2020 US Presidential Election

nvm, i am for adding two more seats to the supreme court I'm sick of republicans taking away things that the American people want the majority want socialized healthcare (the aca), gay marriage (which the three of the scc have said they personally do not believe in), abortion rights (which will most likely be the second to go), and legalizing marajinana federally instead of the opinions of the people being heard the evangelical religious right in office are the ones picking and choosing what we can and cant have based on their puritanical beliefs fuck. them. if they force amy in during an election year, yeah fuck them add two more seats sick of progress being pushed back in this backward ass country

Ngl, when I learned of Amy being appointed and knowing how many years (mere 4) she served as a federal judge, I said insta no. The only redeeming trait of hers is curbing liberal shit, but that's it. Only a maneuver for Thwomp to secure his election... eh. Oh well. But no matter how much you curb that... they return stronger under the newer generations and the old generations die over. This is... problematic, ngl. But I give it to her for being a Trad Catholic. US REALLY NEEDS some Trads to take over.

With the kind of stuff going on over there, people on the Democrat and Left side of politics should be using all the tools at their disposal to boot the Republicans out of positions of governance. No more of this impotent gesturing towards a 'high road', like the Biden campaign did when it pulled its attack ads on Trump when he got hospitalised. Civility does not work on fascists, they are motivated by power and care nothing for any of the principles that even they claim to hold dear (you know, because they're liars); if Leftists and Liberals 'go high', the Republicans have absolutely no qualms about going low.

i would respond @alephy but my new comrade @songofsisyphus said what my stoned and emotional ass could not; it would be redundant at best. thank you for that ^_^

What principles does a Fascist hold, and which of them does they just ignore? Fascists seize power because of a messianic complex that screams "I have a proposal. Let us bring back the aristocracy that shall make this Nation flourish by itself and bring our values, destroyed by Liberalism back.". True, Thwomp is different from the average Republican, he has no qualms to hide that he is just an aggressive, childish buffoon with slight Nationalistic tendencies (in theory) and a ludicrous cult of personality. But these are his only antics we can associate with a Fascist, but it is just not enough. Thwomp has no reason to press or overthrow the current political status quo by restoring the Old Right and instate himself as a leader. His more radical voters might think he would do something of the kind, but it was clear that he wouldn't. But now, they downright hate him. The end question would be: What values would Thwomp want to bring back? The "Greatness" of America? Bitch, please. True, all Fascists are Conservatives. But not all Conservatives are Fascists. What most of the Left considers a Fascist are guys like Augusto Pinochet, Alberto Fujimori... and such guys. But hey, they aren't. These two, specifically are bloody authoritarian dictators, but with Liberal approaches to economy and VERY COMPLACENT to Progressivism, most importantly. They are the Neoconservative's dictatorial wet dream. Nothing Pinochet and Fujimori did to restore Aztec, Inca, or hell even Spanish culture to their countries (Chile and Peru). No, they were governments emancipated by you guys because of Cold War proxies, while the terrorist/guerilla groups were funded, trained and supported by the Soviet Union. I don't need to hide I give it to Fujimori despite wanting him to pay dearly for the corruption issues and the innocent his death squads have murdered. But, he bodied the Tupac Amaru and the Shining Path, two communist terrorist groups. He gets my credit for that... just for that. Pinochet threw some commies from helis, but that's all. He died without paying for his crimes. I don't think such authoritarism is needed anymore unless these kind of groups prove to be a threat to the social fabric. Naught but a fool is one to think that Authoritarism is incompatible with Liberalism. We can see how the ilk of Robespierre and Napoleon, Pinochet and Fujimori work, too. What we can associate more to Fascists, despite not being, are guys like Francisco Franco (dictator of Spain), Antonio de Oliveira Salazar (dictator of Portugal) and our own Military Dictators (soft bastards...), which were mostly... Authoritarian Catholic Trads at most. Not Fascist. Not to mention your nowadays tyranny, cancelling others for just saying "nigger" (knowing all the well this word is perjorative for black people) or not supporting the LGBT, speaking against abortion, feminism and other horseshit. People have reasons to stand against what you like, you gentlemen are no less dictatorial than what you claim not to be. Hail the Brazilian Empire! Glory to the House of Orleans & Bragança!

I forgot to say. Fascists hate economical Orthodoxy and Free Market, as, according to them, those homogenize society and kill the traditions that builds a Nation. All Fascists are Trads. Trads cannot support economical freedom.

"There can be no truly voluntary transaction when such violence is implicit in the exchange. " Yes, there can be such a transaction. People work for a living because they want to. Again, you are redefining terms to fit your narrative. Why is having a job a violent exchange? Work is not implicit slavery. If you think it is. Then that is simply your opinion and nothing more. Abled body adults have to work for a living. When an abled person does not work, what happens? In your on words, it can cause "pain of destitution and starvation". Yeah, if an abled bodied adult does not work, then they starve to death or go homeless. An abled body adult should not be spoon feed. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. If someone's ass can work. Then work, otherwise face the streets or face starvation. Working for a living is not coercition. Even in this pandemic. People would rather work, then be cooped up at home all day. You are redefining terms willy nilly to fit your narrative. You are really far to the left. You did not take one blue pill. You probably took the entire bottle. This will probably be my last response on this topic. There really isn't a point in continuing with someone stuck in one binary choice. "The point being that implicit violence and explicit violence achieve functionally the same thing, and so should be viewed in quite similar ways. " No, they should not. What are you talking about? Working for a living is not implicit violence. Even assuming I granted your argument that working for a living was implicit violence. Explicit violence like rape, murder, and actual theft is no where similar to someone working for a living. Explicit and implicit violence are not functionally the same. You are really stretching your abstraction. "Did I specifically say that the job of police was solely to protect the interests of capitalists? " Well, in your previous statement. "The very laws that the police enforce are to the benefit of the capitalist, but not necessarily as much to everyone else." Technically not solely, but mostly the capitalist and not much of everyone else. I completely agree that taxes benefit the capitalist. But what else? That is only one example of a set of laws. Give me a plethora of different laws where going after murders ,rapist, thieves etc. mostly benefit the capitalist and not necessarily as much to everyone else. @songofsisyphus

"Not to mention your nowadays tyranny, cancelling others for just saying "nigger" " https://i.imgur.com/DU9mV8v.gif

if you call a black person the n word as a means to demean them, you should face social repercussions hard to debate against that imo