Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
Disabled Alaskan Monarchist doomer
User ID: 2666
So... did it land? No I don't think so.
I've seen people argue that this isn't about trying to sway the voters, but laying the groundwork for after the election. For example, from a commenter over at Instapundit:
Trump will be arrested if he wins. The DNC and Deep State will not allow him to take office. They're laying the groundwork for public discourse now and are planning it internally. Harris would not be allowed to call him a fascist, and all the rhetoric from retired generals and "experts" all over the air waves.
I've seen similar arguments elsewhere. As a YouTube commenter once put it, Weimar Germany made the mistake of letting Hitler and the Nazis into the government just because they won elections, and we must never repeat that mistake ("Never again!"). This proves Trump wants to be Hitler — this time, for realsies, trust us! — and so, to defend Our Democracy and countless millions of American lives, we must stop him from returning to the White House, no matter what it takes.
The rules, the Constitution, prohibit this? It's time to get Schmittian — "sovereign is he who decides on the state of exception" — and "the Constitution is not a suicide pact." In this "state of exception," the 'rules' take a backseat to the very survival of our nation against Hitler 2.0. (And besides, the written Constitution hasn't described how our government is actually constituted and functions for at least a century — it's a dead letter.)
Of course, my primary theory is that all of this is for show, and "the fix is in," as they say. Get ready for eight years of Harris. To give some quotes from one of my favorite commenters (one "L") over at the Dread Jim's blog:
So, you rightoids ready to sit in the corner and watch while elite human capital takes home another election?
…
You have crucial states openly announcing that they won’t be reporting counts until several days afterwards and you honestly think you stand a chance? I knew rightoids were low IQ but even I’m surprised by ignorance of that level.
…
Again, doesn’t matter if they exclusively counted votes while utterly shitfaced. You have no institutional means to stop them saying the total is whatever we want and no ability to use force. You’re done, simple as.
And my favorite in the thread:
It literally would not matter if there wasn’t a single genuine voter for Kamala in any of those states. The vote is whatever the people counting the vote say it is. Guess who those people are?
By the way, there’s not a single mechanism or institution that would ever support any kind of challenge to the results. Musk can say whatever he wants, in the short time he has before prison, and it doesn’t mean anything.
Edit: another proposed theory I'm seeing — this isn't about persuading voters, this is dogwhistling for the crazies to get the job done this time. From another Jim commenter:
Surrounded by a crowd of mystery meats, roasties, some pale cucklords who look vegan, and one hoary and hoarse Obongo, she once again attempts to meme Trump into being Hitler (who himself endured lots of assassination attempts, as many people remember), and pretty much begs — she might as well go down on her knees, as she is used to — everyone to just kill that cracker. There’s very little nuance here. It’s open season from now on until Order is Restored.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
1yr ago
This has been going through a number of the podcast & youtube circles I listen to, and there's a few points made by some of them that I've pretty much come around to.
First, that as one put it, Sweet Baby Inc. is just successful Feminist Frequency. This bit of "Gamergate 2.0" just serves to illustrate that the gamers lost in the original.
Not that it was ever really a battle worth winning. That's the second point. "The only thing faker than Trump was Gamergate," as a podcaster put it. Because video games — like movies, comic books, football, etc. — are just an escapist "release valve" keeping people idle and passive. That the attitude of the Gamergaters — including the current anti-SBI crowd — is really just "burn my society down around me, I'm fine with that, just so long as you let me have this little corner of escapism."
It's treating a symptom (a potentially useful one at that) instead of going at the disease. I remember one of the videos had clips from one of SBI's top people, which included what was basically encouragement of a "nice video game studio you've got here; shame if someone were to call it sexist/racist/homophobic/transphobic" strategy. But why does that strategy work to begin with? Another reason firms like SBI work is ESG scores and the corresponding low-interest money. Why is that a thing? Because our society lets fat-cat finance capitalists like Larry Fink go unstopped.
Without video games, or Marvel movies, or football to keep them passive, maybe young men would start getting up off their butts and get active. Don't "fight" to take back gaming or comic books, fight to take back your country, to take back Western Civilization. Because there won't be anyone trying to "wokify" your little hobby once the Woke have been crushed utterly.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
4mo ago
Is liberalism dying? If it is, is that a good thing or a bad thing to you?
Yes, and it's a good thing, because the entire "Enlightenment" political project was a mistake from the beginning.
This is a bad thing to me and a cause of some hopelessness, since America produced a great deal of good things during its heyday, and even still is doing awesome things.
This looks like cum hoc ergo propter hoc to me. I've never really bought the case for "technological determinism" whereby a society's political forms are determined entirely by its technology base, and I especially haven't seen any good arguments for the reverse, that scientific and technological progress are entirely "downstream" of particular political forms.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
8mo ago
Who do you think will win, Trump or Harris?
Harris, because we'll get as much turnout from the living-impaired voter demographic as necessary to ensure she wins.
Relatedly, do you think there will be issues certifying the election results?
No, because Republicans lack the wherewithal to block certification no matter how obviously fraudulent the results. We could have North Korean election results, and people will just throw up their hands, grumble, and plan to vote harder in 2028.
And of course - do you think we'll see outright political violence?
Only if Trump somehow manages to miraculously overcome the margin of fraud — in which case, we will see strong attempts to block certification. We'll also Trump given a lengthy jail sentence in New York, which left-leaning state law enforcement — and possibly the FBI — will attempt to arrest him so he can be extradited to serve said sentence before he can be sworn in. Expect large, organized uprisings to stop the Fascist takeover.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
8mo ago
Which demographics is she pulling in 2024 that Biden DIDN'T pull in 2020? Make the case for me because I don't see any way she pulls better numbers than Biden.
A much larger portion of the cemetery demographic? The non-citizen demographic?
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
7mo ago
It doesn't matter how "competent" they are, the Justice Department will simply ignore them, along with Gaetz, and keep on as they are now. None of Trump's appointments will have any actual power over the agencies, whose personnel will prove impossible to fire. The only way the "Deep State" is getting removed is in body bags:
FBI has to be removed permanently. They are dangerous. They have committed enormous crimes, which if unpunished, will be repeated sooner or later. They have to be eliminated, or we lose.
First step is Trump’s truth commission, and RFK Junior’s gold standard science (restoring the scientific method).
First we have to expose and prove the crimes. Then it becomes possible to do what is necessary to prevent repetition. Whether Trump is able and willing to do what is necessary remains to be seen. The judges that staffed the FISA court have to die. They are too dangerous to live.
If the FBI and the rest live, Trump, Musk, and any namefag so incautious as to have spoken the truth will die.
Musk knows what the time is. Does Trump?
Once elite cooperation collapses, then it is time to win or die.
I guess the big question is ‘what happens next?’
I think @The_Nybbler has it: a bunch of "law and order" Boomer Republicans refuse to vote for "a convicted felon," and Biden wins. Just like happened here in Alaska with Ted Stevens — yes, the conviction (in that case) was a product of egregious prosecutorial misconduct (in conspiracy with FBI agents to withhold exculpatory evidence), and was quickly overturned on appeal… but not until after the election was already lost.
We're about to see total Democrat dominance at the Federal level bigger than that of the mid 20th Century — no conservative "Dixiecrats" to "cross the aisle" or Eisenhowers getting through. Just ever-more-triumphant Blue Tribe as us Reds continue dying out, until we finally go extinct, and disappear forever.
Edit: And, in support of the 'Republicans are going to keep on "taking the high road" rather than engage in tit-for-tat lawfare,' I link former governor of Maryland, and current GOP candidate for US senator for that state, Larry Hogan on Twitter:
Regardless of the result, I urge all Americans to respect the verdict and the legal process. At this dangerously divided moment in our history, all leaders—regardless of party—must not pour fuel on the fire with more toxic partisanship. We must reaffirm what has made this nation great: the rule of law.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
11mo ago
This is aimed not specifically at you, @No_one, but more about at the general discussion around this topic.
I wasn't sure at first how to express my general feelings on this, but it's something along the lines of Neema Parvini's (and guest's) comments (from about 51:40 to 57:30, though the broader context begins around 47:00).
This is a non-story on a number of levels. First, it seems like another example of ginned up outrage-bait slop from the usual right-wing containment outlets. Secondly, even to the extent it's real, Google autocomplete has to be the most trivial level of interference. It's not like they're outright preventing you from searching the terms in question, nor are they preventing these terms from providing relevant results.
And third, that Google is politically biased and Silicon Valley hates the right should not be news to anyone at this point. So what's the point of making a fuss about it, or any other similar little issue in the endless flood of them? And the more important question, the one I find myself asking more and more when people vent about this or that "outrage" by the other side, and the one I'd like to ask all the people griping on Twitter, is "so what are you going to do about it?"
Like Parvini says later in the video (on the topic of free speech), endless talking-head debates are a trap. They're containment — they go nowhere, and accomplish little except wasting time and energy. (Yes, not exactly a fitting attitude for participating in this space, but I've personally got plenty of time to waste, and haven't found better places to spend my energy — indeed, I had a Sunday question about a week ago relevant to this.)
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
1yr ago
This just clarifies the system is broken.
How so? It seems to be working just fine at what seems to me to be its primary purpose — keeping the Blue Tribe elite solidly in power, and protecting Our Democracy from the horrible populist threat of the voters getting what they vote for.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
1yr ago
If you weren't predicting five or six years ago that we'd have AI this capable
What "capable"? LLMs are a meaningless parlor trick — of little significance, and not any kind of step towards "general intelligence." "The whole field of chatbots" is a pointless distraction.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
6mo ago
Maximizing shareholder value is not the sole goal humanity should have. This is strawman paperclip maximizer talk.
Sure, but one problem is that from what I see, the most common alternative goal to "maximizing shareholder value" ends up being DEI, ESG and "forcing behaviors."
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
10mo ago
Given what happened in Pennsylvania, how well will the Secret Service be able (or should that be "willing"?) to protect Donald Trump if (when) he's sent to Rikers Island next month?
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
1yr ago
There will be nothing more destabilizing for democracy and American government than making every president a Caesar who either crosses the Rubicon or dies in jail.
Why would a Democrat president need to worry about "dying in jail" under his Democrat successor? And you won't have to worry about a Republican president becoming a Caesar to avoid that fate when there's never going to be another Republican president.
Permanent Dem rule is here. There is no lawful, nor even non-violent, path left for Red Tribe. And I've expressed my doubts about the effectiveness of violent measures, so, once again, I conclude we're doomed.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
1yr ago
It's increasingly difficult to find any refuge from the daily barrage of reminders that your society is signaling it hates you and is excited for you and your kind to die off.
Well, why should your society, given that it hates you and is excited for you and your kind to die off, allow you any such refuge?
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
1yr ago
What do you wish Trump et al could accomplish between 2024 and 2028? Is it mainly restricting low-skill immigration?
I'm a monarchist, awaiting an Augustus Caesar — while almost certain we'll never get one.
Someone needs to get this on Elons or Vivek’s radar and hope someone takes interest. It’s the only way.
Why? What would that accomplish? DoGE is a joke, powerless to accomplish anything. Malcom Kyeyune:
In truth, though, the fact that DOGE is being taken even remotely seriously is in itself a cause for concern. Trump, as part of the executive branch, has very little power to tell the legislature what it can or even should do. Whatever (minimal) authority he may enjoy leading a department named after a cryptocurrency and an online meme, Musk is at most empowered to make non-binding suggestions. Moreover, if he wants his “department” to actually receive any funding, it is Congress, not Trump, that secures it. The fact that the US state is split into three branches, each with their own remit, is something American children learn very early on. Neither Musk, nor his new boss, have the power to upend this division of power, nor fix problems outside the executive branch of government.
When Mr. Trump takes office, Mr. Musk’s group will face a daunting reality. An entire apparatus has developed over the centuries that allows the government to keep marching on in the face of economic shocks, wartime hardships, or — as in this case — political vows to diminish its size and spending.
Any effort to slash the federal government and its 2.3 million civilian workers will likely face resistance in Congress, lawsuits from activist groups and delays mandated by federal rules. Unlike in his businesses, Mr. Musk will not be the sole decider, but will have to build consensus among legislators, executive-branch staffers, his co-leader and Mr. Trump himself. And federal rules ostensibly prevent Mr. Musk and Mr. Ramaswamy from making decisions in private, unlike how many matters are handled in the business world.
…
A 1972 law says federal open-records laws apply to advisory committees. If a committee does not follow those rules, it could be sued — and a judge could order the committee to stop meeting, or order the government to disregard its advice.
…
Mr. Musk and Mr. Ramaswamy said that cutting rules would allow them to cut staff, allowing “mass head-count reductions” across the government.
Yet many of those employees have civil-service protections, meaning they generally cannot be fired without cause, or for their political beliefs. In his first term, Mr. Trump tried to shift thousands of employees into a different category, where they could be fired at will. President Biden rescinded that order, called Schedule F, when he took office.
…
Jonathan H. Adler, a professor at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, said that many of the ideas mentioned by Mr. Musk and Mr. Ramaswamy would be ripe for legal challenges and noted that many of Mr. Trump’s previous efforts to expansively use executive powers had been struck down by courts.
…
Capitol Hill has always been the place where ambitious efforts to slash the budget — from one started by Theodore Roosevelt to the commission under Reagan run by industrialist J. Peter Grace — have run aground. Members of Congress have been reluctant to cut even small programs they think help their constituents, and the law says presidents must spend all the money that Congress allocates.
…
For now, activist groups like Public Citizen, a left-leaning advocacy group, said that there was nothing about Mr. Trump’s victory, or Mr. Musk’s role at his side, that allowed them to ignore the slow legal process set up to make — or unmake — rules.
“We will use those structures to complain — and sue, if we need to," said Lisa Gilbert, Public Citizen’s co-president. “We’ll see where they start, and we’ll use every tool in our tool set to push back.”
Excludes bodies that also exercise operational functions! I can’t even. But the good news is, “DOGE” will “dispense advice or recommendations.”
Let me repeat this, since it’s so funny: the “Department of Government Efficiency” is not even part of the government. It literally has no power of its own. Everything Elon will be doing now, he could have done six months ago.
The result of this exercise will be a report which suggests to various agencies how they should save money. Or something. Imagine if Elon Musk had provided “advice and guidance” to Parag Agrawal. I think he tried that first. Lol.
…
In this, DOGE perfectly echoes its 40-year-old predecessor, the Grace Commission, for which the slogan “drain the swamp” was actually coined. The Grace Commission spent $75 million to create a 47-volume report. It identified $424 billion of savings from implementing its recommendations. In the end, twelve of its recommendations were passed into law, saving somewhere between two and five billion dollars. I guess that’s a good return on a $75 million report. Let’s see if Elon and Vivek can match it.
It’s unfair, of course, to laugh. The DOGE guys understand this perfectly and have already announced that DOGE will focus on executive actions.
Executive actions are executive orders. EOs have the legal force of a tweet. You can’t go to jail for disobeying a tweet, even if the President tweeted it. Or an EO.
In real life, EOs work when they order an agency to do something it wants to do. In fact, they are generally written by the agency itself. They are certainly reviewed by the agency. EOs are not written high at 3am by Elon Musk with a sharpie on a Denny’s napkin, even if they probably should be. If you know DC, can you make something happen with an EO? Of course. Depends what, though.
…
Basically, DOGE is promising to save the government money through… bureaucratic trench warfare. If you think an executive order is in any way executive, like private sector executive, like actually executive—read about how the process works.
…
But every recommendation in the “DOGE” report, if it goes anywhere at all, will land on the desk of its natural enemy: the bureaucrat whose budget it is trying to cut. His first action will be to write a memorandum, ten times as long as the recommendation itself, about why this is a ridiculous and disastrous and impossible idea.
Getting something on Elon or Vivek's "radar" will do you no good. It's not "the only way," there's no way at all — at least, not within the system and the confines of the law. DC cannot be fixed, it can only be defeated, destroyed, and replaced.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
1yr ago
There's a scenario I've seen postulated elsewhere, that I'm not sure how plausible it is as a possibility (not enough of an expert on the legal system). Specifically, judges can issue suspended sentences, where a defendant is spared jail time subject to abiding by certain conditions set by the judge. These conditions can include refraining from behaviors, contacts, etc. associated with the crime in question — such as giving someone convicted of a drug crime a jail sentence suspended on the condition they go to rehab, stay clean, stay away from known dealers/drug houses, etc.
Given that the 34 charges for which Trump is being sentenced are related to political campaign finance, the proposed scenario is that Judge Merchan gives Trump serious jail time, but suspends it on the condition that Trump refrain from running or campaigning for political office. That is, give Trump the choice of dropping out and letting the Republican convention four days later name someone else their candidate, or going to jail (where he dies — depending on your views and flavor of the scenario, either from old age after how ever many years, or from getting Epsteined before election day).
Is there some rule about sentencing that prevents this?
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
1yr ago
The non-RINO Christian Right
A minority, and a shrinking demographic.
sneering subservient RINO elite wannabees
I also object strenuously to the use of the term "RINO" to characterize the GOP establishment. Because there's nothing "in name only" about them. Indeed, it's quite clear to me that — regardless of what GOP voters may want or think the party stands for — they are the Republican Party. Being a "RINO" "sellout" Outer Party fake-opposition is what the Republican Party is, what it has been for a long time. It's populist outsiders like Trump — and the sizable fraction of voters who support them — who are really Republicans "in name only."
it becomes clearer what lawlessness they will embrace to render him powerless, and how trivially they could trample over people like us who don't have a billion dollars and a TV show and buildings with our names on them.
Which is why we're going to lose. They can and will simply "trample over" all of us, and there's nothing we can do about it.
When the alternative is writing a blank cheque to godless, lawless evil
"But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also."
I've been told repeatedly that Christians are not promised worldly political victory, but that they will be handed over to be persecuted, that they will be killed, and that they will be hated by all (see Matthew 24:9). That the right must understand that, per Tolkien, history will only ever be "a long defeat" and that the only victory to be had is in the next life, by sticking to our values unwaveringly even unto torture and martyrdom; that one should indeed willingly embrace said martyrdom like so many saints of old.
Back at the old place, Hlynka argued that it was precisely this embrace of "principled defeat" in this life for the sake of the next that defines "right wing" and separates it from the left, and thus only those who believe in an afterlife can be on the right; and that, regardless of their political positions, atheists are all automatically "left wing" by definition.
And if they bring him down
There's no "if" about it.
the only ones left are sneering subservient RINO elite wannabees and a lawless brigade that makes its living destroying the lives and livelihoods of middle class Americans on principle... Well, imagine a boot stamping on a human face— forever.
Yes, I agree with that. That is what's going to happen. It's inevitable, and there's nothing anybody can do to stop it.
Death is the only escape.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
1yr ago
he can fire everyone involved he can get his hands on
Again, I dispute this. If he says John Q. Bureaucrat is fired, but the rest of DC says Mr. Bureaucrat isn't fired; they still work with Mr. Bureaucrat when he comes into the office; payroll still issues Mr. Bureaucrat his paycheck; and they have the guy Trump appointed to replace John hauled out of the building and arrested for trespassing, because he doesn't work there, since the job he claims to hold is actually still held by Mr. Bureaucrat; and anyone who tries to remove Mr. Bureaucrat on orders from Trump gets arrested themselves by the FBI for attempting to obstruct a federal employee in the exercise of his duties, because Mr. Bureaucrat is still a federal employee… then has John Q. Bureaucrat really been fired?
he can declassify any and all documents involved
And if everyone ignores him, and keeps treating them as classified anyway?
he could order the entire classification system revoked
And if everyone ignores him, and keeps acting as if the system is still in place?
If Congress is on his side, they can open investigations into the investigators
With what people? Who are they going to order to carry out these investigations? What if those people ignore that order? Or side with those they're "investigating" against Trump and Congress?
they can defund the offices involved.
Government "shutdowns," where nothing shuts down and the executive branch continued to spend and disburse funds without the constitutionally-mandated Congressional authorization, say otherwise. What happens when Congress "defunds" the offices, and Treasury just ignores them and keeps issuing the offices their funds as before?
but I find it very unlikely that Trump's enemies will really push (escalate) a Constitutional crisis
Why not? I don't understand why everyone seems to think a "Constitutional crisis" would be any kind of big deal. What would change, really?
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
1yr ago
but the head of the FBI is still fired.
Not if the entire FBI says "no he's not" and keeps taking orders from him, while ignoring any "replacement," and whoever at Treasury or wherever prints government paychecks keeps paying him on schedule.
There are over two million civilian Federal employees. If all of those two million plus collectively decide that they are not going to obey, enforce, or even acknowledge any orders or appointments from Trump, what can he do himself, as one mere mortal, to compel them to obey?
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
5mo ago
It can be undone in a matter of days
No, it can't. Not with legal mechanisms, anyway.
You can just do things.
No, you can't. Because you need people able and willing to carry things out. Only one side has that.
We can win.
No, we probably can't.
So are you going to fight?
No, I can't imagine people actually doing so. They'll do a lot of pointless stuff that feels like fighting — and winning — in the moment, but doesn't actually amount to anything. (See Yarvin here and here).
People are never going back.
Of course they are. They have every time before; if only because they'll be forced to.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
7mo ago
And since we live in a democratic society
That's fixable.
But that rhetoric is exactly why they lost this election, and why they will continue to lose elections (not every election to be sure, but enough) until they realize that politics is not a game of who is the most self righteous and preachy.
Or until they stop holding elections. If letting the American people vote means Orange Hitler, then you obviously can't let them vote anymore.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
8mo ago
an abandoned constituency in the native proletariat victimized by globalization and the SJ conflicts boiling over into larger culture created a broad class of young energetic reactionary activists that were also looking for a champion.
Or to sum it up in a word, fascists.
populism and anti-SJ sentiment.
In other words, the "socially conservative but fiscally liberal" quadrant opposite the sparsely-populated "fiscally conservative but socially liberal" libertarian quadrant on the "social axis vs. economic axis" political plane, which — as people I've encountered from all four quadrants of that plane argue — is best labelled the fascist quadrant.
The coalitions had already been drawn out with the failure of Occupy I would argue.
As a left-winger once argued to me, Occupy had to fail like it did, no matter how lamentable that outcome, because the alternative was platforming fascists.
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
1yr ago
From a Red Tribe perspective, there is no rational reason beyond naked fear to respect or maintain federal authority.
Why isn't that fear enough?
Blues look at this as a fiat accompli, but why respect a system that doesn't respect you?
What matters is not respect, but obedience. Blues don't need or want Reds' respect, only their submission.
Given that reality, why continue to support and maintain those institutions?
Because you will be punished if you don't?
The correct move is to withdraw the consent of the governed, and make them fight for every step.
So, poking the (metaphorical, Federal) bear?
Deny them freedom of action at every possible point.
This implies we have any meaningful ability to do so.
Never concede their legitimacy
Legitimacy is overrated. Don Corleone doesn't need "legitimacy" to get people to pay him for "protection," does he?
never grant them authority
What does this look like, and how does it end in anything other than getting arrested, shot, etc.?
never cooperate.
Try that with the IRS, or the FBI, and see what happens.
When they push back, escalate, and when they push back on that, escalate again.
What makes you think this can possibly end well? How does this not end in the Feds and Blues crushing Red utterly. What does getting you (yes, you) and your entire family gunned down by SWAT accomplish, exactly?
Attack their institutions and organizations.
Attack with what, exactly? As the old meme goes, you and what army?
Engage in economic and legislative warfare.
Same question as above. They have most the big corporations and economic weight on their side, and only their legislation has "teeth," not ours.
All this has been done to us; tit-for-tat is the correct strategy given the state of play.
Except we lack the means to do unto them as they have done unto us. It's like telling a man taking cover from gunfire to "just shoot back; tit-for-tat," when he's unarmed.
It does not appear to have unlimited state capacity to spare.
It doesn't need literally "unlimited" state capacity, merely enough to crush us. And as I see it, it has that in spades. What evidence do you have to the contrary?
It is entirely possible that we can grind them down to the point that the social structures they're leaning on simply collapse,
Wrong, wrong, WRONG! It is not, in fact, "entirely possible" for us to do this. They are too powerful, and we are but ants beneath their boots.
And if we are not so fortunate as to get the happy end, all the efforts put into this strategy pay dividends at the subsequent levels of escalation.
How can you possibly believe that "the subsequent levels of escalation" are anything other than Red Tribe getting crushed harder and harder, until we're eventually eradicated?
The only answers to that question, at this point, involve literal bullets.
Well, now that I'm off ban, to clarify: I mean less "2nd amendment solutions," more Suharto.
How we stop it happening again is we get a Caesar Augustus or a Bonaparte, with the loyalty of the warriors, and the willingness to use them to purge the enemy. It's "tanks in Harvard yard" as part of going Henry VIII (or Qin Shi Huangdi) on academia.
More options
Context Copy link