post
Trump should be hanged for treason.
Like Mussolini?
I think that would be something I'd watch, and I'm not one for capital punishment or public displays of violence.
Rack and quartered*
Soooooo, he's willing to throw Elon under the bus, the richest dude in America (maybe world, don't know), and he's willing to go after governors that make him look like a terrible leader. All of these other oligarchs, what makes you think you'll be special and he won't do the same to you? Answer, he will.
This time it's different. He likes me in a way he doesn't like the others. They were all toxic but he knows I'm true. They made him be like that. He knows I won't.
The American people are the frogs in the pot of water
The water is getting pretty warm and its about to boil soon and everyone keeps hoping that the water won't get any hotter
Arresting Newsome is the dumbest move trump could make, so he might do it.
Eleni Kounalakis isnt so.eone I know about, but after a quick Google seems to be a huge improvement over Newsome, and with the election next year she'll drag the Overton window left even before the primary starts to gear up.
And she'd be out to do a lot before the election because she's already declared for it.
So in your prediction of the future Trump arrests the governor of California and then just fucks off while that governor's replacement does what they like? I'm not following the logic.
You're not following the logic that he would arrest a governor?
Like, for you it's unfathomable to do that and not a full-scale takeover?
I'm genuinely confused what you're trying to ask, and you apparently can't understand me...
I think we're at an enpasse bud, you might have to ask someone else for help.
*Newesome
I agree with the spirit of your message, but it is a hell of a lot more than 100 angry people in that mob. In my opinion, there should be thousands more. The only other option is to do absolutely nothing while democracy dies.
Yes there are more than 100 angry people, but just because you're angry doesn't mean you're violent.
I wrote a longer comment further down in this thread—the group of 100 I saw live on @LordHito’s stream was definitely violent—some had what appeared to be homemade smoke bombs, they lit fires, and smashed some windows.
However, I think this response is entirely justified and the police have definitely been more violent than the protestors.
I don’t disagree with anything they’ve done, I just think it is disingenuous to say they were a peaceful mob, even though that is what the news has been mostly showing.
That's not violent that's disorderly like... A protest. It's like you think we simply showed up and told the British we were displeased and dispersed in an orderly fashion when ordered to do so.
It was the smoke bombs and rocks that I consider violent, but I also think it is justified. Pacifist methods of resistance have been playing into the desires of the ruling class for a long time.
Those things that exist at every protest? You get cars on fire for championship games where their team wins.... This is a hiccup in protest history Jan 6 lasted a sixth as long as had two confirmed deaths at last I checked.
You seem to think I’m making disparaging comments about the protestors. I fully support them and think they are entirely justified in using any means necessary to repel the illegal forces of government that are violating the rights of citizens.
I am only relaying what I have witnessed live through a camera lens, not casting judgment against them.
I don't think your intent matters just the end result which is enabling authoritarians.
The end result is just me repeating things that are still available to see on YouTube. I’m not breaking any news here.
So why are you repeating it then?
Well, when I first brought it up in this thread, I was responding to someone else and it was relevant. Now you and I seem to be locked in some sort of pointless back and forth where I keep feeling like you are interpreting my words to be the opposite of what I’m saying half the time, and then you respond with either a question or another misinterpretation.
We may be stuck here until the end of the universe at this rate.
Maybe you are?
My position hasn't really changed, conflating property crime with violence is a time honored authoritarian talking point to the extent that you can find newspapers of the foundational protests that created this country that say essentially "why can't these protestors protest correctly?" "I was with them until the property crime!"
I was not only talking about property crime, I was talking about throwing smoke bombs and rocks at the police.
Which, once again, I think is an entirely justified thing to do. My position hasn’t changed either, I suppose. I saw violent stuff, I think the violence is justified.
When they shoot you with rubber bullets, pepperballs and tear has throwing them back at them is disorderly not violent.
You haven’t read my comments, some of the smoke bombs appeared to be homemade from fireworks.
If I throw a smoke bomb or rock at someone’s face, I would consider that an act of violence, and if it was at a cop during these protests, it would be a justified act of violence.
Yeah so what? It's smoke it's not meant to harm, the smoke they fire at protestors is meant to harm and is actually more strictly controlled on the battlefield then the civilian policing world.
If they are wearing riot gear it's not meant to harm it's meant to say get the fuck out which is generally pretty easily discerned when they're chanting get the fuck out. Saying it's violence is what makes it a riot genius it's why of you support it you shouldn't die on this dumb hill.
At this point, I just find this amusing.
If I spit on someone, it’s legally assault, so by the same token, throwing a smoke grenade at them also assault. Whether or not I, a random Lemmy user, consider this to be violence doesn’t make a damn difference to what Trump will do—he wants to murder everybody already.
But I guess if you want me to bow out and not die on this hill, then my answer is “yeah, whatever bro, I saw what I saw.”
Cool.
If you spit on a cop or may or may not be depending on context and even then force has to be met with equal force. Try a dictionary then:
the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy
No you're too ignorant to know the difference and too obstinate to accept that your concept of violence may be skewed by capitalist interests.
Lol, yeah, whatever bro, I saw what I saw.
No one is staying you didn't, im saying your definition of violence is contrary to both dictionary definition and legal understanding and only helps to validate authoritarian concerns.
Okie dokey. Should I stop responding so you can have the last word and feel satisfied?
You get that particular idiotic attempt at a dig goes equally well to you correct?
You seem to have responded specifically to get the last word, of you didn't want a response maybe don't respond?
I was asking if it would make you feel better. You seem to really want it, but then you respond with more questions.
At this point, I’m not trying to make any digs or prove anything—what’s the point, we will never agree anyway. I’m just munching my popcorn while you charge at windmills.
I mean you seem to really want it, you complain that I'm furthering conversation to have the last word and your solution is to continue the conversation yourself but solely to complain about it.
Tilting at windmills, you should really read the series because that quote doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.
Munch, munch, munch. Cool, man.
And then you double down, neat! I will advise you harassing me isn't the best choice but you do you.
So throwing a smoke bomb or rock at a person isn’t violence, but trolling you a little with popcorn noises is harassment. Aye aye, cap’n. You have me quaking in my boots over here.
By definition no it's not violence and yes targeted continual contact against warning to cease is harassment.
Dictionaries and code books, read like one ever.
You haven’t told me to cease talking to you in this thread. Regardless, I’m bored with this, so adios muchacho. Sorry if I stepped on your toes too much.
Taco the chickenshit now suggests, "someone please arrest this man." Why won't you have him arrested dementia Donny? Did you forget why again.
Course he does, he's a moron. You literally cannot say anything of an inflammatory nature without giving him ideas
I want to see California form a pact with Oregon and Washington, and then form an alliance with Mexico and Canada. Then MAGA America will be surrounded on 2/3 by hostile foreign nations.
It also means the entire west coast port system would be cut off to MAGA America, and they'd have to pay whatever taxes, tariffs, fees, etc. that California demands. Or they could just ship everything through the Panama canal, at least until CaWaOr (still workshopping the name), can sign a deal with Panama to prohibit MAGA America from using the canal.
Most states probably should be a separated country, I am just worried about states like Texas who will cause more issues that way. You can still do something like we do in Europe with the EU, or Shengen countries etc
Not states, most couldn't survive, but America could certainly Balkanize into several separate entities - New England, Midwest, South, Plains States, West Coast, Southwest, etc. some states like Texas and Florida might be able to survive as stand alone economies, but most couldn't.
no comments (yet)