The Politics Megathread

[Chrona]

@EOTFOFYL

It becomes a permanent stain in your history, how people react to it is beyond anyone's control. Perhaps they should have thought about this more thoroughly...

As already stated, the boomers insurrecting are, if liberal points are to be believed, stupid. Telling them to not be stupid doesn't really change anything. If you somehow think that I think there should be no consequences for them, then you're heavily mistaken. Doing things that follow your personal morals can get you destroyed. Just look at Snowden and Assange. All of this is besides the point, as now you're trying to state that bad things *should* happen to them for doing this. When my point is doing this doesn't fix the radical problem, the thing people should hopefully be trying to fix if they don't want more violence. If you on the otherhand, are possibly fine with more violence, then I agree this is a great course of action to take.

If they succeeded in this coup then forget about fraudulent elections, the election itself becomes meaningless. Why bother with this charade called democracy if people are going to force their way into power?

I agree with you that if this was a coup, then obviously what they would install would be whatever nu-goverment^tm model they wanted, but if you coup brings this to the political overthrow.

Then maybe it wasn't a coup, it was insurrection at most. As an American, I know you are more used to destabilizing other people's governments, as opposed to it happening to yours, so for context, this is a picture taken at the 2019 Sudan coup de'tat.

The man on the tank is the one overthrowing the government. Does this look similar to what happened at the Capitol?

The majority of MAGApedes there were not asking for the government to be overthrown and the new Emperor of America^tm to be installed into power. They have very plainly stated they wanted the election results to be more transparent and audited, and they have felt ignored. Probably because their claim is in and of itself stupid, but that's besides the point.

All this "what if I believed" hypothetical scenario is moot, It would mean that there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt

People are not courts of law, not you nor anyone else, they do not need "evidence beyond a reasonable doubt". You are willfully avoiding the premise by deconstructing whether or not election fraud did take place when that is not what I am asking you to consider. Forget anything else, you are someone who believes the election was fraudulent, what is the moral action to take in such a system?

and at that point its the job of the Justice Department and any other related entities to step in and handle it and not mob rule.

Look! You and the insurrectionists agree on something! Thank you for finally engaging in the hypothetical! Too bad the boomers tried doing exactly what you are saying they should have, and the courts are not even taking a show trial for their stupid evidence that is most likely wrong. Over 50 lawsuits not even brought to trial. Now, do you consider the stance of "We refuse to even take the case" and "We rule there was insufficient evidence that fraud took place" as equivalent? Because if you do, you have fundamentally misunderstood the concerns involved. Continuing the hypothetical, you attempted to bring the evidence to court and was turned down the chance to a fair trial because of various reasons, a trial did not take place. You are still convinced fraud took place, the courts have failed (in your eyes) to fulfil their role to arbitrate, what do you do now that it seems the courts are corrupt too?

It's not something as grand as "liberal talking point," it's a basic "DO YOU HAVE SOME FUCKING EVIDENCE?" What happen to Innocent until proven guilty?

Again, you are willfully dodging the hypothetical. As a premise for the hypothetical I asked you, there is enough evidence to convince you, personally, alone, that election fraud took place. What do you do?

And since when did the "moral path" include assaulting police officers, stealing, destruction of public property, murder and attempted murder?

When American culture literally indoctrinates the implicit understanding that overthrowing tyranny with violence is morally obligated as a founding principle. Once the political framework starts breaking down, all bets are off. If you don't believe it be morally obligated that you kill tyrants, then I can see why you're having a hard time grasping the sense of morality of some of your fellow Americans.

This whole shit show should have stopped once one of these, minus murder, became apparent but nope this went on for hours before finally ending. They just wanted to "talk" to the politicians, huh.

Did I ever imply they wanted to talk to the politicians? It seems you don't have a grasp on the difference between coup, insurrection, riot and protest. The closest thing to a "plan" I can even fathom for this boomer riot would be taking the senate hostage, halting the electoral college vote, and demanding a trial for the legitimacy of the election, in the general case. Maybe after hanging the Vice President if the chanting is to be believed. Some extremists probably wanted the entire political body destroyed (Not a single bomb was brought with them? Literally could have destroyed the entire building. Worst coup I've ever seen 1/10). A few were just rioters having fun with the sense of taboo and looting with glee, wanting to watch the machinery burn rather than have strong feelings about it.

Are you under the impression that every person there came to kill every single politician and draft a new constitution? Was this done by a super-organized para-military force?

 

[2SpiritCherokeePrincess]

Buffet equality. One rule of us, one rule for you

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-police-three-times-likely-060031429.html

Ah, those conservatives spewing out conspiracy theories. Here's something that actually happened: https://www.yahoo.com/news/panic-buttons-ayanna-pressleys-office-160456308.html

Michael Kosta has determined what their problem really is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JROt6OFzaNQ

 

[EOTFOFYL]

@Chrona
(Copy pasting wall of text to is a pain)

You're making this more complicated than it has to be; actions have consequences period, legal, social or otherwise. The only ones who can cure radicalism are the radicals themselves, we can lead the horse to water but the dumb beast has to drink it itself.

That's a round about way of saying they just want Drumpf back. Side note, https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/07/us/insurrection-coup-sedition-meaning-trnd/index.html

Ah, so the people are willfully ignorant then, gotcha.

Ah yes, the rabbit hole gets deeper then, who else is in on the conspiracy? What part of "Plaintiff fails to allege any 'misconduct,' fraud, or 'illegal votes,' " do people not understand? And I already stated what I would do, nothing, because that's not my job. Do I look like a revolutionary to you? I'm just an anime girl squatting in a white room. Now if you would excuse me, I need to wash myself after being lumped together with these people.

Well thank fucking god I managed to dodge that bullet from whatever school that came from then, I didn't realize overthrow was code word for killing. You can stop dangling this idea of "righteousness" in front of me, I ain't biting.

Clearly you failed to pick up the sarcasm at the last part; and what a round about way of saying "threatening politicians into getting what we want". As a matter of fact at least one bomb was brought to the capitol as well as some firearms and apparently a crossbow among whatever else they brought. It doesn't matter if everyone was in on the plot or not, they're assisting just by keeping law enforcement busy as well as being a smokescreen to hide in.

All I see is a cult of hypocrites with an unhealthy amount of political accessories.

https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/seeking-info/suspected-pipe-bombs-in-washington-dc
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1254127

 

[BrapEbony]

And I already stated what I would do, nothing, because that's not my job.

At least you're honest about being the type of person to be complicit in Nazi Germany.

 

[Richman]

At least you're honest about being the type of person to be complicit in Nazi Germany.

Ah yes, because this and that happened the exact same way.

 

[EOTFOFYL]

When you fall asleep during history class and only skimmed over the notes.

 

[BrapEbony]

@Richman
Do you honestly believe that?

@EOTFOFYL
Yeah, the notes about how few people actually rebelled against the state, probably because it "wasn't their job" as the Little Eichmans everywhere did their thing.

 

[Chrona]

@EOTFOFYL

You're making this more complicated than it has to be; actions have consequences period, legal, social or otherwise. The only ones who can cure radicalism are the radicals themselves, we can lead the horse to water but the dumb beast has to drink it itself.

I'm glad we agree on that, as I already stated in my post, I don't believe there shouldn't be consequences. What I am making plainly aware to you is that this does not solve the base problem, so stop referring to it as such. The punishment these people are given is purely in a retributive context, and not in a rehabilitating one. Punishing them because they did something wrong and deserve to have bad things happen to them, and actually fixing the problem that caused the violence are two different things. As an American, I understand why you subscribe to retributive punishment theory though. I am going to reiterate, this will not stop the current violence, which if you find undesirable, should be a problem.

Ah yes, the rabbit hole gets deeper then, who else is in on the conspiracy? What part of "Plaintiff fails to allege any 'misconduct,' fraud, or 'illegal votes,' " do people not understand?

Sincerely and unironically yes. You live in a democratic republic, your local idiot that doesn't understand the details of courts has the same weight as you in politics, one vote. The type of person to believe in electoral fraud is probably stupid, scared and feels unheard. If you're alleging it's a personal failure on their part for being stupid then what's your stance on the cut off point for who is too stupid to vote?

And I already stated what I would do, nothing, because that's not my job. Do I look like a revolutionary to you?

I was guessing it by your wilful refusal to explore the hypothetical, but thank you for confirming the type of morality you possess and your own sense of personal responsibility in a political context. I can now fully understand why you outright refuse to consider these people as viewing themselves as good people, because given the same beliefs as them you would chose a passive stance instead.

Well thank fucking god I managed to dodge that bullet from whatever school that came from then, I didn't realize overthrow was code word for killing. You can stop dangling this idea of "righteousness" in front of me, I ain't biting.

In what context does overthrowing a tyrannical government not involve killing? Do you think apartheid in South Africa went away because they asked really nicely? Do you consider the armed resistance groups at the time to be immoral? As stated earlier in the thread, the founders of America were for all intents and purposes terrorists.

 

[Zephyrus]

@YumoYumo
"Tell him what he's won, Johnny!"

WELL YUMO, YOU'VE WON A ONE WEEK BANNNNNNNNNN~!

ENJOY THE WELL-EARNED PRIVILEGE OF A VACATION FROM COMMENTING ON MANGADEX FOR USING MEME WORDS TO PRETEND YOU ACTUALLY AREN'T BEING A RACIST DICK! IT SURE TAKES SOME SKILL TO NOT READ THE RULES AND KNOW THAT MD FROWNS UPON RACISM. HAVE A GREAT WEEK!

 

[EOTFOFYL]

I'm glad we agree on that, as I already stated in my post, I don't believe there shouldn't be consequences. What I am making plainly aware to you is that this does not solve the base problem, so stop referring to it as such. The punishment these people are given is purely in a retributive context, and not in a rehabilitating one. Punishing them because they did something wrong and deserve to have bad things happen to them, and actually fixing the problem that caused the violence are two different things. As an American, I understand why you subscribe to retributive punishment theory though. I am going to reiterate, this will not stop the current violence, which if you find undesirable, should be a problem.

This isn't some poor sod with mental illness or turned to drugs for comfort, what the fuck are we rehabilitating them for? Wrong view? Besides is this not the "tough on crime" shit people have been spouting over the years and seemingly voted for? Or is there some magical exception I have not heard before?

Sincerely and unironically yes. You live in a democratic republic, your local idiot that doesn't understand the details of courts has the same weight as you in politics, one vote. The type of person to believe in electoral fraud is probably stupid, scared and feels unheard. if you're alleging it's a personal failure on their part for being stupid then what's your stance on the cut off point for who is too stupid to vote?

Utterly off topic, I care not about their votes or how they use them but their allegation, subsequent failure to back it up, and the actions that followed.

I was guessing it by your wilful refusal to explore the hypothetical, but thank you for confirming the type of morality you possess and your own sense of personal responsibility in a political context. I can now fully understand why you outright refuse to consider these people as viewing themselves as good people, because given the same beliefs as them you would chose a passive stance instead.

Never claimed to be a saint never will, and I don't care how they see themselves for it holds little meaning; nice of you to assume that though. Now, instead of talking about my character maybe we move on to the topic at hand?

In what context does overthrowing a tyrannical government not involve killing? Do you think apartheid in South Africa went away because they asked really nicely? Do you consider the armed resistance groups at the time to be immoral? As stated earlier in the thread, the founders of America were for all intents and purposes terrorists.

Ah yes, Apartheid in America, I remember that in school as well as the execution of King George by Americans.

 

[Ivegotnolife]

 

[EOTFOFYL]

 

[Ivegotnolife]

 

[Chrona]

@EOTFOFYL

This isn't some poor sod with mental illness or turned to drugs for comfort, what the fuck are we rehabilitating them for?

Because you want less violence I would hope. I could understand if you wanted the terrorists executed, as that solves the violence problem permanently. I could understand if you wanted them to be rehabilitated in the hopes that they stop being radically predisposed to violence. If all you do is throw citizens in prison and take away their livelihoods, you are pushing them directly into the arms of radicals who will support and embolden them further. Which, given the fact that sedition only has a jail time of 10 years, only pushes the problem out 10 years.

Wrong view? Besides is this not the "tough on crime" shit people have been spouting over the years and seemingly voted for? Or is there some magical exception I have not heard before?

Well I'm glad people subscribe to "tough on crime", but do you? What is prison supposed to be to you specifically? A place where criminals go to hopefully become functioning members of society, or a place where bad people go for being bad people? Because when you put a common thief in prison, he has no illusions that he is a morally corrupt person. When you put a political charged radical in prison, similar to say, Mussolini, you are usually just emboldening them further.

Utterly off topic, I care not about their votes or how they use them but their allegation, subsequent failure to back it up, and the actions that followed.

Whether the election was fraudulent or not is besides the point of the danger of how many people believe it was fraudulent. If you don't comprehend the implications of such a statement I doubt you fully understand how a democracy doesn't rapidly devolve into wanton violence.

Never claimed to be a saint never will, and I don't care how they see themselves for it holds little meaning; nice of you to assume that though. Now, instead of talking about my character maybe we move on to the topic at hand?

It holds meaning, if again, you want less violence. Do you take the stance of wanting more or less violence? Just be clear in which it is as it seems incredibly vague to me. Serial killers sent to jail don't fancy themselves good people, political radicals that get sent to jail view themselves as morally correct people. The different implications involved and the results in the long term have repeatedly on a historical scale shown that throwing political radicals in jail is not going to solve anything. If I can't even get you to take a moral stance on it, it's obviously impossible for me to convey to you the implications of the type of people who do, and when they do, they will make the decision to act for you.

Ah yes, Apartheid in America, I remember that in school

You should, it was what the Civil Rights movement was about, we just call it segregation instead. Literal synonyms. As far as killing King George, they would have had it meant winning independence. Just killing his military underlings was enough in that context though, because unlike in most other countries history, they tyrant ruling them was an ocean away.

 

[Tamerlane]

If they succeeded in this coup then forget about fraudulent elections, the election itself becomes meaningless. Why bother with this charade called democracy if people are going to force their way into power?

First off, this was not a coup. Not even close. It was a hand full of people who did was more comparable to a raid, having little organization, no overall authority and expressly going against the wishes of the President. Too indicate that this was anything even resembling a coup is to use inaccurate diction for the express purpose of haphazardly trying to get the connotative meaning of what a "coup" entails, which is pretty much the opposite of what happened. I am unsure if there was even a unified goal, given how a lot of them acted in the interviews, such as talking about smoking weed in some of the rooms, etc.

To further expand upon the Trump situation, one of the experts of his speech expressly asked they remain peaceful, and there were no cases in which he asked to mob to incite violence or to do anything but protest, which he was within his right to do, and which they were within their rights to do. The closest you could argue was that he rhetorically used the word "fight" in the idiomatic sense of the word that most politicians do, as to convey the idea of a struggle. He was not expressly calling for violence and all his statements during and after the fact have only been in condemnation of those who entered the building.

We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections, but whether or not they stand strong for our country, our country.

Secondly, if we take that the election was fraudulent as an axiom of the argument, (we can debate about this, but you seem to grant it for the sake of argument, yourself) then it invalidates the results regardless of the outcome, as the Supreme Court ruled in US v. Throckmorton. Additionally, the government is ruled on consent of the governed and the social contract, which can be renegotiated at any time by the people of the nation. These were the founding principles of the United States by the founding fathers, who expressed the right to revolution under particular circumstances.

All this "what if I believed" hypothetical scenario is moot, It would mean that there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt and at that point its the job of the Justice Department and any other related entities to step in and handle it and not mob rule.

The idea is that they are not seditious nor are they trying to commit insurrection against the constitution, as they are expressly in their view trying to preserve the integrity of the nation, and so cannot be called treasonous. Even if you disagree with them, it does not mean they are trying to usurp the nation or overthrow it, but that they do not show mens culpa, nor do they believe that they should invalidate the constitution. That is the argument, because you swear to uphold the constitution, NOT the standing government as the founding fathers believed that revolution was a right that every population of people held if they believed the government had become despondent and unaccountable.

Even then, what Bill Barr said is not only just an appeal to authority, but ignores that if the public has access to information and evidence which they wish to present in front of a court of law, yet they are rebuffed, denied, and repeatedly kicked out on procedural grounds and not on the merits, it indicates that the courts have been found derelict to the duty of justice and access to a fair trial, which means that ultimately more and more legal means of recourse are closing. Every part of the government is meant to be accountable to the people and their interests and when half the country believes an election is fraudulent. When you have been stonewalled and lied to and about repeatedly, it reduces faith in the system for any means of recourse or justice to be taken, and when

It's also interesting how the media's tactic seems to just be to deny, deny, deny. "Evidence" is just a sign or indicator of something, and we have plenty of indications of voter fraud. Even now, someone in Texas was just arrested for illegal ballot harvesting and coercion of votes. If you hear people who just seem to say "there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud" despite being presented with evidence to the contrary multiple times, they're just a useful idiot that's parroting what they've been told without actually thinking about what they've been presented with. You can debate whether this can change the outcome of the election, but to outright deny the existence of voter fraud or say that no evidence exists of it is not only disingenuous, but more of a religious dogma, a mantra that is meant to be repeated endlessly in order to psychologically trick people into believing it. It is propaganda of the most obvious kind, gaslighting by a partisan media and a corrupt establishment, which has only served to further its own biased goals and needs.

It's not something as grand as "liberal talking point," it's a basic "DO YOU HAVE SOME FUCKING EVIDENCE?" What happen to Innocent until proven guilty?

When you have so many sworn affidavits under threat of perjury from witnesses and people who claim they were instructed to perform fraud, expert testimony from people within the fields in question, video evidence from multiple sources in multiple states, statistical anomalies and near-impossibilities, and the only counters are by a media that has spent the last four years lying and from politicians and bureaucrats who are as trustworthy as snake oil salesmen. When the courts have abdicated their duty to enforce the law and to act indiscriminately, along with the need to have the evidence assessed properly and independently, you will only get discontent parties who, as they are further marginalized and their grievances remain unaddressed, you will find the only thing that will come is the inevitable backlash that comes with revolution as happened in France, the colonies, and in many other nations and times.

In terms of epistemological philosophy, the claims of voter fraud are not unfalsifiable, and have been quite reliable in terms of predicting further evidence and further testimonies from unrelated parties. The affidavits described what happened in Fulton county BEFORE we got the CCTV footage. The alleged debunk of the CCTV footage is basically akin to asking if the accused did not commit a crime, and further affidavits from the recount indicate a backlogging of printed ballots, which counters the rebuttal that the scanning of the same batch of ballots multiple times would lead to votes without ballots. Again, from BEFORE we had the footage. There's a difference between "innocent until proven guilty" and sticking your head into the sand, closing your eyes, plugging your ears, and refusing to listen to the evidence being presented.

Unless you've watched the various hearings, looked in-depth into the evidence with an open mind, and not fall into the cognitive traps of trying to confirm what you want to believe and look at what the evidence actually indicates, any attempt to tell me that there is not strong evidence of voter fraud is understood to be coming from an uninformed party. And if you've watched all the evidence and still reach the conclusion there's no evidence, then you will have to present one damn strong argument to refute the points being made as to why lest you be dishonest.

I was not a Trump supporter, and I did not vote for him this election, but what all the indicators point towards when I have compared the articles trying to "debunk" the claims and listened to the alleged counters after having seen all the evidence presented, I can only come to the conclusion that it was outright fraudulent, as does half of the country. I do not want a civil war, civil unrest or any kind of violence, but if things keep going in the direction they are with the new aristocracy between the establishment, and the corrupted institutions within our country carrying not for the working class or trying to address their issues, then one will become inevitable as the split becomes too wide and any attempts become too irreconcilable. If such a situation happens, I will side with constitution and work to preserve the few inalienable rights we have as described within the constitution.

@EOTFOFYL

 

[Tamerlane]

The question that keeps recurring in my mind is "where do we go from here?"

How do we deescalate when it's clear that the establishment doesn't care about you? That they're going to keep forcing the US into pointless wars that accomplish nothing, allowing the tyranny of big tech to run uninhibited, selling out our jobs and our morals to China as we look the other way for their fascistic and Imperialistic tendencies, and all while the politicians remain unaccountable and unable to be held to any sort of authority despite very clear evidence of wrong doing?

Right now, we're mimicking all the steps of Roman in the waning years of the Republic. A shrinking middle class, a workforce seeing its sources of income taken away from outside factors, ( In our modern age automation and foreign labor, in their age, slavery) increasing violence and sectarianism in the streets, Populists seeking reforms which leads to the elites in their ivory towers trying to depose, defame, and discredit them, an establishment of corrupt figures which have only their own interests in mind, blindsided by their greed and their desire to make themselves ever-more richer and secure political favors that they are unable to see the larger picture of society crumbling around them, and the general rising tensions of unfulfilled promises and wishes that create ever greater divisions in society that is divided alongside arbitrary lines.

If Trump was a Gaius Gracchus, consumed by passion and deposed by the senate, it is only a matter of time before we see Sulla and Caesar.

 

[Ivegotnolife]

It pisses me off when they claim the Alt-Right movement is part of the conservative party. I lump them into the same group of Jerry Springer rejects as ANTIFA because they are just useful idiot pawns in the left's agenda to divide the country and stir up a race war so when everything goes to crap they can crawl to the top of the ash heap and take control like dictators have been doing for decades all over the globe!

They have to break the system before they can replace it with their system. The world would rather revise or ignore history then actually learn from it.

I thought it was so cool how the Cuban refugees in Florida recognized the Demorats for the Communist seeds they are, and didn't just vote no, but "HELL NO!!" when they got to vote on the matter.
Too bad the American Skraven haven't developed enough sense to know better then stick their heads in that trap yet.

 

[crazybars]

Nixon's southern strategy for Republican political realignment to court Southern Voters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy


Lol, is this the Democrat's fault too now?
Nixon, A Republican president, and co was brainwashed into this plan by Democrats
60 years ago to switch the Republican party voter demographics?


Bold claims.

I was there in 2005 when Ken Mehlman publicly apologized for this strategy usage publicly to try to get votes to keep Bush elected during the Iraq war when they were desperate for votes.

 

[EOTFOFYL]

@Chrona
Would it make you feel better I say I am morally bankrupt then? As for Appartheid, sure I concede we have our own version of it.

@Tamerlane
Holy shit this voter fraud theory is harder to kill than the Last Letter Game thread. Affidavits alone does not hold eough value, its a bloody piece of paper that claims you are not lying.... that's it.

The whole case rests on affidavits and when you only shove those into court rooms....surprise surprise you're getting booted out. And cool, you found one idiot, still not from one of the targeted States in the lawsuits nor did the page state which campaign she aided. When discussing about voting fraud in this context it is assumed to be about "mass voting fraud" and not "no voting fraud".

And the person debunking the Georgian video is Gabriel Sterling, a Republican... he has no reason to help a blue president.

And fuck it, might as well throw this in: https://www.cisa.gov/rumorcontrol

@Ivegotnolife
1st meme hurts in more than one way....

Spoiler

The meme tax shall be paid, in light of your uhhh... 'contributions'.

 

[Chrona]

@EOTFOFYL

Would it make you feel better I say I am morally bankrupt then?

Why would it make me feel better? I wasn't talking to you to make myself feel better, I was having a discussion, trying to appeal to any internal sense of morality and sense of desperation for why these people acted the way they did, hopefully hearing any argument I was not already aware of in response and reorienting myself. What joy is there to be found in the fact that both mine and your political weight are the exact same, but you can't even take a moral stance, let alone empathize with someone else's?