This is the world we live in now. Where one side of the political spectrum can openly advocate for violence, violation of basic human rights, and other gross injustices without consequence, and...
Exemplary
This is the world we live in now. Where one side of the political spectrum can openly advocate for violence, violation of basic human rights, and other gross injustices without consequence, and everyone else is canceled for daring to say the quiet part out loud. Further, apparently forced to apologize.
How many times has Trump, how many times have other prominent flaming conservatives, called for outright violence. For murder and assault? How many times have they "nudge nudge wink wink" endorsed violence against the many outgroups they target?
Kyle Gass says one thing, that it's quite obvious a not-zero and not-infinitesimal portion of the planet (certainly of America) is thinking, and suddenly it's "we're very sorry, we'll cancel our tour, we'd never advocate for anything violent."
You call a spade a spade. You shoot straight and speak truth to assholes because an increasing number of people are flat out sick of "when they go low we go high."
That's a really sweet sentiment in an uplifting movie of rising to overcome bullying and foul play. In the real world, it's why evil prevails and good is curb stomped over, and over, and over, and over.
"Political violence is never acceptable." - this is the world we wish to live in, it is the world we would all (hopefully) prefer to live in. I know I want to live in that world. We don't live in...
"Political violence is never acceptable." - this is the world we wish to live in, it is the world we would all (hopefully) prefer to live in. I know I want to live in that world.
We don't live in that world. We haven't for a while. It is as you said, when one side can openly and without consequence call for, and receive, intimidation, violence, murder, and literal outright insurrection... at that point, to blindly parrot 'we must all condemn political violence' becomes a fairy tale, a nursery rhyme to sing us quietly into a sleep that some of us will not have the privilege of waking from.
There has long been the concept of 'The Four Boxes of Liberty', purportedly/maybe originating from one Stephen Decartur Miller in a speech on September of 1830 and expanded on since then.
The Soap box, the Ballot box, the Jury box, and lastly, the Cartridge box. With the pleading advice to use in that order.
The Soap box is freedom of speech. It is the Free Press. It can be expanded to also be considered nonviolent political protests, such as rallies, mass sit-downs, job walk-outs, etc... How much of our speech is left to us today? Do we have some voice? Yes, we do still have some, though might I suggest it has been much degraded. Real civil discourse is quite rare in our current day. The largely privately-owned and for-profit oriented news cycle is highly incentivized to go with what is most bloody, most hateful, most visceral and anger-inducing. Because most news organizations need to run what will draw the most engagement, leading to the most ad-revenue. Making that already damaged box even more rotted out from under us is the incredible weaponization of AI for various disinformation strategies which pollute our information ecosystem with ever more noise, making the signal-to-noise ratio (and ability to find accurate, unbiased, trustworthy information sources) ever more difficult. The Soap box still exists, but it is a broken thing today compared to what it was 50 or 100 years ago.
The Ballot box is our right to vote, our ability to make our will in levels of government known by choosing who represents our will. In theory. I would argue that on the smallest scale (local elections, towns, small cities, etc...) we do still have this box to stand on. But today the Ballot box we have is ever so short. We cannot stand tall on it. Nearly every election of high importance at State and Federal level are, if not outright guaranteed by who has the most money (in Millions of dollars at the low end - with strings and obligations attached only to those who wield such fortunes), then they are influenced so heavily by money as to marginalize the very concept of 'one person, one vote'. When you can effectively pay to decide who the candidates even get to be, then pay more to influence and manipulate who will get voted for... The Ballot box is quite rotten. Furthermore, when it comes to the highest office, the President of the United States of America, our vote is pretend. The Electoral College decides the President, and in recent years twice gone against the will of the people. For the highest office, we have only the illusion of the Ballot box.
The Jury box is our civic duty to take upon ourselves the role of jurors and be a group of impartial individuals who are presented with a case and make a decision. The will of the people arbitrating a case. But what if we are never allowed to fulfill that duty? What if the highest court in the land is poisoned, captured by those who do not hold the neutrality of legal ideals as highest, but instead serve biased, partisan masters? What if they change the law itself such that a criminal, who has betrayed the country he swore to serve, is prevented from sitting before the Jury box to be judged for his crimes? What if those same bad actors manipulate the system we have for appointing Judges at all levels of the courts, to systematically block the appointment of Judges who will not swear fealty, and ensure that their chosen, loyal, biased Judges are the only ones who can populate our judicial seats? There are myriad ways to prevent a Jury from ever being presented with a case in the first place, as we have oh-so-recently seen blatant examples of. The Jury box has been carved away from under our feet. Its legitimacy is so much tarnished, stained metal, no longer gleaming with the faith and trust of the nation.
So exactly what do we have left to stand on? Because to me, it looks more and more like all we have left are tears, bitter regrets at a dying dream, and far too much blood. I hate this. I don't want this. Please, anyone who has a sane answer, a peaceful path that is not the quiet that allows evil men to triumph, anyone who has more wisdom than me... please.
I'm not advocating for anything. I do not call for violence or blood. I viscerally do not want that future. I'm observing a deteriorating situation with, from my perspective, all quite bad...
Exemplary
I'm not advocating for anything. I do not call for violence or blood. I viscerally do not want that future. I'm observing a deteriorating situation with, from my perspective, all quite bad potential futures branching out (and falling into states and conditions I see things heading towards) and hoping someone else is seeing a pathway I'm not.
I'm only one person, with one perspective, with all my unique human flaws and failings. Others have different perspectives and will inevitably lack failings I am burdened with.
I'm hoping someone else, looking at what I am looking at, can perceive and share a less harmful, less dark pathway to a better potential future.
At the moment, when I look forward, what I feel is dark despair.
With less prose, and more plain language: what I see is us moving towards is a Christian Fundamentalist Autocracy, ushered in with the subversion of our ability to govern ourselves democratically, and pushed over the edge with intimidation, violence, murder, and insurrection. Power, for powers sake, seized by any means. The parallels with pre-war Germany are not subtle.
I see a near-future where the ability of all our non-violent means of contesting this have likewise been subverted. Where extremists guide 'true believer' expendable masses to commit violence on their behalf and take the consequences in place of those who issue the orders. Where the people at the top of this push for power at any price are utterly above the law and free to try and try again until they succeed. At that point, it feels like the options narrow to quietly allow our democracy to die, or engage in some uncontrollable and unknown degree of internal bloodshed which will do incredible, lasting harm to us all.
I don't want any of the futures I see branching out in front of me.
History has surprised. No regime has yet stood the test of time. No dictator has achieved immortality. I'll share mine, speaking as a member of a diaspora: be flexible, stay alive, pack up your...
I'm hoping someone else, looking at what I am looking at, can perceive and share a less harmful, less dark pathway to a better potential future.
History has surprised. No regime has yet stood the test of time. No dictator has achieved immortality.
I'll share mine, speaking as a member of a diaspora: be flexible, stay alive, pack up your loved ones and leave, and wait for this to blow over in a couple hundred years. In the mean time, the sun shines and the rain falls.
My grandparents might have lived to their 40's if they had been as alert as you are. My father did succeed in running, leaving everything behind, but he found a nicer home. He'll always miss the home of his childhood but it is not a place that can be visited by planes and cars. He probably thought Hong Kong would be a forever home for his kids. But, be flexible. Now, I also have a home that no longer exists on this timeline. But I survive, and I appreciate the beauty of my new country.
Take the best of America with you when you decide there is no other choice than to leave. Leave the awful bits behind and be vigilant. Try again elsewhere.
Being Canadian, I can't quite recommend us except as an easy midway step to somewhere else. But midway steps are fine: you're not looking for utopia, you're looking for somewhere to be while hoping for either change back home or else catch your breath long enough to keep moving
I fear, given the advanced weaponry of the US military, that leaving the US is only a temporary solution; doesn't matter where one chooses to go. If the US government fails I fear for the entire...
I fear, given the advanced weaponry of the US military, that leaving the US is only a temporary solution; doesn't matter where one chooses to go. If the US government fails I fear for the entire world.
You're not wrong about risk of America becoming aggressive towards others, hence why I suggested Canada is only suitable as a stepping stone. We'd be first to get annexed for resources and slave...
You're not wrong about risk of America becoming aggressive towards others, hence why I suggested Canada is only suitable as a stepping stone. We'd be first to get annexed for resources and slave labour. But surely they can't hit every corner of the globe at the same time. Even the Axis had allies. Even North Korea is cozying up with China Iran Russia.
Keep being vigilant and be ready to stay just ahead.
Or the whole place could go in mutually assured destruction, in which case let's not worry about that either. I'll buy you a drink on the other side.
I would actually say you don't need to worry about that, at least in the near to mid term future. That kind of thing has very public indicators of how high the political temperature on such an...
You're not wrong about risk of America becoming aggressive towards others, hence why I suggested Canada is only suitable as a stepping stone. We'd be first to get annexed for resources and slave labour.
I would actually say you don't need to worry about that, at least in the near to mid term future. That kind of thing has very public indicators of how high the political temperature on such an issue goes. Actions like villainizing the target nation happen, pointing to the target nation or a group or groups in said nation and making them appear to be vile enemies and an imminent danger in the eyes of the public. Russia did this, by pumping out rhetoric about the Nazi threat in Ukraine, etc...
Even dictatorships do need to maintain a facade of legitimacy internally to maintain the support of at least some of the public, if only to reduce how many resources they need to maintain oriented towards retaining control on internal power.
If the US were to look towards annexing anyone geographically close, it would probably start at our southern border, especially given the existing rhetoric about 'millions of illegals flooding the border' and dehumanizing Mexicans, Central and South Americans (with your standard racist overtones of 'brown skin bad').
I'm not holding out hope for the existence of another side, but if there is I'll gladly take you up on that offer. :) Canada is only 45 minutes from my house by car, so I'll be there ASAP if...
I'm not holding out hope for the existence of another side, but if there is I'll gladly take you up on that offer. :)
Canada is only 45 minutes from my house by car, so I'll be there ASAP if things start to go down. haha
My specific concerns regarding this aspect are that, should these evil goals succeed with a Trump 2024 election, there will be a green light for slamming a foot on the gas pedal accelerating...
If the US government fails I fear for the entire world.
My specific concerns regarding this aspect are that, should these evil goals succeed with a Trump 2024 election, there will be a green light for slamming a foot on the gas pedal accelerating towards the World War III that we are currently headed towards at a moderate walking pace. Trump would be likely to withdraw from NATO and/or cease all aid to Ukraine for his buddy Vlad. As for China and Taiwan, it seems very likely Xi would see the opportunity for what it is and pull the trigger on a Taiwan invasion.
Regarding Ukraine / Russia: Europe is still spinning up defense production and really can't just instantly take up the slack in terms of raw volume of war materiel that the US can provide as lethal aid. They are ramping up, but that just does not go from 0 to 60 in an instant. It will be years yet before the majority of European nations have a fully ramped-up defense industrial base that can meet the materiel needs Ukraine is showing us we need.
I think it was Kant of Locke that already answered this for me. If you believe you can affect change in the system, no matter how small, you should work to affect change instead of destroy the...
I think it was Kant of Locke that already answered this for me.
If you believe you can affect change in the system, no matter how small, you should work to affect change instead of destroy the system.
The new system after the chaos from the ending of the old system isn't really knowable. There's a ton of risk and uncertainty about the new system, thus, if you can move the needle on the old system that is preferable.
I still think we are able to affect change though we are moving towards the other answer, but not yet at all.
I agree with your assessment of the double standard public figures are held to in the current political landscape. But I think it’s plausible this is a response to death threats rather than fear...
I agree with your assessment of the double standard public figures are held to in the current political landscape. But I think it’s plausible this is a response to death threats rather than fear of cancellation. Should they continue to play the game then? I wouldn’t blame them for disappearing for a bit until it blows over, Trump supporters can be ruthless.
JB also has plenty of lucrative projects coming up, including follow ups to the wildly successful Mario movie. I think he is trying to protect his image moving forward as a result.
JB also has plenty of lucrative projects coming up, including follow ups to the wildly successful Mario movie. I think he is trying to protect his image moving forward as a result.
I'm not sure how active he is in the Biden campaign other than the one appearance with the President or in a video or whatever it was. If he's still involved I would assume the campaign asked him...
I'm not sure how active he is in the Biden campaign other than the one appearance with the President or in a video or whatever it was. If he's still involved I would assume the campaign asked him to distance himself from any such controversy.
I wonder who's turning the screws on them this time, I can't see Jack Black normally caring enough about a throwaway statement like this without some external pressure. Wants to keep on starring...
I wonder who's turning the screws on them this time, I can't see Jack Black normally caring enough about a throwaway statement like this without some external pressure. Wants to keep on starring in family-friendly media perhaps?
It's kind of beating a dead horse at this point, but still very funny seeing people have to act appalled by violence being applied against a guy who has spent 8 years promoting and encouraging violent acts. His supporters marched on to the capital to try and enact a coup, constructing a gallows in front of the capital and chanting "Hang Mike Pence" against his own VP, he's pledged to have members of his party and his opposition be thrown in jail from a military tribunal. Suddenly we all have to act shocked when violence comes in to play. An assassination attempt on the guy? Wow, well I would never, what a terrible tragedy yadda yadda.
Anyway, did you know Gerald Ford survived two different assassination attempts during his 1975 presidential campaign? Only reason I bring that up is I really never heard that before this news and its use in context of someone surviving assassination attempts and losing their election bid. Never in my life had I heard of that tidbit, and it was just casually used as an example of political probability. Not even a notable president, boring ol' Gerald Ford. Assassination attempts against political candidates, doesn't really feel like an unforeseen shocking event anymore, it along with the normal violence and cruelty, just feels like it's a regular part of America to me now. People always talk up America as a place of freedom and liberty and hope and the American dream, but really the last few decades has shown me that it's just as much about racism and violence and cruelty and greed than any sentiment of equality.
Ive seen the same arguments being made "as a joke" by folks on the opposite side, replacing treasonous violence with "killing babies and old people". So I sort of get why you said you're not...
It's kind of beating a dead horse at this point, but still very funny seeing people have to act appalled by violence being applied against ...
Ive seen the same arguments being made "as a joke" by folks on the opposite side, replacing treasonous violence with "killing babies and old people".
So I sort of get why you said you're not surprised, but violence against people, even horrible and deserving people, wasn't built into part of a democratic system. I still have hopes of seeing Trump defeated and in jail so only on that front I'm glad he didn't die.
Also. It sure was a surprise for the Biden campaign folks. That fist in the air photo is going to help their awful campaign like crazy.
Of course violence was built into the system. The rule of law is based on the implied threat of violence. Violence was what severed our ties to England. Letting one group have a monopoly on...
Of course violence was built into the system. The rule of law is based on the implied threat of violence. Violence was what severed our ties to England. Letting one group have a monopoly on violence leads to the stripping of rights and civil liberties.
Liberalism’s very foundation is that conflicts must be solved with words and votes not spears and guns. That the world would be better if Trump dropped dead of a heart attack does not justify...
Liberalism’s very foundation is that conflicts must be solved with words and votes not spears and guns.
That the world would be better if Trump dropped dead of a heart attack does not justify political violence or attempts on his life.
That the state can enforce democratically enacted laws by force does not somehow mean political violence is right, fine, or part of the design of the system.
You quite literally cannot have a country without the state establishing a monopoly on violence.
Democracy does not survive tit for tat violence between political factions. It survives by proper prosecution and due process of all of those who perpetuate violence, as hundreds of January 6th participants have found out after being convicted of felonies.
To jump into a cycle of violence is to give up liberalism completely.
It is the most common definition of a state. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_(polity) Once a state loses the monopoly on violence they end up like present day Haiti.
It is the most common definition of a state.
According to sociologist Max Weber: a "state" is a polity that maintains a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence
That makes total sense, although they say it’s disputed in definition. But this only raises more questions that I’m sure someone has already answered. The general idea seems to be those with more...
That makes total sense, although they say it’s disputed in definition. But this only raises more questions that I’m sure someone has already answered. The general idea seems to be those with more guns/sticks/swords and legal authority to kill people, make the rules. And it’s usually the state - or is it; it can only be the state.
If you want the rule of law you can’t have competing violent factions that decide to use violence to get their way. Otherwise you just have a piece of paper with some words on it if the state...
If you want the rule of law you can’t have competing violent factions that decide to use violence to get their way. Otherwise you just have a piece of paper with some words on it if the state cannot enforce it.
If any random group can get some guys together with guns and use violence to get their way you don’t have a country with laws, stability, or democracy.
You can't have rule of law when there is no rule of law. America has been twisted into vast, abusive, oppressive, violent corruption. Citizens who were gerrymandered into irrelevance, who lost...
You can't have rule of law when there is no rule of law. America has been twisted into vast, abusive, oppressive, violent corruption.
Citizens who were gerrymandered into irrelevance, who lost their ability to meaningfully affect who gets elected in their states, sued. The case went to the Supreme Court. The state and its (MAGA) politicians stood up in open court and said "we didn't draw the maps to discriminate against minorities, we drew them to ensure our party wins elections."
And The Court ruled that's legal. Just as they ruled the President is now a King, and Federal agencies have no power unless Congress specifically and explicitly spelled out the rule that agency is enforcing.
The process by which "rule of law" comes about has been perverted, held hostage, and squeezed until it has no shape and holds no weight. There's no law when the laws are fungible on the whim of Dear Leader. There's no law when We The People have no meaningful say in those laws.
We're in the early stages of a historical moment that is going to result in wholesale realignment of society on the North American continent, and people continue to insist we're not. Continue to assume MAGA and the Heritage Foundation and Trump are kidding, that they won't really do any of the things they've openly stated they're going to do, they want to do, they're ready to do.
When someone tells you they're going to kill you, it is illogical to base your actions on the assumption they're kidding. Particularly when they've said it repeatedly, written it down, published it, confirmed it, and waved it proudly about while repeatedly expressing fervent desire to carry it out.
Am I happy about where we are? No. Does it suck? Yes. Is it going to result in many, many, many people dying one way or another? Yup.
That's what happens when you're stuck in a chapter of history that'll be on the test.
Respectfully, this is twitter doomer level hyperbole. Are there real problems with gerrymandering? Yes. Can they be overcome at the state level? Yes. Look at how Wisconsin was able to peacefully...
Exemplary
Respectfully, this is twitter doomer level hyperbole.
Are there real problems with gerrymandering? Yes. Can they be overcome at the state level? Yes. Look at how Wisconsin was able to peacefully and democratically take back control of their gerrymandered state. None of this justifies political violence on any level.
Is Trump a dangerous man to hold the presidency? Yes. That's why you should vote for Democrats.
The United States is a still a country with the rule of law. A justice system that has already convicted Trump of 34 felonies, convicted hundreds of January 6th participants, and even just today convicted a sitting US Senator for corruption.
But to say that any of this justifies political violence is to just preemptively embrace fascism itself. What's the point of beating Trump if you're just going to become worse than him in order to do it.
If Democrats truly believed Trump was truly this country ending threat, they would be replacing Joe Biden on the ticket with someone with better poll numbers. Not preemptively embracing political violence.
If I recall from when I saw the Post Apocalypto tour, they have a whole segment about Don Jr. being an evil tyrant who literally has the KKK guarding the white house and they defeat him and for a...
If I recall from when I saw the Post Apocalypto tour, they have a whole segment about Don Jr. being an evil tyrant who literally has the KKK guarding the white house and they defeat him and for a moment it seems like he's gonna turn but then he belts out "And one last time, you're gonna fuckin' die" and there's a Terminator and KG's kid is the bad guy.
So, as long as Kyle would've threatened his kid it maybe would've been okay I guess?
I enjoy the D's silly shenanigans, but I don't know much about their personal relationship. This seems like an overreaction to some black humor (no pun intended)?
I enjoy the D's silly shenanigans, but I don't know much about their personal relationship. This seems like an overreaction to some black humor (no pun intended)?
I'm assuming it's pressure from their various sponsors, but it also occurs to me that someone may have given them the blunt truth: "Now that you said it, you and everyone at your shows is at a...
I'm assuming it's pressure from their various sponsors, but it also occurs to me that someone may have given them the blunt truth:
"Now that you said it, you and everyone at your shows is at a much higher risk of dying in a retaliatory mass shooting."
Haha thanks for noticing the username! Everyone who notices is "my people." Also, thanks for sharing your response. Super interesting from someone in the field. I'm here in the US and the right...
Haha thanks for noticing the username! Everyone who notices is "my people."
Also, thanks for sharing your response. Super interesting from someone in the field. I'm here in the US and the right wing is absolutely frightening at this point. I grew up in a Republican area and I've seen them change - people I've known my whole life. A lot of them are just people with whom I disagree but many others are straight up ready for war. They are just praying someone will break into their house so they can light them up with one of their many weapons.
The scariest part to me is how they think Antifa is lurking behind every corner. I've quite literally never met someone in Antifa, and I can't really think of many violent acts they've actually committed beyond fist fighting at protests. But if you ask the conservatives I know, Antifa has millions of members who are gearing up for war and sabotaging the country with acts of violence all the time.
Something that irritates me about “antifa” as a boogeyman is how the popularized nickname conveniently cuts out meaning, aside from being against a vague “something”. That the group is at least...
Something that irritates me about “antifa” as a boogeyman is how the popularized nickname conveniently cuts out meaning, aside from being against a vague “something”. That the group is at least nominally against facism (and thus, logically are probably not all that concerned with the average person, especially not some random individual at least an hour’s drive from the nearest major metro) is lost entirely.
I can’t say for certain but it feels like this was an intentional choice by conservative networks like Fox. It’s a lot easier to other a group with a vague, meaningless name.
That's a really good point, I had not thought of that. I hope it's a planned thing and they're actually still friends and they'll publicly reconcile some months from now after it cools off.
That's a really good point, I had not thought of that. I hope it's a planned thing and they're actually still friends and they'll publicly reconcile some months from now after it cools off.
It's self-preservation on Jack Black's part. If you're older, you probably know and love him from the edgy Tenacious D days with lyrics that seem much worse than this joke (City Hall, anyone?),...
It's self-preservation on Jack Black's part. If you're older, you probably know and love him from the edgy Tenacious D days with lyrics that seem much worse than this joke (City Hall, anyone?), but modern Jack Black has Nintendo and big box office studio money. He's in content marketed directly to kids. It's not just that he has sponsors to please, it's that those sponsors are more sensitive than if he was doing ads for DraftKings and White Claw. A lot of his charity work is kid/family-oriented as well.
During a performance in Sydney on Sunday—only a day after shots were fired at Trump during his rally in rural Pennsylvania—Gass celebrated his 64th birthday onstage. Black asked his bandmate to “make a wish” as he blew out candles on a birthday cake. “Don’t miss Trump next time,” Gass replied, to some laughter from the audience.
This is the world we live in now. Where one side of the political spectrum can openly advocate for violence, violation of basic human rights, and other gross injustices without consequence, and everyone else is canceled for daring to say the quiet part out loud. Further, apparently forced to apologize.
How many times has Trump, how many times have other prominent flaming conservatives, called for outright violence. For murder and assault? How many times have they "nudge nudge wink wink" endorsed violence against the many outgroups they target?
Kyle Gass says one thing, that it's quite obvious a not-zero and not-infinitesimal portion of the planet (certainly of America) is thinking, and suddenly it's "we're very sorry, we'll cancel our tour, we'd never advocate for anything violent."
You call a spade a spade. You shoot straight and speak truth to assholes because an increasing number of people are flat out sick of "when they go low we go high."
That's a really sweet sentiment in an uplifting movie of rising to overcome bullying and foul play. In the real world, it's why evil prevails and good is curb stomped over, and over, and over, and over.
Play the game being played. They do.
"Political violence is never acceptable." - this is the world we wish to live in, it is the world we would all (hopefully) prefer to live in. I know I want to live in that world.
We don't live in that world. We haven't for a while. It is as you said, when one side can openly and without consequence call for, and receive, intimidation, violence, murder, and literal outright insurrection... at that point, to blindly parrot 'we must all condemn political violence' becomes a fairy tale, a nursery rhyme to sing us quietly into a sleep that some of us will not have the privilege of waking from.
There has long been the concept of 'The Four Boxes of Liberty', purportedly/maybe originating from one Stephen Decartur Miller in a speech on September of 1830 and expanded on since then.
The Soap box, the Ballot box, the Jury box, and lastly, the Cartridge box. With the pleading advice to use in that order.
The Soap box is freedom of speech. It is the Free Press. It can be expanded to also be considered nonviolent political protests, such as rallies, mass sit-downs, job walk-outs, etc... How much of our speech is left to us today? Do we have some voice? Yes, we do still have some, though might I suggest it has been much degraded. Real civil discourse is quite rare in our current day. The largely privately-owned and for-profit oriented news cycle is highly incentivized to go with what is most bloody, most hateful, most visceral and anger-inducing. Because most news organizations need to run what will draw the most engagement, leading to the most ad-revenue. Making that already damaged box even more rotted out from under us is the incredible weaponization of AI for various disinformation strategies which pollute our information ecosystem with ever more noise, making the signal-to-noise ratio (and ability to find accurate, unbiased, trustworthy information sources) ever more difficult. The Soap box still exists, but it is a broken thing today compared to what it was 50 or 100 years ago.
The Ballot box is our right to vote, our ability to make our will in levels of government known by choosing who represents our will. In theory. I would argue that on the smallest scale (local elections, towns, small cities, etc...) we do still have this box to stand on. But today the Ballot box we have is ever so short. We cannot stand tall on it. Nearly every election of high importance at State and Federal level are, if not outright guaranteed by who has the most money (in Millions of dollars at the low end - with strings and obligations attached only to those who wield such fortunes), then they are influenced so heavily by money as to marginalize the very concept of 'one person, one vote'. When you can effectively pay to decide who the candidates even get to be, then pay more to influence and manipulate who will get voted for... The Ballot box is quite rotten. Furthermore, when it comes to the highest office, the President of the United States of America, our vote is pretend. The Electoral College decides the President, and in recent years twice gone against the will of the people. For the highest office, we have only the illusion of the Ballot box.
The Jury box is our civic duty to take upon ourselves the role of jurors and be a group of impartial individuals who are presented with a case and make a decision. The will of the people arbitrating a case. But what if we are never allowed to fulfill that duty? What if the highest court in the land is poisoned, captured by those who do not hold the neutrality of legal ideals as highest, but instead serve biased, partisan masters? What if they change the law itself such that a criminal, who has betrayed the country he swore to serve, is prevented from sitting before the Jury box to be judged for his crimes? What if those same bad actors manipulate the system we have for appointing Judges at all levels of the courts, to systematically block the appointment of Judges who will not swear fealty, and ensure that their chosen, loyal, biased Judges are the only ones who can populate our judicial seats? There are myriad ways to prevent a Jury from ever being presented with a case in the first place, as we have oh-so-recently seen blatant examples of. The Jury box has been carved away from under our feet. Its legitimacy is so much tarnished, stained metal, no longer gleaming with the faith and trust of the nation.
So exactly what do we have left to stand on? Because to me, it looks more and more like all we have left are tears, bitter regrets at a dying dream, and far too much blood. I hate this. I don't want this. Please, anyone who has a sane answer, a peaceful path that is not the quiet that allows evil men to triumph, anyone who has more wisdom than me... please.
Political violence will absolutely make all of those things so much weaker and worse.
Yes. That is part of the problem. It already is. And as far as I can tell, the first three of the boxes are not stopping it.
So what exactly are you advocating for?
I'm not advocating for anything. I do not call for violence or blood. I viscerally do not want that future. I'm observing a deteriorating situation with, from my perspective, all quite bad potential futures branching out (and falling into states and conditions I see things heading towards) and hoping someone else is seeing a pathway I'm not.
I'm only one person, with one perspective, with all my unique human flaws and failings. Others have different perspectives and will inevitably lack failings I am burdened with.
I'm hoping someone else, looking at what I am looking at, can perceive and share a less harmful, less dark pathway to a better potential future.
At the moment, when I look forward, what I feel is dark despair.
With less prose, and more plain language: what I see is us moving towards is a Christian Fundamentalist Autocracy, ushered in with the subversion of our ability to govern ourselves democratically, and pushed over the edge with intimidation, violence, murder, and insurrection. Power, for powers sake, seized by any means. The parallels with pre-war Germany are not subtle.
I see a near-future where the ability of all our non-violent means of contesting this have likewise been subverted. Where extremists guide 'true believer' expendable masses to commit violence on their behalf and take the consequences in place of those who issue the orders. Where the people at the top of this push for power at any price are utterly above the law and free to try and try again until they succeed. At that point, it feels like the options narrow to quietly allow our democracy to die, or engage in some uncontrollable and unknown degree of internal bloodshed which will do incredible, lasting harm to us all.
I don't want any of the futures I see branching out in front of me.
History has surprised. No regime has yet stood the test of time. No dictator has achieved immortality.
I'll share mine, speaking as a member of a diaspora: be flexible, stay alive, pack up your loved ones and leave, and wait for this to blow over in a couple hundred years. In the mean time, the sun shines and the rain falls.
My grandparents might have lived to their 40's if they had been as alert as you are. My father did succeed in running, leaving everything behind, but he found a nicer home. He'll always miss the home of his childhood but it is not a place that can be visited by planes and cars. He probably thought Hong Kong would be a forever home for his kids. But, be flexible. Now, I also have a home that no longer exists on this timeline. But I survive, and I appreciate the beauty of my new country.
Take the best of America with you when you decide there is no other choice than to leave. Leave the awful bits behind and be vigilant. Try again elsewhere.
Being Canadian, I can't quite recommend us except as an easy midway step to somewhere else. But midway steps are fine: you're not looking for utopia, you're looking for somewhere to be while hoping for either change back home or else catch your breath long enough to keep moving
I fear, given the advanced weaponry of the US military, that leaving the US is only a temporary solution; doesn't matter where one chooses to go. If the US government fails I fear for the entire world.
You're not wrong about risk of America becoming aggressive towards others, hence why I suggested Canada is only suitable as a stepping stone. We'd be first to get annexed for resources and slave labour. But surely they can't hit every corner of the globe at the same time. Even the Axis had allies. Even North Korea is cozying up with China Iran Russia.
Keep being vigilant and be ready to stay just ahead.
Or the whole place could go in mutually assured destruction, in which case let's not worry about that either. I'll buy you a drink on the other side.
I would actually say you don't need to worry about that, at least in the near to mid term future. That kind of thing has very public indicators of how high the political temperature on such an issue goes. Actions like villainizing the target nation happen, pointing to the target nation or a group or groups in said nation and making them appear to be vile enemies and an imminent danger in the eyes of the public. Russia did this, by pumping out rhetoric about the Nazi threat in Ukraine, etc...
Even dictatorships do need to maintain a facade of legitimacy internally to maintain the support of at least some of the public, if only to reduce how many resources they need to maintain oriented towards retaining control on internal power.
If the US were to look towards annexing anyone geographically close, it would probably start at our southern border, especially given the existing rhetoric about 'millions of illegals flooding the border' and dehumanizing Mexicans, Central and South Americans (with your standard racist overtones of 'brown skin bad').
I'm not holding out hope for the existence of another side, but if there is I'll gladly take you up on that offer. :)
Canada is only 45 minutes from my house by car, so I'll be there ASAP if things start to go down. haha
My specific concerns regarding this aspect are that, should these evil goals succeed with a Trump 2024 election, there will be a green light for slamming a foot on the gas pedal accelerating towards the World War III that we are currently headed towards at a moderate walking pace. Trump would be likely to withdraw from NATO and/or cease all aid to Ukraine for his buddy Vlad. As for China and Taiwan, it seems very likely Xi would see the opportunity for what it is and pull the trigger on a Taiwan invasion.
Regarding Ukraine / Russia: Europe is still spinning up defense production and really can't just instantly take up the slack in terms of raw volume of war materiel that the US can provide as lethal aid. They are ramping up, but that just does not go from 0 to 60 in an instant. It will be years yet before the majority of European nations have a fully ramped-up defense industrial base that can meet the materiel needs Ukraine is showing us we need.
I think it was Kant of Locke that already answered this for me.
If you believe you can affect change in the system, no matter how small, you should work to affect change instead of destroy the system.
The new system after the chaos from the ending of the old system isn't really knowable. There's a ton of risk and uncertainty about the new system, thus, if you can move the needle on the old system that is preferable.
I still think we are able to affect change though we are moving towards the other answer, but not yet at all.
I agree with your assessment of the double standard public figures are held to in the current political landscape. But I think it’s plausible this is a response to death threats rather than fear of cancellation. Should they continue to play the game then? I wouldn’t blame them for disappearing for a bit until it blows over, Trump supporters can be ruthless.
JB also has plenty of lucrative projects coming up, including follow ups to the wildly successful Mario movie. I think he is trying to protect his image moving forward as a result.
I'm not sure how active he is in the Biden campaign other than the one appearance with the President or in a video or whatever it was. If he's still involved I would assume the campaign asked him to distance himself from any such controversy.
There were calls to have the band deported by right wing politicians in Australia, that may have played a role.
I wonder who's turning the screws on them this time, I can't see Jack Black normally caring enough about a throwaway statement like this without some external pressure. Wants to keep on starring in family-friendly media perhaps?
It's kind of beating a dead horse at this point, but still very funny seeing people have to act appalled by violence being applied against a guy who has spent 8 years promoting and encouraging violent acts. His supporters marched on to the capital to try and enact a coup, constructing a gallows in front of the capital and chanting "Hang Mike Pence" against his own VP, he's pledged to have members of his party and his opposition be thrown in jail from a military tribunal. Suddenly we all have to act shocked when violence comes in to play. An assassination attempt on the guy? Wow, well I would never, what a terrible tragedy yadda yadda.
Anyway, did you know Gerald Ford survived two different assassination attempts during his 1975 presidential campaign? Only reason I bring that up is I really never heard that before this news and its use in context of someone surviving assassination attempts and losing their election bid. Never in my life had I heard of that tidbit, and it was just casually used as an example of political probability. Not even a notable president, boring ol' Gerald Ford. Assassination attempts against political candidates, doesn't really feel like an unforeseen shocking event anymore, it along with the normal violence and cruelty, just feels like it's a regular part of America to me now. People always talk up America as a place of freedom and liberty and hope and the American dream, but really the last few decades has shown me that it's just as much about racism and violence and cruelty and greed than any sentiment of equality.
Ive seen the same arguments being made "as a joke" by folks on the opposite side, replacing treasonous violence with "killing babies and old people".
So I sort of get why you said you're not surprised, but violence against people, even horrible and deserving people, wasn't built into part of a democratic system. I still have hopes of seeing Trump defeated and in jail so only on that front I'm glad he didn't die.
Also. It sure was a surprise for the Biden campaign folks. That fist in the air photo is going to help their awful campaign like crazy.
Of course violence was built into the system. The rule of law is based on the implied threat of violence. Violence was what severed our ties to England. Letting one group have a monopoly on violence leads to the stripping of rights and civil liberties.
Liberalism’s very foundation is that conflicts must be solved with words and votes not spears and guns.
That the world would be better if Trump dropped dead of a heart attack does not justify political violence or attempts on his life.
That the state can enforce democratically enacted laws by force does not somehow mean political violence is right, fine, or part of the design of the system.
You quite literally cannot have a country without the state establishing a monopoly on violence.
Democracy does not survive tit for tat violence between political factions. It survives by proper prosecution and due process of all of those who perpetuate violence, as hundreds of January 6th participants have found out after being convicted of felonies.
To jump into a cycle of violence is to give up liberalism completely.
Got any stats on this? Interesting proposition.
It is the most common definition of a state.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_(polity)
Once a state loses the monopoly on violence they end up like present day Haiti.
That makes total sense, although they say it’s disputed in definition. But this only raises more questions that I’m sure someone has already answered. The general idea seems to be those with more guns/sticks/swords and legal authority to kill people, make the rules. And it’s usually the state - or is it; it can only be the state.
If you want the rule of law you can’t have competing violent factions that decide to use violence to get their way. Otherwise you just have a piece of paper with some words on it if the state cannot enforce it.
If any random group can get some guys together with guns and use violence to get their way you don’t have a country with laws, stability, or democracy.
You can't have rule of law when there is no rule of law. America has been twisted into vast, abusive, oppressive, violent corruption.
Citizens who were gerrymandered into irrelevance, who lost their ability to meaningfully affect who gets elected in their states, sued. The case went to the Supreme Court. The state and its (MAGA) politicians stood up in open court and said "we didn't draw the maps to discriminate against minorities, we drew them to ensure our party wins elections."
And The Court ruled that's legal. Just as they ruled the President is now a King, and Federal agencies have no power unless Congress specifically and explicitly spelled out the rule that agency is enforcing.
The process by which "rule of law" comes about has been perverted, held hostage, and squeezed until it has no shape and holds no weight. There's no law when the laws are fungible on the whim of Dear Leader. There's no law when We The People have no meaningful say in those laws.
We're in the early stages of a historical moment that is going to result in wholesale realignment of society on the North American continent, and people continue to insist we're not. Continue to assume MAGA and the Heritage Foundation and Trump are kidding, that they won't really do any of the things they've openly stated they're going to do, they want to do, they're ready to do.
When someone tells you they're going to kill you, it is illogical to base your actions on the assumption they're kidding. Particularly when they've said it repeatedly, written it down, published it, confirmed it, and waved it proudly about while repeatedly expressing fervent desire to carry it out.
Am I happy about where we are? No. Does it suck? Yes. Is it going to result in many, many, many people dying one way or another? Yup.
That's what happens when you're stuck in a chapter of history that'll be on the test.
Respectfully, this is twitter doomer level hyperbole.
Are there real problems with gerrymandering? Yes. Can they be overcome at the state level? Yes. Look at how Wisconsin was able to peacefully and democratically take back control of their gerrymandered state. None of this justifies political violence on any level.
Is Trump a dangerous man to hold the presidency? Yes. That's why you should vote for Democrats.
The United States is a still a country with the rule of law. A justice system that has already convicted Trump of 34 felonies, convicted hundreds of January 6th participants, and even just today convicted a sitting US Senator for corruption.
But to say that any of this justifies political violence is to just preemptively embrace fascism itself. What's the point of beating Trump if you're just going to become worse than him in order to do it.
If Democrats truly believed Trump was truly this country ending threat, they would be replacing Joe Biden on the ticket with someone with better poll numbers. Not preemptively embracing political violence.
Exactly. Both sides are guilty of the same stuff they blame the other side for, and that will always be a fact.
If I recall from when I saw the Post Apocalypto tour, they have a whole segment about Don Jr. being an evil tyrant who literally has the KKK guarding the white house and they defeat him and for a moment it seems like he's gonna turn but then he belts out "And one last time, you're gonna fuckin' die" and there's a Terminator and KG's kid is the bad guy.
So, as long as Kyle would've threatened his kid it maybe would've been okay I guess?
That's fucking wild about Gerald Ford, and heartwarming to boot (that he lost).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Ford#Assassination_attempts
I enjoy the D's silly shenanigans, but I don't know much about their personal relationship. This seems like an overreaction to some black humor (no pun intended)?
I'm assuming it's pressure from their various sponsors, but it also occurs to me that someone may have given them the blunt truth:
"Now that you said it, you and everyone at your shows is at a much higher risk of dying in a retaliatory mass shooting."
Haha thanks for noticing the username! Everyone who notices is "my people."
Also, thanks for sharing your response. Super interesting from someone in the field. I'm here in the US and the right wing is absolutely frightening at this point. I grew up in a Republican area and I've seen them change - people I've known my whole life. A lot of them are just people with whom I disagree but many others are straight up ready for war. They are just praying someone will break into their house so they can light them up with one of their many weapons.
The scariest part to me is how they think Antifa is lurking behind every corner. I've quite literally never met someone in Antifa, and I can't really think of many violent acts they've actually committed beyond fist fighting at protests. But if you ask the conservatives I know, Antifa has millions of members who are gearing up for war and sabotaging the country with acts of violence all the time.
Something that irritates me about “antifa” as a boogeyman is how the popularized nickname conveniently cuts out meaning, aside from being against a vague “something”. That the group is at least nominally against facism (and thus, logically are probably not all that concerned with the average person, especially not some random individual at least an hour’s drive from the nearest major metro) is lost entirely.
I can’t say for certain but it feels like this was an intentional choice by conservative networks like Fox. It’s a lot easier to other a group with a vague, meaningless name.
That's a really good point, I had not thought of that. I hope it's a planned thing and they're actually still friends and they'll publicly reconcile some months from now after it cools off.
I thought that too, especially for someone like Jack Black.
I thought a simple apology and a statement condemning violence would have been enough.
It's self-preservation on Jack Black's part. If you're older, you probably know and love him from the edgy Tenacious D days with lyrics that seem much worse than this joke (City Hall, anyone?), but modern Jack Black has Nintendo and big box office studio money. He's in content marketed directly to kids. It's not just that he has sponsors to please, it's that those sponsors are more sensitive than if he was doing ads for DraftKings and White Claw. A lot of his charity work is kid/family-oriented as well.
From
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/story/jack-black-steps-away-from-tenacious-d-after-kyle-gass-jokes-about-trump-assassination-attempt