228
There Is No Constitutional Mandate for Fascism
(www.theatlantic.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2024
228 points (97.1% liked)
politics
19089 readers
2122 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
People are quick to forget the second amendment exists for situations like this.
"A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."
"being necessary to the security of a free State" being the key point here. I find it ironic that every time anyone tries to pass any gun legislation the right cry foul saying they need to defend themselves from a tyrannical government. Then literally elect an outspoken tyrant. Neo-liberals (diet conservatives basically) are so busy jerking themselves off about how great they are, forgot why the second amendment exists. Despite all the cries for help, scared of fascism, they did nothing to actually prepare for the perceived threat. If it came down to it, toe to toe, left vs right, they'd get slaughtered. They're afraid of guns.
Now am I saying we need a violent coup d'etat? Nah. But some people are wholly convinced Trump is going to go full on fascist. Do things like invoke the insurrection act, declare martial law and suspend habeas corpus. To those people, y'all need to rethink your stance on arms. If it's coming and you want to stop that freight train? That's war. And you're not ready.
You think civilians with guns are going to thwart an army?
Sure, if they are coming after you directly and you've got nothing else to lose, it would make sense to make a stand.
But if you preemptively show that you are a threat then you will be bringing that upon yourself, and possibly others, needlessly. We have seen this before, as another user pointed out, with Waco and Ruby Ridge.
Do not make yourself a target and a danger when the threat against you is just shitty laws that benefit the wealthy.
Civilians did thwart an army. Look at the middle east. We didn't win shit, we just left.
It worked in the middle east because the government had to avoid offending the sensibilities of the American people. Imagine how it would go if the American people had been indoctrinated completely into a fascist hate frenzy.
That would never happen in America, of course ( /s ). However, imagine what war with America would be like with a fascist government firmly in control.
Imagine what would happen to the minority of civilians who would engage in revolt?
The fact is the U.S. is still a democracy. If there were enough people to win in a fight against the government, they could just vote in who they want. As much as it makes me sick to say it, that's what they just did.
It's probably prudent for me to mention a few things, one I don't personally think that's where this is going, at least not yet. Two I'm aware of the sheer size and number of Americans would need to whole heartedly participate. I'd never expect that many to even get off the couch. I was more directing the sentiment of "resistance" that so many keyboard jockey liberals keep throwing around. I would not start or attempt to lead or even advocate for this level of action so prematurely. What I failed to articulate was I was operating under the assumption america had a civil war at the same scale of our first, or like other countries have had.
To your point, tangentially, if it were left v Trump 'regime', they'd (Trump regime) probably have support from Russia at the very least. We already know how limp dick NATO is. It would be a blood bath with a pinhole path to victory.
Do I believe it could happen or work with the current state of our country? No. Do I think we'll get there? No. Do I want it to? Still no. My point was if the left want it they should put their money where their mouth is and that it's not impossible for a well organized civilian army to "win" to some effect. Especially since something like that is bound to cause some splintering in the military.
I'd say at this point the left's response, if they want to stop the decline of the country, is to abandon the Democratic party and form a new party that actually puts the needs of the 99% above the needs of the 1%.
Communism and Socialism have no chance in the US, but a social democrat is probably pretty close to what the majority of Americans want.
Of course, I'm not talking about a group that only surfaces once every four years. The presidency shouldn't even be a thought. Instead, we need a progressive party, dedicated to people, and working at the local and state level to fix what we can there.
I agree. Would help if the party didn't accept corporate money, like the Sander campaign before the DNC fucked him over.