6 ms·

If they do give in though, they might face consequences after Trump’s term. The Supreme Court should definitely chime in quickly here, although the court is sta

If they do give in though, they might face consequences after Trump’s term. The Supreme Court should definitely chime in quickly here, although the court is stacked way too heavily with conservatives who open to Trump’s new interpretation of the constitution.

ggm 2y ago
Holding back science publication for national security is pretty well understood. I'd be amazed if the funding T&C doesn't have weasel words back to the sixties about requiring permission from the feds to publish, even if it was implicitly assumed most of the time.
- seanmcdirmid 2y ago
  Retraction of previous work for political reasons is a new thing.
- Fomite 2y ago
  Funder publishing requirements are actually one of the few contractual things my university usually refuses to accept.
maeil 2y ago
[flagged]
- nine_k 2y ago
  Trump is not exactly young. President Biden also hoped for a next term.
  - scrollaway 2y ago
    You have a whole government getting dismantled, with purpose. I wouldn’t bet on Trump getting reelected or extending his term — but the bigger question is: what will be left at the end of it? It’s not impossible the very idea of a “US presidency” radically changes by 2028.
    - matwood 2y ago
      We’ll know which way the wind is blowing by the midterms. If the plan is to never cede power again it will also have to be done by then. Trump is speed running the US to a recession which bodes well for 2026 assuming they happen.
      - AlecSchueler 2y ago
        If the recession is heavy enough that people take to the streets he can declare martial law.
        bluGill 2y ago
        But will the militry agree or like south korea resist?
        tremon 2y ago
        They probably won't need the military: the police itself is already heavily militarized. But I have no illusion that Hegseth would even blink one eye before deploying soldiers domestically.
      - FranzFerdiNaN 2y ago
        Right now I wouldn’t be certain there will be anything resembling midterms. Trump and his pals are speedrunning turning America into an Russia-style oligarchy. There will be of course be “elections”, that happen to always turn out exactly like the sitting power wants it to be.
        ithkuil 2y ago
        I'm not saying they wouldn't like to try that, but I'm not sure exactly how that may happen. Do you think flooding the zone with shit will work? If they actively rig the next elections do you think that any attempt to point that out will be met by "you were saying all the time that elections cannot be rigged"? It seems society has been caught off guard by the transformation in the media landscape and the resulting fragmentation of attention.
  - atoav 2y ago
    And who says they are willing to hold fair elections next time? They are not going to conceed power voluntarily, especially not now since they see what they can get away with and that means if you let them, they will "win", just like the decades of "wins" in other authoritarian states. "a republic, if you can keep it" and obviously you can't.
    - tivert 2y ago
      I'm tired of people crying wolf, like they've done pretty much every day since 2016. I'm not a fan of Trump, but his critics have pretty much squandered their credibility, and his political opponents have dumb strategies and even dumber priorities (if you can even take them at their word).
      - atoav 2y ago
        Who said I was crying wolf? I believe Trump would have lost if this was a fair election. So does Greg Palast: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Palast https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Palast See: https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/ https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/ I believe Trump is a fascist who is extremely dangerous and everything he did so far ticks all the boxes. And by the way: In the wolf story you refer to the wolf was real. The real moral of that story is that the villagers should have trusted the boy (to prevent his death) and help him, as he in fact saw a wolf (who ate him in the end). The story says that the boy lied, but as he died that story would have been told be the villagers who let him die. The wolf was real (he ate the boy), the villagers made up a story after the fact of how the boy had it coming as a lier to justify their position. It is a story about people who are more afraid of the scary story and the messenger who tells it, than of the actual danger itself. About people who despite warnings let the boy get eaten, because they checked the first two times and the evil wasn't directly evident to them. In German we say about fascism: "Wehret den Anfängen" (defend against the beginnings). Once you are in a fascist society, once the wolf is eating you, it is to late. And the wolf is real.
        tivert 2y ago
  - maeil 2y ago
    Oh sure, I'm not suggesting Trump has a fountain of youth in his bedroon. Kim Il-Sung and Kim Jong-Il also eventually died, ending their terms. At least in their case, or pre-democracy European countries, the power was very explicitly blood-bound. This had the advantage that if a few quickly died in succession you might just get a child on the throne who ends up being overthrowable. Unfortunately, this problem has been solved by dictatorships where the power is tied to a party or small non-familial circle, such as China, potentially Russia (though we'd have to see how things end up would Putin disappear tomorrow, they may actually have reverted to familiar inheritance) and now, likely, the US. There, pesky biology forms no such risk.
    - kmeisthax 2y ago
      The dynastic approach to power retention requires a coalition of ideologically unified extremists to keep it going. One key feature of the Trump coalition is that everyone hates each other. They all are cranks who want something unthinkably awful, but also don't care about what the other guy wants and hopes they don't get what they want[0]. There is no Trumpism to rally around, only a Trump. [0] A microcosm of this is the Musk / Altman feud.
      - grey-area 2y ago
        You’re a little early to come to this conclusion and dictators don’t require a political coalition, they just reward loyalty and eliminate opposition ruthlessly. You’re still playing a game Trump doesn’t want to play (democracy). Hitler was also perceived as a worthless clown who could be easily manipulated by other interests when first elected. But he was cunning enough to eliminate all opposition and start a world war. Putin and Xi (who Trump admires and looks up to) are very similar. Trump could easily start a dynastic takeover of the republican party, there is more than one Trump (Ivanka, Baron, etc). There are many reasons to be fearful at this juncture, especially if you live in the US.
        maeil 2y ago
        I agree with all of it and think the likelihood of a dynastic takeover is over 50%. But I don't think this is entirely accurate > Hitler was also perceived as a worthless clown who could be easily manipulated by other interests when first elected. But he was cunning enough to eliminate all opposition and start a world war. Putin and Xi (who Trump admires and looks up to) are very similar. Especially with Putin, as far as I can tell at no point was he considered a clown by anyone who mattered. He was definitely underestimated, but it's a marked difference with Trump (and Hitler).
  - angoragoats 2y ago
    Trump is constitutionally prohibited from running for another term.
    - nobody-really 2y ago
      [flagged]
    - brookst 2y ago
      That old piece of paper? Obviously that wasn’t really what they meant at the time, just like the 14th amendment doesn’t really grant birthright citizenship. Why, the whole thing is really just a set of guidelines that need to be interpreted by a council of clerics.
    - tremon 2y ago
      I find your lack of imagination disturbing. Literally so.
      - angoragoats 2y ago
        What would "figuratively disturbing" look like? What are you even saying? Also, I know. My only point was that comparing to Biden doesn't make sense, since when Biden was running again he was not term-limited.
    - shawabawa3 2y ago
      They've literally already proposed a law to allow him to run a 3rd term in the house and they're only 2 weeks in They're going to try to find one way or another to let him run again (if he lives long enough)
      - tbatchelli 2y ago
        “Run”
    - hobs 2y ago
      Not if they change the constitution. https://ogles.house.gov/media/press-releases/rep-ogles-proposes-amending-22nd-amendment-allow-trump-serve-third-term https://ogles.house.gov/media/press-releases/rep-ogles-propo...
nradov 2y ago
I think this move by the administration is a bad idea but it's not necessarily illegal. Which federal law or Constitution article do you think is being broken here?

ggm 2y ago

Holding back science publication for national security is pretty well understood. I'd be amazed if the funding T&C doesn't have weasel words back to the sixties about requiring permission from the feds to publish, even if it was implicitly assumed most of the time.

seanmcdirmid 2y ago
Retraction of previous work for political reasons is a new thing.
Fomite 2y ago
Funder publishing requirements are actually one of the few contractual things my university usually refuses to accept.

maeil 2y ago

[flagged]

nine_k 2y ago
Trump is not exactly young. President Biden also hoped for a next term.
- scrollaway 2y ago
  You have a whole government getting dismantled, with purpose. I wouldn’t bet on Trump getting reelected or extending his term — but the bigger question is: what will be left at the end of it? It’s not impossible the very idea of a “US presidency” radically changes by 2028.
  - matwood 2y ago
    We’ll know which way the wind is blowing by the midterms. If the plan is to never cede power again it will also have to be done by then. Trump is speed running the US to a recession which bodes well for 2026 assuming they happen.
    - AlecSchueler 2y ago
      If the recession is heavy enough that people take to the streets he can declare martial law.
      - bluGill 2y ago
        But will the militry agree or like south korea resist?
        tremon 2y ago
        They probably won't need the military: the police itself is already heavily militarized. But I have no illusion that Hegseth would even blink one eye before deploying soldiers domestically.
    - FranzFerdiNaN 2y ago
      Right now I wouldn’t be certain there will be anything resembling midterms. Trump and his pals are speedrunning turning America into an Russia-style oligarchy. There will be of course be “elections”, that happen to always turn out exactly like the sitting power wants it to be.
      - ithkuil 2y ago
        I'm not saying they wouldn't like to try that, but I'm not sure exactly how that may happen. Do you think flooding the zone with shit will work? If they actively rig the next elections do you think that any attempt to point that out will be met by "you were saying all the time that elections cannot be rigged"? It seems society has been caught off guard by the transformation in the media landscape and the resulting fragmentation of attention.
- atoav 2y ago
  And who says they are willing to hold fair elections next time? They are not going to conceed power voluntarily, especially not now since they see what they can get away with and that means if you let them, they will "win", just like the decades of "wins" in other authoritarian states. "a republic, if you can keep it" and obviously you can't.
  - tivert 2y ago
    I'm tired of people crying wolf, like they've done pretty much every day since 2016. I'm not a fan of Trump, but his critics have pretty much squandered their credibility, and his political opponents have dumb strategies and even dumber priorities (if you can even take them at their word).
    - atoav 2y ago
      Who said I was crying wolf? I believe Trump would have lost if this was a fair election. So does Greg Palast: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Palast https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Palast See: https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/ https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/ I believe Trump is a fascist who is extremely dangerous and everything he did so far ticks all the boxes. And by the way: In the wolf story you refer to the wolf was real. The real moral of that story is that the villagers should have trusted the boy (to prevent his death) and help him, as he in fact saw a wolf (who ate him in the end). The story says that the boy lied, but as he died that story would have been told be the villagers who let him die. The wolf was real (he ate the boy), the villagers made up a story after the fact of how the boy had it coming as a lier to justify their position. It is a story about people who are more afraid of the scary story and the messenger who tells it, than of the actual danger itself. About people who despite warnings let the boy get eaten, because they checked the first two times and the evil wasn't directly evident to them. In German we say about fascism: "Wehret den Anfängen" (defend against the beginnings). Once you are in a fascist society, once the wolf is eating you, it is to late. And the wolf is real.
      - tivert 2y ago
- maeil 2y ago
  Oh sure, I'm not suggesting Trump has a fountain of youth in his bedroon. Kim Il-Sung and Kim Jong-Il also eventually died, ending their terms. At least in their case, or pre-democracy European countries, the power was very explicitly blood-bound. This had the advantage that if a few quickly died in succession you might just get a child on the throne who ends up being overthrowable. Unfortunately, this problem has been solved by dictatorships where the power is tied to a party or small non-familial circle, such as China, potentially Russia (though we'd have to see how things end up would Putin disappear tomorrow, they may actually have reverted to familiar inheritance) and now, likely, the US. There, pesky biology forms no such risk.
  - kmeisthax 2y ago
    The dynastic approach to power retention requires a coalition of ideologically unified extremists to keep it going. One key feature of the Trump coalition is that everyone hates each other. They all are cranks who want something unthinkably awful, but also don't care about what the other guy wants and hopes they don't get what they want[0]. There is no Trumpism to rally around, only a Trump. [0] A microcosm of this is the Musk / Altman feud.
    - grey-area 2y ago
      You’re a little early to come to this conclusion and dictators don’t require a political coalition, they just reward loyalty and eliminate opposition ruthlessly. You’re still playing a game Trump doesn’t want to play (democracy). Hitler was also perceived as a worthless clown who could be easily manipulated by other interests when first elected. But he was cunning enough to eliminate all opposition and start a world war. Putin and Xi (who Trump admires and looks up to) are very similar. Trump could easily start a dynastic takeover of the republican party, there is more than one Trump (Ivanka, Baron, etc). There are many reasons to be fearful at this juncture, especially if you live in the US.
      - maeil 2y ago
        I agree with all of it and think the likelihood of a dynastic takeover is over 50%. But I don't think this is entirely accurate > Hitler was also perceived as a worthless clown who could be easily manipulated by other interests when first elected. But he was cunning enough to eliminate all opposition and start a world war. Putin and Xi (who Trump admires and looks up to) are very similar. Especially with Putin, as far as I can tell at no point was he considered a clown by anyone who mattered. He was definitely underestimated, but it's a marked difference with Trump (and Hitler).
- angoragoats 2y ago
  Trump is constitutionally prohibited from running for another term.
  - nobody-really 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - brookst 2y ago
    That old piece of paper? Obviously that wasn’t really what they meant at the time, just like the 14th amendment doesn’t really grant birthright citizenship. Why, the whole thing is really just a set of guidelines that need to be interpreted by a council of clerics.
  - tremon 2y ago
    I find your lack of imagination disturbing. Literally so.
    - angoragoats 2y ago
      What would "figuratively disturbing" look like? What are you even saying? Also, I know. My only point was that comparing to Biden doesn't make sense, since when Biden was running again he was not term-limited.
  - shawabawa3 2y ago
    They've literally already proposed a law to allow him to run a 3rd term in the house and they're only 2 weeks in They're going to try to find one way or another to let him run again (if he lives long enough)
    - tbatchelli 2y ago
      “Run”
  - hobs 2y ago
    Not if they change the constitution. https://ogles.house.gov/media/press-releases/rep-ogles-proposes-amending-22nd-amendment-allow-trump-serve-third-term https://ogles.house.gov/media/press-releases/rep-ogles-propo...

nradov 2y ago

I think this move by the administration is a bad idea but it's not necessarily illegal. Which federal law or Constitution article do you think is being broken here?