Federal immigration agents swarm Minneapolis high school, handcuff staff and fire chemical irritants at students. Safety concerns prompt school closure.
I don’t know where else to ask this question…or even if I’m formulating this question properly in my rage.
Violence in the streets seems to be inevitable to me at this point with the recent revelation that Minnesota will not be allowed to perform a state-level investigation in to Renee Nicole Good’s death. The sheer audacity of the injustice, the inhumanity before, during and after this event, the clear and shameless lying. Now, they are attacking your children. If Americans take this lying down then there truly is no Rubicon, so at this point I’m practically hoping for violence, because how many more dead would the alternative bring? That feels wrong to me, but if no one stands up for these victims, then obviously their number will rise exponentially. But that’s not my question.
My question is, when this thing explodes and the violence breaks out. When Trump and his goons do the only thing their limited minds can think of and try to “crack down”. When it all goes to fucking shit… then what? Line up on sides like a dodgeball team and States start rebelling like it’s 150 years ago? Isolated city-states locked out from Federal support and interference? Trump declares himself President for Life?
It’s not weird that those resisting fascism have no solid plan, this is being thrust upon them. It might have been predictable but I can’t blame people for not really believing it until folks started dying. But it seems weird that the instigators of this fucking circus don’t even seem to be able to tell me what their fucking goal is. Do they honestly think they can create a brutal Christofascist ethno-state out of modern America? That no one will stop them, just because no one has killed them yet? And more insanely, if they do succeed, do they think they’ll all live through that attempt?
You are missing the key piece of information here:
The instigators of this are TRYING to harm the United States. They do not have a vision of a better country at the end of this. They are enemies of the nation and a chaotic mess is exactly what they want to see happen. Its not SUPPOSED to work. A dysfunctional country IS the goal.
Take a look back at the “Troubles” in Northern Ireland to get more of a sense of what a modern civil war would look like. You can also look at the insurgencies in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, though obviously those countries are much different from the US than the UK is.
Preventive maintenance is always better than repairs…
If there’s a group of 100 protestors and 10 of them have rifles and plate carriers, all of a sudden de-escalation can become a common goal.
If the same side is always the only one with guns, and they face no legal consequences from escalating to violence…
They’re gonna keep doing it.
It sounds counter-intuitive, but there’s a reason ICE isn’t going after actual cartels and drug smugglers. They’re picking the easiest targets, so now is the time for everyone to stop being an easy target while we’re still legally allowed to buy this shit. Being visible armed is the only way to make cops want to de-escalate. If not, they’re trained to “press the advantage” and keep you panicked, which doesn’t work at all, but makes them feel tough.
Eventually Trump’s gonna stop letting people buy guns, if you think an armed populace will ever be necessary, now’s the time to get a kit together.
Just one person being armed won’t deter them. There’s a reason the 2A specifies “well organized militia”
It is your right to gather together with other armed citizens and use violence to defend your communities.
Arturo Gamboa, the man shot in June while openly carrying a rifle at Salt Lake City’s No Kings protest…
Looking to confront Gamboa for his AR-15-style firearm, a safety volunteer fired three shots. Two struck him, and another killed an innocent bystander…
When asked about his actions that day, Gamboa said he was “peacefully protesting, utilizing my First and Second Amendment rights under the Constitution.”…
A civilian volunteer (peacekeeper for the organization that held the protest I’m pretty sure) that pledged not to have a gun. Shot another civilian who didn’t pledge to have a gun, for having a gun…
What does this have to do with law enforcement again?
When it all goes to fucking shit… then what? Line up on sides like a dodgeball team and States start rebelling like it’s 150 years ago? Isolated city-states locked out from Federal support and interference? Trump declares himself President for Life?
It likely depends on what the actual circumstances of the violence is and the various responses from other government agencies.
In other fascist government takeovers the key differentiator is the role/reaction of the military. Does the military support the fascist leader or does it oppose them? In 1922 Mussolini had full control and loyalty from the military while the government did not. Alternatively, while not in 2013 President of Egypt Mohamed Morsi, which had was facing protests by the populous for his actions was deposed by the military in what their opponents label a coup. In the 1930s in the USA, there was a fascist group called German American Bund. These were the American Nazi party you may have heard of of which famous pilot Charles Linbergh was a member of. There were supposed plans to execute a fascist takeover of the USA deposing FDR. The military stepped up protection of FDR, so we can infer that FDR had the support the military. German American Bund was investigated, many arrested, and it was dissolved.
So in your theoretical, which way does the US military go?
That, except with pipe bombs, rented trucks, and ubiquitous modern firearms. It could get very ugly. I don’t know what kind of appetite either side has for that long term.
This is what it looks like when fascism is in the midst of overthrowing a country. And old-school democracy has very few defences against these tactics.
Passivism does allow for self defence and, in many cases, the defence of others.
They’re trying to provoke us out in the open. They’ve been trying to normalise violence against us (and have become alarmingly effective).
A few people have commented places where this has happened before; where government has been captured by the far right. Historians have identified key moments where a different action or approach had a high chance of changing the outcome. If we look at current events temporaly through the lens of those key moments, we can be far, far better informed.
I know some people have been doing that.
eta: We’re running Democracy2.0, and many more versions have been developed in the past 200 years. We’re driving a constitution designed to be transported by carriage. It’s incompatible with our recent technology.
Congress and the senate could stipnthis tomorrow. A serious, fucused pressure campaign on republicans would flip this script. Right now trump takes all the heat, and he doesnt cate becuase hes a moron and just doesnt care.
the house and the senate get to just ignore all of this. no one ever mentions them, like they have a free pass or something.
We should be following these people, their assistants, and their spouses 24/7 365 until they impeach this shitstain.
We can not allow them off the hook beacuse “republicans wont impeach”, thats bullshit. they are just humans, and they will break like anyone else.
he needs the distraction from the epstein files, any news even things like this is good for him. the venezuelan issue, was dropped by the media immediately the shooting happened.
I don’t know where else to ask this question…or even if I’m formulating this question properly in my rage.
Violence in the streets seems to be inevitable to me at this point with the recent revelation that Minnesota will not be allowed to perform a state-level investigation in to Renee Nicole Good’s death. The sheer audacity of the injustice, the inhumanity before, during and after this event, the clear and shameless lying. Now, they are attacking your children. If Americans take this lying down then there truly is no Rubicon, so at this point I’m practically hoping for violence, because how many more dead would the alternative bring? That feels wrong to me, but if no one stands up for these victims, then obviously their number will rise exponentially. But that’s not my question.
My question is, when this thing explodes and the violence breaks out. When Trump and his goons do the only thing their limited minds can think of and try to “crack down”. When it all goes to fucking shit… then what? Line up on sides like a dodgeball team and States start rebelling like it’s 150 years ago? Isolated city-states locked out from Federal support and interference? Trump declares himself President for Life?
It’s not weird that those resisting fascism have no solid plan, this is being thrust upon them. It might have been predictable but I can’t blame people for not really believing it until folks started dying. But it seems weird that the instigators of this fucking circus don’t even seem to be able to tell me what their fucking goal is. Do they honestly think they can create a brutal Christofascist ethno-state out of modern America? That no one will stop them, just because no one has killed them yet? And more insanely, if they do succeed, do they think they’ll all live through that attempt?
You are missing the key piece of information here:
The instigators of this are TRYING to harm the United States. They do not have a vision of a better country at the end of this. They are enemies of the nation and a chaotic mess is exactly what they want to see happen. Its not SUPPOSED to work. A dysfunctional country IS the goal.
There will not be battle lines.
Take a look back at the “Troubles” in Northern Ireland to get more of a sense of what a modern civil war would look like. You can also look at the insurgencies in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, though obviously those countries are much different from the US than the UK is.
Myanmar comes to mind as a worst-case scenario, too. They’ve been fighting since the pandemic and it’s basically in every direction, everywhere.
facebook had a hand in thier current state right now.
Preventive maintenance is always better than repairs…
If there’s a group of 100 protestors and 10 of them have rifles and plate carriers, all of a sudden de-escalation can become a common goal.
If the same side is always the only one with guns, and they face no legal consequences from escalating to violence…
They’re gonna keep doing it.
It sounds counter-intuitive, but there’s a reason ICE isn’t going after actual cartels and drug smugglers. They’re picking the easiest targets, so now is the time for everyone to stop being an easy target while we’re still legally allowed to buy this shit. Being visible armed is the only way to make cops want to de-escalate. If not, they’re trained to “press the advantage” and keep you panicked, which doesn’t work at all, but makes them feel tough.
Eventually Trump’s gonna stop letting people buy guns, if you think an armed populace will ever be necessary, now’s the time to get a kit together.
Just one person being armed won’t deter them. There’s a reason the 2A specifies “well organized militia” It is your right to gather together with other armed citizens and use violence to defend your communities.
It’s well established that a line of armed men is the best way to prevent Police from rioting at a protest.
I’ve never seen a video of a cop shooting a protester while another protester is in the area with a rifle…
Can you show me a single example of me being wrong?
Because it’s logically impossible for anyone to prove the opposite, I’d have to show you ever video of American law enforcement shooting someone…
How about shooting an innocent bystander and the armed protester while he was carrying a rifle.
They would have thought twice about shooting Arturo if he had a dozen armed friends nearby, I’d wager.
example of you being wrong
So…
That means you couldnt find an example of what I was actually g about?
Are you being sarcastic or can you really not tell the difference between those two sentences?
Bystander was a protestor.
Arturo was a protestor with a rifle, in the same area as bystander.
Bystander was shot.
“I’ve never seen a video of a cop shooting a protester (bystander) while another protester (Arturo) is in the area with a rifle…”
https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-news/salt-lake-city/peacekeeper-in-no-kings-protest-shooting-makes-first-court-appearance
A civilian volunteer (peacekeeper for the organization that held the protest I’m pretty sure) that pledged not to have a gun. Shot another civilian who didn’t pledge to have a gun, for having a gun…
What does this have to do with law enforcement again?
Who is the cop that shot someone?
Are you aware that you are arguing in bad faith?
It likely depends on what the actual circumstances of the violence is and the various responses from other government agencies.
In other fascist government takeovers the key differentiator is the role/reaction of the military. Does the military support the fascist leader or does it oppose them? In 1922 Mussolini had full control and loyalty from the military while the government did not. Alternatively, while not in 2013 President of Egypt Mohamed Morsi, which had was facing protests by the populous for his actions was deposed by the military in what their opponents label a coup. In the 1930s in the USA, there was a fascist group called German American Bund. These were the American Nazi party you may have heard of of which famous pilot Charles Linbergh was a member of. There were supposed plans to execute a fascist takeover of the USA deposing FDR. The military stepped up protection of FDR, so we can infer that FDR had the support the military. German American Bund was investigated, many arrested, and it was dissolved.
So in your theoretical, which way does the US military go?
Look up “Bleeding Kansas” and “bushwhacking”.
That, except with pipe bombs, rented trucks, and ubiquitous modern firearms. It could get very ugly. I don’t know what kind of appetite either side has for that long term.
This is what it looks like when fascism is in the midst of overthrowing a country. And old-school democracy has very few defences against these tactics.
Passivism does allow for self defence and, in many cases, the defence of others.
They’re trying to provoke us out in the open. They’ve been trying to normalise violence against us (and have become alarmingly effective).
A few people have commented places where this has happened before; where government has been captured by the far right. Historians have identified key moments where a different action or approach had a high chance of changing the outcome. If we look at current events temporaly through the lens of those key moments, we can be far, far better informed.
I know some people have been doing that.
eta: We’re running Democracy2.0, and many more versions have been developed in the past 200 years. We’re driving a constitution designed to be transported by carriage. It’s incompatible with our recent technology.
Congress and the senate could stipnthis tomorrow. A serious, fucused pressure campaign on republicans would flip this script. Right now trump takes all the heat, and he doesnt cate becuase hes a moron and just doesnt care.
the house and the senate get to just ignore all of this. no one ever mentions them, like they have a free pass or something.
We should be following these people, their assistants, and their spouses 24/7 365 until they impeach this shitstain.
We can not allow them off the hook beacuse “republicans wont impeach”, thats bullshit. they are just humans, and they will break like anyone else.
he needs the distraction from the epstein files, any news even things like this is good for him. the venezuelan issue, was dropped by the media immediately the shooting happened.