3 ms·

Right. All this breathless speculation over authoritarianism is bullcrap when what's actually going on is rooting out deeply entrenched bureaucracy, cleaning up

Right. All this breathless speculation over authoritarianism is bullcrap when what's actually going on is rooting out deeply entrenched bureaucracy, cleaning up corruption and waste, and securing the borders. The fact that the Trump administration is complying with judicial orders (many of which are unconstitutional on their face) that will be overturned on appeal is evidence that these are not authoritarian moves. President Trump was voted in to do what he's doing. The fact that the Democrats are screaming bloody murder about him doing things they don't like doesn't suddenly transform the actions into authoritarianism. > Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in democracy, separation of powers, civil liberties, and the rule of law. -- Wikipedia Strong-arm tactics to preserve the power of the state and entrench one-party control were what was happening under the previous two Democrat administrations. What's happening now is a dismantling of those control structures in government. The funneling of billions of dollars out through NGOs and back in to DNC coffers and news organizations is stopping and the people on the gravy train are flipping out. Good.

nunez 2y ago
What are your thoughts on this administration replacing nonpartisan heads of departments with people who completely agree with their agenda? Also, what are your thoughts on this administration paying civil servants to move into companies within the private sector that are owned by people like Elon?
- slowmovintarget 2y ago
  Can you explain what you mean by "replacing nonpartisan heads of departments?" Also, what do you mean by "paying civil servants to move?" They're creating buy-out packages for some federal employees. What evidence do you have that they are paying them to accept positions "for people like Elon" as opposed to, say, federal employees taking the buy-out and finding jobs in the private sector?
  - nunez 2y ago
    > Can you explain what you mean by "replacing nonpartisan heads of departments?" Sure; people like the eight inspector generals that were fired [^0] or the civil servants on the NSC [^1]. > Also, what do you mean by "paying civil servants to move?" Civil servants moving into defense/public sector from the USG is a known phenomenon. Their deep ties to the USG and experience working through the process/red tape makes their value obvious to these companies. From my perspective, these buyout packages are basically warm invitations for these people to slide into equivalent roles at contractors like Lockheed/Northrup/BAH/BAE/etc. I don't have sources to back this; this is just my intuition. They'll be paid more by these companies, sure, but they're also working for the mission the execs/boards of these companies set (i.e. "people like Elon"), not the missions that are best for citizens at large. They'll also cost taxpayers more, since these contractors need to make profit on the margin. There's also long-term planning to consider. Some things, like so many Internet technologies we take advantage of, take a really long time to provide a net-positive return. Governments, by and large, can afford to spend decades funding and researching things that seem like good ideas. Private sector companies can't. There are many people that chose to work for the USG to pursue these ultra-long-time-horizon projects while being fully well-aware of how much money they're leaving on the table by not working in the private sector. Many of them are now being told "sorry, only companies that make the line go up matter now; here's a rack; go work for them." [^0] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/inspectors-general-fired-trump-lawsuit/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/inspectors-general-fired-trump-... [^1] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/biden-national-security-council-white-house-trump-b2684527.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politic...

nunez 2y ago

What are your thoughts on this administration replacing nonpartisan heads of departments with people who completely agree with their agenda? Also, what are your thoughts on this administration paying civil servants to move into companies within the private sector that are owned by people like Elon?

slowmovintarget 2y ago
Can you explain what you mean by "replacing nonpartisan heads of departments?" Also, what do you mean by "paying civil servants to move?" They're creating buy-out packages for some federal employees. What evidence do you have that they are paying them to accept positions "for people like Elon" as opposed to, say, federal employees taking the buy-out and finding jobs in the private sector?
- nunez 2y ago
  > Can you explain what you mean by "replacing nonpartisan heads of departments?" Sure; people like the eight inspector generals that were fired [^0] or the civil servants on the NSC [^1]. > Also, what do you mean by "paying civil servants to move?" Civil servants moving into defense/public sector from the USG is a known phenomenon. Their deep ties to the USG and experience working through the process/red tape makes their value obvious to these companies. From my perspective, these buyout packages are basically warm invitations for these people to slide into equivalent roles at contractors like Lockheed/Northrup/BAH/BAE/etc. I don't have sources to back this; this is just my intuition. They'll be paid more by these companies, sure, but they're also working for the mission the execs/boards of these companies set (i.e. "people like Elon"), not the missions that are best for citizens at large. They'll also cost taxpayers more, since these contractors need to make profit on the margin. There's also long-term planning to consider. Some things, like so many Internet technologies we take advantage of, take a really long time to provide a net-positive return. Governments, by and large, can afford to spend decades funding and researching things that seem like good ideas. Private sector companies can't. There are many people that chose to work for the USG to pursue these ultra-long-time-horizon projects while being fully well-aware of how much money they're leaving on the table by not working in the private sector. Many of them are now being told "sorry, only companies that make the line go up matter now; here's a rack; go work for them." [^0] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/inspectors-general-fired-trump-lawsuit/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/inspectors-general-fired-trump-... [^1] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/biden-national-security-council-white-house-trump-b2684527.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politic...