4 ms·

The US government is currently inhabited by one political Duopoly, the RepubliCrats, who cater to the interests of the 0.001%, who keep us divided. It's been th

The US government is currently inhabited by one political Duopoly, the RepubliCrats, who cater to the interests of the 0.001%, who keep us divided. It's been that way since at least 1970, if this set of interviews from 1970 is to be believed[1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeeA-IU45pc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeeA-IU45pc

api 3y ago
[flagged]
- coldtea 3y ago
  >What we have today is an overtly fascist MAGA Republican party that calls openly for dictatorship. This is UFO level conspiratorial thinking, but it's however encouraged by the established press. What exactly happened in 4 years of Trump? Basically more of the same. The idea that it represents some kind of fascist danger or whatever is oversold for partisan gains by the other party.
  - halfmatthalfcat 3y ago
    You left out the part where the President tried to persuade the Vice President not to ratify the election based on manufactured false pretense of election fraud. Or that same President trying to persuade another State’s elected officials to “find votes” so he could win.
    - kelipso 3y ago
      Sorry but complaining about things like this and calling it fascism or end of the world or whatever looks like a joke or someone doing hysterics and not remotely anything to be taken seriously.
      - TOMDM 3y ago
        They didn't call it an end to the world; they claimed that attempts to subvert democracy are fascistic. Where's the hyperbole?
        skissane 3y ago
        > they claimed that attempts to subvert democracy are fascistic > Where's the hyperbole? Fascism was highly ideological – Mussolini wrote a whole book explaining his ideology – The Doctrine of Fascism - partially ghostwritten by the Italian philosopher Giovanni Gentile. It contained specific doctrines, such as the primacy of the State. While Nazism is often equated with fascism, it had a different ideological flavour, with a much heavier emphasis on race. Still, while the ideology was different, the strong emphasis on ideology remained – you can read all about it in Mein Kampf (I tried to read it once, it was so boring I fell asleep), in Hitler's speeches, in the works of his various acolytes. Trump's ideology isn't fascism. Trump doesn't have an ideology. All he really believes in is his own personal power. Ideas aren't really that important to him. So, I'm not saying that various things he did weren't bad, but they weren't fascist. Calling them fascist is definitely inaccurate, and maybe even hyperbolic.
        nemo 3y ago
        Instead of making up your own strict, carefully selected, and historically inaccurate definition (no historic fascists ever cared about ideology as anything other than a pretext for their authoritarianism.) I'd recommend reading up on this, just making things up as you go along isn't a great way to approach this particular topic. There's plenty you could read, though I'd recommend starting with Eco's Ur-Fascism as a bridge to start learning about the topic. There's more current work that's worth reading, but since you aren't familiar with any of it I'd recommend starting with the light material, it's more approachable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascism
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
  - petre 3y ago
    You had the Capitol attack on the Trump administration's watch, so I wouldn't say it's oversold. Meanwhile the others are too busy showing off PC and LGBT progressivism, to the point that it just creates too much needless tension in American society and the conservative reactions to this are discussions about criminalizing abortion.
  - api 3y ago
    If Obama had lost in 2012 and had pulled exactly what Trump pulled on January 6th using anarchists, BLM, and the Nation of Islam as soldiers, would you have called that a coup attempt? Now imagine that months earlier a member of one of those groups had asked him what to do and he’d said “stand back, and stand by.”
    - bigbillheck 3y ago
      I can't imagine anarchists thinking Obama would have been any better than Romney, and as for the Nation of Islam, in 2011 Farrakhan called Obama an assassin and a murder.
      - dctoedt 3y ago
        Your challenge to the premises isn't helpful. Sure, the parent comment poses a hypothetical question (and perhaps counterfactual), but it's clearly designed to probe the GP comment's reasoning.
  - TOMDM 3y ago
    The slate of false electors is UFO level conspiracy thinking?
  - ajross 3y ago
    > What exactly happened in 4 years of Trump? Basically more of the same. It was histrorically bad corruption and abuse of power, honestly. I mean, lots and lots of people curated lists. Here's a quick one from the weeks before the 2020 election: https://www.citizensforethics.org/news/analysis/president-trumps-worst-offenses/ https://www.citizensforethics.org/news/analysis/president-tr... Now I know you'll want to argue specifics for every element and that the source is partisan or suspect, etc... and I'm not going to get involved. But suffice it to say that any one of those items would have been enough to sink any other administration. It's the authoritarian tilt of the modern GOP that led it to green light all this, and that is only going to get worse with a more ambitious candidate.
    - noitpmeder 3y ago
      Never seen this list before... But holy cow, it's actually insane when you compile it all like that. This election cycle is going to be madness.
    - bigstrat2003 3y ago
      No, it was the same shit in another term. The only reason people noticed or cared was because the press hated Trump with the passion of a thousand fiery suns, so they actually did their jobs and held his feet to the fire (unlike with Obama).
      - ajross 3y ago
        As stated, I'm not going to argue specifics and really don't think anyone should try. But I will say that if you want to argue against a list like this, posting a similar one from a similarly non-partisan source about your target administration might be a better technique than invoking conspiracies about the media (which CREW is not, btw).
- donor20 3y ago
  In terms of getting things done under dems environmental reviews can literally take decades. I donate to dems, but in many areas of development dems are focused on slowing / blocking for lots of reasons
  - api 3y ago
    [flagged]
  - hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
    While I totally agree with that, in present circumstances, that seems a bit to miss the point. The Republican Party essentially doesn't exist anymore, it has been replaced lock, stock and barrel with a cult of personality. There are no longer any "Republican principles" or "conservative principles", whatever curries favor with the Party Leader is what goes. To emphasize, I think there is plenty wrong with both parties, and I yearn for the days (long time gone I know) where you could at least sometimes have debates about policy, and not just about personalities or tribalism. But I think it's a huge mistake to "both sides" over policy differences when it's core things like peaceful transfer of power that are at stake.
    - jahewson 3y ago
      The leader of the Republican Party, Ronna McDaniel?
      - prawn 3y ago
        Totally sick of hearing about them and their media saturation. /s
bigstrat2003 3y ago
Amen. Both parties are equally hostile to my freedom and well being. I would love to have another option, but Americans have been brainwashed by the parties in power to think that they are "wasting" their vote if they vote for anyone else. I have voted third party in every election since I turned 18, but as long as that pernicious lie continues to spread nothing will change. It's a dumpster fire and I don't expect it'll ever be fixed in my lifetime.
- notTooFarGone 3y ago
  They are wasting their vote and actively vote against their interests by voting third-party. This is a well established fact and the main reason why the voting system needs an overhaul to allow for ranked choice or something similar. Chances of Duopoly parties doing that by their own are 0% - so it has to be the people.
  - webninja 3y ago
    No they’re not. If a third party gets 5% of the vote, they receive federal funding during the next election which could be enough to make them go mainstream. Also every vote is tallied so your vote is more visible when you vote for a 3rd party. Anonymously of course.

api 3y ago

[flagged]

coldtea 3y ago
>What we have today is an overtly fascist MAGA Republican party that calls openly for dictatorship. This is UFO level conspiratorial thinking, but it's however encouraged by the established press. What exactly happened in 4 years of Trump? Basically more of the same. The idea that it represents some kind of fascist danger or whatever is oversold for partisan gains by the other party.
- halfmatthalfcat 3y ago
  You left out the part where the President tried to persuade the Vice President not to ratify the election based on manufactured false pretense of election fraud. Or that same President trying to persuade another State’s elected officials to “find votes” so he could win.
  - kelipso 3y ago
    Sorry but complaining about things like this and calling it fascism or end of the world or whatever looks like a joke or someone doing hysterics and not remotely anything to be taken seriously.
    - TOMDM 3y ago
      They didn't call it an end to the world; they claimed that attempts to subvert democracy are fascistic. Where's the hyperbole?
      - skissane 3y ago
        > they claimed that attempts to subvert democracy are fascistic > Where's the hyperbole? Fascism was highly ideological – Mussolini wrote a whole book explaining his ideology – The Doctrine of Fascism - partially ghostwritten by the Italian philosopher Giovanni Gentile. It contained specific doctrines, such as the primacy of the State. While Nazism is often equated with fascism, it had a different ideological flavour, with a much heavier emphasis on race. Still, while the ideology was different, the strong emphasis on ideology remained – you can read all about it in Mein Kampf (I tried to read it once, it was so boring I fell asleep), in Hitler's speeches, in the works of his various acolytes. Trump's ideology isn't fascism. Trump doesn't have an ideology. All he really believes in is his own personal power. Ideas aren't really that important to him. So, I'm not saying that various things he did weren't bad, but they weren't fascist. Calling them fascist is definitely inaccurate, and maybe even hyperbolic.
        nemo 3y ago
        Instead of making up your own strict, carefully selected, and historically inaccurate definition (no historic fascists ever cared about ideology as anything other than a pretext for their authoritarianism.) I'd recommend reading up on this, just making things up as you go along isn't a great way to approach this particular topic. There's plenty you could read, though I'd recommend starting with Eco's Ur-Fascism as a bridge to start learning about the topic. There's more current work that's worth reading, but since you aren't familiar with any of it I'd recommend starting with the light material, it's more approachable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascism
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
- petre 3y ago
  You had the Capitol attack on the Trump administration's watch, so I wouldn't say it's oversold. Meanwhile the others are too busy showing off PC and LGBT progressivism, to the point that it just creates too much needless tension in American society and the conservative reactions to this are discussions about criminalizing abortion.
- api 3y ago
  If Obama had lost in 2012 and had pulled exactly what Trump pulled on January 6th using anarchists, BLM, and the Nation of Islam as soldiers, would you have called that a coup attempt? Now imagine that months earlier a member of one of those groups had asked him what to do and he’d said “stand back, and stand by.”
  - bigbillheck 3y ago
    I can't imagine anarchists thinking Obama would have been any better than Romney, and as for the Nation of Islam, in 2011 Farrakhan called Obama an assassin and a murder.
    - dctoedt 3y ago
      Your challenge to the premises isn't helpful. Sure, the parent comment poses a hypothetical question (and perhaps counterfactual), but it's clearly designed to probe the GP comment's reasoning.
- TOMDM 3y ago
  The slate of false electors is UFO level conspiracy thinking?
- ajross 3y ago
  > What exactly happened in 4 years of Trump? Basically more of the same. It was histrorically bad corruption and abuse of power, honestly. I mean, lots and lots of people curated lists. Here's a quick one from the weeks before the 2020 election: https://www.citizensforethics.org/news/analysis/president-trumps-worst-offenses/ https://www.citizensforethics.org/news/analysis/president-tr... Now I know you'll want to argue specifics for every element and that the source is partisan or suspect, etc... and I'm not going to get involved. But suffice it to say that any one of those items would have been enough to sink any other administration. It's the authoritarian tilt of the modern GOP that led it to green light all this, and that is only going to get worse with a more ambitious candidate.
  - noitpmeder 3y ago
    Never seen this list before... But holy cow, it's actually insane when you compile it all like that. This election cycle is going to be madness.
  - bigstrat2003 3y ago
    No, it was the same shit in another term. The only reason people noticed or cared was because the press hated Trump with the passion of a thousand fiery suns, so they actually did their jobs and held his feet to the fire (unlike with Obama).
    - ajross 3y ago
      As stated, I'm not going to argue specifics and really don't think anyone should try. But I will say that if you want to argue against a list like this, posting a similar one from a similarly non-partisan source about your target administration might be a better technique than invoking conspiracies about the media (which CREW is not, btw).
donor20 3y ago
In terms of getting things done under dems environmental reviews can literally take decades. I donate to dems, but in many areas of development dems are focused on slowing / blocking for lots of reasons
- api 3y ago
  [flagged]
- hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
  While I totally agree with that, in present circumstances, that seems a bit to miss the point. The Republican Party essentially doesn't exist anymore, it has been replaced lock, stock and barrel with a cult of personality. There are no longer any "Republican principles" or "conservative principles", whatever curries favor with the Party Leader is what goes. To emphasize, I think there is plenty wrong with both parties, and I yearn for the days (long time gone I know) where you could at least sometimes have debates about policy, and not just about personalities or tribalism. But I think it's a huge mistake to "both sides" over policy differences when it's core things like peaceful transfer of power that are at stake.
  - jahewson 3y ago
    The leader of the Republican Party, Ronna McDaniel?
    - prawn 3y ago
      Totally sick of hearing about them and their media saturation. /s

bigstrat2003 3y ago

Amen. Both parties are equally hostile to my freedom and well being. I would love to have another option, but Americans have been brainwashed by the parties in power to think that they are "wasting" their vote if they vote for anyone else. I have voted third party in every election since I turned 18, but as long as that pernicious lie continues to spread nothing will change. It's a dumpster fire and I don't expect it'll ever be fixed in my lifetime.

notTooFarGone 3y ago
They are wasting their vote and actively vote against their interests by voting third-party. This is a well established fact and the main reason why the voting system needs an overhaul to allow for ranked choice or something similar. Chances of Duopoly parties doing that by their own are 0% - so it has to be the people.
- webninja 3y ago
  No they’re not. If a third party gets 5% of the vote, they receive federal funding during the next election which could be enough to make them go mainstream. Also every vote is tallied so your vote is more visible when you vote for a 3rd party. Anonymously of course.