The exasperated, defensive tone is reminiscent of leftists and their expressions of resigned frustration.
-
Features
Holy Crap - The Revolution is about to start
- Thread starter laughing dog
- Start date
The exasperated, defensive tone is reminiscent of leftists and their expressions of resigned frustration.
Emily Lake
Might be a replicant
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2014
- Messages
- 7,062
- Location
- It's a desert out there
- Gender
- Agenderist
- Basic Beliefs
- Atheist
It is my position that the narrative of existential threat, fascist, and dictator that are being applied to Trump have primed the powderkeg for violence if Trump wins. Thus, I believe that if Trump wins, there will be violence initiated by the left.
If Harris wins, I think it's a foregone conclusion that there will be violence initiated by the right.
laughing dog
Contributor
So if Trump wins and there is no violence, then there is a silver lining to that disaster. Personally, I don't that test is worth the outcome.
Emily Lake
Might be a replicant
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2014
- Messages
- 7,062
- Location
- It's a desert out there
- Gender
- Agenderist
- Basic Beliefs
- Atheist
All of these things you're saying are justifications for expected future violence. It lays the groundwork for retaliatory violence if Trump wins.
If you actually, truly believe the things you say, you should be prepared to take direct action against Trump. If you aren't prepared to take direct aggressive action, you shouldn't be saying it.
Emily Lake
Might be a replicant
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2014
- Messages
- 7,062
- Location
- It's a desert out there
- Gender
- Agenderist
- Basic Beliefs
- Atheist
Oh I'm definitely exasperated and frustrated, but I'm not entirely resigned. Were I resigned, I wouldn't be in here arguing for people to recognize the impact of their rhetoric and take a step back.
The exasperated, defensive tone is reminiscent of leftists and their expressions of resigned frustration.
Look, folks, I’m with Emily on this. I think she’s highlighting the dangers of dehumanizing one another. There’s a fine line we need to avoid crossing if we truly want to deter the encouragement of extremism—whether it’s from the left or the right. We all know extremists exist on both sides, and regardless of where you stand, there are people within your camp who may intend to cause serious harm. So, while you may not consider Trump’s impact equal to Harris’s, I think it’s fair to ask that we all proceed with caution. I think that's all Emily is getting at here.
truthsocial.com
Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
Comrade Kamala is spending the waning days of her horrible campaign using the same old tropes to attack the most beautiful movement in American history, MAGA! Yet, it’s not working, and even her own Super PAC has screamed, “STOP!” She is incapable of talking about real issues. Instead, many...
truthsocial.com
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 46,751
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
If Trump wins, he wins. You think the left wing was happy with W winning re-election '04 or Trump in '16?
That is a baseless assertion and repeating it doesn't make it any less baseless.
I don't think violence is set in stone in either case. Trump sure the heck is setting it up though. He has made questioning the veracity of our elections a mainstream right-wing thing. This isn't just him now.
Elixir
Made in America
No. They are motivations for turning out to vote in numbers sufficient not only to create an electoral landslide, but also to discourage people from participating in the ensuing coup attempt. That is the only path to a peaceful transfer of power in January. And by peaceful, I mean body counts of no more than three digits.
TomC
Bless Your Heart!
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2020
- Messages
- 9,877
- Location
- Midwestern USA
- Gender
- Faggot
- Basic Beliefs
- Agnostic deist
"Win" is a complicated word in that sentence.
Trump has never won an election. Ever. He's always been 2nd runner up.
In 2016 the state legislatures appointed enough EC delegates for Trump to take the White House.
In 2020 he both lost the popular vote and also the EC appointment. He responded with lies and violence designed to undercut the USA, from faith in our elections to basic American institutions. When nothing worked out he stole crates of top secret documents he could sell to our enemies.
Trump winning isn't much of a question. The question is how much damage he will do to the USA trying to keep his grip on power.
Tom
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 46,751
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
*self-moderated* that! Emily is trying to convince people the left-wing is dehumanizing the right-wing. They aren't.
Trump is dehumanizing immigrants and migrants. The liberals are the "enemy from within".
linkarticle said:
The left-wing is warning about Project 2025 and the roadmap that provides. A roadmap that aims at turning the nation closer to before the days when the Fed got involved in the South. It says that, not the left says that.
Donald Trump is saying that the Democrats (ie "the people that we have that are actually running the country") are "fascists", "Marxists", "communists" by his declaration.
Project 2025 roadmap... real.
Fascist Democrats... not real.
That is polite of you. But no, Emily isn't saying that. She is creating a false equivalence (beyond that of Moore-Coulter), where there isn't even a viable comparison to be made. Gaslighting via the cloak of false equivalence.
Toni
Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2011
- Messages
- 20,984
- Basic Beliefs
- Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Here’s the thing tho:
As well as love of money and power. I happen to think those are fear based as well but I’m not even a psych major-or minor for that matter.
Elixir
Made in America
That’s the foundational threat - let me have it or I’ll burn the place down.
Look, I was just translating what she said—just like she’s translating what Trump said. Alright? Geez!
Elixir
Made in America
T.G.G. Moogly
Traditional Atheist
I think you nailed it. Fear generates hatred and insecurity, two hallmarks of the right wing. They want the money, the power and the glory that is rightly owed them because it's owed them. Never mind that maybe they're not as smart or as lucky as the next person.
Right wingers really have no vision, let alone collective vision, of the future aside from furthering their own selfish interests.
Elixir
Made in America
Financially insecure people are easily brought to believe that financial stability would banish their insecurity. It turns out that insecurity is a human condition, not a financial one. But keeping the masses subdued and insecure, is most easily accomplished by imposing financial hardship them. (Just make sure you have a pre-fabricated villain to blame it on).
That’s a big part of what Pootey has been tutoring his puppet on.
That’s a big part of what Pootey has been tutoring his puppet on.
Politesse
Lux Aeterna
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2018
- Messages
- 13,799
- Location
- Chochenyo Territory, US
- Gender
- nonbinary
- Basic Beliefs
- Jedi Wayseeker
Well, no. Elixir has not said that. You said that, about Elixir. I'm pretty sure Elixir is hoping for an electoral defeat of Trumpism.
Politesse
Lux Aeterna
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2018
- Messages
- 13,799
- Location
- Chochenyo Territory, US
- Gender
- nonbinary
- Basic Beliefs
- Jedi Wayseeker
It seems to me that Trump's people are likely to perpetrate violence either way. They certainly did last time. Speaking from my little corner of the world, some of the worst violent incidents we have ever seen in the history of the college campus where I work happened in the months following the 2016 election, as emboldened local hate groups took aim at students they believed to be undocumented.
But while we should be prepared for that reality, individual vigilante justice is not the only way to deal with terroristic threats, that is the role of the police and legal system, or in the case of interstate organizations, the federal government.
Emily Lake
Might be a replicant
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2014
- Messages
- 7,062
- Location
- It's a desert out there
- Gender
- Agenderist
- Basic Beliefs
- Atheist
No, they weren't happy. But they also weren't preaching the same message in the lead-up. They weren't banging the drum about fascist dictator for life, imprison political enemies, hunt down us citizens, repeat of hitler, existential threat.
The rhetoric from the left has changed for this election. The rhetoric has become much more inciteful than it has been in the past. That's why I'm concerned.
What's your first recollection of the outcome of a presidential election being challenged? It's been escalating for several election cycles, and it's not an exclusively right wing issue. The tactics employed differ by party, but the tendency to challenge or call into question either the legitimacy or the fairness of the outcome has been going on since Gore v Bush.
I don't know how to get this across. This is a conceptual issue, based on the abstract impact of learned behaviors, and the way they get amplified over time.
The political divide in the US has been growing over time. Democrats and Republicans keep getting further and further apart. When I was younger, working across the aisle was common. Now it's virtually forbidden. It used to be that average americans might be registered, or lean toward one party or another, but we all had a very large common ground that we agreed on. We differed on some bits and piece, or we different in how something should be implemented, or to what extent... but the core values were shared. That's no longer the case - and we're in a period now where average everyday people have become extremely partisan. We're at a point where we're all being conditioned to be intolerant of "those people" and to view anyone who even leans toward the other party as bad from top to bottom.
The tactics differ by party, but the strategy is the same.
That schism, that inability to find or even tolerate common ground and a shared objective... that's a far bigger risk to democracy than any specific individual.