Both of those documents list anticapitalist views among warning signs of domestic terrorism.
Prove it, because I looked and couldn’t find it.
permission to use anticapitalist views as a reason to open an investigation into someone who isn’t even accused of doing anything else.
Which is a different thing than using anti-capitalist views alone to arrest someone.
Keep doing the thing that created the problem on the first place, some day it will solve the problem
You’re the one doing that. How many decades of protest voting, and what has it accomplished? We have this problem because of people like you, who confuse strategic action with boot licking. Without people like your, we would’ve gotten Gore in 2000, and we wouldn’t be in this situation.
Delude yourself well you like, but don’t try to moralize your foolishness.
Then either you’re a fool with no idea how these documents are used and you’re looking for it to openly say “anticapitalist sentiment is a valid reason to open an investigation”, or you’re being disingenuous. Second paragraph on page 41 in the first document, I’ll leave the second as an exercise for the reader.
Which is a different thing than using anti-capitalist views alone to arrest someone.
That’s not what I said they did, but the difference is largely academic. Once an investigation is opened a pretense for arrest can be manufactured easily at any time.
We have this problem because of people like you, who confuse strategic action with boot licking.
No, we have this problem because of people who confuse supporting Neoliberal ghouls who are polite about it over Neoliberal ghouls who are in your face and arrogant about it with harm reduction. Had the party you’re scolding people for turning on not spent damn near half a century gleefully helping the other half of the uniparty gut the working class and force people into serfdom, Trump would never have gotten on the ballot in the first place. Sonyesz you are absolutely advocating for people to continue doing exactly what created the problem, and scolding people who won’t join you in that because you don’t understand the problem, nor how to solve it. And you never will as long as you accept the narratives about the problem that are pushed by the people who benefit from the problem not being solved.
Yes, that was the one reference to capitalism which I referred to. It doesn’t say what you’re implying it does.
That’s not what I said they did
No, but that is what the current administration is doing. So yes, there is a difference.
Had the party you’re scolding people for turning on not spent damn near half a century gleefully helping the other half of the uniparty gut the working class and force people into serfdom, Trump would never have gotten on the ballot in the first place.
Hard disagree.
you are absolutely advocating for people to continue doing exactly what created the problem, and scolding people who won’t join you in that because you don’t understand the problem, nor how to solve it.
Again, no, that’s you. Your suggested actions won’t work, and you’re scolding people for damage mitigation. No one here is supporting neo-liberals, they’re fighting fascists. The fact that you’re intent on demonizing damage mitigation for a delusional fantasy where you sway 150 million people is all the proof I need that you’re not a serious adult worth continuing this conversation with. Come back after you’ve spent some actual time in the real world, and get some context for how social change works.
Can you find me a single example in history of fascism arising in a Democracy without the working class being under extreme enough pressure to make fascist strongman rhetoric appealing?
Or are you arguing that the Democrats don’t have a track record of hard Neoliberalism, or that that Neoliberalism isn’t the cause of the working class pressure that led to Trump?
Come back after you’ve spent some actual time in the real world, and get some context for how social change works.
Ten years in the trenches working for Progressive Democrats’ campaigns and seeing how the party functions from the inside was the real world. You should try it. Go volunteer for your local DSA. More importantly, start showing up to local Democratic Party meetings. See who weilds power there and how they do it. With the way things are going, it won’t even take you ten years to realize how utterly futile it is to expect the Democratic Party to fight fascism in any effective sense.
Prove it, because I looked and couldn’t find it.
Which is a different thing than using anti-capitalist views alone to arrest someone.
You’re the one doing that. How many decades of protest voting, and what has it accomplished? We have this problem because of people like you, who confuse strategic action with boot licking. Without people like your, we would’ve gotten Gore in 2000, and we wouldn’t be in this situation.
Delude yourself well you like, but don’t try to moralize your foolishness.
Then either you’re a fool with no idea how these documents are used and you’re looking for it to openly say “anticapitalist sentiment is a valid reason to open an investigation”, or you’re being disingenuous. Second paragraph on page 41 in the first document, I’ll leave the second as an exercise for the reader.
That’s not what I said they did, but the difference is largely academic. Once an investigation is opened a pretense for arrest can be manufactured easily at any time.
No, we have this problem because of people who confuse supporting Neoliberal ghouls who are polite about it over Neoliberal ghouls who are in your face and arrogant about it with harm reduction. Had the party you’re scolding people for turning on not spent damn near half a century gleefully helping the other half of the uniparty gut the working class and force people into serfdom, Trump would never have gotten on the ballot in the first place. Sonyesz you are absolutely advocating for people to continue doing exactly what created the problem, and scolding people who won’t join you in that because you don’t understand the problem, nor how to solve it. And you never will as long as you accept the narratives about the problem that are pushed by the people who benefit from the problem not being solved.
Yes, that was the one reference to capitalism which I referred to. It doesn’t say what you’re implying it does.
No, but that is what the current administration is doing. So yes, there is a difference.
Hard disagree.
Again, no, that’s you. Your suggested actions won’t work, and you’re scolding people for damage mitigation. No one here is supporting neo-liberals, they’re fighting fascists. The fact that you’re intent on demonizing damage mitigation for a delusional fantasy where you sway 150 million people is all the proof I need that you’re not a serious adult worth continuing this conversation with. Come back after you’ve spent some actual time in the real world, and get some context for how social change works.
Can you find me a single example in history of fascism arising in a Democracy without the working class being under extreme enough pressure to make fascist strongman rhetoric appealing?
Or are you arguing that the Democrats don’t have a track record of hard Neoliberalism, or that that Neoliberalism isn’t the cause of the working class pressure that led to Trump?
Ten years in the trenches working for Progressive Democrats’ campaigns and seeing how the party functions from the inside was the real world. You should try it. Go volunteer for your local DSA. More importantly, start showing up to local Democratic Party meetings. See who weilds power there and how they do it. With the way things are going, it won’t even take you ten years to realize how utterly futile it is to expect the Democratic Party to fight fascism in any effective sense.
I do.
Good thing I don’t expect that. You’ve misunderstood my point really, really badly.
If that wasn’t what you expect, how is being a safe vote for the Neoliberal ghouls any form of harm reduction?
I expected it, I just hoped you were better than that. How is harm increase beneficial in any way? Absolute nonsense.