top 96 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 100 points 1 year ago (36 children)

That's what all their guns are for, right? Not just for shooting minorities and kids, right?

  • source
  • hideshow 36 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I mean yes, but most of the gun owners in this country will rise up and stand on the side of tyranny.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (30 children)

    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?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

    Cool. Our largest nationwide protest was ~11M, most of whom were elderly. So you agree we need to grow our numbers.

    Small factions of violence have historically proven to reduce resistance numbers and justify the implementation of assembly-restricting legislation.

    https://tedxboulder.com/speakers/erica-chenoweth

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago*

    tThe scary part to me is the imbalance of power and how few are aware of it. Yeah we have a bunch.of guns around here, but how many people actually can use them in a meaningful way? How many would know what to do if THEY were being shot at? Handful of retired vets, some people with a little training, but few have ever experienced active combat.

    Never mind the fact that money is the real deal breaker. Government has drones upon drones. They have satellite imagery, cameras all over the place, they could easily shut down phone and internet connectivity as well as power. Collect phone data off of a certain area, set up a perimeter and use everyone stupid phones as a tracking beacon. Send in some drones for visibility some for strikes and push in military to clean up what's left.

    Thats the thing nobody talks about. Going from our current pseudo-democracy to totalitarianism is little more than the flip of a switch by a crazy old man. They are under the illusion that it can't or won't happen. It 100% can. Nobody gives a shit about the nowhere places like great plains states, it would happen in major cities and surrounding regions. Take over, set up checkpoints. Once under control, sell them off to billionaires who would enact all their crazy control fetishes. One for zuck, one for theil, bezos will want one, maybe musky. Some people will escape to the useless regions like the south, central states or whatever, nobody will bother too much. If some sort of resistance grows, drop a few bombs to remind them that they're being watched. Cut off food, energy, blow upna few bridges and roads wait until winter.

    I'm sure multiple versions of this have been modeled out within the military intelligence groups. Nobody is coming to save us. The rich people dont give a shit about this country, they only care about themselves. Nobody in the military is going to stage a coup, they would not stand a chance anyway and it would be a death sentence for anyone they know or love.

    The only hope is that the crazy old bastard dies before he really decides to go full Looney toons. Its clear who runs this country; they always have but now they are no longer content to own an absurd amount of it, they want it ALL.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (21 children)

    Dude the president just declared birthright citizenship illegal and deployed the mari!es to crack down on peaceful protests against ice blatant violating the 4th amemdment.

    Nobody. Gives. A. Shit. About your fucking constitution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (20 children)

    No, he didn’t. He wrote an executive order. That’s not a law. It’s a directive to the executive branch, and we are in no way obligated to follow it as citizens.

    SCOTUS ruled that a district judge cannot impose a nationwide injunction against the executive order. Each judge will now have to rule on the case of birthright citizenship independently. The 14th amendment is very clear.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)

    He declared, and people are going along. 'Law' does not seem to matter here.

    We are not obligated as citizens. Thats what the men with guns are for.

    scotus says

    Thats some tepid-ass bullshit for a part of thr constitution, it almost doesnt matter that the administration is going to wipe their asses with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    So because you believe something will happen, we should lead a small, unsuccessful, violent revolution to ensure that it does happen?

    How about you keep your big feelings to yourself while the people who have successfully grown a resistance from a few hundred thousand to ~10M in four months continue to successfully plan and execute a real resistance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    You use that phrase a lot. I feel like you're not actually reading what im typing.

    It's not a resistance if it can't actually do anything. I'm not sure the milder thing is necessarily the easy sell.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    What about growing numbers is confusing to you? 10M people is ~2% of our nation. We couldn’t collectively get anything done, yet. We’re growing a resistance through organized protests.

    You clearly haven’t read enough on the topic. Do some research and then we can talk. Until then, your opinion is woefully uninformed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    You're just repeating talking points and numbers, not engaging with what im saying. You can see how that might make me feel vindicated unexpectedly quickly?

    I know the first piece of theory you read is very heady, but please keep reading.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (4 children)

    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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT MEAN JACK SHIT TO NAZIS.

    FUCK OFF, SHITLIB.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    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?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 51 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The only times americans revolted against their government was when americans were fighting to KEEP slavery. So I wouldnt get my hopes up.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago

    While this is true, the Million Man March was not supposed to be a peaceful protest. Malcolm X talked about how Martin Luther King's speech pacified what could have been a turning point in history.

    Also the government has destroyed any positive movements but making laws indirectly making those movements illegal and killing leaders of any significant movement.

    The anti marijuana laws is a great example of shutting down a hippie movement and any positive black groups at the time.

    The killing of leaders is also particularly damaging because new leaders weren't able to trust people in their own organization. For example the man that killed Malcolm X was from his own movement. This created paranoia for people with in the movements.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    My guess is that their revolt will be similar as the recent Chinese and Russian ones.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    There's a revolt in China and Russia?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 15 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    The monopoly on violence for the most part comes from the military, so the choice they have is a military coup. Problem is he's stacked the military with loyalists. But also what you said.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    He stacked military leadership with loyalists. It's still each and every individual soldiers responsibility to determine for themselves whether they will follow an order if they believe it to be unjust. Many in the military are Maga, but there will be many that would refuse such orders as well... Basically, I'm just trying to say the military isn't a hivemind. If orders came down to attack us citizens, I'd hope there'd be significant pushback throughout the ranks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Refuse an order, get court martialled despite all your rights, get dishobourably discharged and lose your livelihood, all for some people you dont know, and greatly negatively affect the lives of those you provide for.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 30 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    The declaration really can't be highlighted like that. It undermines the gravity of the letter, but I understand people don't like to read.

    Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed.

    Essentially, they say that people are willing to endure suffering for the sake of not having to change their lives. But Then it follows that with

    But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism

    When all people can no longer ignore that the government is forcing everything to have an absolute ruler, the people will come to the conclusion that the government must end by force.

    While a lot of people agree with this, it's not enough. When I go to work, everyone is still going about their day like nothing has really changed. Too many people still have shelter, food, and medicine. That's about to change now. And when people experience that, that is the time they will overthrow.

    The reason they want revolutionary violence to occur earlier than later is because they still have the opportunity to turn the most brain washed against the rest of us.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Is it possible ? Can US americans revolt against their own government ?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    How about a general strike? More than protests but non-violent.

    It worked for Germany after WW I.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    The thing is that the average person in the US still have it pretty good, because they still have their bread and circus to distract them from the creeping fascist takeover.

    When people refer to those instances in history where non-violent protest succeeded, the average person was much more afflicted, as in with literal risk of starvation or similar. Modern dictators have long since learnt that you just need to ensure very basic means of sustenance and a helluva lot of entertainment (provided with the willing help of the tech bro oligarchs), to keep the general populace content with events.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    I work for an US company and I got a day off, it is curious, cause Im from Costa Rica, and I belong to the bribri indigenous nation, and we commemorate Pa Bru day, an ancient leader who stopped Spanish incursions to our land in 1710. So I wish, from the deepest of my soul and for my ancestor that you, US fellows, rebel!

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] [S] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It sucks that the USA is associated with the bald eagle because IMO it's still a beautiful bird and it did nothing to deserve the association. And also for me, the fact that they sound like seagulls makes them even more relatable because it has an annoying voice just like me 😆

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    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?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • 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.
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    We need to grow our numbers! The only way we can do that is with continued non-violent organized protest. Violence will only reduce our numbers and suppress our resistance.

    Erica Chenoweth has a very well researched presentation on the success of non-violent resistance overthrowing dictatorships with only 3.5% of the population. I highly recommend it.

    Come out today for the Free America protest! We also have the Good Trouble Lives On protest on July 17th.

    Sign up for notifications from 50501 to stay informed.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (7 children)

    I still cannot fathom why they scheduled on a weekday for the next one. If you want turnout schedule for the weekends.

    I know people should go out regardless, but they have bills to pay. A lot of people can't afford to miss a shift and vacation time is far too limited

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    It just simply won't have the same turnout. Frankly I think weekend protests are more visible since the average person is more likely to be out and about and not at their job.

    I think making the people see it and then you pressure the politicians. The politicians don't give a fuck if thousands of people are gathered outside a building.

    I attend my local protests and take the time off to do so. The last no kings protests pulled well over 1,000. Other weekend protests typically pull around 300 - 400 people. Weekday protests typically pull barely 100, if we're lucky 150 people. It just has less impact.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    At least in my city we are fortunate that the government buildings are located at a key intersection. Weekdays we usually just get heckled by lead brained boomers. Weekends there are way more cars, a more diverse audience, and more support in general.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    I work weekends, so it's hard for me to attend weekday stuff. But I took off of work on a Saturday to protest, because we need people out there. So I say do it on the weekdays too, and have people call-in to work to go

    Peaceful disruption by having mass call-ins on protest days; because it matters and it makes the protests harder to ignore when people aren't going into work every time a protest happens. Keep it happening, and keep the pressure up. I can't afford a vacation anyway, so I'll save my PTO to get out there and call-in to work whenever

    My time off is my time off, don't matter why. I'm calling-in because it's none of their business. It's just a "sick day" cause I'm fucking sick (of the atrocities being normalized and the utter disintelligence spreading like wildfire)

    Smaller protests are fine, cause people can't afford to be at every single one. But everyone can afford to be at as many as possible. Than you have a constant force that's more likely to crest

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Because defending your democracy isn't a weekend fucking sport. How many days a week are the fascists trying to tear down your democracy? Because that's the same energy you need to bring to defend it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    No need to come at me, the fact of the matter is the majority of people won't take time. I take the time, but most won't. If you want the biggest impact you'll always draw the largest crowds on a weekend.

    I don't disagree with you I'm just being pragmatic. A protest of 1,500 is a bigger deal than a protest of 200. That's the typical difference in my city with weekend vs weekday protests

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    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

  • source
  • "today we declare independence from the USA" was a particularly nice headline from the guardian

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    First past the post voting system isn't democratic and can easily be corrupted by Gerrymandering.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I mean yeah, I vibe with this, but did you mean to reply to something else? 😄

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    No, I meant that revolting against a government without an election system change is replacing one almost dictatorship with another.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I'll believe it when I see it. The Americans seem perfectly content with how things are.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Lisa murkowski can catch these hands.

  • source
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago

    Long live King George III

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›