It does follow.
Again: this is not a game, Max. It’s not a hypothetical. It’s happening, right now.
It does follow.
Again: this is not a game, Max. It’s not a hypothetical. It’s happening, right now.
Conservative historian Paul Johnson said the great societal advantage of America in the 18th century was we lacked the burden of a massive peasant class, that to just be in America showed intelligence, an ability to work the system, and a self-confidence above and beyond the norm.
We no longer have this advantage.
The hamster called. He wants his wheel back.
This gives me quite a bit of insight to how you’re thinking. I disagree, of course; to me, America is the country and people and things within, not some ideal or philosophy.
~Max
You have got to be fucking kidding.
It was literally founded as such. And our history, and oaths, show this - you don’t swear to the country, you swear to the Constitution and pledge to support America’s laws:
You don’t swear to the Country or to the King. You swear to the ideal, the belief, of following the Law.
Honestly, how bad does someone have to be before it becomes a moral stain on their soul to identify as a supporter of the perpetrator? “Oh, I know Trump is an authoritarian who spits on the fundamental principles of Democracy, but I really like his tax plan.”
Give me a break.
How is he defining peasant class? Is this the same Paul Johson that I remember reading about as a teenager, who also wrote Intellectuals? Anyway, certainly people did not immigrate to America if they had great lives in Ireland, Italy etc . But while they may have had a somewhat better life here, by not starving, I think they were still peasants, loosely defined.
Not trying to argue, just wondering. This is about the 12th thing that has come up in this thread that is worthy of a new thread.
You’re right, the country and it’s Constitution.
~Max
Lol, same Paul Johnson. I have the book (A History of the American People) behind me, I’ll see if I can be arsed to find the passage.
I just realized I’ve made a terrible mistake. Please forgive me for disrupting actual discussion of the election.
~Max
No, in no place does the oath say you pledge fidelity to the country, it’s clearly written that you pledge fidelity to our Laws and Constitution.
And since the laws are determined by democratic majority as defined by the Constitutions of the various States as well as the Constitution, you are pledging fidelity to the democratic processes which generates these laws.
And, the results of the election in Maricopa county have been certified:
I hope you are joking, I wasn’t complaining. Hell, we may as well use this thread for jumping off points, because this election is over. The lawsuits are not going anywhere, the state legislatures are not going to flip states, and Trump is not going to declare himself President for Life and enforce it with the military. If he could do the latter, he would. But he can’t, he does not have that support. Joe Biden will be our next President
It may not everything, but you have to agree on the most important thing. And it should be obvious that trying to stage a coup and take over the American government is the most important thing in this case. Everything else pales in comparison.
I’m all for trying to save these Trump supporters—to bring them back. I keep hoping this is possible. But, until then, we can’t ally with them. You can’t have a halfway coup. You can’t have a “sorta dictatorship.”
Biden may say he wants to be everyone’s president. But the only way that happens is if they stop supporting Trump taking over instead.
Hell, we may as well use this thread for jumping off points, because this election is over.
I’ve made a spin-off topic in Great Debates,
There was a topic about divisive political questions. I suggest that this question is among the most divisive. Was it possible for a morally upright person to vote for President Trump in 2020? If so, was it plausible? ~Max ETA: Morally upright in your eyes
~Max
Hmmmmm…
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans in Congress are engaged in a risky but calculated bet that once President Donald Trump has exhausted his legal challenges to the election , he will come to grips with his loss to President-elect Joe Biden. But the...
Indeed, major GOP quiet complicity, Bo.
There is absolutely no excuse - none - to identify as a Republican unless you are staunchly, vociferously, vocally against Trump and his attempt to destroy American democracy. I know so many conservatives that have stood up for what’s right despite the fact that it has brought them personal hardship, that I have little sympathy or interest in those who don’t. Anyone who does not speak up is complicit in propping up an authoritarian. Thus the vast majority of Republicans in congress are complete cowards.
Max_S: Can you concur with the bolded?
The Republican Party is so tainted right now that it’s far safer to assume they are America-hating fucksticks or at least America-hating fuckstick enablers than to assume otherwise. When I feel like fewer than 20% of them support destroying the country for something like the sake of one 74 year old rich white man’s happiness, I’ll start cutting them some slack. Until then: fuck them. Fuck them all that enabled this.
Yup - 20% is a fair number. Well put. Running across too many Canuckleheads gone Trumpy lately; fortunately no nutjob politicians to cater to what looks like a disconcertingly growing contingent of militia/white nationalists up here. (BC, anyways - I won’t venture to comment on elsewhere, eastward.)
And I’m speaking only anecedotally here - coming across more MAGA hats in Vic. for fricksakes! - but overhearing them in mechanic shops, or gorcery store line ups, or this creepy strata owner at one of the apartments I work at, I realise there’s no way I’m going to try to engage them in any way, at all, if I’m gonna get nothing but an earful of Qanon bloviation (or “election rigged”!) in return. Or, failing that - saying anything to them often simply gets the annoying lalalala girl response.
Max_S : Can you concur with the bolded?
I don’t personally think Trump is an authoritarian. That’s not his style; I don’t think he has it in him.
I am fine admitting that silence equals complicity. I would not say that silence alone implies anything about one’s intentions.
~Max
Meh - silence, on any level, sucks, regardless of any intentions.