MAGAThread XX: A Journal of the Plague Year

[Cannot think of a name]

Reconciliation only works if the people you want to reconcile with have stopped being a flaming pile of assholes first.
You can't reconcile with someone who is still determined to punch you in the face.

But if we just give in they might be good this time. They pinkie swear.

[Juristonia]

Reconciliation only works if the people you want to reconcile with have stopped being a flaming pile of assholes first.
You can't reconcile with someone who is still determined to punch you in the face.

But if we just give in they might be good this time. They pinkie swear.

And if we don't, we're the real bad guys here!

[Des-Bal]

But insisting that people who have been fighting against police brutality and for civil rights stretching back 400 years who were called 'sons of bitches' when they kneeled need to 'self reflect' on the violence that happened on the fringe of their movement because it 'is part of a pattern' that contributes to the violence at the capitol? And that won't lead to entrenchment and isn't part of a centuries long pattern of marginalizing the fight for civil rights in this country?

You sure have a lot of excuses for right wing violence and a lot of strict demands for those struggling against actual grievances.

It's a good look.

I've made zero excuses for anyone's behavior and never expected anyone to do more than abstain from committing or endorsing political violence. It seems asymmetrical because you compulsively read out the litany of wrongs justifying and minimizing violence when you support those who perpetrate it. That is exactly what I anticipate the trumpeteers will do once the shock wears off.

The neat thing about using a litany to justify things is that it gets bigger every year and the bigger it gets the more bodies you can sweep under it.

[Cannot think of a name]

But insisting that people who have been fighting against police brutality and for civil rights stretching back 400 years who were called 'sons of bitches' when they kneeled need to 'self reflect' on the violence that happened on the fringe of their movement because it 'is part of a pattern' that contributes to the violence at the capitol? And that won't lead to entrenchment and isn't part of a centuries long pattern of marginalizing the fight for civil rights in this country?

You sure have a lot of excuses for right wing violence and a lot of strict demands for those struggling against actual grievances.

It's a good look.

I've made zero excuses for anyone's behavior and never expected anyone to do more than abstain from committing or endorsing political violence. It seems asymmetrical because you compulsively read out the litany of wrongs justifying and minimizing violence when you support those who perpetrate it. That is exactly what I anticipate the trumpeteers will do once the shock wears off.

The neat thing about using a litany to justify things is that it gets bigger every year and the bigger it gets the more bodies you can sweep under it.

No man, that's just your inability to see past your self righteousness. I haven't justified a goddamn thing and it's weird that you think I have. Instead what I've done is continued to point out your flawed premises that you keep clinging to like a life raft.

No one has made excuses for violence then or now during the civil rights protests, you have just kept insisting that they continue to repudiate it while the smoke hasn't even cleared during a right wing attack. I merely pointed out that doing so is part of a long pattern of dismissing and marginalizing the struggle for civil rights.

That's not making an excuse for violence, that's pointing out your bullshit premise is bullshit.

No one made excuses then or now for the violence that happened at CHOP, the organizers were concerned about it when CHOP began because 'enlightened' folk like you that have dutifully played their role that has upheld the white supremist agenda by clutching you pearls, and were concerned about the violence that happened.

That's not making excuses for violence, that's just your bullshit premise.

Pointing out that when CHOP wasn't able to prevent all violence over the course of 10 days during tense times the entire community, who were for the most part were holding townhall discussions, providing medical care, and creating art, were met with rubber bullets and tear gas...that to suggest that was a 'successful' use of violence when CHOP was then and in your own words now used to diminish and dismiss the struggle for civil rights was a flawed premise.

That there was a direct line between the violence that happened at CHOP and the right wing militia fueled violence and the left needed to take inventory was ridiculous on its face when the very same people that sacked the capitol building were also the ones that have been showing up at peaceful protests all summer disrupting them and driving cars throough them. And unlike the civil rights movements that often took measures to quell violence in their own ranks, elected officials made excuses for them and even went so far as to make the act of driving their cars through protesters legal. AFTER someone had taken a life doing so. And that while the smoke cleared on their attack it was tone deaf at best and part of a long history of racism at worst to look at white right wing violence and cluck your tongue and say, "Well...those civil rights activists sure have a lot to answer for."

That's not making excuses for left wing violence, that's pointing out that your bullshit premise once again let's the violent right off the hook.

I pointed out that you have twisted yourselves into pretzels to make a false equivalence about escalating violence without looking at the well documented continued rise of right wing domestic terrorism and the continued refusal to address it. That we would have to look through twisted prisms to find a way to blame the left for this while meanwhile right wing militias aim guns at police to defend a rich white rancher with little consequence.

Pointing out that your premises are god-fucking-awful is not making excuses. That was just something you guys pulled from your asses along with your terrible premises.

But saying that the left needs to continually apologize like you're some sort of ideological ED 209 while wringing your hands that there might be a shred of consequence for the elected officials who have abused their office and used it to encourage and endorse violence because some of their feelings might get hurt, that is some of that high grade hypocrisy you like to accuse others of and could do with some of that self reflection you keep prescribing.

[Des-Bal]

No man, that's just your inability to see past your self righteousness. I haven't justified a goddamn thing and it's weird that you think I have. Instead what I've done is continued to point out your flawed premises that you keep clinging to like a life raft.

No one has made excuses for violence then or now during the civil rights protests, you have just kept insisting that they continue to repudiate it while the smoke hasn't even cleared during a right wing attack. I merely pointed out that doing so is part of a long pattern of dismissing and marginalizing the struggle for civil rights.

That's not making an excuse for violence, that's pointing out your bullshit premise is bullshit.

No one made excuses then or now for the violence that happened at CHOP, the organizers were concerned about it when CHOP began because 'enlightened' folk like you that have dutifully played their role that has upheld the white supremist agenda by clutching you pearls, and were concerned about the violence that happened.

That's not making excuses for violence, that's just your bullshit premise.

Pointing out that when CHOP wasn't able to prevent all violence over the course of 10 days during tense times the entire community, who were for the most part were holding townhall discussions, providing medical care, and creating art, were met with rubber bullets and tear gas...that to suggest that was a 'successful' use of violence when CHOP was then and in your own words now used to diminish and dismiss the struggle for civil rights was a flawed premise.

That there was a direct line between the violence that happened at CHOP and the right wing militia fueled violence and the left needed to take inventory was ridiculous on its face when the very same people that sacked the capitol building were also the ones that have been showing up at peaceful protests all summer disrupting them and driving cars throough them. And unlike the civil rights movements that often took measures to quell violence in their own ranks, elected officials made excuses for them and even went so far as to make the act of driving their cars through protesters legal. AFTER someone had taken a life doing so. And that while the smoke cleared on their attack it was tone deaf at best and part of a long history of racism at worst to look at white right wing violence and cluck your tongue and say, "Well...those civil rights activists sure have a lot to answer for."

That's not making excuses for left wing violence, that's pointing out that your bullshit premise once again let's the violent right off the hook.

I pointed out that you have twisted yourselves into pretzels to make a false equivalence about escalating violence without looking at the well documented continued rise of right wing domestic terrorism and the continued refusal to address it. That we would have to look through twisted prisms to find a way to blame the left for this while meanwhile right wing militias aim guns at police to defend a rich white rancher with little consequence.

Pointing out that your premises are god-fucking-awful is not making excuses. That was just something you guys pulled from your asses along with your terrible premises.

But saying that the left needs to continually apologize like you're some sort of ideological ED 209 while wringing your hands that there might be a shred of consequence for the elected officials who have abused their office and used it to encourage and endorse violence because some of their feelings might get hurt, that is some of that high grade hypocrisy you like to accuse others of and could do with some of that self reflection you keep prescribing.

Excellent point. Compulsively describing the exact motives of actors and focusing on the nonviolent actors exclusively when they're ideologically in line with you isn't at all your naked attempt to downplay wrongdoing. Further saying "both of you do and stop doing the same thing" is hypocritical, and nobody argued it wasn't sedition when they liked the motives of those doing it. "Let's not kill each other or act like it's fine if we do" is in fact a form of pearl clutching.That thing you said proved all these things. Good job.

[Cannot think of a name]

No man, that's just your inability to see past your self righteousness. I haven't justified a goddamn thing and it's weird that you think I have. Instead what I've done is continued to point out your flawed premises that you keep clinging to like a life raft.

No one has made excuses for violence then or now during the civil rights protests, you have just kept insisting that they continue to repudiate it while the smoke hasn't even cleared during a right wing attack. I merely pointed out that doing so is part of a long pattern of dismissing and marginalizing the struggle for civil rights.

That's not making an excuse for violence, that's pointing out your bullshit premise is bullshit.

No one made excuses then or now for the violence that happened at CHOP, the organizers were concerned about it when CHOP began because 'enlightened' folk like you that have dutifully played their role that has upheld the white supremist agenda by clutching you pearls, and were concerned about the violence that happened.

That's not making excuses for violence, that's just your bullshit premise.

Pointing out that when CHOP wasn't able to prevent all violence over the course of 10 days during tense times the entire community, who were for the most part were holding townhall discussions, providing medical care, and creating art, were met with rubber bullets and tear gas...that to suggest that was a 'successful' use of violence when CHOP was then and in your own words now used to diminish and dismiss the struggle for civil rights was a flawed premise.

That there was a direct line between the violence that happened at CHOP and the right wing militia fueled violence and the left needed to take inventory was ridiculous on its face when the very same people that sacked the capitol building were also the ones that have been showing up at peaceful protests all summer disrupting them and driving cars throough them. And unlike the civil rights movements that often took measures to quell violence in their own ranks, elected officials made excuses for them and even went so far as to make the act of driving their cars through protesters legal. AFTER someone had taken a life doing so. And that while the smoke cleared on their attack it was tone deaf at best and part of a long history of racism at worst to look at white right wing violence and cluck your tongue and say, "Well...those civil rights activists sure have a lot to answer for."

That's not making excuses for left wing violence, that's pointing out that your bullshit premise once again let's the violent right off the hook.

I pointed out that you have twisted yourselves into pretzels to make a false equivalence about escalating violence without looking at the well documented continued rise of right wing domestic terrorism and the continued refusal to address it. That we would have to look through twisted prisms to find a way to blame the left for this while meanwhile right wing militias aim guns at police to defend a rich white rancher with little consequence.

Pointing out that your premises are god-fucking-awful is not making excuses. That was just something you guys pulled from your asses along with your terrible premises.

But saying that the left needs to continually apologize like you're some sort of ideological ED 209 while wringing your hands that there might be a shred of consequence for the elected officials who have abused their office and used it to encourage and endorse violence because some of their feelings might get hurt, that is some of that high grade hypocrisy you like to accuse others of and could do with some of that self reflection you keep prescribing.

Excellent point. Compulsively describing the exact motives of actors and focusing on the nonviolent actors exclusively when they're ideologically in line with you isn't at all your naked attempt to downplay wrongdoing.

Pointing out a false equivalence or a mischaracterization isn't downplaying, it's correcting the record.

What is downplaying is amplifying events to create a false equivalence and then making excuses for the actions of one party by exaggerating the actions of another.

Pointing out that it plays into a century long pattern of so-called 'reasonable folk' dismissing civil rights movements and perpetuating a white supremist narrative is just fucking history.

Further saying "both of you do and stop doing the same thing" is hypocritical, and nobody argued it wasn't sedition when they liked the motives of those doing it.

This sentence is just a fucking mess, man.

"Let's not kill each other or act like it's fine if we do" is in fact a form of pearl clutching.

No, pearl clutching is 'let's not hold the people who have actively and unequivacally encouraged and excused violence to account because they might do more violence" is pearl clutching. Thought that was clear but here we are.

That thing you said proved all these things. Good job.

Okay, dude...okay.

[Des-Bal]

"Stop it" is an excuse "Reason" is white supremacy.

[Cannot think of a name]

"Stop it" is an excuse "Reason" is white supremacy.

You can do anything once you remove that pesky context.

[Des-Bal]

Or when your selective with your context. It doesn't actually matter what you have to do to justify something, just that you get there. The context that concerns me is perpetual escalation. A lot of the right seems ready to lay down arms and demanding an act of contrition may cause them to reconsider.

[Juristonia]

So basically:

But if we just give in they might be good this time. They pinkie swear.

[Senkaku]

A lot of the right seems ready to lay down arms

As indicated by their *checks notes* taking up of arms and plotting of coups...?

and demanding an act of contrition may cause them to reconsider.

The exact mindset of appeasement-- demanding something entirely reasonable could cause someone to go off the deep end, so better to just avoid bringing it up at all. If you choose dishonor, you may still get war, Neville.

[Nakena]

Reconciliation works sometimes. However, whrn it comes to the far right, it allows them another opportunity to abuse your trust. Civility politics is the death of resistance against dangerous movements.

So it's basically Satan?

[Cannot think of a name]

Or when your selective with your context.

Yes, and you should stop doing that in an effort to shift blame.

It doesn't actually matter what you have to do to justify something, just that you get there.

Like saying "Let's not have consequences because they might punish us for punishing them! But, the other side must feel shame because that standard isn't for them.

The context that concerns me is perpetual escalation.

Liar liar pants on fire. If perpetual escalation was your concern you would be looking at the thick clear line between Republican politicians literally going out of their way to excuse and even legalize acts of right wing terror over the last four years, but instead you wanted to re-punish a bunch of hippies that were unsuccessful at completely policing a volatile situation. You don't give a tiddly shit about perpetual escalation, your concern is that you dig out a false center to sit in that just so happens to help perpetuate a pattern of violence.

A lot of the right seems ready to lay down arms and demanding an act of contrition may cause them to reconsider.

They are literally threatening to take the capitol raid to all fifty states and are making continued and increasing threats to disrupt the inauguration to the point that the national guard from several states have been called in to protect the capitol. This whole thing started by saying the Republicans participating in impeaching Trump shouldn't do that because the supporters might get more violent. You are actually suggesting that the right NOT 'lay down arms' so to speak by holding one of their own to account and drawing a line as to what they accept because their followers might get more violent, making the biggest argument and excuse for violence this thread has witnessed.

Stop making excuses. It is 100% you that is doing that.

[Nakena]

So basically as it turns out the BLM and their friends in summer were less sucessfull in terms of qualitative force deployed yet with far higher quantitative numbers and considerable political sucess as result.

Meanwhile the MAGA and their associates were more sucessfull in terms of qualitative force applied so far, but their political sucess is by all means a negative given the harsh amount of oppression they are going to face.

Qualitative force means: More results with less numbers and less effort. I.e. stuff like the capitol storm.

[Kexholm Karelia]

I don’t regret supporting Trump though, because what he did manage to do before 2020, including tax cuts, formation of anti-China bloc in Asia, border security, etc. was good

So then the riot was worth a few right wing policy successes?

I don’t understand the premise of this question

[Borderlands of Rojava]

So then the riot was worth a few right wing policy successes?

I don’t understand the premise of this question

Do you regret supporting Trump? Yes or no?

[Borderlands of Rojava]

A lot of the right seems ready to lay down arms

As indicated by their *checks notes* taking up of arms and plotting of coups...?

and demanding an act of contrition may cause them to reconsider.

The exact mindset of appeasement-- demanding something entirely reasonable could cause someone to go off the deep end, so better to just avoid bringing it up at all. If you choose dishonor, you may still get war, Neville.

What else should we do in the name of "unity?" Let Trump be president again anyways? Take down statues of Fredrick Douglas? Close the black history museum? Erase all references to native american massacres from our history books? I mean cause one side won't make peace until the entire country is subjugated under their will and their president and the other side is basically everyone else. When I see footage of the capitol siege, I'm not thinking "let's just come together like the beatles." This "we need to heal the divide" bullshit leaves out an important fact, which is that one side increasingly supports armed insurgency and the other side doesn't really. And yes, the CHAZ was a thing but it wasn't nearly the same as what the right wing is planning for on the 20th, which is nothing short of an uprising. I have no plans to bury the hatchet by any means with people who wanna bury it in my back.

[Kexholm Karelia]

I don’t understand the premise of this question

Do you regret supporting Trump? Yes or no?

No, see the earlier post in the quote chain

[Nakena]

As indicated by their *checks notes* taking up of arms and plotting of coups...?


The exact mindset of appeasement-- demanding something entirely reasonable could cause someone to go off the deep end, so better to just avoid bringing it up at all. If you choose dishonor, you may still get war, Neville.

What else should we do in the name of "unity?" Let Trump be president again anyways? Take down statues of Fredrick Douglas? Close the black history museum? Erase all references to native american massacres from our history books? I mean cause one side won't make peace until the entire country is subjugated under their will and their president and the other side is basically everyone else. When I see footage of the capitol siege, I'm not thinking "let's just come together like the beatles." This "we need to heal the divide" bullshit leaves out an important fact, which is that one side increasingly supports armed insurgency and the other side doesn't really. And yes, the CHAZ was a thing but it wasn't nearly the same as what the right wing is planning for on the 20th, which is nothing short of an uprising. I have no plans to bury the hatchet by any means with people who wanna bury it in my back.

The JCS have already thrown their support behind Biden. Theres no way an insurrection is going to work out at the 20th unless lower officer ranks or so have different ideas about who should be President. If there were any plots in the darks they are likely going to be dissuaded from furthering their plans. And Trump is at this stage nobody but some QAnonists and radical MAGA would be going to fight for. not after his lackluster speech in Texas. He's finished.

https://www.stripes.com/news/us/joint-c ... n-1.658299

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

his lackluster speech in Texas.

What was that one about? More fraud claims?

[Cannot think of a name]

So basically as it turns out the BLM and their friends in summer were less sucessfull in terms of qualitative force deployed yet with far higher quantitative numbers and considerable political sucess as result.

Meanwhile the MAGA and their associates were more sucessfull in terms of qualitative force applied so far, but their political sucess is by all means a negative given the harsh amount of oppression they are going to face.

Qualitative force means: More results with less numbers and less effort. I.e. stuff like the capitol storm.

Well, counter to the hand wringing and pearl clutching narrative, violence works but entirely not the way that has been suggested.

In the early evening of the first George Floyd protests broadcasts fell all over themselves featuring looting and other acts of relative violence and breathless comparisons were made to the riots in 1992 over the Rodney King beating.

As the BLM protesters made constant efforts to distinguish their protest from opportunists and bad actors and overtly worked to prevent violence in their ranks, we started seeing footage of police firing rubber bullets at people sitting on their porches, of tear gassing otherwise peaceful protesters, knocking down an old man trying to return their helmet.

In the wake of this footage the public began to turn on the police.

During a demonstration supporting the marginally popular position of maintaining confederate statues, the nation watched a right wing demonstrator drive into otherwise peaceful protesters and public opinion turned against the monuments and they started to come down.

Concern that protesters had set up occupation zones became empathy as images of protesters being rounded up by unidentified agencies in unmarked vans began to air.

in the wake of image after image of police beating protesters, culminating in the clearing of lafyette square, opinion had turned against the police forces enough that large municipalities began reassessing their policing practices and changing their policy of dealing with protestors.

Despite weeks of Trump pushing a false narrative, tying up courts and literally pressuring other elected officials to overturn the will of the electorate, it wasn't until his supporters storm and sack the capitol that we find the largest amount of support for impeaching Trump ever.

BLM knows that violence would detract from their message because the powers that be have been using any act of violence to dismiss civil rights movements for decades. They also knew that during the civil rights struggles in the 60s it was images of dogs attacking and firehoses being turned against them that turned public opinion against the police and towards the protestors. They knew that it was the image of Emitt Till's battered face that finally drove their plight into the uncomfortable consciousness of white America.

If the right wing militias were looking back of the last year or decades, they could have learned two lessons. Violence is the best way to lose support or their leaders will bend over backwards to accommodate, excuse, or even legalize their violence.

They learned the latter.

People in this thread have fallen over themselves to pretend that the civil rights movement found excuses for violence but the sad reality is that if you were a black protester, or a protester for civil rights that knew the history of the United States, they knew they had to go out there and take a beating in front of the world so that the world could no longer ignore your reality. And the sad thing is to get that beating all they had to do was show up.

[Gravlen]

[Ifreann]

...They are literally threatening to take the capitol raid to all fifty states and are making continued and increasing threats to disrupt the inauguration to the point that the national guard from several states have been called in to protect the capitol...

And the threat to Congress hasn't gone away.

[Nakena]

his lackluster speech in Texas.

What was that one about? More fraud claims?

Nah just lame talk about da wall and stuff. Self-reptitive blubber. It wasnt even interesting or inspiring.

If he would have pulled something like the Palm Beach speech from October 2016, that would have been interesting. Theres still a few things about the system, a man with nothing to loose could call out for crash and burn purposes.

But alas Trump isn't the guy for that.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

What else should we do in the name of "unity?" Let Trump be president again anyways? Take down statues of Fredrick Douglas? Close the black history museum? Erase all references to native american massacres from our history books? I mean cause one side won't make peace until the entire country is subjugated under their will and their president and the other side is basically everyone else. When I see footage of the capitol siege, I'm not thinking "let's just come together like the beatles." This "we need to heal the divide" bullshit leaves out an important fact, which is that one side increasingly supports armed insurgency and the other side doesn't really. And yes, the CHAZ was a thing but it wasn't nearly the same as what the right wing is planning for on the 20th, which is nothing short of an uprising. I have no plans to bury the hatchet by any means with people who wanna bury it in my back.

The JCS have already thrown their support behind Biden. Theres no way an insurrection is going to work out at the 20th unless lower officer ranks or so have different ideas about who should be President. If there were any plots in the darks they are likely going to be dissuaded from furthering their plans. And Trump is at this stage nobody but some QAnonists and radical MAGA would be going to fight for. not after his lackluster speech in Texas. He's finished.

https://www.stripes.com/news/us/joint-c ... n-1.658299

(X) DOUBT. 33% of Americans will always love him.