3 ms·

_will_ vote in some folks? see this is what confuses me about the trump is a fascist crowd, aren't we concerned about giving the state this much power because o

_will_ vote in some folks? see this is what confuses me about the trump is a fascist crowd, aren't we concerned about giving the state this much power because of the people who have already been voted in? I mean, it's too little too late but likewise it's amazing to me that the same people who are trying to convince me that the current government is fascist is also at the same time still campaigning on behalf of the same government to disarm its citizens. make it make sense!

nathan_compton 2y ago
Ok. First of all, you have a point - Trump is a great object lesson for why its probably not a great idea to have a huge, powerful, monolithic state and a commander in chief that can launch nuclear weapons. I don't think anyone would dispute that. But most people see that the government as currently comported isn't going anywhere, even acknowledging the dedicated if incondite attempts of the current administration to "tame administrative bloat," as they might describe it. Thus your average "liberal" thinks first that government should be executed carefully by professional policy makers that respect the power of the state and second it should "take people's guns away." But I will say that almost no liberal wants to totally disarm the public, anyway. That is a cartoon position which charitably could be attributed to loud voices on social media or something, but not a real policy position held by typical "libs". Most liberals just want guns to be properly regulated (perhaps even restricted to well regulated militias, to recall a phrase from somewhere). There might be some quibbling about precisely where the line between proper regulation and enabling oppression go, but I'd wager a majority of Americans are in favor of some version of the right to bear arms. As evidence of this I proffer this pew research poll (https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/07/24/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/07/24/key-facts...) which indicates that more than half of people who do not own guns could see themselves buying one in the future. 32% of people own guns in the U.S.
goatlover 2y ago
The fascism is consolidating power in the executive branch by having a billionaire gut the federal bureaucracy while trying to intimidate judges who rule against the administration and critical news agencies, among other things. Gun restrictions are a separate topic, and there is no serious chance that ordinary citizens are gong to form a militia to take on the US Military.
kelnos 2y ago
> it's amazing to me that the same people who are trying to convince me that the current government is fascist is also at the same time still campaigning on behalf of the same government to disarm its citizens. Why is that amazing? It doesn't really matter if civilians in the US are armed and trained and organized. If the US government decides to violently oppress people, the US government will win. Sure, it'll hurt more fighting against armed civilians, but they'll still win. The idea that the 2nd Amendment creates a populace full of people who could win an engagement against the US military is hilarious.
- potato3732842 2y ago
  The ability of the citizens to resist the government's ability to enforce compliance of unpopular stuff is a defense in depth thing. Not having pervasive surveillance is one layer. Due process that gives huge veto power to whatever the minority on the issue is is another. Being able to decide you'll take an enforcer with you rather than spend life in prison (and the pause and increased resource expenditure and scrutiny that causes the enforcers) is another layer.

nathan_compton 2y ago

Ok. First of all, you have a point - Trump is a great object lesson for why its probably not a great idea to have a huge, powerful, monolithic state and a commander in chief that can launch nuclear weapons. I don't think anyone would dispute that. But most people see that the government as currently comported isn't going anywhere, even acknowledging the dedicated if incondite attempts of the current administration to "tame administrative bloat," as they might describe it. Thus your average "liberal" thinks first that government should be executed carefully by professional policy makers that respect the power of the state and second it should "take people's guns away." But I will say that almost no liberal wants to totally disarm the public, anyway. That is a cartoon position which charitably could be attributed to loud voices on social media or something, but not a real policy position held by typical "libs". Most liberals just want guns to be properly regulated (perhaps even restricted to well regulated militias, to recall a phrase from somewhere). There might be some quibbling about precisely where the line between proper regulation and enabling oppression go, but I'd wager a majority of Americans are in favor of some version of the right to bear arms. As evidence of this I proffer this pew research poll (https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/07/24/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/07/24/key-facts...) which indicates that more than half of people who do not own guns could see themselves buying one in the future. 32% of people own guns in the U.S.

goatlover 2y ago

The fascism is consolidating power in the executive branch by having a billionaire gut the federal bureaucracy while trying to intimidate judges who rule against the administration and critical news agencies, among other things. Gun restrictions are a separate topic, and there is no serious chance that ordinary citizens are gong to form a militia to take on the US Military.

kelnos 2y ago

> it's amazing to me that the same people who are trying to convince me that the current government is fascist is also at the same time still campaigning on behalf of the same government to disarm its citizens. Why is that amazing? It doesn't really matter if civilians in the US are armed and trained and organized. If the US government decides to violently oppress people, the US government will win. Sure, it'll hurt more fighting against armed civilians, but they'll still win. The idea that the 2nd Amendment creates a populace full of people who could win an engagement against the US military is hilarious.

potato3732842 2y ago
The ability of the citizens to resist the government's ability to enforce compliance of unpopular stuff is a defense in depth thing. Not having pervasive surveillance is one layer. Due process that gives huge veto power to whatever the minority on the issue is is another. Being able to decide you'll take an enforcer with you rather than spend life in prison (and the pause and increased resource expenditure and scrutiny that causes the enforcers) is another layer.