LMFAO. Basically, yeah.
Yes. They have nothing left to sell in terms of politics itself, so their only way to retain power in the long run is to lock power in for their in-group.
Off course it all depends on how you define “power”.
But right now in the US: is there anyone that Trump can’t arrest and deport? On a whim?
Is there any judge that will tell him “no” and can make it stick?
Doesn’t he have absolute power?
If your answer to the last question is “No”.
Are you sure your reasoning to get there isn’t just semantics?
You made the comparison with Hitler–which is great, since that’s what the OP is about.
Even if we grant that Trump can do all of the above, Hitler could do a lot more than that. I mean, within two months of taking power, he had completely eliminated the existence of every political party except his own. The Enabling Act allowed him to write and execute legislation without the approval of a legislative body.
So no, Trump is far from having “absolute power.” If he had Hitler-level power, there would be no Democrats in office right now.
And until the rise of AfD, it was so again.
But back to history. One of the reason Jews thrived (for lack of a better word) in western Europe, was that they were fairly well integrated in their respective country, not assimilated, mind you. Anti-semitism was of course always lurking just beneath the surface, and it exploded with the flood of Ashkenazim fleeing the pogroms in Russia.
Interesting factoid, the U.K. at one time pondered the possibility of “giving” Uganda to the zionists, in order to get rid of the Ashkenazim.
And to tie it into the present: a wave of immigrants, perceived as flooding the homeland stoked the nationalistic fire and “the others” became convenient scapegoats for everything that they thought was wrong about their society.
Sadly, not much has changed.
To me that is semantics.
His goons “arrested” Padilla. That got 0 meaningful pushback.
Every other president would have been impeached.
How is that not absolute power?
I haven’t read the whole thing yet, but interesting thread. I had recently considered making a post discussing the parallels between trumpism and the rise of Nazism in 1930s Germany, but never got around to it.
These are the types of details I wondered about. Did he come across as a buffoon to some, and a genius savior to others, similar to trump, or was he more widely admired by the populace at the time? I had only heard or seen short clips of his ‘ranting’ during his speeches, and wasn’t aware that they were a short part of an otherwise skilled and disciplined oratory. I had heard that Hitler practiced his speeches in front of a mirror to gauge the look of his facial expressions and gesticulations, so I knew that his whole shtick was carefully prepared theater.
I do agree with the others who’ve said it’s very premature to say that trump has ‘already failed’.
It is about semantics (in this disagreement of ours) and the proper use of the term “absolute power.” I’ve explained my own standard of using the term, and I think that that would match up with the way most educated people would use it.
Trump was not directly involved in the Padilla incident, though he is enabling, directly and indirectly, all the garbage that is going on in the country right now.
There is, on the whole, meaningful pushback from Democrats and the courts against him.
Trump will never be impeached until Democrats retake the House.
Let me put it this way: “Any other president” would not be constantly antagonizing and trolling the American people, which is what Trump is doing with all of his actions. And as I pointed out, Hitler didn’t do this because he actually wanted the support of his people. The presidency gives a person a lot of power to make a mess of things, and Trump is availing himself of it. But Trump does not yet have power on the level of a Hitler, quantitatively or qualitatively–not even close. I must reject the idea that one single incident, in which he was not directly involved, shows that he does.
He did no such thing. He selected a Cabinet full of people who would allow this to happen, but let’s be accurate and not accuse him of being directly involved.
Fair enough. Instead, we’ll say that he in no way criticized or disciplined Noem or the officers involved and enthusiastically supported this action, even encouraging more radical harm to other political opponents.
Stranger
She might have been privately scolded.
White House likely told Noem she ‘really messed up’ over senator tackle: insider
But any President with a shred of decency (or at least understood the concept) would have called Senator Padilla immediately to express his abject apologies.
Trump is constantly talking with the media–he loves attention from adults!–and it is clear that he genuinely worries about optics, albeit under his own twisted standard.
Absolutely. Someone like a Reagan or a Mitt Romney, even if they want to do things that we Democrats don’t like, still strives for a semblance of normalcy in the country and competence in the government. Hell, even Dubya, idiot that he was, tried to seem “presidential.” Trump is playing under a wholly different set of rules, and I’m not even sure he understands what the normal rules are. Not completely. But he does have rules of his own.
He has one rule. “Don’t look weak.” Not to be confused with “Don’t be weak,” which, as we know with TACO, he sometimes is.
How much would you like to bet that President Bone-Spurs shows up in a military uniform for tomorrow’s parade?
Horst Wessel, his Lied and the Communist Party of Germany would like to have a word with you. The KPD was not an insignificant force prior to the Enabling Acts, and the ‘Judeo-Bolshevist’ threat was very much not a foreign problem for the Nazis prior to taking power. There was street violence and deaths between the Nazis and the Communists dating to the beginning of the Nazi party, and between the right and Communists prior to the creation of the Nazi party. Hitler’s domestic enemies prior to the Enabling Act were significantly bigger than 0.75% of the population. The KDP’s candidate for presidency in 1932 had almost half the votes that Hitler received.
The KPD maintained a solid electoral performance, usually polling more than 10% of the vote. It gained 100 deputies in the November 1932 elections, getting 16% of the vote and coming third.[16] In the presidential election of the same year, its candidate Thälmann took 13.2% of the vote, compared to Hitler’s 30.1%.
All that you say is correct. I also said that “Bolshevism” was always something Hitler focused on. I said that a generic “foreigners” wasn’t one of the bugbears.
Which nation’s military?
Which ignores that you also wrote:
Which is fundamentally untrue. He was bullying - well, openly and violently fighting - a domestic Bolshevik political party that was nearly half as strong as his own Nazi party before coming to power. It was most certainly not “a tiny minority”. Need I remind you that Karl Marx was a German?
Right. I’m not sure exactly what the point of disagreement is, however. Let’s just say that you have clarified things, and I agree with you.
How many incidents do we need to show there is not rule of law anymore. Only the rule of Trump.
To me one would suffice.
But you surely are not claiming this is the first or only incident where this administration is ignoring judges left and right, randomly arresting/deporting people.
How hot must the water get before you decide you are being cooked? You’re seasoned, in a pan, on the stove, the fire is lit and you are arguing with the other frogs that the water is not that hot and surely those plates are for something else. Even when the cookbook (P2025) is open on the page for frogs legs for months now.