 years for the entire political, legal, and social system to collapse. This seems like outright denialism. Or maybe Denial. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 03:22
|
|
|
Self acclaimed Marxist leninists advocating for single party rule via state sanctioned violence without any hint of self-awareness? How many times do we have to hear this argument again? Harold Fjord posted:This seems like outright denialism. Or maybe Denial. What exactly are you accusing him of being in denial of?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 03:25
|
|
|
The obvious political reality in front of us all as the Republican Party suppresses the vote in states they control and preparing to overturn the political will of their constituents at state level as needed. The thing Democrats have repeatedly warned us about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 03:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 11:35 |
|
|
So new quinnipiac poll came out and wew boy is it loving dire for biden https://twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/1514366187051831296 not just is the approval rating insanely low, the numbers for hispanics are dire as hell. But that's arguably not even the worst! https://twitter.com/whstancil/status/1514331363247280133 like its not that surprising considering he's done literally nothing to draw support from millenials/zoomers but still, good lord those are some insanely rock bottom numbers
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 03:34
|
|