6 ms·

The US started the 2021 with an attempted self-coup, its first ever failure to peacefully transfer power, and has so far done little to punish the organizers of

The US started the 2021 with an attempted self-coup, its first ever failure to peacefully transfer power, and has so far done little to punish the organizers of it (though that's subject to change); a constitutional crisis is on the horizon depending on the outcome of a case the SCOTUS has agreed to hear; the Southwest US is facing record drought, including the near depletion of a watershed depended upon by millions of people; the Russian invasion of Ukraine is just a few wrong moves away from nuclear conflict; there's an ongoing real estate crisis brewing in China; and we're more than 2 years into a global pandemic with no sign of it truly abating, just people mostly fed up with acknowledging it. I'm not quite as pessimistic as some about the possibility of a looming recession, but add that to the pile and things just get even more concerning. "Eventful" is hard to objectively quantify, but subjectively I certainly think that qualifies.

tootallgavin 4y ago
Meanwhile, farmers in Netherlands are no longer allowed to grow food. If there ever was a reason to have the right to own arms, and to overthrow the government, I think losing the right to grow food is a valid justification for a "self-coup". But, if you take a very big view of things, both the religious and science fanatics believe the world is ending. They have different reasons, of course. Nonetheless, the world is not ending.
- delecti 4y ago
  They can still grow food, there are just emission standards for tractors, which importantly will take most of a decade to go into effect. It's a pretty gross misrepresentation of the situation to say they're no longer allowed to grow food. Obviously the world has not ended yet, but that doesn't mean all of history was equally uneventful or pleasant to live through. I'm not saying the world is going to end in the next decade, I'm just saying that it stands to be "eventful", and quite likely not in a good way.
  - tootallgavin 4y ago
    If they can still grow food, why are they protesting? Seems like a lot of time to waste not working on the farm. But, honestly, I haven't really found a source of news that wasn't just calling the farmers terrible names. Why do you think the farmers are being called terrible names by news sources? Maybe its because they are not growing food. Its becoming a circle now. Which decades were "uneventful"?
    - delecti 4y ago
      I don't know why you want me to be the one to defend the protests of farmers whose positions I clearly disagree with. I wouldn't be a very effective advocate for their position. And while I didn't see any articles calling them names, "short sighted" seems pretty fair given the goals of the emission standards. I feel pretty comfortable saying the 1990s were less eventful in the US than the 1930s, not that I think you're responding in good faith.
      - tootallgavin 4y ago
        I didn't ask you to defend them. I asked why they would be protesting. I, too, would be a bad advocate for them as well. I am neither a Netherlander nor a farmer. I just eat and don't wonder where the food comes from, nor do I want to. I just want the food to be at the store when I am ready to buy it. I agree the 90s were great, but I'll admit I was born in '92. So I might be biased. I don't know what you mean by "good faith". I don't think the farmers are the short sighted ones here. They are farmers. They might be little bit interested in the long view, as hear it takes many months to grow food, and years to raise livestock. Again, I don't know, I just go to the grocery store. I hope in 10 years, whatever the farmers are protesting about, the Netherlanders can enjoy a burger [1][2], just like I do. [1]"The ruling coalition has earmarked an extra 24.3 billion euros ($25.6bn) to finance changes that will likely make many farmers drastically reduce their number of livestock or get rid of them altogether." https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/22/thousands-of-dutch-farmers-protest-against-emissions-targets https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/22/thousands-of-dutch-... [2]"According to government estimates, this could lead to the shutting down of about 30 per cent of livestock farms." https://thewest.com.au/politics/dutch-farmers-block-roads-ports-in-demos-c-7404365 https://thewest.com.au/politics/dutch-farmers-block-roads-po...
bagacrap 4y ago
c'mon, "coup" is a bit of a ridiculous way to describe a few nutcases trespassing on government property. I did worse as a teenager.
- kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
  The nutcases were the distraction for the plan to breach Congress. You need a mob to operate without interference from Capitol police. The idea was to pull a mayor Giuliani after 9/11 scenario and have an excuse to stay in power after manufacturing chaos.
  - ALittleLight 4y ago
    Giuliani tried to get a three month extension on his term in the wake of a massive terrorist attack in NYC. He also threatened to try to get the term limits on the mayoralty changed so he could run again. He was denied and Bloomberg was elected. Bloomberg did get around the term limits thing to get an extra term, which I bring up to highlight that a mayor serving a third term is not some horrible crisis or usurpation. "Pulling a Giuliani" just seems like a weird expression. First, the events weren't all that comparable - 9/11 versus an hours long riot. If the worst terrorist attack on American soil didn't weaken democracy enough for a mayor to take a third term, why would a protest turned riot overthrow the presidency? Second, what Giuliani tried wasn't even that bad. And, third, not even Giuliani could pull off a Giuliani. Personally, people who think the January 6 riot was some coup seem a bit hyperbolic to me. Was it a coup attempt when violent protesters attacked Trump's inauguration? I'd say no, of course not. Neither was January 6th.
- barking_biscuit 4y ago
  Those nutcases being Donald Trump, Peter Navarro, Steve Bannon, Rudy Guliani and Sidney Powell to be clear.
- delecti 4y ago
  If it were just the people storming the capitol it would already be one of the worst security breaches in the country's history. It also involved more than 60 lawsuits to overturn election results, plots to submit fraudulent slates of electors or fraudulent election results, attempts to convince officials in several states to just overturn their states' election results, over 100 congresspeople voting to overturn lawful elector counts, pressure on the vice-president to illegally overturn the election results (or even just to cooperate with them trying to do that), and plenty more, much of which was organized by the outgoing administration. It perfectly fits the definition of "self-coup", with no exaggeration required.

tootallgavin 4y ago

Meanwhile, farmers in Netherlands are no longer allowed to grow food. If there ever was a reason to have the right to own arms, and to overthrow the government, I think losing the right to grow food is a valid justification for a "self-coup". But, if you take a very big view of things, both the religious and science fanatics believe the world is ending. They have different reasons, of course. Nonetheless, the world is not ending.

delecti 4y ago
They can still grow food, there are just emission standards for tractors, which importantly will take most of a decade to go into effect. It's a pretty gross misrepresentation of the situation to say they're no longer allowed to grow food. Obviously the world has not ended yet, but that doesn't mean all of history was equally uneventful or pleasant to live through. I'm not saying the world is going to end in the next decade, I'm just saying that it stands to be "eventful", and quite likely not in a good way.
- tootallgavin 4y ago
  If they can still grow food, why are they protesting? Seems like a lot of time to waste not working on the farm. But, honestly, I haven't really found a source of news that wasn't just calling the farmers terrible names. Why do you think the farmers are being called terrible names by news sources? Maybe its because they are not growing food. Its becoming a circle now. Which decades were "uneventful"?
  - delecti 4y ago
    I don't know why you want me to be the one to defend the protests of farmers whose positions I clearly disagree with. I wouldn't be a very effective advocate for their position. And while I didn't see any articles calling them names, "short sighted" seems pretty fair given the goals of the emission standards. I feel pretty comfortable saying the 1990s were less eventful in the US than the 1930s, not that I think you're responding in good faith.
    - tootallgavin 4y ago
      I didn't ask you to defend them. I asked why they would be protesting. I, too, would be a bad advocate for them as well. I am neither a Netherlander nor a farmer. I just eat and don't wonder where the food comes from, nor do I want to. I just want the food to be at the store when I am ready to buy it. I agree the 90s were great, but I'll admit I was born in '92. So I might be biased. I don't know what you mean by "good faith". I don't think the farmers are the short sighted ones here. They are farmers. They might be little bit interested in the long view, as hear it takes many months to grow food, and years to raise livestock. Again, I don't know, I just go to the grocery store. I hope in 10 years, whatever the farmers are protesting about, the Netherlanders can enjoy a burger [1][2], just like I do. [1]"The ruling coalition has earmarked an extra 24.3 billion euros ($25.6bn) to finance changes that will likely make many farmers drastically reduce their number of livestock or get rid of them altogether." https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/22/thousands-of-dutch-farmers-protest-against-emissions-targets https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/22/thousands-of-dutch-... [2]"According to government estimates, this could lead to the shutting down of about 30 per cent of livestock farms." https://thewest.com.au/politics/dutch-farmers-block-roads-ports-in-demos-c-7404365 https://thewest.com.au/politics/dutch-farmers-block-roads-po...

bagacrap 4y ago

c'mon, "coup" is a bit of a ridiculous way to describe a few nutcases trespassing on government property. I did worse as a teenager.

kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
The nutcases were the distraction for the plan to breach Congress. You need a mob to operate without interference from Capitol police. The idea was to pull a mayor Giuliani after 9/11 scenario and have an excuse to stay in power after manufacturing chaos.
- ALittleLight 4y ago
  Giuliani tried to get a three month extension on his term in the wake of a massive terrorist attack in NYC. He also threatened to try to get the term limits on the mayoralty changed so he could run again. He was denied and Bloomberg was elected. Bloomberg did get around the term limits thing to get an extra term, which I bring up to highlight that a mayor serving a third term is not some horrible crisis or usurpation. "Pulling a Giuliani" just seems like a weird expression. First, the events weren't all that comparable - 9/11 versus an hours long riot. If the worst terrorist attack on American soil didn't weaken democracy enough for a mayor to take a third term, why would a protest turned riot overthrow the presidency? Second, what Giuliani tried wasn't even that bad. And, third, not even Giuliani could pull off a Giuliani. Personally, people who think the January 6 riot was some coup seem a bit hyperbolic to me. Was it a coup attempt when violent protesters attacked Trump's inauguration? I'd say no, of course not. Neither was January 6th.
barking_biscuit 4y ago
Those nutcases being Donald Trump, Peter Navarro, Steve Bannon, Rudy Guliani and Sidney Powell to be clear.
delecti 4y ago
If it were just the people storming the capitol it would already be one of the worst security breaches in the country's history. It also involved more than 60 lawsuits to overturn election results, plots to submit fraudulent slates of electors or fraudulent election results, attempts to convince officials in several states to just overturn their states' election results, over 100 congresspeople voting to overturn lawful elector counts, pressure on the vice-president to illegally overturn the election results (or even just to cooperate with them trying to do that), and plenty more, much of which was organized by the outgoing administration. It perfectly fits the definition of "self-coup", with no exaggeration required.