Ehh /r/conservative, it is such an echo chamber. I had a permban for daring to say that Warren technically was right as her DNA result showed. The reason was something like "you're wrong" (I don't remember it exactly, it was a long time ago as you can guess from the topic). My response also wasn't aggressive or attacking the parent commenter.

To be honest, your comment 100% reads to me like you were celebrating him having a stroke. I’m no fan of that sub, and I seriously suspect its mods are on the take to promote garbage stories, but they may be in the right here. I’ll take it at your word that you didn’t mean it that way, but maybe if you cooled down and were more humble in your message to the mods, it would’ve been best for both sides.

It's happening! The Gerontocracy is starting to waver! Seriously, this is the shit I love to see.

I'll rephrase this: "I love to see an elderly politician have a serious medical problem."

Still think you weren't celebrating something?

Personally my first thought wasn't a stroke although that ofc occurred to me too, but something related to dementia as I used to take an elderly relative shopping and just before she fell over this happened, twice.

The thing is, regardless of your politics, you were celebrating something horrible happening to another human, by the meaning of the words you used.

And I'm sorry but the autistic thing doesn't help you here as you are using that to imply normal people are inferring a 'hidden' meaning. There is no hidden meaning, your words are being interpreted exactly how they are meant. Instead of this doubling down (such a tiresome reddit thing!) you should just accept you made a snarky arsehole-ish comment. We all make these silly, mean comments and mistakes sometimes.
Whether this warrants a permanent ban and so on and so forth is another matter I'm not going to bother with.

I was banned from r/politics, on January 6th, for wondering why the hell capitol security and the military wasn't intervening. Like, imagine if something like January 6th had been perpetrated by some heavily armed offshoot of BLM or antifa groups. I have zero doubt such an incursion would have been met with automatic weapons fire. Our nation's capitol was literally being overrun, with many of the insurgents proudly brandishing weapons. This is in a city filled with security of all types. Government buildings are protected by heavily armed units, anti aircraft batteries, and the whole area is lined with tunnels to ease rapid evacuation of lawmakers and deployment of troops. The whole city is a fortress. The troops and firepower existed in the city to prevent this atrocity from ever happening.

I'm sorry, but play stupid games, win stupid prizes. I don't condone violence, but let's be honest. If a group of armed people tries to overthrow and interfere with the peaceful transfer of power, that is literally an act of armed rebellion. And if people are willing to use lethal violence to overthrow a government, the state should wield whatever level of violence is necessary to stop them.

If there was any kind of fairness in the American political system, the insurgents on January 6th should have literally been met with automatic weapons fire on the steps of the capitol. If a thousand had died at the hands of machine gun nests opening fire on crowds attempting to storm the capitol, so be it.

And in retrospect, I really think we would have been far better off if a couple thousands rebels had died that day. It would have served to shake the society to its foundations, a firm wake-up call saying, "this is what is at stake. A group of armed people literally tried to overthrow the government." And while on the day of, Republican congress members were ready to crucify Trump for his actions, that quickly faded. Despite the direct threat to their lives, Republicans caved and ultimately didn't support the impeachment and conviction of Trump. If there were instead a few thousand armed radicals dead on the capitol steps, that would not have happened. It would have been impossible for them to sweep their failed coup under the rug if a thousand of the attackers had been killed in the process.

But instead, we didn't do this. Aside from a handful of cases, security did not intervene. The heavily armed troops and heavy weaponry were never brought out. We utterly failed to protect our democracy from an armed rebellion that day. Some of the insurgents have been tried since then, but it's had little effect. They've mostly received slaps on the wrist. And many of them, after serving their short or nonexistent sentences, are now back on social media repeating the exact same lies that led to January 6th. They mostly to this day insist they did nothing wrong. Several are even planning on running for office.

The greatest mistake the Weimar government in Germany ever made was not summarily hanging Hitler and all the other Nazi Party members involved in Hitler's Beer Hall Putsch. Hitler attempted a coup d'état. He committed treason against a duly elected democratic government. By all rights, he and everyone involved should have been hanged for their crimes. Instead, they were treated with kid gloves, and the results were what they were.

When a democratic state is threatened by armed insurgents, lethal violence is actually the correct and rational response. We're taught to abhor violence, and we internalize that so much that we can't recognize the times where violence really is the correct response. If someone is actively attempting to violently overthrow a government, well I'm sorry. They brought it on themselves. In something as sensitive as the official counting of Electoral votes, which was what was happening on January 6th, is threatened, violence really is the correct response.

Some might say killing so many would have resulted in a civil war. But realize, these people, intentionally or not, were attempting to trigger a civil war. If they had succeeded, actually hung Mike Pence with the literal gallows they brought, and declared Trump the winner, what other possible outcome could there have been? Were the blue states just going to accept such a clearly bogus result? Of course not. We would have had the worse possible outcome. We would have actually had a case where it wasn't clear who the president was. Trump could claim to be the winner based on the results of the rigged vote. Biden would claim to be the winner based on the actual results of the Electoral College. And the military would be stuck in the middle.

The military chain of command works pretty well to prevent generals from going rogue, but it only works if there is a clear chain of command. If two people are running around, each with a plausible claim to the office, what are they to do? How do you keep from ending up with some units following one president, while others for the other? That is a recipe for a very terrifying civil war in a heavily armed nation with the world's most powerful military and nuclear arsenal. And that's before you worry about states trying to secede from the union, which many likely would have tried.

That is the fate we escaped by only a hair's breadth on January 6th, 2021. We were on the knife's edge of a civil war. If a large group of armed people tried to storm a military base (as was suggested in the humorous 'Storm Area 51' plan, the military has made very clear that they would be met with heavy weapons fire. If you get a thousand people together and try to storm a US army base, they will kill you in large numbers, if that's what it takes to stop you.

On the day of, literally as an armed group of people were storming the US Capitol building, in an r/politics thread I asked aloud where the hell the military was. I pointed out that if it was anyone other than a group of white conservatives doing this, they would be met with automatic weapons fire. And I wondered aloud why the hell these people weren't being treated that same way. In time, it became clear that the reason the military wasn't deployed was that Trump and his cronies had deliberately kept the military from intervening. But for daring to suggest that our military should use any means necessary to stop a literal armed rebellion, a literal coup attempting to overthrow democracy, I was permanently banned from r/politics.

Rules against encouraging violence are understandable. But I wasn't celebrating violence or saying it was a good and beneficial thing. Rather, I was simply wondering why the hell our military wasn't protecting us against an armed rebellion.

In a democracy, we ultimately agree to abide by the result of elections. We do this precisely to prevent the alternative, which is civil war and might-makes-right. And if a group of people is willing to abandon democracy and to attempt to violently overthrow a democracy? Well I'm sorry, but I fully support using whatever level of force, including the mass deployment of lethal force, in order to protect the Republic. The tree of democracy is from time to time watered with the blood of tyrants. And sometimes that tyrant takes the form of not just a single dictator, but of a group of armed maniacs trying to overthrow the government. On January 6th, there really should have been a very heavy military presence on site. And if the crowds had still tried to storm the capitol, they should have been stopped by any means necessary. If that meant a couple thousand dead Trumpers on the steps of the Capitol building, so be it. But we didn't do what was necessary, and now we have a good chunk of the country who believes those insurgents did nothing wrong at all.

And ultimately, the problem is, they're just going to keep trying. They were stopped by a hair's breadth last time, but they'll try again using some other method. And that is what is so dangerous about coddling insurgents. If they don't face real consequences for their actions, they will simply come back again later. I believe every single person involved in the storming of the capitol is traitor to their country. They may be traitors egged on by disinformation, but they were still traitors nonetheless. And traditionally, the standard penalty for such violent betrayal of your country is execution by hanging. And while I think giving a death sentence to every person who participated would be a bit extreme, I believe whatever force was necessary should have been used to stop the events of January 6th. If that meant dropping bombs or unleashing machine guns on a mob of people trying to overthrow the government, so be it.

And because of that, for pointing out, on the very day of, that it is perfectly reasonable to use lethal violence to stop an armed coup against a free and fair election, I was permanently banned from r/politics.

Yup, I remember I posted a comment once in T_D (and only once), not even in support of Trump, and immediately got banned from like 15 subreddits at once lol, powermods are a complete cancer.