American Politics IV: 1400 Reasons Why(A Stimulus Serial)

[San Lumen]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/26/politics ... index.html

Gayle Manchin, an educator and wife of Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, has been nominated to serve as the federal co-chair of the Appalachian Regional Commission,

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Explain to me how I'm fighting for a totalitarian dictatorship?

From your signature:
"Ethics and morality are for the weak and spineless.
The media is a propaganda tool fueling the two parties hyperpartisanship and killing the country, it's time to end the "freedom of the press"
Time for compromise is over, time to end the reign of corrupt politicians on all sides of politics and their crony capitalist bourgeoisie buddies through force and action no matter what."

Go ahead and do your little revolution, we'll see how long it takes for you to fail. I see totalitarianism all in that.

I literally do not see how anything he said is authoritarian. How much did you have to read into his signature to reach that conclusion

[Borderlands of Rojava]

There's also all the times people armed themselves to resist police or government overreach ie the original Black Panthers and various other groups.

And as I said yesterday, it was of no help for them when they started by murdered, it was of no help for them when Cointelpro started destroying their lives, it was of no help for them when they were framed for murder they didn't commit - quite the opposite, the fact they were armed made it so much easier to frame them and break them, because they scared people.

I've lots of sympathy and respect for what the Black Panthers did. But let's face truth: the way they were wiped out shows out pointless guns are against a modern government.

Like how the British totally exterminated the IRA right? Or how the anti apartheid movement failed because they used guns.

[Untecna]

From your signature:
"Ethics and morality are for the weak and spineless.
The media is a propaganda tool fueling the two parties hyperpartisanship and killing the country, it's time to end the "freedom of the press"
Time for compromise is over, time to end the reign of corrupt politicians on all sides of politics and their crony capitalist bourgeoisie buddies through force and action no matter what."

Go ahead and do your little revolution, we'll see how long it takes for you to fail. I see totalitarianism all in that.

I literally do not see how anything he said is authoritarian. How much did you have to read into his signature to reach that conclusion

Then you haven't read long enough.

[Dresderstan]

Liar.

I don't generalize. We had an attempted coup on January 6th. It got little sympathy. What makes you think yours would get much either?

Yes you do.

Because unlike the coup on the 6th it would not be to install some crybaby who lost the election crying foul to stay in power, it's a total destruction of the current status quo by people with genuine grievances against a system that has been seen for what it truly is; a corrupt system that benefits the rich and powerful few and fucks over the many and poor who struggle. A new electoral system is needed one that is actually free and fair and representative, a new government that protects ALL Americans rights, and will tell the rich and powerful to either play ball or get fucked. You on the other hand act like everything is fine while the house burning all around and nothing needs to be done.

[Washington Resistance Army]

And as I said yesterday, it was of no help for them when they started by murdered, it was of no help for them when Cointelpro started destroying their lives, it was of no help for them when they were framed for murder they didn't commit - quite the opposite, the fact they were armed made it so much easier to frame them and break them, because they scared people.

I've lots of sympathy and respect for what the Black Panthers did. But let's face truth: the way they were wiped out shows out pointless guns are against a modern government.

Like how the British totally exterminated the IRA right? Or how the anti apartheid movement failed because they used guns.

There was also a very active left wing insurgent movement in the US all throughout the Cold War, it only went away cuz the Cold War ended and oof ouch ideological defeat.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

I don't generalize. We had an attempted coup on January 6th. It got little sympathy. What makes you think yours would get much either?

Yes you do.

Because unlike the coup on the 6th it would not be to install some crybaby who lost the election crying foul to stay in power, it's a total destruction of the current status quo by people with genuine grievances against a system that has been seen for what it truly is; a corrupt system that benefits the rich and powerful few and fucks over the many and poor who struggle. A new electoral system is needed one that is actually free and fair and representative, a new government that protects ALL Americans rights, and will tell the rich and powerful to either play ball or get fucked. You on the other hand act like everything is fine while the house burning all around and nothing needs to be done.

He's a political centrist, he can't tell the difference between a popular revolution against tyranny and systems of oppression and a fash revolt.

[San Lumen]

I don't generalize. We had an attempted coup on January 6th. It got little sympathy. What makes you think yours would get much either?

Yes you do.

Because unlike the coup on the 6th it would not be to install some crybaby who lost the election crying foul to stay in power, it's a total destruction of the current status quo by people with genuine grievances against a system that has been seen for what it truly is; a corrupt system that benefits the rich and powerful few and fucks over the many and poor who struggle. A new electoral system is needed one that is actually free and fair and representative, a new government that protects ALL Americans rights, and will tell the rich and powerful to either play ball or get fucked. You on the other hand act like everything is fine while the house burning all around and nothing needs to be done.

go start your revolution.

[Dresderstan]

Yes you do.

Because unlike the coup on the 6th it would not be to install some crybaby who lost the election crying foul to stay in power, it's a total destruction of the current status quo by people with genuine grievances against a system that has been seen for what it truly is; a corrupt system that benefits the rich and powerful few and fucks over the many and poor who struggle. A new electoral system is needed one that is actually free and fair and representative, a new government that protects ALL Americans rights, and will tell the rich and powerful to either play ball or get fucked. You on the other hand act like everything is fine while the house burning all around and nothing needs to be done.

He's a political centrist, he can't tell the difference between a popular revolution against tyranny and systems of oppression and a fash revolt.

Ironic how last year he'll call for the people of Belarus to fight against Lukashenko through violence yet call for "peace" and "free and fair elections" at home, total hypocrisy.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Yes you do.

Because unlike the coup on the 6th it would not be to install some crybaby who lost the election crying foul to stay in power, it's a total destruction of the current status quo by people with genuine grievances against a system that has been seen for what it truly is; a corrupt system that benefits the rich and powerful few and fucks over the many and poor who struggle. A new electoral system is needed one that is actually free and fair and representative, a new government that protects ALL Americans rights, and will tell the rich and powerful to either play ball or get fucked. You on the other hand act like everything is fine while the house burning all around and nothing needs to be done.

go start your revolution.

Be careful what you wish for Lumen. With the way this country is going, it may happen.

[Kilobugya]

Your position here seems oddly inconsistent with your politics. While yes you are a democratic socialist I still find it mindboggling that you want only the agents of a hypercapitalist state and it's cronies to be armed. In a nation where political strikes are pretty much illegal you'd be removing the only equalizer the people have.

I don't oppose violence in all situation - I supported the French Revolution, Paris' Commune, October Revolution, Spanish Republicans, Resistance against nazism, Cuban revolution, Manela's ANC, Rojava's YPG, ... and you'll notice that all of them happened without any "gun rights".

But I do consider violence to be "the last refuge", the very last thing you should resort to when all the rest failed.

And I do think that violent revolution in a modern semi-democractic regime will just not happen. A violent revolution can only occur against a government that itself uses violence in a much more direct and brutal way. In a semi-democratic regime, control of the narrative, control of public opinion and control of the means of production is what matter. Non-violent action, mass protests, strikes are how you get wins. Not with guns. In fact guns make you more likely to lose.

[Untecna]

go start your revolution.

Be careful what you wish for Lumen. With the way this country is going, it may happen.

I heavily doubt it will work.

[San Lumen]

He's a political centrist, he can't tell the difference between a popular revolution against tyranny and systems of oppression and a fash revolt.

Ironic how last year he'll call for the people of Belarus to fight against Lukashenko through violence yet call for "peace" and "free and fair elections" at home, total hypocrisy.

Lukoshenko is a tyrant who rigged an election he lost. You don't know what tyranny is.

[Kilobugya]

I literally do not see how anything he said is authoritarian. How much did you have to read into his signature to reach that conclusion

Ethics and morality are for the weak and spineless.

is a pretty authoritarian thing to say, and living by it in a world of conflicts mean you'll become one if you ever have a shred of power. To wield power without becoming a tyrant you need strong ethical safeguards and to be guided by morality.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Ironic how last year he'll call for the people of Belarus to fight against Lukashenko through violence yet call for "peace" and "free and fair elections" at home, total hypocrisy.

Lukoshenko is a tyrant who rigged an election he lost. You don't know what tyranny is.

Oh really Lumen? Americans don't know what tyranny is? Why don't we remind ourselves of what happened here last summer

[Genivaria]

Sure, "for their day" being the key part here.



It made some sense at their time, yes. When they just had to fight for independence. When modern democracies were still in their infancy. When "arms" was a impossible to conceal, hard to carry, slow-firing musket. When armies didn't have choppers and stealth bombers and tanks. When unions and strikes where basically unheard of. When death rate for so many other reasons were so high that human life had a much lesser value than today. And within the bounds of a "well-organized militia".

The world changed. What was reasonable back then is now both useless and criminally absurd. Refusal to accept that, worshiping words of a Constitution that's just a relic from a bygone age is part of what is breaking USA apart.

Your position here seems oddly inconsistent with your politics. While yes you are a democratic socialist I still find it mindboggling that you want only the agents of a hypercapitalist state and it's cronies to be armed. In a nation where political strikes are pretty much illegal you'd be removing the only equalizer the people have.

What part of "Under no pretext" is unclear I wonder?

[Shrillland]

OK, I think we should calm down for a moment and back away if we have to.

[Dresderstan]

Ironic how last year he'll call for the people of Belarus to fight against Lukashenko through violence yet call for "peace" and "free and fair elections" at home, total hypocrisy.

Lukoshenko is a tyrant who rigged an election he lost. You don't know what tyranny is.

Neither do you, taking people's guns is tyranny, so is taking away people's right to vote, yet you think lazy voting will do anything.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Your position here seems oddly inconsistent with your politics. While yes you are a democratic socialist I still find it mindboggling that you want only the agents of a hypercapitalist state and it's cronies to be armed. In a nation where political strikes are pretty much illegal you'd be removing the only equalizer the people have.

I don't oppose violence in all situation - I supported the French Revolution, Paris' Commune, October Revolution, Spanish Republicans, Resistance against nazism, Cuban revolution, Manela's ANC, Rojava's YPG, ... and you'll notice that all of them happened without any "gun rights".

But I do consider violence to be "the last refuge", the very last thing you should resort to when all the rest failed.

And I do think that violent revolution in a modern semi-democractic regime will just not happen. A violent revolution can only occur against a government that itself uses violence in a much more direct and brutal way. In a semi-democratic regime, control of the narrative, control of public opinion and control of the means of production is what matter. Non-violent action, mass protests, strikes are how you get wins. Not with guns. In fact guns make you more likely to lose.

You know diversity of tactics is a thing. We can use guns while also using non violent actions too.

[San Lumen]

Lukoshenko is a tyrant who rigged an election he lost. You don't know what tyranny is.

Neither do you, taking people's guns is tyranny, so is taking away people's right to vote, yet you think lazy voting will do anything.

No one wants to ban all guns. This is a scare tactic with no basis in reality. Democrats are trying to expand voting rights whereas Republicans want to limit them because they know they can't win free and fair elections.

Voting does change things. Had the Georgia runoffs gone the other way Biden would be getting absolutely nothing done. His cabinet would not have been confirmed nor would he get any judges through or any legislation passed. The relief bill would have failed.

[Dresderstan]

Neither do you, taking people's guns is tyranny, so is taking away people's right to vote, yet you think lazy voting will do anything.

No one wants to ban all guns. This is a scare tactic with no basis in reality. Democrats are trying to expand voting rights whereas Republicans want to limit them because they know they can't win free and fair elections.

Voting does change things. Had the Georgia runoffs gone the other way Biden would be getting absolutely nothing done. His cabinet would not have been confirmed nor would he get any judges through or any legislation passed. The relief bill would have failed.

Your party does.

Our elections are neither "free" nor "fair" regardless when the only choices are giant douche and turd sandwich.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Neither do you, taking people's guns is tyranny, so is taking away people's right to vote, yet you think lazy voting will do anything.

No one wants to ban all guns. This is a scare tactic with no basis in reality. Democrats are trying to expand voting rights whereas Republicans want to limit them because they know they can't win free and fair elections.

Voting does change things. Had the Georgia runoffs gone the other way Biden would be getting absolutely nothing done. His cabinet would not have been confirmed nor would he get any judges through or any legislation passed. The relief bill would have failed.

You can't really say nobody wants to ban all guns when we had to get a Supreme Court decision saying Democrats couldn't actually ban all handguns and when their regular "Assault weapons" bills would ban all of the most commonly made and owned firearms in the nation. This is bullshit misdirection akin to what the Republicans do on abortion. The end goal is clear even if you're not open about it.

[Genivaria]

Your position here seems oddly inconsistent with your politics. While yes you are a democratic socialist I still find it mindboggling that you want only the agents of a hypercapitalist state and it's cronies to be armed. In a nation where political strikes are pretty much illegal you'd be removing the only equalizer the people have.

I don't oppose violence in all situation - I supported the French Revolution, Paris' Commune, October Revolution, Spanish Republicans, Resistance against nazism, Cuban revolution, Manela's ANC, Rojava's YPG, ... and you'll notice that all of them happened without any "gun rights".

But I do consider violence to be "the last refuge", the very last thing you should resort to when all the rest failed.

And I do think that violent revolution in a modern semi-democractic regime will just not happen. A violent revolution can only occur against a government that itself uses violence in a much more direct and brutal way. In a semi-democratic regime, control of the narrative, control of public opinion and control of the means of production is what matter. Non-violent action, mass protests, strikes are how you get wins. Not with guns. In fact guns make you more likely to lose.

Violence being an option, even the last option, becomes somewhat difficult if you deprive the people of weapons to enact violence with.

To put that another way, removing the guns removes the option.

[Kilobugya]

You know diversity of tactics is a thing. We can use guns while also using non violent actions too.

I'm all for diversity of tactics - but when you cross the Rubicon and start using guns and violence, all the non-violent tactics lose most of their efficiency. That's why it should be the "last resort". Only used when absolutely required and with a significant probability of success. None which are true in modern semi-democracies like the USA. And "gun rights" are of no use anyway, since when you cross that Rubicon, you become a target for lethal force anyway.

[San Lumen]

No one wants to ban all guns. This is a scare tactic with no basis in reality. Democrats are trying to expand voting rights whereas Republicans want to limit them because they know they can't win free and fair elections.

Voting does change things. Had the Georgia runoffs gone the other way Biden would be getting absolutely nothing done. His cabinet would not have been confirmed nor would he get any judges through or any legislation passed. The relief bill would have failed.

Your party does.

Our elections are neither "free" nor "fair" regardless when the only choices are giant douche and turd sandwich.

Rubbish.

Yes they are. Enough with the generalizations. Don't look whose in power vote in every elections, Don't like whose running run yourself or perhaps get friends of yours to run.