• ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    13 days ago

    Or, and hear me out - stop desperately trying to reform an unreformable system and ignoring that it is working exactly as it was designed to, abolish it, and build something better instead.

    • hobovision@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      13 days ago

      I think we’d all love to. The constitution is fundamentally broken and should be completely rewritten. It’s founded on ideas that just aren’t true now, if they ever were. The idea that the states are more like countries than counties is the biggest one. The idea that we can and should protect ourselves from the tyrrany of the majority by having independent branches of government and countless ways to stop and stall things is another huge one.

      But here’s the biggest problem, not enough of the country agrees that the system is broken, and even smaller portion of those who do can agree on how it’s broken or what changes to make. So no, we can’t just abolish it. We can either (1) fix it enough to get to the point that we may be able to have the stability it would require to safely transition to a new constitution or (2) see things get so bad that enough of the country is on board for revolution. Both options suck, but option (2) has a pretty bad record compared to option (1) in my view.

      • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        13 days ago

        In other words, “no, I won’t stop desperately trying to reform an unreformable system and ignoring that it is working exactly as it was designed to, instead, I’m just going to insist on playing by the rules of this system that was designed to work against me over and over and over again expecting a different result to magically manifest in to reality”

        • hobovision@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          In other words, “no, I won’t stop desperately trying to abolish an nationally popular system and ignoring that it hasn’t been possible for centuries even after a civil war, instead, I’m just going to refuse to do anything to help within the rules of this system that might be able to improve life for people care about over and over and over again eve though history shows us things can be made better”

      • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        13 days ago

        Only one thing could have broken our movement—if the adversary had understood its principle and from the first day had smashed, with the most extreme brutality, the nucleus of our new movement. -Adolf Hitler

        And quite frankly, we’re long past that point.

        If you think there is any other way to fight fascism, you’ve not been paying any attention, and clearly don’t have a fucking clue what fascism actually entails and how it functions.

        ETA: moreover, fascists, who are the actual terrorists literally holding the world ransom and exploiting us all and destroying our habitat for their own gain, count on people like you to turn on people like me and call us the terrorists to ensure they maintain their power. You have a choice to make.

        • Knightfox@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          13 days ago

          The right believes that the 2nd amendment exists so that the public can overthrow a corrupt government, in this faulty logic they believe that some normies with AR-15s can overcome the US military. Unlike January 6th the current political right also wouldn’t hesitate to use that military might to crush a violent revolution. At best what you are talking about would result in a civil war, assuming the military splits evenly as well, and at worst would result in the obliteration of the rebels. Given the number of Punisher symbols I see on military persons I wouldn’t bet on them supporting leftist revolutionaries.

          • Saleh@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            13 days ago

            We have seen revolutions in many places where the military had the force to kill everyone.

            The military relies on a functional society to fund it. Guerilla wars are not winnable for the military. Some soldiers do have a conciousness and given how racialized people often join the military for educational opportunities, i dont think they are too keen on slaughtering their own people in the streets.

            It will be bloody. But it is winnable. And if the alternative truly is Trump putting people in camps, like many liberals claimed, the rational choice is fighting and risking to die fighting than dieing without even trying.

          • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            13 days ago

            The military may well be on our side, even if Trump decides to schedule-F all the top brass and replace them with loyalists, the officers that follow them are likely to have differing opinions of what constitutes a legal order.

            From the top of the GOP down, Trump is a useful idiot, but difficult to handle. As I noted on NCD ( Sorry about the dumb link ) Trump is actually eager to nuke the snot out of someone, unable to regard the consequences. (He may be unable to consider the consequences, but I can’t make that assessment.) It’s going to be up to the commanders down the chain to find a way to ignore those orders, or delay them until someone up the chain of command comes to their senses.

            That said, I suspect they might run out of patience, especially if they’re sent to attack Americans (we’re still wary after the anti-riot deployments during the civil rights movement). While I can’t expect US armed forces to take sides in a civil war, they can certainly intervene to stop smaller military units from engaging.