Happy No-more-USA Day
-
The big word is YET.
They are funding ICE with 10 billion dollars. ICE will not be used just for immigration. It will be filled with Nationalist goons and thugs and ICE will be the group that goes after citizens and dissenters.
Give it a year and large protests against the current regime will probably not be allowed.
So you think it makes sense to bring violence and provoke that step before we have the numbers we need for a successful resistance, rather than continuing to grow our numbers under our legal protections?
Do you see how your argument makes no sense?
-
Yes. I’ve cited sources, provided facts, and quoted statistics. You’ve repeatedly used inflammatory language to share your feelings. How could you possibly think your argument is credible based on emotion. Provide documentation refuting my claim of peaceful protests being an effective engagement system to grow our numbers and I’ll reconsider my stance, but not before.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]The thing about history and power is that there's always enough lies to tell any story you want to.
But generally 'peaceful' movements work best as a visible face to allow power a graceful surrender. Which means you guys get all the credit and a ton of divisive fuvking sanctimony while people willing to push in more radical ways get a little bit of night watchman syndrome. Dont let that shit work. If you try to discredit your allies, you're working for the enemy.
Theres a value in that option for non-humiliating surrender, in many cases. It's generally been a great need-for-force-divider¹ but when you're up against nazis, people with not an ounce of grace subtlety or sportsmanship within them, who do not get yo feel big for listening to people and changing course, it has not historically been useful. To them even communication is kind of an attack, so there is no way to disagree with civility, and the whole mechanism of peaceful opposition is undermined.
Your enemy, who they are, what drives them, and their horizons of action are absolutely factors that need to be taken into account when choosing strategy. These guys get hard when they think of shooting into a crowd.
The doctrine and driving force behind your people is also fucking important. It's more than just having people/not having people. A shitlib who wants to be at the party, a conscript who doesnt want to be hunted as a deserter, someone with a particular interest, and a die hard true believer, all have different horizons of action and lengths they'll push to, or be pushed to before breaking.
I do think this would have been important and the most effective thing against the biden regime, or a hypothetical harris regime, but i doubt we wouldve gotten it.
I agree violence is fucking scary and I'd rather not. I just don't think that's on the table.
¹effectively force multiplier
-
So you think it makes sense to bring violence and provoke that step before we have the numbers we need for a successful resistance, rather than continuing to grow our numbers under our legal protections?
Do you see how your argument makes no sense?
I think you mistake me for someone else. I've made no argument here.
Having said that, I think you need to start doing something yesterday. You need to start shooting at ICE if they come masked, without badges or identifying names. You have no way to distinguish them from random cartel kidnappers.
If you have no idea who they are, what department they work under, if they have a valid order to take a person, or information where they are taking that person, and no way to lodge a complaint against the agent, this is basically an outlaw. A threat. A risk to life, liberty and happiness.
These people should be shot at.
-
The thing about history and power is that there's always enough lies to tell any story you want to.
But generally 'peaceful' movements work best as a visible face to allow power a graceful surrender. Which means you guys get all the credit and a ton of divisive fuvking sanctimony while people willing to push in more radical ways get a little bit of night watchman syndrome. Dont let that shit work. If you try to discredit your allies, you're working for the enemy.
Theres a value in that option for non-humiliating surrender, in many cases. It's generally been a great need-for-force-divider¹ but when you're up against nazis, people with not an ounce of grace subtlety or sportsmanship within them, who do not get yo feel big for listening to people and changing course, it has not historically been useful. To them even communication is kind of an attack, so there is no way to disagree with civility, and the whole mechanism of peaceful opposition is undermined.
Your enemy, who they are, what drives them, and their horizons of action are absolutely factors that need to be taken into account when choosing strategy. These guys get hard when they think of shooting into a crowd.
The doctrine and driving force behind your people is also fucking important. It's more than just having people/not having people. A shitlib who wants to be at the party, a conscript who doesnt want to be hunted as a deserter, someone with a particular interest, and a die hard true believer, all have different horizons of action and lengths they'll push to, or be pushed to before breaking.
I do think this would have been important and the most effective thing against the biden regime, or a hypothetical harris regime, but i doubt we wouldve gotten it.
I agree violence is fucking scary and I'd rather not. I just don't think that's on the table.
¹effectively force multiplier
Your entire comment is based on your projection of a peaceful surrender. I don’t think you understand how to debate. I’m stating that peaceful resistance has successfully grown our numbers from a few hundred thousand to ~10M in four months. You are challenging that method. Propose a better method to mobilize tens of millions of citizens and you’ll have my attention. Otherwise, you’re just writing noise.
-
Be careful though, emergency dissolution of the Senate is exactly how Palpatine gained power. There has to be a careful plan and new system ready to go and not just fall to the one person it shouldn't.
I know it's fiction, but just saying. Dissolving it is one thing, but having a coherent plan is another.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Its not even fiction. Palpatine's rise to power is based on actual history. Both the Roman Empire and WW2 Germany had that happen.
-
Your entire comment is based on your projection of a peaceful surrender. I don’t think you understand how to debate. I’m stating that peaceful resistance has successfully grown our numbers from a few hundred thousand to ~10M in four months. You are challenging that method. Propose a better method to mobilize tens of millions of citizens and you’ll have my attention. Otherwise, you’re just writing noise.
Im criticizing the degree to which theyre mobilized, and concerned that this kind of rhetoric caps that pretty low.
You're just repeating 'line go up!' And while that's not useless, it's not enough. It doesn't win alone.
-
Im criticizing the degree to which theyre mobilized, and concerned that this kind of rhetoric caps that pretty low.
You're just repeating 'line go up!' And while that's not useless, it's not enough. It doesn't win alone.
So you have no advice, only condemnation. Thanks for wasting my time. Good luck complaining the government into submission.
-
So you have no advice, only condemnation. Thanks for wasting my time. Good luck complaining the government into submission.
That is what im doing, yes. Complaining so fucking hard.
-
I mean yes, but most of the gun owners in this country will rise up and stand on the side of tyranny.
republicans are so far gone they would welcome a tyrant if it was trump. he is their religion now.
-
Is it possible ? Can US americans revolt against their own government ?
The biggest problem is, that this isn't a government issue. A lot of people still stand behind that government so overthrowing the government would likely lead to a civil war.
-
It’s a great way to get arrested or killed, scare people away from resistance for fear of their safety, and embolden fascism by turning a constitutionally protected peaceful resistance into a domestic threat.
How many people with guns do you estimate it takes to overthrow the largest military in the world by force?
I think it’s hilarious that the US navy has the second largest Air Force in the world but people think they’re going to take it on with some handguns and rifles.
-
I think it’s hilarious that the US navy has the second largest Air Force in the world but people think they’re going to take it on with some handguns and rifles.
Agreed. You may enjoy this too. https://youtu.be/WOSqCjMRXWA
-
So you think it makes sense to bring violence and provoke that step before we have the numbers we need for a successful resistance, rather than continuing to grow our numbers under our legal protections?
Do you see how your argument makes no sense?
this mofo said calm the fuck down, Mueller's got this -
Then why haven’t we been arrested for protesting yet? Oh, right, because it’s still protected.
Maybe you should talk to a therapist about those big feelings instead of typing all caps and name-calling.
Not any more.
-
Its not even fiction. Palpatine's rise to power is based on actual history. Both the Roman Empire and WW2 Germany had that happen.
I mean true. At least Germany and Romans didn't have JarJar.
-
Is it possible ? Can US americans revolt against their own government ?
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Unfortunately probably not in this day and age. Cutting-edge identification AI and drone tech, and of course weaponry, will be used against the civilian population. It has all been subverted to oppress us and control us.
-
This post did not contain any content.
"today we declare independence from the USA" was a particularly nice headline from the guardian
-
This post did not contain any content.
The civil war that follows isn't even the difficult part.
The difficult part is coming up with a vision for the time after the civil war. And that's gonna be difficult. If americans couldn't agree on a policy before 2025, why would they be able to come up with one after that?
-
The civil war that follows isn't even the difficult part.
The difficult part is coming up with a vision for the time after the civil war. And that's gonna be difficult. If americans couldn't agree on a policy before 2025, why would they be able to come up with one after that?
wrote on last edited by [email protected]I just want to mention that there's a series of difficulties:
- practically, a good 20% - 30% are still backing trump, especially among "republicans for life". It would be easy to topple a government if 99% of the population despised it, but if 20% back it, it's difficult because it can retract and re-collect strength.
- normally, conflicts are decided by who can stay solvent longer, i.e. who has more money. normally, that would be blue states, but if trump can just print money through the federal reserve, then that kinda makes that point more questionable. blue states kinda would have to start using their own currency, or some foreign currency like the canadian dollar or the mexican pesos, to be fiscally independent from washington. that's a logistic challenge to pull off so quickly. but it can be done.
- then there's a shitload of cultural issues. the vietnam kicked the american's butt because they were fierce and willing to die for their cause, because they were willing to die for their community. america doesn't have communities like that, america is very atomistic, i.e. everybody fights for themselves. establishing a good sense of community is a whole lot of work and takes a long time. i don't see it happening overnight.
-
This post did not contain any content.
omg guys calm down holy fuck. I swear to God progressive and leftists are the masters of infighting, I wish we could not squabble like this. whatever anyone is doing is good, I know it comes from a good place but we've got to stop all this incessant bitter. people on the right go along with whatever batshit insane plan their chosen lunatics shovel out, while we debate about semantics and methods lmao
