Impeach / Punish

[cordex]

That was a lot of words just to say that you are so afraid of the current despotism

Some, for sure, but not nearly so much as I am afraid of the civil war that you and the left are trying to bring about.

that you won't even broach discussion of the realities of the situation

Exactly which realities do you think I'm avoiding discussion of?

and instead choose to insulate yourself in a fantasy of faux moral superiority as if it will shield you from the actual aggressions of evil people.

We're both claiming moral superiority here. 

I'm claiming it because I see political mob violence (primarily practiced by the radical left in modern America) as a Bad Thing that is morally wrong, will not advance my beliefs, will not win supporters, will give my political opponents (who will gleefully justify the same kind of behavior from their supporters) a cudgel to beat me and my side with, and will in fact lead to more violence as the spiral continues.

You, on the other hand, are claiming moral superiority because political violence is evil if the left does it, but is good if the right does it, and despite the fact that we agree on something like 98% of the situation, because I fail to come the last 2% into "... and so we should start murdering the other side and talking about it in public," I fail your ideological purity test.

It was a FAKE insurrection.

There was no insurrection, nor any sort of real plan to overthrow the government.  It was a political protest turned riot.  When it happened I joked that it was "mostly peaceful" because that was the kind of obviously false, willful blindness we saw from the likes of CNN when it was the left rioting, but it's kind of funny to see some of us now solemnly pushing the same kind of thing.

[Ron]

There was no insurrection, nor any sort of real plan to overthrow the government.  It was a political protest turned riot.  When it happened I joked that it was "mostly peaceful" because that was the kind of obviously false, willful blindness we saw from the likes of CNN when it was the left rioting, but it's kind of funny to see some of us now solemnly pushing the same kind of thing.

The FAKE meme is just a gift that keeps on giving.

What is something that is FAKE?: it's not true, real, or genuine : COUNTERFEIT, SHAM, one that is not what it purports to be : such as a worthless imitation passed off as genuine.

The left is calling it an insurrection. It was not an insurrection. Hence the left is pushing a FAKE insurrection.

One of the oddest ironies of the last five years is that of all people, Donald Trump is the one who pulled back the curtain for the normies and revealed IT'S ALL LIES. It's all FAKE.

It wasn't anyone in government, it wasn't anyone in academia, NO prominent religious leader of any persuasion called out the lies. Everyone is invested in protecting the (lying fake) system.

Of all people, it was Trump by calling the media FAKE (liars) that so many people came to question not just the media liars but all the liars running the system.

It was a fake election, we have a fake president and VP and there was a fake impeachment (again).

The best and brightest obviously aren't the ones in control. They may have the power and authority but they haven't done a very good job of making their show believable.

Whatever is really going on between our competing oligarchs, any truth of events is buried beneath mountains of lies.

It's almost as if all global principalities, powers and rulers are liars, following their god, the father of lies 

[dogmush]

I'm claiming it because I see political mob violence (primarily practiced by the radical left in modern America) as a Bad Thing that is morally wrong, will not advance my beliefs, will not win supporters, will give my political opponents (who will gleefully justify the same kind of behavior from their supporters) a cudgel to beat me and my side with, and will in fact lead to more violence as the spiral continues.

Is Violence (political or otherwise) always morally wrong, regardless of the morality or ideas that violence is furthering?


Violence, and mob violence, has been a constant companion of humanity since before it was actually humanity.

[Ron]

Is Violence (political or otherwise) always morally wrong, regardless of the morality or ideas that violence is furthering?


Violence, and mob violence, has been a constant companion of humanity since before it was actually humanity.

The problem is who is whipping the crowd up into a frenzy?

The knowledge of how to manipulate the populace is now a pretty well tuned technique.

There may be utility for our enemies in promoting freedom lovers to engage in violence.

A large percentage of the country thinks that Trump supporters committed an attempted insurrection.

Trump did a great job of pulling the rights strings, he isn't the only master wizard out there trying to control events.

It's not outside the realm of possibility that the right could get tricked into a confrontation.

 

[Ron]

If you use violence to take control of the levers of Hell, becoming the new ruler(s) ... you are still nothing more than the ruler of Hell.

[cordex]

Is Violence (political or otherwise) always morally wrong, regardless of the morality or ideas that violence is furthering?

No.

[fifth_column]

It was a FAKE insurrection.

This can't be anything more than a statement of belief. Those Sund described as insurrectionists in his resignation letter might have been antifa, or they might have been militia members, or even KGB for all we know. Discovering what is belief and what is fact is the first step towards wisdom.

[Ron]

This can't be anything more than a statement of belief. Those Sund described as insurrectionists in his resignation letter might have been antifa, or they might have been militia members, or even KGB for all we know. Discovering what is belief and what is fact is the first step towards wisdom.

At worst, they were bad actors setting up the stage so the charge of insurrection could be leveled.

At best, they were a bunch of dufuses who were unable to imagine the optics and consequences of their actions.

If we are going to hold the capital rioters accountable as insurrectionists then we need to demand that all the BLM rioters also be held to account for insurrection. Same thing with the foolishness going on in Seattle and Portland.

If we are going to maintain that protests against government that get violent is insurrection then it needs to be applied uniformly across the board.

Otherwise we need to use discretion when applying the term.

Equal application of the law.   

[RoadKingLarry]

“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse. When a people are used as mere human instruments for firing cannon or thrusting bayonets, in the service and for the selfish purposes of a master, such war degrades a people. A war to protect other human beings against tyrannical injustice; a war to give victory to their own ideas of right and good, and which is their own war, carried on for an honest purpose by their free choice, — is often the means of their regeneration. A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. As long as justice and injustice have not terminated their ever-renewing fight for ascendancy in the affairs of mankind, human beings must be willing, when need is, to do battle for the one against the other.”

― John Stuart Mill,

[kgbsquirrel]

...

I fail your ideological purity test.

...

Yes you do, because your mentality gets loaded onto train cars while undercutting any who would choose to resist.

[cordex]

Yes you do, because your mentality gets loaded onto train cars while undercutting any who would choose to resist.

I've said there is a time for violence.  Even offensive violence.  I do not believe the time for violence is now, and I believe that beginning an offensive campaign today, or advocating such a thing at this stage is counterproductive in the extreme.

Despite your fiery rhetoric I feel confident that you're not actually interested in practicing what you preach.  You're smart, experienced, and you have an excellent grasp of OPSEC.  If you were remotely serious about jump starting the boogaloo I highly doubt you would be raising your profile by getting in internet catfights about whether or not today is the day to start murdering Democrats.

If all you want to do is beat your chest in public and burn bridges with insufficiently pure allies, okay.  Not much of a winning tactic, but have at it.

[Perd Hapley]

"Ignore what he says, pay attention to what he does and the results he gets" - I heard that all the time about Trump.
If you apply that standard to Mitch then he's still looking pretty darn good.

On that head:
https://thefederalist.com/2021/02/17/mitch-mcconnell-has-learned-nothing-and-forgotten-nothing/

[Lennyjoe]

I've said there is a time for violence.  Even offensive violence.  I do not believe the time for violence is now, and I believe that beginning an offensive campaign today, or advocating such a thing at this stage is counterproductive in the extreme.

If not now, when do you think it’s appropriate?

[Ron]

I'm in no hurry for CWII or any other type of "hot" warfare to breakout. We are already in an unconventional war and that sucks bad enough.

I'm not sure the political left we see are anything other than ideological footsoldiers and cannon fodder to be sacrificed. They are not the power "behind the throne".

Taking out frustration on the lefts unarmed willing dupes/cannon fodder would be a strategic blunder, imho.

If it comes to shootin time I don't think there will be much doubt it is shootin time. Start shooting or be shot/disappeared removes a lot of doubts.

[cordex]

If not now, when do you think it’s appropriate?

In my opinion, when the peaceful options have failed and the threat is imminent. 

The question might be turned around and asked ... why hasn't it been shooting time for decades?  What has changed for you in 2021 that you think now is time to start the violence?

[dogmush]

In my opinion, when the peaceful options have failed and the threat is imminent. 

A valid case could be made that those conditions have been met in several cities in America.


{For Clarity, I'm not arguing with you.  We haven't hit my personal line for "shoot people for politics" yet, but I live in a pretty safe region of the country (Safe from political extremists, anyway).  I might have a different opinion if I risked mob violence by taking a wrong turn downtown.}

[cordex]

A valid case could be made that those conditions have been met in several cities in America.


{For Clarity, I'm not arguing with you.  We haven't hit my personal line for "shoot people for politics" yet, but I live in a pretty safe region of the country (Safe from political extremists, anyway).  I might have a different opinion if I risked mob violence by taking a wrong turn downtown.}

I agree completely, but I would classify that as self-defense against political violence, not the initiation of political violence.

Maybe that's the difference between myself and kgb.  I too live in a relatively safe part of the country.  Sure, last year I walked the streets of a nearby city with my young daughters and fielded questions about why every ground-floor window we saw was either broken or boarded up and there was graffiti all over the place.  But that's not where I live, and I've been able to avoid such riots while they were going on.

It is possible I might feel different if I'd survived one of those riots.  Or maybe if someone I loved hadn't survived.

[dogmush]

I agree completely, but I would classify that as self-defense against political violence, not the initiation of political violence.

Maybe that's the difference between myself and kgb.  I too live in a relatively safe part of the country.  Sure, last year I walked the streets of a nearby city with my young daughters and fielded questions about why every ground-floor window we saw was either broken or boarded up and there was graffiti all over the place.  But that's not where I live, and I've been able to avoid such riots while they were going on.

It is possible I might feel different if I'd survived one of those riots.  Or maybe if someone I loved hadn't survived.

No, not self defense.  Proactively finding people that are members of groups that are destroying [local] civil society and dismantling those groups.  We are discussing justified political violence here, not self defense.

[cordex]

No, not self defense.  Proactively finding people that are members of groups that are destroying [local] civil society and dismantling those groups.  We are discussing justified political violence here, not self defense.

Ah, I see what you're saying.

[RoadKingLarry]

No, not self defense.  Proactively finding people that are members of groups that are destroying [local] civil society and dismantling those groups.  We are discussing justified political violence here, not self defense.

Proactive self defense.
 

[kgbsquirrel]

I'm in no hurry for CWII or any other type of "hot" warfare to breakout. We are already in an unconventional war and that sucks bad enough.

I'm not sure the political left we see are anything other than ideological footsoldiers and cannon fodder to be sacrificed. They are not the power "behind the throne".

Taking out frustration on the lefts unarmed willing dupes/cannon fodder would be a strategic blunder, imho.

If it comes to shootin time I don't think there will be much doubt it is shootin time. Start shooting or be shot/disappeared removes a lot of doubts.

This is why General Pinochet only targeted the leadership and organizers of the communist revolutionaries in Chile.  And it was always a disappearing via helicopter in order to deprive them of their martyrs and propaganda from such.

[kgbsquirrel]

I agree completely, but I would classify that as self-defense against political violence, not the initiation of political violence.

Maybe that's the difference between myself and kgb.  I too live in a relatively safe part of the country.  Sure, last year I walked the streets of a nearby city with my young daughters and fielded questions about why every ground-floor window we saw was either broken or boarded up and there was graffiti all over the place.  But that's not where I live, and I've been able to avoid such riots while they were going on.

It is possible I might feel different if I'd survived one of those riots.  Or maybe if someone I loved hadn't survived.

Normalcy bias certainly seems a factor in our differences of mentality; you've never been personally exposed to any political violence whereas I have done political violence, in your name and paid by you. 

[WLJ]

And the *expletive deleted*it show continues

Democrats introduce bill prohibiting ‘twice-impeached presidents’ from being buried at Arlington National Cemetery
https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2021/02/18/democrats-introduce-bill-prohibiting-twice-impeached-presidents-from-being-buried-at-arlington-national-cemetery/

[RoadKingLarry]

Wouldn't that come under that bill of attainder prohibition? Or ex post facto?

[TommyGunn]

Wouldn't that come under that bill of attainder prohibition? Or ex post facto?

It comes under "STOOPIDZ."