Thread:
1 Like
2 Likes
Twitter anarchists and communists squabbling:
Some interesting debate in the comments (plus a lot of snark and flames).
1 Like
TBH, I distrust hardcore anything that claims to have all the answers or that there are easy answers. I don’t care where you sit on the 4-D political spectrum.
The answers are never* easy, and nobody’s got all of them.
*Unless your philosophy is “kill all X (or X,Y,Z etc.)” at which point the answer is quite easy: you are wrong, your opinions are wrong, and you need to be kept well away from everyone else. Mars will do nicely, for now. Basically, the more harm you do, the more wrong you are.
2 Likes
I agree in general, but I can see areas where I would be inclined to quibble.
How absolute are you about the edge cases? For example, armed liberation struggles, stopping Nazi Germany, slave revolts, etc.
The Haitian revolution was followed by the massacre of all the remaining French people on Haiti. While I don’t endorse the massacre, I don’t think that it negates the virtue of the Haitian liberation struggle.
Does it make a difference if “all X” is a freely chosen behaviour rather than an immutable identity? e.g. “kill all the slavers”? What about if it’s a mix of identity and behaviour: e.g. “death to kings”?
I’m not a fan of violence when there are better solutions available, but I do think that oppressed people have the right to defend themselves by any means necessary, including the mass application of lethal force.
Is there a sharp distinction between immediate self-defence, preemptive self-defence and vengeance?
If the US Civil War had ended with every slaver hanging from a rope, I would not have objected. I probably would have classified it as a mix of preemptive defence and vengeful justice.
(context = Joy Reid)
There are still liberal folks constantly pulling this style of bigoted dickishness on BB. For example:
(linking image rather than post because this is more than an individual problem, and I don’t want to target any particular poster)
I’ve mostly given up on trying to stop it, but it pisses me off every time. How hard is it to remember to punch up?
2 Likes
1 Like
LibTwitter today:
“Billy Bush! John Yoo! Welcome to the #Resistance!”
They’re also keeping up the “how dare you impugn the honor of the noble FBI?!” bullshit.
Including some who are openly calling for sedition prosecutions…
Very Woodrow.
Not sure what to make of this, except that I’m fascinated.
And that is not a young Joe Biden.
2 Likes
2 Likes
Just this once, I’m going to indulge @Wanderfound 's paranoia.
The proposal, co-authored by Shams Hirji, a recent graduate of Northwestern’s law school, is dressed up with data and charts about judicial caseloads, but its stated premise is straightforward: to create “a sufficient number of new judges that would help change the balance of power . . . back to a conservative majority” and would clean up the “damage done to the rule of law” by Obama’s appointees. How many new judges? Thirty to fifty per cent more than we have today, Calabresi suggests, and he would like them right away, please—before Democrats have a chance, in 2018, to take back the Senate. As the former Clinton and Obama adviser Ron Klain has pointed out, in the Washington Post, this would, “almost overnight,” make the number of Trump-selected judges on the federal bench nearly equal to the number appointed by the last nine Presidents combined.
1 Like
For proper paranoia, consider how easy it would be to manufacture a natural-appearing death for Ginsberg and Breyer.
4 Likes
4 Likes
5 Likes
