3 ms·

"and I agree that there was a fair bit of it..." This casual aside is really doing alot of heavy lifting here and doesnt really acknowledge the scale of the pro

"and I agree that there was a fair bit of it..." This casual aside is really doing alot of heavy lifting here and doesnt really acknowledge the scale of the problem. Dismissing it as "muddled bureacracy" doesnt even come close. After 4 years of the previous administration, the American people voted in the most disruptive change agent in US political history. And they did this with full knowledge of how he operates from his previous 4 years in the presidency. There is a counter-revolution happening right now and there is a popular mandate for this. And this means a few people are going to lose their job. I dont have any numbers for this but its probably likely that just as many, if not more, conservatives lost their jobs under the previous administration. (DEI provides a wonderful camouflage for political cleansing at scale).

shadowgovt 1y ago
You'll want to learn more about the distinction between "political appointees" (who, yes, are generally changed out when the administration changes) and "career civil servants." Trump's administration as President 47 has gone deeply after the latter, which is new. And, arguably, dangerous; we do not know what happens to the function of the modern federal government when we start pushing out skilled professionals in the specifics of administration of specific pieces of the bureaucracy and replacing them with neophytes. We don't know because it isn't done (and may be illegal, see https://www.nteu.org/schedulef https://www.nteu.org/schedulef - the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act of 1883 was created to prevent "spoils system" hiring and firing after President Garfield was assassinated by someone who believed he should receive a civil service job for supporting the President). I think you are correct that a counter-revolution is in progress. Not all revolutions end in something better. Most end in something remarkably worse.
- lazyeye 1y ago
  The "remarkably worse" has already happened. It's what we are trying to get back from. It's why I used the term counter-revolution. https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/06/politics/biden-removing-trump-board-appointments/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/06/politics/biden-removing-t...
  - shadowgovt 1y ago
    Indeed, there is definitely a messy fight going on between two halves of the country over what the country should be. I don't know what side history will record is the right side. But I do know that one side declared that the solution to the cognitive dissonance between immigration policy and the words on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty was to take the words off the Statue... And that side's in the White House right now.
    - lazyeye 1y ago
      ok but I thought you were arguing that a president removing a previous appointee is heralding the end of democracy or something. I dont know what point you are trying to make with regard to immigration but not flooding the country with millions of illegal immigrants from 3rd world countries (with everything that entails) is commonsense for most people. It doesn't mean you are racist or hate legal immigrants, it just means you haven't been successfully gaslit by Democrat propaganda.
      - shadowgovt 1y ago
        “Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” ... It's not exactly inviting the people in who have the money to pay a citizenship paperwork fee or a lawyer, is it? When our laws drift from our principles, what are we to do? In any case, no, the President violating the civil service act by arranging to have non-political appointees removed doesn't herald the end of democracy. It might herald the end of the rule of law. Because there's certainly a critical mass of people who are tired of following the laws, I think we could both agree. And if the president is also not interested in following the laws... Laws are just paper if no one follows them. And, I suppose, that could herald the end of democracy. Best of luck out there.
        lazyeye 1y ago
        You just sort of put words together that have little to no connection to reality. Deriving an immigration policy based on an environment that existed 150 years ago would be insanely stupid.

shadowgovt 1y ago

You'll want to learn more about the distinction between "political appointees" (who, yes, are generally changed out when the administration changes) and "career civil servants." Trump's administration as President 47 has gone deeply after the latter, which is new. And, arguably, dangerous; we do not know what happens to the function of the modern federal government when we start pushing out skilled professionals in the specifics of administration of specific pieces of the bureaucracy and replacing them with neophytes. We don't know because it isn't done (and may be illegal, see https://www.nteu.org/schedulef https://www.nteu.org/schedulef - the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act of 1883 was created to prevent "spoils system" hiring and firing after President Garfield was assassinated by someone who believed he should receive a civil service job for supporting the President). I think you are correct that a counter-revolution is in progress. Not all revolutions end in something better. Most end in something remarkably worse.

lazyeye 1y ago
The "remarkably worse" has already happened. It's what we are trying to get back from. It's why I used the term counter-revolution. https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/06/politics/biden-removing-trump-board-appointments/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/06/politics/biden-removing-t...
- shadowgovt 1y ago
  Indeed, there is definitely a messy fight going on between two halves of the country over what the country should be. I don't know what side history will record is the right side. But I do know that one side declared that the solution to the cognitive dissonance between immigration policy and the words on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty was to take the words off the Statue... And that side's in the White House right now.
  - lazyeye 1y ago
    ok but I thought you were arguing that a president removing a previous appointee is heralding the end of democracy or something. I dont know what point you are trying to make with regard to immigration but not flooding the country with millions of illegal immigrants from 3rd world countries (with everything that entails) is commonsense for most people. It doesn't mean you are racist or hate legal immigrants, it just means you haven't been successfully gaslit by Democrat propaganda.
    - shadowgovt 1y ago
      “Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” ... It's not exactly inviting the people in who have the money to pay a citizenship paperwork fee or a lawyer, is it? When our laws drift from our principles, what are we to do? In any case, no, the President violating the civil service act by arranging to have non-political appointees removed doesn't herald the end of democracy. It might herald the end of the rule of law. Because there's certainly a critical mass of people who are tired of following the laws, I think we could both agree. And if the president is also not interested in following the laws... Laws are just paper if no one follows them. And, I suppose, that could herald the end of democracy. Best of luck out there.
      - lazyeye 1y ago
        You just sort of put words together that have little to no connection to reality. Deriving an immigration policy based on an environment that existed 150 years ago would be insanely stupid.