Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On April 12 2025 05:28 micronesia wrote: Yeah I too am not happy with the state of affairs in the USA.
Too bad the only options are apparently walk with the facists or start a revolution to make everything worse.
The alternative is to annoy them so much that they do something stupid that reveals the lack of morals of the leadership before it can be shown without consequence because they adjusted the laws to accomodate it.
On April 11 2025 02:40 Dan HH wrote: I'm less concerned with corpo shitbags trying to make numbers go up no matter the circumstances, than I am with all the videos of gleeful smirking ICE agents that look like they were all just itching for someone to give them permission to act on their intrusive thoughts. They're not just following orders, this is like Chrismas for sociopaths.
I am more concerned with people who skirt the rules to line their own pockets, destroy small businesses to build transnational untouchable conglomerates whose #1 concerns are cheap exploitable labor and dependent consumer classes, than the facial expressions of people who enforce the law against brazen and systemic trampling of it.
What is the law worth when Trump just pardons people who side with him or run darknet market operations because it makes people buy crypto ?
Try besieging the Austrian parliament and breaking stuff in it and see who pardons you.
Vandalize the seat of US power = pardon Burn cars = Terrorism
It‘s comical how the US is currently run. It already was on his first term but it wasn‘t as obvious.
Dude has a Russian visum in the drawer.
I have to exercise a lot of restraint on the daily to not take a fat crap over the situation.
Case in point.
Maybe mass burning cars that are targeted based on the politics of the head of the company to induce fear would best be classified a youthful mistake? A tragic accident? Protected political speech? Mere hooliganism?
Burning a couple of cars is small potatoes compared to getting into Congress looking to hang politicians. Just saying.
yes. is it good that property is damaged or destroyed? no. but there are laws on the docket already, going full gung ho on "tesla burners", categorizing them as terrorists does not even muster comical. it's farcical.
people are pissed, and addressing the underlying reasons is key for lasting peace and good governance.
having the richest person on the planet destroying government programs ordinary people rely on... to survive... is so far beyond the pale. mind bending stuff.
doge and their leader then lied about massive fraud in the federal government, while being asked about it could not substantiate/verify anything.
and to top it off mr. ketamine/elmo then has the gall to act like the cringelord he is at CPAC with his chainsawbrother + Show Spoiler +
and some wanna tell me people being pissed at that are the problem?
I heard it once said that the "US is a developing nation with a gucci belt". how it is being run kinda fits the bill.
and for what exactly? what was achieved or is in the process of being achieved by the best people to ever lead, being led by the leader of leaders? if those are the collateral costs?
"terrorism, the calculated use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective."
You‘re not wrong.
When someone instrumentalizes social media to manipulate public opinion to the point where it concerns people that weren‘t using it?
Let‘s assume I began copying your posts from here and posting them on various social media platforms predominantly used by Republican voters without your knowledge or consent, how would you feel about that ?
Maybe after I doxxed you and hacked your devices as well.
Just a prank bro?
It‘s a thought experiment. Not a threat lol.
The point is to illustrate that social media owned by people with political aspirations is a danger to democracy. Especially when it can be coupled with monetary compensation for propagandists using it.
Or let‘s pretend this: If the president gets upset over your posts he can begin sifting through your history, take out something that makes you look awful and throw you to a pack of hungry wolves on his social media platform.
That‘s not terrorism? According to the definition above ?
On April 11 2025 02:40 Dan HH wrote: I'm less concerned with corpo shitbags trying to make numbers go up no matter the circumstances, than I am with all the videos of gleeful smirking ICE agents that look like they were all just itching for someone to give them permission to act on their intrusive thoughts. They're not just following orders, this is like Chrismas for sociopaths.
I am more concerned with people who skirt the rules to line their own pockets, destroy small businesses to build transnational untouchable conglomerates whose #1 concerns are cheap exploitable labor and dependent consumer classes, than the facial expressions of people who enforce the law against brazen and systemic trampling of it.
What is the law worth when Trump just pardons people who side with him or run darknet market operations because it makes people buy crypto ?
Try besieging the Austrian parliament and breaking stuff in it and see who pardons you.
Vandalize the seat of US power = pardon Burn cars = Terrorism
It‘s comical how the US is currently run. It already was on his first term but it wasn‘t as obvious.
Dude has a Russian visum in the drawer.
I have to exercise a lot of restraint on the daily to not take a fat crap over the situation.
Case in point.
Maybe mass burning cars that are targeted based on the politics of the head of the company to induce fear would best be classified a youthful mistake? A tragic accident? Protected political speech? Mere hooliganism?
Burning a couple of cars is small potatoes compared to getting into Congress looking to hang politicians. Just saying.
yes. is it good that property is damaged or destroyed? no. but there are laws on the docket already, going full gung ho on "tesla burners", categorizing them as terrorists does not even muster comical. it's farcical.
people are pissed, and addressing the underlying reasons is key for lasting peace and good governance.
having the richest person on the planet destroying government programs ordinary people rely on... to survive... is so far beyond the pale. mind bending stuff.
doge and their leader then lied about massive fraud in the federal government, while being asked about it could not substantiate/verify anything.
and to top it off mr. ketamine/elmo then has the gall to act like the cringelord he is at CPAC with his chainsawbrother + Show Spoiler +
and some wanna tell me people being pissed at that are the problem?
I heard it once said that the "US is a developing nation with a gucci belt". how it is being run kinda fits the bill.
and for what exactly? what was achieved or is in the process of being achieved by the best people to ever lead, being led by the leader of leaders? if those are the collateral costs?
"terrorism, the calculated use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective."
Insert Generic January 6 comparison here.
bolded - Agree on "generic"
All of it - Democrats I believe will be free to pardon them for everything from 1862 till 2145. (once they get president elected)
Imagine if your end goal was trade war with the second biggest economy and your opening move was to start one with literally every other country you could possibly trade with (and even some you can't for good measure).
Then show your old and new enemies your resolve by backing down in mere days, multiple times.
It is comically bad. The good news is that while there are lots of Americans like oblade that are so far down the rabbit hole there is absolutely no move dumb enough to shake his faith. There is also a lot like Blackjack who are firmly in that camp when it comes to culture war junk, can not ignore how inexplicitly dumb this is.
On April 11 2025 02:40 Dan HH wrote: I'm less concerned with corpo shitbags trying to make numbers go up no matter the circumstances, than I am with all the videos of gleeful smirking ICE agents that look like they were all just itching for someone to give them permission to act on their intrusive thoughts. They're not just following orders, this is like Chrismas for sociopaths.
I am more concerned with people who skirt the rules to line their own pockets, destroy small businesses to build transnational untouchable conglomerates whose #1 concerns are cheap exploitable labor and dependent consumer classes, than the facial expressions of people who enforce the law against brazen and systemic trampling of it.
What is the law worth when Trump just pardons people who side with him or run darknet market operations because it makes people buy crypto ?
Try besieging the Austrian parliament and breaking stuff in it and see who pardons you.
Vandalize the seat of US power = pardon Burn cars = Terrorism
It‘s comical how the US is currently run. It already was on his first term but it wasn‘t as obvious.
Dude has a Russian visum in the drawer.
I have to exercise a lot of restraint on the daily to not take a fat crap over the situation.
Case in point.
Maybe mass burning cars that are targeted based on the politics of the head of the company to induce fear would best be classified a youthful mistake? A tragic accident? Protected political speech? Mere hooliganism?
Burning a couple of cars is small potatoes compared to getting into Congress looking to hang politicians. Just saying.
yes. is it good that property is damaged or destroyed? no. but there are laws on the docket already, going full gung ho on "tesla burners", categorizing them as terrorists does not even muster comical. it's farcical.
people are pissed, and addressing the underlying reasons is key for lasting peace and good governance.
having the richest person on the planet destroying government programs ordinary people rely on... to survive... is so far beyond the pale. mind bending stuff.
doge and their leader then lied about massive fraud in the federal government, while being asked about it could not substantiate/verify anything.
and to top it off mr. ketamine/elmo then has the gall to act like the cringelord he is at CPAC with his chainsawbrother + Show Spoiler +
and some wanna tell me people being pissed at that are the problem?
I heard it once said that the "US is a developing nation with a gucci belt". how it is being run kinda fits the bill.
and for what exactly? what was achieved or is in the process of being achieved by the best people to ever lead, being led by the leader of leaders? if those are the collateral costs?
"terrorism, the calculated use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective."
Insert Generic January 6 comparison here.
bolded - Agree on "generic"
All of it - Democrats I believe will be free to pardon them for everything from 1862 till 2145. (once they get president elected)
On April 12 2025 00:56 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: [quote]
Immediately: Teachers and other people working at public schools could push back against any anti-education policies that are being dictated by Trump/McMahon, just as how other professionals could push back when their profession is being undermined by Trump/Musk/whoever. Those are things that could be done right away / during Trump's term, and non-educators could certainly spread the word and voice their support for better education reform too.
Future: It's also not a terrible idea to compile instances of Trump's crew being against education or against whatever supposedly appeals to potential voters. When it comes time for the next election, tailoring a persuasive argument based on whatever the group claims to be a top issue for them (even if it's not education) includes being able to list reasons why your candidate is pro-that-issue and list reasons why the opposing candidates are anti-that-issue. (Not knowing the difference between artificial intelligence and steak sauce is obviously a far less significant embarrassment, but there is plenty of substantive ammunition one could point to, to make the case that Trump/Republicans are anti-education during the midterm elections, during the next presidential election, etc.)
I genuinely appreciate this effort even if my skepticism makes that hard to identify. I support the educational overhaul the US desperately needs.
What does "push back against any anti-education policies that are being dictated by Trump/McMahon" mean though? Like how Micro and their managers "pushed back" against Musk's "5 things you did" thing?
On April 12 2025 01:06 Mohdoo wrote: [quote]
I'm not referring to democrat gears turning. I felt like I was clear about this in an earlier post, but just to say it again: I don't really even view the democratic party as a valid topic of discussion. They are just a relic of an old political system. Anything that comes after Trump won't involve democrats. If Trump's government is ever replaced with an opposition government, it will be a party built entirely separately from democrats.
I'm not registered as a democrat, I don't vote for democrats, and I don't view the democratic party as a valid topic when discussing the political future of our country.
Fair enough, but as you describe them, they are a significant oppositional force worthy of consideration in that capacity. Many/most/all of them would rather be part of Trump's project than banished to irrelevance or worse I'd bet/we see with the Fetterman types.
Stupid 5 bullet e-mails aren't policies.. they are stupid orders. Fortunately, the process has smoothed out and it just takes everyone a few minutes each week to make the Secretary happy. Better that than to leave all the Chernobyl-preventer seats vacant because of one administration, in my opinion.
But I really don't know what "push back" means, and it doesn't seem like DPB does either, despite advocating for it. AFAICT people are already doing what DPB is advocating and it's definitely not working.
To be clear, DoD employees have not taken orders from musk on "bullets", only from Hegseth... which isn't terribly better but it's more sensible.
I don't believe Hegseth repeating Musk's orders to DoD employees makes them not Musk's orders. Pretty confident you don't actually believe it does either.
Well it's not as simple as "repeating" the orders. Musk/DoGe, via OPM, originally tried to order the government to do certain things, such as the 5 bullet e-mails. DoD (and some other departments) told its staff not to obey Musk/OPM and instead follow only orders from above within DoD after DoD leadership evaluates what Musk/OPM wants and when/how/if to implement. Implementation of bullets for DoD is better than for some other departments, such as how the e-mails are kept within military e-mail systems, not sent directly to OPM, filter out a lot of the bullshit from the original OPM request, and provide better guidance for how to comply in various situations, such as while on leave.
Still, the fact remains that the bullets are dumb. I don't consider them the hill to die on, in part for the reason I gave earlier.
And that's one convoluted way someone can be frogboiled into rationalizing effectively taking orders from a guy they watched give a Nazi salute multiple times on stage.
Those orders just had to go down the chain of command and get amended by a guy with white supremacist/Christian nationalist tattoos first, so they could be followed by people like yourself.
I don't say that to pick on you, I don't think most of us would do anything different in your spot. It's just an observation about how so much of the US government (without even the pretense of your Hegseth rationalization) is already effectively taking orders from a guy they all watched give Nazi salutes on stage and his white supremacist lackeys.
On April 11 2025 02:15 Legan wrote: Reading up on the company that sold Zyklon B to Auschwitz this week was interesting. None of the indicted got longer than 8 years sentences, and many apparently did not know what went on in the camp even tho they had a factory inside the camps and had visited the camps personally. Quite a few were acquitted, and a few were released because of good behaviour and ended up in high industry positions. I don't think much has changed in how we would treat people related to similar violations. It is just so easy to claim that you did not know what was being done by the people you supported. I'm sure the world's richest standing next to each other at the inauguration will share amnesia about the event in the future. All will just be accidental, even if the results are catastrophic.
“This is an account of a fracture,” he writes, “a breaking away from the notion that the polite, western liberal ever stood for anything at all.” It is a deft, broken-hearted, rhetorical savaging of comfortable people who say nothing (or pay lip service) but care only about preserving normality, convincing themselves that these things only happen “to certain places, to certain people”.
EDIT2:
On April 12 2025 05:28 micronesia wrote: Yeah I too am not happy with the state of affairs in the USA.
Enough to do something? Join the effort for a General Strike maybe?
Yeah I too am not happy with the state of affairs in the USA.
Too bad the only options are apparently walk with the facists or start a revolution to make everything worse.
While I'm personally partial to revolutionary socialism, the General Strike I'm primarily advocating is well within the historical labor paradigm of the US. There's also LibHorizon's plan which is also well within the liberal electoralism paradigm.
On April 12 2025 01:10 GreenHorizons wrote: [quote] I genuinely appreciate this effort even if my skepticism makes that hard to identify. I support the educational overhaul the US desperately needs.
What does "push back against any anti-education policies that are being dictated by Trump/McMahon" mean though? Like how Micro and their managers "pushed back" against Musk's "5 things you did" thing?
[quote]
Fair enough, but as you describe them, they are a significant oppositional force worthy of consideration in that capacity. Many/most/all of them would rather be part of Trump's project than banished to irrelevance or worse I'd bet/we see with the Fetterman types.
Stupid 5 bullet e-mails aren't policies.. they are stupid orders. Fortunately, the process has smoothed out and it just takes everyone a few minutes each week to make the Secretary happy. Better that than to leave all the Chernobyl-preventer seats vacant because of one administration, in my opinion.
But I really don't know what "push back" means, and it doesn't seem like DPB does either, despite advocating for it. AFAICT people are already doing what DPB is advocating and it's definitely not working.
To be clear, DoD employees have not taken orders from musk on "bullets", only from Hegseth... which isn't terribly better but it's more sensible.
I don't believe Hegseth repeating Musk's orders to DoD employees makes them not Musk's orders. Pretty confident you don't actually believe it does either.
Well it's not as simple as "repeating" the orders. Musk/DoGe, via OPM, originally tried to order the government to do certain things, such as the 5 bullet e-mails. DoD (and some other departments) told its staff not to obey Musk/OPM and instead follow only orders from above within DoD after DoD leadership evaluates what Musk/OPM wants and when/how/if to implement. Implementation of bullets for DoD is better than for some other departments, such as how the e-mails are kept within military e-mail systems, not sent directly to OPM, filter out a lot of the bullshit from the original OPM request, and provide better guidance for how to comply in various situations, such as while on leave.
Still, the fact remains that the bullets are dumb. I don't consider them the hill to die on, in part for the reason I gave earlier.
And that's one convoluted way someone can be frogboiled into rationalizing effectively taking orders from a guy they watched give a Nazi salute multiple times on stage.
Those orders just had to go down the chain of command and get amended by a guy with white supremacist/Christian nationalist tattoos first, so they could be followed by people like yourself.
I don't say that to pick on you, I don't think most of us would do anything different in your spot. It's just an observation about how so much of the US government (without even the pretense of your Hegseth rationalization) is already effectively taking orders from a guy they all watched give Nazi salutes on stage and his white supremacist lackeys.
On April 11 2025 02:15 Legan wrote: Reading up on the company that sold Zyklon B to Auschwitz this week was interesting. None of the indicted got longer than 8 years sentences, and many apparently did not know what went on in the camp even tho they had a factory inside the camps and had visited the camps personally. Quite a few were acquitted, and a few were released because of good behaviour and ended up in high industry positions. I don't think much has changed in how we would treat people related to similar violations. It is just so easy to claim that you did not know what was being done by the people you supported. I'm sure the world's richest standing next to each other at the inauguration will share amnesia about the event in the future. All will just be accidental, even if the results are catastrophic.
“This is an account of a fracture,” he writes, “a breaking away from the notion that the polite, western liberal ever stood for anything at all.” It is a deft, broken-hearted, rhetorical savaging of comfortable people who say nothing (or pay lip service) but care only about preserving normality, convincing themselves that these things only happen “to certain places, to certain people”.
EDIT2:
On April 12 2025 05:28 micronesia wrote: Yeah I too am not happy with the state of affairs in the USA.
Enough to do something? Join the effort for a General Strike maybe?
Yeah I too am not happy with the state of affairs in the USA.
Too bad the only options are apparently walk with the facists or start a revolution to make everything worse.
While I'm personally partial to revolutionary socialism, the General Strike I'm primarily advocating is well within the historical labor paradigm of the US. There's also LibHorizon's plan which is also well within the liberal electoralism paradigm.
You're welcome to present your ideas instead though?
We were all on board with the general strike but you never organized one. Now maybe you're waiting for someone else to organize one, maybe you're not the organizing type, I don't know, but I don't think you've shown up to one yet either.
This is you
GH, when is this illegal administration going to cross your red line and finally cause you to go on a general strike? When will you stop being complicit? Exactly how many illegal orders is too many for you? You can't answer these questions because you're holding a stick.
Stupid 5 bullet e-mails aren't policies.. they are stupid orders. Fortunately, the process has smoothed out and it just takes everyone a few minutes each week to make the Secretary happy. Better that than to leave all the Chernobyl-preventer seats vacant because of one administration, in my opinion.
But I really don't know what "push back" means, and it doesn't seem like DPB does either, despite advocating for it. AFAICT people are already doing what DPB is advocating and it's definitely not working.
To be clear, DoD employees have not taken orders from musk on "bullets", only from Hegseth... which isn't terribly better but it's more sensible.
I don't believe Hegseth repeating Musk's orders to DoD employees makes them not Musk's orders. Pretty confident you don't actually believe it does either.
Well it's not as simple as "repeating" the orders. Musk/DoGe, via OPM, originally tried to order the government to do certain things, such as the 5 bullet e-mails. DoD (and some other departments) told its staff not to obey Musk/OPM and instead follow only orders from above within DoD after DoD leadership evaluates what Musk/OPM wants and when/how/if to implement. Implementation of bullets for DoD is better than for some other departments, such as how the e-mails are kept within military e-mail systems, not sent directly to OPM, filter out a lot of the bullshit from the original OPM request, and provide better guidance for how to comply in various situations, such as while on leave.
Still, the fact remains that the bullets are dumb. I don't consider them the hill to die on, in part for the reason I gave earlier.
And that's one convoluted way someone can be frogboiled into rationalizing effectively taking orders from a guy they watched give a Nazi salute multiple times on stage.
Those orders just had to go down the chain of command and get amended by a guy with white supremacist/Christian nationalist tattoos first, so they could be followed by people like yourself.
I don't say that to pick on you, I don't think most of us would do anything different in your spot. It's just an observation about how so much of the US government (without even the pretense of your Hegseth rationalization) is already effectively taking orders from a guy they all watched give Nazi salutes on stage and his white supremacist lackeys.
On April 11 2025 02:15 Legan wrote: Reading up on the company that sold Zyklon B to Auschwitz this week was interesting. None of the indicted got longer than 8 years sentences, and many apparently did not know what went on in the camp even tho they had a factory inside the camps and had visited the camps personally. Quite a few were acquitted, and a few were released because of good behaviour and ended up in high industry positions. I don't think much has changed in how we would treat people related to similar violations. It is just so easy to claim that you did not know what was being done by the people you supported. I'm sure the world's richest standing next to each other at the inauguration will share amnesia about the event in the future. All will just be accidental, even if the results are catastrophic.
“This is an account of a fracture,” he writes, “a breaking away from the notion that the polite, western liberal ever stood for anything at all.” It is a deft, broken-hearted, rhetorical savaging of comfortable people who say nothing (or pay lip service) but care only about preserving normality, convincing themselves that these things only happen “to certain places, to certain people”.
EDIT2:
On April 12 2025 05:28 micronesia wrote: Yeah I too am not happy with the state of affairs in the USA.
Enough to do something? Join the effort for a General Strike maybe?
Yeah I too am not happy with the state of affairs in the USA.
Too bad the only options are apparently walk with the facists or start a revolution to make everything worse.
While I'm personally partial to revolutionary socialism, the General Strike I'm primarily advocating is well within the historical labor paradigm of the US. There's also LibHorizon's plan which is also well within the liberal electoralism paradigm.
GH, when is this illegal administration going to cross your red line and finally cause you to go on a general strike? When will you stop being complicit? Exactly how many illegal orders is too many for you? You can't answer these questions because you're holding a stick.
Also its been very clear that the entire plan for you has been to get to the general strike and zero thought into what happens after past "everything gets better as we rebuild and non reform reform every aspect of society". When it comes time for you to be there for anyone you will not be there for them.
Why do you put specific effort into hiding the parts of the post you don't read/don't want to respond to? Do you think that if you try to minimize it that other people will forget those parts?
On April 12 2025 01:39 micronesia wrote: [quote] To be clear, DoD employees have not taken orders from musk on "bullets", only from Hegseth... which isn't terribly better but it's more sensible.
I don't believe Hegseth repeating Musk's orders to DoD employees makes them not Musk's orders. Pretty confident you don't actually believe it does either.
Well it's not as simple as "repeating" the orders. Musk/DoGe, via OPM, originally tried to order the government to do certain things, such as the 5 bullet e-mails. DoD (and some other departments) told its staff not to obey Musk/OPM and instead follow only orders from above within DoD after DoD leadership evaluates what Musk/OPM wants and when/how/if to implement. Implementation of bullets for DoD is better than for some other departments, such as how the e-mails are kept within military e-mail systems, not sent directly to OPM, filter out a lot of the bullshit from the original OPM request, and provide better guidance for how to comply in various situations, such as while on leave.
Still, the fact remains that the bullets are dumb. I don't consider them the hill to die on, in part for the reason I gave earlier.
And that's one convoluted way someone can be frogboiled into rationalizing effectively taking orders from a guy they watched give a Nazi salute multiple times on stage.
Those orders just had to go down the chain of command and get amended by a guy with white supremacist/Christian nationalist tattoos first, so they could be followed by people like yourself.
I don't say that to pick on you, I don't think most of us would do anything different in your spot. It's just an observation about how so much of the US government (without even the pretense of your Hegseth rationalization) is already effectively taking orders from a guy they all watched give Nazi salutes on stage and his white supremacist lackeys.
On April 11 2025 02:15 Legan wrote: Reading up on the company that sold Zyklon B to Auschwitz this week was interesting. None of the indicted got longer than 8 years sentences, and many apparently did not know what went on in the camp even tho they had a factory inside the camps and had visited the camps personally. Quite a few were acquitted, and a few were released because of good behaviour and ended up in high industry positions. I don't think much has changed in how we would treat people related to similar violations. It is just so easy to claim that you did not know what was being done by the people you supported. I'm sure the world's richest standing next to each other at the inauguration will share amnesia about the event in the future. All will just be accidental, even if the results are catastrophic.
“This is an account of a fracture,” he writes, “a breaking away from the notion that the polite, western liberal ever stood for anything at all.” It is a deft, broken-hearted, rhetorical savaging of comfortable people who say nothing (or pay lip service) but care only about preserving normality, convincing themselves that these things only happen “to certain places, to certain people”.
EDIT2:
On April 12 2025 05:28 micronesia wrote: Yeah I too am not happy with the state of affairs in the USA.
Enough to do something? Join the effort for a General Strike maybe?
Yeah I too am not happy with the state of affairs in the USA.
Too bad the only options are apparently walk with the facists or start a revolution to make everything worse.
While I'm personally partial to revolutionary socialism, the General Strike I'm primarily advocating is well within the historical labor paradigm of the US. There's also LibHorizon's plan which is also well within the liberal electoralism paradigm.
GH, when is this illegal administration going to cross your red line and finally cause you to go on a general strike? When will you stop being complicit? Exactly how many illegal orders is too many for you? You can't answer these questions because you're holding a stick.
On April 12 2025 01:47 GreenHorizons wrote: [quote]I don't believe Hegseth repeating Musk's orders to DoD employees makes them not Musk's orders. Pretty confident you don't actually believe it does either.
Well it's not as simple as "repeating" the orders. Musk/DoGe, via OPM, originally tried to order the government to do certain things, such as the 5 bullet e-mails. DoD (and some other departments) told its staff not to obey Musk/OPM and instead follow only orders from above within DoD after DoD leadership evaluates what Musk/OPM wants and when/how/if to implement. Implementation of bullets for DoD is better than for some other departments, such as how the e-mails are kept within military e-mail systems, not sent directly to OPM, filter out a lot of the bullshit from the original OPM request, and provide better guidance for how to comply in various situations, such as while on leave.
Still, the fact remains that the bullets are dumb. I don't consider them the hill to die on, in part for the reason I gave earlier.
And that's one convoluted way someone can be frogboiled into rationalizing effectively taking orders from a guy they watched give a Nazi salute multiple times on stage.
Those orders just had to go down the chain of command and get amended by a guy with white supremacist/Christian nationalist tattoos first, so they could be followed by people like yourself.
I don't say that to pick on you, I don't think most of us would do anything different in your spot. It's just an observation about how so much of the US government (without even the pretense of your Hegseth rationalization) is already effectively taking orders from a guy they all watched give Nazi salutes on stage and his white supremacist lackeys.
On April 11 2025 02:15 Legan wrote: Reading up on the company that sold Zyklon B to Auschwitz this week was interesting. None of the indicted got longer than 8 years sentences, and many apparently did not know what went on in the camp even tho they had a factory inside the camps and had visited the camps personally. Quite a few were acquitted, and a few were released because of good behaviour and ended up in high industry positions. I don't think much has changed in how we would treat people related to similar violations. It is just so easy to claim that you did not know what was being done by the people you supported. I'm sure the world's richest standing next to each other at the inauguration will share amnesia about the event in the future. All will just be accidental, even if the results are catastrophic.
“This is an account of a fracture,” he writes, “a breaking away from the notion that the polite, western liberal ever stood for anything at all.” It is a deft, broken-hearted, rhetorical savaging of comfortable people who say nothing (or pay lip service) but care only about preserving normality, convincing themselves that these things only happen “to certain places, to certain people”.
EDIT2:
On April 12 2025 05:28 micronesia wrote: Yeah I too am not happy with the state of affairs in the USA.
Enough to do something? Join the effort for a General Strike maybe?
Yeah I too am not happy with the state of affairs in the USA.
Too bad the only options are apparently walk with the facists or start a revolution to make everything worse.
While I'm personally partial to revolutionary socialism, the General Strike I'm primarily advocating is well within the historical labor paradigm of the US. There's also LibHorizon's plan which is also well within the liberal electoralism paradigm.
GH, when is this illegal administration going to cross your red line and finally cause you to go on a general strike? When will you stop being complicit? Exactly how many illegal orders is too many for you? You can't answer these questions because you're holding a stick.
☐ No ☐ Yes, I signed up for the General Strike and am advocating others join us ☐ I support and advocate for the General Strike but am not in the US
You understand there's a difference between signing up on a website and actually striking, right? You do get that, don't you?
Because if you feel like you're doing your part in the revolution because you filled in a google form then that's really sad.
Of course I know there's a difference, you know that I do. You're lashing out at me because you're embarrassed.
Just to be clear though, you all are in fact not "all on board with the general strike".
I am all on board, in fact I'm already on strike right now. You're the poser who isn't all on board with a general strike. You're embarrassed. What's your facebook background?
On April 11 2025 10:53 Sermokala wrote: I think its the oppisite really. If trump wanted a trade war, and the Chinese peasents talk does lend itself to wanting to go scorched earth against them, he would need coordination to make it work. By presenting the Chinese as the reliable trading partner in the room they isolate other nations even more to turn to china. The more power and influence China gets in global trade the more they can survive the hit if they do go after Taiwan. IF they decouple completely from American pork imports the only thing that could stop china from going after taiwan is an naval blockade. The smaller nations they source their food imports from wouldn't survive having their primary market taken from them like America theoretically could.
Is this line of reasoning not ignoring any economic damage caused by the trade war? People can argue over who gets hurt "the most" from this situation, but the reality is both countries will be harmed a great deal. Its not like whoever suffers the most is the only one who is harmed and the other side emerges totally unscathed.
I don't think the issue of Taiwan has ever been about total military strength. As-is, China has the ability to flatten Taiwan, but would not benefit from flattening Taiwan. China's only real option is to seize it and occupy it. But China and everyone else knows sanctions and whatnot create a need for them to be in a good position going into it.
The US complicating things with direct military intervention or anything else makes it precarious as well.
Taiwan is deeply important to China, but they have waited this long because they realize it really is not super duper urgent and will not provide an immediate significant benefit. They have a lot to lose and its difficult to predict how things will go. If a prolonged trade war really does happen, I have a hard time believing they'll have the stability they need to let things shake around a bit from Taiwan's occupation.
I'm not one of the types who insists China is perpetually on the verge of collapse, but China clearly chooses to play most situations as safely as they can. Their population and geography are both way too big to allow for instability. Things could spiral in a bad way if they bite off more than they can chew. And unless I am missing a critical detail, the immediate payoff of Taiwan simply doesn't exist. I don't think Xi would risk it.
But I of course say this with a great deal of ignorance. The specifics of the internals of China and the US are not known to any of us. We don't know how much each side are really willing to commit to this trade war. We don't know if China really is a paper tiger barely holding on, or wildly unstable. Many things are simply beyond reasonable prediction. But I am offering my 2 cents because its a fun conversation to have. If anyone knows more than me, I'm always happy to learn.
The sanctions response is the thing though that this trade war prepares them for. If they are able to build relationships with nations where those nations become so dependent on trade with china and are not dependent on trade with the US that creates leverage for china to get them to not join the sanctions again them in a war to take taiwan. This trade war is creating that opportunity for them to break a lot of nations relationships with the united states. Australia for example could be flipped very easy with how dependent they were already on Chinese trade, if the tariffs come back they will have no choice but to go even deeper with china. The voting public is not going to swallow economic pain in exchange for not taking a deal with china that they can offer them.
I agree with your point that the US antagonising the rest of the world with tariffs will weaken their position in a trade war with China by driving third countries away from themselves and towards China. But I think you are wrong about Australia specifically. Australia has a strategically significant economic relationship with China - they are by far our largest and most important export market - but our security relationship and cultural identity is 100% ‘western’. A 10% universal tariff plus 25% on steel and aluminium by the US is not going to have any significant direct economic effects on Australia. Our exposure is all secondary - we only get hurt if / when Chinese demand for our iron ore, coal, and gas is reduced as a result of the direct US / China trade war.
We have also only just got out of a multi-year mini trade war with China. They tariffed our exports of wine, barley, lobsters etc to try and coerce diplomatic concessions - our government at the time was calling for an investigation into the origins of covid and the defence minister was openly talking about the possibility of armed conflict - and they didn’t like it. We didn’t make any concessions and after a few years and a change of government resulted in less antagonistic rhetoric all those trade restrictions have been removed. But the result is that Australia is under no illusions about what becoming even more reliant on China could mean for our independence and sovereignty.
It’s also important that during that trade conflict, China was still very happy to keep buying our iron ore, coal and gas. And that is because the volume of that trade is large enough that it is actually strategically significant for China as well. There is nowhere else that can replace Australia’s output in these areas in the short term. I don’t think China could coerce Australia onto their side by tariffing iron ore for example because they need us as much as we need them.
Short of the US actually invading an existing ally, I don’t see Australia changing our security alliances away from the US towards China.
The fact you’re even asking for the demands before signing up proves you’re just some status-quo genocide-enabling pissant and not a true revolutionary socialist
On April 12 2025 00:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Donald Trump's Secretary of Education (Linda McMahon) is desperately trying to one-up Trump's other Secretary of Education (Betsy DeVos) in just how uneducated the Secretary of Education can possibly be. Linda McMahon recently thought "A.I." (artificial intelligence) was actually "A1"... like the steak sauce: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/6QL0c5BbCR4
The Republican party's vision has always been "If we create a dysfunctional and useless government, then we can convince people that all government is dysfunctional and useless", and that philosophy has been epitomized by Trump's quest to close down the Department of Education by making it implode with disastrous anti-education decisions like appointing DeVos and McMahon to be leaders of the DoE.
The questions posts like these always beg are "What are you going to do about it?" and "What do you want us to do about it?"
AFAICT the answer to both of those is mock and gawk at it along with you. If I'm wrong, I'd love to be shown how.
Immediately: Teachers and other people working at public schools could push back against any anti-education policies that are being dictated by Trump/McMahon, just as how other professionals could push back when their profession is being undermined by Trump/Musk/whoever. Those are things that could be done right away / during Trump's term, and non-educators could certainly spread the word and voice their support for better education reform too.
Future: It's also not a terrible idea to compile instances of Trump's crew being against education or against whatever supposedly appeals to potential voters. When it comes time for the next election, tailoring a persuasive argument based on whatever the group claims to be a top issue for them (even if it's not education) includes being able to list reasons why your candidate is pro-that-issue and list reasons why the opposing candidates are anti-that-issue. (Not knowing the difference between artificial intelligence and steak sauce is obviously a far less significant embarrassment, but there is plenty of substantive ammunition one could point to, to make the case that Trump/Republicans are anti-education during the midterm elections, during the next presidential election, etc.)
You seem ready to "push back against any anti-education policies". And you think other professionals could also push back. How do you think you and they should "push back"? Do you think that refusing to work on those anti-education policies is a form of pushing back? Or is that too radical? Is the most pushback you'd support to change your Facebook page (like Kwark is ironically suggesting)? Or should they voice their concern to their superior while collaborating on implementing the, and I repeat, *anti-education* policies these educators are asked to implement? Or is even voicing that concern to your superior too personally risky, and calling for pushback on a gaming forum is about the extent of your rebelliousness?
For the sake of argument, I'm going to assume that the pushback against *anti-education* policies that, as an educator, you would personally be willing to commit to is to lay down your work until those policies are reversed.
Now, let's imagine another government employee. Maybe a park ranger who knows nothing about education policy. They are happy to believe you that Linda McMahon is generally incompetent and her policies should be reversed, but don't really know or care too much about specifics. Nor do they feel their own striking would send a very clear message about education policy. However they do feel empowered to push back on fracking in national parks? For instance, by not doing the work they were hired to do, when that work has changed from "work to protect the nature in the park" to "accompany prospectors to find the best places to frac"?
So there are educators ready to strike for education policy and park rangers ready to strike for environmental policy. Now for the private sector. Laying down your job at Meta, Ford, Walmart, your local small store, isn't going to have that same direct impact: you don't want something at your job to change, but you are generally fed up with most of what this government is doing and want general change. Maybe your primary concern is to reverse the tariffs, or you're afraid of being picked up off the street and being deported as an American citizen and without due process. Or you don't want a Nazi-saluting technocrat feeding your tax information into whatever AI he's using to decide whether you are a good citizen? Or you oppose cozying up to Russia and dropping support to Ukraine? Or you support your educators' fight against anti-education policies. But the overarching demand is that you want to hold your government accountable and meet your basic needs, even if everyone has slightly different basic needs, in the same way the park rangers and educators above do.
Now, all of these groups could start organising their individual strikes, which the powers that be would deal with individually and you might not even hear about that strike in the news. Or they could realise that a lot of what they want is generally the same, and band together in a general strike. That strike, when it starts, may not have any specific demands. Occupy didn't. They were just really angry people who lost their livelihood overnight and wanted people to be held accountable and their basic needs met. The specific demands came way later. The same for mass protests in Brazil before the football world cup and Rio Olympics. It all started because the price of public transport was raised in Rio. Do you think people in Porto Alegre were on the streets because of the price of a bus ticket 2000km away? The Arab spring started over some Tunisian street vendor setting himself on fire in response to the government confiscating his stuff.
Now, do I personally believe signing up in advance to https://generalstrikeus.com/ , so that when there's 3m signaturories there, they can start shaping the specific demands, is the way to organize this kind of mass protest? No. I think it's a bit ridiculous. I support it, and wish it the best, but that isn't the way any protests ever have started. But the general sentiment to be ready to go out on the streets in support of the people when something somewhere sparks enough outrage for a local protest is good. I personally would've thought the increasingly alarming price of eggs would be a good thing to latch onto and start protesting. Or the deportation of an innocent man to an El Salvador jail. Or any of a large number of evil things the government has demonstrably done, which would each have been plenty to send most Europeans out into the street. But then again, we haven't forgotten how to strike and protest for what we want from our governments. Even if that something isn't always too clearly defined from the start (just look at the gilettes jaunes). So maybe the way it works in the US is through a change.org style petition, until there's a critical mass. I don't know. But I know ridiculing that support is definitely the opposite of what I'd be doing as an American.
Sorry if it’s off topic to not bitch and whine about everything in this godforsaken thread, but this parody (if you can even call it that) is pretty funny.
EPT![[image loading]](https://www.financialexpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/diya-2025-02-21T074621.571.jpg?w=1024)
