I agree with the method of international comparisons.
Yanukovych served as president for four continuous years before Maidan protests began. Someone might say that Trump’s first term was the four years, but I do not think so. Even Trump would have a bit of the traditional presidential honeymoon unless he truly tried to be a day one dictator, disregarding courts at all levels.
The thread question answer is — rebellions, of whatever type, are extremely hard to predict. The CIA spends a lot of resources trying to predict them, and has repeatedly failed.
In both this and both “Trump won’t get nominated thread,” you’ve put forward scenarios that have zero basis in reality and then acted aggrieved when posters point out the many holes in your position. You frankly come across like you only want to hear from people who agree with you.
Altogether, 108 civilian protesters and 13 police officers were killed[1] in Ukraine’s Revolution of Dignity (or the ‘Maidan Revolution’), which was the culmination of the Euromaidan protest movement. The deaths occurred in January and February 2014; most of them on 20 February, when police snipers fired on anti-government activists in Kyiv. The slain activists are known in Ukraine as the Heavenly Hundred or Heavenly Company (Ukrainian: Небесна сотня, Nebesna sotnia ). By June 2016, 55 people had been charged in relation to the deaths of protesters, including 29 former members of the Berkut special police force, ten titushky or loyalists of the former government, and ten former government officials
My thoughts are there may some legal issues, including mass election fraud, denial of people’s right to vote, insurrectionist clause, Russian hacking of our polling places, etc. But really part of our democratic republic is the right to vote that away. And though it normally involves either foreign assistance or a revolution to get freedom back, it is part of the system to be able to dissolve it and thus it should be allowed
I actually got DMed by someone participating in the other thread who thanked me for arguing back so cordially, so I guess opinions vary on that.
I think it’s more fun to hear from a variety of perspectives then just have everyone tell me I’m stupid without actually adding any content. I think the other thread was fine in that regard, and now we’re starting to see some actual participation here too.
The citizens of the USA are not like the citizens of Ukraine. For Ukrainians, the potential and consequences for ceding their fate to a malevolent dictator sit daily on their doorstep. They are much more attuned to the need to resist than our population is.
As a former government employee, I can tell you that they run the gamut in their political persuasions. There is no “cookie cutter” government employee, and they do not necessarily view themselves as the tip of the spear when it comes to resisting coupes. We were meant to check our political views at the door, and at least pre-Trump, we mostly did. Then we did as we were told. Change comes slow to the Deep State™. There are some good reasons for that, but the intractable nature of government employees to change does not make them nimble in a crisis such as you describe.
My thinking is that if the citizens of this country are insufficiently attuned to the danger Trump poses by November and he is not defeated in the election, they will not be well equipped to defeat him after he has assumed office.
Our chance to stop him is November. And that’s it. If he gains the office a second time, we’re cooked for the foreseeable future. It will be over before enough regular folks have connected the dots to understand what happened. And it will be too late.
I don’t know. You may be right, but BLM got pretty big.
I acknowledge this data point as well.
I am less saying that they definitely would do so than there is a the potential for Liberal government employees to leave a mark.
But we have all the state and local governments as well. Do I think the governments of Chicago, LA, and New York would simply shut up and go along with any crazy thing Trump did? No. We’re already seeing this type of resistance from, say, Texas with the border battle (obviously on the other side of the political spectrum), sanctuary cities, etc.
Even if there were no resistance, I think tradition and inertia would make it very difficult for Trump to create his dictatorship. But I agree that we will be fucked one way or another if he becomes president again.
In a certain sense, yes, I’d expect the governmental bureaucracy to provide resistance against Trump, given that civil servants and bureaucrats generally lean Blue. Whether that’s enough will be hard to say, but they are generally as opposite of Trump as can be.
I’m not assuming everything will function per normal if Trump wins. I am presuming that at least some things will go to shit. How many, how fast, and whether what is left of government constraints will stop it while there’s still something resembling a functional democracy, I have no idea.
But I think it’s all too likely to be a really nasty mess, whatever happens. And I very much doubt that it would be anything like
“It doesn’t matter if the whole thing collapses because we’ll build it back up better right away!” doesn’t seem any more likely to me if the claim’s coming from the left.
How about we don’t elect him, and then we won’t have to find out?
By the way, at least one former congressman has moved overseas, and is encouraging others similarly situated to have their own contingency plans, in the event donald is re-elected.
I agree that it’s all highly unpredictable. My main intent was to challenge the idea, which is really quite common, that people would just allow Trump to establish a dictatorship without resistance.
Not electing Trump will kick the can down the road a bit, but we need a new constitution at this point–or one that is significantly amended. And the reason for this is that undemocratic institutions are baked into the constitution and give the fascists an unfair advantage (electoral college, senate, etc.). Since it is almost impossible to amend the constitution and since the fascists will never give up their advantages, then, sadly, the thing is going to have to be taken apart somewhat and put back together. I don’t want a “complete collapse” either, but the bad people are going to make a revolution of some sort inevitable.
The Supreme Court is also now corrupt and off the rails. That’s a stimulus toward change that won’t be going away anytime soon.
Once something big like that happens, however, you will see state governments openly opposing it and letting people take sanctuary there. Then the question is what can Trump do about it? He can try to send in the troops, but then the big thing becomes a cataclysmic thing.
I’m surprised it didn’t happen the first time around. FWIW, anyone who did work in that administration has basically found themselves unemployable outside their own little spheres.
While this is true and is specifically called out in the UCMJ, the reality is that military enlisted will generally do what they are told rather than risk punishment for refusing. Officers would likely be more discerning about committing possible treasonous acts. Very senior officers who refused to comply would likely be replaced by those who are more pliable. His 2020 “massacre” of senior Defense officials is a good example of his scorched earth methods.
Which doesn’t change the fact that it was neither peaceful nor nonviolent. It also directly touched off the 2014 war in Donbas. Which has led to the current ongoing ‘special military operation.’ Calling it an example of peaceful, nonviolent revolution is simply factually incorrect. Vietnam was intended to be peacefully unified by national referendum in 1955. Diem’s refusal to allow them doesn’t make the 20 years and up to 3 million deaths it took to reunify the country peaceful and nonviolent.
