gransoporro wrote:
I agree with the similarity with the blackshirt tactics. They used the same approach. They stopped before taking the people off the bus and beating them up, so not the same level at all.
I agree that this behavior is fascist and scary for democratic minded people everywhere. Still not the same as the blackshirts. That happened when the switch from democracy to authoritarianism was already in full motion. We are not there yet, although the signs are not worrying: they are outright scary.
I generally agree that it's not at the level of the blackshirts yet, but if they'd managed to make the bus stop, do you think that mob wouldn't've taken people off the bus and beaten them up?
Puja
Do you know that they would have resorted to that? Sorry, being pedantic but we cannot know the real intention. It's possible that the mob could have been whipped up to anger and violence, or they could have chanted some unpleasant phrases and left it at that. I completely agree that this is a worrying development which is made much worse by the response of Trump who refuses to condemn it; you can make a very good argument that he encourages it. When Democrat activists are beaten up or murdered in broad daylight by Republicans, it will have reached the level of the Brown/Black shirts/ communists etc. I don't think, as Gransoporro says, that it's at that stage yet but it's certainly deeply concerning behaviour that cannot be allowed to develop to that next level.
This did happen during the civil rights era. Also, that fat kid that shot people with an assault rifle in Kenosha. If you saw the armed angry white cosplay wingnuts over here right now, you'd risk tragedy by assuming they wouldn't. Yesterday entry by road into NYC from New Jersey was blocked by angry Trump wankers protesting fuck knows what. When protestors tried that in Philly in the aftermath of George Floyd the pigs teargassed them, herded them into a fence and beat the living shit out of them.
The cosplay crackers have got the message they can act with relative impunity.
gransoporro wrote:
I agree with the similarity with the blackshirt tactics. They used the same approach. They stopped before taking the people off the bus and beating them up, so not the same level at all.
I agree that this behavior is fascist and scary for democratic minded people everywhere. Still not the same as the blackshirts. That happened when the switch from democracy to authoritarianism was already in full motion. We are not there yet, although the signs are not worrying: they are outright scary.
I generally agree that it's not at the level of the blackshirts yet, but if they'd managed to make the bus stop, do you think that mob wouldn't've taken people off the bus and beaten them up?
Puja
Do you know that they would have resorted to that? Sorry, being pedantic but we cannot know the real intention. It's possible that the mob could have been whipped up to anger and violence, or they could have chanted some unpleasant phrases and left it at that. I completely agree that this is a worrying development which is made much worse by the response of Trump who refuses to condemn it; you can make a very good argument that he encourages it. When Democrat activists are beaten up or murdered in broad daylight by Republicans, it will have reached the level of the Brown/Black shirts/ communists etc. I don't think, as Gransoporro says, that it's at that stage yet but it's certainly deeply concerning behaviour that cannot be allowed to develop to that next level.
That is a fair point and I'm possibly being unfair in imagining the worst. However, I cannot imagine a mob that has successfully hunted down and caught a bus, full of people that their ideologue denounces as criminals and traitors, deciding to just to chant some unpleasant phrases at it. The adrenaline, the enthusiasm of having caught their enemies, the anonymity of the mob and the confidence from having them backing you - I just can't see that not turning violent.
You are right that comparisons to blackshirts and brownshirts are not justified (yet) though. If that had turned to violence, it would've been spur of the moment mob idiocy that escalated out of control. It's not at full blackshirt level until the mobs are going out with the intention of violence from the start.
You will also need the acquiescence of police and of those in charge of justice, to the highest level, to reach that point. We can already see some of that, but hopefully the highest level will change in January.
Blackshirts knew they did not have to worry about the carabinieri coming knocking at their doors. Morepork already cited the civil rights movement and that is the most relevant example for the US.
I've just had a quick look on the BBC for the election details, and its the first time Ive read about Faithless Electors. I can't quite get my head around the fact that despite a particular state deciding on what basis its electoral college votes will be made, someone can just say 'fuck it' and do something else. Thats a bit farcical.
gransoporro wrote:
I agree with the similarity with the blackshirt tactics. They used the same approach. They stopped before taking the people off the bus and beating them up, so not the same level at all.
I agree that this behavior is fascist and scary for democratic minded people everywhere. Still not the same as the blackshirts. That happened when the switch from democracy to authoritarianism was already in full motion. We are not there yet, although the signs are not worrying: they are outright scary.
I generally agree that it's not at the level of the blackshirts yet, but if they'd managed to make the bus stop, do you think that mob wouldn't've taken people off the bus and beaten them up?
Puja
Do you know that they would have resorted to that? Sorry, being pedantic but we cannot know the real intention. It's possible that the mob could have been whipped up to anger and violence, or they could have chanted some unpleasant phrases and left it at that.
Hmm yes, can't imagine why someone would think the MAGAshirts had ill intent. It's not like they rammed a staffer's car and tried to run them off the road or anything.
I'm a god
How can you kill a god?
Shame on you, sweet Nerevar
Sandydragon wrote:I've just had a quick look on the BBC for the election details, and its the first time Ive read about Faithless Electors. I can't quite get my head around the fact that despite a particular state deciding on what basis its electoral college votes will be made, someone can just say 'fuck it' and do something else. Thats a bit farcical.
Please someone tell me that this has been fixed.
The US system is actually ridiculous the more you examine it, isn't it? They just seem to be cruising along on a set of rules made up in 1800, back when everything was completely different, but can't possibly be changed because "it was the way the founders intended it".
I mean ours is as well, but ours isn't currently under full-blown attack, nor held in the same reverence.
Sandydragon wrote:I've just had a quick look on the BBC for the election details, and its the first time Ive read about Faithless Electors. I can't quite get my head around the fact that despite a particular state deciding on what basis its electoral college votes will be made, someone can just say 'fuck it' and do something else. Thats a bit farcical.
Please someone tell me that this has been fixed.
The US system is actually ridiculous the more you examine it, isn't it? They just seem to be cruising along on a set of rules made up in 1800, back when everything was completely different, but can't possibly be changed because "it was the way the founders intended it".
I mean ours is as well, but ours isn't currently under full-blown attack, nor held in the same reverence.
Puja
And ours has an independent body overseeing it (to an extent). A relatively modern body at that.
First Past The Post sucks a fuck, but fuck me, not as much as the Electoral College system.
Once in a while, the side that got fewer votes might win in an FPP government - case in point NZ in 1978 and 1981, when the National Party won despite the fact that Labour got more votes. BUT I kind of fuckin' doubt the Tories or Labour would be "winning" despite getting literally millions of votes less than the losing side.
I'm a god
How can you kill a god?
Shame on you, sweet Nerevar
Sandydragon wrote:I've just had a quick look on the BBC for the election details, and its the first time Ive read about Faithless Electors. I can't quite get my head around the fact that despite a particular state deciding on what basis its electoral college votes will be made, someone can just say 'fuck it' and do something else. Thats a bit farcical.
Please someone tell me that this has been fixed.
The US system is actually ridiculous the more you examine it, isn't it? They just seem to be cruising along on a set of rules made up in 1800, back when everything was completely different, but can't possibly be changed because "it was the way the founders intended it".
I mean ours is as well, but ours isn't currently under full-blown attack, nor held in the same reverence.
Puja
And ours has an independent body overseeing it (to an extent). A relatively modern body at that.
But we do still have archaic procedural rules that can be gamed by anyone willing enough to be a dick about it, cf. the proroguing shenanigans, anything Christopher Chope does, etc.
cashead wrote:First Past The Post sucks a fuck, but fuck me, not as much as the Electoral College system.
Once in a while, the side that got fewer votes might win in an FPP government - case in point NZ in 1978 and 1981, when the National Party won despite the fact that Labour got more votes. BUT I kind of fuckin' doubt the Tories or Labour would be "winning" despite getting literally millions of votes less than the losing side.
Very true, but I felt the disclaimer was needed nonetheless.
Sandydragon wrote:I've just had a quick look on the BBC for the election details, and its the first time Ive read about Faithless Electors. I can't quite get my head around the fact that despite a particular state deciding on what basis its electoral college votes will be made, someone can just say 'fuck it' and do something else. Thats a bit farcical.
Please someone tell me that this has been fixed.
The US system is actually ridiculous the more you examine it, isn't it? They just seem to be cruising along on a set of rules made up in 1800, back when everything was completely different, but can't possibly be changed because "it was the way the founders intended it".
I mean ours is as well, but ours isn't currently under full-blown attack, nor held in the same reverence.
Puja
The reverence with which the founding father are held is frankly ludicrous. There were many historically great men amongst them but they were still fallible and were drafting this document in a world very different to today. The reluctance
To change is bizarre in a country that is dynamic in so many other ways.
Puja wrote:
I generally agree that it's not at the level of the blackshirts yet, but if they'd managed to make the bus stop, do you think that mob wouldn't've taken people off the bus and beaten them up?
Puja
Do you know that they would have resorted to that? Sorry, being pedantic but we cannot know the real intention. It's possible that the mob could have been whipped up to anger and violence, or they could have chanted some unpleasant phrases and left it at that.
Hmm yes, can't imagine why someone would think the MAGAshirts had ill intent. It's not like they rammed a staffer's car and tried to run them off the road or anything.
I saw the video of this, if this sort of political intimidation isn't indicative of fascism then I don't know what is.
The electoral college was invented to prevent the most populous states (Mass., NY, Penn, Virginia) from dominating the federation and the presidency. The mechanism occasionally allows minority votes to win.
Same, and even worse, for the Senate. Wyoming and California have both 2 senators.
Sandydragon wrote:
Do you know that they would have resorted to that? Sorry, being pedantic but we cannot know the real intention. It's possible that the mob could have been whipped up to anger and violence, or they could have chanted some unpleasant phrases and left it at that.
Hmm yes, can't imagine why someone would think the MAGAshirts had ill intent. It's not like they rammed a staffer's car and tried to run them off the road or anything.
I saw the video of this, if this sort of political intimidation isn't indicative of fascism then I don't know what is.
For real, Sandy. Fuck off with this "we gots to hears thems outs!" bullshit, yo. Those cunts do not deserve the benefit of the doubt whatsoever.
I mean, straight from the mouths of the MAGA mouth pieces.
I'm a god
How can you kill a god?
Shame on you, sweet Nerevar
cashead wrote:
Hmm yes, can't imagine why someone would think the MAGAshirts had ill intent. It's not like they rammed a staffer's car and tried to run them off the road or anything.
I saw the video of this, if this sort of political intimidation isn't indicative of fascism then I don't know what is.
For real, Sandy. Fuck off with this "we gots to hears thems outs!" bullshit, yo. Those cunts do not deserve the benefit of the doubt whatsoever.
I mean, straight from the mouths of the MAGA mouth pieces.
Where have I written that we have to hear them out? I suggested that America wasn’t at the Black/Brown shirt or communist level of intimidation yet. Read the post FFS.
Sandydragon wrote:
Do you know that they would have resorted to that? Sorry, being pedantic but we cannot know the real intention. It's possible that the mob could have been whipped up to anger and violence, or they could have chanted some unpleasant phrases and left it at that.
Hmm yes, can't imagine why someone would think the MAGAshirts had ill intent. It's not like they rammed a staffer's car and tried to run them off the road or anything.
I saw the video of this, if this sort of political intimidation isn't indicative of fascism then I don't know what is.
Completely missed the point being made. Well done.
