Like seriously, I'm tired of whining on the internet about this shit. Where can I go to learn about joining a protest? It's better that doing fuck all by tut-tutting the establishment hellbent on fucking us over while they count their money.
Peaceful protests build the sense of consensus and unity. Violent solutions can't succeed without both popular support and enough participants to make a difference, but if everybody's scared of standing alone they're doomed. Sudden upheaval is likely to make more people oppose the change, because most people like stability.
Peaceful protests that get gradually more frustrated are more likely to support more drastic measures than a sudden upheaval. Whether or not you believe peaceful protests will fix anything, they're the best solution that's viable right now.
If it's five people throwing them, they're terrorists. If it's five million, they're a problem. (Depending on the size of country and military, I'm pulling numbers out my arse to exemplify a point, not as accurate measures).
Numbers matter. If you have enough people on your side and willing to join the throwing for your cocktails to make a difference, that might work for you. But if most of the populace are scared to lose more than they stand to gain, you'll end up with the brave throwers arrested or killed, the media denouncing their "undemocratic" acts and possibly the people even more afraid to do anything.
Any revolutionary movement will need to hit a point of critical mass that allows it to succeed. It's hard to gauge just when that point is reached, but if you misjudge, you'll end up another failed insurrection.
The bad guys know this too, they'll penetrate your organization (if it's decentralized, they'll still poison it with plenty of agents, they've got taxpayers' money), they'll use your inaction to communicate apathy, they'll even have something false flag to still cause the effect you're describing without real people using force. And their media doesn't need anything real to happen to report it.
Any revolutionary movement will need to hit a point of critical mass that allows it to succeed. It’s hard to gauge just when that point is reached, but if you misjudge, you’ll end up another failed insurrection.
Not hard for a government, no. Anything predictable and organized will not succeed. As chaotic and brave as possible or not at all.
That's sounds accurate for Russia, but could it be that different strategies remain possible in the US? The US could be on it's way to be a totalitarian state like Russia, but it's not there yet, and still has a lot of (flawed) democratic institutions. I think in the US you can still protest without being put in jail.
I don't think so, because what I said didn't mention anything about already having totalitarianism. The means today's governments have at their disposal allow to achieve most of things done by classic 30s totalitarian regimes without visible violence.
Thanks for the reply. I'd argue it's still worthwhile to speak out in a peaceful manner and hope that truth will prevail, but maybe you're right and I am too optimistic
think you Americans are beyond a peaceful protest at this point, right now you need a revolution. you are quite literally 4 months away from a potential dictatorship.
So you can have a revolution with a peaceful protest. The problem is that requires a general strike to go with it to entirely cripple the economy. And Americans are obviously still too fat and happy to even do that.
why don't you go learn about using firearms and secure communication networks instead? protests accomplish nothing. protests get you put on lists for when the authoritarians really take over.
Hell, people in the military just need to go on and execute the offending members of the supreme court, the house, etc., then just say "the president told us to do so".
The Article itself stays within the scope of the Executive Branch but the Section itself just says:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Likely, if Congress tried, it would be argued that the scope is only the Executive Branch.
Article 3's scope is the Judicial branch but says in Section 1:
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
However, Samuel Chase who was appointed as a Supreme Court Justice by George Washington and confirmed by the Senate was impeached by Congress in 1804, and other federal judges (some having life-time appointments apparently) were dissolved.
Samuel Chase ultimately was acquitted by the Senate in 1805 however.
Article 2, section 4 clear says "and all civil officers." It specifies president and vice president likely because they were getting away from a monarchy and wanted to specify they aren't above the law, but it clearly should apply to any federal civil officers.
Does this actually matter if the Supreme Court is ruling in the constitutionality of how accountable they are to other's power? Probably not. This supreme court at least will always argue in favor of serving themselves. I don't know how that plays out at that point.
Who would decide tho who can impeach Supreme Court Justice? Because it can't be SCOTUS as that would be deciding in your own case and you guys also don't have a separate constitutional tribunal
is biden better than trump? yes. am I voting biden? yes, there's no other real option. is he a feckless snivelling coward that only cares about people if they offer him a chance for power? yes. does he actually intend to do anything to improve our country and stave off a christofascist totalitarian takeover? hell no he doesn't lmao
he won't do a good god damn thing if the corporations who have their fists up his ass don't force him to, and they don't give a shit about any of this because when it all turns red come inauguration day, regulations and protections will be stripped away and they'll have no restriction on how they can abuse us and our planet for their own gain.
he has this new power, and just like with the power he holds now, he won't do anything with it that will actually move the needle and improve quality of life for anyone unless it serves his interest. the next guy will use it though. bend over, y'all.
if you're not American, I would understand that to be a reasonable suggestion. not how it works here, though.
under our system of voting, third party votes are less than worthless. I would rather that not be the case, but here we are.
If you're American or if you're not simply ignorant of that fact, I assume you're salivating at the idea of getting a reluctant biden voter to vote third party to help secure your authoritarian party win.
Authoritarian party win? Do you even know who I was going to vote for? I guess any third party means authoritarian to you? No, and its not just Biden voters, its people who vote for Trump as well. We all need to pick a different canadite now. I'd personally vote for Chase Oliver.
You may think that's how the system works, but at it's root, you can pick other choices, not just one or the other. The more you say that, the more real it becomes, and the more hopeless you make everyone else feel. You have a very nuanced view of how everything works and what type of person I am.
The system is set up to only have two options. It's intentional. Also the VP used to be the party that lost. That's how much it matters to vote after the parties pick a nominee.
Big tough guy on the internet, but let's see how you feel when Trump's brown shirts are knocking on doors to check if you're harboring any trans people...
I wish I was joking, but be prepared because this shit can happen fast. Then maybe you'll think back on this election and wonder what could have happened if all you stupid motherfuckers would just shut the fuck up and vote for Biden.
"Wahhh we had four years to choose a better candidate and we did FUCKING NOTHING. Now we're looking literal fascism in the face and we're suddenly all concerned about who our presidential candidates are." You know we have a whole process for this, right? It doesn't start 5 months before the election.
It's so fucking juvenile. We get it, you're not going to vote. Stop spreading your cancer.
Glad to hear that one party is playing by imagined rules and that the other party is playing by what is actually written.
Good thing that we're getting fucked either way.
I don't think that many people have realized this yet, but we are all fucked no matter who is in office.
It's very evident that nothing is getting better no matter who from our two choices is in charge.
I'm actually losing weight (that I don't need to lose) because the cost of living is too high. I've had to start working more, and it's barely helping.
Thank the good lord that the DNC is following decorum though. So glad that they're being polite while we are being absolutely fucked.
I wasn't implying it was a good thing, just the explanation of why they don't get more done.
That said, they have improved a few things. It just isn't as much as we need. Insulin, for example, is in a much better place, and that should be expanding to cover more drugs. Thr democrats are significantly better than the Republicans. They are not both the same. They just aren't as good as we deserve.
I'm sorry to vent at you. It wasn't really meant to be directed at you. I'm just very frustrated.
My girlfriend is a diabetic, and insulin is indeed more affordable. It still costs her about $120 a month for something that costs pennies to produce.
My real point though, is that it doesn't matter who is in power. Things are getting dramatically worse every year no matter who is in the White House.
The Supreme Court is obviously completely fucked. They literally made it legal for them to be bribed. And they are not elected by citizens, and also have a lifetime appointment.
There is nothing that we as citizens can legally do to curb their power. We are quite literally at their mercy, and they are not being merciful.
And I haven't even touched on our actual real long-term problems.
The president cannot impeach them unilaterally, and is explicitly out of his power.
He could, however, potentially send them to a blacksite as a prisoner or conveniently kill them as part of that arrest. They could claim collusion with domestic terror groups, espionage, corruption, etc, as very plausible justification for arrest, and that would probably qualify as official duties, at least how this SCOTUS would classify the same actions if executed by a republican president.
Blatant misinformation and a fundamental lack of understanding of the ruling. Nothing changed. President cannot commit a crime and say it was in official capacity. Obviously.
And you have all the reasons to be terrified, the US in case of a Trump victory will either:
a) Go isolationist, dissolve the NATO, then let the power vacuum to be filled by Russia and China (one is better than the other), all while a big ultranationalist movement will claim to fix the issues.
b) Make whatever insanity Trump's christofascist call "morals" into the global standards for human rights, heavily censor the internet, etc.
A second Trump victory will have dire consequences for the rest of the world.
If the President can communicate with the DoJ or VP, even about doing something illegal or as part of some illegal scheme and be immune to prosecution because being in contact with the VP and DoJ are part of his duties, why would talking to the CIA to ask them to "retire" SCOTUS justices not be an official act that's immune to prosecution?
Shooting political rivals probably isn't an official act, but presumably he could ask, she could shoot and he could pardon and I think it would be untouchable?
The dissent said the president can now assassinate someone. The president enjoys no such authority, and therefore, the dissent must be discarded as not a serious opinion.
People have been saying that for years. Why not make voting something we don't need to get out to do though? I think it's ridiculous and frankly anti-democratic to only count votes from people that travel to a polling station in the 21st century.
Voting gives us no control with the current party system. We need ranked choice voting, end campaigns and advertising. Only 1 website will have the candidates and their platforms, tax funded only, anyone who wants to run can run and ranked choice voting will make the actual most popular acceptable candidate win.
Yes, but until we have rcv, we make do with the system we have, flaws and all. Unless you're suggesting we don't vote at all because we are unhappy with the system...?
the democrats literally cancelled their effective primary and selected Biden. Remember Tulsi Gabbard? They won't let her run cause she'd fucking win, same as Sanders. It's a one party state, and it's not subtle
That's simply not true, Tulsi Gabbard had the opportunity to submit her name to the primary election after getting enough signatures just like Dean Phillips and Marriane Williamson did.
She didn't even do that, the most basic step of trying to become president, I wouldn't blame the DNC for her not bothering with the basics.
During a Fox & Friends interview on March 6, 2024, Gabbard was directly asked about serving as Trump's vice-president. She responded, "I would be honored to serve our country in that way and be in a position to help President Trump..." In March 2024, Gabbard was cited by Trump as one of his potential choices for his vice presidential running mate.
Because eating poisonous animals is dangerous and we all know that Thomas and Kavanaugh have the most toxic blood possible while being able to pass as human from a medical point of view.
Short of federal troops literally kicking down doors as oFFiCiAl aCtS it won't happen. The Republicans want their dictatorship and they're not going to vote against it.
