4 ms·

>I am a "Parler User." I have an account and until it was taken down I used to check it every few days. Don't make assumptions about a person's politics from th

>I am a "Parler User." I have an account and until it was taken down I used to check it every few days. Don't make assumptions about a person's politics from the mere existence of software on their device. There's nothing wrong with Parler users or anyone else per-se. There is, however, a problem with violent insurrectionists. It's unfortunate that a small group of people planned and executed a violent attack on the seat of US government, although unfortunate is nowhere near a strong enough term for their acts. I don't know you, but if you don't participate in violent acts to support your political agenda and respect the rule of law, I have no problem with you. Assuming that's true, even if (and I don't know one way or another about that) I vehemently disagree with your policy perspectives, I will defend your right to hold and advocate for those perspectives. Because that's what a free society is all about. On the other hand, those that believe it's okay to use violence, lies and intimidation to achieve their political goals have no place in a free society and should be shunned, ridiculed, and if they perpetrate acts of violence, punished. I'd posit that anyone who believes in our constitutional system of government and the rule of law would agree with all of the above.

o-__-o 6y ago
When does an insurrectionist turn into a revolutionary? In the 1770s George Washington and ilk were insurrectionists. Now we look at them as revolutionaries. Do people who fight for change only become revolutionary when it’s an argument you agree with? Are you an insurrectionist if you fight the government to the death (literally) for what you believe in? Obvious disclaimer: I don’t hold a candle to this fight in either direction but can empathize with both sides
- nobody9999 6y ago
  >When does an insurrectionist turn into a revolutionary? They don't. The terms are synonymous. >Obvious disclaimer: I don’t hold a candle to this fight in either direction but can empathize with both sides Why is that obvious? And as to the idea that you can "empathize with both sides," Who do you think those "sides" are? They are most certainly not those of the two major political parties in the US. They are not even those who consider themselves "conservative" or "liberal." In reality, one side supports our constitutional form of government and the rule of law. The other side despises the rule of law and seeks to use violence, intimidation and lies to destabilize my home in an attempt to seize power. The former are 98%+ of my countrymen (many of us disagree about a great many things, but not about our constitutional republic and the rule of law), and the latter are a tiny minority who wishes to impose their will on everyone else. If you see things differently, I'd love to hear your arguments.
- zug_zug 6y ago
  > When does an insurrectionist turn into a revolutionary? A reasonable question in the abstract, but in this case the distinction is rather simple: 1776 was people revolting against a king to create a democracy. What we saw this month was quite the opposite - trying to undo democracy (i.e. negate the results of popular vote).
  - o-__-o 6y ago
    People used their voice to express their concern. Everyone dismissed them. They are the ones asking for a congressional oversight review and being rejected. They think something is being covered up. I thought the same way about 9/11 when it happened. It’s one of those believable far-fetched scenarios. But no one is legitimizing it and people are upset about it. Rather than be human about it we’re laughing them off then acting shocked and surprised when that group acts out. For contrast, black people were claiming police abuse decades ago and the country turned a cheek towards it. Police abuse increased until technology put the power back in our hands. It’s very hard to look at where the protestors are coming from but it is very easy to dismiss it because of status quo. Just a warning, and my downvotes are proving my point. No one wants to talk about it, they want to sweep ideas they don’t agree with under the rug. Just like my police encounters in the late 90s. I’m sure at one point in your life you have said “my vote doesn’t matter, the president will be picked regardless of my input”. That’s what these people are upset about, and the solution seems about as attainable as politicians cracking down on abusive cops in the 1990s
    - anigbrowl 6y ago
      Everyone dismissed them apart from all the states that held recounts, 60+ court hearings, endless media appearances aso on. They're being laughed off because of things like press conferences held at 'Four seasons total landscaping', attorneys making wild claims in press conferences and the meekly walking them all the way back in actual courtrooms, and bizarre public and private statements - like the President calling state officials in Georgia and spending an hour begging/threatening them to find votes for him. Your downvotes aren't proving a point. Trump's and his supporters' complaints about the election were given extensive public airing but none of them have been sustainable under closer scrutiny, and many claims about procedure, constitutional law and so forth have ben flat wrong. I don't understand how you can claim Trump supporters don't feel listened to when there has been a non-stop barrage of accusations from them over the last 2 months. Why don't they listen to the opinions that come out of the courts?
- anigbrowl 6y ago
  That's a reasonable point but the context of trying to prevent an incumbent from being turned out of office suggests these insurrectionists were more reactionary than revolutionary - that is, they were trying to prevent rather than institute change. Admittedly, this a rather fine semantic distinctions, and many Trump supporters consider their guy to be fighting against institutional corruption in DC.

o-__-o 6y ago

When does an insurrectionist turn into a revolutionary? In the 1770s George Washington and ilk were insurrectionists. Now we look at them as revolutionaries. Do people who fight for change only become revolutionary when it’s an argument you agree with? Are you an insurrectionist if you fight the government to the death (literally) for what you believe in? Obvious disclaimer: I don’t hold a candle to this fight in either direction but can empathize with both sides

nobody9999 6y ago
>When does an insurrectionist turn into a revolutionary? They don't. The terms are synonymous. >Obvious disclaimer: I don’t hold a candle to this fight in either direction but can empathize with both sides Why is that obvious? And as to the idea that you can "empathize with both sides," Who do you think those "sides" are? They are most certainly not those of the two major political parties in the US. They are not even those who consider themselves "conservative" or "liberal." In reality, one side supports our constitutional form of government and the rule of law. The other side despises the rule of law and seeks to use violence, intimidation and lies to destabilize my home in an attempt to seize power. The former are 98%+ of my countrymen (many of us disagree about a great many things, but not about our constitutional republic and the rule of law), and the latter are a tiny minority who wishes to impose their will on everyone else. If you see things differently, I'd love to hear your arguments.
zug_zug 6y ago
> When does an insurrectionist turn into a revolutionary? A reasonable question in the abstract, but in this case the distinction is rather simple: 1776 was people revolting against a king to create a democracy. What we saw this month was quite the opposite - trying to undo democracy (i.e. negate the results of popular vote).
- o-__-o 6y ago
  People used their voice to express their concern. Everyone dismissed them. They are the ones asking for a congressional oversight review and being rejected. They think something is being covered up. I thought the same way about 9/11 when it happened. It’s one of those believable far-fetched scenarios. But no one is legitimizing it and people are upset about it. Rather than be human about it we’re laughing them off then acting shocked and surprised when that group acts out. For contrast, black people were claiming police abuse decades ago and the country turned a cheek towards it. Police abuse increased until technology put the power back in our hands. It’s very hard to look at where the protestors are coming from but it is very easy to dismiss it because of status quo. Just a warning, and my downvotes are proving my point. No one wants to talk about it, they want to sweep ideas they don’t agree with under the rug. Just like my police encounters in the late 90s. I’m sure at one point in your life you have said “my vote doesn’t matter, the president will be picked regardless of my input”. That’s what these people are upset about, and the solution seems about as attainable as politicians cracking down on abusive cops in the 1990s
  - anigbrowl 6y ago
    Everyone dismissed them apart from all the states that held recounts, 60+ court hearings, endless media appearances aso on. They're being laughed off because of things like press conferences held at 'Four seasons total landscaping', attorneys making wild claims in press conferences and the meekly walking them all the way back in actual courtrooms, and bizarre public and private statements - like the President calling state officials in Georgia and spending an hour begging/threatening them to find votes for him. Your downvotes aren't proving a point. Trump's and his supporters' complaints about the election were given extensive public airing but none of them have been sustainable under closer scrutiny, and many claims about procedure, constitutional law and so forth have ben flat wrong. I don't understand how you can claim Trump supporters don't feel listened to when there has been a non-stop barrage of accusations from them over the last 2 months. Why don't they listen to the opinions that come out of the courts?
anigbrowl 6y ago
That's a reasonable point but the context of trying to prevent an incumbent from being turned out of office suggests these insurrectionists were more reactionary than revolutionary - that is, they were trying to prevent rather than institute change. Admittedly, this a rather fine semantic distinctions, and many Trump supporters consider their guy to be fighting against institutional corruption in DC.