5 ms·

>>I don’t know how to connect constructively Yeah we probably never will. The part of him that everyone hates is creating a division in the nation. On the flip

by roamerz 10mo ago

>>I don’t know how to connect constructively Yeah we probably never will. The part of him that everyone hates is creating a division in the nation. On the flip side I disagree so much with what the Biden administration did I am willing to accept his faults and will bide my time until Vance and Rubio take office when hopefully the hate will subside and we can start to come together as a country.

dpark 10mo ago
The part of him that I hate most is that he’s exposing a huge chunk of the country as being willing to continue to support a man who very clearly cares nothing about democracy or the country except to the extent that it lines his pockets. > hopefully the hate will subside and we can start to come together as a country Trump got elected on a platform of divisiveness and hate and he’s continued that playbook since. You can’t support him and then seriously say you want the country to come back together.
- mothballed 10mo ago
  [flagged]
  - dpark 10mo ago
    I wish all of Trump’s most fervent supporters would be as bravely open about their support for dictatorship as you.
    - mothballed 10mo ago
      Honestly most dictatorships are less effective at crushing the freedom and spirit of the populace as democracies are. If you go someplace like Myanmar or DRC, the response to the whims of a dictator are something like "you and what army." Most of their populace doesn't even listen to what the dictator says, nor pay taxes or any of the like. Democracy scams the populace into thinking the government is actually 'them' which disarms them into subservience. Occasionally you do find a dictatorship that can run with an iron fist and actually subject the majority of the population. A couple of divergent examples are UAE/Dubai -- which ranks higher in economic freedom than the US. On the other hand you have places like DPRK which are just an absolute shithole all around. Depending on where you're at democracy definitely functions worse, than say a kritarchy (ex: Somalia, which was more prosperous and peaceful and better respect for individual rights under decentralized 'xeer' law than under any democratic government.)
  - tastyface 10mo ago
    Not sure if trolling or actual fascist. Anyway, if you think people are going to give up their rights without any pushback, you’re in for a really scary decade. 37% will not be able to rule by fiat over the remainder without, essentially, civil war.
    - dpark 10mo ago
      I fear we may all be in for a really scary decade.
      - tastyface 10mo ago
        Yes. But many people aligned with the regime think it’s going to be smooth sailing into their dream autocratic ethnostste. Nope.
        dpark 10mo ago
        It’s weird that someone can look at Russia where wealthy white folks frequently fall out of windows and think “yeah, that’ll probably work great for me”. Too much main character syndrome, the assumption that in any alternate system they would go up in privilege and status.
        quickthrowman 10mo ago
        > Too much main character syndrome, the assumption that in any alternate system they would go up in privilege and status. The same problem plagues almost every libertarian, they all imagine themselves as John Galt in a potential libertopia. In actuality, they would end up as a regular person serving the John Galts of the world.
        lovich 10mo ago
        The mothballed guy is just crazy, trolling, or lying. I was going to respond to another comments of his in this thread when I realized he was the poster who laid out a false timeline of events by omitting the one comment that made him wrong in another post of mine. You can also see it with him arguing about how democracy is bad because you’ve been tricked into losing your rights, but also his preferred governmental organization includes being taken advantage of by anyone stronger than you. His stance is logically inconsistent on even a barest look and his hinting at sovereign citizen arguments and hero’s is telling me the answer is that he’s crazy
  - grog454 10mo ago
    Who or what should determine the natural rights that one lives by?
    - mothballed 10mo ago
      One way would be to use a polycentric form of law where each individual could determine what or which form of law to live under that protects them by voluntarily entering some sort of protective group. Or choose none at all and merely protect their natural rights on their own. A key difference here from democracy is that merely living in one place doesn't lock you into a specific legal system. Of course these also suffer one of the same weaknesses as democracy, e.g. if certain groups disagree with you they can just kill you if they're able. We see this in US for instance where if a guy named Randy Weaver cuts a shotgun 1/4" too short than what the 'people' say your right to bear arms includes and then for contested reasons doesn't show up for court, then a man named Lon Horiuchi can snipe his wife dead while holding a child and then get promoted and go on to do similar things at Waco.
      - dpark 10mo ago
        It’s illuminating and sad to piece together the picture of what you actually want. You mention dictatorship being better than democracy and then talk about “polycentric law” which seems to basically be sovereign citizen stuff. And then you trot out Weaver who was specifically under siege for refusing to appear on charges of dealing illegal arms to white suprematists. You don’t have a problem with democracy. You’re just a white supremacist. You want a white dictator so you don’t have to worry about the voting rights of minorities or whites who might be sympathetic to minorities.
        mothballed 10mo ago
        Your assertion that undercover ATF agents are 'white suprematists[sic]" is probably the most accurate thing you've said so far.
        dpark 10mo ago
- roamerz 10mo ago
  The emotional hate I see is mostly centered around the person and not his policies. I am hopeful yes that once that divisive aspect is gone we can at least have somewhat normal discourse about policies and centrist ideas.
  - dpark 10mo ago
    Centrist ideas like abducting people off the street and sending them to deportation camps without due process under the assumption of guilt? Or centrist ideas like sending troops into politically opposed states out of spite? Or sweeping tariffs imposed without congressional approval? Or centrist ideas like the president having virtually unlimited authority and freedom from criminal prosecution for effectively any act? What centrist ideas do you believe are going to come from any of this? Because this stuff isn’t centrist.
    - roamerz 10mo ago
      I wonder how many true citizens have actually been deported? Do you have any specific cases to cite? The sheer number of people that are being processed is due to prior administrations open border policy. They didn't enforce the law that has been approved by congress (since you mentioned congressional approval) and by doing so have created the situation which we now find ourselves. Want to change the law? Do it correctly. The troops were there to protect Federal Law Enforcement and Federal property. I imagine that would happen in any case regardless of political affiliation. In any case I 100% support that. Federal Officers are there to enforce the law. >>freedom from criminal prosecution for effectively any act. Were you referring to Biden's son? Seems within scope of the comment.
      - dpark 10mo ago
        The US specifically doesn’t gather or publish stats about citizens who are detained or deported. Shocking, that. But you can easily search on Google and find some info. Propublica has an article claiming they investigated 170 cases of citizens detained by ICE, some without communication for more than a day, some physically abused. There’s info out there. Are we only concerned about deportations of citizens, though? Not illegal detentions? Not abuse? Not deportation of legal residents? > The sheer number of people that are being processed is due to prior administrations open border policy. Obama got called the deporter in chief because he deported so many immigrants. It’s possible to enforce immigration laws without having a bunch of masked men snatching people off the street. I think there’s a real conversation to be had about immigration. But that’s not what’s happening. > Want to change the law? Do it correctly. Agreed. Follow the law. Deporting residents in violation of court orders is not following the law. Denying due process is not the law. Maybe Biden should have enforced the law more effectively. Trump flouting the law doesn’t fix that. > Were you referring to Biden's son? No. I was referring to the president. And the Supreme Court essentially granting the president immunity for any and all actions. Are you under the impression that Hunter Biden was president at some point? Or maybe you believe that Biden being addicted to coke and buying a gun is somehow relevant to any of the actions Trump has taken Or maybe you’re not acting in good faith and you’re invoking this as a distraction.

by roamerz 10mo ago

dpark 10mo ago

The part of him that I hate most is that he’s exposing a huge chunk of the country as being willing to continue to support a man who very clearly cares nothing about democracy or the country except to the extent that it lines his pockets. > hopefully the hate will subside and we can start to come together as a country Trump got elected on a platform of divisiveness and hate and he’s continued that playbook since. You can’t support him and then seriously say you want the country to come back together.

mothballed 10mo ago
[flagged]
- dpark 10mo ago
  I wish all of Trump’s most fervent supporters would be as bravely open about their support for dictatorship as you.
  - mothballed 10mo ago
    Honestly most dictatorships are less effective at crushing the freedom and spirit of the populace as democracies are. If you go someplace like Myanmar or DRC, the response to the whims of a dictator are something like "you and what army." Most of their populace doesn't even listen to what the dictator says, nor pay taxes or any of the like. Democracy scams the populace into thinking the government is actually 'them' which disarms them into subservience. Occasionally you do find a dictatorship that can run with an iron fist and actually subject the majority of the population. A couple of divergent examples are UAE/Dubai -- which ranks higher in economic freedom than the US. On the other hand you have places like DPRK which are just an absolute shithole all around. Depending on where you're at democracy definitely functions worse, than say a kritarchy (ex: Somalia, which was more prosperous and peaceful and better respect for individual rights under decentralized 'xeer' law than under any democratic government.)
- tastyface 10mo ago
  Not sure if trolling or actual fascist. Anyway, if you think people are going to give up their rights without any pushback, you’re in for a really scary decade. 37% will not be able to rule by fiat over the remainder without, essentially, civil war.
  - dpark 10mo ago
    I fear we may all be in for a really scary decade.
    - tastyface 10mo ago
      Yes. But many people aligned with the regime think it’s going to be smooth sailing into their dream autocratic ethnostste. Nope.
      - dpark 10mo ago
        It’s weird that someone can look at Russia where wealthy white folks frequently fall out of windows and think “yeah, that’ll probably work great for me”. Too much main character syndrome, the assumption that in any alternate system they would go up in privilege and status.
        quickthrowman 10mo ago
        > Too much main character syndrome, the assumption that in any alternate system they would go up in privilege and status. The same problem plagues almost every libertarian, they all imagine themselves as John Galt in a potential libertopia. In actuality, they would end up as a regular person serving the John Galts of the world.
        lovich 10mo ago
        The mothballed guy is just crazy, trolling, or lying. I was going to respond to another comments of his in this thread when I realized he was the poster who laid out a false timeline of events by omitting the one comment that made him wrong in another post of mine. You can also see it with him arguing about how democracy is bad because you’ve been tricked into losing your rights, but also his preferred governmental organization includes being taken advantage of by anyone stronger than you. His stance is logically inconsistent on even a barest look and his hinting at sovereign citizen arguments and hero’s is telling me the answer is that he’s crazy
- grog454 10mo ago
  Who or what should determine the natural rights that one lives by?
  - mothballed 10mo ago
    One way would be to use a polycentric form of law where each individual could determine what or which form of law to live under that protects them by voluntarily entering some sort of protective group. Or choose none at all and merely protect their natural rights on their own. A key difference here from democracy is that merely living in one place doesn't lock you into a specific legal system. Of course these also suffer one of the same weaknesses as democracy, e.g. if certain groups disagree with you they can just kill you if they're able. We see this in US for instance where if a guy named Randy Weaver cuts a shotgun 1/4" too short than what the 'people' say your right to bear arms includes and then for contested reasons doesn't show up for court, then a man named Lon Horiuchi can snipe his wife dead while holding a child and then get promoted and go on to do similar things at Waco.
    - dpark 10mo ago
      It’s illuminating and sad to piece together the picture of what you actually want. You mention dictatorship being better than democracy and then talk about “polycentric law” which seems to basically be sovereign citizen stuff. And then you trot out Weaver who was specifically under siege for refusing to appear on charges of dealing illegal arms to white suprematists. You don’t have a problem with democracy. You’re just a white supremacist. You want a white dictator so you don’t have to worry about the voting rights of minorities or whites who might be sympathetic to minorities.
      - mothballed 10mo ago
        Your assertion that undercover ATF agents are 'white suprematists[sic]" is probably the most accurate thing you've said so far.
        dpark 10mo ago
roamerz 10mo ago
The emotional hate I see is mostly centered around the person and not his policies. I am hopeful yes that once that divisive aspect is gone we can at least have somewhat normal discourse about policies and centrist ideas.
- dpark 10mo ago
  Centrist ideas like abducting people off the street and sending them to deportation camps without due process under the assumption of guilt? Or centrist ideas like sending troops into politically opposed states out of spite? Or sweeping tariffs imposed without congressional approval? Or centrist ideas like the president having virtually unlimited authority and freedom from criminal prosecution for effectively any act? What centrist ideas do you believe are going to come from any of this? Because this stuff isn’t centrist.
  - roamerz 10mo ago
    I wonder how many true citizens have actually been deported? Do you have any specific cases to cite? The sheer number of people that are being processed is due to prior administrations open border policy. They didn't enforce the law that has been approved by congress (since you mentioned congressional approval) and by doing so have created the situation which we now find ourselves. Want to change the law? Do it correctly. The troops were there to protect Federal Law Enforcement and Federal property. I imagine that would happen in any case regardless of political affiliation. In any case I 100% support that. Federal Officers are there to enforce the law. >>freedom from criminal prosecution for effectively any act. Were you referring to Biden's son? Seems within scope of the comment.
    - dpark 10mo ago
      The US specifically doesn’t gather or publish stats about citizens who are detained or deported. Shocking, that. But you can easily search on Google and find some info. Propublica has an article claiming they investigated 170 cases of citizens detained by ICE, some without communication for more than a day, some physically abused. There’s info out there. Are we only concerned about deportations of citizens, though? Not illegal detentions? Not abuse? Not deportation of legal residents? > The sheer number of people that are being processed is due to prior administrations open border policy. Obama got called the deporter in chief because he deported so many immigrants. It’s possible to enforce immigration laws without having a bunch of masked men snatching people off the street. I think there’s a real conversation to be had about immigration. But that’s not what’s happening. > Want to change the law? Do it correctly. Agreed. Follow the law. Deporting residents in violation of court orders is not following the law. Denying due process is not the law. Maybe Biden should have enforced the law more effectively. Trump flouting the law doesn’t fix that. > Were you referring to Biden's son? No. I was referring to the president. And the Supreme Court essentially granting the president immunity for any and all actions. Are you under the impression that Hunter Biden was president at some point? Or maybe you believe that Biden being addicted to coke and buying a gun is somehow relevant to any of the actions Trump has taken Or maybe you’re not acting in good faith and you’re invoking this as a distraction.