General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Sincere question: Waste of time for President-elect Biden to go on FauxNews, OANN and Newsmax ? [View all]Hortensis
(58,785 posts)know what "revolution" means? Revolution requires smashing the old and all those who fight to protect it, and both socialists and the Republican "organized conspiracy" and autocratic trumpists have to overthrow what we inherited to achieve their new forms of government. Both sides have their "bros" anxious to get to the smashing part. The Republicans/Trump are much closer because they're far more powerful, organized, financed, and, yes, ruthless. But neither are the unicorn fantasies of romantic imagination.
Speaking of "bros," how about noticing the hostile (and potentially violent) populist movements on both LW and RW that have been creating rage against whatever establishment stands in the way? Sure, Sanders' haven't gotten much beyond throwing a couple of chairs and vicious swarming on social media, but then his was never the side that was going to prevail. So a bunch of his bros just moved to the revolution with mobs to join.
Did anyone see attempted election theft in the past two elections because majorities wouldn't buy what the revolutionary leaders were selling?
Speaking of fascism, how about the question of how to KEEP the revolutionary ends when large majorities reject them every time when the choice is free and informed?
Name even ONE socialist regime that wasn't imposed on the people by what becomes authoritarian government using ruthless fascistic means. Guaranteed of course because socialism requires certain losses of freedoms and relative poverty at best (but disruption and decline are usually severe). Without authoritarian repression, what would keep Americans from just changing their minds and voting to return to a capitalism-based system (like what we have and those in Europe that are NOT socialism)?
Everyone worried about subversion and protecting the democracy we inherited really needs to understand the great similarities between the hostile extremist movements active in this nation. There are two, not just one. And our leaders absolutely have a duty to explain to all who are vulnerable to dangerous leaders what they have to lose and why they really want to protect what they have.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):